Newspaper websites and blogs all closed down
Bill English has pointed out in Parliament that the Electoral Finance Bill only has an exemption for newspapers, but not for websites and blogs run by newspapers. And as they no doubt cost more than $60,000 a year to run, and certainly take positions on propositions associated with political parties, we can say goodbye to Herald online and Stuff next year if the bill is passed in its current form.
You see in the exceptions to what is an election advertisement in Clause 5(2), we have paragraph (c):
any content of a newspaper or periodical that has been selected by, or with the authority of, the editor of the newspaper or periodical solely for the purpose of informing or entertaining its readership
And a website is not a newspaper or periodical. And as Colin Espiner’s and Audrey Young’s blogs are not done on a non commercial basis (they are part of their paid jobs), their blogs will have to go also.
Yes, once again, the bill really is that bad.
The Government can’t even deny in the House it isn’t that bad. All Burton can say is:
Questions about the bill would be answered at select committee hearings, where MPs would receive expert advice about how key sections of the bill would be interpreted
Now this is crap. The Minister has tens time the number of expert advisers than the Select Committee has. It is a disgrace he can not get up in Parliament and answer questions on it.
This shows why the bill must be killed. The Government will just claim the interpretations are wrong, and then come election year it will be too late. Because the most nasty part of the bill is that once it is passed, you will not be able to spend more than $60,000 in election year criticising the bill itself.
Anyway this bill might be great for me. If Herald and Stuff and TVNZ have to close their websites down, I might get some of their advertising dollars 
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:28 am
“It is a disgrace he can not get up in Parliament and answer questions on it.”
Now now David, you should know better than to expect questions in parliment to be answered. madam speaker only requires that they be ‘addressed’.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:30 am
I should be sick of hearing about this bill every day, but I’m not!
KILL THE BLOODY THING NOW. NO SELECT COMMITTEE DISCUSSIONS, JUST GONE.
Surely by now the idiots must realise that they have created a monster, so their continued defense of the anti-democracy bill can only be seen as total arrogance.
oh, business as usual then.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:30 am
This bill is rapidly becoming the final nail in the labour coffin. Those of us who are more interested in politics have a vested interest in the outcome of this bill. There are those who I work with whose interest in politics are somewhat less than mine. I have spoken to them with regard to this bill and the usual response is a generous measure of incredulity followed by a statement along the lines of “They can’t do that!” or They’re taking away our rights?”
Expect the gap in the polls to grow as more people become aware of what Labour is trying to achieve, and how far they are prepared go if left unchecked.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:32 am
And not only does Bill English say this, he now writes for NZPA (until the Herald fixes it anyway).
[DPF: That might be his cunning way of getting around the proposed law
]
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:59 am
CraigM said ” should be sick of hearing about this bill every day, but I’m not!
KILL THE BLOODY THING NOW. NO SELECT COMMITTEE DISCUSSIONS, JUST GONE.
Surely by now the idiots must realise that they have created a monster, so their continued defense of the anti-democracy bill can only be seen as total arrogance.”
Labour’s continued defence of the EFB is all the more reason to let this vicious, insidious Bill go to the Select Committee, then get sytematically dismantled under the weight of public submissions. Labour dropped 3 1/2% in the latest Roy Morgan poll, collated even before the MSM leader writers started to dissect the EFB and expose it for what it is. I’m quite happy to watch as the remaining flesh gets stripped from the Labour carcass over the next few months as Clark, Cullen, Burton & Peters try to defend the indefensible. They’ve lost the “War on Iraq” against John Key; let them suffer another humiliating and prolonged defeat over the EFB, by which time their support base will have been decimated.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:00 am
You know what has to be done if this bill becomes law dont you…
It must be flouted and ignored by all. The only way to bring down a facsist regime is by the people rising up.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:09 am
DPF, Is there any posibility of you creating a political party seeking membership from your readership and contributions to make it attractive to you.
You are aware that you have a significant footprint and the expat NZ voter would also be significant.
An initial policy plank being to establish open and fair communication between the Bee Hive and the NZ voter.
Initially no candidate stood.
Or some variation of this theme..
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:10 am
Inventory2;
mate, you have more faith in the select committee process than I do!
It will get bogged down by the submissions, become too hard to sort out by Decemeber and the government will have to run with the interim legislation for the next election, which they can determine themselves without any input.
I appreciate your desire to watch the public flogging that they will recieve, but for the sake of a sound election process, I just wish they would wave the white flag on this one.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:14 am
Now this is crap. The Minister has tens time the number of expert advisers than the Select Committee has. It is a disgrace he can not get up in Parliament and answer questions on it.
I’d also note that when you’ve been talking about putting a bill up for over eighteen months, its not an unreasonable expectation that it be reasonably well-drafted and unambiguous. I’m sure Graeme, or some other legal eagle/constitutional scholar will correct me if I’m wrong, but surely the Select Committee process was never intended to be a place where bills are (effectively) re-written because the framers either can’t be arsed, or want political cover?
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:17 am
CraigM said”Inventory2;mate, you have more faith in the select committee process than I do!”
No mate, I’d like to see Labour run up the white flag too, but only once they realise just how strong public opinion is against them on this, and once they have taken a REAL and humiliating hiding in the polls, and in their own polling – it’s not going to take much more bad news for Labour to drop below 25% support, which I am sure would have Phil Goff hastily arranging another BBQ!!!
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:20 am
Oh please Labour, attempt to get this bill through parliament, and prove to all what an unprinicpled power hungry bunch you are. Shouldn’t the fact that every media outlet in the country are pointing out what a terrible piece of legislation this is wake Labour up to this.
So, if the Labour Government are going to perisit with this bill, what possible reasons would they have? Could it be:
a. They think the New Zealand public is gullible enough to actually let them get away with it?
b. They think they will lose face if this bill is defeated?
c. They think they will lose the election if this bill is not passed? (But pushing this bill through will have the same effect!!!)
d. They are arrogant enough to beleive the average New Zealander will allow restictions on our freedom of speech?
e. They are too thick to realise that the electorate will not wear it?
So, go on, push the bill through, and guess what, we will still speak of it, we will still talk about, we will not register our intent to speak about it, and we will kick you out on your chardonnay socialist backsides.
(Unless you follow China’s wonderful example and restrict the internet as well! Oh wait, Google CYFSWATCH – you already have!)
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:49 am
The proposed Electoral Finance Bill is a “SEDITIOUS” bill as it will? (should) lead to public disorder? It’s primarily function was to distract public attention from the present Labour-Led Government’s breaches of our statutes, but the exposed proposed measures show a Government proposing to gain power under the shameful guise of supposedly protecting our electoral system from a take over by the Exclusive Brethern. What hypocrites when they are proposing a takeover themselves?
The present contents of the bill propose a shut-down on the freedom of speech. This should be enough to promote “Civil Disobedience”.
But
Gutless New Zealanders just take it lying down and say thank you to the Dominatrix
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:54 am
“Gutless New Zealanders just take it lying down and say thank you to the Dominatrix”
Well about 30% of us at the moment anyway. Still can’t believe there are that many stupid, gullible & yes, ignorant people in this country.
How can anyone let themselves be treated the way this government treats us, without at least voicing concern? It is staggering.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:55 am
If the bill is passed in close to its current form, then yes it has occured to me to register the blog as a political party. Not to stand any candidates but because the bill makes parties first class citizens and everyone else second class.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:03 am
Those who would support this bill claim that freedom of speech is not threatened by it.
What point is free speech if no-one can hear or read it?
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:11 am
I propose a law that says all ginger haired babies are killed at birth. it should get passed at first reading. But don’t worry, the select committee will sort it out.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:18 am
DPF, Good.. You will know from the manipulations in Select Committee and the form that the EF Bill takes, when it is passed, whether this is just incompetence or whether there is truely an evil intent.
What if you are prevented from forming a new Political Party by some arbitrary dead line once the EFB is passed??
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:21 am
Gooner said “I propose a law that says all ginger haired babies are killed at birth. it should get passed at first reading. But don’t worry, the select committee will sort it out.”
Will it be retrospective enough to take care of Darren Hughes?????
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:26 am
Careful DPF – if the Bill passes in its present form, then registering as a political party would prevent you from discussing issues (political parties can’t run issue ads) and you won’t be able to tell people to vote for National.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:28 am
and H2
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:31 am
Inventory2 – yep, and H2 also (she’s kond of a ginga).
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:33 am
Graeme – good point. Maybe I set up multiple blogs but then I get hit with colluding with myself!
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:39 am
Some random questions
Do the law drafts people live in the 19th century?
If not why were other than newspapers not exempted?
Or was this a deliberate instruction from the law draft peoples maters?
Is this intended to shut down free speech in media that the Governments opponents use most effectively?
Answers will be sought at the SC.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:57 am
Weren’t our corrupt police going to put forward recommendations for the next elections?
Weren’t they challenged on this and asked to produce their non-existent recommendations?
or
Have I my wires crossed?
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:16 am
Gooner ;
I have been attacked on this blog at various times by various people for being:
A Christian
white
too middle class
too conservative
too rich
bad spelling
poor research (wonder who that was?)
Been called ; fool, idiot, moron and more…
Now it is the colour of my hair!
as a ginga all I can say is that the world would be a sadder place without us.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:18 am
Frank, our police are underfunded… and they’re just a wee bit busy working on the income generation side of their business just now.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:55 am
Who drafted this Bill? Having drafted tax and other law I know that the dratfs(person) would have been horrified at it. There would have need to have been precise instructions as the contents is contrary to legal instincts. It is almost impossible to imagine a draftsman producing such a Bill on the basis of a brief. Is Sir Geoffery Palmer involved? His legal deftness enable Bradford to have her way with Key not seeing the obscured provisions.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:11 pm
Gingas always get picked on Craig. Sorry!
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:24 pm
“Gingas always get picked on Craig. Sorry!”
Tell me about it. No worries Gooner, just yanking your chain.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Krazykiwi: Granted. How remiss of me. I had forgotten that the issuing of speed tickets is a priority in the police budget.
These actions maintain the full confidence of their Police Minister, Hon Annette King, whose officials direct police to file allegations of fraud and forgery – which they do. This is not defeating the course of justice – it’s saving police time.
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:05 pm
CraigM
“How can anyone let themselves be treated the way this government treats us, without at least voicing concern? It is staggering.”
Cos the last few decades have demonstrated how meaningless our so-called democracy is and how little the pollies and ‘rats care about what us mere plebs think.
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:09 pm
I recall this is the sort of modus operandi that Rob Muldoon used back in the 70′s and 80′s, and Clark obviously believed then that NZ citizens are gullable and can be bullied into submission. Clark cut her “political teeth” so to speak railling against the Muldoon administration, its to be expected this tactic is being used with the EFB.
She still has her head jammed up the arse of the 70′s, and vents that desperation with bills like this.
Because NZ citizens are turning against this goevrment, the Labour Party starts by trying to legislate against the criticism and discord. The hole in the ground just gets bigger for Mike Williams…………..dont ya just love it
Roll on 2008, lets remove the unfortunate experiment!
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:15 pm
“Questions about the bill would be answered at select committee hearings, where MPs would receive expert advice about how key sections of the bill would be interpreted” – I presume this means the minister did not have the benefit of expert advice whihc would explain its obnoxious form or alternatively the draftsman simply corrected the spelling mistakes in the minister instructions and produced the bill in its current form.
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Quite right, Craig R. Nobody yet seems to have called the Minister to account on this. Under standing orders, the Select Committee can only amend a Bill where the amendments comply with the intent and purpose of the Bill.
A fundamental re-write of this Bill simply can’t happen without changing standing orders. It is utter bullshit for the Minister to claim that the Select Committee to claim that the Select Committee can do wholesale changes to the Bill.
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:17 pm
IP – select committee amendments on a bill such as this can be very wide-ranging. It might not be good law-making, but basically anything to do with running elections is up for grabs, if the select committee wants to go there.
August 27th, 2007 at 7:08 pm
I like many others am against this bill, as I believe the right to express a view on any subject matter is a right not a privillage to be legisalted away as they see fit.
I am sure it be possible [if you so desired DPF] for a political party that promoted greater participation in the decision making of government, and therefore had a “forum/blog” such as this to be able to robustly discuss any and all issues of a political nature in order to best identify appropriate policies would circumvent such a draconian piece of legislation?
I would be interested in your thoughts on this. After all, in order to know what people want, their opinions must be sought surely?