Government officials get power to force entry to your home and make you strip

[davereid]

Yes its true.

Our freedom loving government has given officials the power to use force to enter your home, and remove your clothes.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4404868a11.html

The government will have wide powers to make sure the 2011 Rugby World Cup is "clean".

Government "Enforcement officials" will be able to enter private property during major events like the 2011 Rugby World Cup and seize advertising material or force groups of people to remove clothing carrying it...
..Officials will be allowed to enter private land and buildings if they are clearly visible from a clean zone...

..Government enforcement officers can obtain search warrants to enter private property during clean periods and seize or cover up offending advertising. Police or enforcement officers accompanied by police officers can use any force that is "reasonable in the circumstances" to gain entry or break open any article...

...An Economic Development Ministry spokesperson said it was likely groups wearing clothes advertising a rival company would be asked to leave a clean zone although they could be told to remove their clothing if they refused...

[James Deuce]

Really simple folks and we can start organising it here.

Lets start up a line of clothing, with the label "Rugby Sucks", and make sure there are always 2000 to 3000 people in every clean zone during a game. You will get arrested, but I think the time for decent levels of Civil Disobedience have arrived.

I'm serious about this and intend to start organising .

[Trouser]

FFS.

I'm all for organised civil disobedience. This is just rediculous but it does show you who really is running this world.

We need to organise like French farmers. Blocked roads. Signs up and down state highway 1. Spray painted writing on roads. General disorder. Nothing violent but plenty of annoying things for the organisers and sponsors.

I'm serious too. This is too much like a George Orwell bad dream. What next?

If you are from Tangimoana or Echelon and are reading this I don't give a fuck. Bite me, you comms dickheads.

[Steam]

Wow that's pretty disturbing. How did that get through parliament without being questioned by National or the Greens?

[rainman]

First thoughts were that this was an early April 1st story, but no (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2007/0035/latest/DLM411987.html).

Looks like it passed in August. Here is the page (http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Legislation/Bills/2/5/c/00DBHOH_BILL7762_1-Major-Events-Management-Bill.htm) that links to all the bits you need to know. Superficial browsing shows National and Labour in support, Greens/Maori agin. So much for free speech, eh? Now what's that word starting with an H that means someone who says one thing and does another?

Not surprised to see the word Mallard at the top of that page either...

[McJim]

The answer is simple really. Don't watch the sporting events and boycott the official sponsors' products. Big corporations will not want to buy into something this unpopular.

[Skyryder]

Another storm in a tea cup. Personally anything that removes any type of advertising I'm for it. We are subject to too much of it as it is. KB is one of few sites that is add clean. Good one.

Skyryder

[Bikernereid]

I have been advocating this line of action re the cheese cutter campaign too. Thank God someone else sees the benefit of getting off your arse and doing something active!!


FFS.

I'm all for organised civil disobedience. This is just rediculous but it does show you who really is running this world.

We need to organise like French farmers. Blocked roads. Signs up and down state highway 1. Spray painted writing on roads. General disorder. Nothing violent but plenty of annoying things for the organisers and sponsors.

I'm serious too. This is too much like a George Orwell bad dream. What next?

If you are from Tangimoana or Echelon and are reading this I don't give a fuck. Bite me, you comms dickheads.

[Usarka]

Another storm in a tea cup. Personally anything that removes any type of advertising I'm for it. We are subject to too much of it as it is. KB is one of few sites that is add clean. Good one.

Skyryder

It's not making it advert free, its removing anything that doesnt belong to an official sponsor.

This is a ridiculous law.....Eg, if a car maker sponsors the cup then residents in the "clean zone" may be forced to park their holdens out of site.......

Having a beer on the balcony? No youre not, not unless its a heineken.....

[Bikernereid]

For the love of God has your country gone completely INSANE???

Here was me wating to live there cos it was saner and less dogmatic than the UK. Maybe I was very mistaken!!


It's not making it advert free, its removing anything that doesnt belong to an official sponsor.

This is a ridiculous law.....Eg, if a car maker sponsors the cup then residents in the "clean zone" may be forced to park their holdens out of site.......

Having a beer on the balcony? No youre not, not unless its a heineken.....

[Grub]

I would be very surprised if an action under the Bill of Rights could not override this, particularly if you are on your own property

[Ocean1]

For the love of God has your country gone completely INSANE???

Here was me wating to live there cos it was saner and less dogmatic than the UK. Maybe I was very mistaken!!

Could have sworn there had been a World Cup in Europe fairly recently, who paid for that?

[James Deuce]

It's not making it advert free, its removing anything that doesnt belong to an official sponsor.

This is a ridiculous law.....Eg, if a car maker sponsors the cup then residents in the "clean zone" may be forced to park their holdens out of site.......

Having a beer on the balcony? No youre not, not unless its a heineken.....
Absolutely. Freedom of choice removed. Imagine working for TelstraClear and accidentally wearing a Ferrari T-Shirt to work, just across from the Stadium. "Sorry boss I can't fix that problem because I'm in jail."

Grub, I know what you are saying, but the Bill of Rights isn't worth the paper it was printed on and hasn't been since most of the "Western" world decided they weren't "safe" from "terrorism" anymore.

[Okey Dokey]

There really seems to be no end to invasive legislation here in NZ! The government just makes law after law after law, most of which remove personal privacy as well as individual responsibility.

Shades of "Homeland Security" or whatever the knee-jerk legislation in the USA was called, I'd say.

[Ocean1]

Absolutely. Freedom of choice removed.

It wasn't just removed.

It was sold.

The major sponsors insisted on "clean stadiums" (fuck "stadia" it's way too clever), a condition the NZRFU couldn't supply even withing the grounds.

The only bleating I heard when the Gubmint announced they would underwright this one was from angry tax payers who don't like rugby, eve though the event would be profitable at a national level.

I heard not a jot, at the time from the freedom-of-speach or any other "rights" lobbyists, was it not obvious what, in fact, was on the table?

Legislation already existed to handle overt ambush adveretising, the guys with the purse strings just (rightly) felt that litigation after-the-fact wasn't going to stop it.

What do you suppose caused the flurry of activity culminating in the grand Auck waterfront staduim proposal? Votes. This place will remain a circus until we define what is and is not for sale at election time.

[McJim]

If a major sponsor wishes to sponsor a major event then they should make sure that their branding is good enough to withstand guerilla ad tactics rather than bleat to government to make policy on behalf of sports organisers.

Most major advertising awards ceremonies now include a prize for best advertising for a small budget which usually means "Guerilla advertising at a major event."

It's trampling ingenuiity.....mind you - I am in advertising/media so I might be biased.....:rofl:

[rainman]

This place will remain a circus until we define what is and is not for sale at election time.

How you going to do that Ocean1? What's for sale at election time is the same old shit from the same old parties... You can pick party 1 or party 2 (with some largely meaningless options around the edges with respect to minor party support) but they're both fecking useless and will cause similar issues, just slightly shaded by their prevailing ideologies...

Both of them voted in favour of this particular piece of shit legislation, f'rinstance. Seems only the Greens opposed it. (Even then I'm not sure of their motivation, from reading Keith Locke's speech at the third reading).

[Ocean1]

If a major sponsor wishes to sponsor a major event then they should make sure that their branding is good enough to withstand guerilla ad tactics rather than bleat to government to make policy on behalf of sports organisers.

Most major advertising awards ceremonies now include a prize for best advertising for a small budget which usually means "Guerilla advertising at a major event."

It's trampling ingenuiity.....mind you - I am in advertising/media so I might be biased.....:rofl:

Then you know what's at stake, and why they'd go to these lengths to prevent ambushes.

No good bleating at the sponsors, they simply made the offer. It's us that accepted it, and by "us" I mean anyone who didn't object at the time the deal was done.

It's also "us" that can decline to play the game by their rules. There must be hundreds of ways to demonstrate what we think of any sponsor demanding such arangements without actually breaking the law. Could be very entertaining to see just how far you could bend it. Skywriting, 'praps?

Anyone got a list of the event's sponsors? Be nice to know next time I'm out shopping...

[Skyryder]

It's not making it advert free, its removing anything that doesnt belong to an official sponsor.

This is a ridiculous law.....Eg, if a car maker sponsors the cup then residents in the "clean zone" may be forced to park their holdens out of site.......

Having a beer on the balcony? No youre not, not unless its a heineken.....


The Government brings in legislation that enables the police to leave you stranded on the side of the road (instant loss of licence) and there is not a murmer from anybody but myself on this and all of a sudden all and sundry are up in arms over some advertising ban etc. Must be a generation thing or am I missing something.


Skyryder

[Skyryder]

Anybody thought it might be Mallards way of pissing off Jafa's over the waterfront stadium thing. :spanking: Go Trev that'll teach 'em.:2thumbsup

Skyrder

[El Dopa]

Absolutely. Freedom of choice removed. Imagine working for TelstraClear and accidentally wearing a Ferrari T-Shirt to work, just across from the Stadium. "Sorry boss I can't fix that problem because I'm in jail."

Grub, I know what you are saying, but the Bill of Rights isn't worth the paper it was printed on and hasn't been since most of the "Western" world decided they weren't "safe" from "terrorism" anymore.

It may have got worse since the war on abstract nouns began, but this sort of regulatory interference (particularly in relation to major sporting events) has been around since at least Sydney 2000.

A quick google search throws up the following:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/olympics2000/930392.stm

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9502E6D71F3AF93AA1575AC0A9669C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all

http://deseretnews.com/sydney/view/1,3466,195017747,00.html

Which doesn't make it right.

A plague on all their houses.

[Jiminy]

Come on everyone, this is a real and serious offence. "advertising without paying sponsorship money" fully deserves to be treated as a criminal offence. And burn 'em, too.

Shit, this is a bad dream, I'll wake up in a minute and see that this is all a joke. It HAS to be.

Politicians starting to act for the benefit of some individual giant corporations against the individuals, that smells like sci-fi. I didn't realise that NZ was so American.

Btw, what will happen to Greens building in the clean zones? Will they be painted in another color? Because they look like Heineken bars to me...

If I were a competitor, I'd think about putting such billboards and offering free t-shirts to anyone going into the clean zone. The press coverage of the 'disturbance' (there sure will be some journalists writing about it) and the public sympathy earned are likely to be worth the fine.

[Skyryder]

On a serious note I suspect that the Government would have had to 'sign some kind of deal with the IRU before any contract was drawn up for 'hosting rights.' I can just imagine the furore from the general public if the 'hosting rights' were refused on the grounds of the government refusing to 'protect' offcial sponsers.

It (Major Events Management Act 2007) was brought in in time for the Rugby World Cup 2011 to meet International Rugby Board rules protecting official sponsors.



Skyryder

[James Deuce]

The Government brings in legislation that enables the police to leave you stranded on the side of the road (instant loss of licence) and there is not a murmer from anybody but myself on this and all of a sudden all and sundry are up in arms over some advertising ban etc. Must be a generation thing or am I missing something.


Skyryder

Nah, I wrote letters too.

The responses were all along the lines of, "Tough titty."

It's not an advertising ban. If you turned up in a Moto Guzzi shirt you'd be turfed out or arrested.

[James Deuce]

On a serious note I suspect that the Government would have had to 'sign some kind of deal with the IRU before any contract was drawn up for 'hosting rights.' I can just imagine the furore from the general public if the 'hosting rights' were refused on the grounds of the government refusing to 'protect' offcial sponsers.

It (Major Events Management Act 2007) was brought in in time for the Rugby World Cup 2011 to meet International Rugby Board rules protecting official sponsors.



Skyryder

That would have been a good thing. Kiwis are supposed to have balls (Nuclear Free for example) and that would have truly shown we had balls, but one must not interrupt an oval ball tournament on matters of principle. I get this nagging feeling that there is an irony in there somewhere.

[Hitcher]

Our government is just pimping New Zealand as a venue for *major* events. They've just passed laws to ensure cousin Cletus doesn't burst in unannounced when mum is *performing* in the bedroom with that rich Asian gentleman.

[Paul in NZ]

people people people - this is all a silly mis understanding - please relax - we are not running the world - we are just selling sponsorship for the naming rights to running the world and of course handling the ticketing.

PLEASE don't worry - there will be a running the world package for everyone and sufficient tickets will be held for any locals that want to attend (and can afford it) although these are mostly for the thinks they are running the world events....

If you cannot get to a venue we will be bringing the 'end of the world' live to you at home next season.....

[James Deuce]

Lots of good Tui billboards there Paul.

[Jiminy]

Lots of good Tui billboards there Paul.

Aieeee, NO, don't write that word, this is not an official sponsor. Argh, shit, too late, the police is here and taking my computer awaaaayyyyy........

[Skyryder]

That would have been a good thing. Kiwis are supposed to have balls (Nuclear Free for example) and that would have truly shown we had balls, but one must not interrupt an oval ball tournament on matters of principle. I get this nagging feeling that there is an irony in there somewhere.

Something like 'heavy' handed.

Bottomline on this is that sponsers pay megabucks for promotianal rights and the parasitic companies get on for the free ride. This is not just about some local cashing in on a freebee for parking or a sausage sizzle. I once watched a doco on this on some athletic race in the states, I think it was the Boston marathon that was promoted by Addidas. There were a group with the Nike swash on the singlet anyway to cut a long story short some lawyer came along with a cop and told them that if they did not remove either themselves or take their singlets off they would be arrested. don't recall what he said but this guy meant buisness. They removed their sinlgets after he told them what the fines were. Serious money. It's just one of the facets of professional sport. If anyone objects don't watch the cup and boycott the product. That's what I do. Savesgoing on a diet and a great way to save money.

Skyryder

[Grahameeboy]

For the love of God has your country gone completely INSANE???

Here was me wating to live there cos it was saner and less dogmatic than the UK. Maybe I was very mistaken!!

Don't worry about it. This kinda of stuff has just been invisible for years but NZ projects this 'relaxed' image which is not quite true.

But like many things that get raised as silly, they don't really affect most people so can be ignored.

[Ocean1]

How you going to do that Ocean1? What's for sale at election time is the same old shit from the same old parties... You can pick party 1 or party 2 (with some largely meaningless options around the edges with respect to minor party support) but they're both fecking useless and will cause similar issues, just slightly shaded by their prevailing ideologies...

Both of them voted in favour of this particular piece of shit legislation, f'rinstance. Seems only the Greens opposed it. (Even then I'm not sure of their motivation, from reading Keith Locke's speech at the third reading).

And you'll vote for one of them again?

Because you can't find an option that promotes less government?

Look again.


If anyone objects don't watch the cup and boycott the product. That's what I do. Savesgoing on a diet and a great way to save money.

Skyryder

Yes.

Would be really cool if we had the insight and constitudinal fortitude to decline to buy the "product" en mass though. "No thanks, we don't want professional sport at that price, we'll stick to amateur provincial stuff. Good luck with the cup thing though, I'm sure you'll manage just fine without us."

[Swoop]

*makes mental note* "Must not have advertising on the aircraft when it is used to flower bomb the stupid pointy-ball-game".

[roadracingoldfart]

Ok so who really gives a toss about the RUGBY anyhow ????

What a waste of time, resource's and money.

Moan by never going to it a release these guys :Police: to do a real days work out and about where they should be. Not babysitting a bunch of half pissed rugby fanatics.

Ok ill :shutup: now.

[Hitcher]

One wonders what Westpac Stadium and AMI Stadium will be called for the duration of the World Cup. And who's going to tell the publicans in a 5km radius of the Cup venues that they can only serve Heineken?

[rainman]

And you'll vote for one of them again?

Because you can't find an option that promotes less government?

Look again.

After the next election, there will either be a Labour coalition or a National coalition, or Labour will have screwed things up so badly that National can govern alone. Who the specific coalition parties are obviously involves much discussion about rolling over and playing dead again, and baubles, or whatever, but NZF, Greens, Maori, Act, Alliance, Progressives are the likely candidates. The Libz, ALCP, DDP, Republicans and assorted other fringe parties aren't likely.

So, either you candidate vote for someone you think will win, (or against someone you want to lose), and party vote for a minor party to ensure what little balance can be achieved, or you waste your vote to a greater or lesser degree.

Anyone who believes otherwise is deluded.

[Skyryder]

Really simple folks and we can start organising it here.

Lets start up a line of clothing, with the label "Rugby Sucks", and make sure there are always 2000 to 3000 people in every clean zone during a game. You will get arrested, but I think the time for decent levels of Civil Disobedience have arrived.

I'm serious about this and intend to start organising .

Yep with T shirt with monster boobs. Actually you will probly find that such a slogan would not be in breach of the act as it expresses and opion and not a product.

No what you need is a bottle shaped Heinken Dildo with a T shirt. SUCK ON THIS. Plenty of Photoshop types on here run a competition and use the best one................Good luck


skyryder

[Ocean1]

After the next election

Sad ain't it?

God forbid we vote for what we want.

[Coyote]

The government helping business?


What?


Surely not...

Really simple folks and we can start organising it here.

Lets start up a line of clothing, with the label "Rugby Sucks", and make sure there are always 2000 to 3000 people in every clean zone during a game. You will get arrested, but I think the time for decent levels of Civil Disobedience have arrived.

I'm serious about this and intend to start organising .
I'm keen. Here's some photos that'd be good for the shirts

[Skyryder]

I would be very surprised if an action under the Bill of Rights could not override this, particularly if you are on your own property

This has nothing to do with property rights. The issue is the so called 'clean zone.' Does the Government or local body councils have the right to declare an area of the public domain an exclusive 'promotional zone' for the use of 'official sponsors?' That is what the clean zone is an area of the public domain that includes visibility (air space) both of private and public land for the purpose of advertising or promotional activities. It's an interesting question that suggests that business that are in the clean zone may have to remove their signage or be in breach of the law. Somehow I think any business with a permanent address within the zone would be excluded.


Skyryder

[Bikernereid]

People start boycotting sports events or stop buying official sponsor products at said events. If everyone just took their own non-lablled food and drink and stoppped buying Mc D (evil fookers anyway) or whoevers stuff then it would soon hit thier pockets.

Hit them where it hurts!!