Is John a spineless pussy or what?

[Brian d marge]

I don't think he & the nats have done too bad a job, considering what they had to work with.

I do feel let down by their lack of follow through on their "get tough on crime" election promises though. That and the ACC thing.

Those two issues are likely to cost them my vote at the next election.

I would agree,

but , look at what they said they would do back in the 90 s

and they are doing it

and , is it doing you any good ?????

Im ok

plenty of money here , don't have to work too hard

no speeding tax or any tax so to speak ,

When will you realize how good it can be and what crap you are putting up with , all because the funding is from overseas

I heard it said that there isn't enough local money to support the governments borrowing so they source overseas

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen pounds nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery

get those unemployed , dig me a broadband and dig me more trees , I will pay for that ( my taxes )
I wont pay for underpants and a gay trips to Thailand

Just stop using credit and buy local


Stephen

and yes Jk is a good polly , but he isn't what worries me

[Pixie]

As for smiling assassin...when's he gonna start showing some cahoneys?

Are they anything like cojones?

[MSTRS:Me]

STV for parties that don't meet the 5% threshold would make a lot of sense, I think - ie if I vote 1)Green, 2)Labour then at least my vote for 'leftish' counts for something even if the Greens don't make it past 5%. As it is, Green has hovered around that mark, so people may prefer to 'safely' vote Labour instead of what they really want.

Richard

STV is a system of voting for your local candidate/s in order of preference...not necessarily for a party. Think of it as MMP with the party vote removed...
It really does seem the only way to get a truly representative government, by ensuring that those who get in were actually voted for.
How many of us have voted for a candidate, yet the party they front for is the last one we'd want in power? Don't we want to see a return to MP's that will 'cross the floor' on issues being debated? I think we're becoming tired of the system that 'rewards' loyalty to a party, rather than the constituents. Who the fuck do these MPs actually represent? Hmmm?

[oldrider]

How many of us went to the polls expecting to get the coalition that we have now ..... or any other previous MMP coalition before them?

And .... how many of us within the electorate are happy with the performance of those coalitions?

Our votes only give the politicians permission to do what they like with the results of the election, to suit their own needs and benefits rather than that of the electorate!

They are then first loyal to their coalition partners and anyone who has contributed to their being there!

The voters are the last people to ever be considered!

Are you really happy with that?

[Mudfart]

shit! no wonder the natzi party got in last time. you guys are showing your short memories.
Someone mentioned clarke stepping aside when she lost the last election.
*NEWS FLASH* they ALL get the boot if they lose the election, from their own party members, (or very soon after becoming the opposition).
And even if they were already the opposition trying to win, and still don't, they still usually have a "changing of the guard", and their own party will vote for a new leader of the opposition.
Also, another "rule" seems to be, that if you were leader of a party, and lost leadership, you don't get it back again. However I watch with interest Mr English.
The funny thing is, Clarke still had my support as an opposition leader, as I knew the general feeling was Labour had to go, because they had "held power for too long".

[Mudfart]

How many of us went to the polls expecting to get the coalition that we have now ..... or any other previous MMP coalition before them?

And .... how many of us within the electorate are happy with the performance of those coalitions?

Our votes only give the politicians permission to do what they like with the results of the election, to suit their own needs and benefits rather than that of the electorate!

They are then first loyal to their coalition partners and anyone who has contributed to their being there!

The voters are the last people to ever be considered!

Are you really happy with that?

Im not happy with the MAIN party, but you need to consider that the sucker fish parties, (currently the Maori Party) under MMP actually stop the Natzi party from running away with all their fucked up ideas for generating revenue.
Do you really want to go back to a system of one party says all and does all?
The Greens put the stops on some fucked up ideas the Labours also had.
Technically, if you want to be a bitch about politics, then under a true "democracy" we should all have the option to vote for a senate system of rule, ala Roman empire and good ole USofA.
But your kinda back to square one with that, because to get something voted in, the senator rallies his mates to back his vote, pays them off, bribes, kickbacks etc..
the fun part is when they murder eachother though....

[trustme]

I seem to recall Clark losing elections & staying on as leader , so did Rowling. Had Clark elected to stay I think she would still be leader of the opposition , they still don't have a worthy replacement

I did not vote for MMP. We were assured it would lead to more open & transparent govt. I always felt it meant we would get a govt that was compromised from the very start by the behind closed doors horse trading needed to form any stable govt. Transparency, integrity & honesty with the electorate was always going to come a distant second to the desire to secure the treasury benches.

[Maha]

In less than 12 months time he will sitting at home licking his over-righteous balls wondering where it all went wrong. Bring on the Winstonator.

[mashman]

Oh no, what if I lose the election... No worries John, cheers for fucking things up even further, I'm sure the next lot will do a much better job . If the media are to believed, , then we've gone from borrowing $250 mill per week, to $300 mill per week under this govt (i'm sure labour would have been equally as bad), and you'd like these guys to stay ... so much for the cutting of services and upping ACC levies making a difference to the quality of healthcare ($1+ billion per year in the bank , to be ripped off at a later date.)... so much for the trade deal with China, where supposedly (media again) we lose approx $2 billion per year, as we import more than we export ... the SCF debacle smelled to high heaven, but they got their money back plus interest ... The tax cuts for the rich and the upping of GST, go on, i dare you to call it anything other than making the rich richer and be able to justify it in economic terms, more in the private pocket, less for the govt, and by default the people... we're encouraged to save whilst OUR assets are sold off to overseas buyers and any resultant profit leaves the country, yet we're glad because they have created jobs ... the whining about the length of time it takes to change laws, yet the yanks say they're taking a movie away from NZ and the tax laws get changed in days to keep it and all of those other things that we never got to hear about...

I must be living on a completely different planet to the rest of you, if you think National have done a good job.

[trustme]

I hope that one day they start to talk sense on your planet.

[mashman]

I hope that one day they start to talk sense on your planet.

Sorry, can;t really hear ya there

[Number One]

Are they anything like cojones?

LOL yes but I expect they are more hairy! ;p

Thought that didn't quite look right

[rwh]

STV is a system of voting for your local candidate/s in order of preference...not necessarily for a party. Think of it as MMP with the party vote removed...

STV is a system of voting for something in order of preference, such that your vote gets transferred to your second choice if the first can't make it.

The system proposed as an alternative to MMP is as you described; my suggestion is a different application of STV.

It really does seem the only way to get a truly representative government, by ensuring that those who get in were actually voted for.

I guess it's representative in that a Green vote can get changed to a Labour vote rather than being effectively a null vote, but it still tends to split every vote into left and right, at least until the minor parties get much stronger. There would still be no Green or NZFirst MPs in parliament. STV for the local candidate in an MMP system would be a good move though, as well as for the party vote.

How many of us have voted for a candidate, yet the party they front for is the last one we'd want in power?

Hasn't happened to me, I don't think. The opposite has happened - the Greens campaigned on the assumption they'd be supporting Labour, then Labour ignored them when they could make up the numbers elsewhere. The Greens still did good work in parliament, though.
Got an example of this problem?

Don't we want to see a return to MP's that will 'cross the floor' on issues being debated? I think we're becoming tired of the system that 'rewards' loyalty to a party, rather than the constituents. Who the fuck do these MPs actually represent? Hmmm?

That is a bit of a problem; MMP is very party-oriented. I'm not convinced that we could get rid of party dominance under any system, though - unless perhaps by banning parties outright, in which case yes, STV would be the way to go.

Richard

[MSTRS:Me]

The thing about STV is that there is no party vote. You can choose to look at it as a party vote if you wish, but really it is a candidate vote. MMP has led to party-loyalty-driven politics, and with so many MPs with no electorate loyalty, government has become far-removed from the people that put them there. In some ways, it is worse than FFP.

[SPman]

$10 says that if he said he would stay on, the knives would be out for him doing nothing and drawing Opposition perks (charitable salary donation not withstanding; flights, chauffeured cars, etc)

But....by doing nothing....he's let loose the dogs of ACT and the SST to pass the execrable legislation they have,...plus....he's let Parliament run amok with bad laws passed under urgency, so no one actually knows what they are voting for, because the laws are still being (badly) written, as they vote....so, actually, he could be said to be being effective by doing nothing...in a slimy sort of way.

Eddie, from the Standard (boo suck left wing rag, etc)

I’m trying to think of a PM or even Opposition Leader who has quit Parliament after losing an election.
Clark resigned the leadership but stayed on as an MP until offered another political role, which is arguably even more powerful than being PM of NZ. Brash remained National leader after losing in 2005 and only quit after Key rolled him. English stayed on. Shipley stayed on, resigning in 2002. Bolger threw in the towel because he felt betrayed by his party, and that was after 26 years in Parliament. Moore stayed on for nine years after being PM. Palmer quit before he could lose, but only after 11 years as an MP. Lange stayed until 1996. Muldoon until 1991. Rowling retired only after FPP stole the ’78 and ’81 elections from him and he was replaced as leader by Lange in 1983. And so on.
These people didn’t quit when they lost an election because they had ideals they believed in (that's pushing it a bit) and it was furthering ideals that had bought them to Parliament and leadership. They didn’t want the job for its own sake but for what they could do with it for what they believed in.(or couldn't be arsed leaving and liked the lifestyle???)
Key just wants to be PM for its own sake. He just wants the attention and public admiration that he gets by virtue of being PM.
This ultimately explains why he is the do nothing PM: why he has smiled and waved while the country has fallen back into the second dip of recession, while he has done nothing to lift the standard of living of New Zealanders, why he has let his ministers get away with corruption and passing legislation that undermines our democracy and human rights.
Because he doesn’t give a crap about any of that. Being PM isn’t an opportunity to make positive change for Key, it’s an opportunity to get his picture taken and feel good about himself.