Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 100719	2009-06-18 08:16:00	Smacking Referendum - User Pays	Twelvevolts (5457)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
783429	2009-06-28 06:10:00	Poll now says 77% now think $8.9m smacking referendum 'a waste of money', and five percent don't know. Remarkably, eighteen percent still think it is a good use of money. What planet are they on??	Twelvevolts (5457)
783430	2009-06-28 06:34:00	Yes, Its disgusting we are forced into a situation where our money has to be spent to try and fight something that should never have been passed into law in the first place. Shame on the Labour party. Its also disgusting that the views of the masses is ignored by the Government, and that it would take their jobs being jeopardised before they would correct the issue. hell, If they had wanted to tidy up the law and keep everyone happy they could have easily worded it to say your not allowed to bruise,break or mark the skin of a child in the course of discipline. SORTED.	Metla (12)
783431	2009-06-28 07:07:00	Poll now says 77% now think $8 . 9m smacking referendum 'a waste of money', and five percent don't know . Remarkably, eighteen percent still think it is a good use of money . What planet are they on??I would spend $8 . 9M on it in a heartbeat, simply because to do anything else corrupts the democratic process . When such a high proportion of your voting population demands a referendum, ignoring that demand is simply not an option, regardless of how inane or otherwise you may think the question . Yes, Labour should have included the question on the ballot forms back in november, which would have made the cost negligible . We all know that they decided to serve their own interests and avoid reminding people about it on election day . HOWEVER: Now that it's happened, the only choice we're left with is whether to have the referendum, or not . From where I stand, the only morally acceptable choice is to have one . That is why I support spending $8 . 9M of our hard-earned cash on it .	Erayd (23)
783432	2009-06-28 07:42:00	I would spend $8.9M on it in a heartbeat, simply because to do anything else corrupts the democratic process. When such a high proportion of your voting population demands a referendum, ignoring that demand is simply not an option, regardless of how inane or otherwise you may think the question. Yes, Labour should have included the question on the ballot forms back in november, which would have made the cost negligible. We all know that they decided to serve their own interests and avoid reminding people about it on election day. HOWEVER: Now that it's happened, the only choice we're left with is whether to have the referendum, or not. From where I stand, the only morally acceptable choice is to have one. That is why I support spending $8.9M of our hard-earned cash on it. I have no objection whatsoever to you spending your hard earned cash on a pointless referendum, but I object to you spending mine. I don't care what the issue is really (albiet given the lack of any obvious problems with the way the law works that just makes things even more wasteful) as all referendum are a waste of money. If you want one, by all means pay for it.	Twelvevolts (5457)
783433	2009-06-28 07:45:00	Yes, Its disgusting we are forced into a situation where our money has to be spent to try and fight something that should never have been passed into law in the first place. Shame on the Labour party. Its also disgusting that the views of the masses is ignored by the Government, and that it would take their jobs being jeopardised before they would correct the issue. hell, If they had wanted to tidy up the law and keep everyone happy they could have easily worded it to say your not allowed to bruise,break or mark the skin of a child in the course of discipline. SORTED. What is wrong with a law that stops people beating kids? That is the practical effect of the law whatever you might be dressing it up as.	Twelvevolts (5457)
783434	2009-06-28 08:07:00	What is wrong with a law that stops people beating kids? That is the practical effect of the law whatever you might be dressing it up as. There's beating, and then there's a smack. The referendum doesn't mention anything about a beating. So I should let the kid touch the fire rather than smacking the hand away?	the_bogan (9949)
783435	2009-06-28 08:26:00	What is wrong with a law that stops people beating kids? That is the practical effect of the law whatever you might be dressing it up as. It does no such thing, and only a fool would think it did.	Metla (12)
783436	2009-06-28 08:30:00	I have no objection whatsoever to you spending your hard earned cash on a pointless referendum, but I object to you spending mine. I don't care what the issue is really (albiet given the lack of any obvious problems with the way the law works that just makes things even more wasteful) as all referendum are a waste of money. If you want one, by all means pay for it. So, The people are at fault for using the democratic options available to them to try and correct an action undertaken by others even though the people never wanted it done in the first place? I hear China is a great place,And there at least the Great leaders don't have to give a damn what the actual people want or think or expect.	Metla (12)
783437	2009-06-28 08:55:00	Poll now says 77% now think $8.9m smacking referendum 'a waste of money', and five percent don't know. Remarkably, eighteen percent still think it is a good use of money. What planet are they on?? It is only a waste of money because the National and Labour parties won't make referendums binding. I also say **** Labour for not holding it during the elections	mikebartnz (21)
783438	2009-06-28 10:29:00	Funnily enough if you want the law to go back to more or less what you had before you actually vote No to the question. I will be voting the no option as I believe a short sharp smack is the right thing to do under certain circumstances. Like others I do not condone major violence or even verbal abuse over a period of time acceptable. Like some people I also think that whatever the law is there are some people who just don't give a hoot anyway and will go ahead regardless.	Sweep (90)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9