Stand down a MP for a crime a family member is accused of?

Forums › Off topic › Stand down a MP for a crime a family member is accused of?

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#171906 5-May-2015 09:53

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11443425

So as I understand it, a current National MP's BROTHER has been ACCUSED (Not CONVICTED) of Child Indecency Charges.

Different quarters but including Andrew Little, have suggested he be stood down. WHY?

This potentially affects a lot of people:

1) The accused, has requested name suppression. Will become identifiable as soon as the MP is identified.
2) The accused, prejudiced against.
3) Victim becomes much more likely to be identified, which would be pretty poor form.
4) MP becomes "associated" with the potential behaviour which affects his standing in the community and as an MP despite likely not having any involvement or knowledge of anything that may not have even happened!

Am I missing something?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

705 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 656

Trusted

#1298120 5-May-2015 10:01

Would make politics in Australia interesting.

Gilco2

1556 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 134

#1298122 5-May-2015 10:06

At first my thought was a blanket NO. You cant be held responsible for your siblings crimes.

However when you think about it, if the MP is minister of justice or minister of police etc then yes should be stood down as conflict of interest in which they could influence the case. We are lucky corruption is not rife in our politics but can happen.
If the minister is in position where no possible influence likely then no.

HTPC Intel Pentium G3258 cpu, Gigabyte H97n-wifi motherboard, , 8GB DDR3 ram, onboard graphics. Hauppuage HVR 5500 tuner, Silverstone LC16M case, Windows 10 pro 64 bit using Nextpvr and Kodi

geekiegeek

2513 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 625
Inactive user

#1298127 5-May-2015 10:10

The only reason I could see would be if the minister concerned is involved with justice or social development or may be health, any agency that has a part in the case. Otherwise I can't see why they would need to be stood down.

Little may be going after it due to this - http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66654891/mp-stood-down-as-mother-faces-benefit-fraud-charges but in that case there was a clear conflict of interest as the MP was involved with the prosocuting ministry.

Wade

2225 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 373

#1298134 5-May-2015 10:20

networkn: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11443425

So as I understand it, a current National MP's BROTHER has been ACCUSED (Not CONVICTED) of Child Indecency Charges.

Different quarters but including Andrew Little, have suggested he be stood down. WHY?

This potentially affects a lot of people:

1) The accused, has requested name suppression. Will become identifiable as soon as the MP is identified.
2) The accused, prejudiced against.
3) Victim becomes much more likely to be identified, which would be pretty poor form.
4) MP becomes "associated" with the potential behaviour which affects his standing in the community and as an MP despite likely not having any involvement or knowledge of anything that may not have even happened!

Am I missing something?

Political gain must be the overruling motive, I would be confident enough that if processes and protocols are followed this MP will not have any ability to sway the outcome so his connection becomes a moot point

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298135 5-May-2015 10:22

Wade:
networkn: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11443425

So as I understand it, a current National MP's BROTHER has been ACCUSED (Not CONVICTED) of Child Indecency Charges.

Different quarters but including Andrew Little, have suggested he be stood down. WHY?

This potentially affects a lot of people:

1) The accused, has requested name suppression. Will become identifiable as soon as the MP is identified.
2) The accused, prejudiced against.
3) Victim becomes much more likely to be identified, which would be pretty poor form.
4) MP becomes "associated" with the potential behaviour which affects his standing in the community and as an MP despite likely not having any involvement or knowledge of anything that may not have even happened!

Am I missing something?

Political gain must be the overruling motive, I would be confident enough that if processes and protocols are followed this MP will not have any ability to sway the outcome so his connection becomes a moot point

Exactly. Labour continue to fail to grasp that being in opposition doesn't mean opposing for the sake of it. This is just nonsense as far as I can see, and does nothing but damages Littles credibility.

He would have looked a lot better coming out in support of it.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298150 5-May-2015 10:36

Its politically motivated only. The benefit fraud case was a classic case of it being handled correctly as there was a conflict of interest. Otherwise leave it alone, family stuff happens, every criminal has family. What is the worst crime possible? Murder? John Tamihere's brother was convicted of murder, thats no secret and to my knowledge it never made headlines or controversy. This latest news in in my opinion political point scoring.

HP

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

Handsomedan

7769 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7402

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1298287 5-May-2015 12:09

I'm completely over the finger pointing and posturing that our politicians involve themselves in.

It enters daily life, too. You read the uneducated views of commentators on stories like this and there's simply a load of vitriolic points-scoring on both sides that is unnecessary and unwarranted.

I agree with networkn - it'll expose the alleged victim, the accused, and make the whole thing very public if an MP is stood down for a potential crime committed by a family member that he/she has no contro over.

Leave it be and move on...much like Ponytailgate.

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...

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1298295 5-May-2015 12:24

"Leave it be and move on...much like Ponytailgate."

Please, new forum for politics/news discussion (covers gay marriage/flag debates/pony tail pulling, etc...).

Then, some way of disabling posts from that forum, please . I can't stand these discussions but i get sucked in as it is my inclination to argue.

luckysurprise

43 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 21

#1298448 5-May-2015 15:01

I also am in favour of a separate forum for Politics/Opinion. Reading the bizarre counter-factual notions and blind prejudices that otherwise intelligent, sensible seeming people have, just depresses me and I would rather not see it.

"Eat a live frog first thing in the morning, and nothing worse will happen to you for the rest of the day." - Mark Twain

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80653 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41045

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1298449 5-May-2015 15:04

Many times thought of a forum for politics. But disagreements there shouldn't overflow to other subforums. If people agree on this...

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298450 5-May-2015 15:08

Well it's not the worst idea in the world. Though the logic for it presented here seems so flawed.

"I can't control myself from opening a thread in "off topic" but I'll be ok if it's in "politics".

I imagine that if you didn't like what you saw on TV or you overheard someone complaining about the politics on the news, the response to them, rightly so, would be "turn it off or change the channel.

Personally I suspect that if you create a subforum for it, the amount of political discussion will quadruple and given the strong views for many on political matters, I forsee negativity ending up across other threads.

You could make it like the subscriber only forum, visible to only those who ask for it.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#1298455 5-May-2015 15:15

let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2526
Inactive user

#1298457 5-May-2015 15:19

nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

+1

Why should the MP stand down cause the family member is a twat!

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1298458 5-May-2015 15:19

nathan: let the opposition parties continue to focus on things that don't matter to real New Zealanders

Amen!

trig42

5889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2094

ID Verified

#1298488 5-May-2015 16:12

networkn:
Wade:
networkn: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11443425

So as I understand it, a current National MP's BROTHER has been ACCUSED (Not CONVICTED) of Child Indecency Charges.

Different quarters but including Andrew Little, have suggested he be stood down. WHY?

This potentially affects a lot of people:

1) The accused, has requested name suppression. Will become identifiable as soon as the MP is identified.
2) The accused, prejudiced against.
3) Victim becomes much more likely to be identified, which would be pretty poor form.
4) MP becomes "associated" with the potential behaviour which affects his standing in the community and as an MP despite likely not having any involvement or knowledge of anything that may not have even happened!

Am I missing something?

Political gain must be the overruling motive, I would be confident enough that if processes and protocols are followed this MP will not have any ability to sway the outcome so his connection becomes a moot point

Exactly. Labour continue to fail to grasp that being in opposition doesn't mean opposing for the sake of it. This is just nonsense as far as I can see, and does nothing but damages Littles credibility.

He would have looked a lot better coming out in support of it.

This.

What frustrates me, is that the two 'sides' are not actually that different. National is a little Right of Centre, Labour a little left (although with Andrew Little at the helm, probably a bit further off centre).

1 | 2 | 3 | 4