Sit down, and shut up NZ

[Swoop]

In what REAL way though.....I mean we are only talking about freedom of speech before an election.

I agree the Bill is daft but at same time I look at what real harm it is really doing to decide whether it is an issue.

Having a fully transparent government AND how they get elected is vital.

Having completed the election process, then finding out that there was a lot more going on behind the scenes and the voters [except you of course] were duped and hoodwinked, would lay the way to revolution.
Unfortunately in NZ this would mean several people writing a strongly worded letter to the editor of the Herald.
Sensible countries and those with passion for their land, would storm the parliament and hang the politicians... Damn that would be a nice day in NZ!!!
Can we order an extra-strong rope for Parekura please???

[avgas]

How come not voting is considered not considered a political stance, where not working is?
Democracy my ass.
People have chosen in the past, have spoken in the past.
It all falls on Deaf ears.
Like what was said earlier, money can buy anything. Including silence

[oldrider]

Freedom in New Zealand has been getting whittled away bit by bit ever since I was a kid!

Motorcyclists are one of the last bastions of the spirit of freedom in NZ.

It's really a practical example of the "boiled frog" syndrome! Wake up NZ! John

PS: There are alternatives on offer. Just look around!

[Bass]

I we all know that most politicians are bafoons anyway .....

.......red arse monkeys who walk on all fours ??

[Grahameeboy]

.......red arse monkeys who walk on all fours ??

Well they often get there arses spanked

[James Deuce]

I was thinking...always a worry I know.

Yes the Bill seems silly, however, I guess it only affects those who are devout followers of Politics and at the end of the day the vote is via the Polls rather than the show of hands of Political ranters.

So does this mean that the other party's cannot speak out as well.

Sounds like the bill is a load of old nonsense, just like politics but at same time probably not a lot to worry about at the end of the day.

I know I will get some "you are a nob" comments but remember 'freedom of speech'

All it takes for Evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.

[Grahameeboy]

All it takes for Evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.

Smarty pants...........I could answer that with a 'Religious' view but not right place other than to say that Politics is not my path and that there are better men who are best to tread this path.

Hope you are well Sir.

[oldrider]

Are there 2 Labour Parties?

Absolutely, There is a "red" one with a (sort of) female leader!

Then there is a "blue" one with a male leader!

It's designed to give you pseudo choice and "them" guaranteed outcome!

Take your pick but the result will be the same either way!

It's just like in the fifties, you could buy a "Matchless" or an "A.J.S" motorcycle, the difference was cosmetic.

It was just to sell more of the same under the import/export laws of the time!

Cage equivalent was "Hillman" and "Humber".

NZ political equivalent, "National" or "Labour", cosmetic difference, same result!

Debate it all you like, have an election, more of the same! and so on and so on! John.

[riffer]

So when do we storm the Bastille John?

[Skyryder]

I have not read a great deal on this so am in the dark on the finer points. I am however reasonably informed on the Bill's intent. While most media attention for election advertising during the last election was centered on the Exclusive Bretherin. Nicky Hagar's The HOLLOW MEN highlighted the murky world of National Party financing. These involved people with links to the Centre For Independent Studies and the Buisness Roundtable. People whose interests are not those of New Zealand or its voters.

The Bill's intent is to reduce the fianancial clout that those with radical views, both left or right can influence Party or Government policy. Large sums of money are not donated to political parties without a policy tradeoff. And that trade off usually has very little to benefit the majority of New Zealanders.

One example of this is the reason for the eighteen year drinking age. Wine sales were encroaching on beer sales on a national level so the Breweries led by Lion Nathan lobbied National to have the legislation changed and mounted a sophisticated campaign to influence politicians for their conscience vote. The lowering of the drinking age simply meant that now there were more customers that equalled more beer sales that reversed the decline in company profits. There was no public mandate for this change but we the public have to put up and pay for the ongoing disorder that the lowering of the age has caused.

If society is not prepared pay for the democracy that it enjoys there are plenty of people who will pay but it will not be for the benifit of you or I.

Skyryder

[oldrider]

I have not read a great deal on this so am in the dark on the finer points. I am however reasonably informed on the Bill's intent. While most media attention for election advertising during the last election was centered on the Exclusive Bretherin. Nicky Hagar's The HOLLOW MEN highlighted the murky world of National Party financing. These involved people with links to the Centre For Independent Studies and the Buisness Roundtable. People whose interests are not those of New Zealand or its voters.

The Bill's intent is to reduce the fianancial clout that those with radical views, both left or right can influence Party or Government policy. Large sums of money are not donated to political parties without a policy tradeoff. And that trade off usually has very little to benefit the majority of New Zealanders.

One example of this is the reason for the eighteen year drinking age. Wine sales were encroaching on beer sales on a national level so the Breweries led by Lion Nathan lobbied National to have the legislation changed and mounted a sophisticated campaign to influence politicians for their conscience vote. The lowering of the drinking age simply meant that now there were more customers that equalled more beer sales that reversed the decline in company profits. There was no public mandate for this change but we the public have to put up and pay for the ongoing disorder that the lowering of the age has caused.

If society is not prepared pay for the democracy that it enjoys there are plenty of people who will pay but it will not be for the benifit of you or I.

Skyryder

Of course "Labour" is completely innocent of this! Yeah right! Tui moment here!

They are all as bad as each other. John.

[Skyryder]

Of course "Labour" is completely innocent of this! Yeah right! Tui moment here!

They are all as bad as each other. John.

Apart from Rogernomics and international obligations, Treaty Accords etc. I'm unaware of any Labour legislation that specifically benefits outside interests.

Skyryder

PS 'Southern' men don't drink Tui's.

[oldrider]

Apart from Rogernomics and international obligations, Treaty Accords etc. I'm unaware of any Labour legislation that specifically benefits outside interests.

Skyryder

PS 'Southern' men don't drink Tui's.

Unions don't count then! (compulsory unions!)

If the Labour government didn't keep them in legislative power they would hardly exist.

Some unions will always be there because of who they represent not what they represent.

They are the Unions that have my respect, they do a good job. (IMHO) John.

[Skyryder]

I’m a bit unsure of why you have raised the Union issue in this. The Council of Trade Unions have been in opposition along with right wing groups who also oppose the present draught of the Electoral Reform Bill changes.

The intent of the Bill is to close loopholes exploited by third parties. It was only by accident that the involvement of the Exclusive Brethren became public knowledge. If you remember correctly there was considerable denial that the Brethren were actively involved or had had talks with National Party officials. This was a deceit perpetrated on the New Zealand voters that in my short time in having and interest in NZ politics was unheard of. There have for some time been rumours of National Party fianacing from ‘outside’ sources. If this is true then it amounts to political interfering in New Zealand politics. Not unlawfull but it raises question on policy positions and the amount of third party funding in promoting these positions.
To give you some idea of the money involved in 2005 election the National Party received 1.7 million from secret trusts. When it comes to funding an election in a democracy there can be no excuse for secret funding from any source. It undermines the very heart of the democratic system.

The Electoral Reform Bill has nothing to do with reducing democracy but enhancing it.

Skyryder

[oldrider]

Hey there Skyryder.

You have been away and come back refreshed and recharged. (lol)

Did Helen pay for your holiday?

Many happy returns, I have missed you. Cheers John.