National Consistency: Prohibiting local authorities from restricting gene technology to ensure uniform regulations
Local Authority Restrictions: The New Zealand bill proposes to remove local authorities' ability to restrict the use of gene technology, ensuring a nationally consistent approach. In contrast, Australia's regulatory framework involves coordination with state and territory legislation, which can lead to regulation variations across different regions.
Read between the line. They're saying local governors, mayors, city councils, or police can't ban or refuse to impose a national "mandate."
But just out of curiosity ... "if" they were going to enforce a top-down mandate where nobody could opt-out, how do you think they'd phrase it? Do you think these New Speak agencies would say it out loud, or do you think they'd leave just enough ambiguity for them to say "The law doesn't say we can, but it also doesn't say we can't." Because that's exactly what they did the last time and it worked for them. Just curious.
Anyhow, tyrants, like school bullies, only speak one language. A bully will keep coming back to steal your lunch unless and until you punch that faggot's clock. That's one lesson that follows throughout life. The People of Australia and New Zealand have made their feelings about all this very clear, but their tyrants keep coming back to bully them.
Not really 'want', but OK. It's pretty straightforward that is what it means.
But just out of curiosity ... "if" they were going to enforce a top-down mandate where nobody could opt-out, how do you think they'd phrase it?
If you're going to ask me to draft a law for New Zealand, for which there is no precedent, I'm obviously not going to be able to do that. But obviously, the law would have to be very clear, obvious, and non-vague to be used in such a draconian manner and to infringe on people's autonomy.
The People of Australia and New Zealand have made their feelings about all this very clear
They have? I've been rather disappointed. They were fine with people being kidnapped without trial and put into 'quarantine' camps for weeks, even without the government proving that they had contracted the virus.
Read between the line. They're saying local governors, mayors, city councils, or police can't ban or refuse to impose a national "mandate."
Report (see pg. 3-4)
Isn't the obvious reading that no local government can ban a GMO?
Okay, if that's how you want to read it.
But just out of curiosity ... "if" they were going to enforce a top-down mandate where nobody could opt-out, how do you think they'd phrase it? Do you think these New Speak agencies would say it out loud, or do you think they'd leave just enough ambiguity for them to say "The law doesn't say we can, but it also doesn't say we can't." Because that's exactly what they did the last time and it worked for them. Just curious.
Anyhow, tyrants, like school bullies, only speak one language. A bully will keep coming back to steal your lunch unless and until you punch that faggot's clock. That's one lesson that follows throughout life. The People of Australia and New Zealand have made their feelings about all this very clear, but their tyrants keep coming back to bully them.
Not really 'want', but OK. It's pretty straightforward that is what it means.
If you're going to ask me to draft a law for New Zealand, for which there is no precedent, I'm obviously not going to be able to do that. But obviously, the law would have to be very clear, obvious, and non-vague to be used in such a draconian manner and to infringe on people's autonomy.
You can look to this enacted but never-implemented law in Austria.. You would have to prove your coronavirus vaccination during routine checks or be given a fine.
They have? I've been rather disappointed. They were fine with people being kidnapped without trial and put into 'quarantine' camps for weeks, even without the government proving that they had contracted the virus.
There were all-out protests in the streets and clashes with police near the end. That's when they were finally allowed to leave their homes again.