National gag select committee process
You would think that the wholesale dismantling of democratic process by ramming through more legislation under a misuse of urgency than anyone else since Rodger Douglas would be enough for National.
Apparently not.
You would imagine that giving the Police vast new powers like bullshit drug driving laws, seizing your assets by lowering the evidential threshold, taking your DNA on mere suspicion, allowing the Police to form their own political party, (and don't start me on the new search and surveillance powers due in October or Simon Power's conveyor belt of miscarried justice) was all enough.
Apparently not.
We now have a situation where Opposition to this Governments vast expansion of Police Power can't even be allowed a dissenting opinion on the law and order select committee...
Labour views left out of law and order reports
Labour is angry the law and order select committee chaired by National MP Sandra Goudie has not included its dissenting view in two reports, following a protest walkout of the committee by Opposition MPs this week.
I just can't understand why such important law and order legislation that expands Police Power all have to be rammed through with as little scrutiny, public oversight and now dissent in a select committee meeting, as possible.
This is not the way a Democracy should behave when debating the expansion of Police and State power.
posted by Bomber @ 9:36 am
4 comments
4 Comments:
And where is the mainstream media informing us of this?
TV1,TV3 news is just a joke,
bomber u need to bring this up on national radio next time ur on it
"This is not the way a Democracy should behave when debating the expansion of Police and State power."
LOL This from the man who wanted to gag our freedom of speech by supporting the Electoral Finance Act.
Hard to take your defence of democracy seriously when you actively try to undermine it.
LOL This from the man who wanted to gag our freedom of speech by supporting the Electoral Finance Act.
The interesting thing here Anon, is that I've pointed out to you numerous times that you are wrong with this assertion, yet you continue to trot it out, so I'm going to give you one more public spanking on this issue.
As you knowm I marched against this first version of the EFA, I was there, didn't see you. I agreed with the Electoral Commission in their criticisms and believed any legislation with 80 odd amendments was a sign things were badly flawed. BUT - as I have each time argued with you, we need to put protections upon the funding of our democracy or else we get a plutocracy, and restrictions and caps on electoral spending is exactly where we need to go to limit hidden corporate power and influence.
Hard to take your defence of democracy seriously when you actively try to undermine it.
Nooooo, silly anon - it is hard to take your self-righteous and straw man take on my position seriously when you undermine the current issue before us with a bent view of my arguments from the past.
Come on champ, time to retire this one and actually focus on the threat right in front of us all now. If your take on rights and the defence of them are as pure as you insinuate, then what the hell are you doing staying silent about these vast expansions rammed through under a misuse of urgency???
If Labour had pulled this shit with these powers you would've been screaming bloody murder, and yet your Party pulls this and you are quiet as a field mouse. I protested against Labour on the EFA while arguing for the principal I believed was at stake, you however seem incapable of such intellectual scrutiny when it comes to your turn on the throne.
Post a Comment
<< Home