Progress on the Stop the GCSB Bill meeting

I’m a long way from Auckland so am relying on the live stream. Which has been delayed, so have to wait until that starts up “soon”.

Video On Demand of the meeting

Dame Anne Salmond

War Memorial Hall appropriate, commemorating fighting for freedom.

Gosh, this isn’t even everyone who has turned up for the anti GCSB bill meeting in Auckland tonight.

Taking a while to get to the point.

Problems with recent legislation.

All of these defects come to a head in the GCSB Bill.

Almost without limit.


All of the authorities that have looked at the bill have said it should be shelved.

Almost universally condemned.

No it hasn’t.

Democracy is not a partisan matter.

Show some backbone and show they are worthy of the trust we put in them

As for the Prime Minister – we send them to parliament represent us, not rule us.

Very eloquent, but a slanted view.

GCSB Meeting

Dr Rodney Harrison

Background in litigation in security services

Speaking personally.

Look at it as it stands and with the proposed changes. Dunne deal.

MPS – show some backbone.

Actions are covert, only if there is a muckup do we find out.

As a lawyer, if you are going to increase their powers you must increase scrutiny.

This legislation is hopelessly broad.

We need a fully informed national conversation.

The debate needs to take into account and understand current and future technology.

David Cunliffe keeps interjecting “shame”. 🙂

Much of this debate is probably barking up the wrong tree.

We don’t know enough.

Streaming is very good quality.

MPS making the decisions are as ignorant as us, how can we make laws like that?

Open slather on New Zealanders.

If you accidentally intercept private communication it’s ok.

I think the committee report addresses this.

I contend that these are substantive changes.

What this is really about (conspiracy theory) – Waihopai data collection will be shared with other agencies.

Dunne deal. None of them are substantive. All of them are window dressing.

I think that’s an unfair dismissal.

You can have as much oversight as you like but if the powers are loosely framed and if the interceptions are authorised then the oversight is too late.

History tells as that once given power is only ever added, not taken back.

Nasty snark about Dunne.

None of the Dunne deal should be any consolation to the public of New Zealand.

Toby Manhire@toby_etc
Big turnout, I’d guess 1000+, at GCSB bill meeting in Mt Albert. Full to brim.

Kim Dotcom

I’m a living example of why the GCSB shouldn’t be given greater power.

What imaginary threat is keeping John Key awake at night?

New Zealand is a safe country.

Would it be safe with less security?

The access to a massive spy could is the biggest weapon yet.

The GCSB is basically a subsidiary of the NSA.

There is reason to believe this bill is being handed down as a dictate from Washington.

Insufficient checks and balances. Clearly flaws that pose great danger to the nation.

Dotcom is making a lot of assumptions and guesses.

It’s clear the GCSB needs more thought and consideration.

There’s a question of trust.

If we don’t seize this unique moment to reform our spy laws we will live to regret it.

The new GCSB bill is morally indefensible.

The GCSB bill is a greater threat than terrorism.

Some say “beware terrorism, we need spies”

Others say “beware the spies”.

Thomas Beagle

Civil liberties are vital to democracy.

The GCSB bill is not unique to New Zealand.

Keeping up means mass spying.

Mass surveillance is what happens when a government is scared of its people.

We the people get to decide if we want mass surveillance.

Persuade our MPs democratically.

Explains how much can be revealed by metadata.

Superconveniently metadata is already in a readily usable form.

You can now draw conclusions about anyone in the country, about everyone in the country.

There is no doubt that metadata is essential in modern surveillance.

Dunne’s amendments don’t change any controls on metadata. It is still not addressed.

Any intrusions must be minimal and essential.

Mass surveillance is different.

But Key says there is and will be no mass surveillance.

It’s not my job to prove we don’t need this surveillance, it’s your job to prove that we do.

Privacy seems to be a normal human need.

Privacy used to be negligible.

Mass surveillance is partly about power.

Maybe it’s not going to happen now maybe it’s not going to happen in the future, but we shouldn’t give government the power in case they use it in the future.

We need clarity. The bill should be clear if it goes ahead.

Prepared to accept some surveillance but these need to be limited, the minimum required.

Questions (not speeches)

Penny made the meeting aware of a private prosecution against John Key for spying on Kim Dotcom.

Questions aren’t great.

Once data is collected there are no limits on what can be done with the data.

I think the committee report addresses that.

Kim Dotcom – they store all your communication data and can access it. They are capturing all data.

Not according to Key. Some claims are grand speculation.

Shearer is there and put on the spot. Someone asked if opposition parties would repeal it if they get into Government.

But Cunliffe gets up and says the legislation must not and cannot stand. With aplomb

While Shearer looked like he was thinking “what the fuck do I do, what the fuck can I say?”

Cunliffe must have been seated near the front, he wouldn’t have seen Shearer arrive late and stand at the back. David Parker standing beside Shearer.

Green’s Browning says the bill is a total sham and invites everyone to join him at Waihopai at 2pm on Sunday.

Is it time for a third major party to represent middle New Zealand?

Is there a legal way to get this law dissolved? Use vote at next election.

Chair asks for no more political questions/comments.

Questions aren’t contributing much.

Joe Carolan launched into a speech (way off the topic)and the chair refused an answer with some crowd support for his stance.

Rodney Harrison suggested everyone lobby their MPs to vote on their conscience, but said they have no knowledge to base a vote on. Some have.

Martyn Bradbury promotes the march on Saturday and says that when 50,000 march it makes a difference.

Meeting closed.

Very interesting. The speeches were all good, eloquent, many pertinent points, but quite a few assumptions, guesses and probably a few overstatements and dubious claims.

Thomas Beagle made a brief reference to the committee report and said it made little difference, I’d be interested in more in depth analysis of that in conjunction with the Dunne amendments.

I think Key still has to do substantially more clarifying.

The meeting had an obvious political slant. Peter Dunne is still the focus of most of the venting and abuse- 1/121 of MPs is getting 120/121 of the flak, and he’s done more than just about any MP to try and address shortcomings in the bill.

The live stream is now repeating so I’ve just watched the start of the introduction. Yet more piling on Dunne. It could be a pressure filled week or two for him.

Similar thoughts on The Standard about Shearer:

Karol: So, Cunliffe committed a Labour-led government to repeal the Bill?!

Weka: Looked like it. Interesting move at this point in time. If the Labour caucus have actually discussed this and reached that conclusion, then why aren’t they putting out press statements?

Good to see Shearer at the meeting, but the cynic in me thinks it was for the wrong reasons. I can’t decide whether I wish he had been able to answer the questions or if it’s better that he didn’t.

Arfamo: I suspect he was having the same internal dialogue himself. I reckon he made the right choice

The two most under pressure politicians, Shearer and Dunne.

This could be the big news of the meeting:

Sudhvir Singh@sudhvir

Shit just got real – Cunliffe just spoke on behalf of Labour saying they’d effectively repeal not just review the #gcsb bill. #stopthegcsb

Repeal is certainly different to anything I’ve heard Shearer say.

Following democratic process was talked about a lot at the meeting. I wonder what democratic process Cunliffe used there.

Video On Demand of the meeting

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: