There’s already been a referendum

The petition seeking a referendum on the government’s policy to sell minority shares in a few energy companies was presented to parliament yesterday.

Parliamentary Services staff will now have to waste their time and our money ensuring the validity of the signatories.

They shouldn’t have to do it because Keeping Stock shows us there’s already been a referendum.

Labour’s then leader, Phil Goff said so.2011 referendum

Mr Goff said Prime Minister John Key had made this year’s election a referendum on whether New Zealanders wanted to see their most important assets being sold.

Perhaps the current leader, David Shearer, could explain why he’s wasting public money on another referendum when the 2011 was decisive.

And apropos of waste – does anyone know who paid for all those boxes in which the petition pages were delivered and the delivery?

6 Responses to There’s already been a referendum

  1. inventory2 says:

    More to the point Ele, how many trees does it take to produce enough sheets of petition paper for 390,000 signatures, and what impact will the Labour/Green petition have on New Zealand’s CO2 emissions?

    I always thought that the Greens were about saving the planet, but it turns out that they are just as hypocritical as those whom they rant and rave about.


  2. Andrei says:

    You do have to feel sorry for Labour. since under National all their policies are being enacted all they can do is to go for the hollow gesture as John Keys’s government out Helen Clarks, Helen Clark’s.


  3. TraceyS says:

    The papers could always be sent right back to the organisers for recycling after the signatures are counted.

    People should take responsibility for the rubbish they generate. Until they do, we will always have a waste problem.


  4. Cadwallader says:

    I am not traditionally a National Party voter but the “asset sales” was a carrot for me to become one. A question I’ve not seen adequately addressed by the msm is: What constitues an asset, and/or what constitues a liability?
    The sales need to go ahead without further hindrances.


  5. homepaddock says:

    Clark’s government increased the cost of the public services without improving service; Key’s has reduced the cost while maintaining services. If we’d continued with Clark’s level of spending the deficit would be increasing, under this government it’s decreasing and on track to surplus. Labour governments made no attempt to get those who could work to work, National is doing that.Labour would rather borrow more than sell minority shares in state assets. . .


  6. Roger says:

    As to your question Ele, “Ewen Mee pays, that’s who”

    Hear Hear Cadwallader


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: