Showing 121 - 140 of 145 results.
An interview with Francis Cook, broadcast directly after Bridge’s interview with Willis, which included criticism of the National Party’s history of interfering with KiwiSaver.
Given the ambiguity around the term’s origins, it found its use in the context was unlikely to encourage discrimination or denigration, or threaten community standards of taste and decency.Not Upheld: Good Taste and Decency, Discrimination and DenigrationThe broadcast[1] A Newshub story on 15 July 2020 (channel Three) canvassed reactions of politicians and the public to Judith Collins being appointed as the National Party leader.
‘However, the anecdotal evidence [is] that homelessness and living in cars, in 2017, was much worse than 108 people, and also much worse than the 480’ figure in 2022, referring to a Parliamentary debate (where Amy Adams MP noted the National Party planned to build 6400 houses to deal with the problem, ‘an unlikely figure if there were only 108 people living in cars’) and news articles from 2017 highlighting the issue of homelessness and living in cars.1 ‘The programme fails to elaborate on the changes
The remaining bulletins (4am, 6am, 7am, 7.30am, 8am on 20 April 2022) stated MOH said the removal of MIQ requirements was delayed by the Omicron outbreak. [13] The bulletins of 5am, 6am, 6.30am and 1pm on 20 April 2022 focused on the National Party’s perspective on the matter, reporting ‘The National Party says revelations MIQ could have ended sooner shows the Government was not following public health advice.’
The report also included comment from Labour Party Leader Jacinda Ardern, National Party Leader Bill English, ACT Party Leader David Seymour, and in-studio analysis from the political reporter. Our analysis[11] A number of criteria must be satisfied before the requirement to present significant alternative viewpoints is triggered. The standard applies only to news, current affairs and factual programmes which discuss a controversial issue of public importance.
This is despite the National Party also frequently saying they want fewer children born into benefit dependent households.’ Accuracy‘The ACT Party has never talked about eugenics and to state that they have is wrong and deliberately misleading.’ ‘The ACT Party has never advocated for eugenics, it is not a policy, it never has been.’ Ms Ferguson claimed she had read the policy, but ‘by having read the policy…it would have been clear that eugenics is not a policy.
In the minds of many viewers the cause of this"bad news" would almost certainly have been identified as National Party policies -and consequently would have affected their voting intention.
This item was introduced as follows:With the major political parties neck and neck in our latest 1 News Kantar Public poll, National Party Leader Christopher Luxon says 'it's time for a change.' So, we sent reporters out across the country to test his theory and ask people if they're happy with the Government.[3] The item included a mixture of people in support of, and against, the current Government, including the following responses:I feel like I'm living in a gulag.
Although Mr Peters did not answer the questions put to him, he referred to this ‘trend’ being started by the National Party which had taken ‘countless’ people there in the ‘hope that one day soon in the future, when we do need business funding then we can go to the public of this country…’.
Although the broadcast included some contextual information on the Treaty Principles Bill, and representatives of the National Party and New Zealand First were shown distancing themselves from the Bill, the segment did not discuss the Bill in depth. As such, it was not unfair to ACT that more comments in support of the Bill were not included.
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."
party’ and showed misogyny and disrespect towards our Prime Minister.The broadcaster’s response[7] TVNZ did not uphold the complaint for the following reasons:Accuracy ‘Jacinda Ardern’s position on the decision not to use the 757 was accurately conveyed in the 1 News item.
But in the meantime, the National Party can chalk this one up as a win. They campaigned at the election on tax cuts. They were hounded for months over whether or not they were the right idea. Nicola Willis and her Government were forced to hold their nerve and hold the line on tax cuts. And today was D-Day. Delivery day. [Cut to footage of protest] Outside Parliament, they arrived in their thousands. Critical of the Government.
In relation to the water quality and swimmability of Auckland beaches: The issue has been widely canvassed in media since 2018, both by RNZ,12 and other outlets.13 Viewers could reasonably have been expected to be aware of alternative views regarding appropriate measures in response to water quality issues, including those of the National Party as presented by RNZ,14 and those of Dr Armstrong and Milford WEEPS as presented by other media outlets.15 Additionally, this area remains an ongoing topic
Signed for and on behalf of the Authority Peter Radich Chair14 October 2011 Appendix The following correspondence was received and considered by the Authority when it determined this complaint: 1 New Zealand Labour Party’s formal complaint to the Authority – 3 October 2011 2 National Party’s response to the complaint – 5 October 2011 3 Office of the Prime Minister’s response to the complaint – 5 October 2011 4 RadioWorks’ response
The item said that a proposed law change, the Electoral Finance Bill, would force third parties like the Exclusive Brethren to register with the Electoral Commission before they got involved in the election race. [2] The item included quotes from Justice Minister Mark Burton, Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters, and National Party leader John Key. [3] The reporter referred to the controversy surrounding election spending in 2005, and stated that “if plans go ahead, third parties with a stake
Dunlop: We have the National Party talking about how they don't agree with her views, but free speech is a democratic right. Do you think that's a fair stance?Dallow: No, I think it's disingenuous. The free speech argument is a bit of a red herring. We have laws in New Zealand already against some types of speech. So there's criminal law against threats to kill, there’s civil law against libel and slander.
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.
But, the reporter said, MOH was still defending Professor Smith, saying that the “questioning of his scientific integrity in recent days” was regrettable. [4] Tony Ryall, the National Party health spokesperson, commented that there had been “an incredible back-down by the Ministry of Health and the Government. Only 24 hours ago they were defending the need for only one expert opinion”.
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".