Hard News: The best blogger there never was
196 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 Newer→ Last
-
Re: David Garrett. Rodney Hide should be very thankful I'm not the Prime Minister, because I'd be thinking very seriously about running away from the circus ACT has become.
-
Crikey - I assumed Danyl was only satirising.
From Garrett's statement to Parliament - and interesting in light of yesterday's legal judgement about suppression:
I was also granted permanent name suppression. My reluctance to answer media questions was due to my uncertainty regarding the extent of coverage of the suppression order. My preliminary legal advice is that for this reason neither I nor anyone else may comment further on this matter outside of the house at this time. I am now seeking advice on whether the name suppression order can be varied or waived so that I may take media questions.
-
As I thought. Couple of people on Twitter seem less sure.
I think what's confusing is that the permanent name supression means he's breached the court's order by talking about it. However, he's said, in his statement, that he sought advice before making his statement that said the statement itself does not breach the order. If the statement is not in itself a breach, I would assume that any quoting or reporting of the statement is covered by qualified privilege. Your Legal Beagle might wish to comment further.
-
I suspect there are considerable quantities of both roflnui and schadenfraude in Heather Roy's office right now.
-
David Garrett in ... Day of the Jackass.
-
Heh, that would be amusing, if name suppression actually applied to the person whose name is suppressed. I wonder if that's ever come up before. Certainly it's a creative defense and it also sounds like complete BS.
-
Crikey - I assumed Danyl was only satirising.
An entirely understandable error.
-
@ Philip M. I was pleased to see your Press feature on the Chch earthquake reprinted as a full-page feature in the Waikato Times.
-
Heh, that would be amusing, if name suppression actually applied to the person whose name is suppressed. I wonder if that's ever come up before. Certainly it's a creative defense and it also sounds like complete BS.
No, if someone protected by an order wants to talk to the news media and have what they say reported, they need to apply for the order to be lifted.
Also, I see Graeme has just said on the Dim-Post that it's not covered by qualified privilege until the order is lifted. Oops. Well, there are bigger targets ...
-
@ Philip M. I was pleased to see your Press feature on the Chch earthquake reprinted as a full-page feature in the Waikato Times.
Cheers Geoff. And it led to this juxtaposition on Stephen Stratford's blog, where I found myself linked to an endorsement of John Key ... But Stratford is right: few other NZ PMs could have told that story without making it sound like something their spin doctors dreamt up.
-
Hmmm. So far, the Herald, Stuff, One News, 3 News and Newstalk ZB are reporting Garrett's statement -- and Radio NZ isn't.
-
*I'm assuming I can report this to you as it's been aired by him in the House.
So if an MP names a person protected by a suppression order, in the house under parliamentary privilege, then the media can report that? I am not so sure.
*edit, note to self. Reload page before posting.
-
I see Graeme has just said on the Dim-Post that it's not covered by qualified privilege
Danyl's satirical response cracks me up:
I’m making a bold moral stand. Also, I hear voices and can’t control myself and it’s a binary image, not a publication.
-
Garrett's problem is now news in Australia too.
-
Well Heather Roy stayed in the house until the end of Question time. The last Act MP to leave today and am I just cynical thinking there was a glint in her eye along with that smile on her face. :)
-
Yes, Sofie, I believe you might be on to something there.
-
Hmm. So how does the next list MP if Garrett resigns get on with her?
-
And Radio NZ has joined the party and is reporting Garrett's statement.
They're generally very cautious on these matters. I imagine there must have been some lively conversations in the newsroom.
Prize line from that story:
Mr Hide says Mr Garrett can see both sides of an argument because he has dealt with the law.
I'll leave the jokes to y'all.
-
In update to Herald story (scroll to bottom), Garth McVicar declares that Garrett is entitled to a second chance. And like Hide he knew full well about the convictions when brokering Garrett's entrance as an MP.
Whole lot of that 'taking public decisions into your own hands' stuff going around.
-
Even today, he's bragging that the exposure will make him a shoo-in for the Albany local board seat he's standing for
Isn't it Albany ward and therefore potentially Auckland (SuperCity) Council rather than a local board?
ACT party list for 2008 General Election (first 15 of 61)
1 HIDE, Rodney
2 ROY, Heather
3 DOUGLAS, Roger Owen
4 BOSCAWEN, John
5 GARRETT, David
6 CALVERT, Hilary
7 TASHKOFF, Peter
8 ORMOND, John
9 du PLESSIS, Colin
10 TAN, Shawn
11 SCOTT, Ron
12 KEOWN, Aaron
13 KEARNEY, Nick
14 MURPHY, Lyn
15 OLSEN, David -
Isn't it Albany ward and therefore potentially Auckland (SuperCity) Council rather than a local board?
Yes, worked that out later. He's up against Andrew Williams for the council seat.
-
In update to Herald story (scroll to bottom), Garth McVicar declares that Garrett is entitled to a second chance.
I got nothin'.
-
1. Qualified Privilege is a defence to a claim in defamation.
2. It's not a defence to a charge of breaching name suppression.
3. It doesn't even apply in defamation if the publication is prohibited (e.g. by a court order).The Legislature Act 1908, and the Bill of Rights 1688 protect David Garrett for what he said in the House, but those protections don't go very far. Parliament's Privileges Committee doesn't even think the live broadcast of Parliament is protected (.pdf).
-
I got nothin'.
You know it was a three strikes law, right?
-
I got nothin'.
Time for a sing-song, bitches!
Isn't it rich?
Are we a pair?
Me here at last on the ground,
You in mid-air.
Send in the clowns.Isn't it bliss?
Don't you approve?
One who keeps tearing around,
One who can't move.
Where are the clowns?
Send in the clowns.Just when I'd stopped opening doors,
Finally knowing the one that I wanted was yours,
Making my entrance again with my usual flair,
Sure of my lines,
No one is there.Don't you love farce?
My fault I fear.
I thought that you'd want what I want.
Sorry, my dear.
But where are the clowns?
Quick, send in the clowns.
Don't bother, they're here.Isn't it rich?
Isn't it queer,
Losing my timing this late
In my career?
And where are the clowns?
There ought to be clowns.
Well, maybe next year.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.