Standing up for our rights

Written By: - Date published: 10:00 am, August 13th, 2009 - 37 comments
Categories: human rights, Parliament - Tags:

Remember the petition to state your opposition to Paula Bennett’s attack on our privacy rights. The idea is it will be tabled in Parliament next week. It’s a chance to take a symbolic stand against this bullying Key Government. You can download the pdf here or by clicking on the image and mail it freepost by Friday.

If we don’t stand up for our rights when they are threatened, we lose them.

 

small petition

37 comments on “Standing up for our rights ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. starboard 1
    13 August 2009 at 11:39 am

    Yawn…..

    • vidiot 1.1
      13 August 2009 at 11:42 am

      But we must waste zee tax payers dollars on zee free postage before all of our perks are gone !

      The interesting bit will be when the Privacy Commissioner rules that Ms Fuller’s privacy was not breached as she (Ms Fuller) had released all of the information on the Trade Me forums. The subsequent investigation in to Ms Fuller for Benefit fraud (she has stated she was receiving the DPB whilst living with her partner) should be swift & just.

      • infused 1.1.1
        13 August 2009 at 11:46 am

        Hopefully.

      • Bright Red 1.1.2
        13 August 2009 at 12:40 pm

        If 100 petition sheets are sent in that costs the govt, what $50?

        Tell you what, vidiot, since you’re so worried. I’ll pop a cheque to the IRD for $50 in the mail.

        Happy now?

        Man, democracy isn’t free eh?

      • just another student 1.1.3
        16 August 2009 at 3:37 pm

        Interesting how some believe messageboard rumour to be solid fact.

  2. bobbity 2
    13 August 2009 at 12:54 pm

    Waste of time and money – this issue will be ruled upon by the privacy commissioner in due course – Bennett will be rapped over the knuckles and apologise – politicians will then return to their normal practice of leaking the information to the media…..you know it’s true pack of rat bags the lot of them….just look at the past MPs joining in solidarity against anyone looking at retrenching their troughing.

  3. Murray 3
    13 August 2009 at 1:41 pm

    what a load of crap, Get a Life

  4. Scott Yorke 4
    13 August 2009 at 2:08 pm

    Wouldn’t it be prudent to wait for the results of the Privacy Commissioner’s investigation?

    What if the Commissioner says there was no breach of the Act?

    Wouldn’t that make the organisers of such a petition look a bit silly?

    Just sayin’

  5. Tim Ellis 5
    13 August 2009 at 2:09 pm

    What a good idea Eddie. It will also be a good opportunity for citizens to express their opposition to the last bullying government, when bullying ministers frequently leaked private information about citizens to journalists in the press gallery.

    I don’t know if Labour MPs will get the message, though. They still don’t seem to have got the message that they lost the election.

    • Maynard J 5.1
      13 August 2009 at 3:26 pm

      Really Tim? All these members of the press gallery said was that sometimes Labour MPs would tell them where to look, or suggest a line of questioning.

      Bennett could have mentioned to a member of the gallery that they might want to look into the total amount these people were getting from the state, but she chose to take a drastically different course of action.

      Your response says you are equally as comfortable with either course of action. I would hope that is not the case.

  6. bill brown 6
    13 August 2009 at 2:14 pm

    Ha! the fact that Ellis is so obviously threatened by this has just given me the impetus to get of my butt, sign the bloody thing and send it off.

    Thanks Tim, finally found a use for you.

    • Tim Ellis 6.1
      13 August 2009 at 2:42 pm

      Yes, Mr Brown, I’m sure National MPs will be very worried by yet another stunt by a Labour Party hack like Eddie. After all, all the previous stunts by the Labour Party have been so tremendously successful of late, haven’t they?

      I think Mr Key must be shaking in his boots over this. Until he reads the next poll result.

      • bill brown 6.1.1
        13 August 2009 at 2:48 pm

        Dear Tim,

        Go fuck yourself.

        Love, Bill.

      • Bright Red 6.1.2
        13 August 2009 at 3:12 pm

        So, we shouldn’t bother to stand up for our rights because Key will just ignore us?

        Solid logic there Tim boy.

        And if we had been living in a certain european country in the 1930s, I guess we should have just knuckled under and gone with the flow as our rights were taken away, after all, what’s the point in protest?

        I thought the petition was in some guy called Tim’s name… unless, Eddie is Tim… which means that you are Eddie, Tim… we’re through the looking glass people!

  7. BLiP 7
    13 August 2009 at 2:15 pm

    So you keep saying, Timmy, but can you provide one – yes, just one – example of a Labour minister breaking the law to silence dissent?

    Just one.

    • Tim Ellis 7.1
      13 August 2009 at 2:46 pm

      BLiP, I refer you to comments by Duncan Garner, Fran Mold, and Colin Espiner on the night that Ms Bennett released the information, when they all said it was frequently done by Labour Party ministers. They all observed that the difference was that Labour Party ministers did it sneakily.

      An interesting analysis from a respected lawyer, whom you link to. I don’t think there is a material difference between leaking something publicly and leaking it sneakily as Labour did.

      I don’t defend Ms Bennett’s actions. I am just suggesting that it is very hypocritical for Labour Party hacks like Eddie to be outraged at it when he was very silent over occasions when Labour leaked this information.

      • BLiP 7.1.1
        13 August 2009 at 3:04 pm

        Just one example, Timmy. Just one.

        Surely you’re not suggesting those political journalists colluded with the illegal release of private information to silence dissent. Are you?

        Your premise that Bennett somehow was “above the fray” because her malfeasance was out in the open is like saying George Sodini’s behaviour is better than John Allen Muhammad’s.

      • Pascal's bookie 7.1.2
        13 August 2009 at 3:09 pm

        Tim those comments from journo’s are all very interesting and all, but an equivalent situation they do not make.

        Kind of hard for Eddie to be all upset about these allegedly similar situations when those events were unknown. We don’t actually know anything about them even now. When did they happen? What info was involved? Who was it about? Enlighten us Tim. But you can’t.

        What appears to have happened is that info was given to journos on background, ie not for publication. It could well be that that’s a breach of the privacy act, and if so bad Labour, but it is a far different case from what Bennet did. Bennet went public, with a selective piece of information shorn of all context. She wasn’t just filling in the journos so that they would have the full story, allowing those journos to use their judgment about the women’s claims, and how to approach the story.

        Instead she gave a couple of figures that she must have known would have the talkback benne bashers all a quiver, and she did so publicly. She did not explain those figures or give them any context, or even attempt to explain how they might be relevant to what the women were talking about. Her release of those figures was the story. That was the point of it.

        As she herself said, it was about ‘lessons’.

        Now tell us which citizens got taught what lessons in these allegedly equivalent Labour party leaks. Go on.

        • Maynard J 7.1.2.1
          13 August 2009 at 3:31 pm

          PB, Tim is lying as it is, that is not what those journalists said.

          “They all observed that the difference was that Labour Party ministers did it sneakily.”

          The difference being that “sneakily” is a Tim Ellis Special term paraphrased for ‘legally’, and ‘without violating privacy’ and such. Garner, that night, and Espiner, both said that a Labour MP would tell them what questions they might wish to ask, or where to look for information.

          Tim is too much of a National Party hack to see the difference.

          • Tim Ellis 7.1.2.1.1
            13 August 2009 at 4:11 pm

            No, Maynard J, if it is a breach, then passing on confidential information to journalists is still in breach of privacy laws, whether or not the journalist publishes it. Labour did it sneakily because they gave the information off the record, according to several journalists. Labour Ministers didn’t even have the courage to publicly do it, instead they played a game of spin.

            • Pascal's bookie 7.1.2.1.1.1
              13 August 2009 at 4:24 pm

              instead they played a game of spin.

              Is it summer in barse ackwards land Tim? That must be nice.

  8. Bright Red 8
    13 August 2009 at 2:34 pm

    It’s weird how the righties here are actually against us protesting.

    Haven’t you lot heard of the old saying ‘I disagree with what you say but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it’?

    We argued against the substance of your protests against the last governemnt but we didn’t argue that you shouldn’t be protesting if you wanted to. and yet here you are getting your knickers in a twist over a little petition to Parliament.

    • vidiot 8.1
      13 August 2009 at 2:57 pm

      I am not against protesting by any means, but if you must do it, do it with your own money.

      Haven’t you cottoned on yet ? The common NZ tax payer is sick of this constant waste of tax payer money. If it’s not MP’s claiming expenses, it’s ex-MP’s claiming expenses or current leaders of the opposition misusing ministerial limo’s (yes Darren Hughes you were seen). The troughing needs to end.

      • Bright Red 8.1.1
        13 August 2009 at 3:08 pm

        The right to petition Parliament is a foundation stone of our democracy.

        Do you also get upset about people making official information requests? becuase they cost money but are free.

        Should we have to pay for the cost of counting our vote?

        You’re just a whinger getting yourself in a tizzy over $50. It’s pathetic.

      • Armchair Critic 8.1.2
        13 August 2009 at 3:11 pm

        vidiot – the cost of the postage is borne by the tax payer. And since I am a taxpayer, I’ve paid for it already, with my on money that I gave to the IRD as tax.

        • vidiot 8.1.2.1
          13 August 2009 at 3:20 pm

          Actually the postage is born by the MP’s electorate office, which is funded by ministerial services, which is in turn funded by your tax dollar. If the MP’s electorate budget exceeds the amount they are funded by MS, it comes out of that MP’s pocket. Here’s to Clare getting 200,000 responses.

          And AC wouldn’t you rather have your tax payer dollar spend on education (like the TIA) instead ?

          • bill brown 8.1.2.1.1
            13 August 2009 at 3:32 pm

            Ah, but it’s not gonna be spent on the TIA is it?, it’s gonna be spent on rich pricks sending their precious little spawn to private school.

            Fuck ’em I say – give my 50 cents to NZ post!

          • Armchair Critic 8.1.2.1.2
            13 August 2009 at 3:33 pm

            My first choice would be to fund both. Otherwise it becomes a choice between sticking up for my own rights versus helping another person get ahead (which is the principle of the TIA).
            Difficult choice, I think I will stick with my original answer – both.

          • Maynard J 8.1.2.1.3
            13 August 2009 at 3:33 pm

            No, I would rather have strong democracy and weak education, than vice versa. Would you really prefer it otherwise?

          • Bright Red 8.1.2.1.4
            13 August 2009 at 4:02 pm

            There’s not going to be 200,000 responses, vidiot. Typical petitions to parliament have a couple of hundred names on them.

            Also, this doesn’t come out of her electorate budget, the letters are going to Parliament on its freepost account.

            You’re just making it up when you talk about it coming out of her electorate budget and her being responsible for any cost overrun.

            Think about it, if what you were saying were true we could bankrupt MPs just by sending them a few hundred thousand freepost letters.

      • BLiP 8.1.3
        13 August 2009 at 3:17 pm

        Causing needless expenditure by the Government is a perfectly valid form of protest and should be encouraged. In fact, so far as National Inc is concerned, hitting the bottom line is about the only way of getting through to it. The human suffering caused by its policies is making no difference.

  9. bill brown 9
    13 August 2009 at 3:00 pm

    Same old righties spouting the same old boring shit.

    Can’t we get some new ones?

    • bobbity 9.1
      13 August 2009 at 3:26 pm

      Same old lefties (replace with any other political leaning) spouting the same old boring shit.

      Can’t we get some new ones ?

    • BLiP 9.2
      13 August 2009 at 5:35 pm

      Won’t make any difference – they are interchangeable.

  10. TC 10
    16 August 2009 at 11:34 am

    This would be funny if it wasn’t so pathetic – breathless tinkerblogging is an apt description!