Tsk tsk more nanny statism. Even most ACT MPs supported it, it would seem
The fact that two did is indeed a reason why the ACT brand is so tarnished these days - what you might think was a core principle of the party (i.e. slowing the growth of nanny state and the attendant bureaucracy that goes along with it) isn't a core principle at all.
I wasn't going to vote for them anyway.
All but three ACT MPs voted for the Smoke-free Environments (Controls and Enforcement) Amendment Bill.Well not quite. There only being five ACT MPs by a small majority most of them didn't.
The fact that two did is indeed a reason why the ACT brand is so tarnished these days - what you might think was a core principle of the party (i.e. slowing the growth of nanny state and the attendant bureaucracy that goes along with it) isn't a core principle at all.
I wasn't going to vote for them anyway.
I agree the wording in the article is odd and seems to indicate bias on behalf of the writer.
ReplyDeleteBut not all such social laws should be deemed nanny-state and bad. I can see how some would see this as a positive social move.
For my two cents, I can't predict how effective it will be but it seems a step in the right direction and at the least sends a strong message to shopkeepers.
The (actual) majority of ACT that rejected the bill did so on the grounds of personal choice. But I still have the choice to buy cigarettes, don't I?
Smoking being a vice of the lower classes Sean is a target of the pompous ruling class.
ReplyDeleteAnd being as they have the power to express their distaste for it by increasing the powers of government apparatchiks, to wit "smokefree environment enforcement officers" to levy instant fines of up to $10,000 they exercise it.
They would not go after middle class vices such as sodomy in the same manner because after all those may be their vices and as such are approved and almost on occasions promoted.
"Smoking being a vice of the lower classes Sean is a target of the pompous ruling class."
ReplyDeleteAndrei - are you serious? I was not aware the physical nicotine addiction was dependant on one's income.
"They would not go after middle class vices such as sodomy in the same manner..."
Please don't compare one completely different thing with this. It doesn't assist your argument to do this. Let's stay on-topic.