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.


Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | ... | 30
7779 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4147


  Reply # 1958834 15-Feb-2018 22:35
2 people support this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

The complaints of cronyism blah blah are old and tired cliches.

 

 

No they aren't.

 

Fundamentally, the National Party panders to business interests, Labour to unions.  It may be muddied by history over the past few decades and not entirely accurate, but it's real rather than a mere cliche.


19167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5582

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1958836 15-Feb-2018 22:42
One person supports this post
Send private message

Fred99:

 

networkn:

 

The complaints of cronyism blah blah are old and tired cliches.

 

 

No they aren't.

 

Fundamentally, the National Party panders to business interests, Labour to unions.  It may be muddied by history over the past few decades and not entirely accurate, but it's real rather than a mere cliche.

 

 

Cronyism: The appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications.

 

Does anyone have recent (last 9 Years) a concrete example of National doing this?

 

Note that giving someone you have an association with business, because you feel they can do a great job doesn't meet that threshold. Happens all day every day in Business.

 

 

 

 


 
 
 
 


7779 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4147


  Reply # 1958840 15-Feb-2018 23:09
Send private message

networkn:

 

Cronyism: The appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications.

 

 

An opposition leader doesn't have any "authority" - except over party members who are voluntarily subservient.

 

 


517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user


  Reply # 1958855 16-Feb-2018 06:53
Send private message

Fred99:

networkn:


The complaints of cronyism blah blah are old and tired cliches.



No they aren't.


Fundamentally, the National Party panders to business interests, Labour to unions.  It may be muddied by history over the past few decades and not entirely accurate, but it's real rather than a mere cliche.



Well that's hardly news... Labour is the political party of the unions, they are intrinsically tied together. On the other hand, while National favor business friendly policies, their party 'rules' or 'processes' don't require them to consult any body or outside forum etc. At the end of the day it's the caucus vote.

Of course, if a business person is a member of the party they could certainly try to exert their influence or opinion on caucus members. But they don't have a vote at the end of the day.

I guess the reason it was brought up was because of the botch-up the unions made in choosing Andrew Little. A union man to the back teeth, so the unions would have been rubbing their hands together, unfortunately a hopeless leader. So it's a good thing National is free from their influence.

Glurp
9276 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4307

Subscriber

  Reply # 1958948 16-Feb-2018 09:47
One person supports this post
Send private message

And National is not subject to self-serving business interests? I honestly don't see much difference in principle between the two.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


19167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5582

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1958956 16-Feb-2018 09:59
One person supports this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

And National is not subject to self-serving business interests? I honestly don't see much difference in principle between the two.

 

 

 

 

They are not required to consult outside interests in the election of a leader. That is a significant difference.


14908 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2809

Trusted

  Reply # 1958987 16-Feb-2018 10:11
Send private message

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

And National is not subject to self-serving business interests? I honestly don't see much difference in principle between the two.

 

 

 

 

They are not required to consult outside interests in the election of a leader. That is a significant difference.

 

 

I would doubt that Labours official leadership selection protocol requires the official acceptance of the unions. 


19167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5582

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1958989 16-Feb-2018 10:13
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

And National is not subject to self-serving business interests? I honestly don't see much difference in principle between the two.

 

 

 

 

They are not required to consult outside interests in the election of a leader. That is a significant difference.

 

 

I would doubt that Labours official leadership selection protocol requires the official acceptance of the unions. 

 

 

That is incorrect. They cannot elect a new leader permamently without the unions approval. Which accounts for a specific % of the total vote count.


14908 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2809

Trusted

  Reply # 1958997 16-Feb-2018 10:23
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

And National is not subject to self-serving business interests? I honestly don't see much difference in principle between the two.

 

 

 

 

They are not required to consult outside interests in the election of a leader. That is a significant difference.

 

 

I would doubt that Labours official leadership selection protocol requires the official acceptance of the unions. 

 

 

That is incorrect. They cannot elect a new leader permamently without the unions approval. Which accounts for a specific % of the total vote count.

 

 

They have a say, 20% of votes, thats not a requirement to accept or decline a leader.

 

JA was elected solely by the caucus as it was close to the election, but Unions just have a say.


Glurp
9276 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4307

Subscriber

  Reply # 1959000 16-Feb-2018 10:29
2 people support this post
Send private message

I often see things here that make me wonder about the influence of business interests. This is purely anecdotal. I haven't researched anything. I am just saying it makes me wonder. 

 

We seem to be far behind comparable countries when it comes to most forms of recycling. In Europe, sellers of batteries have for years also been required to collect old ones so they don't go into landfills. I believe similar measures exist for electronic goods. Drinks containers have fees added to them to encourage their return, which supermarkets are also obliged to accept. I'm not certain about plastic bags but I would imagine they have probably been banned for years.

 

These are just a few small examples, but they indicate a pattern to me. Although plastic bags are now in the spotlight here, none of these other things are as far as I know, yet they have been standard practice abroad for years. I don't know why New Zealand is so lax in this kind of thing, but I suspect it has to do with business interests whining about the increased costs such measures would impose on them. Or is there another explanation?

 

Business interests are by far the biggest donators to right-leaning political parties. They do this for a reason. There is nothing wrong with it in itself, but I imagine they expect something in return. Just as the unions expect something from Labour. I still don't see a huge difference in principle here, except possibly that the unions represent the interests of people rather than companies.

 

 

 

 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


19167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5582

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1959003 16-Feb-2018 10:34
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

They have a say, 20% of votes, thats not a requirement to accept or decline a leader.

 

JA was elected solely by the caucus as it was close to the election, but Unions just have a say.

 

 

I can't find the article, but I am certain that is incorrect. Her acceptance of leader, was *conditional* upon the final results of the union vote. She could not be leader without this. She can be a provisionary leader. This is what she was over the election campaign. Labour had been told that the Unions didn't specifically oppose her as leader but it was a requirement for her to confirm her plans didn't breach the union goals. Had she of come out saying she was going to lessen the unions power, it's likely a leadership rejection would have occurred. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


14908 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2809

Trusted

  Reply # 1959011 16-Feb-2018 10:57
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

They have a say, 20% of votes, thats not a requirement to accept or decline a leader.

 

JA was elected solely by the caucus as it was close to the election, but Unions just have a say.

 

 

I can't find the article, but I am certain that is incorrect. Her acceptance of leader, was *conditional* upon the final results of the union vote. She could not be leader without this. She can be a provisionary leader. This is what she was over the election campaign. Labour had been told that the Unions didn't specifically oppose her as leader but it was a requirement for her to confirm her plans didn't breach the union goals. Had she of come out saying she was going to lessen the unions power, it's likely a leadership rejection would have occurred. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I did a google and never saw that I just saw the 20% vote they have, MP's have 40%, cant recall the other. Party members I think it was

 

Unions are an organisation, so as they are closely aligned it makes sense to have a say, so they have a small say. On the National side, businesses and National are also joined at the hip, but there is no business "movement" so to speak. But they certainly do have a big influence you can guarantee that, but you wont read about it in the daily news


14908 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2809

Trusted

  Reply # 1959015 16-Feb-2018 11:00
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I often see things here that make me wonder about the influence of business interests. This is purely anecdotal. I haven't researched anything. I am just saying it makes me wonder. 

 

We seem to be far behind comparable countries when it comes to most forms of recycling. In Europe, sellers of batteries have for years also been required to collect old ones so they don't go into landfills. I believe similar measures exist for electronic goods. Drinks containers have fees added to them to encourage their return, which supermarkets are also obliged to accept. I'm not certain about plastic bags but I would imagine they have probably been banned for years.

 

These are just a few small examples, but they indicate a pattern to me. Although plastic bags are now in the spotlight here, none of these other things are as far as I know, yet they have been standard practice abroad for years. I don't know why New Zealand is so lax in this kind of thing, but I suspect it has to do with business interests whining about the increased costs such measures would impose on them. Or is there another explanation?

 

Business interests are by far the biggest donators to right-leaning political parties. They do this for a reason. There is nothing wrong with it in itself, but I imagine they expect something in return. Just as the unions expect something from Labour. I still don't see a huge difference in principle here, except possibly that the unions represent the interests of people rather than companies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good summary, there is no difference apart from Unions being an official organisation, so thats more transparent than deals behind closed doors. However, unions are yesterdays news thanks to the Employment Contracts Act. The left is more centre than its ever been, the right the same.


19167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5582

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1959016 16-Feb-2018 11:01
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

I did a google and never saw that I just saw the 20% vote they have, MP's have 40%, cant recall the other. Party members I think it was

 

Unions are an organisation, so as they are closely aligned it makes sense to have a say, so they have a small say. On the National side, businesses and National are also joined at the hip, but there is no business "movement" so to speak. But they certainly do have a big influence you can guarantee that, but you wont read about it in the daily news

 

 

I don't agree with your assessment, however the fact remains that a leader can not be a leader of the Labour party without the unions. Even if it's 20% that is far more than "a little say". If I cut your pay by 20% for example, or increased your rent, I don't think you'd say you had a little pay cut :-)

 

 


774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 592
Inactive user


  Reply # 1959017 16-Feb-2018 11:02
Send private message

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

They have a say, 20% of votes, thats not a requirement to accept or decline a leader.

 

JA was elected solely by the caucus as it was close to the election, but Unions just have a say.

 

 

I can't find the article, but I am certain that is incorrect. Her acceptance of leader, was *conditional* upon the final results of the union vote. She could not be leader without this. She can be a provisionary leader. This is what she was over the election campaign. Labour had been told that the Unions didn't specifically oppose her as leader but it was a requirement for her to confirm her plans didn't breach the union goals. Had she of come out saying she was going to lessen the unions power, it's likely a leadership rejection would have occurred. 

 

 

 

 

In fact, the Labour Party constitution allows for the Caucus to appoint a new Leader (without requiring the usual vote of Caucus, Membership and Unions) in the period 3 months prior to a general election.   This is how JA was made leader when Little resigned.

 

 

 

Usual process

 

 

9.12.1 The election of the Leader of the Labour Party must be determined by the votes cast in an

 

electoral college composed of the following:

 

(a) Parliamentary Labour Party Caucus (40% of the total vote):

 

(b) Party members (40% of the total vote):

 

(c) Affiliate Party members (20% of the total vote).   <- Unions

 

 

 

 

Exception

 

 

B12 Should a vacancy in the leadership occur in the 3 months prior to the announced date of

 

a general election (where known) or in the absence of an announced date the statutory

 

date (calculated according to the date on which the election is triggered or, in the case of

 

a caucus vote, a meeting or special meeting is requested), a new Leader will be elected

 

by Caucus majority vote. The new Leader will then be subject to confirmation within

 

three months after the election, pursuant to the Party constitution (i.e. they would need

 

to be endorsed by 60%+1 of the new Caucus, or a full leadership contest would be

 

triggered).

 

 

 

 

No union endorsement required.


1 | ... | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | ... | 30
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer 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:



Geekzone Live »

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


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



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.