It's like watching a bad soap opera.
Apologies. Both quotes are taken from 'Be Māori' - Kiingi Tuuheitia gives closing speech at national hui (1news.co.nz)
What the coalition government inherited was an increase in government spending as a % of GDP from 17.92% in 2017 to 20.82% in 2022. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/New-Zealand/Government_size/. That places NZ as the 28th highest out of 142 nations for ...
I think you're being dragged down a rabbit hole. There isn't a single major political party in NZ proposing removing or rewriting the Treaty. For that matter I would question whether there is even a legal vehicle to achieve anything like either of those ...
It is my understanding that the referendum is about the principles of the Treaty. Nothing more, nothing less. The Treaty itself is not up for debate, nor is there any suggestion that the Treaty is being re-written (as if that were even possible). In 1989, ...
"Is “unusual” a euphemism for totally inappropriate and utterly unexpected aka not signalled during the election campaign? " No, unusual refers to the idea that politicians in NZ may actually set about implementing policies they signalled in advance. The ...
"India has a secular constitution, as per the USA (which has a Christian majority)." For now. "The constitution still calls India a secular republic. But the facts on the ground suggest otherwise. Mr Modi’s supporters treat the idea of secularism as a ...
Are you comfortable with a broad based, inclusive conversation about the role of the Treaty in NZ?
Reducing funding for the Office of the Clerk is hardly headline news. The changes being proposed by this government were clearly signalled across the various coalition partners prior to the last election. It may be unusual, but there it is. Edited
"Ps – you didn't answer my question…" Perhaps because it's irrelevant to the point. If "Seymour represents a very small percentage of New Zealanders", so do the leaders of the Greens and TPM.
Thanks SPC. What first drew me to the Ngata piece some time ago was trying understand the historical context behind the differences between the two versions.
So you're comfortable with the role of the Treaty being openly discussed, just not by David Seymour?
It's difficult to know whether you're uncomfortable with the conversation, or just that Seymour is one of the people calling for it. Either way, this issue isn't going away.
This is not the first time you have sought to engage the person not the issues.
The smoke free legislation was, to the best of my knowledge, the only example you give of policy not signalled prior to the election. You might be surprised to know that ASH support the government on that. "Many have claimed this repeal would jeopardise ...
The first paragraph was written by Ngata, the second was a quote attributed to Hobson. Ngata may be contradicting Hobson, or he may simply be pointing out (in language of the day) that Hobson wrote the first draft, Busby a second, which was then approved ...
What nonsense. This is a constitutional conversation. The Treaty is this nations most important historical document, yet minds far more qualified than you and I continue to debate it's meaning and application some 180 years after it was signed. This is a ...
The David commenting here is interested in ...
"ACT is bending the democratic process with money, then claiming popular backing for its warped programme." That's your opinion, and of course you're welcome to it. But your argument about the representative voice remains illogical.
"Because of the importance to the English version he claimed for himself in the link you provided." Which is irrelevant to the points I have made. "Ngata's opine about the Maori language version is a better resource for any debate than anything from ...
You seem to have a very strange view of democracy. Our democratic system allows smaller parties to articulate opinions, to call for conversation you may find personally uncomfortable. On your logic, Te Pati Maori represents just 3% of New Zealander. The ...
Not sure why you mentioned Busby, but anyway: "The English version guaranteed ‘undisturbed possession’ of all properties, but the Māori version guaranteed ‘tino rangatiratanga’ (full authority) over ‘taonga’ (treasures, which can be intangible). Ngata's ...
Indeed. Successive governments in the past 30 years seem to have taken the view that debate amongst the wider population around the meaning and application of the Treaty, and concepts such as sovereignty and partnership, are beyond the comprehension of the...
"Many I know are actually saying this Government has already gone too far. People who voted National, and are not happy with the polygamous marriage. This is not what they expected." Then they were incredibly naieve, or they are simply telling you what ...
I beg to differ. I suspect that's exactly where ACT are coming from.
Re Trickdown's comments, the reason Labour lost to the financial power group was that it hung onto the liberal right idea of no capital gains tax. [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was...
The minimum age for marriage in NZ is 18, unless you get permission from a Family Court judge. At 16, a person is still considered a 'youth' by the criminal justice system, and for good reason. They are kids.
"...like you, they are ideologues who seek to suppress those who are not like them." Labelling people you disagree with as 'ideologues' is not an argument, nor is it a rational position to take. If there is a law that removes the franchise from people ...
I see the 'lottery' aspect (as you've described it) as simply a consequence of offending. However there are obvious compromise positions that could be reached.
"There is no logical number where these things become right; each circumstance has to be looked at with regard multiple factors, which change over time. " Over time, I have seen nothing to convince me that 16-year-olds should be eligible to vote, or that ...
Drowsy just to be clear, I don't see prisoner franchise as being related to any notion of being too 'soft' on sentencing. I see it more as a logical extension of the removal of liberty generally.
Recent Comments