Eff'nhell, National...

[C_T_Russell]

ACT is still too far left if anything, but they are the best option we have got so far, and their support has grown, so that says alot.

God knows where you are standing...slightly to the right of Ghengis Khan and Hitler, perchance?

Hell no!
That would be going too extreme.
Its just an observation. Most parties are too left leaning.
Far right is bad as much as far left is.
Communism is extreme left and nazis are extreme right.

Right now we are heading down very fast towards communism the way things are going, and not just NZ.
Interestingly, what we think is far left in the US is not so the case, i have a friend in the US who says that even the democrats are actually still more right leaning that we are in NZ, I thought that was interesting to hear.

[SueDonim]

Yes, we are still (luckily) very centrist but even National has been leaning more leftwards for a long time. I was horrified at some of what went on after the Christchurch earthquakes. Now we've ended up with a Labour government that happens to have done very well managing the pandemic but is also eating away at our rights. Sliding new taxes in through the back door, piece by piece taking control over things that are not their business. Trouble is, people expect it. How often are we hearing "there are calls for..." or "the government must...." over things that shouldn't even be news, or if they are should be the push towards people doing right for the right reasons, not bleating to the press when their own actions have had a negative consequence on their lives.

It's getting so bad that the only real opposition comes from ACT. Seymour seems to be the only one that understands that the point of being an opposition party is to oppose - and make sure changes get fully thrashed out before legislation creates unintended consequences.

[Lilith7]

Yes, we are still (luckily) very centrist but even National has been leaning more leftwards for a long time. I was horrified at some of what went on after the Christchurch earthquakes. Now we've ended up with a Labour government that happens to have done very well managing the pandemic but is also eating away at our rights. Sliding new taxes in through the back door, piece by piece taking control over things that are not their business. Trouble is, people expect it. How often are we hearing "there are calls for..." or "the government must...." over things that shouldn't even be news, or if they are should be the push towards people doing right for the right reasons, not bleating to the press when their own actions have had a negative consequence on their lives.

It's getting so bad that the only real opposition comes from ACT. Seymour seems to be the only one that understands that the point of being an opposition party is to oppose - and make sure changes get fully thrashed out before legislation creates unintended consequences.

"eating away at our rights?"

What rights have we lost?  If you mean that we need to wear masks in public if close to others that's a matter of safety - our own & that of others, rather than a right deliberately removed since those who have good reasons not to, are still free to not wear masks.

[SueDonim]

Yes, we are still (luckily) very centrist but even National has been leaning more leftwards for a long time. I was horrified at some of what went on after the Christchurch earthquakes. Now we've ended up with a Labour government that happens to have done very well managing the pandemic but is also eating away at our rights. Sliding new taxes in through the back door, piece by piece taking control over things that are not their business. Trouble is, people expect it. How often are we hearing "there are calls for..." or "the government must...." over things that shouldn't even be news, or if they are should be the push towards people doing right for the right reasons, not bleating to the press when their own actions have had a negative consequence on their lives.

It's getting so bad that the only real opposition comes from ACT. Seymour seems to be the only one that understands that the point of being an opposition party is to oppose - and make sure changes get fully thrashed out before legislation creates unintended consequences.

"eating away at our rights?"

What rights have we lost?  If you mean that we need to wear masks in public if close to others that's a matter of safety - our own & that of others, rather than a right deliberately removed since those who have good reasons not to, are still free to not wear masks.

The pandemic management is the one thing I have no problem with. I'm getting sick of people not taking the current requirements seriously.

It's all the other law changes that keep sliding through that make us over-regulated in so many areas.

[Praktica]

"eating away at our rights?"

What rights have we lost?  If you mean that we need to wear masks in public if close to others that's a matter of safety - our own & that of others, rather than a right deliberately removed since those who have good reasons not to, are still free to not wear masks.

The pandemic management is the one thing I have no problem with. I'm getting sick of people not taking the current requirements seriously.

It's all the other law changes that keep sliding through that make us over-regulated in so many areas.

What law changes?

[king1]

"eating away at our rights?"

What rights have we lost?  If you mean that we need to wear masks in public if close to others that's a matter of safety - our own & that of others, rather than a right deliberately removed since those who have good reasons not to, are still free to not wear masks.

The pandemic management is the one thing I have no problem with. I'm getting sick of people not taking the current requirements seriously.

It's all the other law changes that keep sliding through that make us over-regulated in so many areas.

Certainly easier for them to pass legislation given they had an overwhelming win at the last election.  Not really sure there is anything sneaky going on though, all legislation goes through the same process to make it into law ...

[Lilith7]

The pandemic management is the one thing I have no problem with. I'm getting sick of people not taking the current requirements seriously.

It's all the other law changes that keep sliding through that make us over-regulated in so many areas.

Certainly easier for them to pass legislation given they had an overwhelming win at the last election.  Not really sure there is anything sneaky going on though, all legislation goes through the same process to make it into law ...

It does; so you have to wonder what the poster might mean.

[SueDonim]

A couple of examples:

1. Regulations for ceiling insulation have increased for new builds. Sounds fine until you look into the fact that thicker insulation still needs its air gap around it so can't go as far into the edges of the ceiling space as it used to. So now a new structure of roof trusses is needed. More expense when everyone is already claiming that housing is unaffordable. Should have been left as it was. It was enough to be practical while balancing affordability.

2. The news was full of the Gib shortage causing havoc (and all the greedy people selling what they could get at exorbitant prices). One of the problems is that the architects now have to specify exactly what product is going to be used in every part of the build - and do so down to brand level. So if you can't buy that brand right now, the whole build is held up. Instead of compounding Winstone's monopoly it would be better if brand names were banned from plans, instead citing the standards that need to be met by the products used. Then there would have been no problem as there were always suitable alternatives available.

These are just 2 of MANY instances where there has been far too much government control over the minutiae of daily life.

Yes, the government has a majority (which is why it's the governing party) but the processes for legislation provide for and require debate and consultation. During the pandemic the expert advice from all quarters of the health sector was sought, received and acted upon with the best balance between conflicting needs. That should be happening for all legislation. But isn't. Even when submissions are called for, so often the advice of experts is totally ignored and the changes are railroaded through their three readings. And the opposition parties don't do enough to debate everything as they should. Remember, even when they might actually agree, the point of debate is to seek out and discuss every eventuality so that the right action goes forward for the right reasons. This simply does not happen. Which is why we have ended up in such a mess with housing costing a fortune, and so on.

[Praktica]

Is that your answer to my question about law changes affecting liberties? You're having difficulty finding examples!

[king1]

Wouldn't happen to building at the moment would you SueDonim? The way you talk about it and the choice of examples reads like someone who has been affected by it...

[SueDonim]

Is that your answer to my question about law changes affecting liberties? You're having difficulty finding examples!

Well, I thought about using firearm legislation examples, but decided that building was something that more people know more about.

---

Wouldn't happen to building at the moment would you SueDonim? The way you talk about it and the choice of examples reads like someone who has been affected by it...

No, DH got out of new house building a long time ago, although he still works for a mate now and again and keeps up with what's going on in that part of the industry. He has also stopped doing renovations for customers in favour of spending the time and $$ on our own houses as we move towards retirement. The Gib shortage was no problem for our current project because replacing pinex with modern materials doesn't require plans so the Gib-alternative products were fine for us.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Legislation and regulation is based on industry lobbying and advice. Politicians know absolutely nothing about construction - or any of the other sectors they make law for so have to rely on other sources. Therefore, blaming them is a bit pointless. Perhaps instead, we should be joining the lobbyists...

Or at least know what they are recommending and why.

[Lilith7]

Legislation and regulation is based on industry lobbying and advice. Politicians know absolutely nothing about construction - or any of the other sectors they make law for so have to rely on other sources. Therefore, blaming them is a bit pointless. Perhaps instead, we should be joining the lobbyists...

Or at least know what they are recommending and why.

I don't think anyone who hasn't spent a couple of years working, rather than being at Uni should be allowed to become a politician. And in situations where MP's may not have the experience & knowledge necessary they should be obliged to consult experts in that field, who should have the final say.

[harm_less]

A couple of examples:

1. Regulations for ceiling insulation have increased for new builds. Sounds fine until you look into the fact that thicker insulation still needs its air gap around it so can't go as far into the edges of the ceiling space as it used to. So now a new structure of roof trusses is needed. More expense when everyone is already claiming that housing is unaffordable. Should have been left as it was. It was enough to be practical while balancing affordability.

2. The news was full of the Gib shortage causing havoc (and all the greedy people selling what they could get at exorbitant prices). One of the problems is that the architects now have to specify exactly what product is going to be used in every part of the build - and do so down to brand level. So if you can't buy that brand right now, the whole build is held up. Instead of compounding Winstone's monopoly it would be better if brand names were banned from plans, instead citing the standards that need to be met by the products used. Then there would have been no problem as there were always suitable alternatives available.

These are just 2 of MANY instances where there has been far too much government control over the minutiae of daily life.

Yes, the government has a majority (which is why it's the governing party) but the processes for legislation provide for and require debate and consultation. During the pandemic the expert advice from all quarters of the health sector was sought, received and acted upon with the best balance between conflicting needs. That should be happening for all legislation. But isn't. Even when submissions are called for, so often the advice of experts is totally ignored and the changes are railroaded through their three readings. And the opposition parties don't do enough to debate everything as they should. Remember, even when they might actually agree, the point of debate is to seek out and discuss every eventuality so that the right action goes forward for the right reasons. This simply does not happen. Which is why we have ended up in such a mess with housing costing a fortune, and so on.

I know what you mean about specifications on building permits reading like a shopping list of brand name products. I suspect that the bollocking that the Councils received as a result of the 'leaky homes' saga now has them running scared and so micro-managing inputs into projects they are putting code compliance certification to. This situation must been seen by the corporate suppliers of building materials as a licence to print money.

[Lilith7]

It seems that Luxon may have shot himself in the foot by not ruling out the extremely loopy element. It smacks of desperation.


https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politic...reedoms-nz

"Political parties have lined up against National Party leader Christopher Luxon for failing to fully rule out working with Freedoms NZ, a new political party formed of fringe groups including Destiny ChurchÔÇÖs Vision NZ, to form a government after the next election.


Tamaki announced the new party during his anti-Government protest on Tuesday when he held a mock trial where the Government was found guilty of ÔÇ£crimes against humanityÔÇØ.

The event was a nod to conspiracy theories involving extrajudicial killings of politicians, officials and journalists.

Protesters from the church also wore clothing with the slogan ÔÇ£enough is enoughÔÇØ ÔÇô a reference to the churchÔÇÖs 2004 Parliament protest against civil union legislation giving official recognition to same-sex relationships.

Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson said he was shocked Luxon had not given a clear indication of where he stood with the new party.

ÔÇ£I cannot believe that Christopher Luxon will not rule out someone so extreme as Brian Tamaki and the other parties he claims to represent,ÔÇØ he said.

ACT and the Green Party were swift to shatter any perceptions they would work with the new party."

[Foal30]

ACT have been the actual Opposition for some time.

National and Labour merged decades back.

[Lilith7]

ACT have been the actual Opposition for some time.

National and Labour merged decades back.

Really? I'm not sure they've realised they'd merged....

[Foal30]

ThereÔÇÖs no longer major policy differences between the 2 big Parties
They just jostle over minor trappings

Aotearoa has not had a Left Wing Government since KirkÔÇÖs LABOUR in 1972

---

ACT have been the actual Opposition for some time.

National and Labour merged decades back.

Really? I'm not sure they've realised they'd merged....

Each Parties respective cheerleaders decry or acclaim the same policies relative to who announces it