Jacinda Ardern sued over lockdown

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern sued over lockdown

1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 18

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2481008 11-May-2020 11:10

MikeAqua:

freitasm:

Out of context. The quote is about queries regarding the documents released last Friday, not about the legality questioned here.

Speaks to attitude, which IMO opinion is relevant to this thread: We are popular, therefore we can dismiss criticism rather than respond.

The fact the govt is backpedalling and desperately attempting to reframe the email, suggests they have been caught out.

I don't want to make this personal - but whose attitude?
Seems to me that some bias or "attitude" is needed to make a fuss about something completely normal in politics (or business for that matter).

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41091

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2481009 11-May-2020 11:12

itxtme:

I believe this has been a master class in controlling the narrative. Bloomfield is fantastic at re-framing questions away from what was asked to a diplomatic response. They really have dodged the fact the NZ was ill-prepaired.

- Lack of early testing
- Lack of atypical epidemiology testing (started weeks after community spread)
- Subpar tracing systems
- PPE availability
- Influenza distribution issues
- Gross unfairness of industry that can open and those that cannot

And yet, despite the lack of early testing, subpar tracing systems, PPE availability, the results speak for themselves. This government managed to obtain a positive result despite these negatives you listed - some that could be attributed to the current coalition government or from a previous one - it doesn't matter now.

Some people think New Zealand could (possibly) have an open economy with a lot of dead people not being able to work because they would be... dead?

itxtme:

The trouble for Labour will be in the next 90 days when unemployment sky rockets and mortgage defaults begin. The pain for many Kiwis has not begun ye

Agreed.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#2481011 11-May-2020 11:14

BarTender:

- MoH. The intention and reasons should be abundantly clear to everyone why a minimum 14 day isolation when entering NZ is vitally important to the country even if the law hasn't been updated to reflect that. Again someone privileged with money and / or connections to take the case to the High Court says they don't agree and want to be released from lock down so they can see their dying parents. I completely understand the reason behind it but again it is a case of someone with money who is privileged enough to do something about it as they disagree with as their reason is more important than everyone else entering the country.

There is no way someone who is on the minimum wage would or could get the attention either of these cases received especially the MSD one in pre-covid days.

Perhaps this will mean those who are privileged will show some humility for those who are not, but I doubt it.

I've largely stayed away from this thread because, as with any threads to do with the law on any general discussion board, much of the debate tends to be uninformed. But even with that context in mind, your comment is still extraordinarily offensive, uninformed, and ludicrous.

Yes, of course he had to have money to go to the HC. But it's not a case of some privileged guy wanting an exception. It's a guy wanting the MoH to apply the law as written, which actually contemplated balancing the needs of public health and extraordinary personal circumstances and allowing people to break isolation/bubbles where the risk to public health can be managed, as I have thoroughly explained here with a link to the HC's actual decision.

It's not so much that Mr Christiansen's "reason" is more important blah blah as you claimed. It's the fact that the MoH was acting like a lawless mob and repeatedly did so, whilst making up decision-making frameworks that had no basis in reality and practically closing their minds and ears. You can have your opinions but you can't just make up "facts". If you don't understand the issues, please stop spouting off on them.

MikeAqua

8032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3822

#2481027 11-May-2020 11:43

Fred99:

I don't want to make this personal - but whose attitude?
Seems to me that some bias or "attitude" is needed to make a fuss about something completely normal in politics (or business for that matter).

The message comes from DPMC. Therefore, we are talking about the attitude of that department, which is whatever attitude the PM and senior ministers tell them to have.

I personally think this points to the kind of toxic arrogance syndrome we saw creep into Shipley's govt and then Clark's. Key's to a lesser extent on the particular issue of housing. Simply: A govt believes it is popular enough not to be accountable. We all know how that eventually ended for those govts.

It's always a good thing to criticise the govt. That continues to apply in the current situation.

Mike

MikeAqua

8032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3822

#2481035 11-May-2020 11:56

freitasm:

And yet, despite the lack of early testing, subpar tracing systems, PPE availability, the results speak for themselves. This government managed to obtain a positive result despite these negatives you listed - some that could be attributed to the current coalition government or from a previous one - it doesn't matter now.

NZ is relatively isolated (cf Europe and Asia), small population, lagged behind other countries in term of infection pressure. We had he luxury of some time, and we didn't waste all of it. We were lucky to a significant extent. Labour and partners are in power so they rightly get credit for the result.

Let's not forget it hasn't all been sunshine and roses. 21 people have died prematurely. An un-quantified group of people were close to death and have had life changing complications from their illness. This might all have been prevented if the govt had clamped down on the border and gatherings early enough.

That said, I think the govt has acted reasonably, given the circumstances.

Mike

MikeAqua

8032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3822

#2481037 11-May-2020 11:58

itxtme:

The trouble for Labour will be in the next 90 days when unemployment sky rockets and mortgage defaults begin. The pain for many Kiwis has not begun ye

Yup. Pendulum swings both ways.

Mike

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

BarTender

3629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2572

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2481067 11-May-2020 12:16

dejadeadnz: It's not so much that Mr Christiansen's "reason" is more important blah blah as you claimed. It's the fact that the MoH was acting like a lawless mob and repeatedly did so, whilst making up decision-making frameworks that had no basis in reality and practically closing their minds and ears. You can have your opinions but you can't just make up "facts". If you don't understand the issues, please stop spouting off on them.

I agree that MoH were incorrectly and very narrowly interpreting the order but to claim they were acting as a lawless mob seems a bit of hyperbole.

To me it looks a lot more like everyone across MoH was taking an incredibly conservative/cautious approach as you know we are still in a global pandemic and MoH is trying to contain it. The very real impact that whole the country would have of getting it wrong must weigh heavily on everyone making these decisions.

The Matamata cluster shows us that in some cases it was pure luck that things aren't as bad as they are.

I agree my choice of words wasn't ideal and I apologise for that.

BarTender

3629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2572

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2481098 11-May-2020 12:33

MikeAqua: NZ is relatively isolated (cf Europe and Asia), small population, lagged behind other countries in term of infection pressure. We had he luxury of some time, and we didn't waste all of it. We were lucky to a significant extent. Labour and partners are in power so they rightly get credit for the result.

Let's not forget it hasn't all been sunshine and roses. 21 people have died prematurely. An un-quantified group of people were close to death and have had life changing complications from their illness. This might all have been prevented if the govt had clamped down on the border and gatherings early enough.

That said, I think the govt has acted reasonably, given the circumstances.

I agree on the luck but I strongly disagree with the premise that the country we could have either locked down any sooner than we did.

Sure we had the luxury of following what was happening in Italy giving us a 2 week head start but the first case occurred on a similar day as the UK so we can't dismiss the vital role Government and MoH has played.

Locking down earlier completely dismisses the political climate in early March. National and the media would have blown a gasket due to the impact of closing the economy. Then trying to have any sort of compliance should Level 4 occur when clusters started appearing would not happen. Unfortunately I think it was necessary to have some infection spread and a death since otherwise NZers wouldn't have taken it seriously.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#2481100 11-May-2020 12:34

BarTender:

I agree that MoH were incorrectly and very narrowly interpreting the order but to claim they were acting as a lawless mob seems a bit of hyperbole.

To me it looks a lot more like everyone across MoH was taking an incredibly conservative/cautious approach as you know we are still in a global pandemic and MoH is trying to contain it. The very real impact that whole the country would have of getting it wrong must weigh heavily on everyone making these decisions.

The Matamata cluster shows us that in some cases it was pure luck that things aren't as bad as they are.

I agree my choice of words wasn't ideal and I apologise for that.

Have you read the decision by Justice Walker? It's impossible to come away with any view other than the MoH behaving like a lawless mob if you had. Buried behind the usual words of judicial restraint and conservatism, we found that the MoH was applying a decision making framework that for all practical purposes had no relation with what is in the law and the Crown essentially conceded as such. That description is entirely accurate. You can't entirely make up the law and pretend that your decision making had any kind of legal basis. This is not an example where they had to apply a 7 limb legal test and got things wrong at the last decision hurdle.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2481112 11-May-2020 12:45

freitasm:

itxtme:

The trouble for Labour will be in the next 90 days when unemployment sky rockets and mortgage defaults begin. The pain for many Kiwis has not begun yet

Agreed.

Well hopefully - as that inevitably unrolls - politicians of all flavours will be reacting by telling us precisely what they're going to do about it.

Critics of the government can't keep making unprovable claims that "we moved too slow/too fast, too hard/too soft". Well they probably will - for decades - but it's still stuck with the fact that none of it can be proven.

Varkk

643 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 477

#2481115 11-May-2020 12:47

itxtme:

The trouble for Labour will be in the next 90 days when unemployment sky rockets and mortgage defaults begin. The pain for many Kiwis has not begun yet

But Grant Robertson has a budget etc in that time. Similar to all those panicking articles asking what happens when the wage subsidy runs out? It isn't as if no one in his office or treasury or in the party's think tanks don't see any of that coming. This next budget is probably the most crucial in memory and will set the tone to how the economy might endure. As such I am sure people have been working overtime to see how they can re-plan the economy for the new era.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41091

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2481195 11-May-2020 14:35

Original letter here.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

SaltyNZ

8874 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9566

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2481208 11-May-2020 14:50

freitasm:

[This government managed to obtain a positive result despite these negatives you listed - some that could be attributed to the current coalition government or from a previous one - it doesn't matter now.

Bridges, early on, tried to ping the government over not having a specific COVID-19 pandemic plan (never minding the obvious point that COVID-19 was completely new on the face of the planet). The Prime Minister replied that the flu pandemic plan was sufficiently in-depth yet flexible enough to form the basis of the new COVID-specific plan ... and that it had been commissioned and published by the previous National government.

Hon Simon Bridges: Does she have a specific COVID-19 health plan in writing?

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I want to read from page 1 of the New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Plan, which states—[Interruption]

SPEAKER: Order!

Hon Simon Bridges: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked about a specific COVID-19 health plan. The Prime Minister's—

SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. The member knows well that he can't take that sort of point of order until the answer is completed. The member can't anticipate a complete answer. He's been here for at least nine years and he should know that.

Hon Simon Bridges: Twelve.

SPEAKER: Twelve, I'm sorry.

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I was saying, the New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Plan is comprehensive and states—

Hon Simon Bridges: That's not a COVID plan.

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If the member would like to listen—and states on page 1, "The New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Plan could reasonably apply to other respiratory pandemics, such as SARS."

Hon Simon Bridges: UK, Aussie.

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: It is totally relevant. Secondly—

Hon Simon Bridges: It's generic.

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: If the member is criticising it, he may wish to reflect it was produced in mid-2017 under his Government.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

SaltyNZ

8874 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9566

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2481219 11-May-2020 14:59

dejadeadnz:

Have you read the decision by Justice Walker? It's impossible to come away with any view other than the MoH behaving like a lawless mob if you had. Buried behind the usual words of judicial restraint and conservatism, we found that the MoH was applying a decision making framework that for all practical purposes had no relation with what is in the law and the Crown essentially conceded as such. That description is entirely accurate. You can't entirely make up the law and pretend that your decision making had any kind of legal basis. This is not an example where they had to apply a 7 limb legal test and got things wrong at the last decision hurdle.

On the other hand, though, Justice Peters seemed completely satisfied that to the extent New Zealand was being detained, such detention was lawful. Not the same case, but more pertinent to wider question being argued here.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

MikeAqua

8032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3822

#2481317 11-May-2020 15:19

dejadeadnz:

Yes, of course he had to have money to go to the HC. But it's not a case of some privileged guy wanting an exception. It's a guy wanting the MoH to apply the law as written, which actually contemplated balancing the needs of public health and extraordinary personal circumstances and allowing people to break isolation/bubbles where the risk to public health can be managed, as I have thoroughly explained here with a link to the HC's actual decision.

When people who can afford to do so go to the courts, they create precedent. The MoH has had to adjust it's approach, this applies to other cases and benefits other people.

Mike

1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | ... | 18