Dunne must Resign.
The worm has turned on Turner.
The worm may have given Peter Dunne a critical edge, when he mentioned fathers, just before an election, but Turner has only just realised they are guilty of selling out the family, fathers and failing some of our most vulnerable children, those whose lives have been ripped apart by the avarice and ideology of a corrupt family court. It has just dawned upon United Future that the rise of the Republicans will be the end of the political road of United Future. A hasty press release today by deputy leader Turner, the day after Fathers Day 2006, will be the epitaph of United Future, the party that didn’t deliver. You had your opportunity, you didn’t deliver, and now the Republicans are going to do what you didn’t do. How many ways has your leader failed?
He has failed Fathers.
He has failed Families.
He has failed Children.
He has failed to uphold the principles of his party.
He fails his country by supporting a corrupt Government.
The Republicans are calling for Dunne to do the honourable thing.
Resign.
The republicans are calling on Peter Dunne to resign?
What, all three of them?
While Peter Dunne may not have delivered what we want, United Future still offers more hope for fathers than anyone other than ACT.
Anyone who thinks the republicans are ever going to get anywhere is dreaming.
All they will do is take votes off parties that actually stand a chance.
Open your eyes and get real!
Comment by Chris — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 10:45 am
I have met several members of the republican party.
It is my perception that they are good people with good intentions.
However, like it or not, the indisputible reality is that this party is not going to get any MPs in the near future.
Its results in the last election were very sorry indeed, and I can not see things changing.
This is unfortunate because, as I have said, I believe the republicans have some good people.
However, this does not change the fact that every vote that goes to the republicans is a wasted vote that could be used elsewhere.
In the last election, if ACT had got just a few more votes, its 3rd ranked list candidate, Dr Muriel Newman, would have been re-elected.
Those of you who have been around for a while will know that Muriel has done more for fathers than all other MPs put together.
If fathers had not thrown their votes away, Muriel would still be in Parliament.
There is a lesson here that we must not forget.
Comment by Darryl Ward — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 1:26 pm
Thanks Darryl for that shot of reality. I aggree whole heartledly. Most people have no idea how to make MMP work for them, especially if they want to see the back of Helen. Small parties “will have to work together”, its as simple as that.
Further, Judy Turner is doing more for the plight of fathers and families than the original post in this thread suggests, as although she called for calm, she went on to show support for the cause and excused the behaviour of the protestors.
Along with pushing for change in the laws surrounding paternaty testing, Judy Turner’s private members bill seeking the creation of a separate complaints authority for CYF, which must logically overlap the Family Court system, is a huge step in the right direction, and here you guys are dumping on her. If anything the Republicans should be supporting and working in with her, instead of attacking like a band of wild dogs.
Also, in response to an early post; Has anyone got a better idea? …the question should be…Is anyone going to listen?
Comment by Wayne — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 5:16 pm
I didn’t realise there was three Peter Dunne’s, but I was referring to the one in parliament. Peter Dunne’s position is damaging to fathers and families, and the sooner he goes the better. As far as ACT is concerned, it was Muriel Newman alone that had a passion for change in the family court, but it was never ACT. It was the previous leader Richard Prebble who withdrew Muriel Newmans shared parenting bill, and I quote the current leader Rodney Hide “Anyone supporting fathers is committing political suicide” So let’s all play the woolly sheep game and run along behind Judy Turner, and we will be in the same position with United future that we were with ACT. It’s good to see you guys attacking the Republicans — you’ve come to realise we are actually a threat. We are a lot further down the track than you realised. Got caught napping didn’t you. So Darryl you standing again as an ACT candidate, or are you just trying to play secret squirrel. How about you Wayne, you going to be on the United Future List next time.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 6:12 pm
Mmmmmm…not a bad idea. I’ll contact Judy tomorrow. One thing’s sure, I’m much more likey to get into Parliament in the next elections under United Future than with…umm…what’s that other party?
Actually, I understood that this was a forum for “men’s” issues and not a party politcal forum for the Republicans to attack those who choose to support parties that are more likey to get into parliament or already in parliament, thus more likely to be able to help us?
If Judy Turner is able to get her private members bill through, then she will have achieved a huge gain for families and fathers, regardless of what party she represents or who her leader is. Should I come under attack for supporting her bill?
How about judging the policies instead of the people.
Comment by Wayne — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 9:16 pm
Yes this is a forum for men’s issues, and there is no doubt the birth of the republicans resulted directly from the political realities of the social climate for men in New Zealand, and the lack of political progress achieved by any of the current political parties in parliament despite the best endeavours of many of our hard workers. We’ve done the petitions, done the submissions, paid our dues in time and money to these political parties. If you do not want me to attack Mr Dunne, then I will attack his policy of refusing to answer questions in relation to child support. The question Mr Dunne like Mr Cunliffe refuses to answer is
“How much child support has been recovered from how many deceased estates in the last 6 years by the IRD?”
So at the end of the day you might say you are supporting a small win, and I might say I am attacking a big loss. If you really want to get into the policy debate, why not go and see what happened to the family’s commission. That was United Futures flagship policy for the last election.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Tue 5th September 2006 @ 11:08 pm
I am not planning to stand in the next election, Bevan, but that is only because my time is fully committed already.
However, if I did stand, it would not be for a party that had zero chance of getting anyone elected, no matter how nice its people or its policies were.
BTW, your statement that it was “Richard Prebble who withdrew Muriel Newmans shared parenting bill” is completely untrue, as the bill was never withdrawn, it was defeated in the house by labour and its allies.
I know because I was there.
Comment by Darryl Ward — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 12:05 pm
My statement is not untrue, I am talking about the 2nd time it came out of the ballot box, and that was the day that Act, had the mens movenment collecting signitures to support a bill that no longer existed. I haven’t forgotten that either.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 1:41 pm
I think you might be talking about a completely different bill.
ACT always looked after fathers.
Comment by Darryl Ward — Wed 6th September 2006 @ 2:31 pm