Jafapete might be in LA, however that hasn’t stopped him from raising some cogent points on the 90-day bill.
His post Nats hurry to strip workers of rights points out some absurdities of the NACT excuses
So, no opportunity to make submissions on these proposals. What’s that? I could have last year? But last year it was a private member’s bill with little chance of passing. Next year, I would definitely have made a submission. I’ve been disenfranchised.
Now that is a good point, and essentially the one that the Human Rights Commission was making. I haven’t seen much detail on the bill yet apart from some waffle from Kate Wilkinson
But Labour Minister Kate Wilkinson said the public had already had a chance to give its views when the legislation went before a select committee in the last Parliament in the form of a private member’s bill introduced by National MP Wayne Mapp.
The bill was subsequently defeated.
Ms Wilkinson said said the Government had taken several concerns on board and come up with a “gentler” bill.
Of course the original bill was defeated, so this is a new bill. The list she gives seems to make it as being a substantially different bill to to both the one that went through select committee and the one that was defeated. This makes a mockery of NACT’s claim that they are just proceeding with the old bill.
What they are doing is trying to change the procedure of parliament. That is something that they never campaigned on and therefore can’t claim that they have a mandate for.
So what are we left with? The sight of an arrogant autocratic government attempting to subvert the procedures of parliament. Memo to John Key, I didn’t vote for a new monarch. You have no mandate to abrogate the process of parliament.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress