by frog
Given their normal stance I had always been kind of surprised that Act was so opposed to protecting children from violence through their opposition to the amendment to section 59 of the Crimes Act.
But now I find out why thanks to Roger Douglas’s blog:
The cost of doing business in New Zealand is in many ways, beyond belief.
- Resource Management Act.
- Nutty regulation (dogs); anti-smacking legislation.
- Emissions Trading Scheme.
Yup, section 59 is increasing the cost of doing business in New Zealand. Maybe it’s because if you haven’t given your child a good beating with a hosepipe in the morning you’re not feeling at your most productive when you get to work? Or maybe violence against children was being used as a productivity measure by parents who employed their own children in their businesses? Who knows. Anyway it is somehow linked to the impact dogs and nuts have on business expenses. And these guys claim they know about the big issues facing the economy.
Published in Economy, Work, & Welfare | Society & Culture by frog on Thu, October 23rd, 2008
Tags: act party, business, children, frogblog, green party, Section 59, Smacking, violence
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
S59 does nothing to protect children. It’s designed to punish more adults.
The cost of legislation is the the cost of running the style of parliament we have. Big government, small parties wasting time with their tiresome insignificant agendas, opportunity cost.
Still Rome burns.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Did you see the post at Kiwiblog where a contributor claims she witnessed Sue Bradford smacking her own kids when they were young.
That is an interesting claim to make given that Bradford has always claimed that she never smacked her own children.
Could Sue be lying again?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
And I note how you’ve missed the point of Rogers post.
“Labour Party response to fiscal update and global meltdown
● Spend, regulate, hope and pray.
● Carry on as if nothing has happened.
● A lack of honesty.
● A detached, it isn’t happening approach to the global crisis (likely to do great harm).”
He should include the Greens in that, who are also carrying on as if nothing has happened.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yesterday, i talked to a friend who know a guy that saw big bro beating a puppy a year ago in Nelson. Interesting … I thought bb liked animals.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“And I note how you’ve missed the point of Rogers post.”
The point of this post was that Roger is a little odd, I think.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Could Sue be lying again?”
yes she could be. kiwiblob is notorious for having trustworthy & veracious commenters.
could BB be spreading around unsubstantiated hearsay again?
“He should include the Greens in that, who are also carrying on as if nothing has happened.”
whereas bluepeter has heroically engaged with the problem by vociferously advocating the greens become the ACT party on their blog comments. supertroll saves the day again. hurray
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I believe everything anonymous blog commenters say Presse-purre, dunno why you wouldn’t.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Presse
Thats low, even for a commie.
Still, it just highlights your desperation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
nommo
Why do you have such a problem with the truth?
Sue B has repeatedly lied over S59, for goodness sake she is a politician.
You desire to control speech and information is concerning.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP – Of course the Greens(NZ Communist Party) want NZ to collapse, Then they can step in and save everyyone in NZ by turning us into a nice socialist south pacific state.
I’m sure Russel and Sue must be drooling over what Argentina has just done.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>I believe everything anonymous blog commenters say Presse-purre, dunno why you wouldn’t.
Then believe my friend. His name is Greg and he’s policeman you can’t have more reliable than that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
http://www.thestandard.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/breakerboys.p ng
Obviously child protection costs money. That’s money out of the taxpayer’s pocket, by crickey. Off to the coal mine with them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
bb beats puppies?!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BluePeter Says:
October 23rd, 2008 at 12:19 pm
> “Labour Party response to fiscal update and global meltdown
> ● Spend, regulate, hope and pray.
the problems with the finance sector in the US were caused by a lack of regulation (and to a lesser extent by counterproductive legislation), and the experiences of the 1930s clearly show that cutting government spending is not the way to get out of a depression.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Cutting low quality government spending is essential.
Maintaining spending that demonstrates good returns is essential.
Blowing money on train sets and bizarre, uncosted ideological agenda is not only irresponsible, it’s destructive.
Once again, show me the money. How much are you going to borrow? How much will you raise taxes? Where is the transparency?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Rubbish Kahikatea.
The government spending is not what got us out of the great depression.
It was world war II that got us out.
How does government stealing money from one part of the economy and handing it out to another part of the economy result in an increase to the economy as a whole. The net gain of government spending to the economy is 0.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BB is an animal lover! That’s why he likes Fill-ewe so much.
Actually there has been a distinct lack of Fill-ewe lately, why is he so quiet? I like it!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
turnip28,
“It was world war II that got us out.”
How? It IS government spending after all, and certainly NOT on something productive.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Could Sue be lying again?”
Or could big bro be lying *yet* again?
“bb beats puppies?!”
That’s disgusting! What a hypocrite!
“Actually there has been a distinct lack of Fill-ewe lately, why is he so quiet? I like it!”
Sometimes if you ignore them they really do go away…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
On a cost to benefit ratio for protecting children the section 59 thing was a collosal waste of time and money.
However,on cost to benefit ratio for forcing left wing ideology on the general population it was incredibly productive.
Its a shame more kids have died since that bill was passed than adults got off using S59 in the last 10 years.
Never mind, now the greens can relax and know they have done their part to stop child abuse, now that those evil fundamentalists have been put in their place.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“On a cost to benefit ratio for protecting children the section 59 thing was a collosal waste of time and money.”
The smacking thing has nothing to do with the cost of doing business in NZ, so still a mystery why Douglas said it was. Could have been a very vague way of pointing out priorities maybe, but a poor way of doing so.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Spend-Regulate-Hope OK … but the praying is only for folks who got religion, so that has to be left off.
Carry on as if nothing has happened. … I missed where we had a bank failure. What is it we’re supposed to be upset about – the recession? That’s just the universe reminding us: TANSTAAFL
A lack of honesty …. LOL If it were really about trust the Beehive would be left pretty empty after the next election. How can you possibly even imply that honesty and politics isn’t an oxymoron waiting to happen.
A detached, it isn’t happening approach to the global crisis … this is different from your understanding of Global Warming apparently. There’s something we can do to make a difference in the outcome?
Wow! I didn’t recognize the native comic talent that is operating here at first
Go BP!
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“However,on cost to benefit ratio for forcing left wing ideology on the general population it was incredibly productive.”
Yea, must send a thank you to the National Party for helping us with the left wing takeover.
Pure B*llsh*t Shunda. Talk about ideology. You should look in the mirror.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Why do you have such a problem with the truth?”
you mean why don’t I automatically accept kiwiblob comments as the word of god?
“You desire to control speech and information is concerning”
I don’t desire to control your speech (although reading it is usually a god awful waste of my time) but I do have the right to point out when you are being a troll. ie. all the time. go back under your bridge.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
# turnip28 Says:
October 23rd, 2008 at 1:19 pm
> The government spending is not what got us out of the great depression.
It was world war II that got us out.
government spending on public works got New Zealand out of the great depression. Government spending on public works and armaments to invade France and Poland got Germany out of the great depression. Some other countries, like the US and UK, only got out of the depression when they started spending money on arms factories to defend themselves against Germany.
> How does government stealing money from one part of the economy and handing it out to another part of the economy result in an increase to the economy as a whole?
It only works when the economy is deep in a depression, when businesses aren’t spending because there’s not enough consumer demand for what they’re already producing, because people don’t have enough income, because businesses aren’t employing them because nobody’s buying their goods or services. Government spending can break a vicious circle like that. It also has to be spending that’s labour-intensive within your own country.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>this is different from your understanding of Global Warming apparently.
Must everything come back to your monster-under-the-bed?
What am I saying – of course it does! The end is nigh! We’re doomed! Dooooomeed!
In reality, we might get a little warmer here in MaoZone. Not that we can do anything about it except prance and posture….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“What am I saying – of course it does! The end is nigh! We’re doomed! Dooooomeed! ”
soooo the sky is falling because the value of our money is deteriorating but not because we’ve been polluting the atmosphere on an exponentially increasing scale for the last hundred years.
“In reality, we might get a little warmer here in MaoZone. Not that we can do anything about it except prance and posture”
your comments being a perfect example of aforesaid posturing and prancing
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Pure B*llsh*t Shunda. Talk about ideology. You should look in the mirror.”
Oh I would love for you to give your definition of the ideology I am supposed to be forcing on any one. All I am doing is trying (in vain) to up hold my rights from a controlling manipulative two faced govt.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Possibly soon to be 4 or 5 faced.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You Greenies seem to be working yourself into a bit of a lather at the tantalising prospect of being in government.
Frankly it is disgusting to watch, even the more sane Greens (Toad) seems to have lost all ability to debate issue’s.
If you do form part of the next govt do you plan to introduce legislation to make it illegal to speak out against the government?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“seems to have lost all ability to debate issue’s”
debating requires an opponent. your idea of debating is repeating the same facile misrepresentations over an over. trolling is not the same as debating.
“All I am doing is trying (in vain) to up hold my rights from a controlling manipulative two faced govt”
one man struggling against the government. are you jason bourne?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>soooo the sky is falling because the value of our money is deteriorating
If you can’t see we’re in far more danger from short-range economic threats than long-term temperature threats, you’re not paying attention….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“If you can’t see we’re in far more danger from short-range economic threats than long-term temperature threats, you’re not paying attention”
so when you’re PM what exactly are you going to do?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP if you don’t get the hypocrisy of claiming we shouldn’t take action because we’re too small to have an effect on climate change but somehow we can influence the global economy you’re not paying attention
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
We can influence neither.
What we can do is look after ourselves….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
nommo
Your idea of debating an issue it to shove your fingers in you ears when your opponent makes a valid point.
Try being honest for a change, you are an apologist for the Greens and merely recite Green/Communist party doctrine in the absence of any personal ability to form your own opinion.
Yes we have political differences, I have no issue with that however I do have an issue that the party who has the bare faced cheek to claim the moral high ground is the same party that has not been truthful with the electorate.
When faced with a dissenting view you revert (as is typical of the left) to personal abuse and derision.
Not one of you is prepared to debate an issue and I am sure that is a carefully thought out strategy, you do not want to give the public any real detail lest they work out for themselves that you guys gave up being a Green party years ago.
You only had to listed to that arrogant Russ Norman on TV3 this morning to see evidence of that, as soon as Rodney Hide had him on the ropes he started with the “you are a denier” rubbish.
Russ, Jeanette, Keith and Sue B do not see any future for NZ other than as a socialist republic, each and every one of these people have communist/socialist backgrounds and as far as I am aware not one of them has renounced communism or socialism.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>so when you’re PM what exactly are you going to do?
Get rid of you lot for a start. Pull out of Kyoto. Appoint Douglas as finance minister. Get the ball rolling again….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Once you start the ball rolling it goes DOWN the hill.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Get rid of you lot for a start. Pull out of Kyoto. Appoint Douglas as finance minister. Get the ball rolling again….”
Be still my beating heart!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
““All I am doing is trying (in vain) to up hold my rights from a controlling manipulative two faced govt”
one man struggling against the government. are you jason bourne?”
Oh very funny, well lets have a look shall we.
As a young man with a wife and kids I HAD a dream of buying some land and building a house with the idea of living a sustainable life style.
Now with all the left wing govt rules and regulation that is near on impossible for me now. It is impossible for me to realise my dream without doubling or tripling my income to pay for all the regulation based expenses, let alone the fact that I am not even allowed to build my own home (even though I am able).
Then I am told that I am diciplining my kids wrong, feeding them wrong and my wife is asked if I beat her every time she steps foot in the local hospital.
You guys are hypocrits, you participate in massive bloated govt yet expect its citizens to live efficient sustainable lifestyles while making it impossible for the average man to do it. You preach and proclaim like any well versed religious preacher, yet do nothing to help people acheive these goals, while budening them with a multitude of rules and guilt based legislation.
Then you have the nerve to suggest I should just shut up and accept my lot in life and have no right to object.
Well if I offend you, to flippin bad!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Green/Communist party doctrine”
exactly my point. it’s not about making a valid point for you. you are a troll. you call us commies and then say “you revert (as is typical of the left) to personal abuse and derision.” you are worthy of such derision.
“Not one of you is prepared to debate an issue”
actually the green MPs are constantly out there debating in the forum where it’s actually important. there was an excellent debate on bfm yesterday. once again the right accused the greens of wanting to control their showers and once again “that arrogant Russ Norman” (yes well up on the moral high ground there BB, nice view?) calmly reiterated the actual content of the policy. to which Rodders repeated what he’d just said in the hope some of his poo would stick.
“each and every one of these people have communist/socialist backgrounds and as far as I am aware not one of them has renounced communism or socialism”
I thought mccarthy was dead but in fact he’s living under a bridge on frogblog.
I don’t really care to debate with you BB you are boring and repetitive and every second I spend typing is time I could be spending doing something else. please don’t pretend you are here to debate the issues because you do all those things you say are “typical of the left”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Then you have the nerve to suggest I should just shut up and accept my lot in life and have no right to object.”
I’m not suggesting that. if venting about your lot in life on a blog helps go for it.
“You guys are hypocrits”
ouch. stop hurting me.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
nommo
It’s not that you won’t debate the issues it’s more that you cannot.
McCarthy..is that the best you can do nommo?
Where is the costed policy?
How does insulating houses contribute toward building infrastructure?
Why is Sue B being hidden away during this campaign?
Will she apologise for telling lies?
How much will you raise taxes by if you form part of the govt?
What deal has been done with Labour?
Do you not think that the voting public have a right to know what seats you may hold in the next government?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Why is Sue B being hidden away during this campaign?”
I realise I am harping on a bit big bro, and maybe I missed your retort, but i’ve said several times that you heard her in a radio interview once in the last few weeks, so how can she be ‘hiding’?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“It’s not that you won’t debate the issues it’s more that you cannot.”
I cannot answer your specific questions about the internal workings of the party as I am not privy to them. they are a very open party though and their policies are readily available. maybe you should spned more time researching and less trolling?
and yes I think demanding the renunciation of political beliefs does make you sound very mccarthy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
nommo
“and yes I think demanding the renunciation of political beliefs does make you sound very mccarthy”
Not if you are campaigning under a party of convenience banner.
If Sue B, Keith, Russ and Jeanette have nothing to hide then surely they would have no problem renouncing their communist pasts.
Unless of course there is a hidden agenda.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
what a day on this thread and I missed the action (busy showing 50 teachers the ins and outs of community gardens, permaculture and growing vegetables to feed communities – great day) but what revelations here! I lived in Nelson earlier on and think I heard about the’incident’. Shameful! Turned my world upside down! You think you know someone … tried to follow the logic of the trolls here but the dodging and weaving, the laying down of the ‘questions’ smokescreen and the refusal to answer real questions put to them by bona fide commentors meant that nothing was gained. Our resident troll kept wiggling his ‘best kept hidden bits’ to draw attention to himself and no doubt had a stimulating day away from his supposed ‘work’ but seemed oblivious to the mocking that follows him everywhere he goes now.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Community gardens or gardens for the Comrades Greenfly?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Community gardens or gardens for the Comrades Greenfly?”
hahahahaha
BB is funnnie
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
why no, friend bigbro, communities of ordinary folk, working hard to make ends meet, finding though that they haven’t the experience to grow food for themselves and their (young) families and knowing that they enjoy the company of others, pitching in on a shared project that draws the community together, makes use of unused land, involves children and elderly alike, links schools and business, church and other groups in a productive, healthy interest. Nasty eh!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greenfly,
that reminds me; do you know who or what i should contact to see about re-initiating community gardens around Palmerston North? i know there used to be some but my branch would be interested in rejuvinating the practice.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Actually, I find that perma-culture stuff very interesting.
Is that what you do, Greenfly?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
sapient – your nearest Environment Centre will be able to help you. Or you could just start one yourself
Ours has developed into an orchard-garden, where we’ve planted apples, plums, berries, vines etc. amongst the annual vegetables and understory of useful (insect attracting/soil improving) plants. So we are covering short and long term food needs. Plus making a very attractive place to be. And a source of plants for the ‘outside community’. And a place where kids can raid fruit (organic) 
BluePeter – I do (amongst other things) I live in a ‘food-forest’ and work to develop similar systems for people who want to do the same.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“I’m not suggesting that. if venting about your lot in life on a blog helps go for it.
“You guys are hypocrits”
ouch. stop hurting me.”
Once again, I bring up real issues and lefties move to dissmiss debate, I assume cause its in the to hard basket. You guys don’t want to understand people like me, you want to convert me to an un-proven ideological position on just about everything while expecting me to switch off my eyes and head to the obvious problems this left wing govt is creating.
Tell me why I shouldn’t be frustrated by the things I mentioned earlier, tell me why I should trust the greens not to make things even worse.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“you want to convert me to an un-proven ideological position”
I don’t want o convert you to anything. use your vote how you want to. I find green policies most closely embody the way I want our society to evolve. I’m quite happy for you to vote however you want to.
“tell me why I shouldn’t be frustrated by the things I mentioned earlier, tell me why I should trust the greens not to make things even worse.”
I don’t know the answer. regulations are sometimes costly and restrictive but they do serve a purpose. you may be able to build a house but if anyone could just build one then we’d have a much bigger problem than the leaky homes fiasco. it would result in all sorts of unsafe dwellings being constructed all over the place and cost a whole lot in terms of health, environmental and civil defence consequences.
life is full of frustrations no matter what level of society you’ve settled at. blaming the government might work for you but I find it just causes more frustration.
“You guys don’t want to understand people like me”
are you 14?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
shunda – how on earth do you reconcile call us ‘lefties’ when you bristle when you get called a ‘fundy’? Do you not realise that you are being provocative with your words or are you, like the dippy big bro, loving to irritate, safe in your online annonominity (spelled however you might want to spell it)?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greenfly are you avoiding the point I was making?
Really? is “lefties” deeply offensive to the degree that fundamentalist is to me?
I mean seriously “fundamentalist” descibes people who burn down abortion clinics, shoot people they don’t like, blow up people with car bombs and crash planes in to buildings.
Is “lefties” really a comparable derogatory term for people of a left leaning political perspective? Perhaps you could give me a better term to use that causes less offense, assuming your not just pulling my leg.
Back to the issue’s I raised.
Do you think my frustration at this over regulated society is illegitamate?.
What is the green party doing to minimise govt regulation and foster the inovation that this country is founded on?.
Why do greens not seem to think regulation is a bad thing?
When you consider that these stupid laws are contributing to the destruction of our environment, I would have thought the greens would see it as an important issue.
An example.
Transit has got an over zealous approach to trees on highways due to the over regulated culture in all of our govt departments.
They have cut down (with DOC) the 1500 year old Matai in south westland, felled a whole lot of other trees on this highway, and now have some 700 – 800 year old Kahikatea in their sights.
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A PROBLEM WITH THESE TREES KILLING PEOPLE, so why the hell are they cutting them down?
This is the permanent loss of our heritage due to irrational fear becoming legislated into our bloated govt departments.
Equally,inovation is part of our heritage and is disappearing due to an overly restrictive govt that the greens are part of.
Please explain to me what the answer to all this is,if it isn’t removing the current govt and replacing it with another one!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Really? is “lefties” deeply offensive to the degree that fundamentalist is to me?”
yes. what do you know about it? you don’t understand me!
“Why do greens not seem to think regulation is a bad thing?”
because a general question like that is nonsensical. some regulation is not only good but completely necessary. some is bad and wrong. your example is bad but it doesn’t follow to say all regulation is bad. in my example earlier allowing anyone to build anything anywhere would be disastrous.
“due to an overly restrictive govt that the greens are part of.”
the greens have voted against the government on confidence and supply for this entire term. they are not part of this government.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
nommopilot, I am at a complete loss to understand how you can read my post and give me such a patronising reply.
So because I missed out the word “over” before “regulation” you assume I have some strange sort of anarchist belief system? that advocates “allowing anyone to build anything anywhere”?
Give me a break! and answer my concerns instead of avioding the issues with my gramatical errors.
This is a common tactic of the left, unless an argument is presented in perfect literary form you side track the issue with some insignificant error.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
ummmm
“give me such a patronising reply.” . . . “This is a common tactic of the left, unless an argument is presented in perfect literary form you side track the issue with some insignificant error.”
I’m not sure how I’m meant to know what you mean if you don’t write clearly. omitting a word isn’t a grammatical error. but you are constantly patronising in almost every comment, mister kettle.
one man’s over-regulation is another man’s open slather so I don’t know how a government is meant to regulate the building industry to allow laymen to build their own homes while excluding cowboys from building shoddy death-traps.
but I do hope you get to build your house someday
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What a load of rubbish. Wish I not bothered looking at the comments.
But Mr Douglass might want to consider the World Banks report that place New Zealand as the second easiest country in the world to do business in. You’d think he would be pleased.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
now I feel a bit ashamed
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“What a load of rubbish. Wish I not bothered looking at the comments.”
Well you had a long way to read before you came to that conclusion don, thanks for your enlightened dissmissal.
And a wonderful institution the world bank is too.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
yeah, don. you totally killed the vibe
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“one man’s over-regulation is another man’s open slather so I don’t know how a government is meant to regulate the building industry to allow laymen to build their own homes while excluding cowboys from building shoddy death-traps.”
I’m not even allowed to legally replace a window or reclad the house I’ve got, let alone build a new one!.
The building industry is just one govt intrusion into the kiwi way of life.
Do the greens stand for limited govt or not?
I would have thought the anarchist backgrounds of some of your MPs would have encouraged minimal state intrusion into our lives.
True liberty is missing in NZ and for the life of me I can’t understand why the green party is not confronting this state control freakery, unless of course their is another agenda?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda
My understanding of the legislation is that you can do a lot of stuff to your own house as long as you are the one living in it. There’s supposedly an exclusion in the legislation for that particular condition. I have been looking at building my own house as well and doing my usual job while preparing for a time when the finances might work.
The deal with housing is that this country followed the English model and councils are responsible for a lot of things that they should not be, but to proclaim that this has to do with us is a nonsense. Most of us here regard it (housing) as an area in need of much change.
Leaky-Homes happened in the USA too. The monolithic cladding industry fooled a fair lot of inspectors and buyers and builders back then. The difference however, is that the “council” there isn’t on the hook for how the house is built in any but the most basic ways. When you buy a house there YOU pay an inspector and the sale is conditional until everything the inspector finds is addressed. The seller probably paid an inspector in self-defence. The bank that gives you the mortgage may have their own inspector but the deal is that the council? It doesn’t certify squat. House is found defective you can sue the inspector AND the builder AND the seller (depending on the sales contract) and THEY all have insurance.
Council is not on the hook.
Here councils are looking at ruinous legal reparations and repairs and they reacted to the problem by trying to make more regulations and insisting on registered builders because the registered builders have a lot of clout in the council. Just how this is being laid at our feet I can’t understand. The parliament reacted in a similar vein but that’s still got nothing to do with Greens.
Limited Government? – Appropriate Decision Making. You might consider our drug policies, Our resistance to the monolithic Aussie food regulation organization. A mixed bag if all you are looking for are reductions and limitations but there isn’t an agenda of MORE government and that is just another reason why the misrepresentations about us tend to get us riled. Me anyway… and I have been known to fire the odd shot at those.
Thing is we are NOT in government, and the right keeps regurgitating the opinion that we are, like some indigestible bit of sausage. We regard the current Labour and National block as far closer to each other than either of them are to us. The difference is enough for us to pick a side but there’s no way we LIKE either of them a whole lot.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
shunda – it may seem a trivial point, but if you mean, “people of a left leaning political perspective”, then say it, remembering that many greens think they are neither left nor right, but ‘green’ in their political perspective. When you keep hammering home your lable ‘lefty’, they feel aggrieved, in the way you do when you are described as a fundy. fyi.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda,
I trust that most folk would applaud you for wanting to be more self sufficcient.
However, in respect of building (or even renovating/relcocating) a house, I consider it to be very sensible that there are regulations (The Building Act) to try and ensure that the dwelling will be safe, sound, have appropraite insulation, safe electricity, drainage and so forth.
Anyone who believes that they see a major fault in any legislation is free to try and lobby to have the relevent section reviewed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks bjchip for your response, I found that quite interesting.
Greenfly, I had no idea that “lefty” was so provocative, I certainly didn’t intend to cause any great offense by using it.
joy, I certainly believe there should be a building act, I am not suggesting an open slather approach at all. The issue I have is that if someone is capable of building a house to sound building practice, they should be allowed to do it with out a whole lot of red tape.
The leaky building crisis was due to registered builders shoddy work, not the home handy man.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“if someone is capable of building a house to sound building practice, they should be allowed to do it with out a whole lot of red tape.”
but there would necessarily be some red tape in verifying that capability.
“The leaky building crisis was due to registered builders shoddy work”
ie. capable people not performing to this capability.
bj, thanks for your input. considered and rational as usual. appreciated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Violence against children is good business”
To write something like that you must be one of the 20% or so who supported Sue Bradfords legislation, which makes you wonder what it is about the green membership that they caved in to the minority opinion?
Remember too that success in the polls doesn’t necessarily mean support for S59 legislation, you went down whenever that was aired.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I don’t like Frog’s choice of words either, but you’re starting to sound like Shunda now, making things sound other than what they really were. Caved to the minority opinion? Like we were once on the other side but switched under the pressure? That majority you’re referring to still doesn’t know the facts of S59 repeal due to the propaganda of a few, aided and abetted by a derelict media.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)