Has Labour truly gone crazy?

Forums › Off topic › Has Labour truly gone crazy?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Elpie

1304 posts

Uber Geek

#849719 5-Jul-2013 14:08

ajobbins: The public only get to vote on the candidates that get put forward by the party.

In local government, the public only gets to vote on the candidates that (a) put themselves forward and (b) can afford both the time/money to pay for an election campaign and the time/money to do the job. In most of NZ its a part-time job that costs more than it pays.

In national government, regardless of who gets in to the party lists, much depends on who even gets nominated for the party lists. A party can't be blamed if few women are nominated for list selection.

It's a bit like software development, IMO - if we want more women involved then involvement needs to start with education at a young age. The mantra of needing to get more girls and young women interested applies to politics as well. As such, I don't see this quota as being meaningful. Quick fixes don't often work.

To me, it's almost like Labour is saying they know the fix without ever having found out what the problem is that they are trying to fix. Imbalance in representation isn't ideal but this issue isn't a numbers game.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#849753 5-Jul-2013 14:28

I disagree with the concept of quotas they perpetuate the belief that sectors of the community are unable to do the job on merits. And as soon as they ask for special services they are vilified as was the case with Mojo Mathers.

it is a sad reality that New Zealand is not a land of equal opportunity and equal treatment. Hands up those here who have been denied access to a restaurant because they are in a Wheelchair?

If the barriers to equality were truly down this thread would never have existed.

Ragnor

8222 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#849764 5-Jul-2013 14:41

I think this policy is nuts, they should focus on equality of opportunity via education not this nonsense equality of outcome by quotas.

Equality of outcome is impossible.

Handsomedan

7294 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#849782 5-Jul-2013 15:23

I'd like a benevolent dictatorship.

Maybe with me as supreme leader.

Anyone want to be my trusty sidekick?

Handsome Dan Has Spoken.
Handsome Dan needs to stop adding three dots to every sentence...

Handsome Dan does not currently have a side hustle as the mascot for Yale

*Gladly accepting donations...

Giggs

252 posts

Ultimate Geek

#849823 5-Jul-2013 17:29

Klipspringer:

Female dictators are very uncommon (cant think of a single one right now), so its probably best you vote for the labour nutters if you worried about NZ becoming a dictatorship.

Helen Clark? :-)

Seriously though I bet john Key cannot believe his luck with the timing of this and the heat it will take off him.

Not only that but Labour run the risk of alienating a lot of male voters they need to win the next election with all this politically correct rubbish.

Actually do they want to win the next election?

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#849843 5-Jul-2013 18:11

Klipspringer:
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

I agree with this, plenty of mortgagee sales for me the get some cheap rentals from.

But seriously WTF?

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#849846 5-Jul-2013 18:16

sen8or: Labour just needs someone with some balls, like Helen Clarke.

I am not now nor am I likely to be a labour supporter, but, for the first 2 terms of their reign, she led with conviction and determination, even if I dont agree with the message / policies that were delivered, she was to be admired.

Shearer, Cunliffe, whats his name that lost last time, all just muppets

I hate Uncle Helen with avengence, but she was a very good leader, and if she hadn't spent her last term ruining the country in order to secure herself a role in the UN I'd still have a lot of respect for her.

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.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#849866 5-Jul-2013 18:57

"hate" that's a very strong word to use.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

oxnsox

1923 posts

Uber Geek

#849922 5-Jul-2013 21:18

Handsomedan: I'd like a benevolent dictatorship.

Maybe with me as supreme leader.

Anyone want to be my trusty sidekick?

OK..... but you'd probably have to go through some hormone therapy if we were to get the public support....
____________
That any political party would even fess up to having thought of considering such a submission for further discussion is mind boggling. .....
But never mind we'll let them somehow, and at sometime, manage the minds of our children.

KiwiTim

376 posts

Ultimate Geek

#850004 6-Jul-2013 09:32

Well they just lost my vote .... Labour has disillusioned its traditional support base. The traditional support base has been painted into a corner with no where to go (except vote for Winston, or don’t vote at all). People should be elected purely on merit, or at least the perception of merit.

If you carry the argument to its full extent, that all sections of the community need to be represented in kind, then, what about the section of the community with lower IQ, should they have a quota? Although, I think the Beehive has enough of that sector of the community already!

Our leaders need to be intelligent, educated, informed, articulate and moral, with a dedicated intention to serve the communities they represent. It doesn't matter what race or gender they come from, as long as they meet the criteria in my previous sentence, but they do need to be elected by the public's perception of their merit. A quota system limits public choice and is not democratic.

driller2000

935 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#850113 6-Jul-2013 14:30

KiwiTim: Well they just lost my vote .... Labour has disillusioned its traditional support base. The traditional support base has been painted into a corner with no where to go (except vote for Winston, or don’t vote at all). People should be elected purely on merit, or at least the perception of merit.

If you carry the argument to its full extent, that all sections of the community need to be represented in kind, then, what about the section of the community with lower IQ, should they have a quota? Although, I think the Beehive has enough of that sector of the community already!

Our leaders need to be intelligent, educated, informed, articulate and moral, with a dedicated intention to serve the communities they represent. It doesn't matter what race or gender they come from, as long as they meet the criteria in my previous sentence, but they do need to be elected by the public's perception of their merit. A quota system limits public choice and is not democratic.

you do realise it ain't policy...(yet)

it's a proposal - and based on responses from most labour mp's - it's not widely supported by them either

will be interesting to see if it gets the nod...

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#850427 7-Jul-2013 14:33

driller2000:
KiwiTim: Well they just lost my vote .... Labour has disillusioned its traditional support base. The traditional support base has been painted into a corner with no where to go (except vote for Winston, or don’t vote at all). People should be elected purely on merit, or at least the perception of merit.

If you carry the argument to its full extent, that all sections of the community need to be represented in kind, then, what about the section of the community with lower IQ, should they have a quota? Although, I think the Beehive has enough of that sector of the community already!

Our leaders need to be intelligent, educated, informed, articulate and moral, with a dedicated intention to serve the communities they represent. It doesn't matter what race or gender they come from, as long as they meet the criteria in my previous sentence, but they do need to be elected by the public's perception of their merit. A quota system limits public choice and is not democratic.

you do realise it ain't policy...(yet)

it's a proposal - and based on responses from most labour mp's - it's not widely supported by them either

will be interesting to see if it gets the nod...

No it's not policy, and realistically given the feedback probably won't be either! However that won't stop some kind of back-door quota or the belief that candidates have been put forward for the wrong reason.

In England we called it "positive discrimination" which should be an oxymoron. I remember the police going on an equality drive because x, y or z was under represented. This left a number of very capable young white men who could not follow their dream because they were the wrong colour, race or sex.

If labour really want more women then encourage more women to want to be in the party - as said, educate from an early age and make it relevant.

BTW no I don't vote, I just can't decide which party I distrust the least.

Procrastination eventually pays off.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#850595 8-Jul-2013 07:01

I think everyone is well aware that this will never really see the light of day as a policy, but it does go to show the mentality of some in the Labour party.

That would be enough for me to not vote for them.

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#850647 8-Jul-2013 09:32

What I found to be strange was the policy was spoken of and then the leader (for whom I would hope all policy discussions to be held in public should be discussed with first) came out and said he didn't support it.

I have no time for opposition for oppositions sake. If you have a genuine issue with a policy, fine, argue the merits, but arguing so you can be seen to be "opposing" is just stupid.

When Goff was leader I had a discussion with him around it after he had a spout at my sons kindergarten opening (Why???) and he said Labour had been guilty of it, far more than he'd like which was one of the first honest responses I'd ever seen him give.

edge

423 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#851408 9-Jul-2013 11:10

And, not surprisingly, headline from Stuff: "Labour's 'man ban' canned".

"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of what he was never reasoned into."
— most commonly attributed to Jonathan Swift, author/theologian

1 | 2 | 3 | 4