Search

It also maintained that political balance had been achieved by including a comment from the National Party’s spokesperson. [25] Maintaining that One News had treated the allegations as allegations, and not as fact, TVNZ stated that Standard 5 (accuracy) had not been breached. The item truthfully and accurately reflected the principal allegations which were “renewed and highlighted in the Investigate article”.

While different reasons were acknowledged for migration in some of the interviews, a reduction in the New Zealand tax rate was also suggested as a means of retaining skilled workers. [3] The item also included an interview with the National Party finance spokesperson (John Key MP) who said tax rates were an important reason for migration. It was also reported that the Finance Minister (Hon Dr Michael Cullen MP) declined to be interviewed.

Commentators in the studio, Michelle Boag, a former National Party president, and Bob Harvey, a former Labour Party president, spoke about the campaign generally and the issues raised in each segment. Comments were also provided by Jon Johansson, a political science lecturer at Victoria University in Wellington. Complaint [2] Simon Boyce complained to Television New Zealand Ltd, the broadcaster, that the programme was not balanced.

Broadcast [1] On National Radio on 9 September 2005 on the Nine to Noon programme, National Party deputy leader Gerry Brownlee said, referring to Radio New Zealand, “this is Radio Labour at its best”. [2] In response to this comment, the presenter said either “that is a desperate line” or “that is a desperate lie”. Complaint [3] Michael Gibson said that he had heard the presenter respond “that’s a lie”. He considered the presenter’s comment was damaging and offensive.

Complainant’s Final Comment [12] In his final comment, Dr Cooper explained why he was dissatisfied with the broadcaster’s response to his formal complaint. [13] Noting that the National Party strongly disagreed with the government position on taxation, Dr Cooper asserted that this was a highly controversial issue of public importance.

The first table recorded the number of occasions on which the Māori Party had voted the same way as the National Party during the first, second, or third reading of Bills before the House.

The headline referred to a refusal by National Party leader Dr Brash to the Government’s invitation to take part in a proposed inquiry into race issues. Complaint [2] Mrs Harrison complained that the headline breached standards of good taste and decency. She wrote: I believe to suggest that Don Brash “extended his middle finger” in response to Helen Clark’s overtures re race relations enquiries is an insult to him an d breaches the observance of good taste and decency.

She referred to a recent speech on race relations and the foreshore and seabed issues made by the leader of the National Party (Dr Donald Brash), and drew a comparison between the impact of that speech and the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany. [2] Nine to Noon, broadcast each weekday, is a magazine programme which includes news and current affairs, along with items such as book readings and book reviews.

He contended that the exchange as reported left the listener with the impression that the National Party leader was a “Johnny-come-lately” to the issues. [3] However, he continued, Hansard showed that a few minutes after the exchange, the National Party leader had raised a point of order and sought to table two documents which showed that he had previously raised the issues.

Summary The contest for the presidency of the National Party was dealt with in an item on One News broadcast at 6.00pm on 6 May 2001. The item reported on the voting at a regional conference, with one delegate saying that "the party needs a good kick up the arse". The remark was also included in the opening headlines for One News.

In relation to the "brain drain" issue, Mr Boyce said TVNZ had not appeared to "notice for nine years when the National party were in government" and that the broadcaster had not responded to charges of "political motives for creating a programme around Mr Poole’s agenda, and ignoring the warning of [Mr Poole’s] critics." He also complained that Dr Roger Kerr had "managed to get a whole programme segment to himself."

A "reputable economist" in the housing field had explained some of the wider implications for the rental market, the broadcaster continued, and comments made by the Housing Minister had been balanced by the National Party spokesperson. RNZ suggested that as the programme was looking ahead, it had to be speculative, but said that it had achieved what it set out to do, which was to canvass the effect of new government housing policy on low-income consumers.

He said that as the National party had governed the country for approximately two thirds of the time covered, he would have thought it might have been mentioned. In Mr Fulton’s view, the programme had fallen short of presenting a balanced, accurate record of events of the period, and "had a heavy socialist bias". TVNZ assessed the complaint under standards G6 and G19 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

He identified the following as pertaining to National: "something of a prefect", "another disaster", "got the government in trouble", "Stalinesque", "awful new cliché", "all the National Party’s mistakes", "shooting itself in the foot". The epithets applied to Labour were, he contended, much less condemnatory, and included: "sleepwalk to power", "got to encourage their people to vote", "got to do a lot more homework" and "policies incredibly conservative".

In the item, TVNZ's political editor emphasised that it was the battle for second place in the polls which would attract the most interest, as the National Party candidate was clearly the frontrunner. The Executive Director of the Christian Heritage Party (CHP) on its behalf complained to TVNZ that the poll was misleading in both the way in which it was presented, and in the questions asked. As such, it argued, it contravened standard G14 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.

SummaryDissatisfaction among some National Party backbenchers with the condition includedin the Coalition Agreement that a further three NZ First members were to becomeCabinet Ministers in October 1998, was reported in an item on One Network News,broadcast between 6.00–7.00pm on 8 September 1997.

In one exchange the Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters was seenas stating that the support for the Deputy Speaker nominated by the National Party waspart of the Coalition deal. Dr Cullen, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, was seen torespond stating: That man has lied about every aspect of the agreement between us and NZ First. That man has lied his way into the Deputy Prime Minister's chair.

Theprogramme mentioned that the National Party was traditionally the farmers' party andtwo senior National Party Ministers were shown again explaining the impact.As part of the item's conclusion, some alternatives to traditional farming were brieflyadvanced.

The programme which covered three of the smallerpolitical parties, he maintained, breached s.4(1)(d) of the Broadcasting Act 1989 andstandards G6, G14 and G20 of the Television Code of Broadcasting Practice.By way of background, Mr Rogers explained that he had been an MP for six years,initially with the National Party and, since January 1996, as leader of the NewZealand Conservative Party.