| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 38651 | 2003-10-14 05:31:00 | OT: Goodbye Privy Council, Hello Republic | Winston001 (3612) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 183071 | 2003-10-14 08:55:00 | I am considerably heartened. I made this post seriously thinking that there might be 1 or perhaps no replies. The fact that so many of you bothered to read and comment on such a dry topic bodes well for the intelligence of at least this slice of NewZild. Ultimately the Privy Council is not a life and death issue (although it is in capital murder cases in the Caribbean which go to the PC) The important point is that you ventured an opinion or asked a question. Good on you chaps and chapesses. Cheers Winston |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 183072 | 2003-10-14 08:59:00 | i just had a idea.. if theres going to be a supreme court..why dont we pick it... have the judges do a campaign..and we pick them... at least then the judges were picked by us..not the government... well i know it would cost taxpayers money but then it wouldnt be biased by the government and that we had a say in the selection... and dont just include all nzers but include everyone who is in prison or anywhere out of nz that are eligeable to vote... would that work? |
csinclair83 (200) | ||
| 183073 | 2003-10-14 09:01:00 | > yep - that's annoying as well. Plus I remember back > in 1999 my English teacher told me that Helen Clark > had promised to make NZSL (New Zealand Sign Language) > one of the official languages of NZ. > Yes, I saw that too BTW how do you mean an official language. Either you use sign or you don't. Why would it be better is it was "official" |
Far_Canal (4654) | ||
| 183074 | 2003-10-14 09:30:00 | > and dont just include all nzers but include everyone > who is in prison or anywhere out of nz that are > eligeable to vote... > > would that work? And I wonder how this mixed bunch will produce any sensible views on what it takes to decide on all the situations which turn up in court. |
TonyF (246) | ||
| 183075 | 2003-10-14 09:33:00 | i only said them as well so that the whole country gets a say... and maybe the prisioners would need to go to that court for something..and they would want to say in their minds..i voted for him coz i know he is fair in justice... dont prisioners vote in the government elections? |
csinclair83 (200) | ||
| 183076 | 2003-10-14 09:49:00 | anyone in prison is di-barred from voting, as I was in the last election | Far_Canal (4654) | ||
| 183077 | 2003-10-14 09:53:00 | ohh they dont let you vote..thought it was something that every nz has a say in no matter what u are...as long ur a nz citzen.. shows how much i know eh |
csinclair83 (200) | ||
| 183078 | 2003-10-14 11:13:00 | All that's correct . And it IS about time New Zealand "came of age" so to speak . However the most important issue about the abolition of the Privy Council has barely rated a mention - until now, when the Bill's already been shuffled through without proper debate (thank the Greens for that!!) . Establishing a Supreme Court to hear our ultimate appeals is probably not only inevitable (as the British see maintaining the Privy Council as an anachronistic expense), but also sensible - judges here are closer to the issues that judges sitting in Britain will ever be . And assuming that we can provide judges of sufficient ability to make sensible decisions (which may prove to be a dangerous assumption!), we should go ahead with it (IMHO) . But the REAL ISSUE with all this, is the appointment process, which in my opinion is scandalous . Basically the appointment decision rests with the Attorney General, Margeret Wilson . Wilson says that she will "consult" with Paul Reeves (Governor General) and the Solicitor General . But at the end of the day it is her say-so that determines who will be appointed . And we're not talking about short-term appointments here . . these are life-time appointments . So in one fell swoop, Margeret Wilson will determine the makeup of our highest court for the next 15-29 years . And you - poor suckers - haven't even been asked for your input . Feel scandalised yet? I'm a long-term Labour voter/supporter . But on this issue, I'm more disappointed with the way Labour has approached this than I have been with any previous decision made by any government . This is as serious a change to our way of life as the change to MMP was . And yet it's been pushed through by a majority of just three votes by a minority government! Furthermore Labour seems to think that we're all too stupid to understand the issues, and not worthy of consultation about change to what constitutes the social contract that we are individuals have with the state . At least the Privy Council was bound by a tradition of sensible judicial process, and (in the main) staffed by judges with a quality legal training . Now imagine how comfortable you are going to feel if your highest level of appeal is to a Court stacked with revisionist judges who routinely ignore well-established precedent because it doesn't accord with their "political" leanings??!! Look, the vast majority of us would never have had need to recourse to appealing to the Privy Council . But the point is that at least we all retained the right to do so if we ever had need . And there was some comfort in knowing that when we did so, the case would be heard by expert judges with an impartial approach to examining the legal issues . With the current appointment process for the new Supreme Court, how many of you can put your hands on your hearts and say that you will feel "comfortable" appealing to the bevy of judges hand-picked by Margeret Wilson? Scared yet? So in lieu of changes to the appointment process - you just might want to consider signing the opposition petition to roll back the changes . . until we've a) had a chance as a people to have a say - this is an important enough issue to hold a referendum over and b) thought about the issues regarding how judges in a New Zealand Supreme Court OUGHT to be appointed . Your thoughts? [Disclaimer - these are my own personal views and do not reflect the views of IDG Communications - my employer] |
marke (457) | ||
| 183079 | 2003-10-14 11:32:00 | Thats a good post,Made me think.....i hate it when that happens. | metla (154) | ||
| 183080 | 2003-10-14 12:05:00 | U basically summed it all up in that one long posting... I just wish the parliament would just sit still for once and actually listen to the nation....wish it was as simple as staying up and typing this... I'm sure life in NZ would be alot easier for everyone if they sat up and listeneed... Like GE...they refusing to even do anyhting apart from lift the mortorium... I'm sure the people who are against it would let it be lifted if there was something there...like, a limit of 2 approvals a year...or something like that...but no, gotta argue and parliament just ingores.. and with privy council, guess its good for it to be in nz now...and the selection process, i think its gonna be biased, cant they just have a election of the judges by us...campaign for the job and get it that way...therefor we get a say.. Parliament gets paid to represent us...the voters.....havent seen that happening lately... Helen Clark is going over to thailand to speak with George bush about nz;s best interests...but what are they?....What are our best interests?...All i've seen si arguements for and against ge, the war, nuclear ships, the supreme courts....and what is our best interest..for or against..... |
csinclair83 (200) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||