Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Lucia Maori Party to Support the Banning of Smacking

I am not impressed with the Maori Party. For a party that made such a big deal of having to get back to their constituency on just about every little thing that they needed to make a decision on, it seems very odd that in this case what the people think that voted for them doesn't matter.

As I said in my Farewell post at Sir Humphreys:
I’ve realized over the past two years that I’ve been blogging politically, that the fight for Western Civilisation is not an economic one. Socialism vs Capitalism hides the real battle - the social battle. Utopians have been working to change society over generations for a long time now. As each new generation of children is indoctrinated into the new social order through their teachers and the media, society shifts. The latest shift is the removal of parental authority via the Repeal of S59. Once parents no longer have authority, then more intensive indoctrination can pick up steam.
But then again, for the Maori Party to be participating in this destruction of society makes a perverse kind of sense. Party members seems to long for the days of the past when Maori ruled NZ. Ruled NZ in a dog-eat-dog, tribe-eat-tribe kind of way, but where Maori could be Maori without being stopped by outsiders. When the outsiders came, Maori had the natural advantage for a while because of their numbers. The destruction of society could create the conditions for Maori to be on top of the heap again. Have they actually thought about this bill from that point of view? Who knows, but it is possible given that the Maori Party, over the last couple of weeks have called for the occupation of land that they considered theirs, and have accused the government of allowing too much white immigration in order to never let Maori get into a position of dominance again.

The people that thought that the Maori party had principles are sadly going to be disillusioned after this whole sorry episode in NZ history.

The best thing National could do, after the bill is passed to give maximum impact, is to promise to repeal the bill when they get elected. Remind the people that it's only with MMP that minority parties have a chance of getting this sort of legislation through, and also promise to give New Zealanders a chance to have their say on MMP when they get elected - as was promised and reneged upon by our rulers.

8 comment(s):

Cheezy said...

Hello. Nice site you got here :)

Anyway, while I agree with you that the anti-smacking law is a stupid one...

"Remind the people that it's only with MMP that minority parties have a chance of getting this sort of legislation through"

How do you come to this conclusion, bearing in mind that Labour's 49 MPs have voted for it?

Does no one remember that one of the defining characteristics of FPP was that a small cabal within the cabinet of only one political party could pass vastly unpopular legislation with no opposition? I recall those years pretty well.

(Maybe I'm missing something here? Bear in mind I'm 12,000 miles away and not following NZ politics as closely as I used to!)

Berend de Boer said...

National is a sorry joke. Do you really want them to promise they will repeat this law, which they said countless times before, and after a few months/years said, oops, no we won't?

No one will believe National anyway, because of all these cases.

Don't ask them to embarrass themselves further.

Lucia Maria said...

Hi Cheezy,

Yes, Labour has 49 MPs that have voted and will continue to vote for S59. But, Labour, when they tentatively tried to put forward this whole concept a few years ago via Steve Mahary, backed off very quickly as public opinion was obviously against them.

I think that if Sue Bradford did not put this forward as a private member's bill, then Labour would not have touched it.

This way, Labour get to support the bill, but most of the anger and angst is directed towards Sue. People like Sue would not have been able to get away with this sort of social engineering in FPP because of the risk of their constituency voting that person out.

How do we get rid of Sue - she's a list MP. The Greens just need another gullible 5% to get in next election. What other bill will they lead the way in pushing through next time?

Andrei said...

The Bill is unpopualr and bad law.

Labour is voting as a block.

Some Nats are voting for it as well.

Beats me, it just shows how arrogant our "representatives" are.

And MMP exacerbates the problem because you can't get rid of them. They are beholden to the party not the electorate.

Swimming said...

I dont think it is altogether fair to blame the vote on sue - if Helen Klark was to allow her MPs to exercise a conscience vote, the bill will be dead.
Klark is responsible for the likely passage of this bill.

Nigel Kearney said...

The reason Labour is not allowing a conscience vote is that Helen needs to stay on good terms with the Greens in order to hold on to power. It is a result of MMP.

Swift said...

I note the Maori party's press release states that they want to restore the collective sense of responsibility for children. That's code for "State control".

As I said on my blog, I despair of Katherine Rich and the other members of the Blue Rinse brigade. Why do they bother?

KG said...

swift, whenever I hear somebody use terms such as "collective responsibility" I want to reach for a gun.
There's no such damn thing.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.