Latest news with #MMP
Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Otago Daily Times
Letters to the Editor: voting, parking and mining
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including the new electoral law proposals, replacing car parks with cycle lanes, and the Santana gold mine develoment. Former MP condemns electoral law proposals From 1990 until 1999 I was a member of Parliament's electoral law select committee. During those nine years a wide range of changes and reforms to electoral law were proposed. At no time did anyone propose changes remotely as retrograde as those that the current government is progressing. Had they done, they would have been opposed by all political parties, left wing or right wing. Western democracies usually seek to make voting as easy as possible, or alternatively compulsory, to ensure governments are elected validly and have the moral authority to govern. This government's changes are voter suppression, pure and simple. Those affected are likely to be a mix of young, poor, brown and transient. Furthermore, with one exception, all elections since MMP began in 1996 have been surprisingly close. The 110,000 people who may now be disenfranchised are enough to affect the result, and therefore the will of the nation. We should all be deeply concerned. A wrong move I am alarmed to see the coalition government following the American example of making voter enrolment more inconvenient. Justice officials say closing enrolments ahead of advance voting could result in lower turnout and reduce confidence in the electoral system. Those voters who are either working long hours or irregular hours will be most affected by the cancelling of same-day election enrolment. In America over the last 20 years the conservative Republican Party in various states has consistently made it more difficult for working people and minorities to vote. The need to prove your permanent address has been used to disqualify minority voters as America has moved toward becoming a more authoritarian society. Cancelling same-day enrolment is a move in the wrong direction. Trumpism is not a good look in our electoral system. Our electoral system is too important for democracy to be changed casually. Any changes to the electoral systems, even minor ones, should be agreed across parties. Just winning an election should not give political parties the right to alter the electoral system. A great risk I write in profound concern upon realising the extent of voter restrictions this government is considering. Total disenfranchisement for prisoners was sadistic in my opinion, certainly not aiding return to normal life, but to read of universal restrictions for enrolment beggars belief. Or, rather, it confirms that the really needy of New Zealand are also of the same great risk, even should they understand that asking for special votes is possible, though these will be well scrutinised. In particular, the proposed "ability to check enrolment details with data from other government agencies" surely jeopardises privacy, while "greater use of digital communication" has obvious drawbacks, to those without required means (probably mostly elderly) or are not familiar or comfortable with voting process, until now having face-to-face communication with poll clerk or returning officer. Universal emancipation is a vital necessity of an enlightened society, a fact of which this government seems unwilling to ensure. Heavy machinery and losing your car park How would anyone like to have large machinery working about 4m from where he/she was studying for examinations or resting? That happened when the Dunedin City Council worked underground on the Albany St pipes. Now a few DCC personnel have decided to rob about 60 much needed Albany St car parks from right outside the numerous student flats and businesses. This cycle lane is being forced on to those who don't want it. How many cyclists will use it? Cyclists appear to ride anywhere at all, and few appear to keep to the cycle lanes. I have spoken to several present tenants who are surprised and angry to hear their parks will be taken. Where will students' families or shuttle buses park when they need to move students in and out of their student flats? Where will the students, who own cars, park their cars? Most flats and hostels do not provide sufficient parks for all cars and some have no parking areas at all. These people have agreed to waste local money ruining Albany St businesses and living areas. How would each feel if their livelihoods (or streets in which they live) were to be treated in this offhand way? The RMA is there to allay mine concerns The development of the Santana gold mine in the Bendigo area, the site of significant gold mining over 100 years ago, has generated a lot of media coverage, most of which appears to be opposed. Our current principle planning document clearly allows consenting authorities to provide consents for the activities with conditions which should allay the concerns of opposition groups and individuals. These conditions could require the applicant to avoid, remedy or mitigate real or perceived adverse effects on a whole host of values. These could include amenity, visual, natural beauty, landscape, protection of flora and fauna etc. The applicant has the choice of accepting such conditions, appealing them, or choosing not to proceed. This process has the significant advantage of providing environmental and amenity value protection and allowing the activity to proceed . This is entirely consistent with the purpose of this current principle planning document (the Resource Management Act). Manic Monday I guess Monday is a day to stir the pot and get people to react with hopefully more good letters to the editor. Two letters got me thinking, so here goes. Lynne Newell (28.7.25): discussing a world event may not be top of the list of council duties but I think it's relevant. Councillors are our chosen representatives just as parliamentarians are. No-one lives in a bubble. Tony Vink (28.7.25): you are looking through rose-tinted glasses when it comes to Israel. They remind me of the wolf dressed in sheep skin. Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@
NZ Herald
4 days ago
- Business
- NZ Herald
Labour's Chris Hipkins questions MMP system, seeks balance in power
'But, I differ a bit from the current Government in the sense that while I respect the important constituencies the smaller parties represent, and I also respect that we compete with them for votes too, I don't think under MMP the smaller parties should call all of the shots. 'I still think the bigger parties have a mandate to reflect the view of a much larger section of the electorate, and so I do think under MMP you need to keep proportionality in mind. 'Yes, there should be some concessions and some trade-offs to the other parties to form a government. But that doesn't mean that you should be doing things that you specifically told the electorate before the election that you weren't going to do. 'The Treaty Principles Bill is a good example. The Regulatory Standards Bill. Some of these things that no one knew they were voting for at the last election, and now they're being inflicted on them. I don't think that's the spirit of MMP or democracy,' he said. Talk of introducing a Capital Gains Tax has been the bugbear of successive governments. In the 2010s, Sir John Key ruled out a CGT while the then-Labour leader Phil Goff made it the centrepiece of his party's tax policy. Fast-forward to Dame Jacinda Ardern ruling out ever implementing one while she was Prime Minister. Enter, Hipkins, who carried the message through the 2023 election. Luxon's then the one to 'rule it out' while he's in rule. When it comes to Election 2026, Hipkins said Labour will have a 'different tax policy' to the one they had at the last election. He stopped short of confirming whether that means the reintroduction of a CGT, but did say he'll announce it by the end of the year. 'Because I think it is important, that is a big policy area. People want to know where they stand. 'In New Zealand, I think we've placed far too much emphasis on buying and selling houses amongst ourselves, pushing up the price so that potentially a whole generation of homeowners is being shut out of the housing market,' he said. Chris Hipkins and Christopher Luxon during a leaders' debate in 2023 and they will already be planning for another battle in 2026. Photo / TVNZ The Labour Party is yet to release any policy announcements for next year's election, but Hipkins said that's for good reason. He wants to make sure they'll be able to deliver on promises made. 'I think one of the valid criticisms of us last time we were in opposition was that we had some really good ideas, but we hadn't worked through the details of exactly how would we do that. Then, when we got into government, we found that some of the things that we'd said we were going to do, very well intentioned, we didn't have a clear plan for how we would do it. 'I think the same thing has happened to this Government. They've made promises with no plan on how they're actually going to do it, and I don't want to be in that position,' he said. In May, Act Party leader and Deputy Prime Minister, David Seymour, referred to Hipkins as 'poo Midas'. It was after NZ First leader Winston Peters 'permanently' ruled out working with Hipkins in any future government coalition. 'This guy's got the opposite of the Midas touch. I think they call him a 'poo Midas',' Seymour said. Hipkins said he's all for a bit of humour in politics, a 'little bit of a sledge' now and then, where it's funny. But the latest jabs from those at the top don't have him laughing. 'They're not very funny, and they're also not very good at it. So, I think they should just stick to actually doing what people ask them to do, you know, New Zealanders wanted them to fix the cost of living crisis,' he said. Listen to the full episode to hear more from Chris Hipkins about the possibility of free dental and whether we should 'tax the rich'. The Front Page is a daily news podcast from the New Zealand Herald, available to listen to every weekday from 5am. The podcast is presented by Chelsea Daniels, an Auckland-based journalist with a background in world news and crime/justice reporting who joined NZME in 2016. You can follow the podcast at iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
The Spinoff
06-07-2025
- Politics
- The Spinoff
Is NZ politics having a MAGA moment?
American-style conflict and populism are taking root in parliament, and critics say respect for the democratic process is being eroded as a result, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Welcome to the era of 'wrecking ball' politics Andrea Vance is never one to mince words, and she was on form again this weekend in the Sunday Star Times (paywalled). NZ's political pendulum is now a 'wrecking ball', she wrote, smashing through 'the written and unwritten codes that once held together democracy'. Where once governments at least paid lip-service to the MMP ideals of consensus building and thoughtful, long-term change, 'now governing is a zero-sum game. Legislation is drafted to provoke, not to last.' It's an argument that Massey political scientist Richard Shaw echoed – albeit with a little less fire than Vance – in the Conversation last month (republished in The Spinoff). He warned the coalition's approach was veering towards 'government by decree', its unprecedented use of parliamentary urgency allowing it to '[wield] its majority to avoid parliamentary and public scrutiny of contentious policies'. With so many controversial new laws on the books, the next Labour government is certain to undo many of them. And so on, and so on. The sheer pace of repeals, reversals and rushed lawmaking has created what Vance calls a 'cycle of legislative whiplash' – a wasteful churn that chips away at the public's trust in stable governance. Small parties, big influence MMP was supposed to encourage moderation; now it risks amplifying the extremes, writes Shaw, who notes that the most unpopular recent legislation – like the Treaty principles bill and tax breaks for tobacco – was pushed into parliament by the coalition's junior partners. 'Rightly or wrongly, this has created a perception of weakness on the part of the National Party and the prime minister,' Shaw adds. In the NZ Herald (Premium paywalled), right-leaning columnist Bruce Cotterill argues that the minor parties on the opposite side are the real threat. Instead of focusing on 'mainstream' issues of the day, 'we are constantly distracted by the needs of, or the deeds of, those who are representing the minorities', he writes, pointing to Te Pāti Māori's 'increasingly extremist and separatist' agenda and the Greens' spate of MP-related scandals. 'These two parties alone hold 20 seats in the nation's Parliament. Can we really believe that over 16% of voters support their current antics?' Parties lean into online conflict Outrage and social media clicks are starting to shape the tone of politics as much online as in the parliamentary debating chamber. As Glenn McConnell reports in Stuff, NZ First and Act have turbocharged their presence on YouTube, leaning into American-style populism. Titles scream about David Seymour and Winston Peters 'DESTROYING', 'DEMOLISHING' and 'ROASTING' their opponents – including their enemies in the media. This type of 'us versus the elite' politics has been around for a while, says political scientist Luke Oldfield, but now it's been repackaged for the 'New Zealand Joe Rogan vote'. The right-leaning parties' social media teams are drawing inspiration from mega popular US Youtuber Ben Shapiro and his ilk, Oldfield says, creating videos designed to bait the algorithm and draw in disenchanted young men who'd otherwise tune out. 'A revolving-door approach to representation' Another warning about declining parliamentary standards comes from former United Future leader Peter Dunne in Newsroom. The sudden resignation of NZ First's Tanya Unkovich is the latest reminder that list MPs can vanish mid-term with zero electoral consequence, replaced overnight by the next name on the party list, he says. 'Already, in the current 54th Parliament, 7 list MPs – 5 of them from the Labour Party – have resigned … two MPs have died, and one has been expelled.' This 'almost revolving-door approach to representation', Dunne warns, only deepens cynicism about parliament's dignity and purpose. After all, 'It is hard to respect an institution when some of its members by their own disregard for it show so little respect of their own.'
Newsroom
14-06-2025
- Politics
- Newsroom
Anne Salmond: What's wrong with the Regulatory Standards Bill
Opinion: The Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) is a dangerous piece of legislation, inspired by libertarian ideas that seek to free the flow of capital from democratic constraints. In a number of respects, it expresses a contempt for collective rights and responsibilities, public goals and values, and liberal democracy. First, it lacks a strong democratic mandate. At the last election, Act was the only party to put forward such a proposal, and it won only 8.6 percent of the vote; 91.4 percent of voters did not support that party. This bill cannot remotely be taken to express 'the will of the people.' Second, the majority party, National, agreed behind doors – despite its prior opposition for almost two decades – to support this proposal from a fringe party during coalition negotiations. Like the Treaty Principles Bill, this undermines the principles of proportionality and accountability to the electorate on which the MMP electoral system is based. That, in turn, corrodes trust in democratic arrangements in New Zealand. Third, the bill seeks to put in place a set of principles, largely inspired by libertarian ideals, that would serve as a benchmark against which most new and existing legislation must be tested. These principles focus on individual rights and private property while ignoring collective rights and responsibilities and values such as minimising harm to human beings and the wider environment. Fourth, this legislation is to be applied retrospectively, applying to all existing laws as well as most new laws and regulations. Rather than upholding sound law-making processes in New Zealand, it radically undermines them. Fifth, the structures and processes this bill seeks to put in place are profoundly undemocratic. It aims to establish a 'Regulatory Standards Board' selected by the Minister for Regulation, the Act leader, and accountable to him, with the legal right to initiate inquiries into all laws and regulations, past and present, that offend against Act's libertarian ideas. This attempt to gain ideological oversight over the legislative and regulatory activities of all other ministers and government agencies constitutes a naked power grab. Such an arrangement is repugnant to democracy, and must not be allowed to proceed. Sixth, as the minister's own officials and many others have pointed out, this bill is unnecessary. Structures and processes to monitor and enhance the quality of laws and regulations already exist. These are accountable to Parliament, not to a particular minister, as is right and proper. They may be strengthened, as required, and must remain rigorously independent from any particular political party. Seventh, there is little reason to trust the integrity of Act's professed intentions in relation to this bill. Although it is claimed the Regulatory Standards Bill is designed to promote robust debate, rigorous scrutiny and sound democratic processes in law making in New Zealand, in practice, Act ignores these at will. The retrospective changes to pay equity legislation it promoted is a recent case in point. Eighth, New Zealand already has too few checks and balances on executive power. The fact this bill, with its anti-democratic aspects and lack of an electoral mandate, is in front of a select committee demonstrates why constitutional reform to protect citizens from executive overreach is urgently needed. Ninth, and perhaps worst, the practical effect of this bill attempts to tie the hands of the state in regulating private activities or initiatives that create public harm, by requiring those who benefit from laws or regulations to compensate others for the losses of profit that may arise. As many experts have pointed out, under such an arrangement, taxpayers may be required to compensate tobacco companies for regulations that reduce their profits by seeking to minimise the negative health and economic impacts of smoking; mining, industrial forestry and other extractive industries for regulations that seek to minimise environmental harm and damage to communities; and many other activities in which capital seeks to profit at the expense of others. The accumulation of wealth and power by the few at the expense of the many is precisely what is undermining other democracies around the world. It is inimical to the very idea of democracy as government 'of the people, by the people, for the people,' in which governments are supposed to serve the interests of citizens, not of capital or corporations. As social cohesion is undermined by radical inequality and an over-emphasis on private property and individual rights, the danger is that it tips over into anarchy; and by removing limits on the right to accumulate wealth and power at the expense of others, into oligarchy. We are seeing something like this in the United States at present. Around the world, democracies that were once strong are collapsing. It is the responsibility of our Parliament to ensure that this does not happen here. Act's attempt to paint this bill as an innocuous attempt to promote good law-making in the interests of citizens is disingenuous, and should be recognised as such. Rather, this is a dangerous bill that attacks the fundamental rights of New Zealanders, and democratic principles. It must not be allowed to pass.
RNZ News
11-06-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
The Politics Panel
Journalists Ruwani Perera and Dan Brunskill join Wallace Chapman to discuss all the big politics news of the week. Also in the studio is former NZ First MP Tracey Martin. Tonight they examine the Gaza floatilla headed by Greta Thunberg and the NZ sanctions placed on two Israeli ministers. They also discuss the tren dfor more right leaning and alt poltical organisations to film their interviews - David Seymour recently took hi own camera to an interview conducted by John Campbell. What to our journalists think of that? And finally, MMP, has it had it's day? Are we basically running a first past the post system anyway? To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
