Human Rights Commission

Does John Drinnan actually read what he writes?

John Drinnan is a fool.

His latest column mentions the decision b the Press Council to open up membership finally to online media.

This is interesting because in current proceedings before the Human Rights Review Tribunal I have told I can’t be a journalist because i’m not a member of a voluntary regime like the Press Council, but the lawyer ignored the problem that until last week I couldn’t possibly join because their constitution wouldn’t allow it.

I also had to battle that premise int eh High Court, but fortunately Justice Asher saw through that attempt, not so you would know it from the perspective of the Human Rights Commission.

The idea of expanding the Press Council’s reach has been around for years and was given a boost after the Law Commission suggested digital media should join a combined media standards organisation, in return for receiving legal protections available to journalists. Then Justice Minister Judith Collins – a close friend of Slater – quashed that plan.

However the Press Council has since gone ahead with a scheme to represent digital media and blogs under its own steam, and that was unveiled this week.

But the ethics of bloggers and the media in general have come under deep scrutiny since Dirty Politics was published. Neville said it was clear in Press Council rules that publishers could not be paid for editorial.

“There is a grey area now with so-called native advertising, which is meant to be quality journalism which stacks up on its journalistic merits, even though it is sympathetic to one party.”

There were questions about whether the Press Council should have jurisdiction over native content, or if that should be covered by the Advertising Standards Authority.

Dirty Politics author Nicky Hager said the Press Council was getting into complex waters judging digital media on the basis of individuals rather than articles, and deciding whether they were journalism or not.

“My fear would be what could happen is that unscrupulous blogs could be given credibility but not end up with any accountability.

“Sometimes people are publishing public relations, and sometimes journalism,” he said.

Read more »

Something to go to today since the weather is rubbish

image.cover.logo

Could be an interesting meeting this weekend for Aucklanders concerned about the council’s racist Unitary Plan, and trashing of property rights.

Remember when Shane Jones called a stupid digging instrument for corrupt extraction of RMA ransom payments a spade earlier this year.

Of course Labour did not pick up his mere when he left, because it did not fit with the identity politics that was all they had left. Bob Jones seems to have been the next public figure to risk tackling this issue (link). He reminded everyone that thousands of properties were newly vulnerable to iwi discovery of taniwha or other spirits and cultural needs that might need placating with koha.

A group called Democracy Action have called a public meeting in opposition to the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan.

The Plan kowtows to iwi elite and forces the rest of us to pay in cultural impact assessment fees, and lip service to so called spiritual and cultural values (taniwha) just to do things like replacing a window or putting in a pool.  Read more »

Privacy Commission and Human Rights Commission complaints being prepared against Nicky Hager

7SynKvh

Revelations that Nicky Hager used emails hacked from my private files has concerned everyone that has communicated with me.  Some of these people are already in the Dirty Politics book, mostly as secondary characters or even minor bit players in footnotes or mentioned in passing.

And those that are in the book will have many, many more private emails that are in the hands of the criminals feeding  Nicky Hager his filtered material.

“I think if it comes out, which I have a feeling it is going to come out, I think that if people read it, it’ll actually be worse than the book, because while I had to make it a readable book and take things out, when you just go page after page of this cynicism and the nastiness it’s quite an experience.”

– Hager, on Q&A

This isn’t where the potential damage ends.  The emails are obviously in the hands of people that have breached the privacy of many people, including politicians, media, business people and friends and family.

Anyone, who communicated with me is potentially involved here.

The book is published.  That horse has bolted.

However, the threat and possibility of the release of further emails is seriously undermining more people’s privacy.

I encourage everyone that is concerned about their privacy to launch a complaint against Nicky Hager with the Privacy Commission and the Human Rights Commission.

It may be fairly minor in the larger scheme of things, but if you ever emailed me with details about your health for example, this information is now under the control of criminals.

That too, can not be helped.     Read more »

Rodney Hide writes to Susan Devoy

Rodney is disappointed and writes to Susan Devoy to tell her why:

Dear Dame Susan,

I cheered from the sidelines when you were named Race Relations Commissioner. I thought you would bring sense to a nonsense job.

Having you as commissioner was the next best thing to eliminating the role.

But now you have used your office to attack ACT leader Jamie Whyte. That’s an abuse of your position and resources. You must have figured ACT was a soft target.

Your attack demonstrated the stupidity of your role. You called Dr Whyte’s reasoning for justice to be blind to skin colour “grotesque and inflammatory.”

In your topsy-turvy world calling for an end to racism is racist.

It was a bizarre statement, more likely than not prepared by some muppet for her to sign off.

We are not all the same. We vary in our genes and our dispositions. The difference makes life interesting. A world of clones would be a dull old affair.

And some people through talent, hard work and luck do better than others. You should know this better than anyone.

You won the British Open Squash Championship eight times. We didn’t say it’s time for Australia to have a win and give Liz Irving a three-point start. Or worse, that everyone should be “exactly the same” and not keep score.

There would be no drama, no interest, no striving, no achievement. No one would train or put in any effort. There would be no point.

That’s the trouble with trying to make everyone the same. Killing individuality kills initiative.

Read more »

Malcolm Harbrow from No Right Turn on Labour’s rape law changes

Malcolm Harbrow from No Right turn is a nasty spiteful hard left acolyte, but occasionally he stumbles in the right direction.

Today he lambasts Labour for proposing to overturn our Bill of Rights and remove the presumption of innocence and the onus of proof onto the defence in rape cases.

This clearly violates the presumption of innocence affirmed in the Bill of Rights Act (not to mention the Universal Declaration of Human RightsICCPR, and every other major human rights instrument). Under that presumption, the state has to prove each and every aspect of its case (“the burden of proof is on he who declares, not on he who denies”). That’s clearly not the case under Labour’s proposal.

Our Supreme Court has already found that the presumption of supply in the Misuse of Drugs Act violates the Bill of Rights Act for exactly these reasons. They will draw exactly the same conclusion about this proposal – as will the UN Human Rights Commission.

I accept that rape cases are difficult to prove. This change will make them remarkably easier. If Labour gets its way, there will be a lot more convictions for rape. And a lot more of them will be of innocent people. We presume innocence because we believe it is far better for the guilty to go free than for the innocent to be punished. Labour clearly does not believe that any more.    Read more »

Human Wrongs Commission makes a mess of it again

RNZ reports:

The Sunday Star Times is being accused of sensationalising and impeding race relations.

Its reporting of of an Asia New Zealand Foundation survey has been criticised by the Human Rights Commission.

The Foundation’s research showed 44 percent of Maori polled thought New Zealanders felt less warm towards people from Asia. But the newspaper’s headline for the story read: ‘Maori dislike of Asian immigration deepens’.

Indigenous Rights Commissioner Karen Johansen said a complaint has been sent to the Sunday Star Times, and a meeting had been sought with the editor. She said when she saw the article, she could not believe what she was reading.

Karen Johansen said she read it three times and was left with the impression it was inaccurate.

The Human Rights Commission pointed out that some of New Zealand’s first pioneers came from China. It said Asian New Zealanders did not arrive yesterday, and they have been an integral part of the nation since its birth.

So let me get this right.  The Sunday Star Times reports a poll that shows that  more Maori feel badly about Asians now than during a previous period, and the Human Wrongs Commission wants a paper not to report the actual results?

What did the article actually say? Read more »

Labour wants to tax ISPs, watch them tax you in return with higher charges

Labour continue to show what a bunch of muppets they are with their ICT policy that was inadvertently leaked to National showing they want to tax ISPs.

It shows their complete lack of business acumen. They are suggesting a tax on the entire internet via ISPs.

Any cost lumped onto a business like an ISP is simply going to be passed straight onto the customer leading to higher charges.

Telecom is bristling at the suggestion Labour could impose a “content levy” on internet providers.

Labour was left red-faced today after MP Clare Curran’s ideas on ICT policy were accidentally emailed to her National Party counterpart, Communications Minister Amy Adams.

These include imposing a revenue-based levy on telecommunications carriers to create a contestable fund to support the “creation and accessible distribution of New Zealand digital content”.

Another suggestion is a “digital bill of rights” policed by the Human Rights Commission that would “guarantee a citizen privacy”.

Curran, who is associate communications and information technology spokeswoman and Labour’s spokeswoman on “open government”, said the ideas titled “ICT Policy Framework 2014” were sent to Adams’ office this morning. She did not personally send the email, she said.   Read more »

#MANBAN “a very clear breach” of the Human Rights act

A bar in Ponsonby Auckland feels things are getting too blokey, and would like to address that by getting some more female bar staff.  Turns out, offering a job with a predetermined intent to avoid employing one gender over another is against the Human Rights Act.

A popular Ponsonby bar has been caught out advertising jobs for women only, a day after the Herald revealed that Masala restaurant in Stanmore Bay had done the same.

Chapel Bar & Bistro posted an online ad saying: “We need female bar & floor staff at Chapel … drop us an email if you or a friend needs a job.”

Owner Luke Dallow said the ad was to be taken “tongue-in-cheek”, but was worded that way because the central Auckland business was seeking gender balance.

The Human Rights Commission said both Masala and Chapel could be in breach of the Human Rights Act.

“Should the commission receive a complaint, it will be dealt with in the usual manner,” a spokeswoman said.

So if a political party states that they want to achieve gender balance by favouring women over men, then not a PEEP from the Human Rights commission, but when a bar owner does it, he’s getting his nuts pulled off by the Herald for being honest about his intent.   Read more »

This country is becoming a bunch of sooks

Have we become a nation of sooks, a bunch of nancies running off and complaining to the Human Rights Commission and the Privacy Commission and the Employment Tribunal over hurt feelings?

It seems we just may be. Stephanie Flores writes at NBR:

If I ever have a son in New Zealand, I imagine he would punch his way out of the womb, assume the scrum position, then ask where his shotgun is because it’s duck hunting season in the Waikato.

At least that’s how I imagined a male Kiwi is born: tough, macho, hair already growing on his ape-like chest.

But after months of reading Employment Relations Authority decisions, I’m getting the impression that today’s males in New Zealand are more like the Village People version of Macho Man, rather than the Sir Colin Meads of the old days.

This week, more authority decisions trickled out with workers claiming their employers hurt their feelings or, even worse, actually asking them to work.

Now I’m pretty sure my first editor ate cigarettes for breakfast and nails for dessert. It was 10 years ago but I still remember his hatred for humanity and the bloodlust for junior reporters that emanated from his desk.

After a hiding from him, I always waited until I got home to cry with a bottle of vodka and in the comfort of my own bed, which is the proper way to deal with workplace stress.

But I never, ever, considered contacting an employment lawyer seeking advice on my hurt feelings.

Unfortunately for employers, the trend in employment law is moving in the opposite direction.  Read more »

The law of unintended consequences is funny sometimes

Human Rights Commission and Judges the world over are earnest well-meaning twats who just get things dreadfully wrong…most of the time.

Mostly though they are meddlers taking on cases with little merit and in the case of New Zealand sticking up for convicted paedophiles and former bankrupts.

In the UK the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg is impinging on sentencing with their daft rulings on behalf of poor hard done by ratbags and scumbags serving lengthy sentences. The Tory government is moving to run one up that little effort.

Murderers and other serious criminals could be given US-style jail sentences lasting hundreds of years to get round a European human rights ban on whole-life terms, The Telegraph can disclose.

Ministers are considering a change in sentencing rules to allow judges to rule that offenders should spend decades and even hundreds of years in jail.

The plan is part of the UK Government’s ongoing confrontation with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The proposed change to sentencing comes as Conservative ministers prepare to publish the party’s proposals to overhaul the UK’s human rights laws.

They will suggest reforms to ensure Britain’s Supreme Court is the final arbiter on human right cases, not the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Current English law allows judges to impose “whole life” tariffs, effectively sentencing a criminal to die in jail.

However, the Strasbourg court said last year that such sentences are a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, because there was no possibility of a “right to review”.

The court ruling means at least one multiple murderer has avoided a whole-life sentence.

The Government is considering its response to the ruling on whole life tariffs.  Read more »