So how does this work?

Right let’s get this referendum thingy straight.

We have a simple question that the left wing, mostly, is having kittens over because it is allegedly confusing;

“Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence?”

There, quite simple, even a thicky can get it. Yet Sue Bradford and many others including Phil “The Pimp” Goff are saying that the question is too confusing.

I’ll admit that it isn’t as far as a “sales” proposition particularly good wording, it is however a simple question for a simple issue.

Now let’s look at trhe Super City proposal. Phil Goff and Labour would have you have a referendum for this as well, again requiring a Yes or No answer. At the moment, we can’t even agree on the question with regards to this current relatively simple referendum.

How on God’s green earth can the left wing think that acomplex issue like the amalgamation of seven councils and the formation of a new Auckland Super City could be handled by a referendum when a simple issue like smacking can’t?

Gooner, a few months back put down the sort of question that would need to be asked in a referendum about the Super City.

Labour/Green mouthpieces and paid bloggers have similarly called for a referendum on the Super City. Does anyone see a contradiction in their positions? One issue, simple, simple question but supposedly too confusing, the second issue very confusing, wide-ranging but desperately needs a referendum in order to enhance democracy.

If only they could line up their views in a coherent way, then we could at least pretend to respect them.