Wednesday, May 16, 2007



The end of Section 59

Today is a Member's Day, and Sue Bradford's Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill is up for its third reading. Following last fortnight's stunning "compromise" (which was actually a complete surrender to Bradford's position), the bill is expected to pass by a huge margin, 116 - 5, with only ACT, Taito Phillip Field, and United Future's two hardline Christian MPs voting against. For those who want to listen in, debate will start sometime between 16:30 and 17:00, and depending on how many speakers there are, we could conceivably have a vote in in time for the six o'clock news (and if not, it'll be at eight, half an hour after the dinner break).

Meanwhile, Steve Chadwick's Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal (Easter Trading) Amendment Bill will also almost certainly come up for a vote. This passed its first reading by a wide margin, 80 - 38 - but so did Jacqui Dean's bill, which lost its Second Reading two weeks ago. A lot of MPs changed their mind between the first and second readings, but its unclear whether it was becuase they had come out in opposition to Easter trading, or because they opposed the form proposed in Dean's bill (for example, the lack of protection for workers). I don't want to risk guessing whether it will pass or fail (entrail readers may wish to start comparing votes in the Conscience Votes Database and see if they can draw a conclusion), but if it passes, I hope the government will move swiftly to ensure that Easter Sunday is listed as a public holiday to ensure it is on a par with other holidays.

Bump & update: It looks like the vote may just squeeze in before the news.

3 comments:

At least one NZ first MP is voting against the bill

Posted by Dave : 5/16/2007 01:54:00 PM

I hear the UFie hardcore are going to split the party and go their own way. Maybe they'll get together with T. Field and grand high bishop Tamaki praise be his name and give us a Xian party.

I'm still predicting we'll drop to five stable parties in the long term (with a possibility of only four), but who the minors will be at this point is anyone's guess.

If only they'd ditch the threshold.

Posted by tussock : 5/16/2007 05:09:00 PM

Following last fortnight's stunning "compromise" (which was actually a complete surrender to Bradford's position)
Well, at least we agree on something regarding Section 59 :-)

Posted by Duncan Bayne : 5/16/2007 10:16:00 PM