The Bill of no-rights (6 May, 2022)

[aardvark_admin]

This column is archived at: https://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2022/0506.shtml

Is our BOR hardly worth the paper it's written on?

How can we be protected from the tyranny of over-zealous or corrupt government if that government has the power to set-aside the protections allegedly offered by the BOR whenever it is convenient for them to do so?

Is it time for us to have a far more robust and immutable level of protection from governments that may wish to abuse the rights and freedoms of those who it is elected to serve?

[GSVNoFixedAbode]

the US Constitution does a fairly good job of restricting the tyranny of government

With the Republicans mostly in control, the enforcement of their Constitution has been shown to be a farce; and mis-quotes have been used to justify all sorts of abhorrent activity. It's a nation based on slavery and racism currently with a very very thin veneer.

As for NZ's BoR, they're not wrong. It needs to be stronger, and legally binding. But I'm going to pull you up on those comments Bruce: criticise the system, criticise the actions, but stay away from the Far-Right (now not even so far sadly) tactics of slyly denigrating the players. Leave that for the usual suspects here.

As for our Covid response, hell, yes they got it wrong in places, trampled rights, and forced people into terrible situations and decisions. With 20/20 hindsight (useful when running a performance analysis), MIQ should have been handled better, exceptions NOT made for the privileged, and a snot-tonne more money spent on the whole arrangement to allow Kiwis back in sooner. Regards vaccinations, people are still not forced to have them. However, those that do not - for valid or other reasons - must accept the consequences of that, with the medical-based reasoning of protecting the greater number of people. Remember to judge those decisions based on the information they had at the time. Our society is based on the needs of the many out-weighing the needs of the few or the one. Trouble is, those few now have a disproportionately loud voice, and there's a general lack of critical thinking to counter their arguments.

[hagfish]

Well I think - oh. GSV already said it (and more eloquently than I woulda). And when it's a few thousand woogans and red-pillocks vs five million of us, I'd say that's a society united, rather than divided.

[Perry]

Remember to judge those decisions based on the information they had at the time.

You are joking, I hope?

The decisions were most certainly NOT based on the [all] information available at the time!

They were based on the information the NZ gummint (and others) selectively chose to accept at the time.

To illustrate, look at the studied ignorance of the present, never mind the on / off again of Dr Doomfield about masks efficacy.



That information is verifiable as a media release at the college's web site.

But don't let the facts get in the way of a good bit of political propaganda, duplicity and population manipulation.

[GSVNoFixedAbode]

They were based on the information the NZ gummint (and others) selectively chose to accept at the time.

Yeah, they were actually: the accepted current state of information. This is not a political conspiracy/agenda narrative as pushed by the Far Right as FUD.

Decisions were made based on the information to hand that was accepted by the majority - some of which turned out to be incorrect at a later stage. For example in the early waves, masks were discounted by many medical experts because they were looking at things from the wrong direction of "masks protect me" rather than "masks protect you from me" combined with the availability/efficacy of the different types at the time.

Original Covid-19 vs Delta vs Omicron vs Long Covid and the effects on different cohorts of the population are STILL being investigated. Medical groups will take a stance based on current info (as above) which can then very quickly change. Others will take a stance and stubbornly stick to it while updated evidence proves them wrong.

Government action has been largely science-based and protected the majority of NZers over the past 2 years. Modelling of not taking that action predicts over 80k deaths by now. The exceptions & screw-up can be traced back to relenting to the lobbying of the business sector. [golf clap]

Knowing the internal planning that was going on mid-2020 for hospital influx in a worst-case scenario (as per USA etc), we seriously dodged a multitude of bullets there.

[Perry]

They were based on the information the NZ gummint (and others) selectively chose to accept at the time.

Yeah, they were actually: the accepted current state of information. This is not a political conspiracy/agenda narrative as pushed by the Far Right as FUD.

Selectively accepted - yes. By NZ's socio-commie gummint politicians and their yes-and-only-yes sycophants.

Decisions were made based on the information to hand that was accepted by the majority - some of which turned out to be incorrect at a later stage. For example in the early waves, masks were discounted by many medical experts because they were looking at things from the wrong direction of "masks protect me" rather than "masks protect you from me" combined with the availability/efficacy of the different types at the time.

Medical science; all science, is not a democracy.

Original Covid-19 vs Delta vs Omicron vs Long Covid and the effects on different cohorts of the population are STILL being investigated. Medical groups will take a stance based on current info (as above) which can then very quickly change.

Little consolation when people pay with the their lives for the mistakes made by selective acceptance.

Government action has been largely science-based and protected the majority of NZers over the past 2 years. Modelling of not taking that action predicts over 80k deaths by now. The exceptions & screw-up can be traced back to relenting to the lobbying of the business sector. [golf clap]

"Largely science-based" is actually largely selective-science-based.

As for the modelling, it was so wrong, it's hard to believe those concerned aren't on the dole, or at least censured for their egregious errors.

Knowing the internal planning that was going on mid-2020 for hospital influx in a worst-case scenario (as per USA etc), we seriously dodged a multitude of bullets there.

It is impossible to prove a speculative presumption. A guess: at best.

As for the lobbying of the business sector, it seems so. Fizzer were very successful . . .