Moving to the centre
The Herald reports:
The Labour Party, which has prevaricated and criticised the boy-racer legislation, will support both bills and the other four law and order bills as well.
The big test will be what Labour does when the three strikes law is reported back. Of course it will depend on details, but supporting that may be too much for some of their MPs.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Labour, law & order
October 21st, 2009 at 9:09 am
Bold reform?
More taxes.
Sounds futile, won’t the kiddie cars just go somewhere else sometime else? Seems as much use as prohibiting certain insignia.
Criminalising thousands of slow moving grannies?
October 21st, 2009 at 9:20 am
Labour moves to(wards) the centre and National moves left. I’m not so concered that this might be too much for some of their MP’s… more that it’s not good enough for all future NZers
October 21st, 2009 at 9:21 am
If moving to the centre involves agreeing to ban Benzodiazepine then it is not the centre I want.
As Act put it:
“If Mr Joyce is seriously telling New Zealand that sedatives are significant contributors to our road toll he had better start examining anti-histamines, phenothiazines, tri-cyclic anti-depressants, and a host of other legally prescribed drugs that cause sedation. By eliminating half the population from driving he probably will make a hefty dent in the road toll.”
The government has brought this change in as a Supplementary Order Paper with no public consultation. This is outrageous and one of the many issues that people had with the previous administration. It is simply not right to bring in such a law that affects so many people without letting the people have a say on it, doing so turns the Government from a democracy to a dictatorship and removes peoples rights to making their own decisions and having their own free will.
http://www.brad.net.nz/blog/2009/10/government-bans-benzodiazepine-as-part-of-boy-racer-legislation/
October 21st, 2009 at 9:27 am
Isn’t it ironic that while the socialist Labour Party lurches toward the centre, the National Party veers left of its founding principles. Nowadays not much separates these two organisations.
Another common feature is their fiscal voracity and unwillingness to deliver on electoral promises.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:53 am
“but supporting that may be too much for some of their MPs.”
How refreshing!
As much as I will almost always disagree with Labour MP’s it is great to see that some of them remain true to their principals.
Pity that the Nat’s do not do the same.
October 21st, 2009 at 9:54 am
They were like this in government, why would you expect them to be any different in opposition?
National moving to the centre, the Greens moving away from the Left, the Maori Party- all over the place, the Libertarians (ACT) voting to enforce gang patch restrictions and voting for the ETS. Would it make any difference who was in coalition with whom? If you gave each party anonymous names- you would have a hard time differentiating one from the other.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:01 am
Which raises an interesting question. What are National’s principles? They’re very hard to discern, other than “be popular” and “be in power”. Oh, and “don’t rock a sinking boat”.
One might be tempted to look at their website. Waste of time. Their website is much like their leader; looks ok, not too offensive, but not much going on. I defy anyone to go to their website for the first time and print off a statement of their policies and their election manifesto. You can’t find either.
NZ has fallen for a shell game. The John Keyless Shell Game.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:06 am
Which raises an interesting question. What are National’s principles?
Or for that matter, it’s founding principles. Some people make it sound like National was the 1930s version of ACT. Which I doubt. They got elected in the 40s and didn’t exactly slash the welfare state either…I think.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:16 am
As DPF says it’s all politics and perception.
Labour like the Taleban want people to vote for them so they can then revert to type and do what they want not what the people want, its all politics.
Oops didn’t I mean National.
Party vote ACT
Give John Key and National a corrective smack at the next election.
They need hand holding like any naughty child.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:38 am
The support of National for the anti cruising part of the Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Act, has lost them my vote. Its the single stupidest piece of legislation I have ever seen passed.
Effectively it makes it illegal for a section of society to drive down the roads. Its also open to huge abuse by the police, as it is up to them to decide what cruising is, as the definition in the act is so loose. It will also harm charities, as the car community will no longer do cruises for charity (most organised cruises have a $5 entry fee, which goes to a charity).
I honestly think I will have to take the bus in the weekends if the DCC implements a bylaw to prevent cruising, its just not worth the risk.
Also I’ll be making lots of complaints to the police asking them to fine themselves as their cars have badges on them that bring attention to the size or the power of their cars. Also the buses that rev their engines and go up and down main streets (its cruising), guess National forgot about the law of unintended consequences.
It seems like more a Green Party law than a National one. Come on National give it the boot, or I’ll give you the boot.
October 21st, 2009 at 10:59 am
the centre is getting oh so crowded..
it is nearly bursting at the seams..
the greens have just managed to sqeeze themselves in..
what will the do when winnie turns up..?
brandishing fistfulls of ‘clean-up-parliament’ policies..?
and other populist gems..
it’ll be positively third-world-crowding conditions in there..
in fact..if winnie gets populist enough..
(and i’m picking he will..eh..?..)
he could..irony of ironies..
end up the ‘leftist’ of them all..
‘it’s an upside down world..alice..’
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 11:08 am
“..It seems like more a Green Party law than a National one..”
um..!,..i can’t see the greens voting against ‘cruising’..of any type..
this type of pettifogging-authoritarianism..
harkens back more to muldoon..
and how about banning all those grannies..eh..?
not only won’t our anti-freedom govts allow our elderly to sparkle up their final years with a bit of opium..or cocaine..or even pot..
(move to portugal i say..!..or..or…)
now..joyce..after having a rant laid on him by anti-drug/fun-zealots..
has turned all the oldies..tranked up on ‘legal-drugs/highs’..as they are.
into law-breaking junkies..now forbidden to drive..
the day after they have knecked their sleeping pills..
good grief..!
what’s next..?
um..!..aren’t you righties who moaned long and hard about nanny-state labour..
squirming somewhat..?..in embarrassment..?
if not..why not..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 11:12 am
Oh dear…
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10604475
What a fuckup, what a shambles, the Nats really are turning into worse nanny statists than the last lot. Their motto should be along the lines of “Socialism: We’ll do it Better”.
Now I am all for locking the crims up and throwing away the key, but FFS come on:
“The Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Act will allow local authorities to make anti-cruising orders, which prevent “circling designated streets within defined periods of time”.”
And then:
“The act also featured the last-minute inclusion of a ban on driving while affected by benzodiazepine, a prescription sedative and anti-anxiety medication that is often used as a sleeping pill.”
First of all, the anti cruising clause seems to me like the worst kind of bad drafting, there are already laws against reckless driving, loud exhausts etc, why the fuck do we need more? Oh thats right, so John Key can look like a “strong leader”.
Secondly, perhaps if someone in the know can fill me in on this, how the hell do you test someone for sedatives? What a fucking joke.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:16 am
It is different. It is now the Natny state.
October 21st, 2009 at 11:25 am
it’s also known as ‘being keyed’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 11:26 am
Proposed bill to stop citizens from “cruising” (= moving about of their free will on public roads) merely because the car is a Skyline or Integra or whatever and it looks a bit similar to some other cars that – anecdotally – are sometimes seen breaking the law and causing public disturbance.
But no no, Nanny/Police state is what LABOUR and the GREENS want to do to us, remember?
October 21st, 2009 at 11:27 am
and..f.f.s..!..please..!
nobody tell joyce the highs to be had from yoga..eh..?
quick as a flash/knee-jerk..
he’ll ban meditation-mats..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 11:42 am
“..Secondly, perhaps if someone in the know can fill me in on this, how the hell do you test someone for sedatives? What a fucking joke..”
expect to see grannies on the side of the road..being made to ‘walk a straight line’..(and breath into ‘drug-bags’..)
it’s not going to be easy for the ‘dears’..eh..?
and i reckon they’ll get a bit pissed off..
and then it’ll be ‘bye-bye that horrible mr key”‘..eh..?
(golden rules of political-survival..(number four:
never..ever..piss the grannies off..!.)
’tis the equivalent of political suicide..
(b.t.w..speaking of ‘splits in parties’..(as dpf does)..
.how is the libertarian-wing of the nattys handling this little shower..?
(and will act vote to support it..?
you bet yr rightwing boots they will..!)
eh..?
(holy ongoing ideological-blasphemies/betrayals..! ..!..batman..!..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 11:48 am
A thumbs up for you philu, seeing you as an enemy of the Nat’s nannyism only reinforces my concerns about them.
Now if we could only temper your party’s authoritarianism on the economic front
October 21st, 2009 at 11:58 am
Rolla_fxgt & NickB
Thanks for this, it seems ludicrous to me.
Law should be clear and thought out.
We pay them to think through both the intended and unintended consequences.
At least it is in first stages thank god.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:13 pm
They have a test for this, they are going to put the grannies in a rocking chair in front of telly and if they nod off within two hours they will have been deemed to be sedated.
October 21st, 2009 at 12:14 pm
they could/should raid/blockade bowling clubs…
(“did you drive here..?..blow in this bag..!’..)
they’d get a lot there..
(spot raids on op-shop staff would be another ‘easy-catch’..)
‘low-hanging-fruit there..eh..?..be seen to be doing something..that’s the main thing..)
i can’t understand how we’ve gone/survived so long..
allowing the scourge of these drugged-out junkie-grannies..
just going about anywhere as they please..
(and won’t somebody think of the children..?..)
(‘holy new/fresh-moral-panic..!..batman..!’..)
..the pill-gobbling grannies..
too sedated for their own good..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 12:16 pm
and yep..!..nat/act have both voted for the cruising/nanny-junkie bill..
the only party to voe against it ..
was the greens..
October 21st, 2009 at 12:24 pm
“..Brad H (33) Vote: Add rating 6 Subtract rating 0 Says:
October 21st, 2009 at 9:21 am
If moving to the centre involves agreeing to ban Benzodiazepine then it is not the centre I want.
As Act put it:
“If Mr Joyce is seriously telling New Zealand that sedatives are significant contributors to our road toll he had better start examining anti-histamines, phenothiazines, tri-cyclic anti-depressants, and a host of other legally prescribed drugs that cause sedation. By eliminating half the population from driving he probably will make a hefty dent in the road toll.”
so..brad..
why did (your) act just vote to pass this law..?
(remind us again..!..)
(they don’t speak with forked-tongue..do they..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 3:16 pm
@Phil: “…how is the libertarian-wing of the nattys handling this little shower…”
There’s a libertarian wing of the Nats? Surely you jest!
October 21st, 2009 at 8:02 pm
are you saying they are all just nanny-statist ..?
this attack on junkie-grannies could also stir greypower enough..
to lever themselves out of their laz-y-boys..
and if that happens..?
whoar..!..watch out key/nattys..!
incoming..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 8:10 pm
shall we call the benzo’s…’b’..?
it’d be easier..
y’know..!..the ‘b’-scourge..?
the ‘b’-epidemic..?
maybe john key could update his ‘p’-scare-story/urban-myth..?
and tell us about ‘b’-crazed-granny-addicts…
just turning up on law-abiding-punters’ doorsteps..
(what would they say..?:..’got any ‘b”s..?’..
would they threaten to ‘nod-off’..?)
whoar..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 21st, 2009 at 8:24 pm
This fucking drug addict really is a phool, raving all phucking day.
Going on about medication for grannies and grandads, law abiding.
The stupid prick smokes dak all day and he has the gall to give an opinion?
Nod off yourself Phool.
FFS taxpayers pay for everything you do, even breathing, leech
October 21st, 2009 at 8:35 pm
“..Going on about medication for grannies and grandads, law abiding..”
precisely the point..dear steve..
thanks to joyce/national…
they are no longer ‘law abiding’..
they are now ‘b’-heads..
breaking the law..with every breath/trank they take..
phil(whoar.co.nz)