Golriz had her Electoral (Strengthening Democracy) Amendment Bill pulled from the biscuit tin, and there’s a lot that is worthy of debate.
The seven areas of reform in the Bill are:
- Enabling voters of Māori descent to change roll type at any time
- Extending the voting age to 16 years
- Removing the requirement for NZ citizens living overseas to have visited New Zealand within the last 3 years to maintain their voting rights
- Giving all people in prison the right to vote
- Implementing the Electoral Commission’s 2012 MMP Review recommendations
- Strengthening transparency and safeguards on donations to parties and candidates
- Extending the reserved provisions to include all provisions that reduce eligibility to register as an elector or to vote at an election.
Here are my thoughts.
Māori Roll: The manner in which Māori are only allowed to swap between the Māori Roll and General Roll once every 5 years is very regressive in terms of Treaty obligations and democratic representation of Māori. There were tens of thousands of Māori who enquired about changing between rolls at the last election, and the ability to vote where you want is important for universal suffrage.
The justification for the 5 year approach is that the demographic details are used to set electoral boundaries, so there will need to be a technical work around to make this work.
As the country begins to appreciate the yawning chasm of inequality lockdowns have exacerbated between Māori & Pakeha (while acknowledging we aren’t safe until we are all vaccinated), this revelation has to translate into strengthening Māori political representation, not amputating it as ACT want!
Lower voting age to 16: Taxation without representation is a classic and it has weight. Lots of 16 and 17 year olds have jobs and are paying tax but without any political representation. That is an incredibly powerful argument for Democrats and those arguing against lowering the voting age don’t have much intellectual or philosophical counter weight to this prescient point.
One counter is that teenagers frontal lobes haven’t developed enough yet and as such 16 & 17 year olds don’t have the maturity to vote.
While it is certainly true that teens don’t develop frontal lobes until their mid 20s, we are talking about sudden panic moments in young peoples lives like fighting or boy racing or racing off in police pursuits, that criticism can’t be extended to teenagers ability to reason or understand the world around them!
What is the suggestion here? Teenagers will panic at the voting booth and murder everyone in an epic melt down over not being able to take a selfie while voting?
The third argument is that this is self serving for the Left. I think that is garbage. Allowing people over 80 to vote leads to very biased results!
Young people are dealing with climate change, allowing them a political voice and by bringing them into politics earlier builds the franchise of democracy no matter who it benefits politically (and I would argue it benefits older people right now)!
Broadening the franchise of Democracy is the goal and allowing our teenagers to have a say would force politicians to listen.
If politicians aren’t going to listen, they won’t get their vote!
What more democratic is that?
I say yes to lowering the voting age to 16 and welcome a new generation of citizens into the great debate that is democracy!
Removing the requirement for NZ citizens living overseas to have visited New Zealand within the last 3 years to maintain their voting rights: The justification for restricting voting rights to citizens overseas who have visited the country within the last 3 years is so we only include voters who actually have a physical connection here. There is a million of us who live overseas, do we really want to include a vast electorate who never return home?
What about making voting only a right for citizens rather than permanent residents? The question is as urgent to ask if we are opening up voting rights to external citizens who like absent landlords have never visited their homeland but continue to influence the system under which we live, not them.
There are real philosophical reasons you would restrict voting rights and these need to be explored.
Giving all people in prison the right to vote: This makes sense. A prisoners rights are curtailed in a state run environment where they have no power. Allowing prisoners to vote forces society to have a legitimate democratic voice for those being punished by us. Critics claim that you lose your rights as a prisoner including the privilege of voting, but that privilege is intrinsic to all citizens regardless of their imprisonment. A prisoner loses their liberty, they don’t lose fundamental human rights. Allowing prisoners to politically voice their views forces political parties to listen to their concerns, and people in prison have concerns.
Dump Coat-tailing: The MMP coat-tailing rule was a quirky feature that recognized regional political movements and allows for Minor Parties to build infrastructure. The inability for many minor parties to exist suggests it hasn’t been successful to date but doesn’t mean it should be removed! It plays an important incubator in the creation of political movements in NZ and losing it would I think shut down one of the structural engines built within MMP. As someone who has started a fair share of minor parties, it is a legitimate tool that helps build new political parties.
Lower threshold to 4%: We don’t want the madness of the Israeli MMP system, but 5% as the threshold has cut most political movements off before they start. Lowering it to 4% will help NZ First.
Strengthening transparency and safeguards on donations to parties and candidates: Sure, but this isn’t the real reform we need, we need public funding of our political system!
With so much swirling around donations to political parties, isn’t it time to consider publicly funding our political parties? If we want to remove the influence of big money from politics, remove the need for politicians to have to flirt for those donations in the first place.
Law God Andrew Geddis put forward the argument for publicly funded election campaigns for Political Parties in his 2007 public policy essay…
The third set of responses can be termed public assistance measures. They complement the egalitarian objective of the previous two forms of regulation by replacing the role that private (and thus unequally distributed) sources of wealth can play in the electoral process with a ‘clean’ source of funding – the general taxpayer. Further, such measures may be designed to provide funding to parties or candidates which otherwise would struggle to raise private funds, thereby enabling a greater range of voices to participate at the election. A variety of different forms of public assistance measures are available: direct payments to electoral participants on a ‘dollar-per-votes’ basis; post-election refunds of the expenses incurred in campaigning; matching donations for small, individual donations; tax credits to compensate small donors for their gift; the provision of broadcasting time or other campaign benefits to qualifying contestants.
…publicly funding political party election campaigns would remove all money influence from the political decision making process.
Based on the current spending caps we are talking about a $20million cost per election to remove big money from NZ politics.
It’s time to seriously discuss publicly funding election campaigns.
Extending the reserved provisions to include all provisions that reduce eligibility to register as an elector or to vote at an election: There are a lot of mainly women who need to be on private rolls so that they can’t be chased by abusive ex partners, this process to apply to be on the private roll should be as bureaucratically easy as possible.
There is real meat on the bone philosophically and technically on ways to empower and strengthen our democracy that we should all take seriously.
We have seen the danger of misinformation and disinformation to our democracy when it comes to the Facebook algorithms of hate. Strengthening and extending the universal franchise of democracy is an urgent endeavour we must engage with.
Can we have that debate rationally?
Fuck no!
The polarisation of politics is so extreme now, this will immediately be seen as the Greens attempting to screw the scrum in their favour. When you have a Party openly promising to amputate 5 Ministries, the idea of progressive political processes will clash like Donald Trump at a Vegan Feminist Conference.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
Mr and Ms 16 year old can vote. Whoopty do! They can vote Green,. They can see for their vote the priority Green issue is non binary co-leadership models.
Maori can switch rolls with ease.
But none can buy a home because the fucked up economic model every political party in parliament signs up stacks the deck against them and stops them doing so. But they can feel voting achievement for non gender specific co leadership. And ease of switching voter rolls
And expats still get to make decisions that us remaining here have to live with while they don’t? Who on earth apart from the Greens think that is a good idea?
More pointless virtue signaling.
I’m sorry, but is there any point or purpose to the Greens?
Xray
Is there any point to the Greens? None as far as the environment goes…so no. They are just a more bizarre duplication of Labour, more woke and more unrealistic, more glued to Instagram and Twitter. Golriz should focus on the environment instead of trying fuck up the entire political system.
only cabbage, die grunen* are to labour what act are to national
*sorry no umlaut on my keyboard
Hi Gagarin. If there is no unmlaut then there is the alternative of ‘u’e.
There is a very good point to having the Green Party – so we can vote for them!
To provide high paid employment for the useless is my only guess.
And the useless to make derogatory comments about them.
The Greens are not the government, and don’t control the budget, you utter fuckwit! Why not blame Luxon? or the governor general? Hell, why not Jesus?
Geez Roy, least time I looked the Minister for Homelessness aka Associate Housing Minister is, wait for it…a Green Party co-leader. Kind of missing in action, isn’t she!
The Green Party are up to their eyeballs in this sorry government fella, sorry to say!
Have another 40oz bottle of Gin Roy, you might make sense!
Loved thatXRAY.
Which part do you love Booby “least time I looked”
Geez XRAY, not a good look telling someone else they don’t make sense!
bahahaha!
X-ray. I think the Assoc Homeless Minister is busy sorting family and sexual abuse and violence. Expect to see Kiwis stopping killing women and children now.
I have to agree with you. There seems to be little or no point to the Greens. Their appeal as a trendy political party has worn off. Some of the young voters may still appreciate their views but their heyday is no more.
Over the years the Greens have been responsible for most of the absurd bills which have gone up for debate. This has caused social division in this country on more than one occasion.
Yup, because old people seem to think they have a monopoly on sense?
If a 16 year old can start full time employment and pay taxes, then they absolutely should be given a vote.
Incedently prisoners can’t vote, and they are paid nothing for prison labour and rehabilitation is none to nonexistent. They should be given their vote back.
The “standard” minumum wage for Maori are paid less than them. It’s important Maori can switch to and from the Maori and general role when ever the business party try and flog of Maori assets and interests to Chinese water bottling companies ect.
We will need Maori interests inorder to balance Chinese interests.
For this bill to pass, does it have to pass in entirety or can it be cherry picked. Regards lowering the voting age to 16. I maybe wrong, but I always thought the right to vote coincided with the age of majority. If the age of majority were to become 16 by default if voting age were lowered to that, there are all sorts of ramifications, such as the ability to enter contracts. Further, along with the right to vote comes the ability to stand for parliament, I presume. Hmmm….
Bills get cherrypicked. And amended.
It’s true that the voting age tends to match the so-called age of majority (like the drinking age), but that’s only a convention. It could just as easily be linked to 16, the age when one can legally have sex and get married (a fairly responsible commitment), and when many leave school, get a job, and start paying taxes.
One argument in favour of 16-year-olds voting is to establish the voting habit in them before they leave school. In the 2020 election, 22% of eligible voters aged 18 to 24 didn’t vote, more than 24% of those 25 to 39 didn’t. Democracy needs their votes.
Is this a performance art peice entitled “Golriz tries for relevance” ?
NO!!!
( Cough-cough…) ‘Peice’ is spelled / spelt p.i.e.c.e. fyi.
All those things above are worthy things. I’d personally also like to see voting be made compulsory.
I’d also like to see the crimes committed against our democracy, which gave rise to the plutocratic, fascist-capitalism that’s parasitised and bedevilled our democracy over the last almost forty years, be reversed, repaired and those responsible be asset stripped as required and all monies recouped be returned to our country via the most at risk first. I’m sure all those people who live next door to a gangster P house would be happy with those ideas.
Re the young leaving AO/NZ. Yeah, of course they are. Why not? AO/NZ had its sole stolen by roger douglas and his infestation of plutocrats, the ones who ran from his arse hole, the one they’d been kissing to ensure they had pole position for their greed frenzy in snapping up a public asset or several.
Young people are looking for countries with sole. AO/NZ no longer has one. We have anal retention, anxiety, panic attacks and we dress appallingly and The Warehouse is our church. Our politicians are like that flat beer you found in the fridge you thought might be drinkable, they have less charisma than a dead bird jammed in the radiator grill and I have a question? Are they human? Or are they robots banished from Robot Land for being too boring? They’re witless, blank, bloodless meat packs. A three wheeled shopping trolly could do their jobs. All they have to do is go unnoticed while being loaded up with our money. Adern sounds like a depressed bingo caller while luxon, oh my God, when he starts talking headstones try to commit suicide.
Poor ol Nu Zilland. The over regulated, under haemorrhoid creamed, traffic coned-off, fluro vest wearing, caution taped, prozac paradise where 99% of us are broke as fuck and no one needs to be.
@CB
Pre coffee spelling… You amplify my point that these people (not just Golriz) as a collection do very little of any relevance, all the while gulping down (creamy?) taxpayers money as fast as they can.
Soul is not spelled sole.
Either or. Plenty of other things to stretch our brains out over.
I agree with you, countryboy… but if you are going to pick on someone getting i before e wrong, you should not write in ‘sole’ when you mean ‘soul’/
(I want to maintain my reputation as a pedant.)
fyi. I counted 15 typos…and I am german! Hillaryarious!
Du hast ‘Hilarious’ mal geschriben.
It’s verschrieben. And it was done on porpoise.
Ba ha ! That’s brilliant. That’ll learn me to face of againts the edjacated.
Spelt is a type of grain that is related to wheat, barley, and rye. Its scientific name is Triticum spelta ( 1 ). In fact, spelt is considered a distinct type of wheat. Peice be with you.
I agree that voting should be compulsory as in Australia: a civic duty for every citizen. But give the vote to 16-year-olds anyway, so that they have a chance to establish the voting habit while still at school, which will encourage them to continue. Remember, 700,000 people eligible to vote did not in 2020, and a high proportion of them were aged between 18 and 39. (As an aside, however, the claim that ‘While it is certainly true that teens don’t develop frontal lobes until their mid 20s …’ is amusingly sweeping.)
Using the overseas residents who missed out on voting in 2020 as an excuse to extend the franchise to all New Zealand citizens who live overseas regardless of their lack of connection is a terrible idea. All those moaning Kiwis who couldn’t vote could have dropped by for a weekend in 2018 or 2019 to refresh their credentials, but didn’t.
Taking the vote away from permanent residents is another bad idea. Many permanent residents don’t become full citizens because of the problems it might cause them elsewhere, but they nevertheless are fully committed to New Zealand. Permanent Resident: get it?
Lower the threshold from 5% to 4%? That’s tokenist crap. Back the Maori Party and support their demand to lower the threshold to 2.5% which would get a party into Parliament with three List MPs. (And coat-tailing becomes almost irrelevant, but get rid of it.)
Give all prisoners the right to vote regardless of their crime or sentence. Of course. These people are human beings, and need to be encouraged to maintain a sense of connection with society, not treated like animals.
indeed compulsory voting, if you don’t like the choices then spoil your ballot but make the effort to cast the bloody thing.
.OR shut the fuck up and light up another spliff.
We need more votes this is where we can get them.
More votes from who Bob? The 16 to 17 year olds? If the likes of the Nats fear that group of New Zealanders voting you should be asking why. National always prattle on about avoiding debt for future generations (which oddly enough when it comes to education seems to be no issue at all) so what makes them so scared of pitching that to younger New Zealanders?
You know what I mean.
Bob – I think Wheel makes a very good point about National’s hypocrisy regarding student debt. You know what Wheel meant – why no counter-argument?
Because it’s silly.
So no counter- argument?
Very poor Booby, very, very poor, in fact your reply was extremely silly( as always).
get the 16 yr olds in, betray them in the first term and see how that goes….kids can be neo nazis as well as greenies depending on the fashion of the day.
Well said but Bob won’t respond unless it’s a one liner.
Agree.
‘bob bumper sticker brain’ has issues with cognitive thought.
The young are captured by Greens as they have all the answers without the experience ce to see the concequences. As the young travel overseas these would be lost Green votes The prisoners would vote Green as they are soft on crime . Nobody that makes money from business would vote Green . 5 percent keeps out the other looneys that could support Greens. All in all it seems a very self serving move.
Trevor how on earth would you know who the young are captured by? What a sweeping generalisation. Are you seriously telling me a 16-17 year Max Key type, or that f’wit that thought Nadia Lim was virtually nude in a prospectus, would ever vote Green? I have serious doubts
I have grandchildren and teacher friends who talk about the young people . If you think Simon Henry is young at 60 then there is chance for me yet.
I think it was Churchill who said if you were not a socialist when young you did not have a heart but if you remained a socialist when old you did not have a brain.
Absolutely true Wheel
Even if the did vote Greens no different than most farmers voting National with their vested interests.
Absolutely true Trevor.
Absolutely not Bob.
Spot-on, Bert.
You think gang members in prison would vote Green? Stop smoking crystal bruh, your teeth will fall out.
Implementing the recommendations from 2012!
implementing the Electoral Commission’s 2012 MMP Review recommendations – ooops. But still. 2012!
At that speed we ain’t never going to catch up with today, nevermind tomorrow and the future – near and past.
I think we should give the vote to all kids as soon as they finish primary school. Which ensures there is nothing left in life to work your way towards. This will ensure all the kids (and yes 16 year olds are kids still) get instant gratification, which is their main driver in life these days. We should also give them a driving license as soon as they can look over the dashboard. But not send them to adult prison when they commit crimes like ram raiding…no no no can’t have that. So having sorted all that, the Greens will soon be a major party with approx 80% of the vote in the bag. That’s the plan isn’t it…how to we jig the system to get our votes up?
Yes that is exactly their ploy.
No, I suspect that their ultimate aim is voting rights for the unborn foetus. Be reasonable!
Yes I think that’s more accurate.
No JK, I think the old c*nts are doing a fine job of ensuring “there is nothing left in life to work your way towards”. Especially that age that got free education that they probably didn’t need because they fell arse first into a job anyway.
You do realise that this bill goes to get voted on in the House and if it passes then 16 to 17 year olds can vote for whoever they like. Did David Seymour champion the right to die so that only ACT supporters could top themselves?
You know just kraut, it would be nice if once, just once, on this site you could actually put up an argument which wasn’t your usual snowflake triggered poor me schtick.
The amount of strawman arguments you throw around is at this point rather droll.
You remind me of a fubar Stalinists who infected the left in my youth or the woke crowd these days. Drunk on their own self righteous.
100 % Ignatius
Self righteous?
Ignatius and your not?
Fuck wee Bob it must be tiresome having to continually prop up ya buddy.
And a little hypocritical of others wee Bob/ John aren’t you?
” How do we jig up the system to get our votes up”…
Buy up the NZ Herald, fill it with ex National politicians and get Paula Bennett to do a fundraiser of the rich and influential to the tune of millions in donations. There that should do it, that’s the plan isn’t it?
What on earth is that about?
My mistake Booby, I thought you had a speckle of intelligence, I won’t make that mistake again.
Speckle?
Sorry Iggy
I think we should give 16 year olds the vote.
There you go. What more do you want? That’s what you want to hear, right?
Cue, more dirty filthy personal attacks on Golriz–a woman MP that had to have Police protection at one stage such is the fury of frustrated Incels and racists.
Cue, expostulations from grumpy boomers on all counts of the proposal–and the “hang ’em high” lot re prisoners.
This Electoral (Strengthening Democracy) Amendment Bill with some needed and expected changes, will be a good move for many NZers if participation in democracy is improved.
Really agree with Martyn on the unpublished Roll, should be widely publicised and super easy to sign on to.
it’s good not to have rancid blind incel prejudice against women but ok to slag ‘boomers’ at every opportunity huh tiger? sort y’self out.
I am not in favour of 16yr olds voting they need to enjoy life and stop being in a hurry to grow up. We should be encouraging those that don’t vote to do so.
Why encourage people to vote.
I don’t think those that are not interested or informed or those that are simply ambivalent or that prefer to trust the collective judgement of their fellow citizens should be encouraged to vote. Might be better to make it harder to vote, if anything.
Why make it harder to vote that is plain dumb we could make it mandatory like our Aussie mates.
Weir said Covid.
I chucked 1 party vote only last time, a thank you for getting a bill across the line that I felt was seriously important. The 2 times before that I didn’t grace a polling booth. Today I see no good reason to walk into one every again based on the current trend.
How would you encourage me to walk into a polling both next year?
I am not in favour of 16 year olds voting – most are good kids but they are still kids, still at school, they haven’t worked and paid taxes, ie earned the right to have a say which may determine the politics and government of the country.
And I do not want my vote to be cancelled out by someone who lives their life and gets all their info off social media/ their phone.
A small problem with your simplistic logic RosieLee. Sure, 16 year olds in the main haven’t paid taxes but they are sure as f**k going to – big time. You have conveniently overlooked the fact that the Government debt incurred today for your generation will be left for them to pay, long after you are gone. It makes sense that they should have an exercisable option to curb the ‘Me – Now!’ generations who are mortgaging the future of today’s 16 to 18 year olds.
Spot on.
It’s strange that there is much debate over the wisdom of sixteen year olds voting when one can easily find elderly people with diminishing faculties who vote.
Good intelligent response Andy K
Well said Covid.
There are other considerations I think to the ones you discuss Martyn. My almost 16 yr old has been endoctrinated at school. 8 of her potential classes this year (20) are to do with either Climate or mainly, Identity Politics. My daughter worships Jacinda and believes everything the IPCC says. Kids today (especially in a girl’s school) are raised in woke echo chambers. The Greens and Labour know that if they lower the voting age, the votes will mostly go to them. Similarly with criminals, its likely their votes will go Left. Stopping those living abroad may well limit the overseas detractors of Labour particularly at the moment.
So these are all things to consider. If you shift boundaries, limit or increase access to voting (Straight out of the US Republican party playbook) then by default you are having a potentially very significant impact on your democracy. Just imagine if either side (in this case likely to be left) get a 5 – 10% windfall from these changes. We may find ourselves with a LINO government for decades without impetus to change and do better.
The rights and wrongs are one consideration but we’d be naive to view this bill as anything other than primarily about political power. As an aside, Maori and Pasifica would also get more representation from this arrangement so everywhere you look, there are some very significant political issues that will fall out of this so its something that I believe we should vote on via referendum. I think discussing the issues one by one is a smokescreen and it’s typical ‘business as usual’ for this government. Appear to be progressive and transformative whilst incrementally plotting. And almost as bad, never delivering anything that brings about real change for real NZer’s.
Issue by issue, yes, Crims not voting is a human rights issue. Not sure how many 16 year olds do work but certainly if NZDF takes anyone under 18 into a war zone then definitely they should get the vote. People who live overseas for long periods should give up the right to vote as they are not paying tax here.
I am sure that people here have lots of views on the reasons for and against but lets not forget the biggest one. Political power and what it will really mean to NZers.
To sum up, you like things the way they are, because you fear that any change might enfranchise people who want to change the way things are.
Probably.
Maybe but I can say I havent decided my vote yet. And I agree you can argue with real substance that all those voting arrangements should change.
I am pointing out that these changes have far reaching consequences beyond the initial rights and wrongs so we need to understand that as it could very well mean NZ is governed by one party for a very long time. One that I also voted for.
For this reason alone we should have a referendum.
Wheel says”Trevor how on earth would you know who the young are captured by? What a sweeping generalisation.”
Granddaugher attends co ed college in wellington- all except her parrot what their liberal parents parrot from the MSM
A couple of thoughts:
Firstly the ‘taxation without representation’ aspect could equally apply to kiwis offshore. If they’re not ‘resident for tax purposes’ then they shouldn’t get the vote, regardless of how long they’ve been away.
Secondly if we lower the voting age to 16 can we also treat them as adults in the justice system?
And 16 year olds aren’t allowed to go to the pub or play in some contact sports like rugby league, they have to stay in their age grade a health and safety measure.
I disagree here. I do not see myself as regressive but do take issue with 16 and 17 year olds having the right to vote, and also with all prisoners having the right to vote, as well as NZ citizens who are living overseas.
I do see, however, more of an argument, particularly in these times, in favour of implementing a four year parliamentary term.
My main concern actually is that older people and their issues of concern are not adequately represented, particularly because of the fact that Winston Peters catered to them and remains the sole politician that does. Going forward there will be an increased need for the elderly in a range of areas.
MMP doesn’t bother me in particular because coat-tailing has been given a bad rep ever since the electoral rules were changed. Many people will still opine even today that MMP is better than first past the post because MMP provides checks and balances that the old system could not have. If you look at the USA for example, here is the most developed country on earth and yet every eight years they go from a democratic government to a republican government and vice versa and the lives of everyone changes dramatically due to tax changes, budgeting changes in health, education, etc, and some of these changes are so extreme and unfair on certain groups of people. Our political system here in New Zealand is a lot fairer.
We’re making our democracy fair…….sounds like an ad for the IRD…….
Funny how, for a party looking for more support, the Greens never have an opinion on law and roder and justice and how to deal with crime and the gang problems. Golriz should work on that rather than recruit kids into the fold.
They do and she is. How about getting your head out of wherever it is and do some research before ignorantly mouthing off.
No aom, he’d struggle to get his head out of any orifice.
If development of their frontal lobes is a hindrance to extending the voting age to younger people, and despite them being among those most affected by the decisions made at the ballot box, how about, rather than lowering the voting age, just extending parents voting rights to include whatever number of children they have. Did somebody say something about cats and pigeons?.
A problem with that idea, Mr. Evans, is that less intelligent people tend to have more children. So perhaps not likely to improve the quality of our democracy:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/smarter-women-have-fewer-children-researcher-discovers/NIEZV4LGSJ2M5KMB2FC73WFQF4/
I’m not sure about cats or pigeons though.
In any case, the short-term nature of politics in this country undermines the argument about young people being more affected by decisions made at the ballot box.
Excuse me……..just because nz herald deems the 2.5 child average to be ‘smart’ I would say there are a myriad of women with much larger families who are way more intelligent than you could possibly imagine.
Have you heard about the ‘smart’ motorways where all the fatal accidents occur?
‘Smart’ used to mean well dressed and presentable. How far we have fallen.
Children from larger families tend to be better adjusted socially.
Falling birthrates equals collapsing economies.
Maybe you’re just looking for a bite but what you said is insulting.
Golriz’s bill to me is logical in that if you can survive till the age of 16 in this country you should have every right to vote. And change rolls.
Comments are closed.