- Date published:
6:00 am, March 8th, 2023 - 103 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Extending the franchise.
Goldsmith raises not extending the franchise to 16 year olds to youth crime. Doesn't Goldsmith think that practicing civics and letting them have a say might help empower some disempowered young people?
I can almost hear. tough on crime torys like Goldsmith calling for harsher penalties for your offenders, chanting; 'if you can't do the time don't do the crime.'
Young people deserve adult punishment, but not the right to vote which might empower disempowered young people to lift their horizons above the immediate?
16 year olds are mostly still at school, have not finished their education,worked, or paid taxes. I do not want adult votes cancelled out by someone with a sense of me/me entitlement who gets all their information from social media.
Can you please explain how a 16 year old who is still at school, and will be part of a (presumed) civics curriculum if this happens, will be any different, or more of a threat to our democracy, than a very large portion of the current over 18 electorate.
it's the presumed civics question that interests me. Is that an actual thing?
Can we make adults do it too?
I read a piece a couple of years ago around the start of the things arguing that civics curriculum and 16 were closely linked because it would be more relevant.
In my education we got a very good civics component (Upper form at Kelston Boys in early 70’s) and were engaged enough to see right through the Dancing Cossacks in 1975.
they should start teaching it now in depth whether the vote gets lowered or not. Start at the beginning of high school. It's such a basic for democracy.
I don't remember being taught it at all, but I might not have been paying attention either. I did vote the year I turned 18 in the general election.
looks like its voluntary in the school curriculum currently.
Well, it all depends on what you mean by "Civics" – NZ government and comparative governmental systems are already covered in the NZ social studies curriculum – in several ways at several different ages/stages.
Here, for example in Level 5 (which is roughly equivalent to Year10)
Year 10 is the last year where AFAIK Social studies is mandatory – once kids are in Year 11 (what used to be 5th form), they are starting to make choices about subjects, and can opt away from soft sciences.
There were probably some enlightened secondary schools teaching Civics then. I recall it being suggested that it should be taught in all secondary schools and the then Prime Minister, Rob Muldoon vetoed it straight away as being an insidious communist plot.
I'd guess there are plenty of 16 year-olds who would think that's a good idea.
Although I am slightly uncomfortable about 16-year-olds voting, I'm not really convinced that the majority of them lack some necessary component that the majority of adults actually have – or that such a lack could be addressed by civics education.
In reality, civics education would become a contested space like the compulsory teaching of NZ history – ripe with culture war opportunities and filled with denunciations of 'wokeness'.
It's an academic argument anyway – most adults oppose it because they are scared that 16 year-olds would legislate to take their stuff away and stop them eating meat or flying on aeroplanes more than once a year.
I was thinking of the basics like how MMP works, and what local government does. Shouldn't be hard to teach that in a neutral way (assuming there was a will to neutrality!)
I'm relieved it's not a goer tbh. It's a complicated issue with lots of aspects factoring into it. For me it's mostly why 16 and not 17 or 14. Or 5, lol, to which one progresssive I know said he supported young children voting.
thinking about it you are probably right. How to teach Te Tiriti without making some people's heads explode.
Yeah the thing about boundaries is a headache. It's a playground for reductio ad absurdum arguments that can run in all directions – "if 16, why not 10" or "if 18 why not 30", or "if we don't start till 18 why not stop at 60"?
It would be best to settle on an agreed age of adulthood and apply that everywhere. What cuts across that compromise though, is the idea of inter-generational fairness. If young people cannot vote – should there be some auditing of legislation for inter-generational fairness, just as there is for compliance with the BORA? (But the results of the BORA-compliance audits are often ignored I believe)
auditing for generational fairness makes sense. We should be doing this anyway. However I'm not convinced that people who have the right to vote get treated fairly in that regard eg Māori adults can vote but are outvoted by Pākehā interests. Wealthy mainstream people have more sway than poor and fringe people. And so on.
I'm in favour of increasing democracy by participatory means. One person one vote really is a low form of democracy.
Not sure about the age of adulthood. Sex, drinking, military, driving, leaving school, youth rates, lots of things don't match up neatly by age. How would we decide which ones to change?
We learned all that stuff at school in the 60's – even practised mock court sessions to understand how the legal system worked as well.
Even learned about tsunami's even though we lived hundreds of miles from the sea.
Didn't realise they'd stopped teaching this stuff.
apparently something is in the curriculum, in Social Studies, but it's voluntary (for the school I guess?). I couldn't find the actual content.
This is the online portal: https://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum/Social-sciences
edit to add: Admittedly I am unable to find the content also. All of the curriculum is undergoing a refresh that will be implemented fully in 2026 apparently.
Try this one
Here, for example in Level 5 (which is roughly equivalent to Year10)
Year 10 is the last year where AFAIK Social studies is mandatory – once kids are in Year 11 (what used to be 5th form), they are starting to make choices about subjects, and can opt away from soft sciences.
where’s the bit that tells the teacher how to teach this,
AFAIK there is nothing that tells a teacher how to teach a topic in the NZ curriculum.
It's outcome focused – and is deliberately designed to be non-specific.
"Understand how systems of government in New Zealand operate and affect people’s lives, and how they compare with another system."
So, at the end of the 'teaching' the student should be able to demonstrate that they understand how systems of government work in NZ – and compare these to those in other countries.
There are lots of different ways a teacher might approach teaching this topic – and lots of different resources they might use for the compare and contrast element.
When my son did this last year, they used print, online and film resources. And, were required to produce a report contrasting NZ political systems and their-country-of-choice (each one in the class had to choose a different one) – in a range of specific areas (from memory these included: Political structure (Democracy, Monarchy, Oligarchy, Autocracy, etc.); popular involvement (who can vote, does your vote make a difference); Decision-making structure (who runs the government, courts, etc.) — and a whole lot more – I think there were 10 questions which had to be covered.
This was IIRC about a 4-6 week block of work in the Social Studies curriculum.
Having said that – I'm sure there are lots of targeted resources on the Dept of Education sites – to assist with resourcing teaching in this area.
are you saying that this is literally the only guidance given?
What guidance do you need?
It's an outcome – which is intended to be able to be objectively measured.
The curriculum gives deducational outcomes which have to be achieved/demonstrated – it doesn't tell a teach how to teach.
I recall the so called 'civic lessons' we had at my high school during election season. But not fondly.
In the '70's the Cold War was at its height and our teachers were earnestly trying teach us the value of democracy. In social studies class we were made to take part in a mock election. Not allowed to debate any real issues. Not allowed to take part in the real ballot we were given a fake ballot. The lesson I took,was no one cared what we thought. The whole thing was pointless and disempowering. We felt patronised and we let the teacher know it.
I hope things aren't done that way any more.
Because this is not how civics should be taught, or how civics is learnt.
Civics is learnt in the doing.
If you don't give people a voice, they never learn to use it.
If you don't give people choices they never learn to make them.
The answer is an emphatic, No!
A large portion of over 16yr olds or "adult votes" get their sense of me/me entitlement from equally entitled radio and TV personalities. I don't think it's a policy worth dieing in a ditch over but there are equal arguments for and against. I'm not sure my vote preference would've changed between 16 and 18.
Mine certainly did. I was raised in a very middle class environment and the first political action I was involved with (at 17yo) was a demonstration IN FAVOUR of New Zealand's involvement in the Vietnam War. I had a placard with a quote from Churchhill! However, after the demo – my companion and I got talking with a couple of chaps from the PYM (Progressive Youth Movement) who were demonstrating on the other side of the road, and we decided that they had the better arguement. Next Friday evening we were on their side of the pavement – and that is where I have been ever since.
Not wanting people with a sense of me me entitlement cuts most voters out!!!
Where do people who grew up before homosexual law reform, still "remember the war" and whose parents called England "home" get their info from? Radio Rhema? Maybe their votes should be stripped as well.
How about immigrants? Maybe those that work in: <farming><arts><government> should be disenfranchised.
What about anyone that has Facebook – were the VFF nutters all 16yos?
I was 36 years old when Homosexual Law Reform came in – I remember the Vietnam War and I certainly do not listen to any religious radio. Nobody is talking about "stripping votes" I hope – this is about extending the franchise. The rest is hyperbole.
A few people make the argument for removing the vote from retirees. It's a piece of political inanity that demonstrates they don't understand the developmental differences between an old person and a child. Differences which are at the heart of why not that many people support lowering the age.
I know of quite a few 16 and younger that do pay income tax, let alone GST.
As for entitlement and selfishness being a barrier to voting, surely that includes landlords.
TBF, I would suggest most vote for their self interest, but we have elected and re-elected governments that have only paid lip service to CC. Perhaps having a few more idealists vote would be a circuit breaker.
An interesting discussion here between 10.30 min and 16.30 min on Australian aspiration culture, how it evolved politically post 90's to drive electorate decision-making. Now, in the last 6 months, particularly with the housing crisis, this aspirational viewpoint is switching to concern by many voters about their future financial security.
Think there are parallels in parts to our own political trends and messaging.
The other side of the coin:
There are a great many young people today who are so much better informed and who are more intelligent and mature than their senior counterparts.
But on balance, I don't see any desperate need to lower the age to 16. Waiting two more years is nothing. My generation had to wait until we turned 21 and if – like me – you turned 21 soon after an election – tough bickies. I didn't get my first vote until I was closing in on 24.
To RosieLee at 1.1 : Your comment shows it's own me/me frame-of-reference. I am not a teenager taking umbrage, but in my tenth decade, acutely concerned for my greatgrandchildren ( one sixteen, more soon to be ) and their peers in their future.
I find much understanding of important issues in teenagers I know.
Please consult those teens in your own circle when you find a relaxed conversational moment. I think you might be surprised, even comforted.
A nasty generalisation and slur made against the young people of this country, by RosieLee
"I do not want adult votes cancelled out by someone with a sense of me/me entitlement…" RosieLee
Young people with no right to vote on the issue, will inherit from us a badly degraded biosphere. Not having the vote, they have rallied in their thousands in our cities' streets for real government action on climate change. Of course this generation would want young people's voices cancelled out, so we can carry on doing what we are doing..
I want youth voices cancelled out by someone with a sense of me/me entitlement….
There you go Rosie, fixed it for you. No don't thank me.
Rosie, I don't want to get my adult (retiree) vote cancelled by other older citizens who get their daily brainwashing from nothing more than ZB Newstalk and their Natz sycophants.
And left wing don't want their vote cancelled by right wing, (and vice versa)
You don't want people with a me me entitlement who get most of their information from social media from voting ?
That describes the majority of voters on both the left and the right.
Also teenagers pay tax but if not paying enough tax should exclude people from voting there's a lot of people in NZ who shouldn't vote.
Why shouldn't the people who will have to pay for and live with the consequences of decisions made by today's governments get a vote when the citizens who won't live for the consequences or pay for the policies of today's governments get a vote.
If 16 year olds can't get a say, why should pensioners? Why should the rich or unemployed vote? In fact let's make it so noone can vote till they pay their student loans.
Next Should we require voting eligibility be granted only to those who pay more into the tax system than they get out? This would make many working class and working poor families and many who are on subsidized medications and regularly using subsidized healthcare ineligible for voting.
Fair is fair!!
I wondered whether we could have 'youth' MPs, a couple of seats in the current Parliament set aside specifcally for 16-20 y voters, similar to the Māori seats. Like the Māori electoral roll, those 18-20 could opt either to join this roll or the main electoral roll.
I'm not convinced about lowering the voting age to 16, but this idea of a youth roll and seats in parliament is good. Not sure it would work because of the numbers, but I like the thinking. It's a transition, from childhood to adulthood. It would increase awareness of youth issues and encourage youth to stand in general seats/lists. It could up awareness of how MMP works. Lots to like.
I think lowering it to 17 makes sense. That includes 6th form and is an age when many people start to understand what is going on in the world and have opinions.
also when many people start to have to think about adult shit like income and housing.
That is a great idea tWiggle.
After all, we tell them their future is bleak, but "hey keep waiting to have a say in our direction."
If we had an upper house we could do this, it wouldn't have the powers of the HoR but would be a start.
Oh please, no! An upper house strikes me as a layer of pigs in troughs we do not need, as we are not a federal democracy. Even worse, a crony-laden, bloated House of entitled Lords!
Keep it simple, and easily accountable. I like our government structure a lot, MMP, Māori seats and all. The only wobbly bit is the strategic stand-down of one party to safeguard a coalition partner, eg. Epsom.
RNZ morning report today covered the anomalous position of banks as the four largest profit-making concerns in NZ. This is not usual in other OECD countries. There is a push for a Commerce Commission enquiry to investigate how and why this happens. RNZ asked about the influence of ex-politicians in bank directorships as a contributing factor to their political power.
This is relevant also regarding windfall profit tax.
"ex-politicians in bank directorships".
Why are you so worried? As far as I am aware there is only one former MP on a Bank Board in New Zealand. Just one.
I would think it would be more useful if we looked at the directors of some of the failing SOEs in New Zealand to see whether there would be something to gain by replacing former political party hacks on their boards. Railways might be a good place to start. What role have they played in not planning for the Cook Strait ferries to be replaced. Were they asleep at the wheel and didn't look at the ferries getting old to the extent that they are now collapsing regularly and spend most of their time moored in Wellington.
Were we right to put old political relics like Mike Williams and Maryan Street on the Board?
Who owns the ferries Alwyn? What do "Supply lines" mean to you? Do your homework. The new terminals are designed to take hybrid rail ferries from 2025, and are part of a planned programme to replace an aging fleet. Your slurs are just deflection of the poorest kind.
Banking needs to offer ten and fifteen year mortgages. The gouging has to stop.
NZ has Australian owned banks who cream it, aided by such as Key. 200+ points above the base, and slow to pass that to savers. A Commission of Inquiry, which in Australia showed many sharp and even unlawful banking practices, would reveal the same here no doubt.
Simon Power was working for the ANZ at one stage.The big 4 pay no tax in NZ and are pushing services in NZ that were deemed illegal by the Australian banking enquiry resulting in huge fines against all the big banks and AMP.NZ allows Cartels free reign in our unregulated markets .NZ has no real competition in any sector making NZ one of the most expensive countries to live in.The free market policies were supposed to free up competition the reverse has happened.NZ would be better served by having an economic union with Australia at least their SEC has the clout to make the banks do the right thing.NZ just gives the supermarkets,Banks,fuel cos,Power cos, a god telling off but the reality is that nothing changes.Just spin.
Oh dear, where do I begin?
Simon Power never worked for ANZ.
The big 4 banks pay enormous amounts of tax in New Zealand. ANZ in the year to 30/09/2021 paid $750 million and was New Zealand's biggest corporate taxpayer. WBC paid $A402 million in 2019 in NZ (about $420 million NZD). BNZ paid $514 million in the year to September 2021.
I really don't think that I can be bothered pointing out the rest of your fallacies. If you really think you are stating facts please supply your evidence
You did read what tricledrown wrote did you?
"Simon Power was working for the ANZ at one stage".
Well he didn't, which is what I said.
The topic at hand.
From your article, it seems clear that Power was an employee (albeit a senior one on the management team), not a board member.
Two very different things.
Or their employment sinecure. In the USA people leave the Pentagon for positions within the MIC.
Another example two National Party interns get their first job out of university in the same corporate affairs job with an international tobacco company. Then become MP's. The same company has connections to Mr Whale (CS) and presumably funding to certain friendly to vaping organisations/unions etc.
That's raising an entirely different issue – the question of whether any political retreads should be employed in the senior levels of the corporate sector or in the civil service – immediately after exiting parliament. Or whether there should be a mandatory stand-down period (as there is in many other countries)
Most recently (and blatantly) controversially involving Kris Faafoi setting up a political lobbying consultancy immediately after resigning from government.
And, pointing out again, that Simon Power was never a bank director – he was a senior employee on the management team – so his employment situation is entirely irrelevant to the RNZ story.
It isn't just Key aiding and abetting.
Claire Matthews, RNZ's go-to on all things banks, thinks they make big profits 'coz they are big businesses…
No mention of creating credit/debt by entering keystrokes nor anything about fractional reserve banking.
The RNZ interviewed Adrian Stubbs over the bank review, who has questioned ex-politico appointments to banks before. Most OECD countries have a sensible 'restraint of trade' period of at least 3 years before you can move into the finance sector at director level after leaving Parliament.
The story you link to has nothing to do with whether Key should be able to be a bank director because he had been an MP.
It was whether key, as the ANZ NZ Board chairman, along with the BNZ chairman should be able to be on the Main Boards of the ANZ and NAB, who own the BNZ, in Australia. Being on both boards could be a conflict of interest as the ANZ (NZ) and ANZ Group interests could differ. The same applies to BNZ and NAB
It was nothing to do with Key's previous occupation.
James Bolger Kiwi Bank (contrarian vs the others – the black mirror glass ones)
Jennifer Shipley NZ board of the China Construction Bank.
Don Brash ANZ
Simon Power Westpac
John Key ANZ Bank.
OK William English (just about everywhere not bank), so not all former party leaders (Todd Corporation Limited and Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets probably do as much investment in business as the retail property mortgage banks).
Bank of China New Zealand Chairman Chris Tremain
Who the bloody hell, decided to scrap a one of the Ferries instead of refitting her because it was cheaper to her scrap her?
Then fluffed around realising, oh shit we need a replacement but instead of doing the more sensible & smart thing to do & order new one RO/RO Rail Ferries!
Let's buy a one 2nd hand one trick lemon & delay the replacement process as much as possible?
Would you please explain what NZG was in power at the time & why they didn't want to spend a single cent on critical infrastructure such as new RO/RO Rail Ferries?
Labour have been the Government for, if I remember correctly, five and a half years.
Obviously they saw no reason to do anything about getting new ferries to replace those which are now almost worn out.
Why on earth did they ignore reality?
I'd have thought you'd be better informed. New ferries have been ordered.
I shall correct the second sentence.
Obviously they saw no reason to do anything in haste and took three and a half years to order new ferries to replace those which are now almost worn out. that means only wasting about two and a half years I suppose.
It appears that they actually started the work in early 2017. I guess that was when National were the Government. Here was the announcement of their plans in 2018 when the then CEO said they had been working on the proposal for eighteen months.
In July 1941 the US decided they would build a single building for the military. Design was complete by September and construction started in September 1941. It was finished 16 months later in January 1943. Why does everything take so ling these days?
It's was Labour & the NZF Coalition that finally ordered the 2 new Ferries (should've been 3) but costs blew out because the Nat's fart ass about delaying like old women at Country Women's Association meeting!
If you want proof mate? I'll go back through my NZ Rail Observer, Oz Rail Digest Magazines & bombard you like Ukraine Artillery Fire Mission. Plus throw in Winnie's press releases before the election & after the election for shits & giggles.
Who were quite damming in National's stupidity & arrogance at delaying the ordering for the new Ferries but hey we aka National want to be better economic managers than Labour!
Just like National not wanting to invest in Defence Infrastructure & especially in new Defence Married Quarters & Living In Quarters for NZDF Personal. so let's cap NZDF Married Quarters Tenancy for 6yr to save money & boot service personnel after 6yr!!
Do you want some proof for as well?
Just buy the latest Nth & Sth Mag for that btw.
They didn’t ignore reality, Scud. Seems like the ones we have are on stopgap lease until new ones arrive in 1-2 years.
The Muppets tired to do it on the cheap when they paid off one instead of putting it into a refit to get through until the new ones entered service, as it was cheaper to buy or lease a 2nd hand lemon that has KiwiRail & taxpayers more $$$ than the cost of the refit of the paid off ferry.
Now the lemon has finally been paid off, which should've never entered service in the first place because bastards (National & Treasury) didn't what to do the job properly & spend money to do it right in the 1st place.
Because they all had an Anti Rail Agenda until Kaikoura Earthquakes blew up in respective faces & realise Rail is part of NZ's Logistics Chain! But they still starved it of decent funding, which is still going to bite NZ in the ass in future regardless who's in Government!
So if polytechs are centralised now and run by the state, high school is run by the state, and intermediate and primary school is run by the state, and we already subsidise early childhood education up the wazoo, why is the early childhood sector in private hands and not run by the state?
It's time to nationalise early childhood education.
Good point well made.
What and take money off the Wright family, so they cannot fund a right wing propaganda network … . National is a fan on private profit making from government
funded/subsidised service delivery.
But given the government's former focus on fees free tertiary study it does seem an oversight.
Maybe free education 9-3 and subsidy for charging for pre school and after school care.
Especially since we already have some state ECE in kindergartens.
That’s a drum I’ve been banging for a while.
Because this way we can pretend it's personal choice that both parents and or single parents don't have to be out working to survive, if we made them public we'd be admitting that work is more important than raising our kids personally.
A good counterpoint well made.
When it was instituted FDR called for a minimum wage that is a living wage, since then the two have diverged in meaning and practice.
That's closer to where I am at on this.
Like 'aged care', ECE is a euphamism for love. Best provided by whanau.
The crux of the issue is low wages, making it awkward for folk to give their time.
Erin Brokovich flagged as a terrorist. What a sick little world we live in.
At first there were thousands, then tens of thousands, then hundreds of thousands then millions under threat assessment watch.
She's been labeled with a bit more than, being a threat to watch.
Does anyone know the maths of how our MMP parliament would be shaped in the event that a large party received the vast majority of their vote share as electorate votes?
It wuz rigged!
Seems the calculator doesn't expect the results I was testing, it led to 27 overhang seats haha.
Did you account for the fact that there are only 72 electorates?
Yes, admittedly mine was initially broad and extremely unlikely
how many electorates did Labour win?
I reran it with a more completed outline and this time there were only 7(!) overhang seats.
I used 2020 results and changed Labours party vote to 30% and upped te Pāti Māori, the Greens and ACTs. This meant Labour would have 46 seats plus the Greens 19 and Pāti Māori with 9. An enormous 74 seat government, which is probably highly unlikely too sadly.
I hope Chris Trotter is surrounded by family today, he will need the support.
Think Styles was pipped, powerfully, by Danes
Alien Weaponry in Denmark heavy metal youtube
Hard to see Emma Tween and her anxious helicopter mum at that one…
Styles is great. The big, glaringly obvious difference between him and some other big act musicians trying to push the boundaries on gender norms, is that he looks like he's having a lot of fun and being real.
"No tax without representation." So perhaps persons 17 and under shouldn't have to pay tax if they are earning.
If representation were a criterion only the upper income quartile and Treasury wonks would pay tax – government doesn't pay any attention to anyone else.
Given the nature of the social media global village we live in this is not surprising
In the US Congress the new speaker
JosephMcCarthy has formed a committee to stalk people in government positions on Capitol Hill (and is also removing some Democrat Reps from their committee positions).
And at the same time, they come for Campbell, Maharey and Dyson here …
It begins with mobs on the streets and ends with the installation of a government to complete the job (over there no more “stolen” elections).
Hope there's a proper investigation into the chemcouriers truck which went up in flames today.
Was it carrying what it shouldn't be ? Had incompatible categories of chemicals together ? Serious questions as that could've been alongside much denser population close to the motorway as it moved north.
Spray cans +
Sounds like the truck itself caught fire. Alot more common than folks think with the friction at high speed of steel on steel etc on longer hauls.
They don't even have to be carrying dangerous goods and boom up they go.
Today is International Womens Day:
Hopefully our leaders will take note of stress within the hospitals and rethink the Dunedin rebuild, but then again the same people who have reduced the scope of Dunedin are still there. Perhaps the govt needs to think long term and to make better decisions, we can only hope 😢.