NZ Votes

October 30th, 2008 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

Maxim have put together a nice election resource at NZ Votes.

They have a useful graphic guide to the various sites such as decision08, TVNZ, Scoop, Voteme, policy.net.nz etc with what you can find on each site. Also links to all the political parties, and details of upcomings forums.

Well worth a check out.

Tags: , ,

8 Responses to “NZ Votes”

  1. Zulu (19 comments) says:

    Well I have a weight off my shoulders, I voted yesterday and it actually is a relief. I actually made my mind up quite a while ago but the campaigning has only reinforced my decision – it is time for a change.
    I was almost tempted to give my electorate vote to Annette King as she has been helpful in a couple of instances with family health issues, but on reflection I don’t think any other MP would have done any different and I think her efforts elsewhere more than cancel those deeds out! She is probably in one of the safer seats and high up the list but I hope she gets a wake up call.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Ratbiter (1,265 comments) says:

    Speaking of upcoming forums:

    I’ve just been to a presentation organized by IPENZ (Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand) Wellington branch called “Creating New Zealand’s Future: an Engineering Perspective”. Several party candidates were asked to respond to four policy initiatives proposed by IPENZ. Participants were: Mike Collins (ACT), Stephen Franks (National), Dr Brian Kelly (Labour), Jeanette Fitzsimons (Green), and Karuna Muthu (United Future). In general I felt the small pressure parties outperformed Labour/National. Act and Green answers in particular were strong.

    The four initiatives the candidates were asked to discuss, and my summary of their responses, were:

    *****

    (1) IPENZ considers that deliberate policies are needed to adopt new technologies, if we are to maintain living standards and live sustainably. IPENZ proposes the establishment of a Technology Commission to advise government on key sustainability and environmental issues.

    ACT: Not keen on a Technology commission, there are too many commissions, panels and reports already. it would have to be independent of government. Emphasised Act policies of tax reduction and capping govt expenditure.
    GREEN: In favour of this, but believe the effectiveness of these commissions is highly dependent on who’s on them. Condemned Labour’s environment record, especially Clean River Action.
    UNITED FUTURE: Would be interested in considering the cost/benefit of this.
    NATIONAL: “Wary” of these commissions as public servants tend to try to usurp them.
    LABOUR: In favour of this.

    *****

    (2) IPENZ sees the need to increase productivity and increase incomes and the skills shortage as an impediment to progress. To address this, IPENZ proposes a Technology Skills Action Plan aimed at increasing the pool of technicians, advanced tradespersons, engineers, technologists and experienced technical managers.National committment is required and
    ‘buy-in’from all sectors of the community.

    ACT: Did not address the IPENZ proposal. Espoused Act policies re tax rates and capping govt expenditure. made generalised comparison of NZ with Tasmania for OECD rank, incomes & stds of living.
    GREENS: Did not address the IPENZ proposal directly but made reference to this viz their support for Research and Development tax credits which they believe are a good scheme.
    UNITED FUTURE: Said they want to establish “The office of the Chief Scientist” which would have responsibilities for science practice and education, as well as briefing the govt on scientific matters. They felt this would accomplish many of the aims of the IPENZ proposal.
    NATIONAL: Stephen Franks bemoaned the Resource management Act, with reference to (a) his garage, and (b) Meridian’s Project Aqua where the costs of consents “rivalled the cost to build”
    LABOUR: Espoused their own education spending and the modern apprenticeships scheme.

    *****

    (3) IPENZ proposes an Investment Forum. The forum would promote a “whole of society” approach, establish capital needs, and discuss issues (current and those arising) and their solutions e.g. current provision of public utilities.

    ACT: As per (1), prefer these to be ‘think-tanks’ independent of government.
    GREENS: As per (1) the value largely depends upon who the commission is made up of.
    UNITED FUTURE: In favour of this.
    NATIONAL: As per (1) the public service tries to manipulate these types of commissions to their own ends.
    LABOUR: Espoused their own infrastructure spending strategies and the NZ Super fund.

    *****

    (4) IPENZ proposes a Resilience to Climate Change project. IPENZ considers that a coordinated rather than a sector specific response to climate change is needed. New Zealand needs to be cost effective in its strategies; it needs to manage adverse risks and position itself to take advantage of opportunities.

    ACT: Reluctant to acknowledge man-made climate change. Mentioned NZ’s small contribution to global pollution emissions and need to adapt to climate change, not worry about our emissions.
    GREENS: Entire NZ society and economy is underpinned by affordable oil. Need to begin planning and investing in radically different future infrastructure, to allow for petrol at $3.00 per litre and beyond. Believe new roading projects in particular will be white elephants due to petrol price escalations that will make current transport paradigm unaffordable. Want major emphasis on public transport. Mentioned rail freight currently costs 20% of road freight per tonne/mile.
    UNITED FUTURE: Agree with the IPENZ proposal. Espoused their proposal for CO2 trading.
    NATIONAL: Believe peak oil/ end of cheap oil is exaggerated and fuel prices will not become prohibitive.
    LABOUR: Espoused their own renewable energy and emissions trading schemes currently in progress.

    *****

    Miscellaneous:

    There was one very good question from the audience: What do you each believe the government’s top infrastructure spending priorities should be?
    ACT: SH1 Transmission Gully, and Auckland commuter roads.
    GREENS: Public transport, rail, state housing and new efficient homes initiatives.
    NATIONAL: Highway Bottlenecks
    LABOUR: Road & Rail bottlenecks, e.g. railway tunnels North of Wellington cannot take std shipping containers.

    There was one very poor question from the Audience – a dickhead challenged Dr Kelly on his professional background as a chiropractor and asked “how can you feel you can comment on scientific matters at all when that is your background?” Engineers are used to working with other professionals, not smearing and publicly bad-mouthing them, so needless to say this did not go down well with the room. There was a hearty round of applause when Dr Kelly put this dickhead’s objections well and truly to bed. It is worth mentioning that the said dickhead was a “patched” member of the ACT party, and his stupid comment appeared to cost Act several votes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Johnboy (16,722 comments) says:

    Shit-O-Dear Zulu.

    Sounds from your post that you were constipated and that Annette was the cure for this.
    I would agree, she definitely gives me the shits.——Good choice.——Hope your relief is permanent!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Johnboy (16,722 comments) says:

    Ratbiter:

    Could you send me a full calender of the meetings of IPENZ please. I want to make sure I am off planet if by the off chance I may find myself invited to one.

    Cheers Johnboy

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Zulu (19 comments) says:

    Johnboy – no constipation, reasonably serious issues with my son and wife – and waiting list bollocks that got circumvented by a phone call to my MP each time. To give her credit she acted quickly and it was enough to secure my vote last time around.
    since then there has been a long and steady decline in my affections for the Labour party, and any return to the dark side is difficult to contemplate at this stage.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Johnboy (16,722 comments) says:

    Hi Zulu

    Sorry to take the piss but thats what I do.

    Have you come to realise through your difficult experience that you should not have to talk to your local MP to get quality care for your family.
    It should be a right for all of us. Despite the bullshit we hear from Helens spin doctors we are going backwards in all the things that matter to us as family people.
    I don’t know if Key has a better answer–probably not but nothing can be much worse than what we have now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Johnboy (16,722 comments) says:

    Further to that post Zulu I was once a deerstalkers man and met the beloved Annette as member for Horowhenua when we held the national conference at Levin in the eighties. I never liked her then as a recently promoted dental nurse and I still dont like her now. Something to do with self-serving I think.

    I’ll tell you later about when I first met Helen at the opening of the Rimutaka Forest Park information center but the phrase self-serving will still apply.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Ratbiter (1,265 comments) says:

    By all means Johnboy.

    Someone else might appreciate an opportunity to hear a focused and **mainly fact-based** discussion of specific topics, involving most parties (as opposed to the usual petulant shouting-matches and rhetoric-fests we are assaulted with).

    But clearly you are not that someone else…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote