In the mornings, NewsTalk ZB typically has a couple of politicians on that discuss topical subjects. I think the idea is to have two opposing politicians, so they have a National MP and a Labour MP. Maybe someone has gone even further and prefers the MPs to also be opposite in sex, so, currently the National MP is male and the Labour MP is female.
This morning the upcoming referendum on smacking was discussed. The referendum was openly disparaged by both MPs, with nary a word of disagreement from the radio host. Who normally is really good in bringing politicians up on ridiculous positions they may hold.
It's like NZ has entered the twilight zone.
On the positive side, the radio host did bring up the notion of binding referendums to make everyone treat them seriously. For right now, we are going to have a referendum which will not be taken any notice of. Or so the politicians say.
Steven Joyce, for the National side, appeared not to be a fan of binding referendums. He mentioned the "problems" in California because of them.
How interesting, I thought. The latest Californian referendum was of course, Proposition 8 that changed the constitution to specifically state that marriage should only be between a man and a woman.
And tying down marriage explicitly to being only between a man and a woman is somehow a problem. Or is Steven Joyce thinking of another Californian referendum?
This morning the upcoming referendum on smacking was discussed. The referendum was openly disparaged by both MPs, with nary a word of disagreement from the radio host. Who normally is really good in bringing politicians up on ridiculous positions they may hold.
It's like NZ has entered the twilight zone.
On the positive side, the radio host did bring up the notion of binding referendums to make everyone treat them seriously. For right now, we are going to have a referendum which will not be taken any notice of. Or so the politicians say.
Steven Joyce, for the National side, appeared not to be a fan of binding referendums. He mentioned the "problems" in California because of them.
How interesting, I thought. The latest Californian referendum was of course, Proposition 8 that changed the constitution to specifically state that marriage should only be between a man and a woman.
And tying down marriage explicitly to being only between a man and a woman is somehow a problem. Or is Steven Joyce thinking of another Californian referendum?
There's been quite a few referendums since prop8, the probem in Califonia is they have them all the time and while people are by and large happy to vote from more things from the government they don't want to pay for them...
ReplyDeleteI’m a tad confused by this apparent sudden opposition to it. (If indeed there is any real opposition - or is it all just a media beat-up, too.) Maybe the fact that right thinking, conservative, sensible people have won this, has just pissed off a lot of left types.
ReplyDeleteNewstalk ZB this morning led with an item on the growing opposition to it, with a chap from Federated Farmers saying the money would be better spent elsewhere. I think I was in the Twilight Zone hearing that. It was the oddest news item. Quite pointless.
And as for the wording of the question – who started this ridiculous notion that the question is somehow difficult to understand? Pretty clear to me.
The attack on the referendum (which appears to be media led) is stunning. Its not like they can even claim a slow news day with bad weather and the swine flu.
even John Key thinks it should go:
ReplyDeletehttp://johnkey.co.nz/index.php?/archives/66-VIDEO-John-Key-on-the-anti-smacking-legislation.html
Binding referendums are a good idea IMO, but they should ask for specific law changes.
ReplyDeleteThe question the referendum puts forward is leading as it assumes that the person reading it thinks that smacking can be a part of "good parental correction". It's ambiguous because it doesn't offer specific wording for a law change, it doesn't try to define a limit of force that's acceptable.
The referendum would have been a lot harder for politicians to ignore if it had simply asked whether the changes made should be reversed.
Joey, Couldn't agree more.Its all so orchestrated, timed precisely to met the release of brochures in our letter box.You can do that when you have access to tax payer funds Eg Barnardos And Plunket.You can employ Staff specificaly for that purpose eg Deborah Morris-Travis (Ex National Youth Affairs MP 1997) Now Spin Doctor for Barn ardos.I think they may have peaked to soon with their opposition lets Hope so.
ReplyDeleteit's bad enough that politicians from differing parties are all the same underneath, tell me that's not talkback radio. Because if that's the case, then you guys are really screwed.
ReplyDeleteWe really are, MK. Along with every other conservative voter in every other Western 'democracy'.
ReplyDeleteWhat's happened in California is that people have passed (a) referendum for lower taxes and (b) referendum for increased state spending. The referendum were binding so the state is now bankrupt.
ReplyDeleteWhereas Danyl, here in New Zealand we voted in the Labour government and they left a 9 billion dollar hole. And lucky for the rest of the US that they survived the economic collapse without the obvious dangers of a referendum. Good point.
ReplyDelete