Police Minister Anne Tolley has stressed that the report gives the Police a pass on many of their actions and decisions, and she has pointed out that the raids did relate to ‘serious crimes’ and, in fact, led to convictions. Prime Minister John Key has also been downplaying the report, and the chances of compensation for those wronged by the Police. See also, David Farrar’s account –
IPCA report on Operation 8.
What about Labour, the party that was actually in Government at the time and presided over the raids? Its response isn’t much louder than National’s, focusing on a call for the Government to implement the report’s recommendations and for the Police to change their manual. Tame Iti has said that he still holds Helen Clark responsible for the outcome of the raids.
The Greens have been more damning, suggesting that ‘racial discrimination played a part in the raids’. David Farrar responds to this with the blogpost,
Greens see racism everywhere. Greens spokesperson David Clendon also says that the report shows ‘a need for an urgent and dramatic overhaul of police culture’.
The Maori Party, unsurprisingly, is angry about the report. Te Ururoa Flavell is particularly unsatisfied with the Government’s response: ‘It's a weird day in a democracy when a report into Operation Eight identifies police actions that were contrary to law, unjustified and unreasonable, and the grand remedy is to amend the police manual’. Flavell says the problem isn’t just the Police, but the whole justice system, which needs a comprehensive review – see Newswire’s
Maori Party: IPCA recommendations too weak.
At the more radical end of the spectrum, the Mana Party is even more outraged, and is calling for ‘heads to roll’ – see Isaac Davison’s
Police got off over raids - Maori MPs. Hone Harawira says that police commissioner Peter Marshall should go, and that former Labour Police Minister Annette King should resign from Parliament. Deputy leader Annette Sykes is suggesting the establishment of a ‘compensation commission’.
The issue of compensation – along with calls for further apologies – have become the focus of the debate. This is best outlined in the Herald’s
Urewera raids report: Commissioner apologises. The Police stance is that it should in fact be the convicted activists apologising: ‘Marshall has apologised for mistakes made during the Urewera raids but says those arrested and convicted should also consider saying sorry for the stress it caused to the community’. He has said that ‘If it hadn't been for Tame Iti and his band of colleagues ... we would not have gone there’. The Police Association vice-president Luke Shadbolt has also gone on the offensive: ‘What we have never heard ... is any explanation from those who were apparently practising guerrilla tactics with firearms and molotov cocktails at their military-style training camps, as to what they were training for’.
There will be many who deem the Police’s apologies inadequate. For example, today’s Herald editorial says, ‘Commissioner Peter Marshall's casual apology, qualified and defensive, does not sound sufficient’ – see:
Raids report offers lessons for the future. The Dominion Post is also scathing of the policy in its editorial,
Travesty of justice not unnoticed, but it too wants an explanation from the political activists: ‘Now that the IPCA has finally reported its findings, only one question remains: Just what were they up to in the Ureweras?’
The other major report ‘out’ this week was from the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, who has officially ‘cleared’ the GCSB of acting unlawfully. The most interesting commentary on this comes from Matthew Hooton who says the report should be thrown in the bin, and that it’s findings are an ‘outrageous piece of spin from a judicial officer’ – see:
Labour, Greens right on GCSB report. In contrast, Hooton gives praise to the Independent Police Conduct Authority for its Urewera report.
The main problem of the ‘independent’ GCSB report is that it hasn’t actually been released to the public and questions remain about the adequacy of the person carrying out the evaluation – see Katie Bradford-Crozier’s
GCSB conflict of interest for Inspector General. For this reason, blogger No Right Turn has strongly criticised the report in his post, Unsurprising (
http://bit.ly/10SynqA), and Grant Robertson continues to call for an independent inquiry while challenging the logic of the Inspector General – see:
“Arguably” Bulls**t.
A theme of suppressed reports is emerging at the moment, which has led the Waikato Times to declare that ‘The Government is fast exposing a distasteful authoritarian streak, by keeping official reports and advice under wraps - hiding them from the country's elected representatives in Parliament’ – see
Reports kept under wraps. On The Standard there is an intelligent discussion of whether we still have the rule of law in New Zealand – see Michael Valley’s
The rule of law.
Other recent important or interesting items include the following:
Jim Bolger was prime minister of arguably one of the most radically rightwing governments ever seen in New Zealand. Yet in recent years his politics appear to have shifted substantially, and he can be heard railing against inequality, unfair trade, the excesses of capitalism, the monarchy, and so forth. He was at it again recently at the US-NZ Partnership Forum, much to the disapproval of Audrey Young – see:
Wrong audience for Bolger tirade. For another in-depth discussion about his changing views, you can listen to Chris Laidlaw’s fascinating 48-minute
Radio NZ interview with Jim Bolger.
Another controversial view was put forward at the Washington event – 20-year-old Kiwa Huata told the assembled elite that free trade deals raised some difficult questions and it was ‘bullshit’ to describe opponents as ‘wreakers’ – see Tracy Watkins’
Dissenter raises trade deal questions. See also, Watkins’
It's all good, just don't mention the nukes, for details of New Zealand’s closer relationship with the US. And for an evaluation of which politicians have been the best foreign negotiators, see Ken Ross’
Key not making US-NZ ties.
Solid Energy’s financial woes are plain to see, but not that long ago it had plans to boost the economy by up to $100bn, increasing GDP by 40%, and create 7000 more jobs – see
Don Elder's grandiose Solid Energy plans. The political debate now is about whether or not the National Government had to turn down a request for financing this dream – see Adam Bennett and Claire Trevett’s
Key's $1b request claim in doubt.
The future of New Zealand politics – and the past – lies in the centre of the political spectrum. But according to UMR pollster, Stephen Mills I
t's not easy in the centre. He insightfully outlines the situation and the problems. Of particular interest is the polling data that shows 40% of New Zealanders see themselves in the middle.