David Carter

If Parliament's rules say you aren't even allowed to refer to the existence of a particular court case, then how can the Speaker enforce those rules without letting everyone knows that the court case exists?

The following interchange with the Speaker took place today in the middle of Andrew Little's reply to the Prime Minister's statement to the House.

DPF is very, very concerned about how Labour is selecting its Invercargill candidate. Where was that concern back in 2008?

I don't really know anything (and I guess I really should stop this post right there) ...

The Speaker has found that Peter Dunne could not have commited a contempt of Parliament. Told you so.

Peter Dunne has a press release up on scoop.co.nz claiming that the Speaker has exonerated him from lying about any role he may have had in leaking the Kitteridge report on the GCSB: 

Apparently UnitedFuture is no longer a party recognised for parliamentary purposes because doing so would cause too much trouble.

Let's begin with a confession. Last week I wrote a post in which I confidently stated:

The NZRFU's code of conduct requires that players "never argue with the referee.  Control your temper at all times." Peter Dunne could learn from it.

The saga of UnitedFuture's status as a party rolls on, with the most recent development being that the Electoral Commission has rejected its application to register.