Shameful politics, shameless politicians

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

Forums › Politics › Shameful politics, shameless politicians

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#1720810 15-Feb-2017 19:36

Rikkitic:
gzt:

Can you explain this a bit more? To me he appears to be actually quite hard-working and productive. He's been involved in quite a lot over the years and I suspect the house is better for having him in it. It's certainly possible I've missed some news items on the 'troughing' part if you want to expand on that also.

My objections to Dunne are based on different things, but two stand out: First, that he uses a dead political party that couldn’t even beat the cannabis party to maintain the perks of being a ‘party leader’; second that he plays games with the electoral process whereby National tries to lose so he can win. I find this kind of behaviour dishonourable. I find it equally dishonourable whether he does it or Labour and the Greens (or National) do it, as I hope I made clear in my original post. Just because MMP is imperfect and has loopholes, should not be seen as an invitation to take advantage of it. This is a violation of the spirit of our democracy and I think it is despicable. To me it says Mr Dunne is not a person of particularly high ethical standards. That is why I don’t like him. All he seems to care about is getting elected and preserving his perks as a party leader and Minister. I don’t think that speaks highly of him. If he wants to be an MP and support National and his electorate wants to elect him, that is another matter. He can just join National or he can run as an independent. He does not need to maintain the fiction of leading a political party that anyone cares about. Oh wait, that pays $171,000, while a backbencher only gets $156,000. Not bad for doing nothing. Then there are the added expenses and perks, of course, not to mention $282,000 for being a Minister.

As to the weight his vote carries, anyone who thinks a backbencher has the same influence and credibility as a party leader and Minister, not to mention power of patronage and any number of other things, simply doesn’t understand politics. Dunne cannot be compared to a backbencher. What he says and does goes much, much further. If he was the leader of a real party, this might be justified. In the current circumstances, it is just a rort. That is my opinion based on the public information I have seen. It is what I believe.

Ok that's pretty clear. Let's say very hypothetically that the Cannabis Party has a candidate in your electorate and you vote for that candidate and he or she wins. Magically they got some votes around the country also. Now you have a Cannabis Party and the party leader in parliament. Will you now object to your electorate MP and party because of the various financial provisions above? Probably not, you will want that party to represent your interests as they said they would under the electoral system.

Your remaining objections relate to the alleged deal. No doubt there will be more information over the next few days, but it appears to be a tactical decsion by the Green Party rather than a 'deal' as such.

It seems to me that your real objection is to the overhang provisions which see Dunne UF (or any small party capturing an electorate) with an advantage. That being the case it appears your fire and ire are misdirected.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1720817 15-Feb-2017 20:07

You have a point but Mr Dunne has already been there for a very long time, and unlike the scenario you propose, no-one votes for his party. Yes, some in his electorate do vote for him, so maybe there is still a place for him, even after all these years, but at best that place is on the backbenches as an MP. You are right that I would want a party I supported (which wouldn't be the cannabis party) to represent my interests, but what interests outside of his electorate does Peter Dunne represent? Again, no-one votes for his party. It is a fiction whose sole purpose appears to be to afford Mr Dunne the privileges of being a party leader.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720821 15-Feb-2017 20:13

You should get the thread title changed to make it represent your view point. He is a suggested change you could apply ......,

" I hate Peter Dunne and have no idea what he doe and why I hate him"

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#1720824 15-Feb-2017 20:23

Rikkitic:
You have a point but Mr Dunne has already been there for a very long time, and unlike the scenario you propose, no-one votes for his party. Yes, some in his electorate do vote for him, so maybe there is still a place for him, even after all these years, but at best that place is on the backbenches as an MP. You are right that I would want a party I supported (which wouldn't be the cannabis party) to represent my interests, but what interests outside of his electorate does Peter Dunne represent? Again, no-one votes for his party. It is a fiction whose sole purpose appears to be to afford Mr Dunne the privileges of being a party leader.

I presume he represents his electorate + United Future voters for better or worse.

What are your exact grounds for beliving United Future is a fiction? That sounds serious if true.

Once again it seems you are objecting to the current rules rather than anything Dunne did or has done.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1720825 15-Feb-2017 20:27

I feel like I have said everything I have to say about this. It is my opinion. You can agree or not.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#1720836 15-Feb-2017 20:40

deepred:
We have the Crusher-in-Chief to thank for these 'dirty deals' continuing to happen.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8674192/Governments-MMP-review-response-slammed

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10883866

Rikkitic:

The government clearly did not want to pass the recommended legislation from the MMP commission. You should take a look at what that was.

Then if you support that, you can vote for a party that will implement it.

Perhaps if it is labour and or green (and i honestly don't know) then you will have to reconsider.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Bung

6734 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2927

Subscriber

#1720918 15-Feb-2017 23:07

gzt: What are your exact grounds for beliving United Future is a fiction?

Dunne got 13,569 votes in Ohariu, 273 party votes from his own electorate and around 5200 total(0.22%) party votes. Those numbers might contain the answer.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1720951 16-Feb-2017 00:21

gzt:
deepred:

We have the Crusher-in-Chief to thank for these 'dirty deals' continuing to happen.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8674192/Governments-MMP-review-response-slammed

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10883866

Rikkitic:

The government clearly did not want to pass the recommended legislation from the MMP commission. You should take a look at what that was.

Then if you support that, you can vote for a party that will implement it.

Perhaps if it is labour and or green (and i honestly don't know) then you will have to reconsider.

The Govt didnt put the legislation to the house cause they didnt have the numbers for it to succeed.

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#1720985 16-Feb-2017 07:46

That is what the Government implied, but really they had support for that. In fact the Government said a whole bunch of things at the time:

Quote from the Herald article above: Ms Collins said questions should be directed to the party leader on why National did not want many changes to the MMP system.

Labour leader David Shearer said National were working with the Act Party to promote their own interests, saying the coat-tailing provision had helped Act and United Future leaders in the past.

Prime Minister John Key said he wasn't directly involved and Ms Collins was answerable. "My sense at the moment is there's no consistent view across the Parliament. "Unless you can get to a consensus and put it to the people, my view is to just stick with what you've got," Mr Key said.

It appears the prime minister's intention at the end was to put any changes or perhaps change options to another referendum.

In actual fact Minister Collins followed no sensible parliamentary process that I can see which would have led to a consensus being formed.

There was clear support for changes. The prime minister's claim that there was no consensus is a misleading one.

The claim that there was no parliamentary support for legislation is definitely wrong.

Linuxluver

5833 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1639

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720991 16-Feb-2017 08:11

Rikkitic:

There are times when your political ideals force you into uncomfortable corners. I strongly dislike Peter Dunne (as a politician, of course, not personally) and I very much want him to be voted out of Parliament. He is way, way past his use-by date and he has elevated troughing off the taxpayer to an art form. If he had any sense of honour left at all, he would wind up his phoney political party but of course that would cost him the perks of being a party ‘leader’, as well as perpetual Minister of Nothing Important, and he doesn’t want to give up all the free lunches and limos and other benefits of selling his soul to the highest political bidder.

Labour and the Greens share my aspiration of dumping Dunne and for that I have to applaud them. I am not a supporter of Labour and I have never voted for them. I am not a supporter of the Greens either, though I have voted for them. I am not a supporter of any political party as I believe they all have a corrupting influence on democracy. I prefer to support ideas and to place my vote where the best ones are. There isn’t a great deal of real choice in New Zealand, so my party vote is often by necessity a protest vote.

Labour and the Greens have now agreed to collude to increase their prospects of finally dislodging the Member for Life. I doubt he will go quietly. The problem is, in order to do this, Labour and the Greens have abandoned the principles that are supposed to distinguish them from, say, National and (horrors) United Future. They are undermining the spirit of MMP with a cosy deal designed to game the system, just like Peter Dunne, so they can get their way in an election. Of course they deny this. James Shaw especially denies it. ‘I’m not a hypocrite,’ he says. ‘It is okay if we do it, because we do it for the right reasons.’ Or something like that.

So yet another politician is cynical and unprincipled. Where is the surprise in that? In fact, it doesn’t surprise me at all and that is one reason I don’t support any political party. But it does present me with a problem. All other things being equal, I probably would have voted for the Greens again this time for lack of anything better, though I preferred Russel Norman. But now I can’t. And it is unlikely that Labour would ever have such a good idea that I would be able to vote for them. To my mind they are just an inferior version of National, and I don’t have much time for either.

I guess I will have to vote for the cannabis party again. If there is a big enough swing in their direction, maybe whatever government we end up with will take notice. At least it won’t have Peter Dunne in it.

Parties are essential and inevitable simply because thye support and enable (via people and resources and organisation) co-operation between and among people who share - broadly - the same values and - again broadly - the same goals. They also provide continuity through time...and a REAL party isn't a one-man-band like NZ First or United Future or ACT.

People who imagine politics is even possible without parties can not have ever been active politics in any meaningful way over time.

That said....note that all the one-man parties are allied with National: ACT and United Future. If it were not for these two, National would not be able to command a majority in Parliament at all. Epsom and Ohariu are effectively rorting MMP and have been for years. The Greens and Labour have put up candidates....and National hasn't....and it hasn't worked out.

There is too much at stake now. The Arctic is 30C-40C warmer than usual. It's been above freezing over the past week in places where it should be -40C. The world - and NZ - can't afford to waste three more years on a do-nothing National government that gives more and more money to wealthy corporates and leaves the growing numbers on minimum wage to pay for it all or go without.
In the report of the recent Royal Commission on the electoral system submitters made it very clear they regard the one-seat rule as cheating and they want it stopped. But it's the only reason National is the government, so National ignored it.

The only way to combat National's cheating of MMP is to attack it head on.

The only way to do that is vote Green or Labour. If you're going to vote ALCP you may as well make paper swans out of a4 sheets all day on election day......for all the good it will do anyone. The stoners can't organise a piss-up in a brewery....as their (non-smoking) former party secretary once told me.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

Linuxluver

5833 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1639

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720993 16-Feb-2017 08:16

gzt:

The claim that there was no parliamentary support for legislation is definitely wrong.

Not so sure about that. If National and it's sock-puppet parties weren't voting for any change then there wouldn't be a majority.....and thus no meaningful support. A waste of time from National's point of view putting up a bill they would simply vote down.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7827

Lifetime subscriber

#1720994 16-Feb-2017 08:21

It's clear from the Herald article above that Labour supports change in that area. Does the Green Party also support it if they become part of a new government?

Linuxluver

5833 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1639

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720995 16-Feb-2017 08:21

Bung:
gzt: What are your exact grounds for beliving United Future is a fiction?

Dunne got 13,569 votes in Ohariu, 273 party votes from his own electorate and around 5200 total(0.22%) party votes. Those numbers might contain the answer.

Exactly.

This strategy is a cut-down version of Maurice Williamson's plan to subvert MMP by running National A on the list and National B in local seats.

Because our MMP doesn't add seats to maintain proportionality, this would have possibly enable National to win most of the local seats as National A - but get no party votes....and then win 40% of the vote via National B....who would win no local seats. The result would be a towering majority of the monster overhang from National A combined with 40% seats share from National B via the list.

It's obviously corrupt...and even the dimmest voters would see it for what it was: cheating.

So they peeled the onion on it and only cheated in just enough seats to win: Ohariu and Epsom.

UF and ACT are fake parties......especially ACT as National took it over when Brash and Banks kicked out Rodney Hide.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1720996 16-Feb-2017 08:23

@linuxluver I agree. I have been a National supporter for sometime but three terms is enough for a government, it is time for a change and a change of direction we are facing a huge battle that most are ignoring or denying that just is not going away.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

trig42

5889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2094

ID Verified

#1721005 16-Feb-2017 08:43

MikeB4: @linuxluver I agree. I have been a National supporter for sometime but three terms is enough for a government, it is time for a change and a change of direction we are facing a huge battle that most are ignoring or denying that just is not going away.

Maybe true. But the Labour Party are a joke, and the Greens couldn't organise a pre-schoolers savings account.

Out of a frying pan, into a fire anyone? What makes anyone think a Labour-led government will be better for the environment? It certainly wont be better for the economy, or middle NZ.

My opinion, of course.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8