Greens maiden speeches
February 16th, 2012 at 4:36 pm by David FarrarThe maiden speeches of the new Green MPs are here.
Mojo Mathers:
I joined the Green Party and stood as a candidate for the first time in the 2005 general election. When I first stood I had no concept of what huge challenges lay ahead of me as a deaf candidate and activist. I just wanted to speak out in defence of our water and our environment and be heard. But I learnt the hard way that passion and knowledge were not enough. I had to find different ways of doing politics, ways of getting around the barriers posed by being deaf, ways that allowed me to participate and engage effectively. I started learning New Zealand Sign Language and using sign language interpreters when I spoke to submissions to the local city and regional councils. I am absolutely thrilled that there are New Zealand Sign Language interpreters in the gallery today, and I note that it is the first time in New Zealand that a maiden speech is being covered this way. I hope that this will be the start of greater recognition by Parliament of the status of New Zealand Sign as our third official language.
And Denise Roche:
I set out on a journey that began as a union organiser, initially with the Theatrical Workers Union, hitching rides on trains in the guards’ van with my dad’s union mates and fighting for the rights of cinema workers around the northern part of our country. I have protested and picketed with the best. I can attest that love and politics can mix: my first date with my life partner, John, was at a union picket at the Devonport Docks.
Romance at union pickets. Not likely to happen at Ports of Auckland as the union blokes have managed to keep all but two women away from working there.
I can assure the House that even though I am the Greens’ gambling spokesperson, I am not an anti-gambling zealot, and I will prove that to you by selling you a raffle ticket during the dinner break. I am, however, deeply concerned with the harm caused by commercialised gambling, and especially by the blight on our communities caused by pokie machines. Kiwis know that these machines reap their profits from problem gambling. Kiwis know that they can harm whole communities, which is why whenever they have been asked if they want more pokies, people say no. The former Manukau City Council received over 6,000 submissions asking it to restrict pokies. Active, engaged citizens are saying no to pokies, and will be dismayed by the banana republic, back-room deal being done by the Government, where our laws are for sale, and where the Auckland casino, a monopoly provider, is to be expanded in return for a convention centre—or was that 30 pieces of silver. Commercial gambling is deeply regressive, and cynically exploitative. It is a transfer of wealth from the brown to the white, from the women to the men, and from the poor to the rich. Casinos are an engine of crime and inequality.
If that is NOT being an anti-gaming zealot, I’d hate to see what an actual anti-gaming zealot looks like!
Julie-Anne Genter:
I studied philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, to try to uncover the rational underpinnings of my political and ethical convictions. In my final year I took up French, in part due to a love of Voltaire and his pragmatic approach to humanism. Ten years ago I left the United States. I initially went to France to gain fluency in the language, but I stayed because I could not bear to return to a country engaged in the futile and destructive wars championed by George W Bush. After some time working and travelling in Europe I was fortunate enough to receive a scholarship to undertake postgraduate study at Sciences Po in Paris, where I was able to study economics and political theory. My questions about the places we live and the nature of our economy were slowly informed by my experiences, as well as by my studies. I eagerly delved deeper into new approaches to urban planning, transport, and resource management at the University of Auckland, and in my subsequent work as a transport consultant. Everyone one of us travels, most every day, and every one of us consumes goods that have been transported from further and further away. We are all very personally familiar with the annoyances and the injustices that inevitably occur when we are running late and need to get somewhere, but there is a much bigger picture. The places we live are fundamentally shaped by the transport system and policies put in place by the Government. In turn, this affects the money and time we must spend travelling, the quality of our air and water, the fact that nearly 40 percent of our energy use is for transport. We increasingly see that it affects our health, the value of our land, the cost of development, the affordability of housing—it even affects the amount of interaction we have with our neighbours.
Jan Logie:
We are all beneficiaries and should be proud to be so. I am the beneficiary of years of support from family, friends, the State, not to mention the beneficiary of colonisation and at times the unemployment benefit. There should not be a stigma in accepting help when you need it. And there is benefit in sharing and helping others when they need it. Individualism locks in inequality and depression, and as a result we all lose out.
This qualifies for statements ever made I most disagree with.
There is a huge difference between individualism and being selfish. Often those who stick up for individualism are amongst the most generous helpers and supporters of others – when their help and support is given voluntarily.
Steffan Browning:
Forestry—foreign companies such as Tiong own or control the vast majority of logs or timber products going offshore, yet this Government seems hell bent on making it easier for them. One is letting them keep gassing our communities and the ozone layer with spent neurotoxic and carcinogenic, ozone-depleting methyl bromide from the log fumigations. Labour and National have both dodged forcing recapture of the invisible, odourless gas that cannot be tracked with confidence. Giving the industry 10 years latitude, while we increase our exports and fumigations, people are getting sick and dying—dying for whom?
Eugenie Sage:
When I first walked on to Parliament’s grounds as a member of this House last November, I heard a tui, practising its scales below the Beehive. The tui’s chorus is sweeter than anything I might say in this Chamber, so I took its song as auspicious—a sign that if tui have come to Parliament, their oral petitions would encourage this House to give more serious attention to our wild landscapes and our indigenous plants and animals whose ancestry and tenure in those islands is so much longer than our own. Aotearoa’s 70 million years of geographic isolation from other parts of Gondwana produced some of the world’s oldest and most unusual life forms: trees such as the kahikatea, fruit basket of the forest, and animals such as the tuatara, the wētā, and the carnivorous land snails, Powelliphanta. We can and must invest more in safeguarding the first inhabitants of Aotearoa and the places where they live. We have no treaty with them, but they define who we are. They are what makes New Zealand so distinctive in the eyes of the world.
Holly Walker:
Because I never met Rod I never got to tell him that he was partly responsible for the formation of my political consciousness. It was 1997 and I was sitting in a sweltering upstairs classroom at Hutt Valley High School watching a video in fourth form social studies about the 1981 Springbok Tour . Suddenly, there was young Rod, resplendent in his flouro vest and orange bike helmet—clashing spectacularly with his shaggy red hair and beard. He spoke earnestly into the camera about why he was putting his safety on the line to march in the front lines of the increasingly terrifying anti-apartheid protests. I was moved, fascinated, and, strangely, jealous. I went home and told my mum that I wished we had issues like that to protest about these days. She laughed and told me there were plenty. I started paying attention and realised she was right. So I have Rod to thank, in part, for setting me on the path to politics
I suspect Rod would find this the highest compliment.
With the fantastic education I received at public schools in the Hutt Valley, I grew up to win a Rhodes Scholarship and get elected to Parliament, aged 29. But, in the words of Russel Norman in his maiden statement to this House, these stories do not mean that a State house kid, or a public school kid, or a DPB mum can do anything. They mean that the State’s commitment of resources towards housing, education, and income support really does make a difference.
A fair point.
Tags: Greens, maiden speeches
February 16th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Active, engaged citizens are saying no to pokies, and will be dismayed by the banana republic, back-room deal being done by the Government, where our laws are for sale, and where the Auckland casino, a monopoly provider, is to be expanded in return for a convention centre—or was that 30 pieces of silver
Remind me again who made Casinos a monopoly provider?
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 4:46 pm
“Jan Logie:
We are all beneficiaries and should be proud to be so. I am the beneficiary of years of support from family, friends, the State, not to mention the beneficiary of colonisation and at times the unemployment benefit.”
Great, another deranged commie.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 4:53 pm
The same crowd that has their own lottery (Golden Kiwi anyone?), scratchies, sold bonus bonds forever, enabled gambling on horse racing for more than a century and sports for decades, allowed pokies in bars and clubs, bingo anywhere old people congregate, and poker through the internet.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Self-righteous Greens once again – as if they’re the only people that care about the deaf, the waterways, or the poor. And the Yankee Genter sounds like she’s never left the university union mindset and also didn’t have the courage to make a difference in her native land.
Also, we’re not ‘all beneficiaries’. We’re all part of a civil society whose intertwined relationships mean we have concern for our neighbour. My concern for my neighbour has fuck all to do with what Helen Clark or some self-righteous Green bureaucrat says or does. FFS. Why doesn’t the media laugh in her stupid face.
If I grandstanded like that at work or with friends they’d laugh in my face.
Yeah, I dislike the Greens.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:06 pm
@V 4:45 pm
Think that might have had a bit to do with the Overseas Investment Office.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:16 pm
I guess you can read into a speech whatever you want to – Denise Roche does NOT say that she is anti-gambling, but states very clearly that:
1. She supports the 6,000 people that submitted to restrict pokies in Manukau
2. She does not like the backroom deal between this Govt and Sky City
but Farrar interprets that as being an anti-gambling zealot. Sigh.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:19 pm
It’s quite clear that Green MPs are very much wiser and more compassionate than everyone else, and that alone justifies (no, demands) that they limit our freedoms and spend our money for us.
Also, they are on a journey and we are not.
That said, it’s equally clear that Julie-Anne Genter is the one with her head most firmly up her own arse.
“I eagerly delved deeper into new approaches to urban planning, transport, and resource management at the University of Auckland.”
Fuck me.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:22 pm
David, Jan’s politics are to the left of mine, however I think you’ve misrepresented her somewhat by focusing on a relatively small part of her speech. The full speech makes the point that we all benefit from the support of others – parents, friends, communities, teachers etc – and also that we shouldn’t be diminished simple because, for a period, we might receive a governmetn benefit. I did, you did too? I got the unemployment benefit briefly but more importantly, like the vast majority of people, I received government assistance with almost all of of the education and medical services I received for 32 years.
Jan’s a friend of mine, I don’t think she’ll be a favourite around these parts, but I suspect she’ll be an incredibly effective representative and parliamentarian.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:24 pm
Denise Roche has proven that she hasn’t a clue about ‘her’ portfolio.
If she was genuinely interested in reducing gambling, she would mention Lotto and the TAB – in the case of Lotto, the product is sold in an open environment (no age restriction) and there are no financial limits on the amounts spent. Indeed, she would also know that the odds of winning are worse in Lotto than they are on a pokie machine. But if she is interested in the subject, she would already know that…..
In the case of the TAB, there is nothing stopping someone placing a massive bet on a horse – with the entire amount lost in the time it takes a horse to run 1200 metres. And if she was genuinely interested in the subject, she would know that its electronically impossible to drop large amounts of money at one time via a pokie machine. But that probably doesn’t fit her biased views.
She apparently said of pokies: “It is a transfer of wealth from the brown to the white, from the women to the men, and from the poor to the rich. Casinos are an engine of crime and inequality.”
Proof positive that she hasn’t a clue about the subject. She is just another Gween ‘spokesperson’ talking crap.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:37 pm
DPF,
There is a huge difference between individualism and being selfish. Often those who stick up for individualism are amongst the most generous helpers and supporters of others – when their help and support is given voluntarily.
I’m not sure she was addressing the intentions of individualism so much as expressing her belief on what outcomes it produces in actuality. Unless you are suggesting the Libertarianz have all the answers, and that state funded education and health care are harmful, then surely individualism does deserve some criticism.
As an individual I think it is only rational that one uses their own values and interests as a fundamental basis of moral calculations, but I also think an individual’s relationship to society is symbiotic. We depend on each other and imagining that our station in life is purely a consequence of our own individual efforts belies reality. Modern society has evolved according to the model that the state provides certain legitimate functions and these functions, as with all state action, require a limit on our personal freedom whether via taxation or regulation.
While society is not always justified in the things it does we nevertheless cannot expect everything in life to be voluntary. In my opinion this includes providing assistance to those in need because while there are plenty of people who do contribute voluntarily, relying only on that assistance alone will not produce reductions in inequality nor permit the poor a realistic chance at climbing the ladder of prosperity.
That said I do object to Jan Logie extolling the virtues of being a beneficiary as if being a healthy adult and incapable of supporting oneself is the equivalent of being a child in need of education, or being a descendent of western culture and institutions. People in genuine need should get help and I don’t disapprove of that, but being a beneficiary as such is not something to be “proud of”.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:39 pm
Silly person, this is a right wing blog, that should cover everything.
MikeG (208) Says:
February 16th, 2012 at 5:16 pm
I guess you can read into a speech whatever you want to – Denise Roche does NOT say that she is anti-gambling, but states very clearly that:
1. She supports the 6,000 people that submitted to restrict pokies in Manukau
2. She does not like the backroom deal between this Govt and Sky City
but Farrar interprets that as being an anti-gambling zealot. Sigh.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:40 pm
EverlastingFire (236) Says:
February 16th, 2012 at 4:46 pm
“Great, another deranged commie.”
Social democrat more like.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:48 pm
“Casinos are an engine of crime and inequality.”
Can anyone explain how these evil Casinos discriminate? I would have thought it’s all about personal choice…silly me
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:52 pm
While reading these speeches it hit me for the first time that I actually know Julie-Anne Genter, who is like myself an American-born New Zealander. I met her when we were both attending Auckland Uni several years ago now. And what I really recall well is having some interesting political debates with her. I remember she told me she was surprised by how intelligent I was for someone who was supporting all the wrong positions, or something to that effect. I was anti-Green even when I was a uni student. While we disagreed on the issues, she was honest and passionate about her beliefs and a friendly person. I’m actually quite surprised she’s gone into politics!
I don’t think it’s fair to say she lacks bravery for moving to NZ and going into politics here. By that argument no one should ever immigrate for better opportunities overseas and without immigrants NZ would be a very different place. America being the size it is and the political system there as corrupt and broken as it is, she’d never have the chance to advocate her beleifs there as she can here. I disagree with her but I still can say good on her for taking on the job.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 5:57 pm
wat dabney,
That said, it’s equally clear that Julie-Anne Genter is the one with her head most firmly up her own arse.
“I eagerly delved deeper into new approaches to urban planning, transport, and resource management at the University of Auckland.”
Fuck me.
I suppose she has her head up her own arse because she went to a University? Is there something objectionable you find about higher education? Do you find the subjects she studied to lack merit?
I’d say her Masters from the University of Auckland, and several years experience in the transport industry, deserves recognition rather than condemnation. But people differ I suppose.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
“Casinos are an engine of crime and inequality.”
Vilification is the standard leftist tactic to justify stripping away more of our liberties.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:03 pm
Green policy has some curious ambivalence about it. They want to legalise illicit drugs, yet ban GM foods (for no empirical reason except a vague appeal to “sustainability”)… they want a secure food supply for NZ, but would make 100% of food production certified organic, when a recent study (http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/24/us-organic-foods-idUSTRE64N3O920100524) has shown there to be no nutritional benefit in “organic” produce (reducing dependence on oil in food production makes sense, but not woo woo stuff).
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:05 pm
God forbid any of these individuals actually obtain the right to govern. In very short order it would be life and death by a thousand regulations. Individualism is not something the Melon party would ever want, one can not have an individual control their own lives, the state intelligentsia ( Melon academia ) must take control of the collective, can’t have individuals making individual choices. These people are dangerous control freaks despite the fluffy bullshit that comes out of their mouths.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:05 pm
# Longknives (731) Says:
February 16th, 2012 at 5:48 pm
“Casinos are an engine of crime and inequality.”
Can anyone explain how these evil Casinos discriminate? I would have thought it’s all about personal choice…silly me
Personal choice has its limits. It is arguable whether a meth-addict, for instance, has the “choice” to desire more meth. While gambling isn’t a drug, it can have similar effects and indeed many activities in life can have interesting effects on people somewhat comparable to drug addiction. For some people doing certain activities stimulates their brains in a similar way as do drugs. Thus these people continue to do those activities in order to stimulate the pleasure centres in their brains despite the fact that the activity itself is harmful in the long run. This is why you see gambling addicts gambling while their families go without food or their 5 year old child waits outside at 11pm on a school night because the child’s mother can’t bring herself to leave.
Of course I’m not supporting any prohibition on gambling but it’s not unreasonable to acknowledge the harm associated with the activity.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:09 pm
“they want a secure food supply for NZ, but would make 100% of food production certified organic”
This all sounds a bit Pol-Potish.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Sickly sweet, self righteous socialism, wrapped up in twee environmentalism. Horrible. When are the MSM going to scrutinise this lot?
Not until it is far too late, I wager.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:12 pm
@ Paul Williams
“we all benefit from the support of others – parents, friends, communities”
What? Are the Left taking credit for people have friends and family?
“we shouldn’t be diminished simple because, for a period, we might receive a governmetn benefit”
Working for Families is not for a period. Neither is inter-generation benefit dependency. Both of which the Greens would screech about if National reduced these.
MOREOVER, the Left seems to paint a boogie man of the National Party/Right which isn’t actually real.
@ Rightandleft
“America being the size it is and the political system there as corrupt and broken as it is, she’d never have the chance to advocate her beleifs there as she can here.”
A. New Zealand is not America, and comparing the political systems of a federal republic of 350m people and a constitutional monarchy of 4m people doesn’t tell you much.
Vote:B. The US equivalent of a NZ backbencher is US State-legislative nobody. I’m sure she could be equally irrelevant/holier than thou in both jurisdictions.
February 16th, 2012 at 6:13 pm
adze,
Green policy has some curious ambivalence about it. They want to legalise illicit drugs, yet
Arguably the most necessary reform proposed by any party in Parliament and one that would realize the most long term benefits to society.
The fact is the same point about ambivalence could be made about the political right. It is curious that they preach the mantra of “individual freedom” whilst maintaining a prohibition against drugs. For some conservatives their desire for prohibition even extends into our bedrooms and personally I find that far more off-putting than any desire to regulate gambling.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
Gambling is a stupidity tax. It takes money from idiots and passes it back to the government coffers ( no doubt where most of it came from) and to the ( marginally) less stupid people running the “charity” trusts. If Roche thinks idiots are disproportionally “brown, women, and the poor” , that’s her call.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
EWS,
MOREOVER, the Left seems to paint a boogie man of the National Party/Right which isn’t actually real.
But of course the right is perfect and never describes their opposition inaccurately. Equating the Green Party to Pol-Pot and communism is not an overstatement in the slightest.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:23 pm
@Elaycee 5:24 pm
Little do you know. For a start, Denise Roche’s partner John Stansfield, was for many years the Chief Executive of the Problem Gambling Foundation, so she has expert advice on tap at home and will know what she is talking about.
And Lotto and the TAB have minimal harm impact as far as problem gambling is concerned compared with pokie machines, which are deliberately designed to be addictive.
Take a look at this fact sheet published by the PGF. You may want to reconsider your view – I think it is you who may not “have a clue”.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:23 pm
I would agree reform is overdue, particularly for the more non-addictive, low toxicity drugs like THC.
I suspect you’re conflating conservatism and neo-liberal values. In any case, that’s why I’m more in the centre.
Or better yet, use a more sophisticated measure entirely:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2007/12/moral-dimensions-of-political-tribes/
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:30 pm
East Wellington Superhero,
I never compared the US system to NZ’s. I gave a critique only on the US system and stated a fact, it is easier to have a say in the governance of a small nation rather than a much larger one. You’re the one trying to make direct comparisons. Being a state legislator is not at all equivalent to a back-bencher here. Some state legislators have vast amounts of power, others very little depending entirely on the state. Every US state has a different system of governance. In some states the reps come only for a few weeks a year and don’t get paid more than a few thousand dollars for their time. In others they hold far more power than any NZ MP, making decisions effecting a population of 20 or 30 million. In all cases they are each able to vote how they like, not as a party bloc as in the NZ system.
My sincere hope is that a Green List MP will have very little power and that it will stay that way. I don’t want to see free parking disappear.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:36 pm
“The fact is the same point about ambivalence could be made about the political right. It is curious that they preach the mantra of “individual freedom” whilst maintaining a prohibition against drugs.”
There is nothing right wing about the War on Drugs.
Rick Santorum might disagree with the Greens a little about precisely what freedoms are to be trampled, but they are in total agreement that the state has the right and the duty to trample. The instinct to control is just the same. The feeling of moral superiority is identical.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:41 pm
What a load of socialist, saccharine codswallop wrapped up in psychobabble and pretentious statements from the Greens.
The cult of the collective and the evils of individualism, hell have they learnt nothing from history.
God forbid they ever wield any real power.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 6:47 pm
“Equating the Green Party to Pol-Pot and communism is not an overstatement in the slightest”
And don’t forget their election promise of creating jobs included a plan to send thousands of people out into the country to plant trees.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:06 pm
There is no human being or experience but an individual one. All human collectives are just abstractions from the starting point of the individual…and the people who champion collectives over the individual are evil and a grave threat to life and liberty… deal to them….hard.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:08 pm
I was in the same sweltering social studies class at Hutt Valley High School. However, I thought Rod was a total twat and hoped the next scene in the video would be him getting his face smashed in by the red squad…
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:13 pm
@adamsmith1922 6:41 pm
Hell, have you? The international deregulation of the finance markets has worked a treat, huh? Suggest you fly to Athens and get on a soapbox to give he punters there that speech.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:36 pm
if you play lefty drinking game, whenever one of them claims that massive amounts of regulation equals deregulation you have to drink.
of course since Toad is claiming that greece is the failure of the market rather than over the top borrowing and spending, couple with rediculous state benefits for govt workers that means you have to down the bottle – his statement is that bad.
and to the topic at hand, what we have just seen is the next wave of entitled layabouts who have never earned a dollar through providing a good or service to a private individual or company, but are academics, union parasites and ‘consultants’ who only ever consult with govt cronies on tax payers money.
at least it makes Hughes (just) not the most repellent of the them all (maybe).
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:39 pm
Are you really blaming deregulation of financial markets (of which I doubt you could ever conceive having any benefits) for Greece’s GOVERNMENT spending more on its citizens than it collects in taxes?
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:42 pm
Expert advice? Or just an expert on the costs SOME people pay? How much would the CEO of the Problem Gambling Foundation know about the benefits experienced by tens of thousands of non-problem gamblers? Ah, thats right, you’re a Greenie. You think in terms of good vs evil. Gambling cannot possibly have any benefits.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
I’m eager to see Elaycee’s comeback to toad’s remarks at 6.23pm.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:56 pm
@toad says: “Little do you know…”
Actually, I call bullshit on you toad – its yourself who hasn’t a clue and here’s just some reasons why:
In his time at PGF (he is now at Oxfam), Stansfield was funded courtesy of levies paid by the Industry, so the activities of the PGF / his own activities / his personal crusade against gaming machines etc, are known. And for the record, PGF is just one of several organisations in NZ who provide services to ‘problem’ gamblers.
Your comment of pokies: “….which are deliberately designed to be addictive..” is total and utter bollocks. Had you any credibility, you would have checked this before you burst into print – because all machines in NZ have to meet very strict DIA standards for both hardware and software. But clearly you didn’t check this out either because you would have known of the numerous measures introduced by the DIA (and in the past by the now defunct Casino Control Authority) to ensure this isn’t the case.
The “Fact Sheet” to which you refer contains data readily available from the DIA – nothing new here. However, you forgot to mention that it states:
“The NZ Health Survey showed that 83% of people gambled at some time during the year, even if this was only buying a lottery ticket. It also stated that between 0.3% and 1.8% of the population has a problem with gambling.” ALL gambling, toad. This includes Lotto / TAB / Scratchies / Casino / Pokies in Pubs and Clubs / On Course betting / Sports betting / Internet Gambling etc.
Now, toad, even you could understand that the converse to this statement means that between 98.2% and 99.7% of the population *dont* have a gambling problem. And that also means that, whilst there will always be a place for an organisation such as PGF (to look after the problem gamblers in a manner not dissimilar to the Sallies or AA look after those with an alcohol problem), their views (representing the 0.3% – 1.8%) should not override the rights of the rest of us to spend our money (and gamble) if / when we see fit.
If ever you wonder why people often ridicule the Gweens, then reflect on what you and Denise Roche have written and said, because in relation to this particular topic you were either uninformed / poorly advised or worse – you tried to sensationalise the matter by telling outright porkies.
Recommend you do some serious research in future before you make any further outlandish claims.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 7:58 pm
Unconvincing. There is quite a lot of evidence showing the especially pernicious effects of pokies.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:00 pm
milkmilo says: “I’m eager to see Elaycee’s comeback to toad’s remarks at 6.23pm.”
Read it. You may learn something.
Or maybe not.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:07 pm
# toad (3,239) Says:
February 16th, 2012 at 7:13 pm
@adamsmith1922 6:41 pm
…hell have they learnt nothing from history.
Hell, have you? The international deregulation of the finance markets has worked a treat, huh? Suggest you fly to Athens and get on a soapbox to give he punters there that speech.
Frankly I am not sure I see the correlation of individualism with deregulation of financial markets. In any event Greece’s problems were to a large extent caused by a bloated and inefficient public sector supported by excessive government borrowing.
On the other hand Hitler and Stalin flourished through using the State to crush individualism and independent thought.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:12 pm
“For a start, Denise Roche’s partner John Stansfield, was for many years the Chief Executive of the Problem Gambling Foundation, so she has expert advice on tap at home and will know what she is talking about.”
The mistake here is to assert that because someone has expert knowledge of a particular subject they are also qualified to decide whether we lose our freedoms in that area or not.
Vote:A doctor knows more about the physical effects of drugs and alcohol than I do, but they can fuck off when they think that this gives them some right or duty to coercively interfere in other people’s lives. The same goes for this little gauleiter: by all means inform and, in her own time and on her own dollar, implore. But that’s where it ends.
February 16th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
An informed opinion may be worth a little more than mindless ranting though…
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:25 pm
An informed opinion may be worth a little more than mindless ranting though…
Not when it comes from an ideological fanatic, which by definition all Gweens are. None of them will change their minds and none of them change the subject. Case closed. Sorry, mm, toad, et al. Well, not really. It’s your fault for supporting fanatics, isn’t it.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:28 pm
Ah reid, you’re suffering from that cognitive dissonance again.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:37 pm
The best way to prevent people from wasting their money gambling excessively is to educate them better.
By the same token, those who neglect their children or turn to crime to feed their addiction are society’s problem, so the freedom to patronize legal gambling establishments should be denied them. With pattern recognition technology getting more and more sophisticated, perhaps this won’t be too difficult or expensive to implement in the near future.
Yes there would be regulation and compliance costs, but I don’t see gambling institutions voluntarily turning away their best customers.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:40 pm
adze (1,114) Says:
February 16th, 2012 at 6:23 pm
I suspect you’re conflating conservatism and neo-liberal values. In any case, that’s why I’m more in the centre.
Yep because both only see freedom as relating to economic freedom. But I agree, the centre is the place to be because you can see the crap on both sides.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:44 pm
“Not when it comes from an ideological fanatic”
Thus spake the Christian ideologue who thinks a Jewish Bankers are the world’s puppeteers, and that the apocalypse is nigh.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:52 pm
Website for adzes posted test YourMorals.Org
Here is a list of current and non-current studies which have run on yourmorals with general categories
Categories
GENERAL MORAL CONSTRUCTS SPECIFIC MORAL JUDGMENTS EXPERIENTIAL STUDIES
POLITICAL/SOCIETAL JUDGMENTS & OPINIONS EMOTIONAL REACTIONS EVERYDAY BEHAVIOR
ATTITUDES TOWARD GROUPS JUSTICE & FAIRNESS HAPPINESS & WELL BEING
COGNITIONS & BELIEFS GENERAL PERSONALITY MEASURES
Sooo many difference to explore in the human condition
http://upword.blogspot.co.nz/2006/11/left-or-right-liberal-and-conservative.html
Is more instructive on the political animal
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 8:56 pm
wat dabney,
Rick Santorum might disagree with the Greens a little about precisely what freedoms are to be trampled, but they are in total agreement that the state has the right and the duty to trample. The instinct to control is just the same. The feeling of moral superiority is identical.
There are some similarities I agree with regards to the Greens environmentalism. On the one hand Santorum wants us to live for God (as he sees it) and the Greens want us to live for Gaia. But the Greens have a little more credibility. At least we know the environment actually exists.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 9:13 pm
@adamsmith1922 8:07 pm
Bullshit. They were largely caused by banks irresponsibly lending money to people who couldn’t service the loans. But the banks carry on with bailouts from Germany, and meanwhile the Greek people cop the shit with massive public service redundancies and cuts to the minimum wage.
The Greek Government has betrayed their people, to whom they are accountable, and sided with German financiers who they should have just told to “get fucked”. That approach worked perfectly well for Argentina when they defaulted on their foreign debt – they now have a vibrant economy.
Oh, and don’t get me onto the South Canterbury Finance bailout here. Largely the same issue – corporate welfare for the big players, while ordinary people struggle.
Vote:February 16th, 2012 at 9:33 pm
Toad …
Really? Would you mind just setting out which “big players” got looked after, and just which “ordinary people” struggle? The “big players” either lost all their wealth (Hubbard) or are on trial (the “South Canterbury Five”). Meanwhile, the Mums & Dads who’d bought SCF’s bonds … overwhelmingly “ordinary people” … have had all their money refunded courtesy of the taxpayer.
Perhaps you should stick to saving snails, and leave the economics to grown ups.
I suggest you read http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/15/greece-economic-reforms/ for some pragmatic examples of why Greece is in its current parlous financial state. Rather than being due to deregulation you’ll find that Greece is the poster child of rampant short-sighted regulations that have created such perverse economic incentives the whole country has been bankrupted.
Respectfully, a lot of the Green Party’s policy announcements tend to look like the same sort of half-baked fairyland economics as the Greeks have been practising.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 11:28 am
Remember the Greens do not think of People, only of Objectives – defined as:-
“dealing with outward things or exhibiting facts, uncoloured by feelings or opinions”
In their intellectual pursuit of perfection they do not worry as to any effect on people. They do not feature.
Think about it.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 11:37 am
Bullshit. They were largely caused by banks irresponsibly lending money to people who couldn’t service the loans. But the banks carry on with bailouts from Germany, and meanwhile the Greek people cop the shit with massive public service redundancies and cuts to the minimum wage.
It is very hypocritical to jump up and down about the mouse in the room while closing your eyes to the elephant.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 12:07 pm
toad,
“Bullshit. They were largely caused by banks irresponsibly lending money to people who couldn’t service the loans. ”
How can anyone be so ignorant? Really.
Firstly, Greece is in a sovereign debt crisis: it is state finances which are in crisis.
Secondly, to the extent that personal debt is an issue it is due to that statist wet-dream the Euro.
For years the corrupt and bloated state sector was piling on debt, and then Europe’s political elite, in order to progress their statist dream, allowed them to join the Euro when everyone knew their finance figures were a huge lie. After that they were truly screwed: interest rates set far too low and they can’t devalue their currency. They have been living in a huge credit bubble brought caused by Euro membership, that’s what caused any personal debt problem.
The whole Euro debacle is very similar to the global warming scam: sceptics who pointed out the gaping flaws in the argument were vilified and dismissed so that the political project could continue. But at the end of the data is the average bloke in the street who suffers for these statist fantasies.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 12:20 pm
Churchill, statist dreamer.
We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 12:26 pm
cha,
I rather suppose he was thinking about the United States of America rather than the Soviet Union.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 12:30 pm
And supporter of the National Health Service too.
Gosh, if only there were still right-wing conservatives who believed in all that, as long as they’re running things and …. oh wait!
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 12:36 pm
The NHS is a totally different beast today than it was when it started. It makes little sense to say that so-and-so supported an institution 60 years ago that is nothing like its present form and scope.
In any case, I see little need to defend Churchill as a supposed right-winger. He was very parochial. After the war many people thought that the state could solve society’s ills in the same way it had been marshalled to defeat Nazism. But look what happened.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 12:42 pm
EWS said:
So it’s just WfF you object to? Grand. I’ve got my doubts too but on balance I am inclined to agree that mucking about with tax brackets and so on is harder that offering a targetted grant or similar.
Long-term dependency is problematic, I agree. But the solution is not likely simply cutting them.
Either way, I take it that where Logie says that receiving benefits should not be a stigma, you agree (with the caveat that you want people to eventually be independent). Good to have cleared this up.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 12:45 pm
Which was rather my point: Churchill as Romney, or perhaps Orin Hatch with SCHIP.
Vote:February 17th, 2012 at 5:25 pm
I don’t like Labour, but at least they can claim to represent poor people. The Greens represent rich white bureaucrats and busybodies. They have no concept of the real lives of ordinary New Zealanders. They make me ill.
Vote:February 18th, 2012 at 10:48 pm
All we need to do is increase the land supply. It’s greenies holding up developers that cause all our problems.
Vote: