HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: 19 September referendum
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:19:06 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <1992Sep1.071543.155@dde.dk> ct@dde.dk (Claus Tondering) writes:
> I may have missed some postings that discussed this subject, in
> which case I offer my apologies. However, I have just learned that
> on 19 September New Zealand is going to have a referendum on proportional
> representation in parliament.
> 
> What is the likely outcome of the referendum?

There are to be two questions:
 
The first asks if voters want to retain the present system or to change to
something else. 

The second question - which everyone can vote one regardless of the answer to
the first question - offer four options. Two of these are proportional and two
are not.
 
They are: Supplementary Member (similar to South Korea), Single Transferable
Vote (STV - as used in Ireland, Malta, Tasmania and others), Mixed Member
Proportional (Based on German voting system - was the unanimous recommendation
of a Royal Commission on the Electoral System in 1986), Preferential Voting
system (as used in Australia since 1912).
 
MMP is a the front runer among thereform option with support equal to all the
other option combined. What is not known is how those opposed to change will
vote. They may prove to be the largest single bloc, though nowhere near a
majority. They will act as a powerful obstacle to change.


> Will parliament be bound by the referendum?

Parliament is NOT bound by the referendum, but the government has given an
undertaking to hold another referendum at the next election between the
present system and the most popular alternative should a majority vote for
change.

> How will proportional representation work in NZ?

Half local, half list - similar to Germany.

> If approved, when will proportional representation take effect?

At the 1996 general elections.

Steve Withers
(former national secretary of the 
Electoral Reform Coalition)
 
-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | End the two-party duopoly. Vote 
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for the Mixed-Member Proportional 
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            | (MMP) voting system on Sept. 19th. 
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | Give yourself a vote that *counts*!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: Japanese Imports
From: thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle)
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 21:37:16 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.

In article <N8gFqB10w165w@sideways.welly.gen.nz> Bill Bennett <billy@sideways.welly.gen.nz> writes:
>Why should newer cars be safer? Take a look at a new japanese car and an 
>older American or European car. Which has the stronger body? Which is 
>less likely to crumble in a pile up? Sorry , new does not necessarily 
>equate with good.

Modern cars should be safer. They generally seem to have better brakes
and handling. Active safety is as important as passive safety.

More to the point, car designers have two choices.

They can design a car which will keep it's shape in an accident but
the expensive squidgy bits inside have slowed down with excessive
g-force loadings and are dead.

Alternatively, you can design a car with crumple zones and other such
stuff so that the car sacrifices itself in an attempt to keep the
people alive.

I'd choose option two myself...

>I don't argue with the economics. It probably does improve the quality 
>and value. It certainly makes sense. Yet, it sends a message to others 
>overseas that this is a third world country. Maybe it doesn't. Who knows?
>What do others think?

Omigod! Other countries might think we're a third world country!
Quick - bring in the $16,500 tariff so that New Zealanders can again
hold their heads up in the bortherhood of decent world citizens.

-- 
    Thomas Beagle | thomas@datamark.co.nz    or | A beagle a day keeps        
Datamark Intl Ltd | thomas@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz | the doctor at bay.
 Technical Writer | 		      Vote MMP!
From: smk1@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: Good on youpost
Date: 4 Sep 92 14:30:24 +1200
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1992Aug28.065951.24888@dde.dk>, ct@dde.dk (Claus Tondering) writes:
> Could someone please explain the New Zealand/Australian expression
> "Good on you!"?
> 
> Does it mean: "Something good happened to you" (i.e. you were fortunate)?
> Does it mean: "You did something good" (i.e. you were clever)?
> Or perhaps both?
> 
> -- 
> Claus Tondering
> Dansk Data Elektronik A/S, Herlev, Denmark
> E-mail: ct@dde.dk
>I too have pondered this NZ/OZ expression.  Instead of saying that something
you did was good, it seems to imply that something you are wearing looks
good on you.  I don't know.  But then I'm not a Kiwi. - Summer -
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
From: anorris@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Andrew Norris)
Subject: Re: Japanese Imports
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 19:06:14 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.180551.21472@leland.Stanford.EDU> davidnz@leland.Stanford.EDU (David Richard Bell) writes:
>
>I fail to see the logic in a recent posting about Japanese imports that stated
>that these cars are somehow contributing to lower safety levels on the 
>roads in NZ. The influx of imports has dramatically *lowered* the average
>age of cars on the road. Surely newer cars are "better", safer, and more
>fuel efficient than the wrecks that used to populate our roads.
>
>As for the comment about the East Germans not importing these cars, that is 
>completely irrelevant! 

East Germans probably would not want cars that drive on the wrong
side of the road.

		Andrew N.
:wq
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: 19 September referendum
From: paul@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz (cantva)
Date: 3 Sep 92 14:48:10 +1200
Reply-To: paul@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz

From article <BtxH4p.Lo4@comp.vuw.ac.nz>, by Michael.Norrish@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Michael Norrish):
> i) all MPs have some local affiliation, and
> ii) the party doesn't have the monopoly on power that is implied by
>     the fact that parties specify party lists.

I think (i) is a bit of a red herring.  From what I've heard, the usual
practice overseas is for list MPs to be assigned to electorates.  If
list MPs of one party don't do any electorate work then their party
profile will be lower as a result, and the proportion of the vote
they receive will likely fall.

Point (ii) depends on what laws surround the drawing up of party lists.
Even if parties were free to do what they liked with part lists,
they would be wise to have list candidates distributed throughout the
country so as to not to alienate any areas of the country.

I see a couple of major disadvantages of STV:

- voting is much more complicated.

- it isn't a form of PR as far as I can work out (that is there is
no guarantee that the number of seats a party has is in proportion
to the number of votes it gets).

> I'm also curious as to what is supposed to happen if the proportion of
> votes a party gets would indicate that they should have _fewer_ seats
> than they have won in the seat-based half of the parliament. Does the
> party then have to drop people? I admit, the possibility seems a
> remote one, but I'm interested to hear an official answer.

I _think_ that in this _very unlikely_ event such a party would
remain over-represented.  It was claimed on a program on the
referendum on CTV last night that 60% of the seats in MMP 
could be first-past-the-post and there would still be very little
chance of what you describe happening.  (BTW, once again CTV has
put TVNZ to shame in the current affairs department, if the snippet
of the TV1 documentary on electoral reform was anything to go by).

> Finally, it seems a shame that in voting for our preferred system of
> change we have to vote in a first-past-the-post manner. The nasty
> spectre of having to vote for MMP because it needs our votes to do
> better than something stupid like PV, (is there any truth in the claim
> that people who don't want change are being told to vote for this as a
> next best option?), thus precluding STV, is not a pleasant one.
> 
> Michael.

Perhaps we should vote using preferential voting - that way you
could vote for STV first and MMP second (or whereever).


--
----- Paul Ashton ----
Email: paul@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz
NZ Post:        Dept of Computer Science
                University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
From: maj@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Fishing Rights: Maori and Pakeha
Date: 28 Aug 92 08:46:45 +1200
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

Garrett Hardin published in 1968 a classic paper called

'The Tragedy of the Commons' [Science, v162,pp1243-1248]

that is, alas, not as well-known as it used to be. In
it he shows how unregulated individuals, exploiting a
common resource - like the historic Commons or common
grazing land about a medieval village - tend to act in
such a way as to overexploit and bring the resource to
ruin.

This unpalatable fact causes distress to the political
right and left alike. The right is unhappy because it
shows the need for government regulation of a nation's
resources and that the market alone does not act as an
'invisible hand' to solve all problems. The left is
unhappy because it provides a basis for the division of
the resource into private ownership.

This is what happened when the Commons was fenced and it
is what has happened with the establishment of the
fishing quota system. 

The right to roam free on the Commons with your animals
and the right to fish at will have enormous emotional
appeal. But what they lead to are situations like
Somalia and Newfoundland respectively.

I believe that all people who fish seriously in NZ [or any
country] must do so within the constraints of a government
organised system, such as the quota system. This is not to
say that the rights of indigenous peoples such as the Maori
should not be honoured. It is essential that they are.

But they must, when they are determined through the
political process [Parliamentary, extra-Parliamentary, and
Judicial] be expressed, in the case of New Zealand, in the
holding of fishing quota under the same rules as other 
quota-holders.
-- 
Murray A. Jorgensen [ maj@waikato.ac.nz ]    University of Waikato
Department of Mathematics and Statistics     Hamilton, New Zealand      
__________________________________________________________________
'Tis the song of the Jubjub! the proof is complete,
if only I've stated it thrice.'
From: hamish@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: 19 September referendum
Date: 3 Sep 92 16:24:48 +1200
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1992Sep1.071543.155@dde.dk>, ct@dde.dk (Claus Tondering) writes:
> I may have missed some postings that discussed this subject, in
> which case I offer my apologies. However, I have just learned that
> on 19 September New Zealand is going to have a referendum on proportional
> representation in parliament.
> 
> What is the likely outcome of the referendum?

If they knew that, they wouldn't need to have it would they.

> Will parliament be bound by the referendum?

You must be joking. Its just another petition. (But if the referendum gets
enough support for PR, then the voters will get to mark their preference on the
general elections next year. Or so the story went that I read).

> How will proportional representation work in NZ?

Will it work? 

> If approved, when will proportional representation take effect?

Who knows? Maybe when it comes they will, but until then...


> 
> -- 
> Claus Tondering
> Dansk Data Elektronik A/S, Herlev, Denmark
> E-mail: ct@dde.dk
-- 
==============================================================================
|  Hamish Marson   <h.marson@waikato.ac.nz>                             OS/2 |
|  Programmer (n/5), School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences           | 
|  University of Waikato,                                                    |
|  Hamilton, New Zealand.                                                    |
|Disclaimer:  Anything said in this message is the personal opinion of the   |
|             finger hitting the keyboard & doesn't represent my employers   |
|             opinion in any way. (ie we probably don't agree)               |
==============================================================================
  Q. If Nuclear Tests are so safe, why don't the French do them under Paris?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
From: M.Steven@uws.edu.au (Mike Steven)
Subject: Canterbury Under Snow?
Organization: University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:29:45 GMT

An early morning phone call from family at Halkett informs me that most of
Canterbury is waking up to find themselves buried under the heaviest snowfall
in living memorysnow laying 1 metre deep at Darfield apparently. If any
Cantabrians have been able to make it as far as their PC this morning could
they post more details? Now, shall I go for another swim this morning or just
bask in the sun with a good book!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: snow in Dargaville
From: mark@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Mark Davies)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 22:14:06 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.


In article <199208270628.AA00625@kaukau.comp.vuw.ac.nz>, andy@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Andy Bond) writes:
|> Well that's what someone on the radio just said ... no snow in
|> Wellington yet but I'll keep an eye out :-).

Well there was a claim on the radio this morning that it was snowing in karori
but I didn't see any.

cheers
mark
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: This week's news posting
From: cctr123@csc.canterbury.ac.nz (Alan Murray, CSC Operations, Uni of Canty)
Date: 26 Aug 92 12:34:49 +1200
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

I will be posting a news summary this week but it is likely to be late as my
evenings are pretty full.

Alan
From: Michael.Witbrock@cs.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: HELLO OUT THERE
Date: 2 Sep 92 09:09:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.8edDJ6G00j_HIIO6gt
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

> Excerpts from netnews.soc.culture.new-zealand: 1-Sep-92 HELLO OUT THERE
> trdste01@uctvax.uct.ac.z (641)

> p.s. Well done in the RUGBY, it was an excelent game (and *clean*!).


Apart, from what I hear, from some singing.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Subject: Re: 19 September referendum
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 13:29:39 GMT

In article <BtxH4p.Lo4@comp.vuw.ac.nz> Michael.Norrish@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Michael Norrish) writes:
> I'm interested to hear what people think are the objections to STV as
> a proportional representation system. To my mind, it seems to have two
> advantages over MMP,
>  
> i) all MPs have some local affiliation, and
> ii) the party doesn't have the monopoly on power that is implied by
>     the fact that parties specify party lists.
> 
> These might be considered two sides of the same coin I guess. 
> 
> I'm also curious as to what is supposed to happen if the proportion of
> votes a party gets would indicate that they should have _fewer_ seats
> than they have won in the seat-based half of the parliament. Does the
> party then have to drop people? I admit, the possibility seems a
> remote one, but I'm interested to hear an official answer.
> 
> Finally, it seems a shame that in voting for our preferred system of
> change we have to vote in a first-past-the-post manner. The nasty
> spectre of having to vote for MMP because it needs our votes to do
> better than something stupid like PV, (is there any truth in the claim
> that people who don't want change are being told to vote for this as a
> next best option?), thus precluding STV, is not a pleasant one.

I agree with you. But the reality of this referendum is that the supporters of
the status quo stand to actually *gain* from it if PV somehow is the highest
polling alternative.
 
They need never again worry about a third party winning even one seat in
parliament. Labour and national's grip would then be vice-like on  Parliament.
 
The Australian National and Liberal parties are in permanent coalition
precisely because a third party can not survive under PV - at any level.
 
If we are to gain any real reform, support must be united behind MMP. STV was
added to the ballot to split the PR vote.
 
The select committe claimed that "public demand" caused it to be added. Thisis
untrue. There were only *3* submissions asking for it: Bob Stephenson of
Ohariu Valley, Ron Knox of Porirua, and David MacLeod of Karori. The first two
are long-time Social Credit supporters.
 
Amazing, eh! THREE people caused STV to be put on the referendum ballot paper.
Rather, they provided the *excuse* for its inclusion.
 
Jim Anderton has said that the Labour and National MPs on the Committee would
have added more options if they thought they could get away with it.
 
If supporters of change do not unite behind MMP, they may well end with PV as
the alternative - and that is no choice at all. I would vote to retain the
present system of faced with that choice.
 
Steve


-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | End the two-party duopoly. Vote 
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for the Mixed-Member Proportional 
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            | (MMP) voting system on Sept. 19th. 
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | Give yourself a vote that *counts*!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
From: IJB3JMT@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (jeremy taylor)
Subject: travelling babysitter in nov
Reply-To: ijb3jmt@mvs.oac.ucla.edu
Date: 28 Aug 92 11:19:47 PDT



---

26TH AUGUST 1992
MY FAMILY AND I ARE VISITING NEW-ZEALAND IN THE SECOND
HALF OF NOVEMBER PRIOR TO THE INTERNATIONAL BIOMETRICS
CONFERENCE IN HAMILTON. WE ARE PLANNING TO TOUR AROUND FOR A COUPLE
OF WEEKS AND ARE TRYING TO FIND SOMEONE TO TRAVEL WITH US
TO HELP LOOK AFTER OUR TWO CHILDREN (AGES 0 AND 4).
WE WERE THINKING IN TERMS OF PERHAPS A TEENAGER WHO HAS
EXPERIENCE WITH BABY SITTING AND WHO LIKES TO TRAVEL.
THE MOST CONVENIENT WOULD BE SOMEONE WHO LIVES IN THE
HAMILTON OR AUCKLAND AREA.
WE WOULD PAY FOR ALL FOOD AND ACCOMADATION FOR THE PERSON
AND WOULD PAY FOR THEIR TIME AT A RATE WHICH COULD BE NEGOTIATED
BUT WOULD BE SOMEWHERE AROUND US$120 PER WEEK.
PLEASE REPLY TO IJB3JMT@UCLAMVS.BITNET
OR IJB3JMT@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU
OR TO JEREMY TAYLOR
   DEPARTMENT OF BIOSTATISTICS
   UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES,
   LOS ANGELES, CA, 90024, USA
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: car prices and need advice
From: meachen@med.wcc.govt.nz
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 03:36:29 GMT
Reply-To: meachen@med.wcc.govt.nz
Organization: Wellington City Council, Wgtn, NZ


In article <1992Aug30.104315.1717@actrix.gen.nz>, Mary.Curtin@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>In article <0s8BqB7w165w@sideways.welly.gen.nz> Bill Bennett <billy@sideways.welly.gen.nz> writes:
>> tfarmer@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Farmer) writes:
>> 
>> > The reason that we can get second-hand Japanese cars cheaply is
>> > because their system is set up to encourage buying new cars. This is
>> > 
>If fact, I believe that the influx of Japanese imports has drastically
>lowered the average age of cars on our roads.  Surely newer cars are
>safter? It's not so long ago that we had cars exempt from having seat
>belts because they were first registered before 19??
>
>-- 
>\   \/   /  |  
> \/\/\/\/   |  mary.curtin@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
>

As a restorer of a classic car I disagree that newer cars are safer,
accident wise I feel much safer in my '63 Ford Fairlane, or my
80 Aust. assembled Cortina, or the other cars I have owned a 65 Meceredes
and a 59 Dodge Hearse, (all these cars have seatbelts) than in any Japanese 
or modern car, which I feel are death traps. Another point is that seatbelts 
dont necessarily save lives and neglect by the car's owner is more the case.

In New Zealand the scrupulous Motor Trade I feel has to answer for defective
warrants of fitnesses and people looking for cheap alternatives to good motor
oil, decent tyres, good brakes etc. People are silly enough to buy them so 
therefore have created a demand for the biggest hunks of junk-metal out.


--
Red
 

From: chan@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM (Chan Benson)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:55:03 GMT
Subject: Re: Dame Cath Tizard and Paul Theroux
Organization: HP Fort Collins, CO
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand

> Public read his works and this only serves to compound stereotypes and
> ethnocentric biases. It is unfortunate that American journalists think that
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> the rest of the world should be as 'civilised' as they are.

Wow! Was this irony intended or accidental?

			-- Chan
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: Re: Looking for someone
From: Mark.Penney@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Chopper Boy! ( Mark Penney ))
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 10:35:49 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.


In article <1992Sep1.062004.9302@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz>, graeme@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz ( Graeme Moffat) writes:
|> 
|> There's only Auckland University. (At the moment)

    Excuse me but there are a few of us who dare to live south of the
Bombay <sp?> Hills!  Or did you just forget the smiley?  :-)

|> Ah! A dreaded undergrad! No hope of email access for him here!

    Yes well if he was doing Comp. Sci. at a real University (ie Vic. !)
he would have replied by now, from his own account, undergrad or not!  :-)

  By the way I did some fingering :-), but couldn't find any traces of
him here at Victoria University...
... the other unversities are: Waikato, Canterbury, Massey and Lincoln.

Mark.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
From: rcbc@honir.cs.cornell.edu (Robert Cooper)
Subject: Re: NZ news to 29 August
Reply-To: rcbc@cs.cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:21:58 GMT

In article <QedYXGu00j_HEIOCFg@cs.cmu.edu> Michael.Witbrock@cs.cmu.edu writes:

>   > Excerpts from netnews.soc.culture.new-zealand: 4-Sep-92 NZ news to 29
>   > August Alan C. Operations@csc.c (7625)
>
>   >  The storm, billed as the worst natural disaster for decades, caused
>   > havoc throughout the region. 
>   ....
>   > Christchurch residents awoke to 10-30cm of snow in the city with deeper
>   > drifts in the suburbs. 
>
>   Look, I don't like to sound mean or anything, but that's hilarious.  If
>   10cm of snow is the worst natural disaster in decades, then ChCh must
>   indeed be the idyll I remember,

Yeah, I've been holding my tongue on this one too. Another posting said
something like "we couldn't even go outside and make snow-men because it
was only 2 or 3 degrees".

Let's see, a couple of years ago here in Ithaca we had a daytime
temperature of -25 C. Mind you, inside in the energy-unconscious US it's
always a pleasant 20 C. 

        -- Robert Cooper

--
--
From: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Hoff)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: new zealand  vacations
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:12:00 GMT
Reply-To: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: oogoody.corp.sun.com


You all have spoken so highly of new zealand I think it's time for me
to play tourist (providing income for local economies). I have 10 days
during christmas.  So here's some probably ignorant questions:
1. What's the weather like during december?
2. What would be fun to do? And as a cultural tie-in what would be the
   best way to experience the "real" new-zealand.
3. What else should I know.


Thanx.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.new-zealand
Subject: weather report, christchurch
From: moselecw@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (C.W. Moseley)
Date: 27 Aug 92 13:06:37 +1200
Distribution: world
Organization: Electrical Engineering, University of Canterbury, New Zealand


ITS SNOWING IN CHRISTCHURCH

at the moment there is a bit of a southerly, and it is snowing moderately
heavily. It even seems to be settling as slushy crud rather than melting!!

first time for about 3 years??

MOZ