The Judith Collins defamation action is starting to look like a cross between the Teapot tapes and the McLibel trial. The Minister has finally filed the legal proceedings against Labour MPs Trevor Mallard and Andrew Little who, for their part, both seem determined to milk it for all it's worth see the two items by Danya Levy: MPs laugh off Collins' lawsuit and Little tells Collins to send in the 'thugs'. Clearly Little and Mallard sense that this legal action can only embarrass the Minister and her Government, and are set on turning the process into a circus with their hijinks, bluster, and jovial disregard for the matter.
Graeme Edgeler writes in his blogpost, Sanctuary!, that being 'served' your legal papers is a rather quaint, bizarre and 'fun' part of the whole procedure, so who can blame the Labour MPs for enjoying the theatrics. But he takes issue with the notion that MPs cannot be served defamation proceedings while in the Parliamentary complex due to parliamentary privilege. Instead Edgeler suggests that 'unless they're planning on being unfindable for next couple of years, it might be better to get it over with. If the case is as likely as they claim to prove embarrassing for the Minister, one might wonder why they don't want to bring it on'. Furthermore, as Adam Bennett reports in Little out to embarrass Collins over court action, 'should the pair avoid being served in person several times, lawyers could apply for a court order allowing the papers to be simply taped to their front doors'.
So why are the Labour MPs so blasé about Collins' action and why is the Minister so determined to go down such a politically dangerous path? Andrew Little has explained that 'A defamation proceedings is about her reputation and about what Trevor and I have said, not about our reputation. She has more to lose than any of us if she goes to trial'. This is nicely expanded upon in a blogpost on the Standard: Pride cometh. The key point is this: 'She's waited until close to the Budget so that the story would be quickly overshadowed and then forgotten. You see, Collins had foolishly got herself between a rock and a hard place. On one hand, having promised to sue, she had to follow through or be taunted forever and be seen as conceding she leaked Pullar's name. On the other, there's no way she would win a suit and her leadership aspirations would take a big hit from losing, which would be seen as de facto proof she leaked Pullar's name'. Also on the issue, see Danyl Mclauchlan's satire: They write letters.
Other important or interesting political items today include:
* With the issue of gay marriage emerging onto the political arena in New Zealand (and globally), it's worth having a look at where MPs stand on the issue. When I interviewed politicians during last year's election campaign, I asked them about same-sex marriage and their responses can be viewed (with summaries) in the blogpost, NZ politicians on gay marriage (on the record).
