OK, that's sorted. Now back to "Kill the Bill" so much to do, so little time.
The important thing is "Get rid of this government"......John.
UN-be-fucking-lievable!
Earning a shit-load of money = fine.
Donating some of it to others = fine.
Labourite looneys and their corrupt law = not fine!
The sooner they are out, the better!
Wealthy expatriate Owen Glenn, who gave $500,000 to the Labour Party before the 2005 election, has been made an officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit.
Mr Glenn, the multimillionaire founder and chairman of the OTS Logistics Group, which operates in 177 countries, was honoured for his services to business and the community.
In 2005, he made the single largest private donation to education when he gave $7.5 million to the University of Auckland's new business school.
Labour Party president Mike Williams rejected any suggestion that Labour had rewarded the man who was also its largest donor at the last elections.
"I know it will be interpreted in that fashion, but I think he richly deserves it. He is a generous man who supports a country he hasn't lived in for many, many years."
Mr Glenn had not made any donations to Labour since 2005, but he would certainly be approached before next year's elections.
In June 2005, Mr Glenn said he did not expect anything in return from Labour. His gift had been a "spontaneous gesture".
Under the Electoral Finance Act, Mr Glenn, as an expatriate New Zealander, will be able to continue making political donations.
But wealthy foreigners, such as American billionaire Julian Robertson, who contributed to National last election, are now banned from giving money to political parties.
Mr Williams said Mr Glenn told him he supported several political parties in New Zealand.
The National Party had no comment on Mr Glenn's honour, a spokesman said yesterday.
But it drew a derisive response from Act leader Rodney Hide.
"I think it's great," he said. "We've often wondered what you had to do to get the big gong, and we now know it's $500,000 to the Labour Party."
Told that Mr Glenn had said he supported several political parties, Mr Hide said he was confident Act was not one of them.
Mr Glenn left Mt Roskill Grammar at 15, and has not lived in New Zealand since 1966. He commutes between Monaco, England and a house in Sydney's Double Bay.
He supports many international and New Zealand charities and non-profit organisations, including the Millennium Institute of Sport, the Sir Edmund Hillary Foundation, the Breast Cancer Foundation and the Manaakitanga Aotearoa Charitable Trust
TOP QUOTE: “The problem with socialism is that sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
Under the Electoral Finance Act, Mr Glenn, as an expatriate New Zealander, will be able to continue making political donations.
But wealthy foreigners, such as American billionaire Julian Robertson, who contributed to National last election, are now banned from giving money to political parties.
Then I could get a Kb Tshirt, move to Timaru and become a full time crossdressing faggot
I am not from NZ but having spent many years working in politics I can quite honestly say this Bill is insane. Freedom of speech ring any bells. I really hope that you guys dont take this lying down, it is your democratic right to voice your opinion and challenge the views of others.
And at the end of the day politicians work for the electorate and they should be reminded that they can be removed from office very easily if they do not listen to the will of the people.
Good luck and make yourselves heard. Protests do work, look at the French and not the sit on your ass and winge Brits (yes I am one so can comment).
You're suggesting that NZ turn itself into a country full of arrogant wankers with over 10% unemployment and a government held in a deathgrip by corrupt trade unions?
Oh, yes, and perhaps we should also pass laws forbidding the display of religious insignia in public.
Alles verboten!
No, France and the French are no model for any sane society to follow.
kiwibiker is full of love, an disrespect.
- mikey
Difficult to imagine how the direct attentions of corrupt trade unions could do significantly more damage than a corrupt socialist government they own by proxy anyway.
But perhaps you concern yourself unnecessarily, it won’t last. In the absence of a suitably benign and less rapacious alternative, it's time, (apparently) for a corrupt capitalist regime to redress the balance.
Seems like a cyclic positive feedback loop don’t it? We need a constitution which sets limits on the size and power of gumint. Unfortunately such a document not only looks unlikely, but any attempt based on the public perceptions and attitudes that can support either current political option would simply cement in place a crippling disincentive to succeed.
Much as I’d love to be proven wrong, I’m afraid that, as individuals we’re destined to be denied any real ability to generate actual revenue. And with the exponential growth in petty legislation we’ll all be criminals by lunchtime.
Think I’ll go and eat worms…
Go soothingly on the grease mud, as there lurks the skid demon
I've only been back in the country for coming up to two years and half of that I spend at work out of NZ, so I'm not exactly au fait with the minutae of years old grievances. With this in mind feel free to "correct" me but here are a few impressions of recent events that get dragged up ad nauseum:
1) That fuckin' smacking bill - while it has good intent, it seems to be an extremely clumsy attempt to combat our inarguably sad child abuse stats. It seems to me that the government should be putting other programs/measures in place without resorting to legislation. There is no arguing that they have a fine goal, it's just a shitty way of going about it.
2) The bill - anything that reduces the power of big spending individuals/groups can't be all bad. Technically it limits free speech but at the moment the little guy already seems muzzled because his voice cannot be heard over the $$ch-ching$$ of the cashed up lobbyists. Who on this forum can afford to spend $100/week on political advertising/endorsements/lobbying? So how does it affect us again? If someone does choose to front up with some cash to push an issue I'd certainly like to have their name available so I can assess their motivation and perspective. My fear is that this is turning into another clumsy attempt to do the right thing the wrong way.
As I said I don't know (or care really) about age old grievances but I'd be interested in hearing informed opinions regarding the issue without the lefty/righty "your a commie pinko/big buisiness sycophant" bullshit.
The STATED intent to combat child abuse stat’s is at odds with a more or less universal acceptance of the fact that it’ll make not a jot of difference to the number of children seriously hurt or killed by the supposed targets of that fuckin’ smacking bill. The ACTUAL effect is to turn what most would argue, (and a clear majority have done so) are, at worst minor ethical transgressions into serious crimes.
Depends on who you define as “the little guy”. If you mean those not contributing to the economy then I, for one don’t see they’ve got much of value to contribute to policy, (fiscal in particular) anyway. A significant percentage of those earning an hourly wage are represented, (often against their wishes) by unions, who openly support socialist policies, most generously, and will continue to do so with as much freedom under the new rules. Those not so represented have little voice or none at all, surely they, then, are the little guys, the self employed, the small businessmen etc. Y’know, the ones that actually generate the fuckin’ income in the first place?
It’s certainly clumsy, but it’s sure as hell not an attempt to do the right thing in any way, shape or form. It’s a cynically, self-serving and transparent attempt to deny resources to the opposition, any opposition, while retaining all of the “rights” to exactly those traditional resources for themselves. It’s a crock of shit, one that does indeed impinge upon free speech, and more specifically, the right to comment on exactly issues such as these, at a time such comments are most relevant.
Make no mistake, what we have here has no part in a just political system, this bill is a work based in martial ethics, and battlefield tactics have never, ever had any relation to justice. A “fair” allocation of resource availability is never going to be achieved unless the sources of that support are treated equally across all political divides. Like it or not you’re talking about the battle for power between exactly those groups you claim not to be worthy of comment. Those who define “fair” as guaranteed equity of income regardless of contribution, and those who define it as equity of opportunity without prejudice.
Piss, or get off the pot.
Go soothingly on the grease mud, as there lurks the skid demon
It's your last day of free speech, brothers and sisters. Get off your chest now any political gripes and grizzles you may have, because from tomorrow you will have to register with the Electoral Commission prior to doing that publicly.
"Standing on your mother's corpse you told me that you'd wait forever." [Bryan Adams: Summer of 69]
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks