Discussion:
The circus of Shane Jones making
Add Reply
Crash
2020-03-09 01:10:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt

Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.

I am commenting on the ancillary comments - first Ardern:
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.

"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<

She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.


--
Crash McBash
John Bowes
2020-03-09 04:12:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt
Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.
"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<
She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.
--
Crash McBash
Arderns attitude to the furor is a dodgy as anything she attacked National for and more likely dodgier!
George
2020-03-09 18:56:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 09 Mar 2020 14:10:54 +1300
Post by Crash
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt
Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.
"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<
She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.
No way.
She has her orders from Peters so theres an end to it
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
James Christophers
2020-03-09 20:26:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt
Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.
"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<
She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.
Or even standing him down?

If so, in any parliamentary democracy, wouldn't that amount to a coalition partner being free to muzzle and frustrate with impunity not only the PM but also compromise entire ethos of the parliamentary process and the nature of democracy itself?

What would Sir Geoffrey Palmer have to say about it, I wonder?

In any case, it seems inconceivable that Ardern - an accidental PM and total neophyte at the time of the Coalition agreement - would not have been advised not to agree to relinquish her supreme authority to such an extent that she cannot operate within her democratic mandate with complete freedom. It's not as though such 'obvious' advice wasn't to hand at the time.
Crash
2020-03-09 22:35:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:26:09 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt
Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.
"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<
She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.
Or even standing him down?
If so, in any parliamentary democracy, wouldn't that amount to a coalition partner being free to muzzle and frustrate with impunity not only the PM but also compromise entire ethos of the parliamentary process and the nature of democracy itself?
That would appear to be true.
Post by James Christophers
What would Sir Geoffrey Palmer have to say about it, I wonder?
Somewhat irrelevant now that he has been out of politics for 30 years.
Post by James Christophers
In any case, it seems inconceivable that Ardern - an accidental PM
and total neophyte at the time of the Coalition agreement - would not
have been advised not to agree to relinquish her supreme authority to
such an extent that she cannot operate within her democratic mandate
with complete freedom. It's not as though such 'obvious' advice
wasn't to hand at the time.

The situation after the 2017 election was a perfect political storm.
NZF held the balance of power plus Labour and the Greens could
combine with NZF to form a government for the first time since the
2008 election.

The fact that Ardern has said, in the article I cited in my OP, that
she cannot discipline NZF ministers is testament to the existence of
an unpublished Coalition Agreement. Ardern does have the power to
discipline ALL cabinet ministers.


--
Crash McBash
James Christophers
2020-03-10 00:51:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:26:09 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt
Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.
"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<
She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.
Or even standing him down?
If so, in any parliamentary democracy, wouldn't that amount to a coalition partner being free to muzzle and frustrate with impunity not only the PM but also compromise entire ethos of the parliamentary process and the nature of democracy itself?
That would appear to be true.
So if, as seems, the nation's democratic processes are being compromised **along with our diplomatic relations with another country, I'd have thought that, simply in the name of the Queen, the GG would assert her position and summon both the PM and maybe also to leaders of her coalition partners to Government House. Otherwise the current impasse makes nothing but a mockery of both the Crown and our parliamentary governance and can only bring the nation into disrepute.
Post by Crash
Post by James Christophers
What would Sir Geoffrey Palmer have to say about it, I wonder?
Somewhat irrelevant now that he has been out of politics for 30 years.
Out of politics and politicking, yes, but as far as I know he's still regarded as this country's **go-to** constitutional expert. I reckon he'd have a lucid, cogent summation of where Parliament and the government are at in this débâcle and what realistic options - if any - Arden now has.
Post by Crash
Post by James Christophers
In any case, it seems inconceivable that Ardern - an accidental PM
and total neophyte at the time of the Coalition agreement - would not
have been advised not to agree to relinquish her supreme authority to
such an extent that she cannot operate within her democratic mandate
with complete freedom. It's not as though such 'obvious' advice
wasn't to hand at the time.
The situation after the 2017 election was a perfect political storm.
NZF held the balance of power plus Labour and the Greens could
combine with NZF to form a government for the first time since the
2008 election.
The fact that Ardern has said, in the article I cited in my OP, that
she cannot discipline NZF ministers is testament to the existence of
an unpublished Coalition Agreement. Ardern does have the power to
discipline ALL cabinet ministers.
The exercise of that power are her constitutional right and duty.

That being so - and with Ardern nevertheless seemingly dis-empowered, possibly by her own hand - if it is not for the GG now to take the initiative under the powers **the Crown** has delegated to her, then who?

Ardern's compromised situation or no, we're talking here about **the Queen's** parliament, not the idle plaything of some ragged-arsed, full-of-himself MP who's out for no one but Shane Jones, his overweening conceits having blinded him to the critical consequences that must inevitably follow from his gratuitously indecorous behaviour.

However, as an afterthought: if Jones had spoken of people from India rather than mere "Indians" would that still have been racist? After all, suppose he had spoken in exactly the same terms about people from the UK or some other predominantly anglo-saxon culture and origin....still a racist, would you say?
Crash
2020-03-10 04:27:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 17:51:44 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:26:09 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt
Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.
"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<
She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.
Or even standing him down?
If so, in any parliamentary democracy, wouldn't that amount to a coalition partner being free to muzzle and frustrate with impunity not only the PM but also compromise entire ethos of the parliamentary process and the nature of democracy itself?
That would appear to be true.
So if, as seems, the nation's democratic processes are being compromised **along with our
diplomatic relations with another country, I'd have thought that, simply in the name of the
Queen, the GG would assert her position and summon both the PM and maybe also to
leaders of her coalition partners to Government House. Otherwise the current impasse makes
nothing but a mockery of both the Crown and our parliamentary governance and can only bring
the nation into disrepute.
Post by Crash
Post by James Christophers
What would Sir Geoffrey Palmer have to say about it, I wonder?
Somewhat irrelevant now that he has been out of politics for 30 years.
Out of politics and politicking, yes, but as far as I know he's still regarded as this country's
**go-to** constitutional expert. I reckon he'd have a lucid, cogent summation of where
Parliament and the government are at in this débâcle and what realistic options - if any - Arden now has.
Post by Crash
Post by James Christophers
In any case, it seems inconceivable that Ardern - an accidental PM
and total neophyte at the time of the Coalition agreement - would not
have been advised not to agree to relinquish her supreme authority to
such an extent that she cannot operate within her democratic mandate
with complete freedom. It's not as though such 'obvious' advice
wasn't to hand at the time.
The situation after the 2017 election was a perfect political storm.
NZF held the balance of power plus Labour and the Greens could
combine with NZF to form a government for the first time since the
2008 election.
The fact that Ardern has said, in the article I cited in my OP, that
she cannot discipline NZF ministers is testament to the existence of
an unpublished Coalition Agreement. Ardern does have the power to
discipline ALL cabinet ministers.
The exercise of that power are her constitutional right and duty.
That being so - and with Ardern nevertheless seemingly dis-empowered, possibly
by her own hand - if it is not for the GG now to take the initiative under
the powers **the Crown** has delegated to her, then who?
If I recall correctly the GG (on behalf of the Crown) will only
intervene if Government either cannot function or cannot command the
confidence of the house. This is not currently the case.
Post by James Christophers
Ardern's compromised situation or no, we're talking here about **the Queen's** parliament,
not the idle plaything of some ragged-arsed, full-of-himself MP who's out for no
one but Shane Jones, his overweening conceits having blinded him to the critical
consequences that must inevitably follow from his gratuitously indecorous behaviour.
However, as an afterthought: if Jones had spoken of people from India rather than
mere "Indians" would that still have been racist? After all, suppose he had spoken
in exactly the same terms about people from the UK or some other predominantly
anglo-saxon culture and origin....still a racist, would you say?
Yes. He would need to have moderated his language to refer to
immigrants, which is sufficiently generic to outline his views but not
at all sufficient to get him the attention his racist comments got. As
you infer, Jones comments were not to identify a problem that needed
fixing - they were to get media attention on a subject that would gain
him media exposure.


--
Crash McBash

Crash
2020-03-10 00:01:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Mar 2020 13:26:09 -0700 (PDT), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/120062775/government-reassures-indian-high-commissioner-after-shane-jones-comments-cause-hurt
Now I am not commenting here on the aftermath of Jones indefensible
comments. They are clearly racist.
Ardern, in an interview with the Indian Weekender, said she given the
strongest condemnation possible over the comments.
"If I had a member in my own party making statements like that I would
have a very obvious ability and course of action that I could take. I
could demote, I could reprimand," she said.
<<<<<
She quite clearly can stand down or dismiss (cabinet minister) Shane
Jones for comments that are quite demonstrably causing the Government
a problem with diplomacy with India. She is either ignorant of her
options (impossible given access she has to advisors) or there is a
second unpublished Coalition agreement that prohibits her from
dismissing Jones.
Or even standing him down?
If so, in any parliamentary democracy, wouldn't that amount to a coalition partner being free
to muzzle and frustrate with impunity not only the PM but also compromise entire ethos of the
parliamentary process and the nature of democracy itself?
That would appear to be true.
Post by James Christophers
What would Sir Geoffrey Palmer have to say about it, I wonder?
Somewhat irrelevant now that he has been out of politics for 30 years.
Post by James Christophers
In any case, it seems inconceivable that Ardern - an accidental PM and total neophyte at the
time of the Coalition agreement - would not have been advised not to agree to relinquish her
supreme authority to such an extent that she cannot operate within her democratic mandate
with complete freedom. It's not as though such 'obvious' advice wasn't to hand at the time.
The situation after the 2017 election was a perfect political storm.
NZF held the balance of power plus Labour and the Greens could
combine with NZF to form a government for the first time since the
2008 election.

The fact that Ardern has said, in the article I cited in my OP, that
she cannot discipline NZF ministers is testament to the existence of
an unpublished Coalition Agreement. Ardern does have the power to
discipline ALL cabinet ministers.


--
Crash McBash
Loading...