Bradford's flawed bill
Green MP Sue Bradford has another flawed bill that needs to be rewritten. She wants to lower the voting age to 16, while at the same time doesn't want 16 year olds to buy certain foods at tuck shops.
Bradford appears to have forgotten that the voting age is entrenched. And she wants kids at school to learn about politics and our political system?
What entrenchment means is that according to s268 of the Electoral Act, 75 per cent of Parliament has to agree before it becomes law - or the vote has to be subject to a referendum. Not only that, the referendum has to have agreement with both the general electorate and the Maori electorate. It also means Bradford has to amend her bill to remove the entrenchment clause, and get cross party support to avoid a referendum.
Then when it goes to a select committee the 16 and 17 year olds can do submissions - because they can do that, even though they can't vote or stand for Parliament.
2 comments:
Dave
For an unelected MP she sure does wite some law doesn't she?
If we allow voting at 16 I think we have a cheek to not allow the following:
Consumption of alcohol
Signing contracts without parents permission
Entering the army or police without parents permission
Hell there is a whole raft of things we allow adults.
Voting is one of the most important things we can do.
After getting married and having a kid.
Oh and paying for all that ourselves.
MikeNZ
s 268 of the Electoral Act does not mean that the referendum has to have agreement from both the General electorates and the Maori electorates, merely that both get to vote.
Also, Bradford doesn't need to reword her bill (unless she wants a referendum) she can leave it as it is and just try and get 75% support in Parliament.
Post a Comment