Thursday, February 14, 2008

Friday Electoral Politics - Winston Peters hatred edition

Winston Peters in parliament yesterday:

What sort of message is sent to victims in this country when a political leader is happily hongi-ing with someone who is a beneficiary of the Bail Act in that he is out on bail although he faces very serious charges?

Tame Iti is not a beneficiary of the Bail Act. Valerie Morse, Emily Bailey, Omar Hamed and the 23 year-old Swiss musician, who were all released on bail from the same court-room, are not beneficiaries of the bail act. The other eleven people who were arrested on October 15, and are facing charges under the Arms Act were not beneficiaries of the Bail Act.

I lived, worked and worried through the 25 days from October 15 till November 8, when the police said they would no longer oppose bail. Bail is not too easy to get.

This is how Rick Barker replied:
The Rt Hon Winston Peters pointed out very clearly the contradiction of someone saying that he was going to be tough on crime, then being very familiar—hongi-ing—with someone who was out on bail. I think the public will make their own decisions about that. I just advise the member of what my grandmother said: “Show me who your friends are, and I’ll show you who you are.”
As someone who is friends with people who are out on bail 'although they face very serious charges' - I'm going to judge Rick Barker pretty harshly. I am proud of who my friends are, and who I am.


This seems to be as good a time as any to announce my voting rationale in the up-coming election. I will not vote for any of the parties currently in parliament (most will be self-explanatory - this is the reason I'm not voting Green - although I could pile on many more). I could not vote, but I kind of like it and I love ridiculously complex voting rationales. I also like people losing their jobs.

So my main aim for voting this year will be to try and contribute to Winston Peters losing his job. I will do this by making sure I vote in the party vote. The higher the total number of party votes, the higher the number that NZ First needs reach the threshold. Since Winston Peters lost Tauranga NZ First needs 5% to get into parliament.

I won't know which small party to vote for, until the party lists are announced. My preference would be something like the McGilligudy Serious Party, or even Natural Law. The problem of voting for anyone who I even vaguely agree with is that it might encourage them, and I think running for elections is a waste of time. So I'm hoping that a small third party with completely random policies that I don't find offensive, but I don't agree with enough to think that standing for election is a waste.

It may be a tall order.


  1. Anonymous7:53 am

    You could vote for the Māori Party on the basis

    1) The overhang means that the vote won't actually make any difference to the MP outcome.

    2) The overhang means that the vote will count for the 5% threshhold and absolutely nothing else – which is pretty cool if you're only trying to vote against parties crossing the threshhold

    3) Any list vote for the MP in a general electorate confuses the commentators - and that's got to be good!

    On the other hand, it means you'd have to hold your nose and vote for the Māori Party

  2. Worker's Party and RAM are both apparently breaking the 500 and standing on the list. Not that I'd recommend voting for either, I just don't see much point waiting half an hour plus standing in line...especially not when I could be doing something far more worthwhile, like reading a book or drinking a beer (or both!)

  3. Anonymous11:30 pm

    Hello Maia

    What's your view on how the bail act should apply to people who have been arrested and are awaiting trial for rape?

  4. Anonymous4:35 am

    MC Serious and Nat Law are long gone entities. I guess with a blog named 'Capitalism Bad' you will have to look further than planet moonbat to find anybody to vote for.

    Why don't you move to North Korea and vote over there...

  5. It is true the Winston method of using words "beneficiary' here, gives a slant, and Judges repeating the slant reinforce it but your voting position is silly and anarchic and meaningless, you should vote Green, peterquixote