I got a leaflet in the mail today asking me to stand for something, the motto of the Conservative Party, advertising for support for the September elections, so I stood up and came over to my pc to give you my two bits worth on that party. Im horrified that one of the Conservatives main stands in terms of society and family, as described in their leaflet, is the anti-smacking law to be amended to allow a light smack on the bottom. They describe the law there as a failure, as child abuse has continued to rise regardless of the law and has, in fact, increased 32% since the anti-smacking law was introduced - Colin Craig, leader Conservative Party. How Colin Craig came to the conclusion that the figure of 32% is indicative that the law on smacking is a failure and uses that figure as a demonstration of that apparent fact I do not understand. The probability is, in my opinion, a rise in this figure to 32% is in fact showing more prosecutions, not that more people are in fact abusing their children. Christine Rankin, a senior member of the Conservative Party, makes me cringe that she signed up to work for them. Christine comes from a background of working as the head of Work and Income, but more importantly to me, recently coming from a job as the Commissioner of the Families, a government organisation that is an advocate for New Zealand families. I myself find it appalling that someone who managed to have such a high standing job advocating for no abuse towards children would have a view that a little smack on the bum was alright. I have an opinion, a little smack on the bum might not be too damaging, the problem there is that there are so many people in the community who never stop at that. She has recently remarried for the fourth time stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2402725/Families-appointment-Rankin-surprised-by-reaction - 12.05.2009 and, amoungst other things, is a motivational speaker and chief executive of For the Sake of Our Children, a charitable trust aiming to combat New Zealand’s high rate of child abuse and neglect. Tspeakerlink.co.nz/ppvf.asp?pid=338&pn=CHRISTINE-RANKIN – This trust ...speak out for vulnerable children in New Zealand and work towards a brighter, safer community for future generations. I was quite surprised at the listed Chairman of For the Sake of Our Children being a Chairman: John Sax, Email: [email protected]. I thought, who is this man who is from Southpark Corporation, of Church St, in Auckland?. Apparently, lol, he is a businessman with a company described on their website, as one of Auckland’s largest industrial landowners, but with a leaning towards a charitable trust promoting child welfare. - southparkcorp.co.nz/about/ Now I have to have a go at some of Conservative Leaders ideas, such as his idea that if there is a public referendum on any issue and 67% or more of the vote agree, then it must become law. He uses the situation below as a means of explaining why this should happen: New Zealanders voted overwhelmingly (92%) in a 1997 referendum against a compulsory savings scheme. It is our view that New Zealanders have already spoken on this issue, with good reason, and the government should not override the wishes of the people. No Means No to Compulsory Super 05 May 2014 Source: Conservative Party Leader Colin Craig conservativeparty.org.nz/index.php?page=PressReleases I hate being told to save as well, but we have a real problem in this country, known as our aging population. It seems quite generally accepted that we have no clue about how we are going to avoid to pay for our baby boomer generation which are up and coming to retirement, and years to come after that, and I think no one here wants to save, but really, I think we need to. To me, some people in this country really do live for the moment, and do not either have the cognitive skills, or the care, to think about the future. I rely on a government to make the right decisions, based on my vote to put them into power, and Im concerned that the idea is that you could pass whatever law you wanted in essense by picking up the phone and convincing every Tom, Dick and Harry that you know, to vote their way in a referendum, and trust me, they do do this in this country. Garth McVicar from the Conservative Party has a strong following, but Im not a fan of his ideas. Garth, and his party, want to see harsher penalities for criminals, such as minimum sentences for violent crimes to be higher than they already are. It seems that Garth thinks that harsher penalities will reduce crime, and I do not have that leaning. Im interested in the reduction of reoffending, and that may in fact see what Garth would view as prisoners in a more preferable position than they already are. This is because I believe that the real goal here should be to stop recidivant offending, for the benefit of all of the community, and whatever that takes, even more supportive help towards prisoners, then so be it. I think the basis of this view is my understanding that so many prisoners come from a upbringing where they are already what would be classed as living under the advised standard of living, and this seems to be a strong indication that you will in fact become a criminal. Therefore, I believe life has been quite unfair on you already and that you need help to get on your feet, not a whole lot more of harsh penalising people. I have a strong interest in rehabilitation, maybe 50% punishment, 50% rehabilitation. I dont agree with Garth McVicars opinion of the judges lack of ability in the below case: 08 August 2014 “The Dudley family is mourning the loss of their son, and the attacker gets to walk away scot-free, all because a Judge without any medical qualifications has decided that an acclaimed undisclosed heart condition, and not a beating, contributed to Stephen Dudley’s death. - Garth McVicar Source: conservativeparty.org.nz/index.php?page=PressReleases&pressid=138 Its not a requirement of a judge to be a qualified medical practitioner; they are there to oversee a trial, hear testimony, and apply the law as seen fit, or guide a jury about points of law to consider when they weight up guilt or innocence. There is a right of response for the Dudleys family to appeal, if there is something wrong with what happened in court on agreed grounds, and if they think she is wrong, they should take it up that way. Otherwise, the idea that there was a failing in that case due to the judge not being competent because she should have understood the medical situation better was, in my opinion, an unfair accusation levelled about her. There seemed to me to be no doubt as to what message the medical experts were giving; that Stephen had a prior heart condition. Dr Edward Saafi, candidate for Mangere, says that 82% of New Zealanders voted to reduce the number of Members of Parliament to 120. He says ‘we only need a smaller number of MP’s truly focussed on running this country instead of 120 overpaid MP’s who are either not present in the debating chambers or spend most of their time twittering whilst pretending to run this country at our expense’. I challenge Dr Saafi to present evidence that the politicians that are either not present in the debating chambers and are pretending to run this country are twittering instead, as I think that statement and allegation are just nonsensical, as I’ve never heard anyone else suggest that’s what the politicians are up to when they aren’t there. In terms of his claims of getting rid of the extra politicians, Id like to point this out to him: our highest polling result to date (3.4% as published by Fairfax today) 15 August 2014 conservativeparty.org.nz/index.php?page=PressReleases You need 5% party vote Conservative to get a seat in Parliament, or win a candidate seat. Last election 2011, Conservation had these statistics: They had 52 electorate candidates, beaten only in terms of numbers by Labour at 70, National at 63, and Green at 59, and Conservative could still could not get a single seat in the 2011 election. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_general_election,_2011 I think Dr Saafi will probably find that his party Conservative, if they are lucky, are in actual fact one of these additional seats hes complaining about, to which we pay you for, even though you have no real swing at all in Parlaiment. I hope you dont win any seats Conservative, and I have outlined why I feel this way about you. Thank you for listening to my blurp.
Posted on: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 03:11:49 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015