About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

June 18, 2011 8:00am by David Farrar

General Debate 18 June 2011

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment145

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (145)

Login to comment or vote

Viking2

reid , the answer is no. we get because socialists have to interfere in everyones life and have a control for everything.
Made worse because there’s so many of the bastards in every political organization and the orgs. beneath them.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 4:07pm
Johnboy

And of course V2. Mi Lord Smith et al have to keep up their baronial lifestyle. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 4:11pm
F E Smith

reid, the national average of law graduates who practice for even a short time is only 50%. Then there is a relatively high drop-out rate- something like 20% leave the profession in the first 3 years of practice. Overall, I suspect you would have double that dropping out in the first 7 or 8 years or so. It is a good course to do, however, as it really does get you to think very critically about things.

However, much of law is not taking up with ‘laws’. Most of it is about transactions and structuring. Conveyancing practioners still makes up a good part of the profession, with that including both private (houses) and commercial (buildings). The major law firms are these days mostly about mergers, acquisitions, sales, and regulatory compliance and so on. That last one is a big one, actually, as failing to get it right can cost a business a lot of money; those regulations, by the way, come from politicians and civil servants.

Actually, just for interest, have a look at Russell McVeagh’s list of work areas:

Aviation, Banking And Financial Regulation, Capital Markets/Securities Offerings, Climate Change, Competition, Constitutional And Administrative Law, Corporate Advisory, Dairy Industry, E-Business, Employment, Energy, Finance, Fisheries, Food and Beverage, Forestry, Funds Management, Government Relations, Health, Human Rights, Information Technology, Infrastructure, Infrastructure (Economic) Regulation, Insolvency and Debt Restructuring, Insurance, Intellectual Property, International Trade and Business, Land Transport, Litigation, Maori Legal, Media and Entertainment, Mergers and Acquisitions, Outsourcing, Privacy, Private Equity and Venture Capital, Property, Public Law and Policy, Resource Management, Shipping, Sports Law, Structured Finance and Securitisation, Superannuation, Tax, Technology, Telecommunications, Water

That is pretty impressive, I reckon, although can I point out that they don’t do criminal defence work!

Much of that will be in straight advice to do with compliance or, as I noted earlier, in transactions in the areas. Some, like sport, might actually involved managing sportsmen/women.

For your last question about are those laws really necessary, I would personally say no. I think we are vastly over-regulated and over-legislated. The problem is that our politicians are full time and seem to think their existence is threatened unless they continue to pass laws. The worst of recent times has been the UK Labour Party from 1997 to 2010 (over 3000 new criminal offences alone in that time, one for each day they were in power). The cost of all of these laws is often borne by business, with ever changing and expanding regulatory schemes and obligations being placed upon them.

Again, these laws are not driven by lawyers- the growth in the legal profession world wide (now 11,000 lawyers in NZ) is driven by legislatures, not lawyers. One last example there, the growth in legal aid expenditure in NZ was driven not by lawyers but by the last Labour government widening the eligibility criteria substantially (this was supposed to be offset by new recovery rules, but those mostly don’t work) and by the Police laying more and more criminal charges. Add those two together and you get more work for the criminal lawyers (if only someone could explain that so Simon Power!).

Plus, for the big firms it is a business and not a profession. They are interested in making money and will go where that money is. That generally means they get out of what you and I might consider law stuff and into a wider range of areas- look at the list above and you will see what I mean.

Result? More lawyers, most of whom will never, ever see the inside of a Courtroom.

I hope that gives you some idea of the reason behind the expansion.

Edit: “we get because socialists have to interfere in everyones life and have a control for everything.”

V2, I agree, and I include the National Party of NZ in that category!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 4:21pm
tristanb

Oh, and Tristanb, could you please give me some source for the $200 per hour Karam point that you made in the last Weatherstone thread? I would to follow that up. Thanks.

Sorry, lost track of that last thread (I do this a lot) as I got busy at work.

It was for both the Karams, not $200 each (didn’t mean to imply this), $95/hr for Joe’s research (which he claimed to do for up to 80 hours each week) and $120/hr for his boy Matthew.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2486812/Karam-gets-330-000-in-legal-aid
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 4:40pm
publicwatchdog

Pete George (10,187) Says:
June 18th, 2011 at 3:28 pm

Penny – time and events got away on me, I’d had a quick look. Generally I’d support most of those points, maybe all but I’d need to look in more detail.

Some at least I’d strongly support as it is the same as what I’d like to promote through Your NZ. With your approval I could submit the whole list for discussion with a view to supporting it as a whole or with qualifications.’
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pete – use any of those points anyway you want.

You don’t have to get my approval! 🙂

(But thanks for asking.)

What I’m interested in, is informed debate on the issues, and as many political parties and individuals supporting as many of those points as possible.

‘When the people lead – the politicians will follow?….’

Cheers!

Penny Bright
http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 4:50pm
F E Smith

Thanks for that, Tristan. I note that Karam’s son is a qualified lawyer, which is the difference in the pay rates. From memory, he was junior counsel at the trial.

Interesting that the QCs got a higher rate than the norm- I know there was some negotiation about the Bain payments but hadn’t realised that the top rate had gone up for them. I could have that wrong though- need to go back and check the old rates chart. Still, considering those two would normally charge upwards of $600 per hour each, I reckon legal aid got a pretty good deal on it.

Given the nature and length of the trial, and the amount of expert evidence, I still think this wasn’t too bad. Regardless of what the defence got, the Crown would have got a whole lot more! And that doesn’t include the money the police spent on the case!!!!

Edit: by way of comparison, the top rate for the Crown lawyers for the trial was $216 per hour.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 4:54pm
Pete George

‘When the people lead – the politicians will follow?….’

That’s what we’re working on leading by example – I think the politicians will only follow if they think they have to so they won’t lose anything (power or votes), not because they want to.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 4:58pm
AlphaKiwi

@ Pete George

Where do you stand on your candidates sending pictures of their genitalia to university students? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:02pm
starboard

“I think the politicians will only follow if they think they have to so they won’t lose anything ”

Where did it go wrong PG? When did the tail start to wag the dog. NZ’ers need to show the tail who the boss is dont you think? ..and the tail needs to take note.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:13pm
Pete George

Alpha – while each candidate can act independently that’s not recommended 🙂

The US seems to produce some very strange politicians.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:14pm
Pete George

starboard – I think politicians (and an elite) have wanted to retain their control for a long time. MMP was supposed to be more democratic, to be more representative of a diverse electorate, and it has been to an extent.

The problem is that an ideological based party gets used to getting their vote and then following their ideology. But over time that ideology comes second to keeping whatever power they can, so they take a three year mandate and do was they please to try and achieve that. The longer they do it the more remote from people and ideology they get.

That’s why we want to remove ideology from it, and set up a system of constant communication with the electorate, and looking at issues as they come up based on facts, science and common sense without worrying about if it fits with your ideology or not.

If a system of communication and evaluation and openness is set up then that should reduce the chance of self serving politicians, because it would be easily seen when they do it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:29pm
krazykiwi

At last, something IPCC-related that makes sense: IPCC’s renewable energy cycle 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:32pm
Rodders

starboard said “geez rodders you never say anything nice to me”

So you didn’t use the vile expression “lazy black bastards” then?
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/06/general_debate_17_june_2011.html#comment-843346
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:33pm
Johnboy

Call me a silly fool but somehow I am beginning to suspect that Finickity Elucidating Smith (tugs forelock to his lordship) is avoiding me.

Memo to self: ……Put him in same basket as Grumpy Old Hori!! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:38pm
F E Smith

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/06/sir_john_hansen_on_pds.html#comment-839105
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:53pm
Johnboy

🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:59pm
reid

FES thanks.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 5:59pm
Johnboy

As I thought Finangling Expensive Smith. You are a tosser.

Give us your real name and we can all see what a great lawyer you are.

Or perhaps you like to come here and pose as a great man because you are ashamed of the money you have ripped off the poor old taxpayers.

You are a nothing. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:05pm
nickb

I would be interested in knowing what my fellow kiwibloggers think about the heralds latest piece of uninformed drivel on Trusts:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business-editors-picks/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501981&objectid=10732747
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:15pm
mikenmild

nickb
What was wrong with the article? It seemd to canvass a range of views.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:20pm
starboard

…yes I did rodders and I stand by that statement..now run along…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:23pm
starboard

…and the majority are lazy cunning conniving layabouts
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:29pm
mikenmild

Sorry, majority of whom?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:32pm
nasska

A woman meets a man in a bar.

They talk; they connect; they end up leaving together.

They get back to his place,and as he shows her around his apartment.

She notices that one wall of his bedroom is completely filled with soft, sweet,
cuddly teddy bears.

There are three shelves in the bedroom, with hundreds and hundreds of cute,
cuddly teddy bears carefully placed in rows, covering the entire wall!

It was obvious that he had taken quite some time to lovingly arrange them and she was immediately touched by the amount of thought he had put into organizing the display.

There were small bears all along the bottom shelf,
medium-sized bears covering the length of the middle shelf,
and huge, enormous bears running all the way along the top shelf.

She found it strange for an obviously masculine guy to have such a large collection of Teddy Bears,
She is quite impressed by his sensitive side, but doesn’t mention this to him.

They share a bottle of wine and continue talking and, after awhile, she finds herself thinking,
‘Oh my God! Maybe, this guy could be the one!
Maybe he could be the future father of my children?’

She turns to him and kisses him lightly on the lips. He responds warmly.

They continue to kiss, the passion builds, and he romantically lifts her in
his arms and carries her into his bedroom where they rip off each other’s
clothes and make hot, steamy love.

She is so overwhelmed that she responds with more passion, more creativity, more heat than she has ever known.

After an intense, explosive night of raw passion with this sensitive guy, they are lying there together in the afterglow.

The woman rolls over, gently strokes his chest and asks coyly,

‘Well,how was it?’

The guy gently smiles at her, strokes her cheek, looks deeply into her eyes, and says:

‘Help yourself to any prize from the middle shelf’
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:44pm
nickb

Where do I start mike?

This year the Law Commission

Some cynics would say you should stop reading there!

As a result, the government has reached for the blunt instrument and, this year, upfront GST refunds will no longer be paid, no matter how valid. This is solely due to the abuse of trust law. Beggar the entrepreneurs.

Complete and utter falsity. GST input claims are not allowed moving forwards on the the of property between a GST registered vendor and a GST registered purchaser- such transactions are now zero-rated. But how much of a % of property transactions involve two property traders? 5%? Less?

“Why is it that New Zealanders have this predilection for trusts?” asks the Law Commission’s Tanner. “Why is it that everyone must have a trust – is it that they don’t trust government? Is it that they think the government will get at their assets and, by putting them in a trust, they’re putting them out of reach?

It says a lot about the Law Commission that they would say something so dripping with irony.

Tubb says the law is clear that the transfer of property into trusts to defeat creditors can be reversed “but it can be a difficult set of rules to apply. From a creditor’s point of view, trusts are pretty complex and relatively unregulated.”

Again, completely wrong. Why have they interviewed only people with a vested interest in weakening Trusts?

What a load of shite. Be careful though, if anything this emphasises the need for good trustee record keeping and the inclusion of an independent trustee in your family trust.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:46pm
mikenmild

Well, the Law Commission report is only a starting point. Plenty of vested interests yet to have their say. Judging by what happens to other LC reports, I wouldn’t get too worried.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 6:54pm
Johnboy

Frantically Evasive Smith must be having dinner! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:01pm
reid

What lies in store for Greece, Portugal, Spain, Ireland, Italy, and, in short order, the United States, is the wholesale sell-off of public property to private corporations at bargain basement prices. What the despots who gather in their secretive lairs at Davos, Cernobbio, Bilderberg, and G8/G20 are bringing about is a world where no property is owned by the state, which by default means the people. Total corporate control over every facet of life equals extreme fascism.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:14pm
Viking2

Talking about youth rates and such earlier.

Hon Sir Roger Douglas Speech to Budget Debate
Parliament

Mr Speaker, the National and Labour parties are the biggest obstacles to the reform, modernisation and eventual success of New Zealand. This Budget shows why.

National, like Labour, have elevated means over ends, pragmatism over principles, posture over policy, cynicism over sincerity and symbols over substance.

National may have inherited the financial mess from Labour, but that’s no excuse for not tackling its causes head on.

When it comes to means over ends, we can all agree we want to see New Zealanders enjoying the best living standards possible. Only ACT, however, identifies and promotes means based on private enterprise, choice and competition that will deliver that end on a viable and lasting basis. National has unfortunately long since succumbed to bribery, via Government spending, as a means to that end, a means which is not viable and leads only to lasting debt.

The end result of decades of bribery by both National and Labour Governments is a level of spending that now represents 36.4% of GDP. Best international estimates of the optimal level of central and local government spending that now represents over 40 percent of GDP Running at nearly double that level can only mean an economy hobbled by excessive taxation and bureaucracy, and warped incentives. That is exactly what our economy is.

A government that makes no serious effort to change this when it has the opportunity is clearly a government that puts pragmatism over principle. It fails to do the right thing because it’s simply too hard and runs the risk of upsetting vested interests and lobbyists.

While ACT welcomes the opening up of certain SOEs to private ownership up to 49 percent, we are left wondering why National lacks the courage of its alleged private enterprise convictions and wants to retain a majority interest in, for example, an airline and a television network when such things are properly the purview of the private sector.

Cuba nationalised everything in sight in the 1960s, but eventually learned its lesson and is now busy privatising again. If they can do it surely we can.

It’s not just a question of the money, Mr Speaker, that so-called “asset sales” would bring into empty government coffers; it’s that governments have no business owning such things in the first place.

In its obsession with not frightening the horses, this government tries to create the appearance of tackling our present crisis when in fact it does as little as possible. This is where posture over policy comes in.

National at one time pretended to be enthusiastic about New Zealand catching Australia by 2025. It even created a taskforce charged with telling us how we could do that. The taskforce was even chaired by one of the best economic brains in the country, ACT leader Dr Don Brash. It made many excellent recommendations. What has National done? Filed them in the rubbish bin. National’s purported commitment to catching Australia by 2025, if ever, is now shown to be as hollow as Helen Clark’s infamous commitment to returning New Zealand to the top half of the OECD by 2010.

All posturing, no policy to back it up. Even the posturing was eventually abandoned. Has Mr Key abandoned any pretext of wanting to catch Australia by 2025? Let him tell us. But, if the answer is “yes”, as this Budget would indicate, where does that leave his claim to be ambitious for New Zealand?

In its failure to tackle the looming crisis facing our nation, this Budget is a symbol of National’s cynicism. National knows, for example, that in reinstating a youth minimum wage at least 12,000 new jobs for young people would be created in short order. The Budget could have signalled National’s intention to do that. It did no such thing. Instead it relied on the tired old Muldoonist tool of subsidisation – its Youth Employment Package – which creates fewer than half as many jobs at enormous cost to the taxpayer. A further instance of this Government not only spending too much money, but spending it unwisely.

I mentioned at the outset the Government’s propensity for symbolism over substance. Is there a more eloquent example than National’s continuation of Labour’s big government approach to early childhood education. Ever greater wads of taxpayer money have been thrown at the sector, with both parties touting it as illustrating their caring natures. In practice what’s to show for all this “generosity” with other people’s money? A 300 percent increase in expenditure over five years has resulted in a 1 percent increase in participation. Symbolism over substance – and at what cost!

Mr Speaker, in 2009 Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, in a speech in Switzerland, observed that, quote: “Any fourth grade history student knows socialism has failed in every country, at every time in history,” end quote. As a surviving luminary from the collapsed Soviet Union Mr Putin should know what he’s talking about. It would seem our politicians have failed to heed the lesson that Mr Putin correctly says is obvious to any fourth grade history student. Sadly, this Budget confirms this to be the case. Government assets over the last 10 years have doubled to 120 percent of GDP, or $223 billion – money taken from the private sector now invested in poorly performing government assets.

As President Ronald Regan once observed, quote: “In our present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” New Zealand’s government is too big, too intrusive and it spends too much. National’s Budget did nothing meaningful to change this. It was, as my colleague Hon Heather Roy so accurately described it yesterday, a dire disappointment and an abject failure of nerve.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:19pm
mikenmild

Ha ha. Roger Douglas quoting Vladimir Putin on how to run a country.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:24pm
nasska

reid

Why do I get a faint whiff of Dear Leader & the sound of World government?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:25pm
Gulag1917

Re Christchurch. People are waiting on the government to make decisions. Why the delays. Surely there is sufficient legislation now to allow that.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:37pm
Gulag1917

Surely the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 would obligate people/civil servants to make decisions for the welfare of Christchurch.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:44pm
Pete George

Re Christchurch. People are waiting on the government to make decisions. Why the delays.

Check Geonet.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 7:52pm
Pete George

Did anyone see the item on TV3 news about the eugenics in the US? In many states, in Georgia up to the seventies, they sterilised people to improve bloodstock – they forcibly operated on those who were mentally impaired, homosexual, promiscuous, poor.

Incredible.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 8:18pm
Elaycee

An elderly lady decided to give herself a big treat for her significant birthday by staying overnight in one of London ‘s most expensive hotels.

When she checked out next morning, the desk clerk handed her a bill for £250.00. She exploded and demanded to know why the charge was so high. “It’s a nice hotel but the rooms certainly aren’t worth £250.00 for just an overnight stop without even breakfast.”

The clerk told her that £250.00 is the ‘standard rate’ so she insisted on speaking to the Manager. The Manager appeared and forewarned by the desk clerk announced: “The hotel has an Olympic-sized pool and a huge conference center which are available for use.”

“But I didn’t use them,” she said. “Well, they are here, and you could have,” explained the Manager. He went on to explain that she could also have seen one of the in-hotel shows for which the hotel is famous. “We have the best entertainers from Edinburgh , Glasgow , and Aberdeen performing here,” the Manager said.

“But I didn’t go to any of those shows,” she said.

“Well, we have them, and you could have,” the Manager replied. No matter what amenity the Manager mentioned, she replied, “But I didn’t use it!” The Manager was unmoved, so she decided to pay, wrote a cheque and gave it to the Manager.

The Manager was surprised when he looked at the check. “But madam, this check is only made out for £50.00.”

“That’s correct. I charged you £200.00 for sleeping with me,” she replied.

“But I didn’t!” exclaims the very surprised Manager.

“Well, too bad, I was here, and you could have.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 8:40pm
Tauhei Notts

Nickb at 6.15 p.m.
Thank you for bringing that article to our attention.
Whilst reading it I was reminded of the comment made by some American politician some years ago (the name escapes me) that a government that is big enough to give you everything you want will also be big enough to take away everything you have got.
Many lawyers, I think in an attempt to increase their income, have been warning about trusts. I do not know how the government can get at them, unless we have a Bananarama dictatorship.
People get confused about trusts so let me put it in simple terms.
After being dropped off at the airport prior to a four week overseas trip you ask your mate to look after the three $100 notes in your pocket. Give them back to me when I return. No worries, mate.
The mate is a trustee of the $300.
If he was an Australian owned bank he would lend that $300 to credit card borrowers at 19.95% and upon your return give you $248; the $52 balance being bank fees. But not your mate. He will give you back the $300 and insist upon you shouting for him as you discuss the travel itinerary.
But consider that while overseas the courts told your mate that the $300 had to be handed into them. Any mate that was worth trusting with that $300 would then hand the dough onto another of your mates and promptly tell the court that he no longer holds the money in trust. And so it would go on.
I do not see, with the frequent change in trustees, how the court could pursue these matters.
I could believe that under a jurisdiction run by an evil barren harridan, that such draconian laws could be passed, but I give John Key & Co better marks than that.
Please don’t tell me that I am wrong.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 9:08pm
nickb

Not sure I follow Tauhei. I do find it ironic the direction our potential trust reforms are taking bearing in mind the number of them on our MP’s pecuniary register.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 9:27pm
publicwatchdog

Seen this?

Fellow ‘Public Watchdog’ on NZ judicial matters – Vince Siemer ‘blows the whistle’ on the delayed ‘Operation 8 Show Trial’:

“After almost 4 years and over $10 million in taxpayer funds thrown at the prosecution, few Kiwis are aware of the evidence and court proceedings in the criminal prosecution of 18 New Zealand citizens initially labelled as terrorists, but whom the U.S. Embassy in Wellington was advised in 2007 by NZ Police would likely face only fines of up to $4,000.

The High Court has tried to shroud the proceedings in secrecy.

But you can FIND OUT THE INSIDE STORY AND FACTS at

http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/index.asp?pageID=2145845331

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Penny Bright
http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 10:08pm
TimG_Oz

Penny is it true that you had comments deleted from this left wing blog for being anti-semitic?

http://capitalismbad.blogspot.com/2009/03/political-anti-semitism-in-new-zealand.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 11:00pm
reid

So I read the whole thing Penny and found nothing new.

What’s your point?

As we’ve previously discussed, do you really expect the authorities to take less seriously what these guys were doing? Do you think it was just childish paintguns? Some of you do. That’s completely mental you know so I hope you don’t think that Penny.

It’s clear as we’ve previously discussed the prosecution is a complete shambles and needs urgently to be sorted one way or the other.

It’s also clear that it’s merely – again – sigh – the usual idiots such as the Greens, who as usual support the wrong causes for the right reasons, who are behind the agitation to pretend this is a twavesty of justice.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 18, 2011 11:15pm
Manolo

Millions here and there being given away. The gravy train continues: “Agreement reached in $4.6m treaty deal”
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyID=198870
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 19, 2011 6:22am
Elaycee

TimG_Oz (556) Says: June 18th, 2011 at 11:00 pm “Penny is it true that you had comments deleted from this left wing blog for being anti-semitic?” http://capitalismbad.blogspot.com/2009/03/political-anti-semitism-in-new-zealand.html

What a coincidence – the same Vince Siemer mentioned by Penny Bright (June 18, 10.08pm) has just lost an Appeal to the NZ Supreme Court: BETWEEN VINCENT ROSS SIEMER Applicant AND MICHAEL PETER STIASSNY First Respondent AND KORDA MENTHA FORMERLY FERRIER HODGSON Second Respondent.

“Vincent Ross Siemer seeks leave to appeal against a judgment of the Court of Appeal of 30 March 2011 dismissing his challenge to a judgment of Cooper J delivered on 23 December 2008 awarding the first respondent, Michael Peter Stiassny, defamation damages totalling $825,000 and the second respondent, Korda Mentha, damages of $95,000 ($75,000 for defamation and $20,000 for breach of an agreement settling a dispute between the parties).”

The judgement [linked] is an interesting read – including the references to Siemer’s anti-semitic comments about Stiassny.

What a coincidence…..

http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/from/decisions/judgments
(Scroll down to the Siemer reference).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 19, 2011 8:49am
publicwatchdog

TimG_Oz (556) Says:
June 18th, 2011 at 11:00 pm

Penny is it true that you had comments deleted from this left wing blog for being anti-semitic?

http://capitalismbad.blogspot.com/2009/03/political-anti-semitism-in-new-zealand.html
______________________________________________________________________________________________________

I am not anti-semitic.

I support the human rights of Palestinian people who after 60 years still do not have their own ‘state’ (unlike Israel).

I supported Jon Eisen (Editor of Uncensored) in 2009 – when Scott Hamilton attempted to stop Uncensored from using the Mt Albert War Memorial Hall for a seminar/conference.

Scott Hamilton tried to claim that Jon Eisen was anti-semitic because of articles published in Uncensored which he disagreed with. (Jon Eisen is in fact a New York Jew).

“Uncensored have booked the Mt Albert War Memorial Hall for a conference at the end of April, and Scott Hamilton wrote a letter to Cathy Casey (a left-wing Auckland city councillor) asking her to stop Uncensored from using the hall.*

Scott Hamilton’s disgraceful attempt at political censorship was unsuccessful, it was a very successful event, where the basic human rights of New Zealanders to freedom of expression prevailed.

Penny Bright
http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 19, 2011 4:30pm
Elaycee

So, Penny – I take it that you have totally distanced yourself from the anti-semitic comments made by your friend Vincent Ross Siemer?

As a reminder, I’ve copied the judgement of the Supreme Court in which Siemer’s appeal against defamation was dismissed.

The judgement [linked] is an interesting read – including the references to Siemer’s anti-semitic comments about Stiassny.

http://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/from/decisions/judgments
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
June 20, 2011 8:19am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Is UNITE solvent?

Agreeing with Hone »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.3K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

Free speech victory
Hompaddock
Why Tuesday?
No Minister
What a Trump Win would spell out in terrible detail
The Daily Blog
Does the TPM Secretary know he could face jail time?
Utopia
Open mike 05/11/2024
The Standard
Sabotaging justice
No Right Turn
What would Sumner say about Trump and Vance’s pro-tariff rhetoric?
Not PC
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
A tariffying prospect for Kiwi exporters: Trump plans to tax imports – but a Harris presidency would be not much better
Point of Order
NZ media’s “propagandisation” of the US Election
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
THE PUNCHING ABOVE OUR WEIGHT EMBARRASSMENT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
The Battle for Democracy
NZCPR
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Where are the food carts?
Offsetting Behaviour
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d