Tuesday, July 9, 2013

John Key---you are just a political bully! Conscience vote only on his terms!

If any National MP has a conscience then now is the time to show it and vote how they truly believe on the casino conference centre. I find it hard to believe that all of them agree with John Key's stance. The fact that he has virtually 'ordered' his MPs to back the proposal means that none of them will go against his will. He will have his way and the MPs in his caucus know that if they want a future in 'his' party then they will have to tow the line.
Don't expect a mass breaking in the ranks. If even one of the National MPs actually dares to vote against the casino plans then they will be doomed to battle for their reselection at the next election.
Will there be a Marilyn Waring?  I doubt it but will be most pleased if someone comes out of the woodwork.
If anyone needed proof that John Key is a megalomaniac in drag, then here it is. He is determined to get his policy through at all costs. The cost to him should be that NZ finally sees him for what he is--- a face that hides the truth--- He is intent on turning NZ into 'his way or the highway!
Come on Nats! There must be some of you who can live up to the much vaunted claim that your party represents 'middle New Zealand and not some fascist state! Conscience vote my ass!

There is going to be a conscience vote re the 'dirty deal' for the Auckland Casino.

About time, I say. The Speaker in Parliament has arrived at the conclusion that the vote re legislation around the deal proposed by the Prime Minister for the funding of the Auckland Casino be put to a ‘conscience vote.’ There has been a great deal of debate about this issue.
While some see the huge conference centre as being central to the enhancement of opportunities for Auckland and New Zealand in general, along with the creation of jobs, both in the construction phase and the running of the centre after the opening, others see a wider cost to the community.
Sure, we may get a brand spanking new centre but at what cost? Do we really need more pokie machines and gaming tables? Do we really want to increase the social pressures on the people of New Zealand, because in the final analysis, that is who will be paying for the extra social services needed as a result of increased gambling? As far as I can see, the only ‘gainers’ are not the ‘gamers,’ but the people who make the profits out of the presence of these gambling palaces. We all know that things are geared so that there are always more losers than winners.
Why should we, the public pay for the damage that problem gamblers inflict on themselves and others. It is all too easy to say that it is a ‘choice,’ made by the gambler and that if they get hooked then that is a natural consequence. Talking a broader view would indicate that the collateral damage is paid by us all. Broken families cost us all money. Social dysfunction is something we all reap the costs for.
I say to the politicians---take a hard look at this proposal and find another way to finance this conference centre. Yes, we will all pay for that too, but at least we will have control from the start as to its use, and any benefits will accrue to the city and New Zealand. It may mean waiting a bit longer. In this case, delaying is good; unlike the public transport issues that need addressing here and now!
Dig deep into your emotions and find out the real costs of bringing in yet more machines to our city! Hopefully without the shackles of ‘party machines’ to ramp up support for this proposal, maybe just once we will get a decision that does  not hurt the people who can least afford to ‘have a free choice,’

Parliament had a chance last night to take a stand for the protection of animals from harmful testing--all so 'legal highs' can be sold! Shame on you!

Parliament missed a chance last night to enhance the protection of animals when it comes to using them for testing substances that are intended for the recreational use of people. Most New Zealanders are concerned about the so-called ‘legal highs’ that are being sold at our corner shops. Yes, Parliament is about to make that much more difficult and the legalisation that is finally going to be enacted will make it that much more difficult for those who ‘prey’ on our young people and make huge profits from plying their evil trade.
What is so sad is that last night Parliament missed the chance to protect animals from the testing that is necessary to make sure that these drugs are ‘safe.’ ‘That will involve a certain amount of testing’ say the proponents of the main bill. But---- testing either here in New Zealand, or worse, overseas in countries that have an appalling record re the rights of their people, never lone for animals should not be condoned at all.
Mojo and John Banks were on the same side in their desire to prohibit such moves but they did not have the support of the ‘spineless’ NZ First Party (So the elderly supports of that party who often have pets, agree with their darling, Winston?!) and mainly National members of parliament.
It is disgraceful that we as a nation will allow testing on animals for something most of us agree is harmful to humans and for a product that is there for recreational use. I dislike that description; it just makes it all seem so unnecessary. Are we not mostly in  agreement that we want these substances banned completely, so that our hospital wards can get on with the other work they need to do and not be using their precious resources to combat a substance that is increasingly causing concern re its use?
I am assume that many of you reading this will be angry. Let your local MP know about your concern and even consider voting against them at the next election. That this was a party vote also makes me mad. Surely it is a conscious issue. Shame on you ‘sheep’ who followed your leaders on this issue (namely the National Party and the defunct Peter Dunne Party) and voted against Mojo’s amendment. You will not be forgotten.
To all people who feel even a smidgeon of discomfort over this issue---get out there and ‘tell your MPs’ in no uncertain terms,’ what you think.
To those who think it’s OK to test on animals, for a recreational drug, then I wonder what else you would allow through as law. We are not talking about some medical breakthrough that will save lives or lead to better lives---we are talking about a substance or collection of substances that ‘harm people in every way!’ Mojos amendment would have gone some way to establishing a base from which we could have operated for other substances, and the list would indeed be long. At least her move was a damned good start. PARLIAMENT MISSED A VERY VALUABLE CHANCE!