Well, it's not their money they are spending

September 6, 2009 – 1:34 pm

Kiwi Party leader Larry Baldock  didn't get his the way for the first referendum, so he decides to have another go - this time, it's on whether a referendum should be binding.

I actually agree with him this time. In a democracy people should be the utilmate ruler, and a binding referendum provides a check on politicans, preventing them from forgetting who voted them in the first place.

However, in order to make the referendum binding, there are some criteria the referendum you have to meet first - the most obvious one - people ought to at least know what it binds for. The last referendum question is by no contest, the worst example of this.

It was very clear from the start, Mr Baldock hijacked the smacking issue for his own political gains, and this time he didn't even bother to hide his intention - he wants the referendum to coincide with the next general election.


Section 92A is alive again

July 14, 2009 – 6:25 pm

Earlier today, Ministry of Economic Development has released a Review Policy Proposal Document, highlighting recommended changes to the older version of the section.

It is significantly improved, according to many sources. A copyright tribunal is proposed to deal with the judicial and punishment issues, and alhtough the three strikes policy is still there, the details are quite different now. I've reduced it two three steps, for details, see the excellent analysis from the Creative Freedom Foundation.

Phase 1 - First Infringement and Cease and Desist Notice Procedure

Phase 2 - Obtain Copyright Tribunal Order to get infringer's details

Phase 3 - Copyright Tribunal decision

Creation of the copyright tribunal significantly improves the fairness of the whole process, however, I am still very disappointed that termination of Internet access remained as a punishment.

Access to Internet, in my opinion, is a fundamental human right in this digital age, people who lacks the full and free Internet access will be significantly disadvantaged in the society.Internet access should be regarded as part of the freedom of communication, which is a concept in many written constitutions.

Such termination is not in the spirit of a free, democratic society - This is why we are so against Internet censorship, especially the Great Firewall. The termination is even worse than that, which the citizens' right to communicate is not just being impeded, but denied in full.

The document is open for consultation, submissions are open until 5pm Friday 7 August.


Stunned

July 4, 2009 – 1:43 pm

Thinking about voting in the child discipline referendum ? Don't know how to decide? This elegantly produced flow chart will help to make the right decision (warning: large picture).

The related story can be found here.


Corporal punishment referendum

June 18, 2009 – 8:01 pm

I supported the amendment on section 59 of the Crimes Act, or commonly known as the "anti-smacking bill" . New Zealand is far from a safe heaven for children to grow up, although a change in law would not solve the problem our society is facing in a split second, but you always need to start on something.

The fundamental problem of child abuse is the parents, not the law nor the children. I could still recall that some of people who oppose the bill even made a personal threat to the Green MP Sue Bradford: that left you wondering, if they don't even treat a human being, an adult in a proper manner, how do you expect them to take care of their children?

However, for this referendum, there is another problem, the question used for voting:

Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?

I'm not quite sure who was behind the basis of this question,  Clerk of the House finalised the question but I guess the basis of the question was the work of  some Christian fundamentalists, but I mean, can it get any more stupid  than this? This question carries a clear presumption that smacking (at least some kinds of smacking) is "good parental correction" - well if so, then what heck we are debating about? Should a good thing be criminalised? It's a no brainer question, even I can write something better than that:

Should the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007 (Commonly known as the "anti-smacking legislation") be repealed?

That's the root of all the fuss is it?

I (and many others) actually believe that smacking is not a tool parents should be used to teach their kids as it is inherently bad,  but if the currently adapted question is being asked in the referendum, there is no way I could tick either yes or no. For that reason, I will not be voting in this referendum.


Mt Albert by-election results

June 14, 2009 – 1:40 pm

(Preliminary results, Source)

Nobody believed Nats would actually win this seat, but last night's result was still a surprise for me. Shearer did not just win the seat, but with a huge 63%:17% margin. Percentage wise, Shearer beat his predecessor, former PM Helen Clark and even Labour's performance in safe seats like Mangere.

However, this is not a serious set back for National as well. First Mt Albert has always been a red seat, secondly, the turnout was less than 50%, it appears that many right wing votes chose not bother to vote, as the result is inevitable. Lee's blunder to blunder performance and media stir up also contributed to this. If this was a general election, I believe the result would be quite different, Labour would still win, but with a smaller margin.

There were only two races last night, first was the race between Melissa Lee and Green's Russel Norman. As previous polls suggested, Green may have chance to beat National, so I was really wondering whether Mt Albert can humiliate National further by place Lee on the third place. However, it didn't happen though, but the margin between the two is very small, about 5%.

Another surprise race emerged from last night's result, the race between United Future's former deputy leader, Judy Turner, and candidates from other small parties.  Although Turner herself is not in the parliament, but as a member of a parliamentary party, being beaten by Bill and Ben and Legalise Cannabis should be something she didn't expect.


Mt Albert By-election

May 6, 2009 – 8:33 pm

Local issues tend to get magnified in by-elections, but I cannot see that in this election yet. All two major parties have announce its candidate for the by-election, but non of them really know the area well - Labour''s David Shearer was a International aid worker; National's Melissa Lee, there's very little known about her stand on local issues.

This is more of a party contest now.

Unlike a lot of tories dreaming of getting an extra seat but have no vote in this, I happen to actually live in the electorate. You have to admit this is a very red seat, National never took it before, the last close call I could remember was in the 1990 election, but Clark still managed to hold on the seat despite Labour's poor showing nation-wide. If this is a National-Labour contest, I could see no chance for National.

But this is more than a two party contest, so National may got a chance, but just. It will depend on:

  • Performance of Russell Norman, his ability to split hard left votes.
  • How successful Nats could brand Shearer as the "national-lite".
  • Turn out rate.
  • Development of the supercity proposal.

It's still too early to call but I understand Labour does felt a bit nervous right now, many of residents got Labour polling phone calls recently, but that's understandable, given that the party has just lost an election, and Shearer is a relatively new face, therefore there are a lot of uncertainties.

For me, I do admire Shearer's career as a international aid worker, for that, I think he deserves this seat, as his skills of managing refugee camps would come quite handy as some parts of this electorate do give you a refugee camp kind of feeling. Although Clark was a successful Prime Minister, I do feel she owes quite a lot to her electorates, some areas didn't gain a lot from the economic development in the last few years.