Nandor’s valedictory

19 comments on “Nandor’s valedictory ”

• Comments are now closed

1. erikter 1

   27 June 2008 at 11:13 am

   I’m still waiting to read the long list of Tanczos’ achievements in Parliament. Why? Because, he got none!

   He’s been a waste of space and his lamentable physical appearance (skateboard under the arm) added to that impression. NZ has lost nothing at all.

   [lprent: I still haven’t received an answer to my previous query
   http://www.thestandard.org.nz/?p=2263#comment-62811
   Is there any reason not to ban you – moving you to moderation]
2. Steve Pierson 2

   27 June 2008 at 11:20 am

   God you’re pathetic erikter. How about doing some research before putting your ignorance on the record? Nandor’s Waste Minimisation Bill is set to pass, he introduced the Prison Ombudsmen and did great work on Victims’ Rights amongst other things.

   He is well-known for his thoughtful and constructive contributions to legislation.

   Moreover, he (as an MMP politican) brought a whole sector of the community, people who had previously been excluded from the process, into the body politic. He made people feel that they had a say too.
3. T-rex 3

   27 June 2008 at 11:24 am

   Nandor was a huge asset to NZ in government. I’m sure he’ll remain so having left, but I’m still sorry to see him go.
4. outofbed 4

   27 June 2008 at 11:29 am

   Erikter
   Methinks your post says a whole lot more about you then it does about Nandor!
   Parliament is a representative democracy
   I for one, do not be totally represented by white middle aged men in suits. although they have their place I’m sure

   Nandor. for those of us privileged to have made his acquaintance. is an intelligent principled man and an allround good bloke
   Parliament will be for the worse without him
5. Stephen 5

   27 June 2008 at 11:30 am

   Looking good eriketer!

   I believe Tanczos managed to get hemp legalised for cultivation too, which was certainly a victory for common sense.
6. Stephen 6

   27 June 2008 at 11:38 am

   Mind you, every MP works on bills through the party or through some select committee or other, so it’d be pretty ridiculous to say ANY MP had nothing to show if they quit, because there is so much work done behind the scenes!
7. erikter 7

   27 June 2008 at 11:42 am

   lpreny, I resent your increasingly dictatorial style and demeanor in this blog.

   As far as I’m concerned, you can do whatever you want.

   [lprent: Thank you. I usually do. You could stay here, but you’d have to upgrade your standard of comment. Otherwise, there are a lot of other blogs that would like your style – use them (I won’t make suggestions).]
8. Vanilla Eis 8

   27 June 2008 at 11:46 am

   Stephen: Select committees play a large part in the process, and most MP’s sit on two. Nandor sat on the Local Government and Environment and Justice and Electoral select committees.

   As mentioned, the Waste Minimisation Bill is one that he submitted to Parliament, and he would have worked on the EFA, amongst other bills before J&E. Make of that what you will.

   I decided to go to the gallery for the speech and don’t regret it a bit. He was a touch late, so David Bennett (of all people!) continued his speech a little longer, and talked of the honour it was to have someone like Nandor in Parliament.

   Erikter: stop waiting to be spoon-fed and try to find things out for yourself for once before shooting your mouth off, yes?

   I’m with oob and SP – in a representative system, people like Nandor represent portions of the population that otherwise wouldn’t have a voice. It’s the most anyone could ask of him.

   Oh, and read the Stuff article – you might learn something.
9. Vanilla Eis 9

   27 June 2008 at 11:48 am

   I appear to be caught in moderation too. Any reason why?

   [lprent: it is a bad idea to say the name of someone in moderation? We have to moderate the name rather than the person]
10. Tane 10

    27 June 2008 at 11:50 am

    It’s just a bit random sometimes bro, quite often it thinks you’re spam. I’ve been caught in it too.
11. Stephen 11

    27 June 2008 at 11:50 am

    Looks like you already do erikter – saying the first thing that comes into your head, whether it’s based on anything approaching ‘reality’ or not! Hurrah!
12. Stephen 12

    27 June 2008 at 11:51 am

    Vanilla Eis, so er yeah we agree! Wonder what sort of agenda he was pushing on the Local Government committee, being from the ‘anarchist’ wing of the GP and all…
13. Matthew Pilott 13

    27 June 2008 at 12:16 pm

    Heh, not sure exactly what ‘drives’ erikter, but it clearly isn’t small government or anti-regulation, or he’d know the patent absurdity of ‘resenting’ his treatment on a private blog.
14. Lew 14

    27 June 2008 at 12:23 pm

    erikter: “As far as I’m concerned, you can do whatever you want.”

    I’m sure Lynn is pleased to have your permission.

    How about discussing the speech?

    It was a good one, definitely one of the better valedictories I’ve heard, in that it spent less time trumpeting Nandor’s and the Greens’ achievements and dropping names (though there was a bit) than exhorting those involved in the political process to leave it better than they came to it. This is ultimately the purpose of government and politics – to make things better.

    Nandor spoke directly to those involved in politics, and that includes the media and by extension bloggers, who like to consider themselves the media. He spoke to those of you who ascribe sinister motives to all National’s (or Labour’s, or anyone else’s) ideas and policies, reminding people that many politicians `perhaps even a majority’ is what he said, actually genuinely believe they’re doing what’s right for the country. They might be misguided, they might be plain wrong, but they’re not necessarily being evil. This is a timely reminder, ahead of what’s going to be a brutal election campaign.

    And he smashed a watch. Bloody hippie. Wonder what he’ll do now?

    L

    Captcha: `burning Governor’.
15. Brownie 15

    27 June 2008 at 12:30 pm

    Outstanding speech. Nandor was, and still is, a true “representative” of the people.
16. Ari 16

    27 June 2008 at 2:44 pm

    I loved his comments on Question Time and the General Debate. Good on him for calling people on the pettiness usually occuring in Parliament.
17. Tim 17

    27 June 2008 at 3:27 pm

    Wasn’t he behind the Clean Slate Act? That was a good piece of legislation.

    However, when it came to cannabis and drug reform he didn’t do what he aimed to and was a disappointment. We still have hypocritical cannabis prohibition laws. Why not decriminalise it and put the fines towards drug education and health? Takes the money away from criminal enterprises, stops people’s lives being ruined by convictions and stops the waste of police resources that could be spent stopping P. It always baffles me that you can buy alcohol and tobacco legally yet go to jail for smoking cannabis. Drug law reform seems to be off the Greens’ agenda these days.
18. Camryn 18

    28 June 2008 at 5:03 am

    The only time I ever exchanged emails with Nandor was over the GE debate.

    Generally, I’m a small government kinda guy, but I saw GE-Free as a competitive advantage for NZ products, since it seemed ridiculous for NZ to try to compete in the GE science and mass commodity agricultural production markets due to our small size and distance from customers. GE seemed to play to our brand and our isolation would’ve made it practical. And there was definitely a niche demand for GE-Free (and probably still is). So, I saw a role for government in this since it’s really an all or nothing deal.

    Unfortunately, Nandor said to me that the Greens weren’t going to make a stand on it because they valued being a constructive partner in the government rather than a single issue party. I didn’t like that at all… I thought the Greens had a chance at that time to be an effective Green force but turned it down to remain a less effective Green-ish/Social-ish influence.

    I’m sure some of them wanted to make it a stand, possibly even Nandor himself.

    Apart from that, I agree with everyone that he was a good politician. He never took it personal, or made it personal with others. One of the most civil MPs in the whole house.
19. George Darroch 19

    30 June 2008 at 10:46 am

    The problem with cannabis law reform was scummy and useless Ian Ewan-Street. He threatened them, and the other MPs didn’t take a strong enough stand against him. Once he was gone they were free to move, but by that time the issue had stagnated…

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS