How often did NZ political parties agree on bills in the last parliament?

Compare party bill voting from the last parliament.

Video Surveillance—Covert Footage from Private Property

Tuesday 27 September 2011 Hansard source (external site)

Locke9. KEITH LOCKE (Green) Link to this
to the Minister of Police

In how many trials completed this year have the Police submitted covert video footage obtained on private property; if any?

LockeKeith Locke Link to this

Does the Minister agree with the Attorney-General who said in response to an earlier question today that before the Supreme Court ruling of 2 September on the unlawfulness of police use of covert video surveillance that there was “no appreciation of the issue of lawfulness having been raised,”?

FinlaysonHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON Link to this

Yes, although if he was to be exact, the Attorney-General could possibly also have referred to comments made in the Law Commission report, but instead he was focusing mainly on the 15 years of Court of Appeal jurisprudence upholding this activity.

LockeKeith Locke Link to this

Is the Minister saying that she received no advice from police that there had been a High Court ruling on 7 October 2009 relating to the Operation Eight case that covert video surveillance was unlawful?

FinlaysonHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON Link to this

Yes, she would have received that report. She would also have received a report that the High Court allowed that evidence in under section 30 of the Evidence Act. She would also have received a report of the decision in the Court of Appeal that upheld the lawfulness.

LockeKeith Locke Link to this

If she did receive advice that there was a determination of the illegality of covert video surveillance evidence, even if it was allowed in this particular case, what did she do to ensure that the police would not be acting illegally in the future by engaging in covert video surveillance?

FinlaysonHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON Link to this

She would have been relying at all times on the advice of the Crown Law Office, which has had the carriage of this criminal litigation on behalf of the Government. She would also have known that the case was going through other levels of the court system—first, the Court of Appeal and, subsequently, the Supreme Court.

LockeKeith Locke Link to this

Does the Minister agree that because the police continued to use covert video surveillance they were essentially flying in the face of court rulings, and does she agree with the Chief Justice’s comment in her operation case ruling on 2 September that there had been “deliberate unlawfulness” by the police in conducting filming and that this “is destructive of an effective system of justice”?

FinlaysonHon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON Link to this

I will not answer that question, because it seeks a legal interpretation. I would think it would be very unwise in this place to start commenting on judgments—be they of the Chief Justice, Justice Blanchard, or anyone else.