Thursday, 17 August 2006

HEADS UP: Labour file defence

Helen Clark and 46 other current and former Labour MPs have finally filed their Statement of Defence in Darnton V Clark -- the case that will test the legality of their misappropriation of taxpayer's money to pay for the Pledge Cards and succcessfully buy the election.

Litigant and Libertarianz leader Bernard Darnton suggests visiting the entry on his lawsuit blog at, where you can either read his three-sentence summary "or download 9 pages of mumbo-jumbo."

Things are soon to get interesting.

UPDATE (9:15am, 18 August): Darnton's lawyer Alan Dormer responds very briefly in today's Herald:
Labour's statement of defence says the pledge card was "an inherently political expression".
This is a different emphasis to that put on the card by Helen Clark, who said it was allowable under election spending rules because it set out the party's policy.
The statement of defence also says that under the Bill of Rights, the Labour Party and its leader have "the unqualified right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, and belief, including the right to adopt and to hold opinions without interference".
Mr Dormer said Labour appeared to be saying that it had a right to exercise freedom of speech at the taxpayers' expense.
"If one put all their quotes together, there would be a high degree of inconsistency, it seems to me."
LINK: Labour's Defence - Darnton Vs. Clark
Official contradicts MPs on electoral expenses - NZ Herald

RELATED: Darnton V Clark, Politics-NZ, Politics-Labour

No comments:

Post a Comment

1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.