Hehir vs Goldsmith

Liam Hehir writes:

The clash between the Broadcasting Standards Authority and The Platform has exposed a troubling reality in New Zealand’s system of government: ministers can now routinely hide behind the mantra of “operational matters” to avoid accountability for regulatory overreach happening on their watch.

Minister for Media and Communications Paul Goldsmith’s refusal to engage with the BSA’s bold attempt to extend its jurisdiction over internet content represents not principled adherence to constitutional convention, but an abdication of ministerial responsibility that demands a remedy in the form of either a change in approach or a change in minister.

When the BSA announced its interpretation that an outdated Broadcasting Act gave it authority to regulate internet platforms, it was reasonable for us to expect the responsible minister to respond.

This is more than an administrative decision about processing a complaint within a widely accepted framework. It was instead a fundamental expansion of state regulatory power into new territory, on the basis of a view for which there is no consensus, with profound implications for free speech and internet freedom.

It was incredibly frustration to see Goldsmith declare a preference to let things “flow through the system” and making only broadly supportive noises about the BSA. In short, the Minister has acted as if he was the BSA’s representative to the people and not the other way around.

Worth reading the entire article, but I think it nicely captures the frustration so many of us feel on this issue.