F*ck democracy

Written By: - Date published: 9:30 am, December 10th, 2008 - 17 comments
Categories: national/act government - Tags:

No Right Turn has an excellent post pointing out that National is misusing urgency in a manner unseen since the bad old days of Douglas and Richardson:

You have to go back to Douglas and Richardson to see this sort of abuse of the Parliamentary process. And if this is how National intends to run Parliament – as if the change to MMP had never happened, and this was still an FPP elected dictatorship

Frankly this is a disgusting and anti-democratic abuse of urgency. As NRT points out NZPA is reporting that many of the bills haven’t been drafted and some don’t even have names!

The National/Act tactic is clearly designed to leave little time for debate and disclosure of their plans and to ensure that anyone with an opposing view is left with as little time as possible to analyse and critique them.

And while we’re talking about ramming unpleasant legislation through, expect the fire at will bill to come up tomorrow. Merry Christmas.

17 comments on “F*ck democracy ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Zoup 1
    10 December 2008 at 10:24 am

    Is there a case for a citizens initiated referenda on this one? I know it would kick in well after the fact if succesful however it does provide a way to keep the issue fresh.

    I for one would be a starter if anyone else is interested in getting involved in setting this up.

    captcha: ‘Trenton was’
    Was what? Employed maybe?

  2. Lew 2
    10 December 2008 at 10:27 am

    Shortly after the House resumed at 0900, Darren Hughes requested that the bills about to be debated be tabled so members could read them before debating them. Just before 1000 he asked what progress had been made, and was told by the Speaker that under urgency there is no requirement to table a bill before it is introduced – which means that the bill has to be read, analysed and understood as the first-reading debate is taking place.

    And another thing – as urgency was accorded yesterday after a heavily truncated Address in Reply debate, Cullen sought leave for Question Time to be duly held today and tomorrow `so the Ministers in the new government can be held to account’. Leave was denied by government members – this isn’t customary, even in urgency, and toward the end of their term I seem to recall the former government holding Question TIme as usual, even under urgency.

    L

  3. IrishBill 3
    10 December 2008 at 10:33 am

    Lew, do you mind if I put your comment into a post?

  4. Lew 4
    10 December 2008 at 10:34 am

    IB: Fine by me.

    L

  5. Graeme 5
    10 December 2008 at 10:56 am

    Leave was denied by government members – this isn’t customary, even in urgency, and toward the end of their term I seem to recall the former government holding Question TIme as usual, even under urgency.

    Your other complaints – all perfectly reasonable.

    However, this is very customary under urgency.

  6. Lew 6
    10 December 2008 at 11:00 am

    Graeme: Hm, after a bit more looking around it seems you’re correct. Perhaps I’m misremembering the Question Times under urgency in the old government?

    L

  7. Steve Pierson 7
    10 December 2008 at 11:24 am

    At the end of the last Parliament, Labour dropped out of urgency to allow Question Time. It was the Greens’ condition for supporting urgency in the first place.

  8. Graeme 8
    10 December 2008 at 11:41 am

    Interesting theory, Steve, but it doesn’t match reality.

    After question time on Tuesday 23 September 2008, the House went into urgency. The House then sat on the 24th, 25th, and 26th of September under urgency, and there was no question time on any of those days.

    After question time on on Tuesday 2 September 2008, the House went into urgency. The House then sat on the 3rd, 4th, and 5th of September under urgency, and there was no question time on any of those days.

  9. illuminatedtiger 9
    10 December 2008 at 11:48 am

    What a violently anti-democratic government we have now.

  10. Steve Pierson 10
    10 December 2008 at 12:01 pm

    ah well, Graeme, they certainly have done that at some point, dropping out of urgency for QT.

  11. Steve Pierson 11
    10 December 2008 at 12:12 pm

    Iistening to Parliament. National MPs costantly claiming their tax package will help those onlow incomes. Incompetent or liars?

  12. Mr Magoo 12
    10 December 2008 at 12:35 pm

    Steve: Why is this an either/or situation again??

  13. Chris G 13
    10 December 2008 at 12:36 pm

    SP, yeah hardout.

    Cullen and Goff were awseome in their speeches. Particularly Goff getting that twit David Bennett. Mallard was alright at getting John Hayes.

    the best calls at them were what Bennett and Hayes will tell their electorate re. it being a tax hike.

    Then enter Bill English who pretty much just gave the KiwiBlg et al line of ‘We won, eat that’

  14. Swampy 14
    11 December 2008 at 10:36 am

    Savant is 100% wrong of course. Labour used urgency the same way last term. Most recently Mallard snuck amendments to Kiwisaver into the end of term urgency just before the election. And then there was the retrospective validation of unlawful parliamentary spending after the 2006 election. Have a closer look Mr Savant, you’ll find countless other examples…if you have the courage to.

Links to post

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.