Legal Beagle by Graeme Edgeler

Read Post

Legal Beagle: It's (almost) never that simple

50 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

  • merc,

    Casino = small pox blanket.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • tussock,

    If Key's giving his time to a commercial body during an election campaign, isn't that treating? Surely an illegal gift by a politician can't undo an illegal gift to a politician?

    Otherwise you could give them free advertising as long as they pimped your business for free during question time. That can't be right.

    Since Nov 2006 • 338 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    Will we see Joyce (or Gerry by proxy) suggesting a partnership with the nearby Chch Casino (part owned by Sky City I think)?

    I wouldn't be surprised - though I'm with Graeme on that being just usual business for large projects rather than corruption. Plenty of that elsewhere.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 15769 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to merc,

    Casino = small pox blanket.

    nice

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 15769 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to tussock,

    If Key’s giving his time to a commercial body during an election campaign, isn’t that treating?

    No. Is he corruptly trying to change that body's vote (or someone else's)? If not, it's not treating.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 2971 posts Report Reply

  • Alex Coleman,

    So the Electoral Commission has replied, and basically said they can’t make a judgment on a radio show without seeing a transcript. But they have been pretty clear about putting the responsibility on the broadcaster, which is useful.

    Emph. mine

    http://thestandard.org.nz/pms-office-cuts-radio-dead/

    That little note about usefulness, made by someone in the PMs office prior to the broadcast, sticks in my craw.


    Are there cabinet manual implications there? Thinking about high ethical standards and what not. It certainly looks, right there, that they are far from sure that the broadcast will be legit, but go ahead with it because the broadcaster will be the ones on the hook.

    Or is it not a cabinet manual thing because it's political rather than policy work?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 193 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    No. Is he corruptly trying to change that body’s vote (or someone else’s)? If not, it’s not treating.

    Indeed. Treating is basically bribery, but with food & drink instead of money.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 3912 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    If, at election time, a pro-National businessman were to produce and distribute a bunch of leaflets with a National electoral message on the front and a business advertisement on the back (and having a promoter statement), would this be a donation? Could they argue that the cost was defrayed by increased attention given to their business message?

    Or, if DB were to run Tui ads attacking Labour policies (again with promoter statement) could they argue that the advertising was zero cost for the same reason?

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4221 posts Report Reply

  • Euan Mason,

    Shearer makes a slick one hour TV programme during which he discusses all sorts of things other than politics, and TV3 agrees to show it during prime time just before the next election, at no charge. TV3 thinks that having a high profile politician on TV during an election campaign will be good for its ratings, and Shearer says that this free airtime is not a donation because he didn't discuss politics. This goes unchallenged by the National Party. Yeah right.

    NZ runs on personality politics, and one of the key (no pun intended) questions that will decide the next election will be whether or not Shearer can go head to head with Key on personality. There is absolutely nothing subtle about what Key did. It was electioneering, pure and simple.

    Canterbury • Since Jul 2008 • 143 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to Euan Mason,

    ...and Key got to choose his interviewees.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed, in reply to merc,

    …and Key got to choose his interviewees.

    He’s never had an ‘ambush’ interview – read Simon Walker or Stephen Sackur – so long as he’s been within NZ. And once again, if major broadcasting personalities are going to nail their colours to a mast, it’s perfectly OK for them to do so for as long as they play their cards with an open hand. Otherwise, they deserve nothing short of a WikiLeaking.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 3912 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    "Not to the best of my knowledge," Key replied.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6417211/Labour-reveals-PMs-emails-over-radio-show
    By any reasonable measure a smoking gun I think.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to merc,

    Labour-reveals-PMs-emails-over-radio-show

    I understand that the email advice was released before the election on The Standard.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 2971 posts Report Reply

  • DeepRed,

    And still on politics and the law, could the non-funding of Mojo Mathers’ digital note-taker fall foul of the Human Rights Act 1993 or related legislation?

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 3912 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to DeepRed,

    I believe it might.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 1701 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    Indeed, but not tabled in parliament?

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to DeepRed,

    For sure. But everyone would rather get on with the job than waste time on that, I'm sure.

    The core issue as I see it is Lockwood's misunderstanding: it is actually Parliament's accessibility that's being supported, not Mojo's. So it's not a matter of personal support funding.

    The inconsistency over his stated approach to wheelchair-users should make that obvious even to someone obviously wedded to old thinking like him. And it shows more than ever the crying need for a competent education programme for everyone including our politicians.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 15769 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    And Smith was a teacher. As ever NRT has a good point or two http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/

    Since Dec 2006 • 2468 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Sacha,

    I've copied my post to the accessibility thread (which seems more fitting), if you feel moved to respond to it.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 15769 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to DeepRed,

    Fall foul in what sense?

    In the sense that a body like the Human Rights Review Tribunal or a Court could look into it and decided whether it had? No. I anticipate that parliamentary privilege/comity between the branches of government tells everyone else to stuff off.

    In the sense that reasonable accommodations weren't provided as required by law? Well, is two full-time staff members who will do whatever you want within reason and ~$1.8m provided each year to the Greens, the sole purpose of that money being to be spent almost however they want to assist Green Members of Parliament to function effectively as representatives a sufficient accommodation, or not?

    Other parties spend the similar staff time/money/ they get to assist, for example, technologically-challenged MPs by printing off all their incoming email and drafting all their emails from dictation. Parties without this technological disability can spend that money on other things, but haven't seemed to complain that parties with technologically-adept MPs get the same funding without the same need etc. etc.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 2971 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    Other parties spend the similar staff time/money/ they get to assist, for example, technologically-challenged MPs by printing off all their incoming email and drafting all their emails from dictation. Parties without this technological disability can spend that money on other things, but haven’t seemed to complain that parties with technologically-adept MPs get the same funding without the same need etc. etc.

    I appreciate that you're making a point as (I presume) Devil's Advocate, but those of us who do operate with disabilities could easily take offence at your phrase "technological disability". Deciding not to learn how to do something is not the same as being physically incapable.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 1701 posts Report Reply

  • Euan Mason,

    Irrespective of whether it was worth something to the station, Key got free radio time; something his party would normally pay for. After all, companies don't donate to the National Party out of the goodness of their hearts. They clearly expect a policy return, yet what they pay is a donation.

    Canterbury • Since Jul 2008 • 143 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Euan Mason,

    Irrespective of whether it was worth something to the station, Key got free radio time; something his party would normally pay for.

    Actually, no. Radio time is something National is legally forbidden from paying for (which is why Radio Live will be in trouble if Police get around to charging them this week).

    After all, companies don’t donate to the National Party out of the goodness of their hearts. They clearly expect a policy return, yet what they pay is a donation.

    I don’t think that’s clear at all. I suspect most people who donate to a political party do so not because it will adopt policies it might want, but because it already has, and they'd like it to win an implement them.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 2971 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Euan Mason,

    After all, companies don’t donate to the National Party out of the goodness of their hearts. They clearly expect a policy return, yet what they pay is a donation.

    Euan: No they don't, just as unions don't donate to the Labour Party for shits and giggles. You might, however, want to be careful about insinuating anyone "buys" policy no matter how carefully couched in the passive-aggressive voice it is.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 11622 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to nzlemming,

    those of us who do operate with disabilities

    beware surgeons :)

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 15769 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.