Who will win the 2011 election?

[Oscar]

Actually there is a big difference. The Labour/Union relationship is very public and the unions are not out to influence social policies and to impose their ideologies on the country, they are there to protect and advance the interests of their consituents. They don't give a shit about morals and are really only interested in labour laws. A better comparison would be National and the Business Round Table.

The example I gave is a Union trying to influence social policy - the Teachers don't like NCEA and National Standards and they just happen to be trying to influence public opinion in an election year.

[shrub]

Bring in voter testing! Smarter voters might lead to smarter leadership?

Hmmmm.... a very interesting concept. In my perfect world I would require people be able to demonstrate a sound understanding of the political process and be able to answer simple questions about the different parties before being allowed to vote.

But that's not democratic and would be too open to abuse - I become the King and change the requirements to the only people allowed to vote own motorcycles and drink beer, then I would require everyone under the age of 25 to be on contraception and make it illegal to be stupid and ugly in public and I would make it illegal to own an SUV unless you farmed, hunted or towed something and would impose the death penalty on women dropping their kids off at school in SUVs - I picked my step daughter up from her private school yesterday - I have never seen so many blonde women with bobs in SUVs!

[shrub]

The example I gave is a Union trying to influence social policy - the Teachers don't like NCEA and National Standards and they just happen to be trying to influence public opinion in an election year.

Teachers don't like NCEA and National Standards because they are the people who have to work with it and as a parent I have to agree - NCEA is a complete crock of shit (Labour shit). They are lobbying to change something that directly impacts on them and on their ability to do their jobs whereas Quentin shagging Cedric in their Grey Lynn villa has no impact at all on the exclusive brethren, yet they wanted that stopped.

[Swoop]

Bring in voter testing! Smarter voters might lead to smarter leadership?

I'd prefer to see the party candidates tested prior to being allowed to stand.
"Sorry Mr Smith, your IQ only allows you to be a back bencher. Here's your blanket and pillow, enjoy the debates".

[Oscar]

Teachers don't like NCEA and National Standards because they are the people who have to work with it and as a parent I have to agree - NCEA is a complete crock of shit (Labour shit). They are lobbying to change something that directly impacts on them and on their ability to do their jobs whereas Quentin shagging Cedric in their Grey Lynn villa has no impact at all on the exclusive brethren, yet they wanted that stopped.

It's still a group outside the political mainstream trying to effect an election outcome, and in that regard differs little from the Brethren, the Union Movement as a whole and other ginger groups like Citizens for Rowling.

As a matter of opinion, I have no problem with pressure groups using the election to gain their own way, which is why I find it strange that the Brethren should be viewed as anything different.

[shrub]

It's still a group outside the political mainstream trying to effect an election outcome, and in that regard differs little from the Brethren, the Union Movement as a whole and other ginger groups like Citizens for Rowling.

As a matter of opinion, I have no problem with pressure groups using the election to gain their own way, which is why I find it strange that the Brethren should be viewed as anything different.

The Brethren are not a pressure group. They are a religious cult with some bizarre and destructive philosophies that were covertly trying to influence a democratic process that they neither support nor participate in in order to impose their ideologies on New Zealanders.

The union movement, teachers and citizens for Rowling are all open to public scrutiny and clear about what they're doing and why. Very, very different.

[oldrider]

The union movement, teachers and citizens for Rowling are all open to public scrutiny and clear about what they're doing and why. Very, very different.

I'm surprised you wrote that, you're too smart to be that biased or that naive!

Duplicity is one of the essential (unwritten) tools of most political and pressure groups!

They only show the face that they believe the observer wants or need to see!

Most are even duplicitous about their duplicity!

IMHO duplicity is one of NZ's worst social ills!

[shrub]

I'm surprised you wrote that, you're too smart to be that biased or that naive!

Duplicity is one of the essential (unwritten) tools of most political and pressure groups!

They only show the face that they believe the observer wants or need to see!

Jeez you're a cynical fuck, you make me seem wide eyed and trusting. It's normal to have different faces for different audiences and it's also normal for organisations to manage those faces for the best results. If I'm talking to the guy I want to pay me a shitload of money to do stuff i have a very different face to the one I wear when I'm down at the boozer which is different to the one I wear when I'm talking to my daughter's friends (why do 18 year old girls have to be so pretty and why do they flash so much body? It's hard on an old biker such as myself).

But having said that, I think most pressure groups like teachers, unions, Business Round Table, Prisoner's Aid, Family First and even the dodgiest of them all, BRONZ; and even political parties are pretty straight and what you see is pretty well what you get. When John Key and Bill English present a firm and united face before the cameras they seem like they are good mates and work well together, but I believe that behind closed doors they disagree a lot and sometimes things get nasty. Is that duplicitous? No more so than my parents never fighting in front of me. A few years ago I managed the publicity for a national pressure group and while some board meetings got hot, everyone had the same objectives and they were incredibly transparent, and all of us were committed to making the world a better place for our constituents. I know people in unions and business interest groups, and all of them have shitloads of integrity and wouldn't have a bar of working for any group that was the slightest bit dodgy or duplicitous.

IMHO duplicity is one of NZ's worst social ills!

I disagree, IMO (nothing humble about my opinion) NZ's biggest social ills are greed and ignorance. We live beyond our means and want everything NOW, and we can't be arsed finding anything out for ourselves so accept what we're told without checking. Cognitive dissonance is as rare in this fine land as jackets without tassels and patches at a HOG rally.

[Oscar]

The Brethren are not a pressure group. They are a religious cult with some bizarre and destructive philosophies that were covertly trying to influence a democratic process that they neither support nor participate in in order to impose their ideologies on New Zealanders.

The union movement, teachers and citizens for Rowling are all open to public scrutiny and clear about what they're doing and why. Very, very different.

Wow, that's a large brushstroke.
There is a long history of religious influence in politics, and as much as I think that the Brethren are creepy, I think they have every right to do what they did, Having said that, I think Brash was mad to entertain their overtures.

The Labour attack on the Brethren, late in the election was breathtakingly hypocritical considering their long ties with Ratana. The main thrust of their complaint was the unattributed media ads, which is also rich considering the amount of money unions spend trying to influence the voters.

Basically, the system allows for the Brethren, and if you want to change that, you'll have to prevent all the other pressure groups from trying to influence the election, and that's anti-democratic.

[oldrider]

IMHO where H stands for honest, never thought for a minute that it stood for humble!

Cheers, (honest/humble/take your pick ) John.

[Oscar]

On a slightly different note - I see "Who the fuck cares" outpolls Labour by over three to one. I hope Phil has his retirement mapped out...

[oldrider]

Wow, that's a large brushstroke.
There is a long history of religious influence in politics, and as much as I think that the Brethren are creepy, I think they have every right to do what they did, Having said that, I think Brash was mad to entertain their overtures.

The Labour attack on the Brethren, late in the election was breathtakingly hypocritical considering their long ties with Ratana. The main thrust of their complaint was the unattributed media ads, which is also rich considering the amount of money unions spend trying to influence the voters.

Basically, the system allows for the Brethren, and if you want to change that, you'll have to prevent all the other pressure groups from trying to influence the election, and that's anti-democratic.

That was a very good post, +1 for me Oscar! .... Now I must adjourn to the olive grove, I may be gone for some time!.

[Swoop]

i have a very different face to the one I wear when I'm down at the boozer...

So YOU are "Wayne" from down the boozer with the grouse missus and hot Holden ute!

[shrub]

Wow, that's a large brushstroke.
There is a long history of religious influence in politics, and as much as I think that the Brethren are creepy, I think they have every right to do what they did, Having said that, I think Brash was mad to entertain their overtures.

The Labour attack on the Brethren, late in the election was breathtakingly hypocritical considering their long ties with Ratana. The main thrust of their complaint was the unattributed media ads, which is also rich considering the amount of money unions spend trying to influence the voters.

Basically, the system allows for the Brethren, and if you want to change that, you'll have to prevent all the other pressure groups from trying to influence the election, and that's anti-democratic.

If what they did was perfectly acceptable, then why was it hidden? Maybe it's because I'm a parent, but when someone is trying to hide something I get a little suspicious.

And I agree, Labour have had a long connection with the Ratana church, but there is a huge difference between a very public relationship with a group that are openly lobbying for the interests of their members and a clandestine relationship with a group that is not interested in advancing the interests of their members, but is instead committed to imposing their archaic religious views by blocking the ability for legitimate challenges to occur in the house of representatives. A house of representatives that they don't vote for.

[shrub]

So YOU are "Wayne" from down the boozer with the grouse missus and hot Holden ute!

Bugger, I've been outed, even when I carefully disguised my ute as a $500 Nissan Bluebird.