O'Connor is a union boss/spokesman, and it's job to advocate for the interests of his members.
Which apparently include unlimited authority, reduced oversight, no qestions asked, and the right to shoot anyone they damn well please.
Maharey is going to be Vice-Chancellor of Massey University.
Well, he's got to be better than the current one...
I probably don't have the highest opinion of Maharey among PA readers - but he's the first resignation announced recently I'd consider any kind of loss to Parliament.
Yeah. And it means its Goff after Helen. So much for any hope I'll be voting Labour anytime soon.
It also means the PN electorate might just be in play. It's very red, but Simon Power (whose home in Milson is now within the new electorate boundary IIRC) might have a chance against a new candidate.
As for who that candidate is, I'm wondering whether our recently unemployed mayor, Heather Tanguay, will give it a go...
Chris Trotter expresses confidence in Howard Borad's judgement in his column this morning.
Broad has been very careful in public not to over-egg things; its the leaks to the media which are doing that.
Meanwhile, it seems the SIS are involved - they briefed John Key (and presumably other members of the Security Intelligence Committee) last week.
My estimation of the "evidence" the police might present to support terrorism charges just went through the floor. Quite apart from their institutional prejudices, these people regard Google as a useful intelligence tool...
I’ve gone and booked a one-way flight to Brisbane...
Ah yes, Queensland - I can see how a policeman would regard that as paradise. Corruption, no oversight, a licence to beat aborigines to death in the cells - they'd just love it.
Frankly, the sorts of cops who'd move there are the sort we are better off without. Clint Rickards and friends would fit right in.
Judith Binney did a book on Rua about 10 years ago.
Mihaia: The Prophet Rua Kenana and His Community at Maungapohatu, by Judith Binney, Gillian Chaplin, and Craig Wallace. I haven't read it; I just skimmed it for the sedition stuff (2R passed 109 - 7, with NZ First banging the terrorism drum and voting against, and ACT and half the Maori Party not voting. but at least Hone Harawira was there...)
According to what I read (and it is not in front of me, and no I will not google it ; ) he was being arrested for selling booze. At the time pakaha could. Maori couldn't. In spite of this and many other things it looks like he was trying to work with the system having been convinced by the rhetoric of "one law for all", he even had a flag up with words to that effect.
Kotahi te ture mo nga iwi e Rua Maungapohatu. And it was used as evidence of his sedition, the claim of Maori equality under the law being considered "arrogant" at the time.
It's now apparently in a museum somewhere.
(And yes, the original arrest - the one he was convicted for resisting - was over selling booze. He refused to go, and allegedly slagged off the police and the king - though the count found the police had made all of that up in a post-facto attempt to justify their use of force)
Possibly the comparison to Parihaka was stretching it but to Rua Kenana maybe not so much
The parallel there is quite good, and not just geographic. Rumours of "disloyal" Maori playing with guns in the hills, plotting who knows what. In that case, though, the farce turned into tragedy when the police started murdering people (and they were murdering people; the courts found that the warrant they relied on to arrest Kenana at his home was unlawful, and that Kenana's followers were entitled to use force in self-defence against their unlawful arrest. The "morally resisting arrest" finding related to an earlier incident, where he simply refused to go with poloce).
This time, at least, no-one is dead. But I wonder how much of that fear of maori with guns is still there amongst the authorities...
And on the subject of the Booker prize:
Ok, I did. For 2 seconds. From what I have read this bill is going to be passed by about 110 to 10. Given its negative nature and the support of National why the hell would the Government/Cops contrive an event to bring unwanted attention to the bill. That claim is nonsense.
Pretty much. Why would anyone need to conspire when they were already going to get what they wanted?
I like a good fnord as much as anyone, but please...
What seems more likely is that those opposed to the bill are using this incident to bring more rigorous attention to its content.
As they bloody well should - the bill is Ahmed Zaoui all over again, a human rights disaster waiting to happen. And a lot of people should be paying a lot more attention to what our Parliament does, and the seeming cosy consensus that basic things like the right to a fair trial can be tossed in order to keep the 'merkins happy.