High Court Judge Urged To Consider Public Trust In McSkimming Case ‘Superinjunction' Decision
Even if a powerful individual is not charged or is found not guilty, the public should still have access to the facts in order to make their own informed judgments about his character.
The High Court judge has reserved her decision on whether to maintain the 'superinjunction' in Jevon McSkimming's case, which currently disables the media and public from discussing the details. The Free Speech Union urges the Court to consider the damage to public trust caused by excessive secrecy, says Stephen Franks, Free Speech Union Council Member.
'The Court should uphold the speech rights of all New Zealanders by allowing the media, and therefore the public, to scrutinise matters of genuine public interest. The public should be free to discuss the conduct of their officials and form their own opinions on matters.
'The media play a crucial role in enabling Kiwis to seek and receive information. The High Court set a dangerous precedent by limiting this freedom. The public's ability to discuss cases should be prioritised in court decisions.
'Even if a powerful individual is not charged or is found not guilty, the public should still have access to the facts in order to make their own informed judgments about his character.
'We urge the judge to consider the full weight of the damage done to public trust in courts, lawyers, and judges when they act as if only they can be trusted, while the 'little people' are kept in the dark.
'Suppression is bad, whatever the outcome.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Covid spending can be justified, despite Treasury report
Coverage of this report has focused on an implication that Treasury were opposed to much of the Covid-19 response and had sought to limit the extent of Government spending. Others have noted that the report does not say this directly, though the selective quotes from advice at different stages do not exactly discourage this reading. In the interests of full disclosure, I was an adviser to the Minister of Finance Grant Robertson from December 2020 onwards. Unsurprisingly, my perspective often differed from Treasury (which in some ways was a key required skill for that job), and readers may reasonably take that into account in the criticisms that follow. The risks highlighted in the report around the use of fiscal policy tend to underline the view that 'cyclical management should mostly be left to monetary policy run by an independent central bank'. This is not a new position – it is such an established aspect of economic orthodoxy that it is known as the 'consensus assignment'. Finance Minister Grant Robertson during the pandemic. Photo / Pool Why, then, would we use fiscal policy in response to a shock? Recent decades have seen very low interest rates, and therefore situations where central banks cannot cut rates to the level they believe necessary to support the economy. This issue is known as the 'effective lower bound' and was one of the major preoccupations of economic debates following the global financial crisis. However, it was clear that Treasury had done limited thinking on how fiscal policy should be used in a crisis. This was despite the fact that the official cash rate was just 1% as the pandemic approached. I recall my surprise at being briefed on a work programme to review Treasury's macro-economic framework – thinking that I would have assumed it had already taken place sometime in the previous decade. At different stages Covid-19 required spending to support overall economic activity (i.e. stimulus) as well as more targeted spending for workers and businesses directly affected by lockdowns. The LTIB notes that Treasury did support large-scale spending responses in the initial stages, but then 'advised shifting towards more targeted fiscal support and recommended against further stimulus from Budget 2022 onwards'. Covid-19-related supports had continued during this period, because large numbers of New Zealanders continued to be affected by Covid-19, most notably during the Auckland lockdowns. But the purpose of this spending was to support people and businesses during a time when normal economic activity was not possible, not to stimulate more economic activity. Despite the large initial cost of the wage subsidy scheme in 2019/20, the largest year for Covid-related spending was actually 2021/22, owing to the combination of business support programmes and the ramping up of the national health response. Former Beehive staffer Toby Moore. Photo / Supplied A further, separate category of spending is funding allocated through the Budget operating allowance, which is typically a mix of new spending and the increased cost of existing spending (cost pressures). In late 2021, the operating allowances for upcoming budgets were increased compared to what was previously signalled. Treasury has at times raised concerns that adjusting future allowances might undermine credibility; however, it was not an uncommon occurrence for parts of Treasury to raise such concerns and for other parts of Treasury to put advice to the Minister suggesting that allowance should increase. It is important to understand that budget allowances are not an end in themselves. Adhering to previously planned allowances come what may does not amount to a sensible fiscal strategy, and governments tend to put more focus on whether those allowances are contributing to them keeping debt or deficit levels in line with their intended objectives. The operating allowance for Budget 2022 was large, at $6 billion. But based on forecasts at the time, that level of spending was consistent with Government debt peaking at a much lower level than earlier forecasts, and the Government's books returning to surplus much earlier, in 2023/24. At the point Treasury states that they were not advising further stimulus, this was very much the Government's view as well. Economic and fiscal forecasts were looking much different from mid-2022 onward, and the economy continued to slow as the Reserve Bank tightened interest rates in response to rising inflation of the sort that was experienced around the world. While larger proportions of budget spending during this period were trying to maintain existing public services in the face of high levels of inflation, the other side of this story is the fact that forecast tax revenue has continually failed to eventuate. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern during the pandemic. Photo / Mark Tantrum Ahead of Budget 2024, Nicola Willis alluded to a further downgrade in economic and fiscal forecasts, saying 'Sadly, I've learned to dread what comes out of the forecasters' mouths when they come into my office'. If nothing else, this is a sentiment shared across successive offices of the Minister of Finance. Repeated downward revisions of the tax-to-GDP ratio over time means that Budget 2025 forecasts for the current fiscal year are a full 3.3% of GDP lower than what forecasts in mid-2022 had anticipated. This has contributed to OBEGAL surplus getting pushed further out in the forecast period (and more recently, only showing surpluses on the Government's self-invented measure, OBEGALx). If decision-makers had cared only about inflation and nothing else, fiscal policy could potentially have done a lot more to reduce economic activity. With the Government not willing to resort to tax increases, more contractionary fiscal policy would have meant absorbing more of the burden of constraining demand through deteriorating public services, with the Reserve Bank having to do less through the OCR. Given the ongoing pressure on the health system today, we should be glad this was not the path that was taken. But far from being critical of this Budget spending, Treasury was also raising concerns that spending was not high enough. In the half-year update in 2022, Treasury expressed concern about what it described as the largest fall in real government consumption since 1987. As late as October 2022 Treasury was advising the Minister of Finance to increase the allowance for the next Budget from $4.5 billion to $5b. This incongruous array of advice was not a matter of mutinous radicals seizing control of the Government's lead economic adviser. Treasury was trying to tread the same narrow path that the Government was. The economy as a whole was hitting up against its capacity, and vulnerable New Zealanders needed targeted support towards the cost of living. Every dollar of additional spending risked adding to inflation and every dollar of spending that was withheld meant that rising costs would hit core government services or households directly. It is appropriate that we try to learn lessons from the experience of Covid-19. It is reasonable for people to disagree with some aspects of the fiscal response and it is highly unlikely that every decision taken was the right one. But the economic response was overwhelmingly guided by officials' advice rather than contrary to it. There may now be unease among some public servants about the level of debt that New Zealand assumed or the spending pressures that it is facing. But the other side of that debt is the businesses that are still operating, the people who were kept in work and the loss of friends and family members that were avoided because NZ chose to support each other through that most complex and challenging time. Toby Moore is a doctoral candidate at Te Herenga Waka - Victoria University of Wellington and was previously a senior adviser to former Finance Minister Grant Robertson. He is also on the Labour Party's policy council, though the views here are his own
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Letters to the Editor: electricity, flatting and the Oval
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including keeping power prices down, the trick to warming a student flat, and the year-long occupation of the Oval. Underinvestment is having chilling effect Contact Energy's CEO says they know homes are doing it tough at the moment and that they are doing their best to keep prices down ( ODT 8.8.25). What he fails to mention is that Contact Energy along with the other major gentailers (Genesis, Meridian, and Mercury) have for the last decade dramatically reduced their investment in future sources of energy alongside skyrocketing dividends. The long-term impacts of underinvestment have become clearer in the past 12 months: high power prices for families; factories and mills shutting down, leaving workers jobless. The gentailers are required to look after the interests of their shareholders, not those of struggling New Zealanders. A shortage of supply is good for their bottom line. Nevertheless their PR machine will continue to promote public good falsehoods. This is well illustrated by Contact Energy's fast-track proposal to lower the operating level of Lake Hāwea. This will result in significant adverse environmental outcomes. Their justification is security of supply — which they historically underinvested in. If approved this will be a financial windfall for Contact as it requires no capital investment. The electricity reforms introduced by National have been a disaster. It is ironic that a National minister, Nicola Willis, is struggling to control the cost of living crisis bought about in part by her National predecessors. No problem What is the problem with the latest reforms to the electoral system? Everyone who is eligible to enrol in the elections has access to do so before the shut-off time. How many years have we been doing it now, without issues? It has nothing to do with race, or trying to prevent people having their say. Maybe some people should look in the mirror to see where the problem lies. Stop blaming everybody else, get off your butt and enrol before the cut off time. It is called personal responsibility. The majority of us do the right thing. Was it not the previous Labour government who, in 2020, changed the electoral system rule and bought the cut off-time to enrolling and voting to the day of the election when it really did not need to be changed at all. And by the way I do not have a problem with prisoners who are serving time, not allowed to cast a vote. Reading the opinion piece article of Metiria Stanton Turei (Opinion ODT 8.8.25) draws me to the conclusion that it is not "their people" (as she calls us colonials) that are the ones creating division in this country. You just need to read the said article to see where the fuel that sets that fire is coming from. Meeting deadlines I totally disagree with Metiria Stanton Turei. The government is not preventing a 100,000 people from voting: all they are doing is setting a reasonable date for people to enrol. We all have expiry dates, acceptance dates, and multiple times and dates we have to keep on a daily bases. I don't see any difference in setting an enrolment date. There will be plenty of advertising, social media and individual communications between communities and different racial groups. The government is not preventing people from voting it is just setting a date. Why not let people vote who forget to vote after the ballots close? Finding a warm flat for next year is possible As an elderly computer incompetent it took me about two minutes to find a variety of double-glazed new (as in no more than about 10 years old) student flats for $180-$250 approx a room for 2026. I found a bargain 1990s two-bathroom, six-bed flat — not double-glazed, but low ceiling wall and underfloor (because it was the law from the late '70s) insulated flat in Opoho Rd at $147 a room for next year. Heatpumps need to be on all day at 18°C or 20°C in cold weather: it's what most older people do. This works especially well if you have wall insulation — double glazing is not even required. Previous generations wouldn't believe that you can get 6kW or 8kW of heat by only using 2kW of power. Many are as cheap to run as an old one- or two-bar heater and heat the whole house, not just part of one room as the old heaters used to. Also to the girls who turned down a good flat because of ceiling cracks: unless they're as wide as a pencil, 99.9% of homeowners have them, due not least because of normal settlement but also because we live in an earthquake zone. We have so many we don't even notice ones that terrify overseas visitors. Past time for Oval evictions I am in utter disbelief at this current council's hypocritical incompetence — the trigger being the now year-long occupation of the Oval by vagrants who have chosen to pitch tents on council land where the local by-laws expressly forbid doing so. This action not only seems to be tolerated by the council, but seems to be free from any infringement notice, fine or prosecution. Instead, the council would rather hypocritically divert their attentions around the Oval to putting up an extensive collection of newly installed, expensive, "No parking" signs obviously directed at parents coming to the ground for weekly children's sports. How these rate-paying parents must have their blood boiling when they are confronted with these new signs and additional concrete bollards placed by the council to threaten them about the legalities of them parking for an hour while their children play on the sports grounds that their rates have paid for. Adding insult to injury is having their view of the said sports event corrupted by vagrants in their tents being left to do what they want. Ironically, even when they park one of their own cars outside their tents they do so with some impunity. Can I remind current councillors running for re-election that such incompetence on their behalf to deal with this now long, ongoing situation of illegal squatting on council land has been noticed by the voting public. As a passive protest I would like to encourage every person who receives a parking ticket from the council to refuse to pay it, and simply write "Oval" on it, and return it to the council. The law must be consistent. Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Roles shift in Parliament
Party leaders in the New Zealand Parliament (from left) Prime Minister and Reform Party leader Gordon Coates, Leader of the Opposition and National Party leader George Forbes, Labour Party leader Harry Holland. ("National" was a name briefly used by the Liberal Party at the time, not to be confused with the modern National, a merger of United and Reform in 1936.) — Otago Witness, 27.10.1925 Thomas Wilford steps down Wellington, August 13: The House met at 2.30pm. Mr G.W. Forbes (Hurunui) occupied the seat of the Leader of the National Party. Mr Ransom moved that leave of absence be granted to Mr Wilford, Leader of the National Party, for the remainder of the session. Mr Coates, speaking to the motion, said he was sure every member would regret the necessity for such a motion, and the wish would everywhere go out that Mr Wilford would soon be restored to normal health. Mr Holland briefly but feelingly regretted the fact that Mr Wilford found it necessary to ask for leave, and expressed the hope that he would soon be sufficiently restored to health to resume his parliamentary duties. Mr Forbes, on behalf of the National Party, thanked the Leaders of the other parties for their kindly and sympathetic reference to Mr Wilford. He felt sure that Mr Wilford would deeply appreciate the kindly references which had been made to him by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Labour Party. The motion was agreed to. For some weeks now it has been apparent that the health of Mr T.M. Wilford, Leader of the Opposition, has not been satisfactory. He had taken the advice of medical men and it was certified that he was suffering from severe nervous debility. It was freely stated that it was more than probable that he would have to take a sea voyage, involving a somewhat prolonged absence from the House of Representatives. On the last occasion on which he made a speech in the House it was evident that he spoke with a considerable want of confidence in himself; as a matter of fact, he had difficulty in finishing his speech and nearly broke down. Since then he has been only once in the House. — by ODT Wellington correspondent Friending naval visitors A Dunedin soldier who achieved high honours during the war and a friend have adopted a very sensible method of entertaining our American visitors. They stroll along the street and the first two sailors they meet are invited to have lunch with them. The invitation is always gladly accepted, and the two Dunedinites are getting a more intimate knowledge of American life than most people. Beating Aussies at forestry In the matter of forest development, Australia has in all approximately 74 square miles of plantations. New Zealand has 100 square miles of plantations (one-third as much again as the whole of Australia), and this area is being added to at the rate of 17,500 acres, or over 27 square miles per year. 1.4m New Zealanders The estimated population of the dominion (including Maoris) as at June 30 last: Males 705,921. Females 676,015. Total 1,381,938. Parole system working There has been the shadow of a controversy concerning the methods of the Prisons Board in releasing offenders. The board acts on psychological and experimental grounds. It bases its decisions on the reports of officials upon whose fairness of judgment it has reason to rely. Speaking generally, we should be inclined to say that justice is done, and reasonable mercy afforded. Moreover, the records show that the clemency which it extends to prisoners has, as a rule, not been abused. — editorial — ODT, 14.8.1925 Compiled by Peter Dowden
