Posts by nzlemming
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: The file-sharing bill, in reply to Matthew Poole,
Riiiight, because that's worked so well in the UK, yeah?
-
Hard News: The file-sharing bill, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Talk about Twitter tennis. Game, set & match to the nephew
And the comments at the end are priceless:
Tau HenareApril 14, 2011 at 12:50 pm
NIce article but i dunno about calling me eager for credibility.Fiona RaeApril 14, 2011 at 2:04 pm
The phrase was “creditably eager”. Not the same thing -
Up Front: Fairy-Tale Autopsies, in reply to giovanni tiso,
Is there a one-armed man after you?
-
Hard News: The file-sharing bill, in reply to Lyndon Hood,
Don't you believe it. The lawyergrams will cite the Act for added "authority" and most people will go "Oh, yeah, I heard about that" and pay up.
Will be watching this space very carefully...
-
Hard News: The file-sharing bill, in reply to Fooman,
Technically, I think they can but OMG Constitutional Crisis!!! (think Whitlam in 1975).
Before a bill can become law, the Royal Assent (the monarch’s approval) is required. The Governor-General acts on the Monarch’s behalf; in theory, he or she may grant the Royal Assent (making the bill law), or withhold the Royal Assent (vetoing the bill). By modern constitutional convention, however, the Royal Assent is always granted, and Bills are never disallowed
Under the Reserve Powers assent can be withheld but the PM would have to have lost the confidence of the House etc.
So, no, there’s not a requirement to simply assent, but it’s very unlikely that they’d do anything else. It would be tantamount to sacking the PM (see Whitlam in 1975)
ETA Such are the joys of an unwritten constitution - very murky boundaries and lots of convention which means "this is the way we've always done it, don't rock the boat"
-
The provision for suspensions will be delayed for two years, and even then would need to be enacted by an Order in Council on the part of a Cabinet minister, with the assent of the Governor General
Juha's right. The 2 year period is for review of the law as a whole. The Minister can activate the termination clause any time he thinks it's justified by taking a request to the Executive Council and getting the GG to sign it (please point me to any GG who has ever refused assent to an OIC)
-
Up Front: Fairy-Tale Autopsies, in reply to Jacqui Dunn,
Talking about making one cry – I watched “Darklands” last night,
Sigh, I've tried and I just can't "do" Latta. Something about his voice sends me spiralling into yelling at the screen very quickly.
-
Up Front: Fairy-Tale Autopsies, in reply to Bart Janssen,
That why I hate rules based on the assumption everyone will be selfish arseholes, because in my experience that isn't true.
It's usually the selfish arseholes that make that assumption, because they can't imagine anyone not wanting to be them. You often find them in politics...
-
Up Front: Fairy-Tale Autopsies, in reply to James Butler,
Also I once wrote off a car belonging to a “Damian Christie”, but we can keep that quiet, can’t we.
Don't worry, everyone's done that. It's part of his charm
-
Up Front: Fairy-Tale Autopsies, in reply to Russell Brown,
which is somewhere between 17,000 and 40,000 a month (I mean seriously, fuck knows).
Ah, lies, damn lies and web statistics. I remember the stunned mullet look on the boss who wanted to know how many people had read his missive online. "What do you mean you don't know for sure? We bought that statistics package for you!" "Yes, that's how I know it's at least x and probably not more than y"