Forms of government for New Zealand

Forums › Off topic › Forms of government for New Zealand

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 13

127 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 77

Trusted

#1026878 17-Apr-2014 13:51

KiwiNZ:
KieranReid: I've always thought that the ideal government would be something like:
1) Republic independent state (rule by the people under a founding constitution, promoting human rights, privacy and freedom of everything)
2) Combined with an e-democracy (laws directly voted on and proposed by electorate via internet)
3) Combined with a technocracy (so government representatives would not be economists, businessmen and lawyers, but rather: top experts in relevant fields like engineering, medicine, computer science, sociology, agricultural science, mathematics, statistics etc...; selected by how expert and knowledgeable they are in their field, rather than being voted in on personality)

E-Democracy no thanks , wait hang on we could use Kiosks they are secure.

Fair opinion, security all depends on implementation though. Was thinking more like website+app for regular citizen direct voting on laws, and official opinion polls for anyone who wanted to contribute using "something" like RealMe login and 2step verification or similar.

If my post helped you, consider my referrals (: Sharesies $5 referral code, Skinny 4GB buddy code, Contact Energy $100 promo code

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1026891 17-Apr-2014 14:19

KieranReid:
KiwiNZ:
KieranReid: I've always thought that the ideal government would be something like:
1) Republic independent state (rule by the people under a founding constitution, promoting human rights, privacy and freedom of everything)
2) Combined with an e-democracy (laws directly voted on and proposed by electorate via internet)
3) Combined with a technocracy (so government representatives would not be economists, businessmen and lawyers, but rather: top experts in relevant fields like engineering, medicine, computer science, sociology, agricultural science, mathematics, statistics etc...; selected by how expert and knowledgeable they are in their field, rather than being voted in on personality)

E-Democracy no thanks , wait hang on we could use Kiosks they are secure.

Fair opinion, security all depends on implementation though. Was thinking more like website+app for regular citizen direct voting on laws, and official opinion polls for anyone who wanted to contribute using "something" like RealMe login and 2step verification or similar.

That would be a nightmare. Many many months of research planning etc etc goes in well before a Bill is even tabled in Parliament, 90%( yes that % was pulled from the air to be an example) of the public have very little insight, understanding, caring about laws and legislation.
E-Democracy more E -Chaos and E- collapse

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

gzt

18694 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7831

Lifetime subscriber

#1026897 17-Apr-2014 14:29

Yeah I think the difference between you two indicates it is not just a technical gap. There is a world of difference between an opinion poll and legislation. Legislation has to have a bit of complexity to cater for the past (previous legislation), present and future and to respect any constitutional and legal issues that may arise.

I'd be interested to hear from the proponents how they suggest it will work with that gap.

Imo the most likely use of ED in the beginning is in making it easier to contribute during the creation of legislation once a need has been identified, but I'm sure it will evolve in the long term also.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1026899 17-Apr-2014 14:34

gzt: Yeah I think the difference between you two indicates it is not just a technical gap. There is a world of difference between an opinion poll and legislation. Legislation has to have a bit of complexity to cater for the past (previous legislation), present and future and to respect any constitutional and legal issues that may arise.

I'd be interested to hear from the proponents how they suggest it will work with that gap.

Imo the most likely use of ED in the beginning is in making it easier to contribute during the creation of legislation once a need has been identified, but I'm sure it will evolve in the long term also.

One can participate with legislation now, when a Bill is sent to select committee submissions to the committee can be made. I shudder to think of the legislative log jamb that would ensue if it were "open season" so to speak.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

SaltyNZ

8874 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9566

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1026940 17-Apr-2014 15:24

KiwiNZ:
That would be a nightmare. Many many months of research planning etc etc goes in well before a Bill is even tabled in Parliament, 90%( yes that % was pulled from the air to be an example) of the public have very little insight, understanding, caring about laws and legislation.
E-Democracy more E -Chaos and E- collapse

That's why the system I advocate would be fine. For the 90% of the public who don't care or understand, they could just vote for their preferred candidate (or not) and leave it at that. Just because a direct democracy gives you the option to vote directly doesn't mean you are forced to do so, any more than the current system forces you to vote.

TL;DR those who don't care now won't care later either.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Geektastic

18010 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1026949 17-Apr-2014 15:41

KiwiNZ:
KieranReid:
KiwiNZ:
KieranReid: I've always thought that the ideal government would be something like:
1) Republic independent state (rule by the people under a founding constitution, promoting human rights, privacy and freedom of everything)
2) Combined with an e-democracy (laws directly voted on and proposed by electorate via internet)
3) Combined with a technocracy (so government representatives would not be economists, businessmen and lawyers, but rather: top experts in relevant fields like engineering, medicine, computer science, sociology, agricultural science, mathematics, statistics etc...; selected by how expert and knowledgeable they are in their field, rather than being voted in on personality)

E-Democracy no thanks , wait hang on we could use Kiosks they are secure.

Fair opinion, security all depends on implementation though. Was thinking more like website+app for regular citizen direct voting on laws, and official opinion polls for anyone who wanted to contribute using "something" like RealMe login and 2step verification or similar.

That would be a nightmare. Many many months of research planning etc etc goes in well before a Bill is even tabled in Parliament, 90%( yes that % was pulled from the air to be an example) of the public have very little insight, understanding, caring about laws and legislation.
E-Democracy more E -Chaos and E- collapse

I'd have to agree entirely with your 90% figure - but personally I'd extend it and deny them the vote for being too uneducated to properly exercise it. Voting ought to require a licence to demonstrate your reasonable understanding of economics, politics, foreign affairs etc.

Pass the test and get a licence that looks like a driving licence. RFID the licence and use it to determine eligibility to vote on polling days.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1026955 17-Apr-2014 15:50

Democracy is ... Government Of the People, by the people, for the people, despite the people. Despite it's warts the NZ system it is better than many examples around the globe present and past

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

wongtop

569 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 50

#1026958 17-Apr-2014 15:52

SaltyNZ, it sounds like you are advocating something like Bruce Simpson's recoverable proxy system. http://www.aardvark.co.nz/rproxy.shtml

SaltyNZ

8874 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9566

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1026988 17-Apr-2014 16:47

wongtop: SaltyNZ, it sounds like you are advocating something like Bruce Simpson's recoverable proxy system. http://www.aardvark.co.nz/rproxy.shtml

Yes! That's the one. I couldn't remember where I had first read about it... Thanks :-)

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

MrMistofeles

66 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 9

#1027131 17-Apr-2014 22:22

That seems like a nice system for a bi-annual conscience vote but for the vast majority of politics it would just increase Gerrymandering and introduce massive time and administration overheads.

I also think it would cause some less than ideal geographical power swings. Auckland would be massively represented and could essentially VETO the rest of NZ on anything.

Have to agree with KiwiNZ. On the whole what we have works. It's all very well pointing to hypothetical models but when you are talking about something as complex as a political system I don't even know that it's possible to keep in mind all the caveats and assumptions (not even accounting for oversights which remain unidentified until a model is tested). It would be a more meaningful conversation if you could point to an OECD country with a favourable political system and a proven track record.

I am involved in the consultation process helping to draft regulations for a significant piece of legislation that was enacted last year. From where I sit NZ does have the right systems in place. From the beginning the right industry people were involved, a public consultation was held and many entities have provided detailed submissions which have helped to shape the legal framework moving forward.

I think we're on the right track and the way forward is to continue increasing transparency as much as possible and better promote the various avenues by which people can have a say.

Sidestep

1019 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 567

Lifetime subscriber

#1027210 18-Apr-2014 09:26

MrMistofeles:
I think we're on the right track and the way forward is to continue increasing transparency as much as possible and better promote the various avenues by which people can have a say.

Hmm.. I'm no political Scientist, not qualified in any way, but I'll have a little rant anyway.

I think the reason so many (but not 90% @KiwiNZ come on!) have so little insight or understanding is because they feel divorced from the process.

It's true - there's no shortage of Democracy in our existing system. There's a lack of participation.
Finding a new way to engage more people in such important decision making is the key.
It'd be a shame to sit around waiting for another OECD country to come up with a great idea when we could do it.

I lived and worked in Australia, and Canada, and in the US as a young man back in the 90's - when Ross Perot (unsuccessfully) promoted a type of EDD. That tweaked my interest.
The folks I worked and hung with were mostly educated, aware of, and involved in their respective political processes.

Just as most Geekzoners likely are. I began to think everybody was.

Now I live a good part of the year in a remote rural area of NZ, and I'm horrified at the general lack of interest in any of the community, district, or central levels of government.

There's plenty of complaining about the “corrupt politicians” the lack of assistance, feelings of disenfrachisement and so on, but so few seem to get involved in the process. They feel it's pointless, and what difference does one vote make?

They pretty much all have mobile phones, and an internet connection though.

There could maybe be a simple outline of an issue, a yes or no vote. There, they've participated! In real time. They'd see results.
Geez half of them try to vote on America's Got talent - or whatever that silly show is – in spite of the scrolling message saying it's not available!
Or find out more by digging deeper, the option of viewing expert opinions, joining a public debate.

I'm not suggesting the public have the right to table new legislation willy nilly, just that there should an option to really contribute during the creation of legislation (as @GZT suggested).
A new avenue to have a say.

Legislation would be proposed. It'd go through the normal processes, but the public would have a say on some of it. They'd see the results.
I understand that's simplistic, but there must be some way of making it an option.

@geektastic, I'm guessing that saying you'd deny people the vote for being too uneducated to properly exercise it was a tongue in cheek comment.. I do agree political education would help.. but some hands on experience might be better:)
Alienate people from the political process and they'll feel nothing in the system's theirs.
They've nothing to loose and it comes back to bite you as social problems..

/rant

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

dman

956 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 33

#1027267 18-Apr-2014 11:57

This whole thread has skipped ahead a bit too far in asking the question of "what form of government?"

Before then we have to seriously ask ourselves, do we even need government?

I say NO!

https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#1027289 18-Apr-2014 12:43

charsleysa:
KiwiNZ: The Queen is Head of State with limited powers, the Government is those guys in the Beehive.

Yes, your point being?

My point was the fact that you'll never be able to become head of state government with the current government because you must be part of an elitist group, therefore already having the elitist nonsense you wanted to avoid.

As opposed to the US system which requires BILLIONS of dollars. They get these dollars from wealthy contributors who then expect something back for their money, never mind the BILLIONS spent on lobbying, again the wealthy getting a return on their money.

What is needed are laws to prevent political "Match Fixing" where agreements are made to loose to another candidate to influence the electoral process.

For example, if a political party has a "cup of tea" arrangement then BOTH parties forever loose funding for that seat.

The electoral process is there for us, the people, to decide who should represent us as government, currently it is being manipulated by political parties for their benefit, not ours.

So, a change to MMP, every body gets to vote for:

1: A party
2 from 2-5 members of each party, no member vote for all parties = null vote

From the party vote we get the % of each party to be in power.
From the members vote we get who will be in each party in office, so if party A gets 60% of the vote the 60 members of that party with the highest vote becomes part of government.

This gives "the people" sole right over who represents us, not the parties who place whom they want at the top of their "party list" or put them into "safe seats"

This means EVERY MP had better be visible, had better be known or....well.... BYE!

The MP with the most votes is PM irrespective of which party they come from until such time as another election is held.

Offences by a PM/MP is bankruptcy (INCLUDING Trusts, 50% of the partners property and 75% of the children's property) and life imprisonment

See politicians need reminding they are there to represent us, not just the wealthy, their party, their political allies, us the 4 million people who live here as citizens.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#1027291 18-Apr-2014 12:47

dman: This whole thread has skipped ahead a bit too far in asking the question of "what form of government?" Before then we have to seriously ask ourselves, do we even need government? I say NO!

Then you will soon find the wealthy become "Royalty" and the rest of us become "Serfs"

Law and order will be based on who pays the most for it.

"Majority rules" where everyone votes on all issues will see decisions benefiting Auckland first, NZ second.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#1027306 18-Apr-2014 13:26

Sidestep:
MrMistofeles:
I think we're on the right track and the way forward is to continue increasing transparency as much as possible and better promote the various avenues by which people can have a say.

Hmm.. I'm no political Scientist, not qualified in any way, but I'll have a little rant anyway.

I think the reason so many (but not 90% @KiwiNZ come on!) have so little insight or understanding is because they feel divorced from the process.

It's true - there's no shortage of Democracy in our existing system. There's a lack of participation.
Finding a new way to engage more people in such important decision making is the key.
It'd be a shame to sit around waiting for another OECD country to come up with a great idea when we could do it.

I lived and worked in Australia, and Canada, and in the US as a young man back in the 90's - when Ross Perot (unsuccessfully) promoted a type of EDD. That tweaked my interest.
The folks I worked and hung with were mostly educated, aware of, and involved in their respective political processes.

Just as most Geekzoners likely are. I began to think everybody was.

Now I live a good part of the year in a remote rural area of NZ, and I'm horrified at the general lack of interest in any of the community, district, or central levels of government.

There's plenty of complaining about the “corrupt politicians” the lack of assistance, feelings of disenfrachisement and so on, but so few seem to get involved in the process. They feel it's pointless, and what difference does one vote make?

They pretty much all have mobile phones, and an internet connection though.

There could maybe be a simple outline of an issue, a yes or no vote. There, they've participated! In real time. They'd see results.
Geez half of them try to vote on America's Got talent - or whatever that silly show is – in spite of the scrolling message saying it's not available!
Or find out more by digging deeper, the option of viewing expert opinions, joining a public debate.

I'm not suggesting the public have the right to table new legislation willy nilly, just that there should an option to really contribute during the creation of legislation (as @GZT suggested).
A new avenue to have a say.

Legislation would be proposed. It'd go through the normal processes, but the public would have a say on some of it. They'd see the results.
I understand that's simplistic, but there must be some way of making it an option.

@geektastic, I'm guessing that saying you'd deny people the vote for being too uneducated to properly exercise it was a tongue in cheek comment.. I do agree political education would help.. but some hands on experience might be better:)
Alienate people from the political process and they'll feel nothing in the system's theirs.
They've nothing to loose and it comes back to bite you as social problems..

/rant

And they are right, what difference does their one vote make where "One cup of tea" has greater influence via political gerrymandering .

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 13