Attorney General material?

I’m no lawyer, but the guy who wants to be Attorney General is.

Perhaps my readers would be interested in debating this interpretation of the law by Mr Chauvel.

Chauvel said in a media statement today he did not believe he breached the rules.

“As to the Commission’s view that the publication lacks a promoter statement, it is utterly clear from the census that I am its author,” Chauvel said.

“The Act does not expressly require the use of the words ‘authorised by’ but there can be no doubt that the publication was authorised by me.”

Chauvel said he respects the commission’s “right to reach a different view” and said further publications will comply with its interpretations of the Act.

Poor old Charles Chauvel. No contrition and blaming someone else for the predicament he is in and all for the want of two little words and an address.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Michaels

    Must state name and address of the promoter.
    hmmm pretty clear to me.
    Photo fail.
    words pass.

  • Ciaron

    He’s a Lawyer. He’s trained to argue that XYZ actually means PQR. (especially when he’s in the thick of it)

  • Richard McGrath

    Jeez these Labour politicians are scum. I hear Chauvel is a real chardonnay socialist – gold plated bath taps, while he lets the peasants in his electorate eat cake. Fortunately he and his ilk will get trounced in November. Unfortunately, MMP will probably let him, and other vermin from his gang, in through the back door once again.

    • George

      Charles through the back door eh

      • Cadwallader

        Perfect!

  • thor42

    Yet another corrupt Labour prick. Geez, I’m looking forward to election day. Won’t be quite as satisfying as 2008 when we saw the Clark-beast utterly humbled. I remember it being driven to the campaign HQ, and it had the usual dingo-ugly “smile” on its face.

  • Chris

    Regardless of the fact that Labour are a bunch of lying gutless plonkers, I think the shoveler might be right. If your point is that despite his name and address appearing on the advertisement, but that nowhere is there specific reference to him being the “promoter”, I think this might just sneak in under s204F. The way the section reads suggests use of a name that necessarily implies that that person is the promoter, meets the requirement. Even if this isn’t the case, the fact that the offence requires the person to willfully breach the section makes it pretty hard to say the guy’s broken the law, again, for the precise reason he’s got his name and address there.

  • whalewatcher

    Chauvel wouldn’t know an honest day’s work if it took him from behind.
    He is the classic career Labourite in the vein of Clark, Goff, et al, and is tainted with their slipperiness.
    Not who we NZers want or need.
    The rules are crystal-clear and not open to Chauvel’s re-ANALysis. Or perhaps he never bothered to read the rules, and now is trying a bit of lawyer SMARTING-arse retrospective reinterpretation.
    Whatever…

    run away Charlie boy

  • thor42

    To quote George from “Blackadder goes Forth” – Chauvel is “as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo.”

38%