Labour's day of decision new leader or not.

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

Forums › Politics › Labour's day of decision new leader or not.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 11

Networkn
32351 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1836314 3-Aug-2017 10:11

Fred99:

Have you forgotten that we've actually got an unelected PM -because the last PM merely got bored with the job or whatever?

Personally, I think people (and the media) should STFU about it.

It's a non-issue. We're electing a PM, not a president - nor anointing a future monarch.

I disagree it's a non-issue.

You don't know the reason Key left office, and suggesting reasons like that is just disingenuous. The reasons were logical as far as I am concerned. He didn't want to potentially be leader of a country for another 3+ years and felt he needed time for

whomever was his successor was, to show the country their skills/leadership prior to the election. It seemed fair to the country and all those involved.

I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM. PM is leader of our country, as the President is leader of the US.

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1836352 3-Aug-2017 10:44

Well, I'd go further and say we're not even directly electing the prime minister; yes, the leader of the largest parties are sold in that light (as current/potential PM), but of course we're actually voting for the parties themselves. That we have Bill English as PM shows this relatively less direct role of the PM (versus an elected president). The world kept on turning when Key left; as leader of the National Party, which was in government, his successor also takes on the role of PM. Of course, how people vote is directly influenced by their leader (and the perception of how that leader of the large parties would do in the role of PM).

Anyway, picking up on an earlier point: hopefully we will see some more interesting policy coming out of Labour with the election of Ardern. Little certainly tried a more "don't scare the horses" approach, removing capital gains tax off the table, likewise the raise to the age of NZS eligibility. Labour's refusal to go anywhere near drug legislation reform is one area I hope that get's revisited - this ostrich-like approach is just continuing to do untold damage to the country.

That said, I'm already sick of the strategy National ministers have clearly been told ordered to take in response to Ardern's election, which is to follow networkn's line: different leader, same policies (ie the problem is still there with Labour's dated and irrelevant policies). Given this current government's proven lack of ability to tackle any of the big issues facing this country (until they get so big they're impossible to ignore, and even then the response appears to be little more than window dressing) and its complete lack of vision or Big Ideas - pot calling the kettle black me thinks!

And before the Nationalators jump on me for this last comment - this isn't a view unique to those on the left; have a read/listen to right-wing commentators such as Mathew Hooton who have been saying the same thing for years.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1836378 3-Aug-2017 11:14

networkn:

Fred99:

Have you forgotten that we've actually got an unelected PM -because the last PM merely got bored with the job or whatever?

Personally, I think people (and the media) should STFU about it.

It's a non-issue. We're electing a PM, not a president - nor anointing a future monarch.

I disagree it's a non-issue.

You don't know the reason Key left office, and suggesting reasons like that is just disingenuous. The reasons were logical as far as I am concerned. He didn't want to potentially be leader of a country for another 3+ years and felt he needed time for

whomever was his successor was, to show the country their skills/leadership prior to the election. It seemed fair to the country and all those involved.

I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM. PM is leader of our country, as the President is leader of the US.

What a load of rubbish. You've been heading down a very clearly misogynist line in questioning the right of someone who could well be our future PM, based on some expectation you may have that she owes you an explanation about her future plans to procreate (or not).

Go argue with your straw-man

I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM

I'm not playing along with that stupid game.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1836397 3-Aug-2017 11:25

Fred99:

[You've been heading down a very clearly misogynist line in questioning the right of someone who could well be our future PM, based on some expectation you may have that she owes you an explanation about her future plans to procreate (or not).

Go argue with your straw-man
I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM

I'm not playing along with that stupid game.

New Zealanders have every right to know if she is planning on having kids/or not in the near future. Can't see the issue about asking such questions. Its no different to the questions asked in most job interviews these days anyway.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1836409 3-Aug-2017 11:30

Wiggum:

Fred99:

[You've been heading down a very clearly misogynist line in questioning the right of someone who could well be our future PM, based on some expectation you may have that she owes you an explanation about her future plans to procreate (or not).

Go argue with your straw-man
I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM

I'm not playing along with that stupid game.

New Zealanders have every right to know if she is planning on having kids/or not in the near future. Can't see the issue about asking such questions. Its no different to the questions asked in most job interviews these days anyway.

No they actually don't.

No more right than to know if Bill English is planning on having his prostate checked with a gloved finger.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1836412 3-Aug-2017 11:31

Wiggum:

Fred99:

[You've been heading down a very clearly misogynist line in questioning the right of someone who could well be our future PM, based on some expectation you may have that she owes you an explanation about her future plans to procreate (or not).

Go argue with your straw-man
I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM

I'm not playing along with that stupid game.

New Zealanders have every right to know if she is planning on having kids/or not in the near future. Can't see the issue about asking such questions. Its no different to the questions asked in most job interviews these days anyway.

No they don't. That is an issue for herself and her partner. This whole episode shows that sexism is still alive in New Zealand and it is disgraceful. As a person who was an employer I would never dream of asking questions like that, it is none of my business.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1836435 3-Aug-2017 11:39

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

Fred99:

[You've been heading down a very clearly misogynist line in questioning the right of someone who could well be our future PM, based on some expectation you may have that she owes you an explanation about her future plans to procreate (or not).

Go argue with your straw-man
I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM

I'm not playing along with that stupid game.

New Zealanders have every right to know if she is planning on having kids/or not in the near future. Can't see the issue about asking such questions. Its no different to the questions asked in most job interviews these days anyway.

No they don't. That is an issue for herself and her partner. This whole episode shows that sexism is still alive in New Zealand and it is disgraceful. As a person who was an employer I would never dream of asking questions like that, it is none of my business.

If she has plans to become PM, then its fair to think that this question is answered. Obviously if we going to get all PC about it then I can agree that you are right.

But IMO she should be stepping above this and answering the questions put forward to her (regardless if they PC or not), doing so will only increase her popularity. Shying away from such questions will do her no favors at the polls, even less favors if she was PM.

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.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1836438 3-Aug-2017 11:43

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

Fred99:

[You've been heading down a very clearly misogynist line in questioning the right of someone who could well be our future PM, based on some expectation you may have that she owes you an explanation about her future plans to procreate (or not).

Go argue with your straw-man
I don't get your suggestion that it matters not about PM

I'm not playing along with that stupid game.

New Zealanders have every right to know if she is planning on having kids/or not in the near future. Can't see the issue about asking such questions. Its no different to the questions asked in most job interviews these days anyway.

No they don't. That is an issue for herself and her partner. This whole episode shows that sexism is still alive in New Zealand and it is disgraceful. As a person who was an employer I would never dream of asking questions like that, it is none of my business.

If she has plans to become PM, then its fair to think that this question is answered. Obviously if we going to get all PC about it then I can agree that you are right.

But IMO she should be stepping above this and answering the questions put forward to her (regardless if they PC or not), doing so will only increase her popularity. Shying away from such questions will do her no favors at the polls.

Bollocks, and don't throw the "PC" rubbish. I Bill English, Gareth Morgan, James Shaw being asked the same question? no, why? its inappropriate .

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1836456 3-Aug-2017 11:48

As an employer myself if I was to ask somebody if they were going to get all jiggy with it and have children I would assume the prospective employee would either tell me where to go or lodge a complaint with ERA.

Personally I don't think its anybody's business but her's and her partner.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1836459 3-Aug-2017 11:49

MikeB4:

Bollocks, and don't throw the "PC" rubbish. I Bill English, Gareth Morgan, James Shaw being asked the same question? no, why? its inappropriate .

Its not an inappropriate question for a possible PM, even Jacinda agreed. Did you miss that?

Its debatable on whether its a valid question for women in the workplace. But that's outside of this discussion.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1836466 3-Aug-2017 11:53

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Bollocks, and don't throw the "PC" rubbish. I Bill English, Gareth Morgan, James Shaw being asked the same question? no, why? its inappropriate .

Its not an inappropriate question for a possible PM, even Jacinda agreed. Did you miss that?

Its debatable on whether its a valid question for women in the workplace. But that's outside of this discussion.

You are making stuff up. Go and have a look at her reaction to Richardsons question she did NOT think it was an appropriate questions

bmt

574 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1836474 3-Aug-2017 11:57

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Bollocks, and don't throw the "PC" rubbish. I Bill English, Gareth Morgan, James Shaw being asked the same question? no, why? its inappropriate .

Its not an inappropriate question for a possible PM, even Jacinda agreed. Did you miss that?

Its debatable on whether its a valid question for women in the workplace. But that's outside of this discussion.

It's not debatable whether it IS a valid question. It is illegal to ask, 100% fact.

Whether it SHOULD be a valid question is debatable.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1836477 3-Aug-2017 12:01

MikeB4:

You are making stuff up. Go and have a look at her reaction to Richardsons question she did NOT think it was an appropriate questions

Really? Did you actually watch the video before you accused me of making stuff up?

Jacinda Ardern: I decided to talk about it, it was my choice, so I am happy to continue responding to these questions

Asked if it is an inappropriate question?

Jacinda Ardern: For me, No. Because I opened myself up to it.....

She then went on a rant about the same question, and other women, Ie in the workplace.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/95352108/no-we-dont-need-to-know-about-jacinda-arderns-baby-plans-ever

I rest my case.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1836479 3-Aug-2017 12:06

bmt:

It's not debatable whether it IS a valid question. It is illegal to ask, 100% fact.

Whether it SHOULD be a valid question is debatable.

Fact should really be followed with some proof, ie a link. Otherwise its just fiction to me.

There are certain instances where this question will be appropriate in a workplace. It depends on the job being applied for.

Think

- Pilots / Flight attendants (Can't fly while you pregnant)

- Contractors (You applying for a contract role of 6 months)

Probably a few more.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1836481 3-Aug-2017 12:11

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

You are making stuff up. Go and have a look at her reaction to Richardsons question she did NOT think it was an appropriate questions

Really?

Jacinda Ardern: I decided to talk about it, it was my choice, so I am happy to continue responding to these questions

Asked if it is an inappropriate question?

Jacinda Ardern: For me, No. Because I opened myself up to it.....

She then went on a rant about the same question, and other women, Ie in the workplace.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/95352108/no-we-dont-need-to-know-about-jacinda-arderns-baby-plans-ever

I rest my case.

" it is totally unacceptable in 2017 to say that women should have to answer that question in the workplace. That is unacceptable in 2017. It is the woman's decision about when they choose to have children," she said."

I sincerely if you ever find yourself as an employer you learn what you can and cannot ask. If you do be prepared to be in the employment court.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 11