Another response to the candidate survey, from Michael Morris, who is the yet-to-be-officially-selected Green candidate for Rimutaka. He is ranked at "30+" on the Greens' list:
If you could ensure the passage of one act on one issue in the next Parliament, what would it be?
Sue Kedgley's Animal Welfare Amendment Bill, banning battery hen cages and sow crates.
What three other electoral candidates or sitting MPs do you think are most similar to you in their political views?
MMP is about coalitions: What sitting MP who is NOT in your party do you think is most similar to you in their political views?
Marc Alexander (UF)
Do you support or oppose:
...raising the drinking age?
Support. I did oppose it, but I can see that lowering it to 18 has meant a lot more drunkenness among teenagers.
...legalising marijuana (or pharmaceuticals based on it) for medical use?
Support, with a doctors' prescription and adequate controls to ensure that the patient does not on-sell it.
...decriminalising or legalising marijuana for recreational use?
Support decriminalising, oppose legalising. Would support making it an infringement like parking.
...allowing same-sex couples to adopt children?
I believe that the ideal for children is for them to have a male and female sex parent. I would support same-sex couples adopting, and adoption by a man or woman without a partner, but they would need to work harder to prove they are suitable.
...amending the Marriage Act to allow same-sex couples to marry?
Oppose. Marriage is a spiritual ceremony in most (if not all) cultures, and is supposed to be between a man and a woman. I would support same sex civil unions but not marriages.
...allowing voluntary euthanasia or physician assisted suicide?
I would support in principle, but it would require VERY RIGOROUS conditions to avoid pressuring unwanted relatives or "burdens on society" to kill themselves. I would support only if the patient is in intolerable pain, the pain cannot be mitigated with pain-killers and the condition is unlikely to improve.
...state funding of integrated schools?
Support. For a healthy democracy to flourish a diversity of views is necessary. The state should therefore fund all sorts of education (including home schooling).
...the retention of sedition as a crime in the Crimes Act?
That's a tricky one. I support free speech, even of those whose views I find objectionable such as the NF, holocaust deniers or vivisectionists. However I acknowledge that it has limits. I will have to reserve judgement until I get a better understanding of exactly what "sedition" means.
...the retention of blasphemous libel as a crime in the Crimes Act?
...further restrictions on hate speech?
Oppose. Free speech is essential in a democracy.
...the use of indefinite detention without trial for those subject to a security risk certificate?
Oppose. Innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental human right. If anyone is considered such a risk to security that the state considers detaining them, then it should not be difficult to obtain sufficient evidence for a trial without undue delay
...restoring the death penalty for serious crime?
Oppose. Two reasons; the death penalty brutalises a society that practices, and experience has shown inconsistency in sentencing. Eg. Pinochet got off his murder charge, Bush and Thatcher were never even indicted, but poor blacks are often executed.
...Georgina Beyer's Human Rights (Gender Identity) Amendment Bill?
I know nothing about it.
...Gordon Copeland's New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill?
...entrenching the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act as supreme law?
Support. It contains all the basic rights that people have fought and died for since Magna Carta.
...New Zealand's participation in the International Criminal Court?
Know nothing about it.
...lowering MMP's threshold from the present 5%?
Would support if it is practicable. Minor parties have a right to be heard, in proportion to their franchise.
With the benefit of hindsight, how should the government have handled the Ahmed Zaoui case?
The SIS should have been forced to either present its evidence or shut up. If they did not choose to present their evidence then the crown has no case and Zoui should have been released.
Some interesting answers there, and like Hamish McCracken's, show that views don't necessarily fall into nice neat boxes.