Candidates Auckland Central | Tuariki Delamere Banks Peninsula | Ben Atkinson Bay of Plenty | Chris Jenkins Coromandel | Rob Hunter Dunedin | Ben Peters Epsom | Adriana Christie Hamilton East | Naomi Pocock Hamilton West | Hayden Cargo Hutt South | Ben Wylie-van Eerd Mount Albert | Cameron Lord Nelson | Mathew Pottinger New Plymouth | Dan Thurston-Crow North Shore | Shai Navot Northland | Helen Jeremiah Ōhāriu | Jessica Hammond Rongotai | Geoff Simmons Southland | Joel Rowlands Tauranga | Andrew Caie Te Atatū | Brendon Monk Wellington Central | Abe Gray Whangārei | Ciara Swords
- Comms & Events
Create a single, totally free from exemptions Banking Transaction Tax
as described in considerable detail in Tim O'Connell's thread ... perhaps looking there and elsewhere you'd have seen what people have suggested ? And ( said peacefully as a request ) Please get your head around the notion that 500 people stood up and put their money down to back GM - perhaps foolishly we ( me anyway) thought it was to be a collective 'OUR' party? The heading above So 'YOU' don't like the idea of 'OUR' tax reforms ... what would YOU suggest ... etc is written in divisive language and the press coverage to date is focussed on the divisive nature of the policy. I for one have NOT been politically active in any way ( that was even asked on the joining form ... not sure why, and I doubt that has any more chance of an answer than dozens other questions in the threads.) I have an image of a bunch of guys sitting fuming at what they are seeing on screen muttering 'Thiss iss not what we wanted ...' Bit sad if you take it that way ... petulance is not pretty amongs children, less so with Adults. What you'e getting here is market research of the very best kind - People being honest, open, raw and you'd never get that from a tick box survey ( as those generally are unwittingly designed to produce an answer that aligns with the inside thinking' Jamie Brahm pointed out the number of political party failures ... and despite may other challenges in our conversation we're agreed that 'this' is not effective. I f the 'in house people' who have paid to join can't agree' then forgive the metaphor but there's not a stray cats chance in a monitored nature reserve that the public, who DO resist change, who DO tend to have a long term favoured party to vote for, and who DO tend to look at their own self interest and vote accordingly are going to accept the idea as policy. Even worse perhaps, many of those who have previously registered 'willing to help' are probably not going to go leaflet stuffing or offer to talk to people on the street to try and sell a policy they oppose. And if you think it can't get worse than that ... I also 'suppose' that some members might well be so opposed to this as to even consider joining another party mow that their 'political interest' has been unleashed ! You can only sell ideas that people want to buy into ...
Do you like this suggestion?