"Kiwi Party" is this upstart political party worth my vote?

[Bren]

I am looking into who to vote for in the 2008 elections and am very disgruntled with Labour (who isn't?).

National under John Keys started off okay, but it seems they are painted with the same brush as Labour now.

NZ First...NO WAY will they get my vote. Winston Peters is in my opinion a con man.

Green Party? As long as Sue Bradford is in that party I will not vote for them as SB seems intent in tearing the moral fabric of our country through her anti smacking legislation..

Maori Party...good on em but I aint Maori.

United Future? looking a bit tired now...they have been on the block for a few years now and as far as I see have not made any major headway.

Act. I like Rodney Hide, he seems quite a character, but I am afraid politics is not all about personality (or is it?)

Progressive. Jim Anderton was maybe okay 10 years ago, but he in my opinion has stagnated.

That leaves only one more, and the more I look at it the more I like it.
The Kiwi Party is advocating policies that address one of the main issues of life in NZ, and that is one of Family. one of their first priorities would be to get rid of Sue Bradfords terrible law that makes common mums and dads criminals. Anti Smacking Law would be gone!!Good Riddance.
Their Constitution (http://thekiwiparty.org.nz/web/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=38) looks more like something that would have been about in the 50s when family did indeed come first.
Their Vision statement backs this up.




4.0 VISION STATEMENT

4.1 The Party's vision for New Zealand is for a strong and responsible nation, seeking peace, stability, justice, economic prosperity, safety and social harmony and in which, consistent with both the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 2004 Doha Declaration of the Family adopted by the United Nations:

4.1.1 Every person is recognised as having an inalienable equality of dignity and worth.

4.1.2 Every person is given the opportunity for individual learning, development and achievement.

4.1.3 The family/whänau, undergirded by the community, is recognised as the fundamental social unit of society in which individuals are cared for and encouraged. It is primarily in the family where our values are formed.

4.1.4 The role and importance of marriage as the foundation of strong and healthy families is recognised and supported by Government.

4.1.5 Communities endeavor to work for the common good in an environment of trust and social harmony, and care compassionately for the weak, the poor and those at risk.

4.1.6 The Government's role is to serve its citizens through principled leadership.



I think this year I will vote for them....and heck, with Simon Barnett on their board of manegement ya cant go wrong.

All statements by me in this posts purely represent my opinion, and nothing more.

[Gubb]

traditionally held Judeo-Christian values.

That puts me out.

Way out.

[jrandom]

ALCP - Tick the Leaf! (http://www.alcp.org.nz/)

[Bren]

That puts me out.

Way out.

from what I see their party is based on those values, but it does not mean they are going to be a radical christian party, more so a party that adheres to the old values that mainstream NZers still (i believe) value.

[MisterD]

From what I can see, the Kiwi party is trying to create a middle of the road party by averaging out the most woo-woo policies from left and right...

[riffer]

Great.

All this country needs is another centrist party with hidden agendas.

[rainman]

...As long as Sue Bradford is in that party I will not vote for them as SB seems intent in tearing the moral fabric of our country through her anti smacking legislation..


So, let me get this right: the very sanctity of our country's moral fabric is dependent on us being able to legally beat our kids?

The Kiwi Party does seem to be the right place for you to put your vote.

[Steam]

ALCP - Tick the Leaf! (http://www.alcp.org.nz/)
I was a founding member of ALCP back in... I dunno, 1997 I think. One of the first 500.

[Bren]

So, let me get this right: the very sanctity of our country's moral fabric is dependent on us being able to legally beat our kids?

The Kiwi Party does seem to be the right place for you to put your vote.

beating kids...no! That implies bashing to a bloody pulp. But giving a kid a smack around the arse I find is okay...worked on me as a kid!

[Bren]

I was a founding member of ALCP back in... I dunno, 1997 I think. One of the first 500.


Why oh why am I not surprised :rofl:

[Pedrostt500]

I see one major floor with all the Political Parties, they have Politicians, I think we could find some small remote Island some where, say Auckland Island, drop them all off there, then NZ would become a much better place to live.

[rainman]

beating kids...no! That implies bashing to a bloody pulp. But giving a kid a smack around the arse I find is okay...worked on me as a kid!

So, let's look at, y'know, the actual law:

New section 59 substituted

* Section 59 is repealed and the following section substituted:

“59 Parental control
“(1) Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of—
“(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or
“(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or
“(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour; or
“(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.

“(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.

“(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1).

“(4) To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.”

Which bits of that are you actually unhappy about, then? Which bits stop you from being a good parent and threaten our country's moral fabric? Or are you perhaps just buying into the anti-Green, anti-Sue Bradford bullshit rather than taking the trouble to understand the real issue?

[Ixion]

So, let's look at, y'know, the actual law:


Which bits of that are you actually unhappy about, then? ..



(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.


perhaps? That is the part that most people find objectionable.

[Bren]

I am not the sharpest tool in the shed, and i aint a lawyer or anything like that...just a down to earth kiwi bloke working in a blue collar job ...but i know that this crap thats known as the anti smacking law is doing more harm than good. Good parents are refraining from disciplining kids through smacking because of it...and before ya tell me that discipline is more than smacking I will say that I agree. I will also state that there are some kids out there that respond best by a good solid boot up the arse. How do I know this? Because many years ago I was one of those kids. Did it harm me? Hell no! (apart from a sore arse for a day or so)...
While we are on the subject I feel that the abolishment of the strap and the cane at school was a bad move too...(i got my fair share of those too, and I came out okay)....but thats just my opinion...

Give me back the good old days where kids could get a boot from their dad, or their teacher...or even from the copper down the road!!!:Police:

Give me back the good old days where kids knew their place and (shock, horror) respected their parents and elders...

Give me back the good old days where common sense prevailed over stupid PC Bullshit!!!!

[jrandom]

I was a founding member of ALCP back in... I dunno, 1997 I think. One of the first 500.

Good man.

I have every intention of standing for the party as an electoral candidate at the next election after this coming one.

Preferably in Helensville against John Key.

[Mikkel]

I really don't get why the anti-smacking bill is getting so much attention. If you don't feel capable of raising children without having to smack them around - don't have them in the first place... It's pretty simple really.

[jrandom]

If you don't feel capable of raising children without having to smack them around - don't have them in the first place...

Raised a few kids in your time, then, eh?

:lol:

[Steam]

I fully support more people voting for this Kiwi Party. The more people who waste a vote on them, the less votes National get.

[98tls]

Shame its come to that though.

[Bren]

I fully support more people voting for this Kiwi Party. The more people who waste a vote on them, the less votes National get.
and that means labour in again?:angry2::crybaby::bash:

[Skyryder]

I fully support more people voting for this Kiwi Party. The more people who waste a vote on them, the less votes National get.


Yep. Go Kiwi Party...........to nowhere. Just tossers jumping on the patrotic wagon.



Skyryder

[FJRider]

As I recall, The New Zealand Party (Bob Jones) did the same thing to good result, a few years back... under MMP they would be in GOVERMENT after the election

[kave]

I would be very worried if this party got into power. The Law and Order policies are terrifyingly stupid and their tax policies seem unrealistic.

Law and order examples


Those convicted for murder and the manufacture and sale of Class A drugs should be locked up for the course of their natural life.

Class 'A' Drugs are Methamphetamine, Magic Mushrooms, Cocaine, Heroin, LSD (Acid), so if someone gets caught flogging magic mushrooms to their mates apparently they should be locked up for the rest of their life?


Change drug policy from harm minimisation to harm elimination.
And this will be done by?

Research shows that faith based and community centered models run by those with experience and neighborhood connections deliver the best results.
The Kiwi Party would promote successful community coalitions, drug testing within workplaces and schools, screening and intervening to interrupt the cycle of drug abuse, providing quality drug treatment services and establishing drug treatment courts
oh excellent! Faith based programs paid for by the state, and drug testing in workplaces and at schools.


I'd love it if they carried out this next idea, but is it even possible anymore?

Introduce separate identification of police and traffic safety officers.

While acknowledging two forces share some common purpose and so need to retain strong connections, with regards to public perception and police effectiveness, the Kiwi Party would initiate differing uniforms and patrol cars.

Then

Establish a uniformed voluntary policing force.

Establishing a uniformed voluntary policing force of retired persons similar to Maori wardens to help support police by attending to routine work and also assisting in being the “eyes and ears” in every community. We support communities who take initiative to care for themselves.
It's so retarded that it doesn't even need any comment.

And it gets even worse, their policy on property crime is to lock up as few as is possible, in direct contrast to their policy on drugs.


Then you get a hugely inflationary tax policy that includes income splitting, raising the minimum wage to $15ph (31k) increasing superannuation, doing away with gst on rates and making health insurance tax deductible.

To me it appears that this party is completely unrealistic, and attempting to appeal to the american-style god fearing, flag waving christians . I'm sure that both the party members, and anyone who votes for them will have the best of intentions, but if they do get into power it will be a disaster for this country.

I also find it concerning that their member list is packed full of qualifications such as


20 years workin as volunteers in an International Mission Agency


Financial Administrator Catholic Archdiocese of Wellington

and also that everyone I can recognise on the list would be considered by most Christians in New Zealand to be rather excessively intense (zealots) about their religon.
For example:

Simon Barnett- prone to quoting chapter and verse of the bible in daily conversation

Wyn Fountain
Author of:Thy Kingdom Come in The Other Hundred Hours and also the writer of the "Salt Shaker" series and an ex assistant pastor

And then the rest seem to be drawn from various evangelical christian groups. I have nothing against Christians, I always enjoyed hanging out with members of the clergy while I was at school, and even joined the church choir in spite of already being placed rather firmly in the camp of non-believers. I enjoy friendly relations with members of many religons, and even encourage my wife to attend church when she starts feeling that her soul may be imperiled. I just feel that this political party is based around a group of like-minded zealots, good at heart, but definately not representative of me, and quite possibly posing a great threat to the stability of new zealand if they were to gain any significant portion of political power in new zealand.

[FJRider]

I fully support more people voting for this Kiwi Party. The more people who waste a vote on them, the less votes National get.

Or LABOUR ...:rolleyes:

[Skyryder]

I would be very worried if this party got into power. The Law and Order policies are terrifyingly stupid and their tax policies seem unrealistic.

Law and order examples


Class 'A' Drugs are Methamphetamine, Magic Mushrooms, Cocaine, Heroin, LSD (Acid), so if someone gets caught flogging magic mushrooms to their mates apparently they should be locked up for the rest of their life?


And this will be done by?

oh excellent! Faith based programs paid for by the state, and drug testing in workplaces and at schools.


I'd love it if they carried out this next idea, but is it even possible anymore?


Then

It's so retarded that it doesn't even need any comment.

And it gets even worse, their policy on property crime is to lock up as few as is possible, in direct contrast to their policy on drugs.


Then you get a hugely inflationary tax policy that includes income splitting, raising the minimum wage to $15ph (31k) increasing superannuation, doing away with gst on rates and making health insurance tax deductible.

To me it appears that this party is completely unrealistic, and attempting to appeal to the american-style god fearing, flag waving christians . I'm sure that both the party members, and anyone who votes for them will have the best of intentions, but if they do get into power it will be a disaster for this country.

I also find it concerning that their member list is packed full of qualifications such as




and also that everyone I can recognise on the list would be considered by most Christians in New Zealand to be rather excessively intense (zealots) about their religon.
For example:

Simon Barnett- prone to quoting chapter and verse of the bible in daily conversation

Wyn Fountain
Author of:Thy Kingdom Come in The Other Hundred Hours and also the writer of the "Salt Shaker" series and an ex assistant pastor

And then the rest seem to be drawn from various evangelical christian groups. I have nothing against Christians, I always enjoyed hanging out with members of the clergy while I was at school, and even joined the church choir in spite of already being placed rather firmly in the camp of non-believers. I enjoy friendly relations with members of many religons, and even encourage my wife to attend church when she starts feeling that her soul may be imperiled. I just feel that this political party is based around a group of like-minded zealots, good at heart, but definately not representative of me, and quite possibly posing a great threat to the stability of new zealand if they were to gain any significant portion of political power in new zealand.

You put more time into this than me. The bit I noticed was more money for charities. I equate that as more money for themselves at the taxpayers expense. Kiwi Party is just the political wing of the Destiny Church and its sycophants.

[Mikkel]

Raised a few kids in your time, then, eh?

:lol:

Nope - however my parents raised me without using the "smacking" option on a regular basis.
I shall aspire to do the same when my time comes.

I take it you are just taking the piss though - anyone who enjoys debate the way you do would have to agree that resorting to violence is usually the first sign that you have run out of good arguments.

[oldrider]

After reading this thread, it is easy to see that New Zealand has the politicians and government that it deserves! :doh:

Don't worry, Labour will be back in some shape or form after the election, this "is" a left wing country after all. :slap:

It might be the "red" Labour party or the "blue" Labour party! (Labour,thinly disguised as National) :confused:

The so called "winning party" will be propped up by a motley mixture of left wing sycophant's anyway, that's MMP. :headbang:

MMP? It's where everything changes but remains the same. :lol:

Whatever the outcome, don't expect anything to improve or change much, just more of the same old same old! :Pokey:

It's like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic! It wont change the outcome. :crybaby: John.

[Bren]

is the mcgillugudy serious party still going? cos from what i have seen in this debate ( esp what kave dug up)has left me wondering if any vote will be any good....this is where apathy comes into the equation...

so who is there seriously left that stands up for the average Joe on the street???

[jrandom]

... resorting to violence is usually the first sign that you have run out of good arguments.

Jesus H. Christ, dude, you don't argue with kids. You train them.

[Kickaha]

Class 'A' Drugs are Methamphetamine, Magic Mushrooms, Cocaine, Heroin, LSD (Acid), so if someone gets caught flogging magic mushrooms to their mates apparently they should be locked up for the rest of their life?


I know someone who was imprisoned for class 'A' he told me that life imprisonment can already be applied as a sentence

[_Shrek_]

I fully support more people voting for this Kiwi Party. The more people who waste a vote on them, the less votes National get.

The sad thing is that if any of these miner partys don't get 2% of the National vote their votes get divied up amongst the partys that do, ie wasted vote Labour gets back in :argh:

[Quasievil]

Nope - however my parents raised me without using the "smacking" option on a regular basis.
I shall aspire to do the same when my time comes.



I have raised two boys both 14 now and never have smacked them, thats to easy, anyone will know that there are far better and more impacting ways to punish, for example, removing privaleges like Xbox or similair, or denying them treats or pocket money, or even sending them to boring grandmas for a day to do her gardens.
So good on ya Mikkel, its easy to not hit ya kids, but it shouldnt be illegal to if you did.

[Mikkel]

Jesus H. Christ, dude, you don't argue with kids. You train them.

Well, if your only success criteria is to not raise a P-addict I'm sure smacking is a viable option.

I never said you shoul argue with kids - your house, your rules... it's not difficult. However, that's not the same as applying force instead of reason.


I have raised two boys both 14 now and never have smacked them, thats to easy, anyone will know that there are far better and more impacting ways to punish, for example, removing privaleges like Xbox or similair, or denying them treats or pocket money, or even sending them to boring grandmas for a day to do her gardens.
So good on ya Mikkel, its easy to not hit ya kids, but it shouldnt be illegal to if you did.

That's the one :niceone:

Oh, I never said I thought it should be illegal - physical assault is already covered by criminal law, there should be no need for a specific clause on parent-child assault.
My only observation is just that it's fairly interesting that so many people consider it a problem that their "god-given right" to bash their kids around have been taken away.

[blossomsowner]

Jesus H. Christ, dude, you don't argue with kids. You train them.



thats for sure...........anytime you think you will win a argument/debate with one of your kids its all over. We don't convince by reasoning......what i say goes.

[Krayy]

As a matter of interest, if you do vote for the Kiwi Party, how much do you have to tithe to Destiny Church (their financial backers) so that Mr Tamaki can get himself a custom Boeing 747 this time? Or will he go for an A380?

This party looks totally "radical".

[oldrider]

As a matter of interest, if you do vote for the Kiwi Party, how much do you have to tithe to Destiny Church (their financial backers) so that Mr Tamaki can get himself a custom Boeing 747 this time? Or will he go for an A380?

This party looks totally "radical".

Tithe....Tax.....What's the difference? :argh: John.

[peasea]

beating kids...no! That implies bashing to a bloody pulp. But giving a kid a smack around the arse I find is okay...worked on me as a kid!

It worked on my kids too, now aged 16 and 18. They are not getting into trouble with the law, they know right from wrong and live by that. It's like good puppy training, get it right at the start and you won't have too many problems when they're grown.

My 18y/o is working, accumulating some household goods before she looks at tertiary studies for '09. My 16y/o is doing extremely well in 6th form, her last report was a gem.

I'm proud of my girls and as parents we DID most assuredly smack their bums when they were little. It was rare though and I felt like shit when I did it but you have to look at the bigger picture. Nine times out of ten a loud voice works on toddlers but you need to back it up on the odd occasion and also be consistent. Then they know that a loud voice means what it says, just like a puppy.

The last time I saw Sue Bradford on TV I thought she could do with losing about six or seven kilos of useless, unsightly fat. Would someone PLEASE cut off her head?

[RantyDave]

The Kiwi Party is advocating policies that address one of the main issues of life in NZ, and that is one of Family.
No mate, it's Christian child beaters in disguise. They say "Family" because "Passing on violent attitudes to the next generation" was rejected by marketing.

Dave

[Str8 Jacket]

Nope - however my parents raised me without using the "smacking" option on a regular basis.
I shall aspire to do the same when my time comes.

I take it you are just taking the piss though - anyone who enjoys debate the way you do would have to agree that resorting to violence is usually the first sign that you have run out of good arguments.

I dont agree with you but I am not even gonna bother arguing with you cause you dont agree with mine. BUT.... I am a woman so I just *have* to have my say.... :rolleyes:.......

Smacking a child on the bum after a warning to stop their bad behaviour in MY opinion is totally justified. It is not beating in MY opinion. If I have children and they are naughty then I will smack them if their behaviour is *that* bad.

BTW, this is my opinion and I dont give a flying f*ck if you dont like it.

[peasea]

It's a hell of a shame we don't have the McGillicuddy Serious Party any more, if nothing else those folk brought some levity to an election.

[avgas]

Nope - however my parents raised me without using the "smacking" option on a regular basis.
I shall aspire to do the same when my time comes.
What people aspire to do should not become law but common sense. While im against the beating of kids, i feel the anti-smacking bill is kinda pointless. If your going to do that you may as well drop ACC and change completely like the US where your kids can just sue you.
By making smaking illegal you are not removing cases of kids getting beat up - you removing cases of kids reporting being beat. Assault was illegal before the anti-smacking bill was introduced, and it got quite a few parents into the slammer - how many has the anti-smacking bill got?