No Right Turn, one of New Zealand's largest left-wing blogs, has launched its 2005 election candidate survey.

The candidate survey aims to canvass the views of electorate candidates on a range of liberal and human rights issues. Questions cover topics such as euthanasia, gay adoption, hate speech, and raising the drinking age, as well as the Ahmed Zaoui case.

"Any of these issues could be the subject of a conscience vote in the next Parliamentary term," said Idiot/Savant, blogger. "Having more information about candidate's views will help voters make an informed choice."

An initial batch of 160 surveys, covering all National and Labour and some minor party candidates, has already been emailed out. Other candidates will be surveyed as contact details come to hand. The aim is to build up a comprehensive picture of the views of those running for Parliament, so that voters can know what they are choosing between when they cast their vote.

The survey questions were compiled from suggestions by the blog's readership. The results will be published online, and used to compile a voting guide.

No Right Turn (http://norightturn.blogspot.com) is one of New Zealand's largest left-wing blogs. It focuses on New Zealand politics, as well as international issues relating to human rights and democracy. It also promotes democratic participation, by encouraging readers to lobby MPs, submit on legislation, and generally make their voice heard. The candidate survey is part of this project.

QUICK FACTS:

The No Right Turn 2005 election candidate survey;

* asks a variety of questions on issues such as euthanasia, gay adoption, hate speech, and the drinking age; * has already been sent to 160 candidates, and will eventually be sent to every candidate in every electorate; * will be used to compile a voting guide.

Dear candidate,

This Parliamentary term has seen a number of important conscience votes on issues such as civil unions, euthanasia and the decriminalisation of prostitution. As potential MP's, your views on similar issues are of interest to the wider public. The attached survey is an effort to gather information on some issues which might crop up in the next Parliamentary term, so as to allow voters in your electorate to make an informed choice about who to support.

So, please fill out the survey and email it back. It's an editable document, so there's no real limit on space. As the intention of this is to inform the wider public (and my readership in particular) of your views, the answers may be published, compared with the views of other candidates, used to compile a voting guide, or anything else that seems interesting. They may also be distributed to third parties for any of the above purposes.

If you prefer to do things in hardcopy, then you can print the survey and post it to 11 Palm Grove, Lower Hutt.

About the survey:

No Right Turn (http://norightturn.blogspot.com) is one of New Zealand's largest left-wing blogs. It focuses on New Zealand politics, as well as international issues relating to human rights and democracy. It also promotes democratic participation, by encouraging readers to lobby MPs, submit on legislation, and generally make their voice heard. The candidate survey is part of this project.

The survey questions were compiled by asking readers what they thought were important liberal and human rights issues which would crop up in the next Parliamentary term. Others were added in response to events, and in response to further feedback and comments from the readers. The resulting list is therefore representative of the issues my readers want to hear about and which could influence the way they vote.

If you have any questions about this survey, then feel free to contact me at idiotblogid@yahoo.co.uk

Idiot/Savant
No Right Turn - http://norightturn.blogspot.com

Name:

Electorate:

Party:

Please provide a short summary of your views on the following issues. Note that we are not just seeking a yes/no answer, but an idea of the reasons you have for your position. If you haven't yet decided where you stand, then say so; there's nothing wrong with taking time to consider something. If you'd rather not answer, just put "refuse to state".

Again, your answers (or refusal to answer) may be published.

If you could ensure the passage of one act on one issue in the next Parliament, what would it be?

What three other electoral candidates or sitting MPs do you think are most similar to you in their political views?

What three other electoral candidates or sitting MPs do you think are most similar to you in their political views?

Do you support or oppose:

...raising the drinking age?

...legalising marijuana (or pharmaceuticals based on it) for medical use?

...decriminalising or legalising marijuana for recreational use?

...allowing same-sex couples to adopt children?

...amending the Marriage Act to allow same-sex couples to marry?

...allowing voluntary euthanasia or physician assisted suicide?

...state funding of integrated schools?

...the retention of sedition as a crime in the Crimes Act?

...the retention of blasphemous libel as a crime in the Crimes Act?

...further restrictions on hate speech?

...the use of indefinite detention without trial for those subject to a security risk certificate?

...restoring the death penalty for serious crime?

...Georgina Beyer's Human Rights (Gender Identity) Amendment Bill?

...Gordon Copeland's New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill?

...entrenching the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act as supreme law?

...New Zealand's participation in the International Criminal Court?

...lowering MMP's threshold from the present 5%?

Finally,

With the benefit of hindsight, how should the government have handled the Ahmed Zaoui case?

Please email your responses to idiotblogid@yahoo.co.uk or post them to 11 Palm Grove, Lower Hutt.

© Scoop Media

Public Address Link:
A (Sweary) Analysis Of Urgency Abuse And
The Consititution

Keith Ng: You’re looking at the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) for the Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill. Basically, the courts said that the Government had to pay family members who looked after people with disabilities (because not doing so was discriminatory), so the Government passed this law to say: “Yeah nah.”

The RIS isn’t just redacted for the public – it was redacted for MPs. *Parliament* voted on this, with all the relevant facts blacked out.

Sure, it’s understandable, right? If you’re passing a law that’s really dodgy, you don’t want advice from civil servants saying “uh, this is pretty illegal” to be public. But actually, that’s not really a problem here, because in the same piece of legislation, THEY SAID THEY CAN’T BE TAKEN TO COURT. More>>