I hadn't noticed previously, but on Tuesday Parliament voted to suspend Standing Orders, to allow the introduction of an omnibus bill to rework a lot of the laws around local government. The motion to suspend standing orders passed by only 67-52. The reason it was required is that standing orders specifically prevent omnibus bills (it states that bills must relate to one subject area only) except under very limited circumstances (such as non-contraversial Statutes Amendments Bills).
The bill that the Government has now introduced would amend the following laws: Rates Rebate Act 1973, Dog Control Act 1996, Litter Act 1979, Local Electoral Act 2001, Local Government Act 2002, Local Government Act 1974, Local Government Amendment Act 1992, Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, Auckland War Memorial Museum Act 1996 and the Land Transport Act 1998.
I proposed recently some changes the Standing Orders specifically to reduce the use of urgency, one of which, was to require changes to, or suspensions of, Standing Orders only to be done on motions with notice, and such motions would require a 66% super-majority.
The problem here is that by suspending standing orders, the Government is making a mockery of Parliament's rules. Standing Orders are there to govern how Parliament is run, and specifically to protect the rights of the minority. Why on earth does it bother with rules against things such as omnibus bills if the Government of the day can override them with a simple majority?
While this specific omnibus bill may not be terribly serious (I haven't seen it yet, so don't know what it actually does), the precedent set is very dangerous. It is a precedent that the Government of the day can just ignore standing orders, and make whatever changes they want.
Standing Orders are there to protect the rights of the minority - they should not be able to changed or suspended on the whim of the majority. That defeats their purpose. They should be changed to require at least a 66% super-majority to subsequently change or suspend them.Microsoft ISA Server crack
The bill that the Government has now introduced would amend the following laws: Rates Rebate Act 1973, Dog Control Act 1996, Litter Act 1979, Local Electoral Act 2001, Local Government Act 2002, Local Government Act 1974, Local Government Amendment Act 1992, Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, Auckland War Memorial Museum Act 1996 and the Land Transport Act 1998.
I proposed recently some changes the Standing Orders specifically to reduce the use of urgency, one of which, was to require changes to, or suspensions of, Standing Orders only to be done on motions with notice, and such motions would require a 66% super-majority.
The problem here is that by suspending standing orders, the Government is making a mockery of Parliament's rules. Standing Orders are there to govern how Parliament is run, and specifically to protect the rights of the minority. Why on earth does it bother with rules against things such as omnibus bills if the Government of the day can override them with a simple majority?
While this specific omnibus bill may not be terribly serious (I haven't seen it yet, so don't know what it actually does), the precedent set is very dangerous. It is a precedent that the Government of the day can just ignore standing orders, and make whatever changes they want.
Standing Orders are there to protect the rights of the minority - they should not be able to changed or suspended on the whim of the majority. That defeats their purpose. They should be changed to require at least a 66% super-majority to subsequently change or suspend them.Microsoft ISA Server crack
Trackbacks
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.cloudsofheaven.org/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/59.Microsoft ISA Server crack