Jacinda Ardern sued over lockdown

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern sued over lockdown

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 18

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479297 8-May-2020 15:39

mdooher:
Handle9:
The third is the rule of law. This is incredibly important and not negotiable. As above the government can very quickly give itself broad powers and make them retrospective.

As a normal principle, retrospective laws should not be made (yes they have done it to get themselves out of trouble for election shenanigans, but nobody had the money, time or cared enough to stop them)

It will be much more difficult in this case because any change could relate to matters that are the subject of prospective court decisions or current litigation. They will need to ensure they don't adversely effect the person bringing the case.

Should be interesting anyway.

I have absolutely zero problem with the government taking practical steps and retrospectively passing laws to cover what has been done, providing that it is done transparently.

Sh*t happens and not everything is forseeable or effectively managed.

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479298 8-May-2020 15:40

SaltyNZ:
MikeAqua:

However, transparency is important, especially when freedoms that are on place due to statute or custom have been suspended. If there was a risk to public obedience and therefore health of releasing the crown law advice, that risk has all but passed now.

Which is why the government created a special committee explicitly to oversee the government's handling of the situation, gave it practically unlimited powers to call anyone it wanted, gave the opposition 2/3rds of the membership, put Simon Bridges in charge of it, and live streamed it every day. How much more transparent could they realistically be?

Release the crown law advice, which I believe has been requested by the special committee.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 910

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479323 8-May-2020 15:50

BarTender:

mdooher: I believe in a democracy the state must act lawfully in all things. If they do not, then by definition it is not a democracy. I want to live in a democracy and warts and all. If that makes me ignorant ...ok

Your preference is you WOULD rather people die, it's just you can't say it honestly which is disappointing.

The problem is with a number of folks here the way I interpret is that they would have preferred more death as then they could have blamed the govt for not responding sooner. And because it us under control they have pivoted to open the country up as I can't accept the overreach.

The simple reality is we just need to look overseas and see the death rates, and that could VERY EASILY have been NZ had the Government not taken decisive actions. If some laws weren't updated to reflect it meh, I am ok with that as they have done what needed to be done to save a lot of lives. The government moved quickly to have this panel where the Opposition can opine on what they would have done differently. They are in easy position that they can say whatever they want as the buck never stopped with them.

I see very little difference with a few of the posters here complaining about government overreach and the protesters in the US demanding the guvvimint reopen the country.

The only way we will know the truth is 2+ years down the track when stats reports all the deaths. Until then lets just listen to science and the medical professionals.

And I hope you have your DNR updated and prepared to offer up your whole family as tribute to the great god of our economy.

I never said the government shouldn't have acted. (I think they should have acted earlier) but if they ignored legal advice and used the police to enforce their edicts where they knew or ought to have known that what they were doing was illegal then they need to be dealt with in such a way as to dissuade them from doing it again.

Matthew

SaltyNZ

8865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9545

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2479324 8-May-2020 15:52

Handle9:

Release the crown law advice, which I believe has been requested by the special committee.

You can start here while you wait for the rest.

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

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

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479331 8-May-2020 15:55

SaltyNZ:
Handle9:

Release the crown law advice, which I believe has been requested by the special committee.

You can start here while you wait for the rest.

So what? I fail to see relevance in what you linked to.

mdooher

Hmm, what to write...
1443 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 910

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479372 8-May-2020 16:01

Handle9:

I have absolutely zero problem with the government taking practical steps and retrospectively passing laws to cover what has been done, providing that it is done transparently....

The Legislation Design and Advisory Committee will. passing retropective law is not a walk in the park

Matthew

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

SaltyNZ

8865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9545

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2479383 8-May-2020 16:10

Handle9:

So what? I fail to see relevance in what you linked to.

Have you read any of it?

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

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

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479397 8-May-2020 16:15

SaltyNZ:
Handle9:

So what? I fail to see relevance in what you linked to.

Have you read any of it?

Answering a question with a question?

Yes I took a look. Once again how is it relevant to the crown law advice?

SaltyNZ

8865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9545

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2479405 8-May-2020 16:24

Handle9:

Yes I took a look. Once again how is it relevant to the crown law advice?

Well, I just get the feeling that you don't actually care about what advice has been provided to anyone about anything, you just heard that Your Team thinks there's a document out there that might bring down the Other Team. There are plenty of documents there to get you started if you actually care about being informed, whilst the release of the other one is worked through.

There are plenty of reasons why it might not be released, starting with the fact that legal advice is nearly always privileged - even advice to the Other Team - and also that internal discussion documents taken out of context do not necessarily show what final decisions might be made. It is, for example, common practice for the first one to be a straw man that is explicitly designed to be shot down as a means of starting the discussion.

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

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

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19065 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16305

Lifetime subscriber

#2479410 8-May-2020 16:29

Yay. Another candidate for my Feud thread.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479413 8-May-2020 16:31

SaltyNZ:
Handle9:

Yes I took a look. Once again how is it relevant to the crown law advice?

Well, I just get the feeling that you don't actually care about what advice has been provided to anyone about anything, you just heard that Your Team thinks there's a document out there that might bring down the Other Team. There are plenty of documents there to get you started if you actually care about being informed, whilst the release of the other one is worked through.

There are plenty of reasons why it might not be released, starting with the fact that legal advice is nearly always privileged - even advice to the Other Team - and also that internal discussion documents taken out of context do not necessarily show what final decisions might be made. It is, for example, common practice for the first one to be a straw man that is explicitly designed to be shot down as a means of starting the discussion.

Which team are you referring to? Please be explicit about what you are saying. If you want to make an accusation of political bias then make it, don't insinuate it.

Aside from that rather silly insinuation, a document dump like the one you linked to, is used to create the appearance of transparency rather than provide actual transparency. Coincidentally enough they are always done on a Friday so they are largely burnt out by the time the politicians come back on Monday.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2479428 8-May-2020 17:00

I'm with you right up to

Handle9:

It's an unprecedented crisis but if there has been a broad abuse of powers then there needs to be a royal commission.

It can't be an abuse of powers if they didn't have, or give themselves, the power. Instead, it is an illegal action.

It's kind of odd that no-one is complaining about what they actually did (apart from the 2 buffoons who sued the PM). The problem appears to be that they didn't have the power, or perhaps didn't give the Police the power, to do what they did. Whilst I do agree that the rule of law is important, in the end what's happened is a failure to go through the correct process rather than an abuse of power.

SaltyNZ

8865 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9545

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2479429 8-May-2020 17:00

Handle9: Coincidentally enough they are always done on a Friday so they are largely burnt out by the time the politicians come back on Monday.

Don't let the bastards get away with it then, get reading!

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

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

BarTender

3629 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2572

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479439 8-May-2020 17:23

mdooher: I never said the government shouldn't have acted. (I think they should have acted earlier) but if they ignored legal advice and used the police to enforce their edicts where they knew or ought to have known that what they were doing was illegal then they need to be dealt with in such a way as to dissuade them from doing it again.

But you did..

mdooher: I choose 1), but the results don't have to be substandard. the existing law allows for quarantining of the sick or places where people are sick etc. Remember the govt said they were going to flatten the curve so that hospitals could cope.. but that is not what has happened they have squashed it flat and now the whole county is quarantined from the rest of the world until someone come up with a cure or vaccine.

Actually I choose 1) even if the result is substandard. this obviously means I have a different opinion than you. But that's why I like geekzone,different opinions and reasoned argument.

You are saying you would have preferred the law to be changed, which no doubt would have cost more lives. We only need to look overseas for that.

I have no doubt in my mind that more people had died and we would be in a completely different situation if the government had to wait days or weeks longer to make a law change.

You are also saying they should have acted earlier, which again is such a great BS pivot. How much sooner should they have locked down, days, weeks, 1st of Feb? 1st of Jan?

There was no cross-party support in parliament for the lockdown, so if the government had moved earlier and there were no deaths then they would have been obliterated by the opposition for over-reacting. You can't be that politically naive to think that National weren't acting like utter petulant children prior to the lockdown and would have not gone on and on about the overaction if no one had died?

https://vimeo.com/395338398#t=4m20s

Again I reiterate those MPs who weren't in the position to make tough calls are just acting like children and no better than a political commentator.

Handle9

11925 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9675

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2479479 8-May-2020 19:39

BarTender:

You are saying you would have preferred the law to be changed, which no doubt would have cost more lives. We only need to look overseas for that.

I have no doubt in my mind that more people had died and we would be in a completely different situation if the government had to wait days or weeks longer to make a law change.

You are also saying they should have acted earlier, which again is such a great BS pivot. How much sooner should they have locked down, days, weeks, 1st of Feb? 1st of Jan?

There was no cross-party support in parliament for the lockdown, so if the government had moved earlier and there were no deaths then they would have been obliterated by the opposition for over-reacting. You can't be that politically naive to think that National weren't acting like utter petulant children prior to the lockdown and would have not gone on and on about the overaction if no one had died?

https://vimeo.com/395338398#t=4m20s

Again I reiterate those MPs who weren't in the position to make tough calls are just acting like children and no better than a political commentator.

Please don't make things up.

There was broad cross party support for the start of the lockdown.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/120494499/coronavirus-national-party-leader-simon-bridges-suspends-campaign-calls-for-alert-level-4

Bridges has behaved like a dick at various points, particularly the roads roads roads speech. It's also not his job to be cheer leader, he should and must ask the government to justify their actions. Any government has a tendency to over extend and abuse their position if they have unchecked power. After the earthquakes Brownlee was a great example in Christchurch. There is ever sign that similar problems are occurring here and without a functional opposition the government will overstep.

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 18