Amendments Voted Down

October 18th, 2006 at 2:52 pm by David Farrar

Very sadly, Labour and allies have voted down amendments which would have made the validatng legislation less obnoxious constitutionally.

Amendments which they defeated include:

Clause 6A(1) Nothing in this Act shall affect the High Court proceedings of Darnton v Clark dated 29 June 2006 (Civ No. 2006-485-1398) in which the plaintiff seeks a declaration that the expenditure on the “pledge card” and related brochures by the Labour Parliamentary Party is a breach of the Constitution Act 1986, the Public Finance Act 1989 and the Bill of Rights 1688.

This means Labour have explictly voted to kill off a lawsuit against themselves. This is even more repugnant that what Muldoon did as he did not stand to personally benefit from his actions in Fitzgerald v Muldoon. This also cements in place the big lie that Labour pushes that the Auditor-General changed the rules. The AG is adamant he did not, and this lawsuit would have allowed a Judge to decide whether or not the pledge card was legal under the current rules.

6A No effect on political parties wishing to repay monies
Nothing in this Act prevents political parties repaying any expenditure identified by the Controller and Auditor-General as being outside of the appropriation for any financial year

This clause would have guaranteed parties can not use this Act to backtrack on their commitment to pay the money back.

Clause 7(2)
To omit “explicitly

This would have meant that all electioneering would be illegal, not just “explicit” electioneering which has loopholes so wide you can drive a pledge card through them.

They are currently voting on the final amendments to the short title and commencement date. These are now debated last, not first (something I only learnt today) so after this the Committee of the Whole should report back to the House, and then proceed with a third reading which should conclude around 5.20 pm.

No tag for this post.

53 Responses to “Amendments Voted Down”

  1. PaulM () says:

    I don’t think the people of Ohariu-Belmont will forget this easily.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. kiwi_donkey () says:

    The Prime Minister has now explicitly used legislation to frusrate a lawsuit against her personally. When was the last time this happened? What historical company does she now keep? Has any other Commonwealth PM every done this?

    The only bright spot in this is that, with the Greens abstaining, Philip Field’s vote has not been relied on to make this law. Although I wonder what the Greens would have done had they known they could make a difference.

    I am also struggling to find a reason for voting down these amendments, except a desire to go to the polls in 2007. So I suspect an election before the sunset clause kicks in, and that this will overtake Labour’s ‘plan’ to ‘pay it back’.

    Bananas – all you can eat for $446,000 !

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Chuck Bird () says:

    I noted on most of the amendments ACT did not vote.

    Has National put in an amendment to allow the court case to proceed?

    Does anyone the answers

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. GPT () says:

    Under the cover of the working day the taxpayers are getting shafted – again…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. tim barclay () says:

    They should have gone further and made the Brady figures a debt due to the Crown. That would have taken care of any uncertainty about repayment and would have flushed everyone out. I think the National Opposition could have done this a whole lot better.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. culma () says:

    Early Elections, Corrupt Govt out anybody in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. gd () says:

    Nothing surprising here for those who understand the workings of the Socialist mind. That venal feral take all power at any price mentality. The Socialists can never ever say they stand for the little guy after what they have done to one B. Darnton. This is the absolute power of a totalitiarian government setting out to defeat the basic tenants of justice. Where is the NZ Law Society? Their silence is deafening. Cat got their tongue. Too scared to stand up and be counted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Andrew () says:

    No foxes shot today. But justice, common law & democracy took couple of lethal blows.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Michael (The Right Wing One) () says:

    Does anyone know who voted and how they voted on each amendment? (Presumably Labour is against the amendments, National is for the amendments.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. book'emDano () says:

    Is this what government has come to in NZ? Sigh. Frankly I have had a guts-full of it and from now on am turning to focus on issues that REALLY matter…20-20 cricket anyone???

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Graeme Edgeler () says:

    Right Wing Michael – the amendments almost exclusively were voted:

    National in Favour
    Labour, Greens, NZF, UFNZ opposed
    ACT, Maori Party no vote

    (the Greens voted in favour of the 6A one DPF lists, however)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. kiwi_donkey () says:

    By the way … H1 and H2 were of course based on B1 and B2, the Bananas in Pyjamas. How prophetic. Time to revert to the original, and start calling them B1 and B2. They’ve earnt it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Murray () says:

    All it takes for evil to succeed is….

    You have failed me for the last time Admiral Hide.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Stuart () says:

    The National party criticised Labour for not providing copies of the bill before the first reading, because they wanted to be able to read the bill and understand what they were voting on.

    Unfortunately, National did the same thing with their amendments. No one from National talked to the other parties about their amendments, nor asked for them to vote for them. Act had to wait until the amendments were being debated before we could even see them.

    Until National learns to work with other political parties, it will find it very difficult form a Government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. kiwi_donkey () says:

    Stuart: Unfortunately, you comment highlights the fact that Parliament is unable to perform its necessary deliberative function under “urgency”. The fault lies with Labour, not National.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. kiwi_donkey () says:

    Stuart: Unfortunately, you comment highlights the fact that Parliament is unable to perform its necessary deliberative function under “urgency”. The fault lies with Labour, not National.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. vanzylnz () says:

    Is the petition possibly the fastest gathering of names on a petition in NZ?
    http://www.petitiononline.com/nzgg/petition.html

    Since 12 this afternoon it has been running at 12 names per minute. (Stood at 147 names at 11 this morning.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Nicholas O'Kane () says:

    I regret to inform all readers that the bill has passed its third and final reading. With the assent of the govenor general it will become law.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. vanzylnz () says:

    Geez apologies folks , a mathematician I am most certainly not!
    What a fool.!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Adolf Fiinkensein () says:

    Van Zyl When I signed on at about ten this morning there were less than 200 signatures – now there are nearly 2,500.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Inventory2 () says:

    There’s been just over a thousand signatures on the GG petition since I signed at 4.35pm – it seems to be growing wings!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Inventory2 () says:

    I’m sure there will be some MP’s in certain electorates taking very careful note – Ohariu-Belmont for one!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Sean Lamb () says:

    Awwwww, poor David. The issue has just about run its steam.

    Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
    Once the validating legislation is passed the whole issue will drop out of the newspapers until briefly reignited when the Courts in response to Winston Peter’s suit slaps down the Auditor-General for providing an interpretation of the regulations in direct and clear opposition to that which was intended by the regulation makers.

    Or as Lincoln put it “The intent of the lawmaker is the law.”

    So the Auditor General had better have a very good reason for over-riding the intention of the law makers if he wishes his partisan judgment to stand up under judicial review.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. vanzylnz () says:

    Adolf I was not saying that it’s not going quickly, still think it could be the fastest, just that my calculations were woeful.

    Sean it is only dead if you get away with this theft, myself, I think you wont.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Hoolian () says:

    Sean Lamb – If those who supported this legislation wanted judicial review why didn’t they let the Darton-Clark lawsuit continue? You and your cohorts are pathetic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Hoolian () says:

    Sean Lamb – If those who supported this legislation wanted judicial review why didn’t they let the Darton-Clark lawsuit continue to see if the case held up in court? You and your cohorts are pathetic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Sean Lamb () says:

    “Sean it is only dead if you get away with this theft, myself, I think you wont.”

    I keep telling you I am not left wing.

    As for a personal interest, I benefitted from Greens, New Zealand First, Peter Dunne, Labour et al. spending 1 milliion on a mailout of a few pamphets as I did from Don Brash blowing a couple of million on some private polling. ie not at all.

    I expect that Brash used his couple of million of taxpayer’s lolly for just as partisan purposes as Labour did. But surprise me.

    The only interesting insight from this whole affair is the unpleasant light it shines on Don Brash. I notice that one of the 3 National MP’s caught out by the Auditor General’s activist ruling was Katherine Rich. Who were the others?

    Presumably the mean-spirited Brash froze her out of the loop of the impending reinterpretation which the Auditor General tipped him off about in a private meeting.

    Was it because Brash is really so petty that he can’t tolerate any principle dissent at all? Or was afraid that Kathrine Rich was too honest to countenance such a corrosive political tactic?

    Either way poor old Ms Rich just carried on as per usual, unaware how head office had knifed her in the back.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. phil u () says:

    sean said..(quoting lincoln..)

    “..”The intent of the lawmaker is the law…”

    that particularly resonates when (as redrag pointed out)rod donald was the one who drove/oversaw the makings/reforms of those regs/guidelines/strictures..

    and then..shortly after..(if we accept the rulings of kevin brady)we are led to believe he led his party on an orgiasic election overspend..?..breaking all those rules/regulations he had (just)drawn up..?

    with …keeping in mind my experience of rod in previous elections is him banging on and bloody on about the importance of money..where it came from..and where and what it could and couldn’t be used for..

    sorta begs disbelief really..eh..?

    with bradys’ interpretations of these regs..(regs drawn up by rod)…showing rod/the greens..and (nearly) everyone else breaking them all…with a sorta ‘rock ‘n roll’ abandon..

    it just dosen’t hold up..eh..?

    and i..for one ..hope peters is successful with his legal challenge…and bradys’ rulings are overthrowen..

    the more and more i look at this..the more it looks like a government official over the top..and out of control…(c.f…kerr in australia..)

    then again…it also all positively reeks of the work/doings of the ‘vast-rightwing-conspiracy’.(c.f.kerr/aust/whitlam..once again)…eh..?

    esp when you consider the rightwing blogs have been whipping this like a crazed slave-holder..

    off the wall calls of ‘stolen election’..and cries for another one..
    (about as likely as your local lotto dealer giving you saturdays numbers on friday..eh..?)..

    with much of this chorus orchestrated/run through the rightwing blogs…(which the m.s.m. read/take/steal ideas/threads/stories from..we a;; know that..eh..?.)

    the old beast feeding upon/off the new beast..eh..?

    and then there is david..(wot..?14 posts out of 18..?..w.t.f…?..(as noted)..raging ‘against the dying of the light..”

    as dying it is..

    soon it’ll have cooled down enough for us to start poking around at it..eh..?

    cd be interesting what turns up…

    then again…

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. burt () says:

    phil u

    “that particularly resonates when (as redrag pointed out)Rod Donald was the one who drove/oversaw the makings/reforms of those regs/guidelines/strictures..”

    Yes and redRag most convincingly lost that angle of attack. Why: because he had no answer to what would Rod Donald have done about it ?

    Pay it back and admit he made a mistake – Not likely, say he would pay it back (admitting he was wrong) then vote to retrospectively change the law to absolve himself of any responsibility or accountability for his (umm, cough) mistake. Not likely.

    Challenge it in court and prove the A-G wrong – most likely.

    So phil u, why have you chosen to try and rekindle a burnt out argument ? Do you have nothing original to offer as defence for the actions of this cowardly Govt that are to scared to face Darnton in court ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. MarkJ () says:

    2770 Total Signatures as at 19:40

    I too will not forget this come the next election.

    http://www.petitiononline.com/nzgg/petition.html

    Have your say – even if the current government isnt listening.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. dad4justice () says:

    Don’t worry they are watching and they care as they have shown us all they have developed up to the limit of their adaptive competence.The illegitimate government has built its own coffin. Helengrad the snake has delusions of decency and that is why she thinks she can shake the stench of corruption and fraud. The law is above you Miss Clark !!! Another one to the snake, however many more rounds of conflict are planned Miss Clark !!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. phil u () says:

    (sigh)..burt..you just don’t get it ..do you..

    he wouldn’t have had to pay back..and neither would anyone else…

    if brady hadn’t given his ‘over-the-top rulings..
    (and then hid behind the authority of the office he holds…)

    there would be no problem..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    you are putting the cart before the horse..burt

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. burt () says:

    phil u,

    So if what you say is tall on facts and short on spin, then I see no need for validating legislation at all. They (all parties allegedly unfairly judged) would simply challenge the A-G in court, as we see Winston doing.

    Interesting though, Winston is in a curious position, voting with the Govt and taking a legal challenge over the same issue. Lucky he’s with the Govt but not in the Govt eh.

    Like yourself I hope Winston has a good crack at the legal challenge, god knows he could do with winning one. But I do not support the introduction of validating legislation and absolution for prosecution via 17 years of retrospective legislation.

    I agree with the A-G, Police, Cheif Electoral Officer, etc etc. I will continue to agree with the with them till such time as their decisions are overthrown by the process of Justice, not a 17 year wide hole torn out of the law books.

    Perhaps you could enlighten us phil on how you can support both courses of action?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Inventory2 () says:

    Everyone is still waiting on Winston for an unconditional and unequivocal statement about paying back the money NZFirst spent – logic would suggest it will be a long wait. If NZ First hides behind today’s legislation, they are political dog-tucker.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Murray () says:

    Only a socialist would cackle with glee at the deliberate and corrupt dismantling of a democracy to grasp power.

    If the red armband fits Sean.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Deane Jessep () says:

    3682 and counting at still more than 10 a minute

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. ScrubOne () says:

    I’ve just posted an update to my analysis on Labour press releases, there’s quite a change to their behavour after the Tito affair.

    Wonder if they’ll now go back to governing the country?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Fisiani () says:

    Another thousand signatures in the last 3 hours. Wow. October 18th may go down in history as the day that the nations tolerance of Labour Party sleaze and corruption finally broke.

    2770 Total Signatures as at 19:40

    I too will not forget this come the next election.

    http://www.petitiononline.com/nzgg/petition.html

    Have your say – even if the current government isnt listening.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Rumpole () says:

    Phil U

    Notice you do not allow comments on your blog, I wonder why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Rumpole () says:

    Phil U

    Notice you do not allow comments on your blog, I wonder why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Paul Marsden () says:

    Now here’s an idea thats whacky but not altogether impossible. Use the power of the internet to convince the 10% of the population that creates 80% of the wealth, to refuse to file & pay Company tax, PAYE,GST, FBT returns etc etc. Could you imagine the caos..??!! For a start, Sonic would become a beggar overnight. (now that would be a sight to behold!!) Oh well, dreams are free.Back to my chardonay….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. pdq () says:

    “This means Labour have explictly voted to kill off a lawsuit against themselves. This is even more repugnant that what Muldoon did as he did not stand to personally benefit from his actions in Fitzgerald v Muldoon.”

    Utterly fucking appalling. Labour will be remembered for this. Corrupt assholes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Craig Ranapia () says:

    phil u. wrote:
    “that particularly resonates when (as redrag pointed out)Rod Donald was the one who drove/oversaw the makings/reforms of those regs/guidelines/strictures..”

    And I’d like to think Rod Donald would never have allowed the Greens to engage in the flaky peformance we saw today, where the Greens opposed the legislation but didn’t vote against it – and don’t get me started on the Maori Party being totally AWOL.

    Pretty distasteful contrast from the staunch opposition to another piece of retrospective legislation rammed through under extreme urgency to protect Harry Duynhoeven’s seat (and incidentally save the Government an embarrasing by-election).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Sinner () says:

    Make no mistake:

    Rod would have voted against this legislation
    and the government would have fallen

    Furthermore, his greens would then have supported National in the necessary caretaker government to revise the regulations etc to allow another election to be held.

    PS: now 4000 signatures.

    citizens initiated referendum requires around 100,000.
    So that’s less than a month.

    the quetsion: should corrupt politicians be jailed and corrupt parties disestablished?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. George () says:

    There is irony in Labour ramrodding extreme urgency in order to disgrace themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. burt () says:

    3831. It just keeps climbing…..

    http://www.petitiononline.com/nzgg/petition.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. burt () says:

    It totally dumbfounds me that supporters of the Govt’s actions pope up an argument (Rod Donald) that, althought it adds weight to their assertion that the A-G is incorrect, completely invalidates the actions of the Govt they support and defend.

    Can I have some more fish in my bucket please, I’ve shot the last lot.

    I bet the spin Dr’s scrubbed The Donald Defence off the whiteboard pretty quickly…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Sinner () says:

    Make no mistake:

    Rod would have voted against this legislation
    and the government would have fallen

    Furthermore, his greens would then have supported National in the necessary caretaker government to revise the regulations etc to allow another election to be held.

    PS: now 4000 signatures.

    citizens initiated referendum requires around 100,000.
    So that’s less than a month.

    the quetsion: should corrupt politicians be jailed and corrupt parties disestablished?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Fred () says:

    It was indeed a sad day yesterday paid scant regard by the news last night. It will be interesting to see what happens to Brady. Here’s what I think. To hear Winston Peters on the radio yesterday to explain the reasoning; eg. if an MP was paying a visit to a factory and happened to mention the benefits of the Party’s policies then it would be outside of the rules and that if all travel and other Parliamentary Business were stopped for the three months then the country would grind to a halt. Hey, the travel, the car(s), the offices, (spouses travel?), I wouldn’t have a clue about all of the things an MP gets, but I bet it’s pretty generous, all adds up to quite a few perks. Who thinks that they are all used or restricted to a particular purpose. So these all add up to the perks of being an MP and of course they would be used for electioneering because that’s what they do. So to lump all of this in together with what was clearly a labour propaganda machine using our money is fallacious. The rules were being broken and now the strategy of blurring the line between the “good spending” and the “bad spending” and thereby turning the bad spending into good spending is something that kids do when they are snapped, con artists do it, and now we have a Labour Government burdened by its own competence doing it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. iiq374 () says:

    Fred – Of course the other point that Winnie misses in there is that he is really arguing against special perks for MPs; on which I would 100% support them…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. phil u () says:

    burt said…

    “..Perhaps you could enlighten us phil on how you can support both courses of action?..”

    i’m not sure what you mean burt…
    i think retrospective legislation..in setting worriesome precedents..both sucks and blows..

    craig said..

    “..And I’d like to think Rod Donald would never have allowed the Greens to engage in the flaky peformance we saw today, where the Greens opposed the legislation but didn’t vote against it – and don’t get me started on the Maori Party being totally AWOL…”

    craig..you know how it is when elephants do battle..
    the mice must exit stage left…

    rumpole said..”..Phil U

    Notice you do not allow comments on your blog, I wonder why?..”

    soon precioussss sooon…

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. pita () says:

    Has anyone wondered where Sonic has gone?

    I guess there just is no defence for the indefensible.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. sonic () says:

    I don’t comment on every thread Pita, I get moaned at enough for making too many posts as it is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.