Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
964 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 363


  Reply # 1875997 2-Oct-2017 11:19
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

MikeB4:

 

I have no issue with James Shaw as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, he would certainly do a better job with the later than Steven Joyce and his manner compliments Bill English well. He also has a long history in sustainable management.

 

 

I think our political system is seriously screwed up if we have to resort to giving big positions to minority party members in Government. I don't care who that person is, or how good they are, If they were not democratically elected to be there, then they should not be there.

 

Our MMP system is seriously flawed, A party with 7% of votes, should never be in a position to decide who will be government.


Onward
11256 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4994

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1876014 2-Oct-2017 11:34
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Wiggum:

 

MikeB4:

 

I have no issue with James Shaw as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, he would certainly do a better job with the later than Steven Joyce and his manner compliments Bill English well. He also has a long history in sustainable management.

 

 

I think our political system is seriously screwed up if we have to resort to giving big positions to minority party members in Government. I don't care who that person is, or how good they are, If they were not democratically elected to be there, then they should not be there.

 

Our MMP system is seriously flawed, A party with 7% of votes, should never be in a position to decide who will be government.

 

 

 

 

James Shaw is in parliament by way of a democratic election. A party with 7% is not deciding it is either a party with circa 46%  or circa 36%. that is making the ultimate decision and the voting public made it so. Just because you may not agree with the outcome does not make undemocratic.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


 
 
 
 


964 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 363


  Reply # 1876022 2-Oct-2017 11:43
Send private message quote this post

MikeB4:

 

 

 

James Shaw is in parliament by way of a democratic election. A party with 7% is not deciding it is either a party with circa 46%  or circa 36%. that is making the ultimate decision and the voting public made it so. Just because you may not agree with the outcome does not make undemocratic.

 

 

I'm not saying he should not be in parliament.

 

I am referring to suggestions that he should be deputy PM, and finance minister. Its ludicrous to say that democratically he deserves those positions when his party only managed to secure 5.9% of the votes.


913 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 411


  Reply # 1876035 2-Oct-2017 11:56
Send private message quote this post

The max he would get is Minister of the Environment. He is way to left to even understand how much he could achieve under National compared to a 3 ring circus with Jacinda and Winston.


Onward
11256 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4994

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1876045 2-Oct-2017 12:14
Send private message quote this post

Wiggum:

 

MikeB4:

 

 

 

James Shaw is in parliament by way of a democratic election. A party with 7% is not deciding it is either a party with circa 46%  or circa 36%. that is making the ultimate decision and the voting public made it so. Just because you may not agree with the outcome does not make undemocratic.

 

 

I'm not saying he should not be in parliament.

 

I am referring to suggestions that he should be deputy PM, and finance minister. Its ludicrous to say that democratically he deserves those positions when his party only managed to secure 5.9% of the votes.

 

 

 

 

So you are saying that a party that has been democratically elected does not have the right to make decisions and the two or three entities that make up that government do not have the right to make decisions.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


35 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 28


  Reply # 1876184 2-Oct-2017 15:34
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

The MMP system is working very well from what I can see. Previously under FPP, large chunks of the population that voted for anyone aside from the main two parties had no say in government, under MMP they get a little say, depending on how negotiations go. On this particular occasion the party that won the previous times has lost many of it's minor parties due to poor performance of those minor parties, the voting public has removed them.

 

Working as intended.

 

If one of the two main parties wants to skip bartering a deal with one or more minor parties they just need to tailor there policies to capture 51% of the vote. Should be fairly straight forward, there is little real difference between the pair of them.


469 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85


  Reply # 1876292 2-Oct-2017 18:18
Send private message quote this post

dwilson:

 

The MMP system is working very well from what I can see. Previously under FPP, large chunks of the population that voted for anyone aside from the main two parties had no say in government, under MMP they get a little say, depending on how negotiations go. On this particular occasion the party that won the previous times has lost many of it's minor parties due to poor performance of those minor parties, the voting public has removed them.

 

Working as intended.

 

If one of the two main parties wants to skip bartering a deal with one or more minor parties they just need to tailor there policies to capture 51% of the vote. Should be fairly straight forward, there is little real difference between the pair of them.

 

 

And in case anyone is not aware of it, before James Shaw can 'make a deal' with National, he has to get 75% of green party membership to agree/vote yes. He has stated, that as the green party vote on the 23rd was for a change of government, he doesn't see a coalition with national as a valid option as he doesn't believe he'll get the support from from the party membership. 


807 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 326


  Reply # 1876309 2-Oct-2017 19:33
Send private message quote this post

MaxLV:

 

 

 

And in case anyone is not aware of it, before James Shaw can 'make a deal' with National, he has to get 75% of green party membership to agree/vote yes. He has stated, that as the green party vote on the 23rd was for a change of government, he doesn't see a coalition with national as a valid option as he doesn't believe he'll get the support from from the party membership. 

 

 

Fair point about the 75% agreement, which of course would mean at least a 100% reply from 100% of their members and 3 out of 4 agreeing. But does that also apply to them trying to do a deal with Labour?


469 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85


  Reply # 1876442 3-Oct-2017 00:35
Send private message quote this post

DaveB:

 

MaxLV:

 

 

 

And in case anyone is not aware of it, before James Shaw can 'make a deal' with National, he has to get 75% of green party membership to agree/vote yes. He has stated, that as the green party vote on the 23rd was for a change of government, he doesn't see a coalition with national as a valid option as he doesn't believe he'll get the support from from the party membership. 

 

 

Fair point about the 75% agreement, which of course would mean at least a 100% reply from 100% of their members and 3 out of 4 agreeing. But does that also apply to them trying to do a deal with Labour?

 

 

They have already agreed to the 'memorandum of understanding' with labour in 2016 to get a change of government this year, which is another reason why they wont go into a coalition with national. 

 

The Labour Party and the Green Party have announced today (31/05/2016) they have signed an historic agreement to work cooperatively to change the Government.

 

 The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the parties commits them to working cooperatively to change the Government including closer work at parliament and a possible joint policy announcement or campaign.

 

 

 

I'd say any coalition with labour would be an extension of this agreement.


3054 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1118


  Reply # 1876532 3-Oct-2017 09:58
Send private message quote this post

Setting aside electorate percentages for a moment ... I think that in every coalition, ministerial portfolios should go to capable and experienced people.  When they don't bad things happen (e.g. Max Bradford's electricity reforms).   No-one in the Greens has been in government, let alone in a ministerial role.

 

I don't see James Shaw as capable of Min Finance.  I do see him as capable of dep PM.   I thought he coped as well any leader could have under the trying circumstances of Meteria Turei.  He seems to be the most pragmatic and grounded person in the Green's line-up.

 

I don't really see anyone else in the Greens' shadow cabinet as capable of being Minister of anything in their first term.  They are all IMO a bit too starry eyed and idealistic. Associate Ministers: Yes absolutely - a good apprenticeship for keen people, new to government.

 

 





Mike

Onward
11256 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4994

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1876542 3-Oct-2017 10:20
Send private message quote this post

I think the portfolio(s) that Mr Shaw may be or not offered will not be Bill English's decision to make it will be Jacinda Arderns and I don't envy her. The ship named Aotearoa is heading towards stormy seas.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


63 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 20


  Reply # 1876543 3-Oct-2017 10:20
Send private message quote this post

MikeAqua:

 

Setting aside electorate percentages for a moment ... I think that in every coalition, ministerial portfolios should go to capable and experienced people.  When they don't bad things happen (e.g. Max Bradford's electricity reforms).   No-one in the Greens has been in government, let alone in a ministerial role.

 

I don't see James Shaw as capable of Min Finance.  I do see him as capable of dep PM.   I thought he coped as well any leader could have under the trying circumstances of Meteria Turei.  He seems to be the most pragmatic and grounded person in the Green's line-up.

 

I don't really see anyone else in the Greens' shadow cabinet as capable of being Minister of anything in their first term.  They are all IMO a bit too starry eyed and idealistic. Associate Ministers: Yes absolutely - a good apprenticeship for keen people, new to government.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Julie-Ann Genter ran rings around Brownlee when she was Green transport spokesperson and he was the minister. That is just one example off the top of my head.




360 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 338


  Reply # 1876550 3-Oct-2017 10:26
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

MaxLV:

 

DaveB:

 

MaxLV:

 

 

 

And in case anyone is not aware of it, before James Shaw can 'make a deal' with National, he has to get 75% of green party membership to agree/vote yes. He has stated, that as the green party vote on the 23rd was for a change of government, he doesn't see a coalition with national as a valid option as he doesn't believe he'll get the support from from the party membership. 

 

 

Fair point about the 75% agreement, which of course would mean at least a 100% reply from 100% of their members and 3 out of 4 agreeing. But does that also apply to them trying to do a deal with Labour?

 

 

They have already agreed to the 'memorandum of understanding' with labour in 2016 to get a change of government this year, which is another reason why they wont go into a coalition with national. 

 

The Labour Party and the Green Party have announced today (31/05/2016) they have signed an historic agreement to work cooperatively to change the Government.

 

 The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the parties commits them to working cooperatively to change the Government including closer work at parliament and a possible joint policy announcement or campaign.

 

 

 

I'd say any coalition with labour would be an extension of this agreement.

 

 

 

 

The agreement expired the day after the General Election.  This was by design to ensure that it did not interfere with any coalition negotiations.

 

The MoU was an agreement to campaign cooperatively with a common purpose and no surprises.(Interestingly, both parties failed to uphold their respective ends of that bargain)  By all measures, it was a failure. 

 

* Labour spiked Turei

 

* Green support plummeted

 

* Split voters in several key electorates

 

* Outcome Green + Lab < National

 

...anyone still clinging to that old chestnut might want to make a quick reality check :-)


469 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 85


  Reply # 1876562 3-Oct-2017 10:35
Send private message quote this post

6FIEND:

 

MaxLV:

 

DaveB:

 

MaxLV:

 

 

 

And in case anyone is not aware of it, before James Shaw can 'make a deal' with National, he has to get 75% of green party membership to agree/vote yes. He has stated, that as the green party vote on the 23rd was for a change of government, he doesn't see a coalition with national as a valid option as he doesn't believe he'll get the support from from the party membership. 

 

 

Fair point about the 75% agreement, which of course would mean at least a 100% reply from 100% of their members and 3 out of 4 agreeing. But does that also apply to them trying to do a deal with Labour?

 

 

They have already agreed to the 'memorandum of understanding' with labour in 2016 to get a change of government this year, which is another reason why they wont go into a coalition with national. 

 

The Labour Party and the Green Party have announced today (31/05/2016) they have signed an historic agreement to work cooperatively to change the Government.

 

 The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the parties commits them to working cooperatively to change the Government including closer work at parliament and a possible joint policy announcement or campaign.

 

 

 

I'd say any coalition with labour would be an extension of this agreement.

 

 

 

 

The agreement expired the day after the General Election.  This was by design to ensure that it did not interfere with any coalition negotiations.

 

The MoU was an agreement to campaign cooperatively with a common purpose and no surprises.(Interestingly, both parties failed to uphold their respective ends of that bargain)  By all measures, it was a failure. 

 

* Labour spiked Turei

 

* Green support plummeted

 

* Split voters in several key electorates

 

* Outcome Green + Lab < National

 

...anyone still clinging to that old chestnut might want to make a quick reality check :-)

 



And yet both labour and greens still refer to this agreement when discussing a possible/probable coalition, with NZF to form a government. It may have expired, but it's still the basis of their joint 'understanding.'

And it's still one of the many stumbling blocks to any possible national/greens coalition. 


4981 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2272


  Reply # 1876641 3-Oct-2017 13:43
Send private message quote this post

 

The possibility of National and the Greens coming together to form a government has been floated by some commentators.

 

But Mr Shaw said that speculation was getting a bit boring.

 

"Our job is to form a government with the Labour Party, that's what I said on election night, that's what I campaigned on for the last 18 months and that's what we are busy working on.

 

"I said on election night that I think the numbers are there for a new government and that's what we are working on, so everything else frankly is noise and no signal."

 

Mr Shaw said talk of a 'Teal Deal' is all being fed through proxies and is all PR and fluff, saying there was no substance to it.

 

Asked whether he believed it was a paid campaign to promote the idea of a National-Greens deal, Mr Shaw said he did not know, and he did not care.

 

"I'm busy trying to form a government with the Labour Party and presumably with New Zealand First as well, and I said on election night if Bill [English] wants to call, I'm happy to take the call and to have a conversation with him, but he hasn't called, so as far as I'm concerned, everything else is pure speculation."

 

source


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Vodafone TV — television in the cloud
Posted 17-Oct-2017 19:29


Nokia 8 review: Classy midrange pure Android phone
Posted 16-Oct-2017 07:27


Why carriers might want to embrace Commerce Commission study, MVNOs
Posted 13-Oct-2017 09:42


Fitbit launches Ionic, its health and fitness smartwatch
Posted 12-Oct-2017 15:52


Xero launches machine learning automation to improve coding accuracy for small businesses
Posted 12-Oct-2017 15:45


Bank of New Zealand uses Intel AI to detect financial crime
Posted 12-Oct-2017 15:39


Sony launches Xperia XZ1, a smartphone with real-time 3D capture
Posted 11-Oct-2017 10:26


Notes on Nokia’s phone comeback
Posted 10-Oct-2017 10:06


Air New Zealand begins Inflight Wi-Fi rollout
Posted 9-Oct-2017 20:16


The latest mobile phones in perspective
Posted 9-Oct-2017 18:34


Review: Acronis True Image 2018 — serious backup
Posted 8-Oct-2017 11:22


Lenovo launches ThinkPad Anniversary Edition 25
Posted 7-Oct-2017 23:16


Less fone, more tech as Vodafone gets brand make-over
Posted 6-Oct-2017 08:16


API Talent Achieves AWS MSP Partner Status
Posted 5-Oct-2017 21:20


Stellar Consulting Group now a Domo Partner
Posted 5-Oct-2017 21:03



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.