The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Section 44 part iv Question

Section 44 part iv Question

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Thanks for that info Yuyitsu , although I remain shocked that even some people who have been in jail for up to a year can run for election.
Posted by Suseonline, Tuesday, 8 January 2013 8:43:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<although I remain shocked that even some people who have been in jail for up to a year can run for election.>>

And even over a year, once they completed their term.

But what's the problem with that?

If you don't want someone who has been in jail to represent you, then just don't vote for them. This information should be publicly available and you can rely on the other candidates to publish it.

Looking at most current politicians (those who have not yet been caught), I think that prisoners could do a better job!
Posted by Yuyutsu, Tuesday, 8 January 2013 8:51:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Better a competent & experienced crook than an incompetent & inexperienced do-gooder.
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 8 January 2013 9:57:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Unfortunately politicians are always incompetent crooks.

Cheers,

Tony
Posted by Tony Lavis, Tuesday, 8 January 2013 10:16:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yuyutsu,

I'm not up on the finer points of law, so would you clarify something for me please.

If an elected member is found to have misused funds [i.e. travel funds or paying for family and friends on supposedly parliamentary business], and pays that amount back before any further proceedings are brought against him/her, does that mean there will be no further repercussions against them - even if they knowingly did this in the hope it would be overlooked?

In my mind, paying back an amount which has been used for anything other than parliamentary business should not be sufficient reason for the person to not be charged with the offence just because they've been caught out.
Posted by worldwatcher, Tuesday, 8 January 2013 10:57:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Worldwatcher,

Perhaps we would like it to be different, but as it stands, a politician just like any other citizen is considered innocent unless proven guilty by a court of law.

Ethically you are very right, such an elected member should be charged despite returning the money. In practice however, the public prosecutor is not obliged to actually charge anyone, especially if there is no "public interest" in that charge. The member may claim that they made an honest mistake and the prosecutor may decide to formally believe the member, end of story.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 9 January 2013 12:15:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy