Quality of candidates – start with “are they human?”

12 comments on “Quality of candidates – start with “are they human?” ”

• Comments are now closed

1. lprent 1

   9 July 2024 at 11:07 am

   Predictably "‘Disproportionate’ UK election results boost calls to ditch first past the post" backed by Reform UK.

   Now I have no problem with getting a more proportionate system. However I really despise the ethics of a party that deliberately puts up a straw man argument like Reform did.

   I recognise the characteristic arsehole tactical approach of mischief makers looking for a diversion from actual policy. So characteristic of the parasitic political classes that the right nurtures almost exclusively in the halls of power. People like Chris Bishop, Nicola Willis and their compatriots in false front entities like TU and FSU.

   Backed by Topham Guerin. (see my comment from the past on Ben Guerin) It wouldn't surprise me if they were helping Reform UK. That campaign was redolent of their stench.

   Typically none of whom have ever had to work for a living. Instead they depend upon connections and patronage that would be familiar to anyone who observes 18th century history.

   They all batten on politics and crony capitalism.

   Chris Luxon seems to me to be a patronage bunny, currently out of his depth and starting to sink.
2. Visubversa 2

   9 July 2024 at 11:29 am

   A serial candidate in the Eden/Albert ward of Auckland City Council was prosecuted some years ago for forging the signatures of his nominators.
   • lprent 2.1

     9 July 2024 at 12:17 pm

     Can we blame someone who was so alone that they couldn't even find two people to vouch for them? Or whatever the local government electoral act requires 🙂 😈

     Sure we can…

     I just got kiwisaver, for which I had to go to a JP to have a look at my identification and at me to certify that I was a live human and I looked like my identity papers. But being a candidate requires less?

     I had to set up several investment accounts and term deposits to take the contents of the kiwisaver. Those required that I front up with identity to make sure that I wasn't money-laundering. They read my drivers license or passport and matched with with the live video from my phone. Then clearly matched it with data attached to both. The alternative was to go to the JP again.

     Surely that should be a minimum standard required for someone who could wind up with the laws governing the taxes I pay?

     To get superannuation, the same. For my brief time on job seekers benefit after a redundancy, the same.

     Every job I have ever gone for in decades has required that they sight my identification and frequently that they can check my records for a criminal past.

     Coming to think of it, for everything important we are mandated to prove that we are human and that we are who we said we are. Why not for seeking public office?

     Must be about time to update the requirements of the various electoral acts.
     • ghostwhowalksnz 2.1.1

       9 July 2024 at 4:09 pm

       I understood the level of identification required to withdraw kiwisaver funds is because of the yearly government contribution up to $520 pa. Since its 17 years since the scheme began in Jul 2007 thats up to $8800 over that time . With earnings that could $15-20k ?
       • lprent 2.1.1.1

         9 July 2024 at 4:37 pm

         Sure, but it really makes no difference these days. That is because of the money laundering requirements on more recent acts.

         I never had to provide any authentication when I set up kiwisaver because it was coming from my salary and in effect validated by the IRD who actually did the deposits in the investment fund. The IRD are notable as an authentication method because of the level of record access that they have.

         But the amount of authentication required to put money back into the same investment company as my kiwisave for a mutual investment fund only lacked the JP because it used electronic means. The actual level of authentication required for both included a scan of the drivers license or passport, matched with a record lookup and with a live scan of my face using the phone. Could be fooled. But personally if I was trying to scam it, then I’d take my chances with the JP.

         With earnings that could $15-20k ?

         14 years for mine as I started when I was 50. The government contribution was a very minor portion. I spent 4 years at 4%, 7.5 years at 8% of earnings, 2.5 years at 10%. An upcoming 65yo was a marvellous incentive.

         The governments $1k and $0.5k was a teeny portion of what I and my employer contributed in each year.
         • ghostwhowalksnz 2.1.1.1.1

           10 July 2024 at 10:52 am

           Its really is just the growth of the 'identity documentation' these days

           I spoke to my lawyer about discharge of a mortgage off the title that was paid off long ago I used them before so they knew who I was.

           They sent me this link for photo identification with this technically interesting way of creating one from my own cell phone.

           Unlike the passport system it checks the image is suitable while you do it …with a oval for the face position. The software wanted your passport as part of the same image- you are holding it in your hand.
3. Dennis Frank 3

   9 July 2024 at 1:28 pm

   A good appraisal and an interesting issue. That image of the youngster reminds me of the old Zappa song about plastic people. If he'd been running in the USA he probably would have captured three times as many voters.

   Funny tho. Reportage seems to avoid the issue of whether Reform broke the rules or not. The LDP trying to publicly shame them seems disingenuous: if the rules weren't broken, then Reform are merely gaming the system. Politics as usual. It's not as if voters genuinely believe politicians are real people…
   • lprent 3.1

     9 July 2024 at 1:47 pm

     Reportage seems to avoid the issue of whether Reform broke the rules or not. The LDP trying to publicly shame them seems disingenuous: if the rules weren’t broken, then Reform are merely gaming the system. Politics as usual.

     If the candidates were in fact not real people or their details that were required to be given to the electoral authority were incorrect or if their 10+ supporting members of the electorate details were invalid – then it is a electoral crime.

     Same as it would be here and the candidate (and possibly the party depending on who provided the details) could be prosecuted for it. Electoral offences are usually pretty severe on punishments – at least they were when the electoral acts were passed.

     However false accusations of criminal offences also tend to carry punishments. So only suspicions can typically be raised without definitive proof. And it is usually hard to prove a absence of negative without some working details to check.

     Only the electoral bodies (like NZ) have the required details like contact numbers or addresses to identify the candidates. The electoral bodies (like our one) also have legitimate privacy issues with releasing those – which is why I pointed out that on the quote from our electoral commission.

     So the LibDems, Greens and the media will be having a look around to see if they can identify someone who is quite suspicious. They will then report that to the electoral authorities who will then be required to investigate for anything obvious. Typically if they don’t have a good answer, it then gets passed to the police for investigation.

     But you’d have to say that not having any idea who some of the candidates are in a community tends towards deeply suspicious. Offhand, outside of some of the obvious attention seekers and students after a grubstake in some of the local body elections, I can’t think of an obvious equivalents here. Even the McGilliculdy Serious candidates used to try to have as high a profile as possible – even in snap elections.
     • Dennis Frank 3.1.1

       9 July 2024 at 5:08 pm

       Okay, the Brits do have an equivalent of our Electoral Commission. It may seem sensible to assume they validate candidates as part of their job but I'd rather see a UK media report actually say so. I've seen too many instances of things falling through system gaps in my life. Like you, I had a sci-fi education long ago and the scenario of fake candidates will appeal to the downstream generations who absorbed the snowballing of that. Sensible system design would cross-check the candidate's name with other govt depts for validation – can we assume their EC already does so?

       Someone ought to get an official govt response to that question. In the meantime we wait to see if the concerns raised pass a critical threshold of necessitating response.
     • Mike the Lefty 3.1.2

       9 July 2024 at 6:50 pm

       I would assume that if any candidate, including Reform UK, hadn't supplied the necessary documentation and accreditation on application then their candidature wouldn't have been accepted by the electoral authority and thus they wouldn't have appeared on the ballot paper.

       Whether Reform UK candidates are human is open to interpretation.
4. adam 4

   9 July 2024 at 1:45 pm

   Bloody nora lprent, that was uncomfortable reading.

   This is insidious.

   The anti-democratic forces are just vile, they infect ever thing they touch with a new level of immorality.
   • lprent 4.1

     9 July 2024 at 2:35 pm

     …that was uncomfortable reading.

     I can but try.. But I was educated in part by science fiction for instance like the stories in discussion here.

     There are a lot of similar stories out there with a similar political themes.

     Plus whenever you look at laws, it pays to remember that if there is a way to leverage them for effect, then eventually someone will do it.

     But always try Jon Scalzi – like "The President's brain is missing"

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS