Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 78531	2007-04-19 03:03:00	Trouble with understanding New Zealand legal system	Renmoo (66)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
542296	2007-04-20 13:24:00	Why wouldn't you consider the Treaty of Waitangi as a written constitution, Winston and Steve? Cheers :) There are much more learned people than I who could explain this. The Treaty is just that - an agreement between the Crown and the Maori chiefs who signed it. No different to the, now defunct, ANZUS treaty signed with the US and Australia many years ago. Neither document is a form of constitution but rather an agreement over certain matters. Having said that, the Treaty of Waitangi does form one of those constitutional documents which makes up our entire constitutional history. So it is important and relevant. If you've read the treaty you'll know it is very brief and says surprisingly little.	Winston001 (3612)
542297	2007-04-20 14:34:00	Why aren't you in bed, Winston? :D Yeap, I get you. Treaty of Waitangi is one of the pieces of "source" of nation's constitution. One last question before I go to bed myself, after the second reading of a bill, the MPs form into "a House Committee". During that time, do the MPs discuss with each other regardless of which party they belong to? Cheers :)	Renmoo (66)
542298	2007-04-21 11:12:00	Yes James, the Committee structure is relatively new and quite effective. The divisions between political parties in Parliament become blurred when the MPs consider legislation in a Committee. It is less formal than Parliament, more intimate, and there is a greater chance for a meeting of minds. MPs are just people after all and in NZ genuinely motivated to do what they consider is right. So discussion can be quite open and changes are made to legislation.	Winston001 (3612)
542299	2007-04-21 20:38:00	genuinely motivated to do what they consider is right. So discussion can be quite open and changes are made to legislation. I must ardently disagree with this view,due to the disgusting things they impose upon us. I am sure a list a mile long could be provided if proof is reqired.	Cicero (40)
542300	2007-04-21 20:52:00	Yes James, the Committee structure is relatively new and quite effective. The divisions between political parties in Parliament become blurred when the MPs consider legislation in a Committee. It is less formal than Parliament, more intimate, and there is a greater chance for a meeting of minds. MPs are just people after all and in NZ genuinely motivated to do what they consider is right. So discussion can be quite open and changes are made to legislation. Oh, right. Thanks for the explanation! Which stage is the anti-smacking bill is at now? Cheers :)	Renmoo (66)
542301	2007-04-21 22:23:00	Oh, right. Thanks for the explanation! Which stage is the anti-smacking bill is at now? Cheers :) It's around at Metla's for final sign-off, then Sue's bringing it to me so we can have a little chat....	allblack (6574)
542302	2007-04-23 05:54:00	Yes, I did, but it was the people on the list that I wasn't able to choose. I agree, but under FPP, you still didn't choose the candidate put up by the various parties - you had no choice but to vote for him or her or change to another party. Most people simply voted for their party, regardless of candidate. [in other words, a "list" vote system.]	decibel (11645)
542303	2007-04-23 06:13:00	It's around at Metla's for final sign-off, then Sue's... How we wish, how we wish... at least 85% of us. If only it could be that way... ...then we would be rid of it and also have a laugh to hear exactly where Metz 'inserted' the proposed legislation. :lol:	Strommer (42)
542304	2007-04-23 08:18:00	How we wish, how we wish... at least 85% of us. If only it could be that way... ...then we would be rid of it and also have a laugh to hear exactly where Metz 'inserted' the proposed legislation. :lol: Ah, thereby hangs a tail. :horrified	R2x1 (4628)
542305	2007-04-23 08:45:00	Ah, thereby hangs a tail. :horrifiedFar too much information!!! :yuck: :lol:	johcar (6283)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8