Has Labour truly gone crazy?

Forums › Off topic › Has Labour truly gone crazy?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Mad Scientist
29763 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#849507 5-Jul-2013 09:17

there's no right or wrong ... the voters decide

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#849515 5-Jul-2013 09:34

Klipspringer:
KiwiNZ:
The Maori electorates were established as affirmative action to address an imbalance especially prior universal suffrage. Once all outstanding treaty issues have been addressed these could and probably will be disestablished as originally planed in 1867.

hmmm. Affirmative action was only invented 100years later (1961 in the States to be exact). I had no idea that NZ was so far ahead of the rest of the world.

The benefit of AA is to represent an underrepresented group" in areas of employment, education, and business. It provides improved access to university courses and scholarships for Maori. Its actually got nothing to so with "outstanding treaty issues" as you put it. Those "treaty issues" will never be addressed because they keep increasing.

Affirmative Action does not work. One only has to look at what has happened in South Africa to see the proof.

*sigh* to address the pedantic

"The establishment of Maori electorates came about in 1867 during the term of the 4th Parliament with the Maori Representation Act, drafted by Napier MP Donald McLean.[2] Parliament passed the Act only after lengthy debate. Many conservative MPs, most of whom considered Maori "unfit" to participate in government, opposed Maori representation in Parliament, while some MPs from the other end of the spectrum (such as James FitzGerald, who had proposed allocating a third of Parliament to Maori) regarded the concessions given to Maori as insufficient. In the end the setting up of Maori electorates separate from existing electorates assuaged conservative opposition to the bill – conservatives had previously feared that Maori would gain the right to vote in general electorates, thereby forcing all MPs (rather than just four Maori MPs) to take notice of Maori opinion.
Before this law came into effect, no direct prohibition on Maori voting existed, but other indirect prohibitions made it extremely difficult for Maori to exercise their theoretical electoral rights. The most significant problem involved the property qualification – to vote, one needed to possess a certain value of land. Maori owned a great deal of land, but they held it in common, not under individual title, and under the law, only land held under individual title could count towards the property qualification. Donald McLean explicitly intended his bill as a temporary measure, giving specific representation to Maori until they adopted European customs of land ownership. However, the Maori electorates lasted far longer than the intended five years, and remain in place today, despite the property qualification for voting being removed in 1879."

It may not a have been called affirmative action but it meets the definition, after all the horseless carriage was an Automobile before being named such.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#849516 5-Jul-2013 09:37

joker97: there's no right or wrong ... the voters decide

I don't think it will even get that far. Media commentary indicates the policy has split the party and if online polls are anything to go by it has been widely panned by the public, and raised a number of issues around human rights and discrimination.

I doubt it will even get off the starting block.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#849518 5-Jul-2013 09:51

KiwiNZ:

It may not a have been called affirmative action but it meets the definition, after all the horseless carriage was an Automobile before being named such.

But your definition of "affirmative action" as "treaty settlement" is incorrect.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#849520 5-Jul-2013 09:55

Klipspringer:
KiwiNZ:

It may not a have been called affirmative action but it meets the definition, after all the horseless carriage was an Automobile before being named such.

But your definition of "affirmative action" as "treaty settlement" is incorrect.

Never said that

Azzura

603 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#849524 5-Jul-2013 09:56

Not sure if it is a bad idea or good idea. But I did find it interesting coming across this thread and remember reading this article (just a couple of days ago) - Women know less about politics than men, study finds

wasabi2k

2096 posts

Uber Geek

#849547 5-Jul-2013 10:22

The move seems to be an incredibly braindead reaction to what I guess is a good general sentiment.

I don't even know if it is legal? If an employer can't discriminate why can a political party?

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#849549 5-Jul-2013 10:24

"The rules would also require a list that had a mix of ethnicity, gender, geographical spread, sexual orientation and disability representation."

I guess they don't really want to win an election this time around either.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#849558 5-Jul-2013 10:27

1080p: "The rules would also require a list that had a mix of ethnicity, gender, geographical spread, sexual orientation and disability representation."

I guess they don't really want to win an election this time around either.

You have described the ideal representation mix for Parliament.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#849570 5-Jul-2013 10:40

KiwiNZ:
1080p: "The rules would also require a list that had a mix of ethnicity, gender, geographical spread, sexual orientation and disability representation."

I guess they don't really want to win an election this time around either.

You have described the ideal representation mix for Parliament.

Agree, but if that was their only qualification for the job then lord help us.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#849573 5-Jul-2013 10:47

scuwp:
KiwiNZ:
1080p: "The rules would also require a list that had a mix of ethnicity, gender, geographical spread, sexual orientation and disability representation."

I guess they don't really want to win an election this time around either.

You have described the ideal representation mix for Parliament.

Agree, but if that was their only qualification for the job then lord help us.

95% of the incumbents are not qualified now, so it may well be an improvement

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#849574 5-Jul-2013 10:47

KiwiNZ:
1080p: "The rules would also require a list that had a mix of ethnicity, gender, geographical spread, sexual orientation and disability representation."

I guess they don't really want to win an election this time around either.

You have described the ideal representation mix for Parliament.

My issue is not with a mixed representation but more with requiring it. What if there simply is no disabled candidate available to stand (pun unintended) in a particular party/region/seat?

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#849575 5-Jul-2013 10:48

KiwiNZ:
scuwp:
KiwiNZ:
1080p: "The rules would also require a list that had a mix of ethnicity, gender, geographical spread, sexual orientation and disability representation."

I guess they don't really want to win an election this time around either.

You have described the ideal representation mix for Parliament.

Agree, but if that was their only qualification for the job then lord help us.

95% of the incumbents are not qualified now, so it may well be an improvement

You have no idea what you're talking about if you seriously think this is the case. When was the last time you spoke with an MP?

SteveON

1916 posts

Uber Geek

#849581 5-Jul-2013 10:56

It's almost as bad as the National Racist Party; AKA the Maori Party...

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#849582 5-Jul-2013 11:00

SteveON: It's almost as bad as the National Racist Party; AKA the Maori Party...

Which is nearly as bad as the racist Mana party.

The Mana Party is pushing for no-deposit, low interest, loans to enable Maori first-time buyers to get their own homes.

Welcome to NZ

1 | 2 | 3 | 4