Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: The Solemnity of the Day, in reply to Pete Sime,
Is this a tacit acknowledgement that referendums at the ballot box are more important than ones carried out by post?
Well, they are, but probably not. It's mostly an acknowledgement that 19 hours of limits on free expression might be okay, but 19 days would not be (and would indeed be counter-productive to democracy).
-
Hard News: The Solemnity of the Day, in reply to ,
But seen as how I have my speedy vote card, I can’t imagine anything particularly remarkable happening.
Be careful who you show that speedy vote card to, if it has the word "Mana" on it.
-
Hard News: The Solemnity of the Day, in reply to Martin Lindberg,
Where did this law come from? Was there widespread intimidation of voters before?
I can find it pretty similar antecedent in the Electoral Act 1905, but didn’t see one in my quick look at the Electoral Act 1893. It wouldn’t surprise me to find out that there was.
-
Hard News: The Solemnity of the Day, in reply to Tom Ackroyd,
“Kids! Don’t forget to eat your greens today!”
That's probably fine. "Greens" isn't the name of a political party "The Greens, The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand" and "Green Party" are names of a political party, but "greens" is not.
"Mana" (not "Mana Party") is the name of a party, however, so people voting in Mana probably won't be able to talk about their experiences. I'm pretty sure the town will cease to exist for 17 hours.
-
p.s. advertising for other sites which may have (even old) election-related stuff is also a no-no.
-
I will open a new thread for people’s polling-day experiences – I think voting is an important and exciting experience and it’s good that people should be able to share it in a place like this.
But what if people's polling day experiences suck?
"It took an hour and the polling clerk was rude" might discourage voting.
-
Legal Beagle: Infrequently asked questions, in reply to Jeffrey Simpson,
If/when Paul Goldsmith wins in Epsom, he could still resign before the return of writs (December 15), and John Banks would be the winner of the electorate without the need for a by-election. Would this be correct?
It would not be correct.
1. He can't resign until he's a member of Parliament, which doesn't happen until the writ.
2. Even if he could resign, and did (or if he dies or is committed to mental hospital, or abandons his citizenship or whatever), there would be a by-election; the runner-up wouldn't take over. -
My thought has always been that if TVNZ wants a 7-type channel on the cheap, using it to show all they stuff they own the rights to as part of package deals, but won't (or no longer) will air elsewhere seems a place to start.
Close TVNZ7, and TVNZ will still have the rights to air ABC World News or SBS' Dateline, for example, it just won't. I can't imagine it would be greatly expensive just running these and the repeats of Sunday, and old Country Calendars and the like, and if it gets funding for a Back Benches or a Court Report or Media 7 it can then air those as well.
-
Hard News: Criminalising Journalism, in reply to Pete Sime,
Couldn’t we call this one the Teapot Drone?
I've been arguing for Teapot Moan scandal for a couple of days.
[On the assumption that either Key or Banks was having a moan about someone they didn't want released. -
By my reading, Richardson would have faced charges had Palmer made a criminal complaint. He didn’t do that.
Your reading is way wrong.
1. Parliamentary proceedings are absolutely privileged.
2. Black didn't intentionally record the conversation, so subsequent use of it isn't criminally proscribed.