Ha ha!

Let’s keep this bit in when we revisit the legislation post-Election.

But having no authorisation statement does carry an offence provision under s64(2) and also if the cost is over $120,000 a corrupt practice under s66(1)

Section 64(2) has nothing to do with promoter statements.

Section 67 prohibits publishing or permitting to be published. It is substantially different from section 63 and 66, the offences in which relate to “promoters” and not to publishers.

A breach of section 67 may be committed by a Government Department – even through something like acquiescence, But the offences you list cannot be – unless the publication is on the Department’s (or the Chief Executive’s) initiative. I don’t know that anyone is seriously suggesting that as a possibility.

The head of the Department of Internal Affairs should be charged for breaching the Act.

Section 67 – the ban on Government departments publishing election advertisements – contains no offence provision.

This is balant promoting of the Labour party. This is an illegal and a corrupt practive from the head of the Department of Internal Affairs.

After all (as the politicians keep telling us) they are accountable to the voters and if they don’t do their job properly, they’ll get voted out.

But we keep voting the bastards back in!

I think this country needs a *real* breath of fresh air rather than doing what we’ve been doing forever — simply turning our undies inside out ever couple of terms so the least shitty side is next to our bum-skin.

That’s why I keep promoting the concept of recoverable proxy. Yes, it would be a *really* bold step (although not as bold as some think) and it would allow *US*, the people of the nation to have the final say in the passing of all legislation.

As a nation of individuals, we could have recovered our proxies and killed the EFA stone dead.

Instead, we effectively hand over all responsibility and control of the nation to an autocracy that changes hands every few terms.

Come on people — this is the 21st century. Why are we still using a representative political system that was created in an era when there weren’t even telephones or reliable private transport?

If we want the country run right, we have to take personal responsibility for demanding change.

Or have I got this wrong?

The Nats will play with a straight bat, Labour will cheat. If the election is close, they will hang on for months while it goes through the courts…

I think I’ll go to Australia too.

I concluded, at the time that the offer was an out and out “bribe” and lodged a complaint with the Chief Electoral Officer to no avail? I argued at the time, in my complaint that to the Police Commissioner: ‘ That as a servant of the Crown she was advantaging her Labour Party over the other Parties.’ The media at the time were referring to bribes.

Today it still would not be considered a bribe. It would just be an election expense?