I’ve had a bit of contact with Birgitta Jónsdóttir. Would like more. She’s an advocate for open government. And I agree with her view that it is essential to make” the process of lawmaking more transparent and accessible for everyone who cares to know or contribute”.
Birgitta is an advocate for more direct democracy and some of her views are quite radical. I think they’re worth thinking about and discussing. I think the way we practice politics needs to change. I’ve never made a secret of that. It’s threatening to politicians and the parliamentary structures. But while there’s a lot of good in our existing structures, and most MPs work damn hard and are committed to what they do, there’s also a lot of bullshit that goes on.
People know that. I agree that MPs need more direct accountability. The review of MMP will no doubt throw up a few ideas. Constitutional change is inevitable in New Zealand. It’s a matter of when.
Having a real debate about how we could improve our democracy for New Zealand’s sake is surely a good thing.
Here’s a start. Birgitta wrote this piece in The Guardian in November 2011
The Dutch minister of internal affairs said at a speech during free press day this year: “Law-making is like a sausage, no one really wants to know what is put in it.” He was referring to how expensive the Freedom of Information Act is, and was suggesting that journalists shouldn’t really be asking for so much governmental information. His words exposed one of the core problems in our democracies: too many people don’t care what goes into the sausage, not even the so-called law-makers, the parliamentarians.
If the 99% want to reclaim our power, our societies, we have to start somewhere. An important first step is to sever the ties between the corporations and the state by making the process of lawmaking more transparent and accessible for everyone who cares to know or contribute. We have to know what is in that law sausage; the monopoly of the corporate lobbyist has to end – especially when it comes to laws regulating banking and the internet.
The Icelandic nation only consists 311,000 souls, so we have a relatively small bureaucratic body and can move quicker then in most countries. Many have seen Iceland as the ideal country for experimentation for new solutions in an era of transformation. I agree.
Iceland’s experience is fairly extreme. But their response to crisis has some lessons for us all.
I like the analogy of the sausage. Especially given it’s summer and we’re all eating a few no doubt
“… sever the ties between the corporations and the state …” Yes, the ownership ties must be severed. Privatisation is key.
yeah right!! cause privatising SOE’s is going to somehow increase their openess and accountability!!
and I’m sure Mighty River and Meridian are the type of big corporate lobbyists the quote is thinking about!!
Privatisation increases the ties because then private companies are doing the jobs that government departments should be doing, thus private companies are more involved with the state.
For example, compare and contrast the political influence of Pharmac with the influence of the drug lobby in America.
Not sure what this is really about.
The foundation for the constitution was created by 1,000 people randomly selected from the national registry. We elected 25 people to put that vision into words. The new constitution is now in the parliament.
The context and what they are really about doesnt seem right for our situation
People have enough work to do.
What or who is the 99%? Where does the 99% come from. The corporations provide input into laws because they have an obvious interest.
If the rank and file do not have an interest why should the corporations be banned?
Then it would just be politicians who do not necessarily have the skill set or experience required.
GWW there are some interesting and useful ideas here. Not necessarily all applicable here. Iceland’s situation very different to NZ as I said. But doesn’t mean we can’t see what other countries are doing. The dislocation people feel from politics is fairly widespread across the world. Important to keep an open mind I think
Clare , how about ‘highlights’ of labour caucus discussions posted on Red Alert ?
We had the beauty parade for the recent leader election, which seemed to go down well.
This generation is used to reality type shows where the give and take of debate/discussion/disagreement is aired ( in a highly edited form). Its now a fact that this makes it real for TV viewers, no wonder that a closed door system seems remote and disconnected.
Look at the mileage given to the teatapes. It was seen as viewer gold because it was unscripted and unrehearsed. Imagine if this was common place. It would put ‘smile and wave ‘ back in his pigeon hole where it belongs.
BTW Judges have seen the light on cameras in the courtroom a while back.
For the caucus it may even improve the level of discussion
“If the rank and file do not have an interest why should the corporations be banned?”
Fletchers, for example get ready access to whoever is the current PM or Minister for Housing, or Forestry. The Hotel Association is another example, so is the Business Roundtable, I don’t get such ready access. It has nothing to do with interest and everything to do with access. I can see why you are confused, hopefully highlighting even this one part will help the fog to lift.
Crikey even in my professional capacity, of assisting people with their issues of justice I can’t get meaningful access to that which I am entitled by law, let alone calling the PM for a “casual” conversation or to book a dinner for us.
Thanks for posting this Clare. Unlike some here, I appreciate examining how others address similar issues. It doesn’t matter if they do or don’t precisely mirror our experiences, we have the capacity to adapt, filter etc.
I hope you don’t mean me Tracey!
Spudulike, no, not you, just a general “sic of the rain and weather” grumble about people dismissing information because they think it wont work here, without explaining why. Too many scared of change to even contemplate looking at new things.
Thanks Tracey
“Crikey even in my professional capacity, of assisting people with their issues of justice I can’t get meaningful access to that which I am entitled by law, let alone calling the PM for a “casual” conversation or to book a dinner for us”.
You know what they say…if you keep on doing what you have always done, you will keep on getting what you always got…
Dont mind a comment or opinion being attacked, but just because you do not agree with it does not entitle you to make a half arsed attempt at attacking the writer.
Who knows – I might be a professional as well. But I am not interested in labeling people.
confused, how easily you become distracted from your own comment, which was my focus. You seem to have entirely missed my comment about the difference between interest and access, which was why I mentioned my professional capacity. Are you saying your question above was rhetorical?
Information is key for democracy.
I really do think that civics in school is necessary for a politically active society.
NZers are still very comfortable (forgetting how much they owe on their mortgages perhaps?) and with that comes complacency. There still appears to be many voting (or not) in a way that indicates there is no real understanding of the impact certain policies are likely to have. NZ has been so easily manipulated this election its really distressing for many people I know.
This is not surprising because over the elections our media was appalling, we had no decent informed political commentary, rather opinions posing as such, one man was taken off the airwaves for expressing a (perhaps overly robust) opinion of our prime minister and another is facing court for recording him at a public event.
There are very few informative articles in our popular/mainstream media regarding past political approaches and how they have affected society.
In the last week one of the most informative TV stations which was giving airtime to a variety of independent thinkers has been taken off the air, due to lack of funding and the other most informative and least monolithically mediocre politically is due to go sometime this year.
I used to say that NZ was still pretty independent –not too affected by corporate influence. After the fiasco described above I am no longer of that opinion.
This site is and the internet is great, yet for how long?