Comments on: Another parliamentary blog

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 04:40:16 +0000

How does a single chamber work in practice?

Steve

By: Glick

Glick — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:41:43 +0000

Nick: It depends what value you put on issues such as ensuring the maintenance of jury trials.

Lord Norton, I notice that people are currently being prosecuted where there is no jury. A law passed by the Lords.

By: Glick

Glick — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:40:49 +0000

Frank Field is become even more of a Joke.

If you look at his website he doesn’t even understand the difference between debt and deficit.

Currently its that the government plans to halve the debt in 4 years.

By: tim garbutt

tim garbutt — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:23:59 +0000

A point for Kiwi’s and UK Lords: why is Infratil New Zealand’s largest aviation company removing noise and air monitors from Manston airport expansion in Kent with the help of the local council? When the airport is slated for expansion.

Aren’t noise and air monitoring tightly regulated to prevent cancer etc?

Are they doing the same at Rotorua and Prestwick and Lubeck?

On the UK Lords why doesn’t each Lord have an email? Whenever I write to non-email Lords, the admin dept refuses to pass them on or asks for a fax.

And why aren’t all Lords costs, expenses etc published in detail eg staff lsitings, dept costs and so on.

The same should apply to all public bodies – as we’ve seen with MP’s expenses and Lords houses greater scrutiny is required.

Less secrecy and greater access and accountability should ensure we have a Parliament that is more efficient and effectve.

Tim

By: Sapient

Sapient — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 04:42:13 +0000

But then again we in New Zealand have the potential for a ‘crisis of the blue eyed babies’ because out house has no other house to keep it in check and our one remaining check and balance, the queen, will not jump in to stop any legislation.
As much as I do like a unicameral system, when we go republic, and we will when succession comes around, we will need to introduce some form of head of state and a constitutional court; a second house could function well in this respect.

By: Bedd Gelert

Bedd Gelert — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:07:44 +0000

Interesting debate on Newsnight about the sex trade and trafficking..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8318629.stm

Possibly more entertaining than informative and a bit more heat than light. But an early warning of the upcoming debates on these issues.

By: nick

nick — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:40:22 +0000

Jury trials?

Parking, motoring offences. You are guilty until proven innocent. Where is my option for a jury trial.

Ah yes, you’ve abolished them.

Now lets predict your answer. It’s the cost.

Abolish the lords on cost grounds? No, too important to keep.

That sort of argument is rather hypocritical if you try and use it.

Nick

By: lordnorton

lordnorton — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:31:46 +0000

Nick: It depends what value you put on issues such as ensuring the maintenance of jury trials.

By: ZAROVE

ZAROVE — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:39:03 +0000

Sev, sorry, I forgot the history a bit. Must have it confused with another state.

By: Wolfgang

Wolfgang — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 12:55:58 +0000

Well, perhaps you can say why a larger country needs more laws than a smaller country?

I do not see why New Zealand needs less laws than the UK. Why the USA should have more laws than the UK.

Why does the size of the country mean more laws, and therefore more Lords etc.