Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Keith Locke’

Citizen A: With Martyn Bradbury, Keith Locke & Matthew Hooton

.

– Citizen A –

 – 16 May 2013 –


Keith Locke & Matthew Hooton –

.

.

Citizen A: With Martyn Bradbury, Keith Locke & Matthew Hooton discuss the following issues:

  • Budget 2013, what should the Government spend money on?
  • How good is John Key’s poker face when dealing the Sky City Convention Centre deal?
  • Was the Aaron Gilmore fiasco an engineered distraction?

For in-depth analysis of this broadcast, go to The Daily Blog and see  Was Aaron Gilmore an inside political hit job?

Citizen A screens on Face TV, 7.30pm Thursday nights on Sky 89


.

*

.

Acknowledgement (republished with kind permission)

The Daily Blog

.

.

= fs =

Advertisements

Citizen A – 2 August 2012 – Online now!

.

Citizen A

.

– 2 August 2012 –

.

– Keith Locke & Phoebe Fletcher –

.

.

Issue 1: Has the Waitangi Tribunal forced the National Party to slow down?

Issue 2: Isn’t it time to allow Gay adoption and Gay marriage?

Issue 3: Epsom MP John Banks is off the hook for any charges on donations, but does the law need an over haul?

Citizen A broadcasts 7pm Thursday Triangle TV – This blogger recommends ‘Citizen A’ as intelligent analysis of current affairs.

.

Acknowledgement (republished with kind permission)

Tumeke

.

.

= fs =

1 October –

Citizens Marched against the new Police Surveillance Bill

Alastair

.

Central Wellington was extremely busy on the day of the protest and as I approached the group in Cuba mall I wondered whether the protest would be lost among the hive of Rugby World Cup activity, or whether we might actually realise some benefit from having such a large captive audience. Either way, the group was absolutely determined to get the message out there. The initial gathering featured addresses from the protest organiser, Valerie Morse, and Keith Locke, not to mention a comical musician who got the crowd going with his catchy rap about police brutality.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The demographic among the protesters appeared to be left-leaning but there was a diverse mix of interests including civil libertarians, gays, Maori activists, and of course no protest would be complete without the presence of the Unite Union.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The crowd voted overwhelmingly in favour of marching to the Wellington central police station rather than sticking to the original plan of marching to parliament, and traffic mayhem ensued as we marched along the traffic lanes of several inner city streets.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Upon arriving at the police station the huge crowd blocked one lane of Victoria street as we sprawled out in front of the police barricade at the station while chanting “shame, shame, shame”. One member of the group faced out onto the one free lane on Victoria street using his megaphone to broadcast our message to passing traffic, while the rest of the group focused on more speeches and chanting.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

As we began moving away from the police station frontage the police momentarily obstructed us from heading towards Civic Square but eventually let down their guard and instead formed a barricade on the city-to-sea bridge to prevent us from from entering the waterfront area.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

This outraged the crowd as it was clear that obstructing our free movement into a public space could have been motivated by nothing other than a desire to avoid embarrassing the government in the presence of huge numbers of overseas visitors on the waterfront. Several members of the group began trying to physically force their way past the police officers, and whether it was the earlier speech about police brutality, my camera right in their faces, or the risk of the situation erupting into violence the police seemed reluctant to use any significant amount of force apart from man handling one particularly persistent member of the group. Outnumbered and with limited options the police eventually backed down and let us through.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

As we moved onto the waterfront we took our message to the world, with the protest organiser explaining the implications of the government’s draconian legislation to scores of foreign and local onlookers. As we eventually disbursed it was very clear to me that we had indeed enjoyed a captive audience.

.

.

.

***

Additional information

Website:  http://stopthebillnow.blogspot.com/

Email:      StopTheBillNow@gmail.com

State-sponsored voyeurism? No thanks, Mr Key

Welcome to 1984

.

.

State-sponsored voyeurism? No thanks, Mr Key.

The Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill is perhaps one of the shortest pieces of legislation ever brought before Parliament. The text is barely three paragraphs long.

Yet, the implications of this Bill is far-ranging in it’s impact on our society which supposedly values freedom, privacy, and civil rights.

With this Bill, the government is effectively over-riding a Supreme Court decision, and re-writing law to suit itself – and the Police force.

Many New Zealanders who understanding the ramifications of this Bill are not just unhappy – they are scornful of John Key’s government. That scorn was publicly expressed today (Saturday, 1 October), when a protest closed much of Victoria Street in down-town Wellington, opposite the Central Police Station.

The protest was peaceful and made it’s way to the nearby Wellington waterfront.

Mainstream media – except for the Radio NZ website – did not report any of todays’ protest event.

From Radio NZ,

.

Source

.

Meanwhile, the Dominion Post fed this to the Happy Folk of Wellington,

.

Full Story

.

Now don’t get me wrong – I have nothing against the military. (Even if they have mis-spent $20 million of our tax-dollars on advertising and PR campaigns.)  The NZDF generally do a damned good job.

Then, for the media to report on the pomp and ceremony of our Armed Forces – whilst ignoring protest activity  opposing a Bill that is both invasive of our privacy and contemptuous of the Courts – is frightening. And lazy. There is a tinge of subtle “stalinism” in this affair; public displays of our clean-cut, brave boys (and girls) in uniform – whilst in the back-rooms of government offices, politicians are doing sneaky things to undermine our civil rights.

Thankfully, there are those who are not prepared to take such an affront to our freedoms lying down, like sheep-in-a-paddock.

***

.

Something of immediate importance that did make it into the Dominion Post,

.

.

Never under-estimate the media’s priorities in presenting critical, news-worthy stories to the public.

.

***

.

+++ Updates +++

.

Source

.

Whilst this is a slight improvement, it still doesn’t resolve serious concerns that are held about this piece of legislation.

New Zealand has become a much-surveilled society in the last 20 years, with cameras everywhere, including your local public library.

If people had seen this coming in 1984, I wonder how they would have reacted? With horror and anger I am guessing.

.

+++ Updates +++

.

As part of the campaign opposing this atrocious piece of  “1984ish” piece of legislation, this Blog lobbied several ACT and Labour MPs to encourage them to vote against it.  Charles Chauvel (Labour) was one of only two MPs to respond,

.

from:    Charles Chauvel Charles.Chauvel@parliament.govt.nz
to:    [email]
date:   Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:40 AM
subject:    RE: Video Camera Surveillance Bill!

Good morning

Thank you for your email regarding the Video Camera Surveillance (Temporary Measures) Bill.

Labour has strongly opposed National’s attempt to push through legislation on this issue under urgency and without giving the public a say. We were instrumental in forcing National to send their original legislation to a Select Committee. We made clear that we could not support the Bill that was introduced by National as it had unacceptable retrospective provisions and appeared to widen the powers available for surveillance.

After hearing evidence from experts and other interested parties the Select Committee has significantly altered the Bill.  This has addressed a number of significant issues:

1. In order to allow the Police to resume covert video surveillance from the date of the Bill’s assent, their powers to do so are affirmed, but only on the basis of the law as it was understood prior to the Supreme Court decision, no more broadly than that (as the draft government Bill did), and only on the basis of the most serious offending. Labour would have liked the Bill to go further, and provide a warranting procedure, but the Government left the drafting exercise needed too late to make this happen;

2. The legislation will apply for a maximum of 6 months only, meaning that legislation that can deal with a proper warranting procedure for surveillance will be passed;

3. Cases currently under investigation, whether or not yet before the courts, will not be interfered with by Parliament. The Courts must be left free to determine under existing law whether evidence gathered in support of any such prosecutions is admissible. The overwhelming evidence before the committee was that s30 Evidence Act and s21 NZ Bill of Rights Act give the courts this power, and that there is no justification for Parliament to try to intervene.

With these significant changes, Labour is able to support the Bill.  We believe we have struck a balance between allowing the Police and other investigating agencies to use video surveillance where it is needed, but not giving them wider power or interfering with cases that are currently before the courts.

Persons convicted in cases where covert video surveillance was used in the past cannot now seek to overturn their convictions, or seek compensation from the Crown for wrongful conviction or imprisonment, only by reason of the use of covert video surveillance.  In other words, the law that applied at the time of conviction must clearly continue to apply, rather than the conviction being measured against a later standard.  

I appreciate that this position might not be all that you want. While it would be good to live in a world where video surveillance by the Police was not necessary, sadly we do not live in that world at the moment. Equally, if we are to give powers, we need to ensure they are used only for the most serious cases, and with the appropriate safeguards and procedures.

Labour believes that we have greatly improved this Bill, and a number of the legal academic experts who appeared before the Select Committee have acknowledged that the changes we insisted on have resolved the main issues (though not quite all) they had with the Bill.  I am attaching links to two of those blogs for your information.

http://pundit.co.nz/content/some-praise-for-parliament-rare-though-that-may-be

http://www.laws179.co.nz/2011/10/covert-surveillance-labours-bottom-line.html

Many thanks for taking the time to write. I appreciate you voicing your views.

Yours sincerely

Charles Chauvel

Labour List MP based in Ohariu
Spokesperson for Justice and the Environment

Lets hope that when the “sunset” clause takes effect, that no government of any hue will attempt to resurrect it. New Zealand is a thoroughly surveilled society without adding more to Big Brother.

.

Additional Reading

Welcome to 1984

1 October:  Citizens Marched against the new Police Surveillance Bill

.

.

A travesty of justice

6 September 2011 13 comments

.

Anyone who has watched the documentary, “Operation 8: Deep in the Forest“, will hardly be surprised.

.

..

This entire affair has been a drawn-out, needless, shambles. It has affected many people and cost huge sums of money for both taxpayers and the victims of these raids.

This was not in any sense “justice”. It was a gross mis-use of State power and a naked travesty of justice. Those responsible should be held to account and only a Commission of Inquiry with a wide terms-of-reference, can determine why this happened.

.

POLICE RESPONSE: Armed police man a roadblock in Ruatoki Valley during the 2007 'terror' raids.

.

The victims of these terror-raids (terror, as in causing terror to those who were raided and arrested) who were arrested – and made to waste large sums of money on legal defence and constant, pointless travel to Auckland to attend court appearances that never went anywhere – should now be compensated by the State.

This obscenity should never have happened in our country.

.

***.

.

+++ Updates +++

.

Listen to Valerie Morse on Checkpoint

.

***

.

+++ Updates +++

.

STILL FIGHTING: Tame Iti, left, and Valerie Morse, seen here at an exhibition opening. Iti is still facing charges but the charges against Morse have been dropped.

Full Story

.

+++ Updates +++

.

Full Story

.

+++ Update +++

.

Full Story

.

“”They are charged with the responsibility of keeping New Zealanders safe and they have a responsibility to act where they believe that people are at risk.  It’s my view that the police acted because they believed people were at risk.” ”

.

No, Mr Key. The Police were not acting “because they believed people were at risk.”

The police PUT people at risk with their Gestapo/KGB/Stasi-like raids.

They were terror raids alright – and it was the police who were acting as terrorists.

Apology. Commission of Inquiry. Compensation. It’s as simple as that.

.

+++ Update +++

.

.

A further step in the right direction. Let the defendents be judged by their peers. It’s the right thing to do.

.

.

.

It’s a Man’s World, I guess…

3 August 2011 5 comments

.

Full Story

.

 

$20 million spent on advertising the military…

Meanwhile, back in the Real World,

.

.

$20 million to advertise the Army – “Must Have” *tick*

$800,000 cut from Women’s Refuges to save lives – “Nice to Have” (But cannot afford.) *cross*

If this isn’t making your stomach turn and a sense of outrage rising up in you, then you have all the emotional capacity of a Dalek.

There is only one word for this, and that word is obscene.

.

.