-
01-03-2021, 03:05 PM
#661
Originally Posted by dobby41
They aren't!
What's in a name - as a support party Jacinda would have less interest in something like one of their members asking for preferential treatment at the border.
Which implies that she would "have interest" in one of her own party seeking preferential treatment?
-
01-03-2021, 03:34 PM
#662
Originally Posted by macduffy
Which implies that she would "have interest" in one of her own party seeking preferential treatment?
You'd think so (by 'own party' I would restrict that to MPs rather than any party member).
But asking for preferential treatment isn't a crime or morally reprehensible. Getting your mates to sign off on it and push it through wouldn't be a good look at all.
-
01-03-2021, 04:24 PM
#663
Originally Posted by dobby41
You have a habit of conflating things - I kept it to the topic at hand.
OK, dealt with that one so what about Trevor Mallard?
-
01-03-2021, 04:32 PM
#664
Originally Posted by dobby41
They aren't!
What's in a name - as a support party Jacinda would have less interest in something like one of their members asking for preferential treatment at the border.
Support party / coalition partner - it's a very fine line.
-
01-03-2021, 04:41 PM
#665
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
Support party / coalition partner - it's a very fine line.
Yes a very fine line esp when the support party has Ministerial portfolios. And a very fine line extremely carefully drawn.
-
01-03-2021, 06:05 PM
#666
Originally Posted by Balance
OK, dealt with that one so what about Trevor Mallard?
What was the question?
-
01-03-2021, 06:06 PM
#667
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
Support party / coalition partner - it's a very fine line.
Not so fine - one would have a coalition agreement with lots of stuff you promise to let them do and the other doesn't (Labour didn't need to make any compromises for a support agreement, especially when they don't need support).
-
01-03-2021, 06:08 PM
#668
Originally Posted by artemis
Yes a very fine line esp when the support party has Ministerial portfolios. And a very fine line extremely carefully drawn.
It was a good idea to pick people who were good for the job even if they aren't in your party.
It's a pity that we can't have the portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to.
-
01-03-2021, 06:09 PM
#669
Originally Posted by artemis
Yes a very fine line esp when the support party has Ministerial portfolios. And a very fine line extremely carefully drawn.
It was a good idea to pick people who were good for the job even if they aren't in your party.
It's a pity that we can't have the portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to.
-
02-03-2021, 07:20 AM
#670
Originally Posted by dobby41
It was a good idea to pick people who were good for the job even if they aren't in your party.
It's a pity that we can't have the portfolios being manned (personed) by the best people irrespective of which party they belonged to.
No reason that can't happen. How about Simon Bridges for Attorney General and Shane Reti for Minister of Health?
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks