Random Play by Graham Reid

A small tip to the Nats: to indicate how gravely you view the situation

Except, they don't, do they? I mean, is the 2005 election taught us anything it was the lying and wriggling that various political parties, not least National, went through to hide their funders and backers and circumvent electoral law.

That's why the EFA or something like it was required.

Now I see that a certain retiring MP (Mark Blumsky) is spending PS funds on "surveys" to tell us our concerns of the day should be. I am sure it is legal but it makes it hard for National to put too much emphasis on this line attack, surely?

I'm delighted Winston is taking it Very Seriously Indeed also and has said he intends to litigate against the Dominion Post for the current series of issues it has brought up today.

(This raises the obvious question for him surely: "who's gonna pay the bill this time?")

No, Mr. Reid, the question is whether he's talking a load of shit as usual. There are spasms when he's threatened to sue the entire Press Gallery - and anyone else who even looks at his funny - but the writs never seem to arrive.

Hmmm. Simple questions can often be more illuminating than the very complex and nuanced ones, I think

Yes, Graham, I can also say that in my not so humble (and honestly held) opinion that Winston Peters is a habitual, pathological and quite possibly delusionall liar. You can't stand up in the House and throw the L-word at another MP, but (ironically enough) you can say whatever the hell you like about anyone outside the House with no fear. Welcome to the world of Parliamentary privilege.

That's why the EFA or something like it was required.

And perhaps we now know why New Zealand First (along with ACT) was the only party who opposed setting up a register of pecuniary interests for all MPs. It certainly seems Peters (who loves reminding everyone that he's the only lawyer who understand the law) was down the pup when the concept of Ignorantia juris non excusat was explained.

"Hubris", "petard" and "pants on fire" indeed.
Oh it is a rich and delicious irony, isn't it?
But one mustn't get too smug at the misfortune of others.
Lest one's own petard be required.

And perhaps we now know why New Zealand First (along with ACT) was the only party who opposed setting up a register of pecuniary interests for all MPs.

Quite so. Interesting about ACT's position on that given Hide's delegated role as attack dog.

Ignorantia juris non excusat

Which means "I speak Latin and you don't"
Almost any leader of a political organisation would have some kind of legal "Fighting Fund" and keep it seperate from all other donations, as far as I know. It makes sense as different laws apply to different kinds of "Funds". I'm sure Graeme Edgeler could elaborate.

Which means "I speak Latin and you don't"

No, Steve, it means 'ignorance of the law is no excuse" -- and if you don't believe me, try pleading ignorance with the IRD or Work and Income and the best of British to you. I do love of the irony of politicians who are so slap happy with the regulations, but have such difficulty following them.

Almost any leader of a political organisation would have some kind of legal "Fighting Fund" and keep it seperate from all other donations, as far as I know.

And until proven otherwise, I believe every leader of any political organisation is expected to proactively ensure they're in full conformity with campaign finance, tax and disclosure rules. Unless you're living in Winston's world, apparently.

Quite so. Interesting about ACT's position on that given Hide's delegated role as attack dog.

Well, to be fair, Don, perhaps Rodney actually opposed the creation of that register on principle (and I certainly think the RPI has loopholes you could drive the Death Star through, but a damn sight better than nothing), but also believes that you can't flout laws just because you don't agree with them.

No, Steve, it means 'ignorance of the law is no excuse"

Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?

it means 'ignorance of the law is no excuse

And I guess "caveat emptor" applies to those providing the funding...

I'm sure Graeme Edgeler could elaborate.

I like how as soon as a legal question comes up, we all mention Graeme. He needs some sort of txt alert system. "Legal question raised in PAS 1.04PM by Steve Barnes"

Or maybe some modified version of the bat signal, casting the shadow of a silly looking wig or something. Or, I hesitate to suggest, an ambulance driving across the clouds for him to follow?

Or maybe some modified version of the bat signal, casting the shadow of a silly looking wig or something. Or, I hesitate to suggest, an ambulance driving across the clouds for him to follow?

It should be a modified Snoopy in the silly-looking wig, surely. 'Legal Beagle'!

Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre?.

Non calor sed umor est qui nobis incommodat.

Non calor sed umor est qui nobis incommodat.

Nemo me impune lacessit, is it getting hot in here?
In other News.
I went to Drinking pretetiously tonight at the Lundun bar.
Good grief. Has ever a bar gone so far downhill? (Gluepot excluded) I would rather drink vomit from a vagrants sock than suffer the excuse for beer in that hell hole. Whilst looking for more info. on tonights proceedings come across a post by the name of Jaffa Pete who sugested that Galbraiths already has such a gathering, all be it "Unauthorised" that includes more significant members of the left that we rarely see here. Annat innit?

A small tip to the Nats: to indicate how gravely you view the situation it might be useful to refer to the gentleman in question (as TV One News did) as “the Foreign Minister” rather than “Winston Peters“.

No, they need to keep this as Winston Peters because:

The latter suggests same-old same-old deja-vu blah-blah about controversial Winston...

...is now directly supported, loved and adopted by Helen Clark.

If National can frame the election as John Key vs Helen Clark/Winston Peters it becomes no lose and they will win in Tauranga.

I went to Drinking pretetiously tonight at the Lundun bar.
Good grief. Has ever a bar gone so far downhill? (Gluepot excluded) I would rather drink vomit from a vagrants sock than suffer the excuse for beer in that hell hole.

I know what you mean. I enjoyed the company and the show at the last one, but I was shocked to see how few ales are on the pump at that bar now.

The fridge was almost empty and there wasn't enough cash in the till to get $20 on the ATM card either. I asked the bar person if they actually had any beer from London, all I got was a blank stare.
I won't be going there again in a hurry I can tell you.