From Newsgroup: nz.general

From the outset I had doubts that this Government would complete its
term. Now though I am optimistic it will make it to the 2026
election.

The reasons for this are that:

- Winston and NZ First have moderated their behaviour, partly because
they are 1 of 3 partners whereas in the past they have been 1 of 2, or
not in a coalition. Winston has learnt from his mistakes that lead to
the 2 terms where NZF was not in Parliament.

- ACT have tested the limits with their Treaty Principles Bill. This
was always going to test the Government not because of its merits or
otherwise but because it provided an over-riding focus to
Labour/Greens/Maori Party to irrational opposition. This Bill was
never going to be passed but opposition to it galvanised a
determination by the current Government to withstand the reaction.

- National have an inexperienced but moderate political leader.
However he is very experienced in leadership in the business world
where an ability to create business success from a management team
that has disparate views of success has been evident. Luxon has
always voluntarily moved on from business leadership roles including
his exit into politics.

All the opposition parties cannot match the calibre of MPs that
National and ACT have - being dominated by those who chose to become
an MP after careers in private employment. While both parties have
career MPs, they are few in number.

So the current Government is most likely to continue in office to the
next election. Given that the alternative is a
Labour/Watermelons/Maori Party Government it is my fervent hope that
National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.
--
Crash McBash
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 20:38:14 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

From the outset I had doubts that this Government would complete its
term. Now though I am optimistic it will make it to the 2026
election.

The reasons for this are that:

- Winston and NZ First have moderated their behaviour, partly because
they are 1 of 3 partners whereas in the past they have been 1 of 2, or
not in a coalition. Winston has learnt from his mistakes that lead to
the 2 terms where NZF was not in Parliament.

- ACT have tested the limits with their Treaty Principles Bill. This
was always going to test the Government not because of its merits or >otherwise but because it provided an over-riding focus to
Labour/Greens/Maori Party to irrational opposition. This Bill was
never going to be passed but opposition to it galvanised a
determination by the current Government to withstand the reaction.

- National have an inexperienced but moderate political leader.
However he is very experienced in leadership in the business world
where an ability to create business success from a management team
that has disparate views of success has been evident. Luxon has
always voluntarily moved on from business leadership roles including
his exit into politics.

All the opposition parties cannot match the calibre of MPs that
National and ACT have - being dominated by those who chose to become
an MP after careers in private employment. While both parties have
career MPs, they are few in number.

So the current Government is most likely to continue in office to the
next election. Given that the alternative is a
Labour/Watermelons/Maori Party Government it is my fervent hope that
National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.

https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360765524/poll-suggests-national-headed-one-term-government
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 20:38:14 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

From the outset I had doubts that this Government would complete its
term. Now though I am optimistic it will make it to the 2026
election.

The reasons for this are that:

- Winston and NZ First have moderated their behaviour, partly because
they are 1 of 3 partners whereas in the past they have been 1 of 2, or
not in a coalition. Winston has learnt from his mistakes that lead to
the 2 terms where NZF was not in Parliament.

- ACT have tested the limits with their Treaty Principles Bill. This
was always going to test the Government not because of its merits or >>otherwise but because it provided an over-riding focus to >>Labour/Greens/Maori Party to irrational opposition. This Bill was
never going to be passed but opposition to it galvanised a
determination by the current Government to withstand the reaction.

- National have an inexperienced but moderate political leader.
However he is very experienced in leadership in the business world
where an ability to create business success from a management team
that has disparate views of success has been evident. Luxon has
always voluntarily moved on from business leadership roles including
his exit into politics.

All the opposition parties cannot match the calibre of MPs that
National and ACT have - being dominated by those who chose to become
an MP after careers in private employment. While both parties have
career MPs, they are few in number.

So the current Government is most likely to continue in office to the
next election. Given that the alternative is a
Labour/Watermelons/Maori Party Government it is my fervent hope that >>National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.

https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360765524/poll-suggests-national-headed-one-term-government

Believing in polls is a pointless exercise. They are rarely correct in the middle of a term and often wrong at all stages.
Addressing Crash's very valid points would be far more sensible.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 21:22:36 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 20:38:14 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

From the outset I had doubts that this Government would complete its
term. Now though I am optimistic it will make it to the 2026
election.

The reasons for this are that:

- Winston and NZ First have moderated their behaviour, partly because
they are 1 of 3 partners whereas in the past they have been 1 of 2, or
not in a coalition. Winston has learnt from his mistakes that lead to
the 2 terms where NZF was not in Parliament.

- ACT have tested the limits with their Treaty Principles Bill. This
was always going to test the Government not because of its merits or >>otherwise but because it provided an over-riding focus to >>Labour/Greens/Maori Party to irrational opposition. This Bill was
never going to be passed but opposition to it galvanised a
determination by the current Government to withstand the reaction.

- National have an inexperienced but moderate political leader.
However he is very experienced in leadership in the business world
where an ability to create business success from a management team
that has disparate views of success has been evident. Luxon has
always voluntarily moved on from business leadership roles including
his exit into politics.

All the opposition parties cannot match the calibre of MPs that
National and ACT have - being dominated by those who chose to become
an MP after careers in private employment. While both parties have
career MPs, they are few in number.

So the current Government is most likely to continue in office to the
next election. Given that the alternative is a
Labour/Watermelons/Maori Party Government it is my fervent hope that >>National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.

https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360765524/poll-suggests-national-headed-one-term-government

Rich you seem to have issues with comprehension. I was not commenting
in any way what the result of the next election might be. Read my
post again and try to understand the point I am making.
--
Crash McBash
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

... it is my fervent hope that
National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.

The key word being "fervent" -- a roundabout acknowledgement that NZF
is riding high in the polls and that current polls show *no chance*
that Nats & ACT can field the votes to form a government without NZF.
Why is NZF riding high? Because Luxon is such an enormous wimp.

The danger is that Luxon will prefer a coalition with Labour to
another one with ACT & NZF. That would tear the Nats in half. Don't
put it past him, that's how wet Luxon is.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Wed, 23 Jul 2025 05:26:54 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

... it is my fervent hope that
National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.

The key word being "fervent" -- a roundabout acknowledgement that NZF
is riding high in the polls and that current polls show *no chance*
that Nats & ACT can field the votes to form a government without NZF.
Why is NZF riding high? Because Luxon is such an enormous wimp.

The danger is that Luxon will prefer a coalition with Labour to
another one with ACT & NZF. That would tear the Nats in half. Don't
put it past him, that's how wet Luxon is.

I hear you Willy but I don't think Luxon is silly enough to entertain
the notion of a coalition with Labour. NZF have been dumped from
Parliament before and not because of a dominant National leader.

Equally Labour would only consider this if they are the dominant
player considering an alternative to coalition with the Maori Party
and possibly the Watermelons.

I think we can agree that National need to do more to ditch the
'Labour-lite' moniker. Luxon is not the leader to do that - he
probably does not even recognise National have this issue.
--
Crash McBash
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On 2025-07-23, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

On Wed, 23 Jul 2025 05:26:54 GMT, wn@nosuch.com (Willy Nilly) wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

... it is my fervent hope that
National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.

The key word being "fervent" -- a roundabout acknowledgement that NZF
is riding high in the polls and that current polls show *no chance*
that Nats & ACT can field the votes to form a government without NZF.
Why is NZF riding high? Because Luxon is such an enormous wimp.

The danger is that Luxon will prefer a coalition with Labour to
another one with ACT & NZF. That would tear the Nats in half. Don't
put it past him, that's how wet Luxon is.

I hear you Willy but I don't think Luxon is silly enough to entertain
the notion of a coalition with Labour. NZF have been dumped from
Parliament before and not because of a dominant National leader.

It is unlikely as National and Labour are rivals and could not stand a coalition with each other. It is also a numbers game, unless ACT, NZF, get
more seats closer to National, it is going to be a National or Labour led Government. with the minor parties topping the numbers over into power.

Equally Labour would only consider this if they are the dominant
player considering an alternative to coalition with the Maori Party
and possibly the Watermelons.

I think we can agree that National need to do more to ditch the
'Labour-lite' moniker.

Nationals survival depends on it. The public like an alternative to vote
for. NZF has risen in the poles as they are the (anti woke) alternative.

Luxon is not the leader to do that - he
probably does not even recognise National have this issue.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Wed, 23 Jul 2025 14:07:20 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 21:22:36 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 20:38:14 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:

From the outset I had doubts that this Government would complete its >>>term. Now though I am optimistic it will make it to the 2026
election.

The reasons for this are that:

- Winston and NZ First have moderated their behaviour, partly because >>>they are 1 of 3 partners whereas in the past they have been 1 of 2, or >>>not in a coalition. Winston has learnt from his mistakes that lead to >>>the 2 terms where NZF was not in Parliament.

- ACT have tested the limits with their Treaty Principles Bill. This
was always going to test the Government not because of its merits or >>>otherwise but because it provided an over-riding focus to >>>Labour/Greens/Maori Party to irrational opposition. This Bill was
never going to be passed but opposition to it galvanised a
determination by the current Government to withstand the reaction.

- National have an inexperienced but moderate political leader.
However he is very experienced in leadership in the business world
where an ability to create business success from a management team
that has disparate views of success has been evident. Luxon has
always voluntarily moved on from business leadership roles including
his exit into politics.

All the opposition parties cannot match the calibre of MPs that
National and ACT have - being dominated by those who chose to become
an MP after careers in private employment. While both parties have >>>career MPs, they are few in number.

So the current Government is most likely to continue in office to the >>>next election. Given that the alternative is a
Labour/Watermelons/Maori Party Government it is my fervent hope that >>>National and ACT will form the next government with
confidence-and-supply from NZ First.

https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360765524/poll-suggests-national-headed-one-term-government

Rich you seem to have issues with comprehension. I was not commenting
in any way what the result of the next election might be. Read my
post again and try to understand the point I am making.

Winston and Shane are well aware that this may be their last term in
government - they are going all out to raise as much money as possible
to enrich either themselves or the party - Casey Costello would
probably be happier in ACT, and the rest don't count. There was
speculation that Winston could trigger an early election, but I doubt
that will happen - he is likely to be a last resort but is unlikely to
get as many MPs next time.

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill -
disliked by a large number of National supporters, and detested by the
legal profession and the public service; it is shaping to give
National about the only boost they are likely to get in support from
those who are realising that not only is ACT pushing extreme far-right
Atlas policies, but that they have infiltrated both National and NZ
First with Ministers (Costello and Willis, with Luxon 'happy to go
along' . . .) and persuaded others through support on policy and
funding to other MPs (NZ Taxpayer 'Union', and The NZ Initiative), and traditional National Supporters are realising that National policies
have been distorted.

Luxon has had little leadership experience - he floated through his
time at Air NZ, and contrary to his assertions he has no experience
with mergers and takeovers. He is being led through this term, but the
party must be looking for a replacement. I suspect the publicity from
Collins about the changes to voting rules is partly standard National
Practice of delaying such reports as long as possible, but also a
start to separating herself from the extremism that Luxon does not
even recognise. There is a chance of Luxon 'doing a John Key'
retirement to let someone else through, but that did not go well with
Bill English, and they may have left that too late even now.

So Crash, you say that "the current Government is most likely to
continue in office to the next election" - I suspect that is because
they are not prepared to make the changes they need to make to replace
people and refresh their Cabinet; and that makes it less likely that
they will win the next election. Luxon is a very weak leader, but they
do not appear to have an alternative. Polls measure opinions now, not
at the next election as the url implies, but that poor result after so
many other poor results do make it likely that we will return to a
Labour-led government after the next election - I can see them having
a very legislation programme of reversing many ACT-led policies
immediately they are confirmed to have won the election.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like?

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:17:43 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >>disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like?

It is going the other way - a very Trumpian attempt to put all the
power in one Minister, but also to dictate major policy changes
without having to go through Parliament. Very far-right atlas
policies.

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.

They are making an attempt to reduce participation in voting, too, but
I suspect that one will not go through - they are starting to have to
think about something that ma make ordinary people vote for them . . .
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:17:43 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >>>disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like?

It is going the other way - a very Trumpian attempt to put all the
power in one Minister, but also to dictate major policy changes
without having to go through Parliament. Very far-right atlas
policies.

That is the worst and most transparent lie you have said in months.
You must really haet this country very much.

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.

They are making an attempt to reduce participation in voting, too, but
I suspect that one will not go through - they are starting to have to
think about something that ma make ordinary people vote for them . . .

Another laughable lie.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:22:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:17:43 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >>>>disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like?

It is going the other way - a very Trumpian attempt to put all the
power in one Minister, but also to dictate major policy changes
without having to go through Parliament. Very far-right atlas
policies.

That is the worst and most transparent lie you have said in months.
You must really haet this country very much.

I would not go that far Tony but Rich is becoming far more fanatical
in his posts, to the point where engagement in debate is futile.

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.

They are making an attempt to reduce participation in voting, too, but
I suspect that one will not go through - they are starting to have to
think about something that ma make ordinary people vote for them . . . >Another laughable lie.

Correct. Closing the electoral rolls prior to a general election
makes sense and requires only that those who need to enroll or change electorates simply do so before the rolls close.

Clearly when enrolling for the first time there is a significant
administrative effort to ensure the validity of the enrollment. If
changing electorates the administrative effort is less but it is still
there. Both can be done anytime and outside the election cycles for
central and local government. The only people disadvantaged by these
changes are those that do not get organised as they should.
--
Crash McBash
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 09:17:40 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:22:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:17:43 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >>>>>disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like?

It is going the other way - a very Trumpian attempt to put all the
power in one Minister, but also to dictate major policy changes
without having to go through Parliament. Very far-right atlas
policies.

That is the worst and most transparent lie you have said in months.
You must really haet this country very much.

I would not go that far Tony but Rich is becoming far more fanatical
in his posts, to the point where engagement in debate is futile.

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.

They are making an attempt to reduce participation in voting, too, but
I suspect that one will not go through - they are starting to have to >>>think about something that ma make ordinary people vote for them . . . >>Another laughable lie.

Correct. Closing the electoral rolls prior to a general election
makes sense and requires only that those who need to enroll or change >electorates simply do so before the rolls close.

Clearly when enrolling for the first time there is a significant >administrative effort to ensure the validity of the enrollment. If
changing electorates the administrative effort is less but it is still
there. Both can be done anytime and outside the election cycles for
central and local government. The only people disadvantaged by these
changes are those that do not get organised as they should.

To get back to the Subject of the thread, it is sad that the
government appears to believe that they need to exclude around 100,000
from voting due to not being sufficiently 'organised', to make the
survival of the coalition government "likely". Not all of those votes
would have been for the current opposition parties - it does indicate
that they - or at least Seymour and Peters are running a bit more
scared than they used to be. There is very little administrative
effort in ensuring validity of enrolments, but with the timing of
elections there are often families and students that are in the
process of moving before Christmas.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 13:37:07 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 09:17:40 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:22:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:17:43 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >>>>>>disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like? >>>>It is going the other way - a very Trumpian attempt to put all the >>>>power in one Minister, but also to dictate major policy changes

without having to go through Parliament. Very far-right atlas
policies.

That is the worst and most transparent lie you have said in months.
You must really haet this country very much.

I would not go that far Tony but Rich is becoming far more fanatical
in his posts, to the point where engagement in debate is futile.

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.

They are making an attempt to reduce participation in voting, too, but >>>>I suspect that one will not go through - they are starting to have to >>>>think about something that ma make ordinary people vote for them . . . >>>Another laughable lie.

Correct. Closing the electoral rolls prior to a general election
makes sense and requires only that those who need to enroll or change >>electorates simply do so before the rolls close.

Clearly when enrolling for the first time there is a significant >>administrative effort to ensure the validity of the enrollment. If >>changing electorates the administrative effort is less but it is still >>there. Both can be done anytime and outside the election cycles for >>central and local government. The only people disadvantaged by these >>changes are those that do not get organised as they should.

To get back to the Subject of the thread, it is sad that the
government appears to believe that they need to exclude around 100,000
from voting due to not being sufficiently 'organised', to make the
survival of the coalition government "likely". Not all of those votes
would have been for the current opposition parties - it does indicate
that they - or at least Seymour and Peters are running a bit more
scared than they used to be. There is very little administrative
effort in ensuring validity of enrolments, but with the timing of
elections there are often families and students that are in the
process of moving before Christmas.

Read my OP again. The original subject of this thread was the
Government survival to the next election, not beyond it. Note that in
this sub thread BR trimmed prior posts as normal. You are therefore
not returning to my OP.
--
Crash McBash
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 09:17:40 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:22:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:17:43 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >>>>>>disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like? >>>>It is going the other way - a very Trumpian attempt to put all the >>>>power in one Minister, but also to dictate major policy changes

without having to go through Parliament. Very far-right atlas
policies.

That is the worst and most transparent lie you have said in months.
You must really haet this country very much.

I would not go that far Tony but Rich is becoming far more fanatical
in his posts, to the point where engagement in debate is futile.

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.

They are making an attempt to reduce participation in voting, too, but >>>>I suspect that one will not go through - they are starting to have to >>>>think about something that ma make ordinary people vote for them . . . >>>Another laughable lie.

Correct. Closing the electoral rolls prior to a general election
makes sense and requires only that those who need to enroll or change >>electorates simply do so before the rolls close.

Clearly when enrolling for the first time there is a significant >>administrative effort to ensure the validity of the enrollment. If >>changing electorates the administrative effort is less but it is still >>there. Both can be done anytime and outside the election cycles for >>central and local government. The only people disadvantaged by these >>changes are those that do not get organised as they should.

To get back to the Subject of the thread, it is sad that the
government appears to believe that they need to exclude around 100,000
from voting due to not being sufficiently 'organised', to make the
survival of the coalition government "likely". Not all of those votes
would have been for the current opposition parties - it does indicate
that they - or at least Seymour and Peters are running a bit more
scared than they used to be. There is very little administrative
effort in ensuring validity of enrolments, but with the timing of
elections there are often families and students that are in the
process of moving before Christmas.

Off topic.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 08:22:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 17:17:43 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:

On Mon, 28 Jul 2025 16:20:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

ACT are testing limits much more with the regulatory standards bill - >>>>>disliked by a large number of National supporters,

Pushing back against the excesses of government. What's not to like?

It is going the other way - a very Trumpian attempt to put all the
power in one Minister, but also to dictate major policy changes
without having to go through Parliament. Very far-right atlas
policies.

That is the worst and most transparent lie you have said in months.
You must really haet this country very much.

I would not go that far Tony

I was being kind Crash!!!

but Rich is becoming far more fanatical
in his posts, to the point where engagement in debate is futile.

I suspect the combination of old age, poor intellect, low morality and years of
failing to defend the indefensible.
Must be quite a burden.

and detested by the legal profession and the public service;

Good to see they are pissing off the right people.

Bill.

They are making an attempt to reduce participation in voting, too, but
I suspect that one will not go through - they are starting to have to >>>think about something that ma make ordinary people vote for them . . . >>Another laughable lie.

Correct. Closing the electoral rolls prior to a general election
makes sense and requires only that those who need to enroll or change >electorates simply do so before the rolls close.

Clearly when enrolling for the first time there is a significant >administrative effort to ensure the validity of the enrollment. If
changing electorates the administrative effort is less but it is still
there. Both can be done anytime and outside the election cycles for
central and local government. The only people disadvantaged by these
changes are those that do not get organised as they should.

--
Crash McBash

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: nz.general

On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 13:37:07 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

To get back to the Subject of the thread, it is sad that the
government appears to believe that they need to exclude around 100,000
from voting due to not being sufficiently 'organised', to make the
survival of the coalition government "likely".

If there are 100,000 people who are too lazy or too stupid to enrol as
voters a couple of weeks before an election, then that's 100,000
people who are too lazy or too stupid to come up with an informed
opinion.

Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2