Labour comes out against S92A
NZPA have just reported:
Labour MP Clare Curran has drafted a member’s bill overturning the section and will attempt to get Parliament to consider it.
Well done Clare. That is great news. Generally MPs need the permission of their Caucus to introduce a private members bill, so I read this as Labour reversing their previous support for S92A. It is a very welcome u-turn.
This now has S92A opposed by Labour, ACT, Greens,United Future and presumably Progressive.
The ball is firmly with the Government now.
Once again big ups to Labour for their change of position. I’m delighted.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Clare Curran, Labour
February 19th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Judith lizzard will be delighted!!
February 19th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Yes, pray tell what happens if Ms Lizard gets back in on the Labour list?
February 19th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
Let’s just hope that it is not simply a case of refocussed industry lobbying (from one govt to the next…)…
February 19th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
OMG … they’ve done something right!!!
(I need a nice lie down…)
February 19th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
@Sam & everyone…is there any evidence out there of industry lobbying in relation to this bill?
It certainly seems plausable that this would occur. Is there anyway the public can find out about lobbying activities? How much the large US media companies were behind the initial introduction of the copyright changes?
February 19th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Why all the anguish? The National Party could never have been considering passing this, could they? Why was there ever a need for rank and file to protest, when an enlightened Right wing government wouldn’t have supported the passing of this legislation, even for a moment. What gives?
February 19th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
err, since when have we had a right wing government, greenfly?
Notice how national supporters aren’t afraid to criticise their party when it does things they don’t approve of? Notice the lack of blind following and propaganda repetition? Don’t you find it refreshing, you poncy socialist motherfucker?
February 19th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Now, now Christopher – there’s no need to call greenfly a ……………… socialst
February 19th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
I can only echo your question from a few days ago, David. Why would National even consider the continuation of a piece of draconian legislation dreamed up by one of their most inept former opponents?
And posit the answer I gave back then: Because, regardless of the colour of banner they fly, the instinct of politicians these days is one of control.
I’d like to see National adopt a set of “fundamental principles” similar to the way NZF was founded (though of course those principles were fundamentally ignored… but at least provided clear evidence of hypocrisy long before Owen Glenn). The first principle should be that National will never draft or pass a law that unnecessarily restricts individual freedom. Or something like that… I’m just writing on the fly while waiting for my coffee to percolate.
The fact that it’s entertaining this Bill shows it needs some touchstones which it can reference to see if its lost its way, which it clearly has on this.
Meanwhile fishe asks:
No. And the registration of lobbyists, along with an obligation on Ministers and even MPs to report lobbying contacts and content, has long been something I’ve campaigned for. It was part of the Private Members Bill Gilbert Myles and I drafted, which aimed to clean up a lot of the Parliamentary process, but which was rejected by the NZF caucus.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Agree. The longer you are in government, the more that you think stupid ideas are actually good ideas. National have been in government 100 days – surely they aren’t already losing touch? If so, doesn’t bode well for going 3 terms. I haven’t found anybody, anywhere, who thinks this particular section is a good idea. So it should go. I’m not sure what exactly National are up to – I’m hoping they’re just busy doing something else, rather than that they are finding it difficult to make an incredibly obvious decision.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Yes well I like many other freedom fighters have no quarms getting into the Party of my choice when they do dumbarse things Just as I support the other lots if they do good stuff that will protect or enhance the citizens freedom
We dont suffer from dogma and ideology burps like the Left does
I have and I will continue to protest to the Nats if they dare stray from freedoms path
February 19th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
The people who did the right thing are those brave souls who sacrificed their Facebook profile pictures for the cause.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Christopher asks “err, since when have we had a right wing government, greenfly?”
Err, since late last year Christopher, or has something happened in the meantime?
then goes on to ask”Notice how national supporters aren’t afraid to criticise their party when it does things they don’t approve of”
Err, no? Not to any noticable extent, Christopher, the ‘terrible urgency’ of non urgent legislation through the house being but one example where I see precious little criticism from ‘national supporters’. What I do notice is the intolerence commenters like you display toward anyone from outside of your ‘little blue tent’ and the way you attempt to belittle your detractors on a personal level. I recommmend you look at the way Rex Widerstrom addresses the issue (above) and note his obvious knowledge, ability to put a sound argument together and the polite but convincing way he puts his views foward
February 19th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
greenfly: I think the urgency aspects were valid. National and John Key clearly campaigned on a policy programme, and made promises to enact that policy programme within the first 100 days. It wouldn’t have been possible to meet that promise without invoking urgency. In general I don’t see urgency as a good thing, but I don’t believe that public consultation was necessary on that particular set of legislation – the public consultation was the election.
If National get into the habit of doing everything going forward via urgency, I certainly will be complaining.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Just for everyone’s information, here’s what I introduced (unsuccessfully) in the House today and here’s my release. Labour takes the copyright issue very seriously and is listening and wanting to be constructive:
Despite official advice on the importance of finding a solution to the copyright issue, the National Government today missed an opportunity to take steps in that direction when it refused leave for an Amendment Bill to the Copyright Act to be introduced.
Labour spokesperson for communications and information technology Clare Curran today sought leave to introduce a Bill to amend the Act to ensure a workable code of practice was in place with the approval of the relevant Minister before Section 92A comes into force.
“Despite indications of support from most other parties, the National Party refused leave and is now sitting on its hands on the copyright issue,” Curran said.
“Ministry of Economic Development senior officials in today’s Commerce Select Committee said this was an issue of high priority and needed to be addressed quickly by the government,” she said.
Section 92A of the Copyright Act is due to come into effect on 28 Feb. More time is required for the affected parties to negotiate the issues and reach agreement on a workable code that upholds the principles copyright protects while not placing an unreasonable burden on the internet service providers.
Labour considered a variety of measures including delaying the enactment of the clause, however, only the government can do this by revisiting the date of commencement and I call on Commerce Minister Simon Power to do so urgently.
“The Copyright (Internet Service Provider Account Termination Policy) Amendment Bill creates a mechanism for developing guidelines, something not included in the existing legislation. This Bill therefore proposed to amend section 92A to include the following clause:
“(3) A policy as required by subsection (1) must be in accordance with guidelines developed by industry groupings representing the interests of telecommunications carriers and rights holders and agreed by the responsible Minister.
“The effect of this would have ensured that the parties would have developed guidelines before the section became effective.
“I intend to submit the Bill to the ballot as a Private Member’s Bill so that these issues can be addressed.
“It is in keeping with the objective of the Act which is to ensure a robust intellectual property rights system for the continuing growth of New Zealand’s creative and innovative sectors.
“The wider issue of the future of copyright law in a digital age is complex and fast changing. In order for the Section 92A to be effective, a workable code of practice between the rights holders and the internet service providers must be achieved.
“There is widespread and growing support for an education campaign around the complex issue of copyright. It’s time the government took action on this issue,” said Curran.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
PaulL – looking foward to that. Won’t be long. Your rationale (he promised to do it fast so it’s o.k. to do it undemocratically) seems, to my ‘poncy, socialist, motherfucking’
mind, quite wrong.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
The Nats have blocked Clare Currens bill.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
Because NZ is so small and ministers are so accessible I’m not sure the US-style lobbying register would work. I wouldn’t waste money on a lobbyist if I wanted a law change in NZ that’s for sure.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Only a far left nimrod could say that National was right wing.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
I clicked on that link and now I have to go have a shower as I feel dirty.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Some ask…
..when an enlightened Right wing government wouldn’t have supported the passing of this legislation, even for a moment. What gives?
Because Finlayson is on record as saying he supported Tizards S92 amendment.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Government could have got themselves out of hole very easily. Clare’s bill is simple + direct. Time is needed to sort and the bill bought this. Remember the Nats supported this legislation in the house last year.
February 19th, 2009 at 4:59 pm
One hundred days in and National are behaving with an arrogance it took Labour a term and a half to develop.
Their desire to mimic their former opponents and have control of every aspect of our lives means I (and a lot of other people here) are in a position where we’re cheering on Clare Curran for goodness sake.
Could you get a more tactically inept government than that?!?
February 19th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Clare Curran’s Bill was a sop designed to deflect the heat off Labour for enacting this travesty in the first place, rather than a genuine attempt to sort the problem. Yep, it would have been better than the current law, but didn’t go nearly far enough to address the issues. Here’s Metiria Turei’s media release.
The onus is now very much on the Nats to sort this properly – if they are prepared to, they will have the support of the Greens.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
So it would seem
Probably.
Oh goody
February 19th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
still doing your (needy) kissing of rightwing butt..eh toady..?
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Does anyone know whether anyone did an SOP earlier on in the legislative process? If not, it seems a bit ironic that Labour is now trying to repeal a section of its own law. THats good news, but it should have happened earlier.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
I didn’t vote for this, National, you left-wing stasi plonkers.
Loathe to say it…
It hurts….
But the Greens are right on this one….
February 19th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Umm, late last year we elected a National government, so unless we elected two at the same time, we do not have a right wing government.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Clare/Trevor, you and your benchwarming mates could have stopped this in its tracks last year. You didn’t. Making political capital out of it now has a touch of the desperate about it.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
philu said: still doing your (needy) kissing of rightwing butt..eh toady..?
Piss off Phil – don’t make an even bigger dork of yourself here than is the current perception!
I comment here according to the principle of the issue as I see it – you might recall I opposed the Greens supporting Labour’s ETS, when it had nothing to do with “kissing right-wing butt” at all. But on stuff like the Nats’ fire@will.bill and gutting the RMA I will oppose them all the way.
s 92A is bad law and needs to be urgently amended – surely you agree – and we should work towards whatever political alliances can be forged to achieve this.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
To friggin much – Labour and the Greens using DPF’s site for propaganda releases.
Stop, please, my sides are hurting.
Oh and National, if you’re listening – Don’t pass this piece of crap law. You will lose the support of many Kiwi’s by doing so. Most torrent sites will be offering full encryption within a year.
I hate to shout but -
THE MEDIA COMPANIES NEED TO CHANGE THEIR BUSINESS MODEL
February 19th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
oh..don’t come the raw prawn toad..
..you are from the rightwing/reactionary wing of the green party..
..and have been sucking rightwing (whatever) here for ages..
..anyway..
..roy the lawyer..
..(who’d have thought..?..eh..?..)
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/copyright-protesters-to-hit-parliament-at-midday-umwill-they-be-burning-roy-the-lawyer-in-effigylongterm-bfm-listeners-will-get-the-roy-reference/
phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! The fucking WHAT??!?!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
The right-wing wing of the Green party!
HAHAHA!
February 19th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
If Toad’s rightwing then phool’s fallen off the left hand side of his flat earth
(or dropped a diz)
February 19th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
“..you are from the rightwing/reactionary wing of the green party..”
Another gem from the Whoar, aka The Viceroy of Bludgers.
You should be working/baking/cooking hard for your money instead of picking fights with fellow Luddites.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:53 pm
philu said: ..you are from the rightwing/reactionary wing of the green party..
Come on Phil, you can’t have it both ways. I’m on record here as supporting Catherine Delahunty’s Maiden Speech – which you are on record here as having attacked, as have most Kiwiblog commenters.
So I’m somehow now an utra-leftist and kissing right wing butt all at the same time in your perception.
Get a grip! If you can let go of the doobie for long enought to find it, that is!
BTW, who the hell is roy-the-lawyer. The only “Roy” I can think of at the moment is Aussie cricketer Andrew Symonds, who seems to have the same sort of paranoia and substance abuse issues you do!
February 19th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Phool – I think there’s a job opening for you………..
They say by the end of this year there will only be 2 banks left
That’ll be the blood bank and the sperm bank
The good news for you is they’ll probably merge …..and they’ll be looking for some bloody wankers to staff it
February 19th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
plus you boast over at frogblog..
..how the gibbering nutbars here ‘like you’..
..kinda ‘sad’..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
btw..rightwing greens often only came there for one issue..(ie..g.e..there’s a lot of them..)
..they think a bit of polite fiddling will set things right..
..that abusing/exploiting/killing/eating animals is a ok..
..and they scoff at non-carnivores..(amongst other examples of their ‘reactionariness’..)
..and some of them..even curry favour on kiwiblog..
..eh..?
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
oh dear …..looks like phools going OD
this is too much……………toad and phool going handbags at 40 paces!
LMFAO
February 19th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Patrick Starr said: That’ll be the blood bank and the sperm bank
Neither are any use to anyone who has Hep-C and has a low sperm count due to excessive cannabis use Patrick – um, no, I’m not talking about myself either.
Shit, can’t make a deposit anywhere!
February 19th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
“..Come on Phil, you can’t have it both ways. I’m on record here as supporting Catherine Delahunty’s Maiden Speech – which you are on record here as having attacked, as have most Kiwiblog commenters.
So I’m somehow now an utra-leftist and kissing right wing butt all at the same time in your perception..”
..um..!..delahunty is a left-wing reactionary green..of the alliance-refugee model..
..she has long scoffed at non-carnivores etc..
..so..bad ‘example there..eh toad..?
..and as for ..me..?
i’m neither left nor right..
..(i don’t still cling to either of the failed ideologies of the past..cf..delahunty/toad/farrrar..)
..i’m just ..
..out in front..
..looking to the future..
..eh..?
..yer welcome to come for the ride..
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
are you saying your fellow greenie has hep c as well? eeeewe!
“i’m neither left nor right..” bawww hawww haww
“..i’m just ….out in front….looking to the future..” yeah – future benefits
February 19th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
gee toad..!
..classy..!..deft..!
..another example of your alonquin-styling ‘wit’..
..eh..?
..see you at the vd clinic..eh..?
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 6:08 pm
and do try a bit harder..on the literacy front..eh toady..?
..it would help if your words attempted to ‘make sense’..eh..?
..anyway..must go now..
..i have to whip up a vegan repast for me and ‘the boy’..
..and hey..!
..how about trying to eat..
..without ‘hurting’..
..eh..?
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
what!! you both have VD as well????
C’mon guys – too much information – get a room FFS
February 19th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Phil……….Watch Trainspotting , the movie please and give up the junk!
February 19th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Not me Patrick – did catch crabs back in 1987, but that’s the limit of my personal experience with STDs.
Oh, and there was no implication that Phil (not my fellow greenie btw) does either.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
hey toad..!
..i just copy/pasted yr hep c insult over at frogblog..
..just so they can see/read what a ‘class act’ you really are..
..eh..?
..they need to know..
..eh..?
(btw..for green party ‘outsiders’..
..toad is one of the many greens i clashed with..during my time there..
..but he is a snivelling coward..
..who won’t actually say who he/she is..
..and hides behind that blog-name..
..but green party ‘insiders’ will know who you are..
..eh toady..?
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
Phool – “..i just copy/pasted yr hep c insult over at frogblog..”
well in all fairness Phool – you did imply Toad had VD as well??? ………and as it turns out he just has crabs
February 19th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
ew..!..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
heh..!
..i love toad-baiting..
..it’s so easy..
..phil(whoar.co.nz)
February 19th, 2009 at 6:24 pm
Phool – I notice you didn’t dispute the low sperm count claim either?
(for the sake of the DPB I have my fingers crossed)
February 19th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Congratulations. We have once again allowed Philu to threadjack.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
phool whore smokes threadjack weed grown by the shady chap with the jack clap. Isn’t it funny watching a drug addict talking to a stinking communist toad. No wonder the Maori All Blacks are racist scum.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Sorry for that Christopher, I’ll acknowledge responsibilty for encouraging him by responding (repeatedly). He does piss me off though!
Anyway, back on topic, the ball is now in National’s court. They have passed heaps of legislation under urgency that is not really urgent. This one is, so I’m hoping National will be prepared to introduce a Bill to repeal or substantially amend s 96A, or at least an Order in Council to defer its implementation until this can be sorted out.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Indeed, Christopher. So let’s see if we can get back on track.
I admit I’m not up to speed on the content and efect of Curran’s amendment and neither her statement above nor Metiria Turei’s media release to which toad directed us actually answer the question directly – would Curran’s effort have stopped this, and if so, how?
Can DPF or one of the others in the know please explain? (Gawd now I sound like Pauline Hanson).
February 19th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Phool
So you clashed with Toad aye, now there is a surprise, fancy you falling out with a guy that seems to have limitless patience and the ability to absorb nearly all the abuse he cops here and still stay “on message”.
It goes without saying that I think Toad is politically wrong and there is little we agree about but even his most vociferous opponent would have to admit that he is a gentleman.
I suppose the biggest crime Toad committed in your fucked up eyes was the unforgivable sin of being employed.
Speaking of being employed, the budget is not far away Phool, and remember the Nat’s have delivered on every single promise so far so you had better dust off that CV, I have a feeling that Bill English is going to have very bad news for you and your fellow parasites.
When it does happen I will be the first to laugh at you.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Agreed
Not if I beat you to it!
February 19th, 2009 at 7:39 pm
Wow, now der Kapelmeister Klark is gone the choir on the left side can sing their own individual harmonies?
They make me sick, where were their heavy ball-bags on this issue and the EFA last year? Wasn’t freedom of expression/innocent till proven guilty/etc, etc, and all that jazz, good enough last year?
Curran putting in her members bill is just a ploy (ok, well intentioned I’ll admit) to circumvent another parties MP from doing the same thing. She is just another tool, nine years of putting up with Labours ‘games’ doesn’t make me a patsy for one good act.
February 19th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
It’s clear that Labour is taking its new role of *opposition* very seriously and literally.
Now that one of their laws is being supported by National, Labour obviously have to come out in *opposition* to it.
Such is the feeble and fickle mind of the average politician.
And isn’t this the same Labour that just recently did another about-face to help vote out the EFA.. another of their lame laws?
It just goes to show how very, very poor Labour’s law-making. Of course National look even worse for supporting a law (Sec 92A) that even its originators now agree is just a pile of crap.
Wouldn’t it be really nice (and rather surprising) if we actually (one day) ended up with politicians whose collective IQ broke into double-digits?
February 19th, 2009 at 8:38 pm
PaulL – that’s URGENCY used 3 times in the past 3 days now. How does that make you feel? All warm and fuzzy?
February 19th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
I seem to remember a former Labour leader (ugly looking thing) spitting the phrase “flip flops” out over and over again, wonder what happened to that person and that phrase?
February 19th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
I don’t care much for the general direction labour took ever since it was last in govt, and their *solutions* to the economic crisis are little more than idiotic. However in this one issue the u-turn by labour must be a strong contender for play of the week in DPF’s dispatch from st johnnysberg, and the nats stuffing around over it should similarly earn the worst play of the week.
February 19th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
Rex Widerstrom says at 3:41 pm:
I can give you an answer to that question in two words: ME TOO
Nice to see Labour-lite in action.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:17 pm
Of course labour is against S92A, it’s bottom-feeding opportunism, what they have been consigned to.
And it’s not like they have a whole lot they can be for, do they.
February 20th, 2009 at 12:12 am
I’ve finally worked out why Philu doesn’t use Twitter.
He’d use up half the allocation on bloody fullstops and end up saying nothing at all…….oh wait!
February 20th, 2009 at 12:47 am
greenfly: the argument is to get the opinion of the public. The election gave us that. But the election card only works for so long. I don’t see it as undemocratic – it doesn’t get much more democratic than “I specifically promised it and got elected.” When they start to get into things that weren’t specifically promised, we need scrutiny. Whilst it is specifically promised stuff, we don’t get scrutiny, we get whinging from those who didn’t win.
February 20th, 2009 at 1:59 am
Oh it’s a lovely thing to see both the right and the left manning together and uniting in the common cause of spanking philu. Long may it continue!
February 20th, 2009 at 2:13 am
Christopher (194) Vote: 26 6 Says:
February 19th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
an enlightened Right wing government
err, since when have we had a right wing government, greenfly?
Notice how national supporters aren’t afraid to criticise their party when it does things they don’t approve of? Notice the lack of blind following and propaganda repetition? Don’t you find it refreshing, you poncy socialist motherfucker?
>> What Christopher said, only with more.
February 20th, 2009 at 6:01 am
Andrew – think about the interesting post-nom to his name,
“HepC, STD, DPB, P, MA (fake)”
February 20th, 2009 at 8:19 am
So what would you call National’s blocking of Curran’s amendment?
February 20th, 2009 at 8:27 am
expat – more what? Bile?
February 20th, 2009 at 8:34 am
eeeeeew, someones a little shitty cat. meeeeow greenfly.
February 20th, 2009 at 8:37 am
I fear that my predictions in respect to the backfiring of the Blackout campaign appear to be somewhat more accurate than most would have wanted.
Computerworld estimate the number on the march at 200, ZDNet say much fewer (120).
The total number of *actual* physical signatures presented: 148
The total number of virtual signatures (not really recognised by our politicians): a mere 10,000-12,000 (depending on who you listen to)
The number of “blacked out” Kiwi websites/pages — too small for the average websurfer to notice.
So all we’ve succeeded in doing (in the eyes of the politicians) is *proving* beyond any doubt that it’s only a tiny handful of geeks and activists that are opposed to this law.
Come on people, we’re a bunch of supposedly “smart” people. Surely we know the important of the old adage that “it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt”
The *ONLY* practical way to get the message through to the politicians and the public at large is for the ISPs to start blocking key websites that could result in an infringement of copyright. That’s YouTube, Google, and all P2P traffic.
Instead of just whining and bitching about the onerous task that awaits them if Sect 92A is allowed to continue, the ISPs need to get off their fat arses and take some positive action!
Otherwise, stop your whingey-whining like a bunch of preschoolers.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Stephen, I’d call the nats blocking of Curran’s amendment traitorous, the continuation of S92A is NOT what we elected these people to do. This kind of brown smelly stuff is what caused us to toss out the last lot, so the nats should pull their heads out of their collective ass and do what we want!
A pox on all their houses if they don’t.
But all that said, I still think labour are being opportunists on the issue.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:43 am
But didn’t the Nats vote in favour of Sect 92A when it was passed (I’m not sure — did they?)
If they did then they could (under our current political system which is ridiculously coarse in its granularity) claim that voting them into government was an endorsement of their stance on this law.
But hey, wouldn’t it have been nice if we had a Recoverable Proxy political system in place. The *people* could have voted down the passing of this draconian rights-robbing law and told the politicians to stick it up their backsides.
We need to change the political system to one that is more than serial autocrissy. It’s time to give the people more right of veto over the stupidity of those they elect to represent them.
Politicians can’t be trusted to rule without a few more checks and balances — that’s been proven time and time again.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:58 am
+1
February 20th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Come on Nats, grow some bollocks and get rid of this stupid law, rather than carry on with Labour’s stupidity!