GCSB Bill vs snapper quota

55 comments on “GCSB Bill vs snapper quota ”

• Comments are now closed

1. BM 1

   13 August 2013 at 12:08 pm

   Snapper people aren’t really too big on the intawebs the twitters or the book face.

   Maybe they need to poll the pubs or work sites, where people meet face to face.
   You may find it’s actually quite a big issue
   • Zeroque 1.1

     13 August 2013 at 12:13 pm

     Dunno about that BM but I find the snapper quota issue easier to understand than the GCSB one and I’d feel more confident expressing an opinion about it therefore.
     • BM 1.1.1

       13 August 2013 at 12:41 pm

       Not trying to make out people that fish are complete hay seeds.

       What I mean is that from my experience most would prefer to discuss it face to face rather than on the intawebs.

       For people that can’t type or can’t spell too well, discussing stuff on the web is hard work.
       • Bunji 1.1.1.1

         13 August 2013 at 1:32 pm

         Not trying to make out people that fish are complete hay seeds. […] For people that can’t type or can’t spell too well, discussing stuff on the web is hard work.

         I think you might have contradicted yourself a wee bit there BM.

         That said, I think the snapper issue is an important one – as David Cunliffe says below. It wakes up a whole new audience as to who this government governs for – and it’s not “ordinary New Zealanders”…
       • politikiwi 1.1.1.2

         13 August 2013 at 3:24 pm

         What I heard in your original post – and what I think is a good point that should be made – is that it’s far more likely people who care about the expanded GCSB powers are also going to be heavy internet users. It’s probably no so likely that people who heavily in to fishing would be so au fait with that intertubes thing.

         I’m generalising, but I think the point still holds: It’s probably fair to say that internet users are more concerned about the GCSB bill than the snapper fishing bill.

         That doesn’t mean people don’t, can’t or shouldn’t care about both.
         • Tamati 1.1.1.2.1

           13 August 2013 at 4:51 pm

           +1
         • Mike S 1.1.1.2.2

           13 August 2013 at 8:24 pm

           Myself and all the fishermen I know are regular web users and mostly fairly clued up internet and technology wise, especially for things such as the weather, GPS data, etc. Searching Google for info is hardly rocket science. Funnily enough, all of the avid fishermen I know are also very concerned about and interested in the GCSB bill. Snapper quota, not so much so. Most of them catch and release, only targetting snapper every now and then.
           • lprent 1.1.1.2.2.1

             13 August 2013 at 8:47 pm

             Those fishing boats, both recreational and commercial, often have awesome electronics and a lot of code for them. Many fisherman spend quite a lot of time on the nets researching their chart plotters, fish detectors, AIS colliders, depth charters etc etc. I read some of their online magazines and blogs with their comments because I’m writing code for some navigation devices.

             I think that most serious fisherman would use the net. In fact I suspect they’d use it obsessively.
           • politikiwi 1.1.1.2.2.2

             13 August 2013 at 8:52 pm

             Yep, fair point – I suppose the implicit assumption in my original post was a bit unfair.

             Would it be fair to say, though, that the GCSB bill on the whole will affect a larger number of people than the snapper quota? There would have to be more people online nowadays than do serious fishing (which is probably a bit of a shame). I know I don’t do any, though I think the quota changes are a stupid idea. So stupid, in fact, that it looks like a smoke screen.
   • emergency mike 1.2

     13 August 2013 at 12:46 pm

     mmm but the thing is that Key didn’t say “snapper people are more interested in the snapper quota than the GCSB bill,” did he BM?
2. Tigger 2

   13 August 2013 at 12:15 pm

   I’m not, Mr Key. So there’s that.
3. unicus 3

   13 August 2013 at 12:42 pm

   Snapper ! what else could be expected from this fishy puppet of the rich –

   Truman ( on google today ) was about right in describing a government like Key’s .

   ” Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition,it only has one way to go , and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear .

   Harry Truman 1950
   • Rogue Trooper 3.1

     13 August 2013 at 5:27 pm

     was Schrodinger yesterday. Where’s felix got to…
4. Lanthanide 4

   13 August 2013 at 12:58 pm

   This is a rather pointless image, really.

   Two seconds thought would tell you what you need to know about the snapper quota: “National want to reduce the snapper quota for recreational fishers but not commercial ones”. You don’t really need to google that.

   On the other hand, the GCSB bill is much more complex, so it’s not surprising people would want to google that to find out more.
5. David Cunliffe 5

   13 August 2013 at 1:15 pm

   Lanthanide – good point. Both issues are worth fight. Access to public fishing rights is important both for its reach (1m voters, including a lot of good folk in the provinces, and men that are sometimes hard for us to reach) and for its principle: standing up for the common good against corporate greed.

   I have had lots of comments at public meetings on snapper that they are switching votes to Labour over this as they now see first hand what National is really about.

   A third point is that the whole snapp fiasco has come about partly due to the utterly incompetent management of Nathan Guy, who should have never let that discussion document into the public domain. The fact that he once again bypassed his own cabinet (again) shows that he is on thin ice internally.

   We should show through this issue that Labour is standing up for the public access rights of all Kiwis and that National is beholden to big corporate fishing interests.
   • blue leopard 5.1

     13 August 2013 at 2:40 pm

     @ David Cunliffe,

     Lanthanide’s point misses the point.

     National are creating a big diversion by creating this Snapper issue and then telling us that this is the main issue people are worried about.

     The graphics indicates that there is a lot of interest in the GCSB bill.

     It tells us that despite what our Pm and his dopey, disingenuous gang are telling us to think, that people are concerned over the issues surrounding the GCSB.

     We need graphics like this, so that we are not suckered into the spin of this fishy, lying government.

     We need opposition members of parliament to inform the public, in simple to understand terms, why the GCSB issue is so important.

     ‘Least we forget’ is written on monuments all over our country, yet it appears that we have.
     • politikiwi 5.1.1

       13 August 2013 at 3:37 pm

       > National are creating a big diversion by creating this Snapper issue and then telling us that this is the main issue people are worried about.

       Very good point. This is the epitome of a manufactured crisis.

       > The graphics indicates that there is a lot of interest in the GCSB bill.

       Yes – but comparison to the snapper quota searches is disingenuous based on the likely sample population (see my post in reply to BM above). It might make a good Twitter post but it doesn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny as a weather vane for true public opinion. Polls on stuff.co.nz have more credibility, and that’s saying an awful lot.
       • blue leopard 5.1.1.1

         13 August 2013 at 4:20 pm

         Thanks Politikiwi,

         Please realise that any discussion on whether the snapper issue is of more import than the GCSB bill:

         1 ~ Is the type of distraction that Textor-Crosby intended to create.

         2 ~ Quite simply put: Its a waste of time.

         Any graphic that helps us to see that is useful.

         The snapper issue is d i s i n g e n u o u s.

         *It has been created to distract from a very negative attitude that this government has toward NZers interests. *

         I couldn’t say this better than Vto’s comment 4.1.1 here:

         Three snaps was never ever going to be the final limit – it was so clearly an opening political salvo. So predictable, so tedious …. just hurry up and set it at 5 or 6 or increase length or some combo.

         Hurry up you dumb pack of National pricks, stop fuckign around, we all know you’re going to.

         arseholes

         Here is a novel thought:

         The government could address both issues;

         The one that has been manufactured to distract from the important issue of trying to turn this country into a outpost of American paranoia.

         And

         The issue regarding the protection of our civil rights and important democratic principles.
         • politikiwi 5.1.1.1.1

           13 August 2013 at 7:36 pm

           Blue Leopard:

           I totally agree with you – a discussion of “GCSB vs Snapper” is a debate we don’t need to be having, and it is a waste of time.

           My point, and my opinion, is that putting out a graphic like the above makes it easy to pick holes in the point it’s making: One needs to simply state that the results came about through some sort of “polling bias.” If even I can see that, then most commentators will be able to shoot it down in a matter of seconds.

           The GCSB bill, and the erosion of civil liberties it represents, are very important issues which need to be front-and-centre of people’s minds. I salute Young Labour for helping to make that happen, but I think they are running a real risk of being made to look like fools.

           This is a very familiar pattern from National: Scare with an outrageous policy, then make John Key look like a knight in shining armour when he rolls in and shoots the policy down. Same thing happened with ACC levies on motor cyclists, and numerous other examples I’m sure.

           Next up is the Bill to convey extra investigative powers on to Ministerial inquiries. That’s even more scary than the GCSB bill, in my view.
           • blue leopard 5.1.1.1.1.1

             13 August 2013 at 8:40 pm

             @ Politikiwi,

             Sounds like we agree on the main points here.

             However the graphics issue, probably not. It is most certainly debateable (endlessly I fear) and is very tricky to respond briefly.

             I really don’t think this graph is as ‘explainable away’ as you and others appear to think it is. Even if there is a weakness in it; this really doesn’t mean it still doesn’t have the desired effect.

             Did “A Brighter Future” work? Was it accurate? Or did people simply like the idea.

             This is slightly different because it is conveying information, (not false aspirations) yet do you really think that any right-whinger [sic] is going to share this graphic and try and explain it away?

             That would required bringing attention to it.

             It undeniably contains the information that people are concerned over privacy and the GCSB bill.

             This government wants us to believe there is not interest, they want us to believe that only small amounts of fringe-dwellers, political freaks and ‘misinformed’ people, are objecting to this Bill.

             People are very busy they work longs hours and have families and a lot are not really interested in politics or in understanding the ins and outs of every issue. Those that have less interest could vote either way. Long-winded explanations (such as the one I am writing here..) switch a lot of people off.

             I don’t think that this graph is as easily explained away as you think.
             Even if it is, it puts the message out there and brings the subject into discussion.

             I think Young Labour might know these things.
             Good on Young Labour
             • Colonial Viper …

               13 August 2013 at 8:47 pm

               bear in mind, the problem Labour has is not that people like National just as much as they did in 2009. They don’t. The honeymoon is over.

               The problem is that people cannot see a viable government in waiting. The graphic is fine as far as it goes, but we have yet to see something addressing the main issue.
               • blue leopard …

                 13 August 2013 at 9:33 pm

                 @ CV
                 One of the main issues is that we have a government that continually lies to us and fills us with misinformation.

                 The graphic addresses that.
         • mickysavage 5.1.1.1.2

           13 August 2013 at 7:37 pm

           Three snaps was never ever going to be the final limit – it was so clearly an opening political salvo. So predictable, so tedious …. just hurry up and set it at 5 or 6 or increase length or some combo.

           The interesting thing tho BL and VTO is that while this would have worked a few years ago and people would have been happy the grumpy level is very high now and it will not be as easy to placate as it used to be. There is this growing feeling that this Government is playing around with us for political gain.
   • Colonial Viper 5.2

     13 August 2013 at 2:47 pm

     Also its a great food security issue. More and more NZers value the ability to home garden, fish and hunt to independently feed themselves and their own families.

     Mate of mine picked up several kgs whitebaiting last year, and both him and his wife are still getting meals out of it now. Perfect.
   • Rogue Trooper 5.3

     13 August 2013 at 5:31 pm

     Excellent to see you fueling up at The Standard David; Lanth and blue leopard are experienced, sound commentators. Don’t know about that Viper chappie though… 😉
     • Colonial Viper 5.3.1

       13 August 2013 at 7:13 pm

       LOL 😉
   • felix 5.4

     14 August 2013 at 7:37 pm

     David Cunliffe has it right. It is important.

     The nat spin machine is attempting to create a false dichotomy so people think they have to choose a single issue to care about, and some in this thread are falling for it.

     The correct response to the GCSB bill is that it’s bullshit.
     The correct response to the snapper proposal is that it’s bullshit.

     It’s really that simple, folks.
6. Sanctuary 6

   13 August 2013 at 2:27 pm

   My 5c worth on snapper…

   At the moment, the fishing industry is dominated by a few corporate players, which is why you are seeing this current example of policy capture of the National government by a particular corporate lobby. This dominance by a few players was the unwritten but deliberate intention of the QMS from the moment it was introduced in 1987. The QMS was introduced at the height of Rogernomics and with a full cost recovery and compliance regime that was intentionally biased towards creating a few large operators. While that did and does work reasonably well for the purely commercial outcomes the QMS was set up to achieve in the EEZ outside coastal waters as a resource allocation mechanism it is struggling to reconcile the competing and clashing goals of commercial and recreational/cultural fishing within the old 12 mile limit. That shouldn’t be surprising, since the catch methods and profile of recreational fishing in the Hauraki gulf is completely different to those of squid fishermen on the Chatham rise. The time may have come to reform the QMS in relation to coastal waters to include cultural and recreational values.

   However, recreational fishers have to get real at least up here in the Auckland/Northland region. The population of Auckland is heading towards two million. Even the smallest tinny can now carry a full colour fish finder. Wild stocks are being hunted using industrial methods of detection. To anyone who travels around the North of NZ in the summer it is obvious the recreational pressure is intense. The days of unrestricted technology (why not ban fish finders on recreational vessels?) unregistered boats, unlicenced boaties and unlicensed fishing are drawing to a close. The introduction of registration, licensing and technology bans needs to considered, both to fund more rigorous enforcement activity around quotas and catch limits and as a mechanism to reduce recreational fishing effort. Closed seasons – zero recreational fishing at all allowed – need to be considered. We need more reserves. Nothing should be off the table.

   In return for the reforms above, my view is the inshore commercial industry should be removed from large quota holders and returned to smaller, owner operated vessels. By removing the QMS and introducing different rules for within an 8 or 12 mile limit (for example – maximum number of days allowed at sea; the owner must be aboard the vessel when at sea; no pair trawling, The vessel cannot be more than 25m in length; introduce a formula base on length/engine HP/displacement that keeps the trawl speed down, etc) the problem of by-catch is eliminated and so is the blizzard of paperwork that prevents fishers selling direct to the public from their vessels.
   • Wayne 6.1

     13 August 2013 at 5:30 pm

     I am a very occasional fisher, but this year I was amazed how easy it was to catch snapper in the Rangitoto Channel, right off Takapuna and Devonport.

     The problem was that most were right on the size limit, give or take 2 or 3 cm. Now, I do not know about the age or maturity of a 27 to 30cm snapper, but they were really plentiful. However, I do not know whether the minimum size should be 30 cm, or not.

     Because of the fine weather, there were huge numbers of boats out on the harbour, of all sizes; 12 ft to 60 ft. So there must have been a huge amount of fish caught. And at no stage during the summer did the numbers of fish seem to reduce.

     It would be really good if we just had some plain facts on the health and sustainability of the fishery.
     • lprent 6.1.1

       13 August 2013 at 6:27 pm

       It has been like that for at least a few decades. It is easy to catch undersized snapper and hard to catch legal ones. Which is why there are some interesting rulers on fishing vessels in the Hauraki

       The snapper grow more slowly in the Hauraki primarily because of competition for food and they take about 7-9 years to grow to legal size. You get larger snapper in Kaipara or even at the Manakau heads – but not the swarms you get in the Hauraki.
7. The Pink Postman 7

   13 August 2013 at 2:33 pm

   Its a well know fact that eating fish is good for the brain. Now the Tories don’t want hat do they So let commercial fishers charge top price and cut the workers chance of having a fish meal .
   Kill two fish with one stone .Stop the working class from thinking and let the big companies increase
   their exorbitant profits.
8. tc 8

   13 August 2013 at 2:35 pm

   Anti Smacking helped change a govt, could be anti snapper does it this time.
   • blue leopard 8.1

     13 August 2013 at 9:31 pm

     @ TC
     LOL! 😀
   • grumpy 8.2

     13 August 2013 at 10:07 pm

     Don’t you mean…..”anti – slapper”
     • Rogue Trooper 8.2.1

       14 August 2013 at 11:46 am

       that is funny grumpy.
9. Jenny 9

   13 August 2013 at 2:53 pm

   The snapper quota is an important issue.

   My mother the youngest of 7. Used to tell me a story of her father during the depression. A successful architect before being wiped out by the slump. Finding himself unemployed. According to my mother my Grandfather used to regularly go down to Tamaki Drive on the Auckland waterfront trying to catch a fish or two to feed his large family.

   She well remembers witnessing the distressing sight of her father weeping if he came home with nothing.

   One of my first jobs on leaving school was to work for Sanfords fisheries in Freemans Bay. The sheer waste of the so called by-catch and other unwanted fish caught by industrial scale fishing appalled me. At that time Sanfords had only one retail outlet in the whole country and that was a quaint and ancient little shop in Queen Street. Most of their catch was flash frozen and shipped overseas.

   There is no doubt that our fisheries are being depleted. The huge industrial combines that harvest our fisheries are to blame. Most of the fish they catch in the huge pair trawling operations and factory ships is for export. It barely touches our shores. Apart from a few jobs, New Zealanders get little benefit. Yet it is not these companies that are being attacked by Key and the Nacts.

   If the fisheries are in such danger, rather than hurt New Zealand families, it is these corporate fishing company’s quota that must be cut first, and savagely. The first priority must be that New Zealanders can still (hopefully) catch a decent feed now and again.

   That the quotas of the big corporations are not being cut, shows where John Key’s heart lies and it is not with the average New Zealander doing their best to get by, and sometimes getting a free feed from the sea. Always in every decision John Key will take the side of his big corporate mates first.
   • Chooky 9.1

     13 August 2013 at 5:16 pm

     Jenny +1
   • Don't worry be happy 9.2

     14 August 2013 at 11:44 am

     John Key has a heart?
10. Ad 10

    13 August 2013 at 3:44 pm

    Could Mr Cunliffe please come on The Standard more often?
    • Hami Shearlie 10.1

      13 August 2013 at 4:56 pm

      +100
      • Chooky 10.1.1

        13 August 2013 at 5:40 pm

        Hami Shearlie +1

        It would be a bit like meeting Aslan…shock horror! ….but yes agree…freaky but good
        ….the King should be roaring on the Standard!

        I suspect the MSM picks up on issues raised in the Standard
11. Tiger Mountain 11

    13 August 2013 at 3:58 pm

    The curtain twitching, underwear sniffing, garbage checking, online snooping, compliance seeking, 5 eyes greasing, super snitching GCSB bill more important than fishing? Yes PrimeMinister it is. Who the hell decided it was a good idea to put the two issues together anyway one might ask?

    Oh, thats right, silly me I am off the Crosby Textor memo list at the moment. Fucking fuckers.
12. rod 12

    13 August 2013 at 4:43 pm

    Snapper or Red Herring ? take your pick.
    • blue leopard 12.1

      13 August 2013 at 7:00 pm

      @Rod

      Red Herring

      (psst…do I get a chocolate fish for that?)
13. Herodotus 13

    13 August 2013 at 5:00 pm

    Snapper issue captures the entire socio economic spectrum of NZ- those from owning a tinny even a canoe to the flash launches in the Viaduct, and we can all see the continuation of big business being given priority over what is in the national interest. e.g. Chorus and Broadband, Sky Casino etc
    There was even mention on Deaker last night and the connections of the Talleys, Sanford and the Goodfellas and this on a sports hour, with Deaker even making connections between Sanford and the Nats.
    It may have taken 5 years but even the best of honeymoons come to an end. 🙂
    • Rogue Trooper 13.1

      13 August 2013 at 5:34 pm

      sometimes overnight. 🙂
14. cricklewood 14

    13 August 2013 at 6:53 pm

    Despite what the analytics say, if my the guys i work with are anything to go by most building sites in aucklandare talking about it. Havent ever heard boo over the gcsb during smoko. Difference been a cut in snapper has a real effect on the average person. It has a much greater reach outside those politically inclined
    • Greywarbler 14.1

      14 August 2013 at 11:39 am

      cricklewood
      All the more reason for us to keep up pressure on GCSB. People who can’t get their head around anything outside their own daily lives with some planning for their own future, don’t realise that if someone else doesn’t take up the task, they can end up treated as a mere herd of people being pushed around. And the rights they may quote for themselves have been gained at considerable sacrifice by others.

      It’s the way people are. Most accept the good things that happen as if it was part of some inevitable process when the opposite is the case. And the dismantling of those good things doesn’t worry them too much because they never understood the hard process to make the laws and changes and wrest some advantages from those with power who were bound to the status quo that suited them.
15. MrSmith 15

    13 August 2013 at 7:11 pm

    I see it like this, most of the time people here let the government walk all over them without so much as a whimper and the fishermen included, they couldn’t really give a toss, but when you try to take away what they believe is theirs by right then you will hear them screaming bloody murder.

    These people when threatened tend to get very angry unlike the rest of the sheep in this country.
16. BrucetheMoose 16

    13 August 2013 at 9:48 pm

    I do have an interest in Snapper Johnny, mainly in the respect it won’t be spying on me.
17. David Cunliffe 17

    14 August 2013 at 10:03 am

    Ad, Hamilton, Chooky – happy to.

    Rod, Blue, I recognise the smokescreen risk and consider the GCSB issue to be a far more serious risk to our country that fishing quotas. My views on the iniquitous GCSB bill are well known- review it rhem dump it.

    But I also have a job to do as fisheries spokesperson and we have a genuine case here of the Tories putting commercial interests above the public interest. That is an issue we have to fight on behalf of hundreds of thousands of Kiwis who care about it.

    And if we want a progressive Labour-led government to stop the rot eroding our civil liberties, then we need those folks to know that we genuinely care about them and their issues too.
    • Greywarbler 17.1

      14 August 2013 at 11:28 am

      David Cunliffe
      Fishing – Labour could bring in some controls that wouldn’t be onerous but would ensure that recreational fishers take the snapper and wider fish resource, seriously. Many of the recreational fishery people are not dependent on catching fish for family food, and as someone commented, there are often lots of boats to be seen. It should be that recreational fishers should have to have a licence.

      They have a catch limit but also they should have to contribute to the research and control on fish stocks. Their take if they are regular fishers, even just to the limit, would have a sizeable effect on stocks. We need controls and testing to continually check on fish numbers not some brash hearty, she’ll be right bloke saying ‘Why worry you can see there’s plenty out there.’

      Licences as with trout or even just a weekend one easily and cheaply obtained at a dairy say, would result in more appreciation of the resource because ‘free’ gets taken for granted, and it would slow down those who want to just jump in a boat without a thought for their own and family safety.
    • blue leopard 17.2

      14 August 2013 at 11:43 am

      @ David Cunliffe,

      Yes, thanks for commenting here Mr Cunliffe.

      It will be hard to see Labour as progressive or focussed on ordinary New Zealanders’ interests until the caucus start showing regard for those in the party with winning skills.

      Keep up the good work.
    • xtasy 17.3

      14 August 2013 at 10:24 pm

      Welcome David, the “real one”!

      See my post below, what is your view and take? I gather you are solidly opposed to the present form of the GCSB bill, and that is welcomed. Are you going to be allowed to speak on Monday, at the Auckland City Town Hall, I would really like to see you join the other top speakers!
18. xtasy 18

    14 August 2013 at 10:15 pm

    Con Man meets TV3 current affairs anchor man:

    Yeah, tonight John Key was on Campbell Live, and what a performance. Indeed, Key is the most cunning, calculating, smart and DANGEROUS Prime Minister this country has ever had!

    So good old John Campbell though he had it all cut out, to challenge the PM, but he was nearly pulled over the poker table, by a stunningly cunning John Key, Prime Minister of New Zealand. He, “Hone Key”, aka “Don Key”, is only there, up there, in his office, due to too many minds in New Zealand being misinformed, manipulated, misguided and conditioned, by in part the mainstream media, that still largely has a “crush” on the man, but also by the strong lobby groups in business, who “pay” the media their desperately needed “advertising revenue”.

    That is the “real power” that we as democrats and critics from the basis are up against.

    But hey, Key was applying smoke and mirrors yet again, galore that was, for sure.

    He did NOT answer any questions by Campbell on “Prism”, “Xkeyscore” and other “programs” that the NSA in the US is using for surveillance and data harvesting on the web, or what else is done by them, and the GCSB, and what is actually planned to also be used by the GCSB here in New Zealand.

    Key simply distracted with comparing the past GCSB law to the new proposed law, and referring to sections 14 and 8 in misleading manners. He claimed GCSB was only acting within the law, and to “prove” how supposedly minimal their activity is, he quoted the figure of “only” 88 investigations or surveillance actions over something like 10 years that they were involved in IN THE PAST.

    He did not disclose that this was possibly mainly for the SIS, and only done under exceptional circumstances, as section 14 of the Act actually disallowed GCSB to spy on New Zealanders, which they nevertheless did after all, against the law, likely thinking they must make exemptions for the SIS.

    So he tried to suggest that the future surveillance by GCSB would only be so “marginal” as in the PAST, while in fact their authority to spy and watch – not just on foreigners in future, but also New Zealanders in future, will be something totally different, and expanded, under the new law.

    He was not asked, nor did he say anything on it, how many cases the SIS follows up, on New Zealanders, and that was not even covered in the debate and interview. I tell you, the SIS is not a transparent organisation, and really only being overseen by the PM, with little scrutiny by courts, judges or whatever (they grant warrants quite easily if some major “concerns” are portrayed). They have been and are spying on quite a larger number of New Zealanders and others, and that is something NOBODY will ever learn about, as it is SECRET, and only John Key may have some limited insight into what they do.

    So with allowing GCSB to spy in future, for the SIS, the Police and Defence Force, will that simply mean that only 88 cases will be observed over ten years? Bollocks, bollocks and more bollocks, as Key distracted Campbell with his smart “know better” and “I am in power” tactics. Campbell had lots of papers in front of him, had two opponents give comments on file (videos), but it was not well enough prepared, I am afraid. So Key could distract, mislead and take Campbell to the cleaners tonight. Sad that is, as Campbell has otherwise done a good job to raise awareness.

    That tells us all, to look more closely at the legislation, the facts, the reason for opposition and more. “Meta data” would be handled as other info, Key claimed, but he did not want to answer on “Prism”, whether it is being used by GCSB or anything else. So what does it all mean?

    Key went on about wanting to get back onto Dotcom, onto this that and the other later, but he never did in the interview. He was claiming that the proposed spy laws were nothing else but anti spyware, kind of. Hey that is interesting, anti spyware, anti malware, like Norton, as he quoted, but they (GCSB) are not there to be a “firewall”, are they?

    Certainly Key went onto Campbell tonight for only one reason, to “calm” and “re assure” the ones out there, who have some doubts, but do not want to bother studying the details, who also want to “trust” a government, to NOT worry and “trust him”. It was a damage control effort by Key, nothing else.

    To see the details of the bill look up here:
    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2013/0109/13.0/DLM5177706.html

    I am going to attend the meeting in the Auckland Town Hall on Monday, 19 August, 7 pm, and I will again ask, why do such senior speakers, and the Law Society, the Privacy Commissioner, senior QCs and others oppose this bill, if it is so harmless as John Key claims it is.

    I fear Key was full of BULL SHIT tonight, and distracting from the truth. He is the prime salesman of the US film industry, of oil and gas corporations, of the NSA, FBI and also the GCSB, who spied on one Dotcom, raided his home in Hollywood style, and tried to extradite him to the ally of the US, to have him dealt with – for what they did not like him to do.

    Who do you trust, Key, Dotcom or the other critics of the bill?

    Take your stand. I am unconvinced of Key as he only outdid a too poorly prepared journalist tonight, and that is the problem, most, if not all, have NOT read the bill and done their homework. John Campbell, do YOUR homework, before you bring your final report on Monday!

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS