the Immigration Minister
*cough* Justice Minister, of course. Sorry for the error.
Also: Gordon Campbell
..the same offence meant to justify Dotcom’s extradition – i.e. secondary copyright infringement as a criminal offence – is something that every member country of the Trans Pacific Partnership trade talks (except the US, but including New Zealand) has agreed to reject within the TPP negotiations? As elsewhere, the TPP member countries staunchly maintain that such actions constitute only a civil offence at worst, and not a criminal one..
Which, should the courts rule that Dotcom has committed a US offence with an NZ analogue, is reason to clarify the NZ law to reflect that view. I'd be interested to know National/Green/labour positions on this.
Labour's lost ground...
an aside to the main thread, but tangentially connected:
Just who the hell is the Labour Central Christchurch candidate?
Time is wasting, what are they waiting for?
The boundary changes should only worry someone like Nicky Wagner who is really only there by the vagaries of fate and does very little that is noticeable - she should be worried!
But where is the focus or rallying figure for Labour supporters?
Why didn't they pick someone when they picked the Christchurch East candidate?
Smacks of arrant madness...
OK, I went and looked a bit deeper - nominations close Feb 28 - but I still don't think they are giving themselves enough time - there's a lot of catch up to do for Labour here.
Nominations close on the 28th, selection meeting is the 8th March. As far as I know Tony Milne is the only person to have announced they are seeking the nomination.
As I understand it this is pretty much as fast as the Labour Party is capable of going, considering the (could have been much more drastic) boundary changes etc.
John Key's best bud...
It appears that John Key used no Intelligence services to 'spy' on Winston Peters - he used Cameron Slater - so doubly true then!
Apparently they talk all the time, shudder - all the more reason for the National Regime to be swept from the pages of history...
Not that I actually care, but hasn’t Peters confirmed that… well… Cameron Slater was right? Sorry about that – but it’s not as if Kim Dotcom exactly lives like J.D. Salinger.
And nor is it particularly surprising that Winston tried to change the subject by pulling serious (and absurd) allegations out of his arse that the media faithfully transcribed.
and how did Slater know?
Why didn’t they pick someone when they picked the Christchurch East candidate?
Smacks of arrant madness…
Because the Labour party has an ancient and complex democratic constitution that prescribes the timing and process for electorate selections. Personally I think it needs a thorough overhaul, but considering the changes already made in the last 2 years, it's going to take a while. Sorry. If you find it too slow, feel free to join and help out.
It's not impossible that someone in the GCSB/NZSIS/Police/US might use Slater as a convenient cut-out to launder information they want out there.
Nor is it impossible (and a damn sight more likely) that Winston himself, or someone close to him, got a little loose-lipped over a few jars and the hot goss ended up being repeated into Cameron Slater's quivering lug-hole. Because nobody in political/media circles could see the irony in Winston Peters having a downlow assignation or three, could they?
And of course when the equation evolves a larger than life, flamboyant character who certainly seems to have a taste for publicity, and, of course, Winston Peters, there's not much needed in the way of Secret Squirrel skulduggery to find out who's meeting who.
Because the Labour party has an ancient and complex democratic constitution that prescribes the timing and process for electorate selections. Personally I think it needs a thorough overhaul, but considering the changes already made in the last 2 years, it’s going to take a while. Sorry. If you find it too slow, feel free to join and help out.
Want to talk about Chch Central issues, but you’re merely a long-term resident? Pay your sub and step inside where we can safely patronise you. So the boneheaded condescension that nearly cost Labour Chch Central in 2008, and lost it to Nicky “differently abled” Wagner last time around, appears to be still all the go in Party circles. It was there in spades the first time Brendon Burns and his consort came doorknocking, but to their credit they rose to the occasion after the earthquakes. For all his good works Tim Barnett never quite shook the condescension. Even in his last term he was still making some rather uncomfortable discoveries about the people he represented.
If Burns had been given a sensible place on the Party list he’d presumably have been in there providing some much-needed advocacy for post-quake Christchurch. Hopefully the next candidate will understand that there’s more to representing the electorate than tying a bunch of black & red balloons to your car aerial.
What joe said...
...I agree. Wagner was a 'cuckoo candidate' from day one, on the National list (for whatever reason) she had an office on a high profile street in Chchch (Montreal), many people thought she already was the 'local MP' due to that alone.
Then at least Labour always had the electorate office where it could be seen, in Worcester street behind the cathedral and then Bealey & Fitzgerald aves corner - both good visibility sites - reassuring.
All was swept away, Brendon Burns was abandoned and dispirited, no list person flown in to fly the flag, and the strong Women's Division of Labour were left to do all the heavy lifting down here - which they did (and continue to do) admirably in spades - but none of them really 'spoke for' the Central City electorate.
It seems Lianne saw she could do more for Chchch as Mayor than as a Labour politician, and whatever that says to the electorate needs to be clarified...
Perception is everything.
What happened to the Labour Party book caravan at the markets ?
is it still out there?
Joe, it looks like they are gonna need a push to get running again, we might have to pull over and give 'em a shove, when it comes to it, we really don't want that other mob winning, again!
(I can just see Key's new flag 'The Sudden Double Cross' flying over Parliament a new standard twinned with the Jolly Roger from decades before... and I shudder!)
It seems Lianne saw she could do more for Chchch as Mayor than as a Labour politician, and whatever that says to the electorate needs to be clarified…
My now-retired next door neighbour remembers Lianne as a proactive and effective union person from the days when she worked in the hospital kitchen. That appears to be enough to ensure her loyalty, and for me it’s what drives on the ground politics, rather than any top-down pronouncements from Party insiders.
I was munted out of Chch Central by the 2010 quake, and now reside in Megan Woods territory. While I accord her a lot of respect for taking the inevitable loser role against Bob Parker when he first ran for Mayor, I do rather wish that she was more proactive. Also Clayton Cosgrove has gone disappointingly quiet. There are days when you could be forgiven for feeling that the Party of Social Justice doesn't give at rat's.
BTW has anyone been to Burwood Hospital lately? Three years down the track you can wander the grounds for half an hour before finding a living soul who'll direct you to the functioning parts of the place.
Want to talk about Chch Central issues, but you’re merely a long-term resident? Pay your sub and step inside where we can safely patronise you. So the boneheaded condescension that nearly cost Labour Chch Central in 2008, and lost it to Nicky “differently abled” Wagner last time around, appears to be still all the go in Party circles.
Remember, this was in response to Ian suggesting that there's no candidate becuase of "arrant madness". How is it condescending to point out that the party's stuck with acting in accordance with its own constitution? I'd say your sarcastic attribution of imaginary words is far more condescending that anything I wrote.
For what it's worth, I expect the next candidate will be big on grassroots politics.
Remember, this was in response to Ian suggesting that there’s no candidate becuase of “arrant madness”. How is it condescending to point out that the party’s stuck with acting in accordance with its own constitution?
O poor petal. And you a card-carrying jewel-of-nature paid-up party member!
Condescension and contempt for the ordinary voter appears to be as natural as breathing to you. Khrist only knows what your concept of "grassroots politics" might be. I'd bet it's from the same claptrap factory that came up with "core values".
Have you considered hanging out a shingle as a therapist? You're certainly surprising me with insights into my own character, and from such scant evidence too.
You’re certainly surprising me with insights into my own character
You'd be up for an endless procession of surprises if you took the trouble to find out what's really going on in a part of the world you're happy to talk down to. Even after several terms as an MP Tim Barnett was gracious enough to declare himself to be genuinely shocked by what he discovered through simply doorknocking. And that, of course, was before the earthquakes.
You’d be up for an endless procession of surprises if you took the trouble to find out what’s really going on in a part of the world you’re happy to talk down to.
Three factual errors in that one sentence. Although maybe I'm just not clear who "you" encompasses. I personally doorknock regularly, do talk to people, and am unhappy about being accused of talking down to people. Again, if anyone's making assumptions and patronising people, it's you.
Three factual errors in that one sentence. Although maybe I’m just not clear who “you” encompasses.
I’m talking to you, in the supercilious prick persona you’ve been maintaining since your original stupidly provocative reply to Ian Dalziel. If you wish to be cute about it that’s your problem.
Being cute is the only worthwhile response to your determined projections. Apart from silence, of course. By which I mean: laterz!
politic peace piece...
Joe, I read Stephen's reply more as a devil's advocation, something I do myself, regularly... and I note his frustration with the processes he is saddled with.
Plus he's only recently arrived in Christchurch and let's face it, it may as well be Polanski's Chinatown to an outsider...
.and you know the internet's affect on tone and nuance...
...Politics is a strange and frustrating beast - all Victorian in the basement and trying to be The Future on the telly - plus everything inbetween and all of it human - ostensibly about governance it has become focused on personalities and sides...
Key wins when people who want the same thing don't cut each other any slack...
I think I'm gonna have to volunteer to help,
any one else?
I, too, have been frustrated by Labour's arcane selection process, not in Christchurch but here in the Otaki electorate. After the last election, when replacement candidate Peter Foster lost to Nothin' Guy (but still got more votes than the Labour party vote - the red corner needs to think about that fact), there was effectively no opposing voice. Guy has his weekly bullshit columns in the local rags and there's no-one politically credible opposing him. Annette King was given the role of caretaker MP for the electorate and did a reasonable job of coming to the electorate and meeting people, but it's not the same as having a known candidate who can spend time building their profile. Now they have finally selected Rob McCann, he has a maximum of 9 months to do what Guy has had 9 years or more to achieve. Those are very hard yards.
While I intellectually appreciate Labour's democratic processes, they are somewhat at odds with the reality they exist in, which is easily manipulated by a government like Key's. Delaying the announcement of redrawn electorate boundaries as long as they did meant delaying selection of candidates for Labour, which is of no benefit to the left.
Disclaimer: I am not a member of any party, or involved in selection processes for any party.
Realistically, nine months is a reasonably long time for a candidate to have to fight a seat. It is good to select candidates early but it is also important not to select candidates too early when there's insufficient information about the eventual race. Obviously this cycle we had uncertainty about boundaries which it is important to remember could have resulted in any given seat changing substantially, but there's also things like the retirement of incumbents, events, and yes the slow arcane and complex internal party democracy Labour enjoys.
Key wins when people who want the same thing don't cut each other any slack...