Comments on: Fiji and the priest

By: Mike Readman

Mike Readman — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:42:56 +0000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Citizen_Party

How about this outfit? I heard they were based in China.

By: gump

gump — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:09:53 +0000

Whale is telling lies when he states when he says that “we wouldn’t tolerate [a foreign resident engaging in and participating in local political process] in New Zealand”

We actually do tolerate this – as do most other westernised countries.

As an easy example, just look at the offshore political consultants that our political parties engage e.g. Kevin Doyle or Blue State Digital etc etc.

By: orewa1

orewa1 — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 05:43:39 +0000

Exactly Paulus. Vegemite pays tax but Marmite is tax free. WTF?

Religion is no different to any other pressure group. It should pay tax accordingly.

By: Adolf Fiinkensein

Adolf Fiinkensein — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 04:35:48 +0000

David, why do you perpetuate this myth? The man was not deported. There was no deportation order.

By: Dean Papa

Dean Papa — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:56:46 +0000

I don’t see this link between citizenship and patriotism. Sivivatu was playing for the ABs while on a working visa, so it is clearly nonsense. Irene van Dyke was playing for the ferns years before she became a citizen. Pauleastbay will no doubt agree with me on this issue.

By: scrubone

scrubone — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:42:29 +0000

Well we’ve had over five hundred years since then to prove that the advancement of religion has proved to be bugger all of a benefit to society.

7 comments, slow day.

By: scrubone

scrubone — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:34:09 +0000

Churches are exempt from taxes on profit. But they don’t make any so there’s no point in changing that. They’re also exempt from rates, but not water or waste water charges. Often, their facilities are used by the wider community (I’ve cast my vote in several church halls over the years) so that’s not exactly one way either.

By: nasska

nasska — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:32:53 +0000

….”Because the advancement of religion is a charitable purpose.”…..

Well we’ve had over five hundred years since then to prove that the advancement of religion has proved to be bugger all of a benefit to society. Indeed the children would probably appreciate being generally unmolested by the representatives of the church.

Send in the tax collectors.

By: Paulus

Paulus — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:24:33 +0000

New Zealand’s largest charity is Sanitarium, who are totally tax free, as a sucessful business.

It is wholly Church owned, by the Seventh Day Adventist Church.

By: Cato

Cato — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 03:04:27 +0000

“can’t see why a religious organisation should be charitable in its own right.”

Because the advancement of religion is a charitable purpose. All goes back to the Statute of Elizabeth in 1601 which groups it, along with the relief of poverty and the advancement of education, in the core group of activities that were considered to be of general benefit to society and which are, accordingly, worthy of being generally unmolested by the State.

By: All_on_Red

All_on_Red — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 02:51:02 +0000

“Dissent is not treason. In some cases it is in fact patriotic.”
Then he would serve his OWN country better by going back to Oz and criticising Gillard. God knows there’s enough to criticise there!
What is it with these Priests who meddle in politics . They should stfu and do Gods work. If they want to be politicians then stand and be judged by the voters

By: Whaleoil

Whaleoil — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 02:44:32 +0000

Father Barr is not being patriotic…he is a meddling Australian catholic priest engaging in Fijian domestic politics

By: kowtow

kowtow — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 02:25:08 +0000

We have racial elections,why can’t Fiji?

By: smttc

smttc — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 02:23:20 +0000

The advancement of religion is charitable by its very nature because the common law says it is. Denying religions tax free charitable status would require a legislative change to overturn the common law.