The right of response
March 22nd, 2012 at 12:22 pm by David FarrarAs I am a sad git with no life, I sometimes read the list of papers presented to Parliament for fun. Yes I do need to get out more often. Does an Abba concert tomorrow count? Though not.
Anyway amongst the papers this week, was a response from an Elspeth Buchanan, which had been accepted by the Speaker. This is not widely known but if an MP says stuff about you in Parliament, well you can’t sue them as they have privilege, but you can apply to the Speaker to have a response incorporated into the official record. This is quite rare though, hence I was interested in what it was about, as I had never heard of Elspeth Buchanan. Her response said:
On Tuesday, 6 September 2011, Hon Pete Hodgson referred to me by name during the committee stage of the Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill. In his speech, Hon Pete Hodgson mentioned that I had commented on the bill when it was being considered by a select committee. His comments on my professional competence and my alleged opinions about the bill make me out to be both dishonest, as being in favour of sales of infringing and counterfeit products, and incompetent.
Mr Hodgson’s comments about me are incorrect and have considerable potential to damage my professional reputation. At no time have I advocated that there should be no restriction on the importation into New Zealand or sale in New Zealand of counterfeit or infringing goods. Rather, I have simply made submissions on the most effective way to restrain the importation or sale of infringing or counterfeit goods. Further, the derogatory comments made by Mr Hodgson as to my professional responsibilities and professional competence are wrong and completely without foundation.
This got me curious as to what Hodgson had said. While I have time for a lot of Labour MPs, I have to say Pete Hodgson was not one of them, as he was a chief muckraker. Normally though his target is other MPs.
Ms Buchanan’s firm of patent attorneys made a submission on the Trade Marks (International Treaties and Enforcement) Amendment Bill. The submission is here. It seems fairly unremarkable. There is no record of what Ms Buchanan said at her oral submission, but it was obviously something that Hodgson didn’t like.
Now look at Hodgson’s speech during the committee stage of the House debate. He refers to Buchanan no less than nine times, everytime in a derogatory way, such as:
Let me tell members what patent attorney Elspeth Buchanan has to say about these matters. “Patent attorney Elspeth Buchanan”—the newspaper tells us breathlessly—“knows how hard it is to tell knock-offs from the real thing.” It then quotes her as saying this: “ ‘I’ve been judging trademark infringements for 40 years professionally,’ ”—so Elspeth Buchanan is in her later years—“ ‘and I often can’t tell between the genuine and the fake,’ she said.” That is a pity, because that is what she is paid for. It is a bit of a shame, but anyway, there we are. She said that she has devoted her entire life to telling one from the other and she cannot, so I just wish her a really happy retirement, I do. It is just a shame that she has spent her life not being able to do what she is being paid to do.
That is such a nasty characterisation of what she may have said. You have to wonder if she dated him one at high school, and dumped him, he seems so nasty about her. the jibes about her age, how she should retire and the implication of incompetence.
We think Elspeth Buchanan is wrong, with a capital “R”. We think that Elspeth Buchanan should stand in favour of action against counterfeiters and people who are cheats and liars and stuff like that. She is a lawyer! She went to a law school, and she is letting these cheats and liars off. It is a disgrace.
And that is even worse. No wonder the Speaker allowed a response.
I highlight this matter not just to take a swipe at Hodgson (that is just an added bonus). I highlight it because I think Hodgson’s behaviour is hugely against the public interest.
We want citizens to make submissions to select committees. Generally we have an excellent select committee process. I am one of those who often submits on bills, and appreciates it is a bit of a privilege (but also a right) to be able to address MP directly on issues of concern. I have to say too I have always appreciated the fact that generally MPs from other parties have engaged with me on the issues, and I have always felt I got a good hearing.
But if submitters think that merely by saying what they think to a select committee will end up with them being abused and slandered in the House of Representative, it will deter people from submitting. Look at what Hodgson said about Buchanan, and think about whether you would want to risk having comments like that made about you, as a consequence of exercising your right to make a submission? Especially, when Hodgson’s comments come up second highest in a Google NZ search on your name. Hugely damaging.
I am not suggesting that MPs should not comment on what submitters said, and why they disagree with them. But what Hodgson said, and the way he said it, was grossly abusive and unfair. It also confirms all my previous prejudices about him.
Tags: Elspeth Buchanan, Parliament, Pete Hodgson
March 22nd, 2012 at 12:38 pm
In previous consulting roles, I came across a number of MP’s, particularly from the previous labour Government. Pete H was one of those. Its not often I say bad things about people, but this fucking wanker is one of them. I would happily serve time for smacking this smarmy evil tosser in the chops. He was so rude and condescending to one of my team, herself a consummate professional.
Maybe Pete has problems with smart women. God only knows, he has the IQ of road kill, and the manners to go with it.
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Being obnoxious and stupid seems to go hand-in-hand all too often. Hardly surprising, that said, which party he hails from.
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 12:50 pm
About the most odious person that ever entered parliament. So who is surprised and where was the speaker who should have censored this prick.
Vote:Typical coward, hiding behind mothers skirts as he says something derogatory about another when the other has no right of reply.
March 22nd, 2012 at 12:55 pm
I had no idea this prize asshat was still in parliament.
[DPF: He isn't]
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Nasty Labour. Sad but no surprise.
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 2:50 pm
At the risk of starting a new thread on which my name features somewhere…Hodgson was nowhere near as obnoxious as Clayton “the carpet inspector” Cosgrove…otherwise known as “plughead” because of neat lines of transplanted hair on his head…there is a great deal I could say if I wasnt concerned about our host being caught up in some litigation at the little mongrel’s suit…suffice it to say his two complaints about me to the Speaker were not upheld (what’s that about “men in glass houses…” )
The thing that never ceased to amaze me was that despite being about 5’3″ and having what looked like rows of pine trees across half his head, he frequently commented about OTHER members’ hair or lack of stature! It was great sport every question time watching Judith “Crusher” Collins slap the little prick down… I started to wonder if he somehow liked it…
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 4:05 pm
David Garrett (2:50pm) – thanks, that’s a good laugh! Cosgrove has always been known as “Punch’n'Grow” around here. I’ve never met him though, so I never knew he was a short-arse to boot (might explain a few things…?)
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 4:27 pm
3-coil: Yes, he is very short (I am average height and he is well shorter than me)…but the funniest thing was his comments about other members being short! Almost like in his own mind he’s Jonah Lomu…mind you, in his own mind he is all sorts of things…
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 4:29 pm
When the Clark government first came to office Hodgson was Minster of Forests and one of his first actions was to can logging of native timber on the coast. A compensation package was proposed. I remember Hodgson saying that if anyone dared to challenge the legality of his decrees, there would be no compensation for anyone. Since that time he has done nothing to dispel the notion that he is a prize prick with a penchant for bullying and personal attacks. We are well rid of him. He leaves little in the way of legacy. In fact, Shearer is going to spend a lot of time and effort getting rid of the stain.
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 8:28 pm
“mind you, in his own mind he is all sorts of things…”
Least he’s straight, unlike many Labour timeservers…….. Isn’t he?
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Is there some rule you have to be polite to the offensive idiots in Parliament? Ms Buchanan was quite unnecessarily restrained.
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 10:31 pm
Johnboy: Yes…a little too straight apparently…lets just say Sally, my invaluable EA (PA to those outside parliament), worked with me from my first day to the end… we got on great, and we still talk regularly…Mr Cosgrove has had a bit of trouble keeping his… and it wasnt because he was an obnoxious little mongrel who….no no….I must remember DPF’s potential exposure…
Lets just say Plughead could be very …demanding…. apparently
And what do you mean “timeservers” ?? He could be leader mate…just as soon as the rest of them recognise his talents…I think the best publicity the prick got was through his complaints about me!
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 10:37 pm
Alan: In fact now I think about it, this whole thing about Hodgson and the submitter is richly ironic, given that one of Plughead’s (failed) complaints about me was that, shock horror, after two members of the prison officers union had bagged the private prison operator they had once worked for for about half an hour in the Law and Order SC, and concluded with “..and we would never want to go back there…”I said:
“Well given what you have told us today, you realise I suppose that you would never be offered jobs by them anyway?” A statement of the obvious I thought, but apparently a breach of privilege according to Plughead…the Speaker didnt agree…
Vote:March 22nd, 2012 at 10:38 pm
Just as well her family doesn’t know where he parks his car (I presume it is an open topped sports car) otherwise he might get a can of paint thrown uover it like someone else who behaved like a prat!
Vote:March 23rd, 2012 at 3:22 am
I still remember Pete and Trev’s amazing dance. It is etched onto the memory unfortunately.
Vote:March 23rd, 2012 at 10:13 am
Wiith that and Judith Tizard’s high handedness over the copyright infringement clauses you have to wonder who is pulling their strings sometime.
Vote: