Curran confirmed

datePosted on 16:56, February 19th, 2009 by Lew

I can confirm claims by Trevor Mallard and Clare Curran on The Standard that Curran attempted to prevent the guilt by accusation copyright law from taking effect by today seeking leave to introduce a bill, but was prevented from doing so by National members. Audio is here.

Scoop also confirms it.

L

4 Responses to “Curran confirmed”

  1. Anita on February 19th, 2009 at 17:20

    Over at frogblog Metiria Turei explains that Curran’s Bill wouldn’t actually have been enough to fix the problem.

  2. Lew on February 19th, 2009 at 17:33

    Anita,

    Over at frogblog Metiria Turei explains that Curran’s Bill wouldn’t actually have been enough to fix the problem.

    Thanks. Yeah, no comment on whether it would have been any good or not – just substantiating the claim.

    L

  3. The Standard and s92a. at The Standard 2.02 on February 19th, 2009 at 18:21

    [...] Well it has reared itself again because the offending clause got put back in before it got passed in an even worse form than it was prior to select committee. I’ve been annoying people in the Labour political sphere for the last few days since David Farrar brought it to our attention. It was good to see that Clare Curran attempted to enter a bill to correct the main flaw today. Lew has put up the audio of the Nats stupidly blocking it over at KiwiPolitico. [...]

  4. lyndon on February 20th, 2009 at 12:39

    I have to confess that Scoop’s version of events was based on Curran’s press release. I believe one would expect the leader of the house to deny leave for things like that (except by prior agreement) because it get in the way of their own business and, if it worked, everyone would want a go.

    Thanks for the audio, I nicked a copy and put it on Scoop.

    … and only now do I think that, in the context of this debate, perhaps I shouldn’t have put it that way.

Leave a Reply

Name: (required)
Email: (required) (will not be published)
Website:
Comment: