As a constitutional geek,

This is a bit of a worry, David.

From Wiki:

The word geek is a slang term, with different meanings ranging from “a computer expert or enthusiast” to “a carnival performer who performs sensationally morbid or disgusting acts”, with a general pejorative meaning of “a peculiar or otherwise dislikable person, esp[ecially] one who is perceived to be overly intellectual”.

A constitution is not a computer, so the first doesn’t apply.

Neither, I suspect, would you demean yourself so much as to call yourself an (shudder) “intellectual”!

And I would never term you dislikeable! Simpleton, sure, but a loveable simpleton, like we have loveable rogues

Hmmm…what’s left?

Oh dear.

Is that a gathering demerits storm I sense?

“In the NZ Herald article, Mr Harawira hoped that a parliament of Maori MPs would not be dismissed as “Hone’s Parliament” said Mrs Turia ”
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1106/S00249/hones-parliament-could-be-part-of-constitutional-review.htm

#4 Green Party:
“Catherine Delahunty, Green MP new Zealand
Posted May 4, 2010 at 9:23 AM
We are in fact having that conversation on this blog and I would like to add that demograpically speaking the Pakeha majority is a temporary phenomena. A Maori, Pacific and Asian population will be the majority and Pakeha will be the minority culture eventually. So before we start panicking and putting up walls we have to start talking. There is room for different models within this nation. If anyone watches “Native Affairs” on Maori Television you might have heard Professor David Williams explaining the examples such as the Scottish Parliament in UK, the Sami Parliament in Sweden and the work peoples such as Tuhoe are doing here on their mana motuhake (which is sometimes interpreted as unity and self determination) but we have to be wary of trying to describe tangata whenua structural models according to Pakeha political definitions. The conversation is well underway but to make it work we will have to look in our own mirror and recognise the good things about our current democracy as well as the way in which it has not benefited indigenous rights. As a Green I am very comfortable with an open dialogue under Te Tiriti which recognises that participatory decision making and consensus *as well as a place for voting* improves social harmony and quality decision making. You only have to be in Parliament to see that robust debate is actually abuse and that the power of numbers dominate in unhelpful ways. Whether it is a redundant monarch or an elected President is not relevant to the real constitutional changes we need to make and we this needs a careful national process, not a series of referenda assisted by talk back radio.…. only the right and left wing-indigenous people should have a say. The rest of you should be sent to a “te treedy” workshop!

No he is far too intelligent to disguise himself as a moron and comment on KB.

Agree with FE about John Burrows QC.

Are we sure that FE isn’t John Burrows?

=)

Agree with FE about John Burrows QC.

David Garret — she is on first name terms with senior members of the judiciary…

David -Is this code for “nudge nudge infantile giggling” because she is bugger all use for anything else.

There is no one to represent the comrades of the unions, the student voice, the strugglers and battlers or the mum and dad investors!

Doomed to failure.

Johnboy – and Sonny Bill for the Muslim perspective?

After the world cup perhaps…..?