Filibustering to preserve foolishness

Is the bill allowing students freedom of association really the most important piece of legislation for Labour?

It must be when their serial filibustering is wasting $453,000 for every hour parliament sits.

Meanwhile the Otago University Students Association shows why voluntary membership should be permitted.

Among the issues its memberswere asked to consider in a recent referendum was:

Should OUSA adopt the following as external policy: ‘That OUSA opposes factory farming and the sale of factory farmed products (including eggs, chicken and pig products) and therefore requests that all campus food outlets use free-range products?’

Yes 1616 (74%)
No 573 (26%)
Total votes 2189
Total present 2606 (quorum met)

Otago has about 20,000 students. Only a little more than 10% of them bothered to vote and now they’ve been lumbered with this policy which has nothing to do with education or student welfare which ought to be OUSA’s core business.

It doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with animal welfare either, it’s a policy based more on emotion than reason.

If it was implemented it would add significant costs to the food available on campus which is something the OUSA would be concerned about if it cared more for its members than political crusades.

11 Responses to Filibustering to preserve foolishness

  1. robertguyton says:

    Naughty Labour, doing the kinds of things Oppositions do!
    They should just lie down, like whipped curs, and take whatever National serves up.
    I just can’t understand their disrespectful behaviour!
    Your $453,000 claim is a con Ele.


  2. gravedodger says:

    So long as Labour and their lapdogs continue to recruit most of their talent (term used advisedly) from this fertile training ground while they ignore those of the population who have succeeded in the real world, they will fight tooth and nail to retain the compulsorily funded USA.
    How else could they afford this obvious source of their new blood.


  3. homepaddock says:

    Filibustering is a time-honoured Opposition tactic Robert. It’s not that Labour is doing it it’s the length of time they’re doing it to this particularly piece of legislation.

    They’re not only delaying it they’re holding up all sorts of other legislation including their own members’ bills.


  4. The cost of those hours was $453K, but that’s not an opportunity cost; the same cost would be incurred even if they were doing other stuff. Rather, the opportunity cost is the members’ bills that weren’t debated or passed during the fillibuster. Mileage varies on whether that’s a cost or a benefit.


  5. homepaddock says:

    “Mileage varies on whether that’s a cost or a benefit.”

    When some of the bills not debated include those of Labour MPs, it must be a cost to them. It could well be a benefit to the rest of us 🙂


  6. robertguyton says:

    What’s best is an Opposition showing that it can thwart an un-democractic Government.


  7. homepaddock says:

    It’s a private member’s bill not a government one, Robert.


  8. gravedodger says:

    Robert you don’even hit the target and the range is almost point blank.
    Undemocratic? complete bolllocks, this is a bill proposed by a member of a minor party in the governing coalition and if Sir Rodger’s prints wern’t all over it I suspect the majority party in that coalition may well have overcome the fillibuster easily under standing orders, then your claim might have had some validity, albeit miniscule.
    You have a very selective recall as to what defines undemocratic behaviour in a sitting government, too often your pathological hatred of anything within the orbit of John Key’s administration is soo tiresome.
    If democracy has any part to play in freedom or vice versa, and I fervently believe it does, then this attempt to free non believers in the socialist utopia from being fleeced to support the recruitment pool of modern Labour then they deserve that freedom.
    Before you start claiming that the compulsory SU delivers valuable support to students then please tell me what they might deliver, that an intelligent (assumed) student couldnt access in the myriad of support services elsewhere in the bureaucracy, even the subsidised pissupps could be achieved elsewhere, however, finding anyone to fund the political activity would be nigh on impossible with the collapse of world communism.
    Margaret Thatcher said socialism will only last until they run out of other peoples money to FUND it.


  9. robertguyton says:

    Grave, me ol’ dodger. You miss the mark by a country mile. I’m not making referrence to this particular bill, but the general undemocratic behaviour of the national party in the House. Urgency anyone?
    Any Party that causes the rip-shit-and-bust Tories some grief/delay/irritation in there gives me cause to cheer. What comes around, goes around. I didn’t support Labour when they rammed stuff through, and I don’t support the Tories when they do the same.
    As to the SU, like MMP, could be improved, but the abolition of either is an ideological act and nothing to be proud of.


  10. gravedodger says:

    Robert correct me please.
    I understand this ACT sponsered bill only removes the compulsory funding by all students by a levy whether they wish it or not.
    It does not abolish the SU however if it can’t survive without the compulsory levy then so be it.


  11. robertguyton says:

    That’s right Gravy, ‘whether they wish it or not’.
    That’s unequivocal, eh!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: