So blatant corruption in order to help fast track. Is there not a law? When are police going to pay em a visit?
Swear me in, I will go arrest him right now. I have the afternoon off.
Courtesy u/bodza
The RNZ timeline seems to have a few dates out of order. Here is the timeline with that corrected:
* **March 08**: Forest & Bird submit OIA to the Department of Conservation asking for the advice it had provided to Ministers regarding the Fast-track Approvals Bill
* **March 14**: The Department of Conservation forwarded a list of documents likely to be included in the OIA to the Minister of Conservation's Office and noted that agencies were working to pull together a proactive release package. The Minister’s Office said it had seen an email stating the entire release package was going to be managed through Minister Bishop’s Office and would be released in roughly five weeks.
* **March 14 (continued)**: The Department expressed concern five weeks would mean the release *‘couldn’t inform submissions’* and said *‘we should be aiming for faster’*. The Minister’s Office concurred and noted that it was awaiting an update from Minister Bishop’s Office about *‘when they’re aiming for but I just meant it will likely be less than 5 weeks’*.
* **March 19**: The Department of Conservation provides material for release to the Minister of Conservation. The Department was directed to participate in the broader Government proactive release. At this point, it was expected to occur approximately a week prior to select committee submissions closing. The Department noted as submissions to the Bill had opened, there was some urgency to provide key information.
* **March 20**: The Minister of Conservation agreed to ‘the proactive release of all the attached briefings and memos as part of a wider package to be released by the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform’ subject to the proposed redactions. The Minister’s Office forwarded the Department’s papers to Minister Bishop’s office.
* **March 27**: The Ministry for the Environment update agencies involved in the release. It says not all agencies had provided material for the proactive release and ‘at this stage’ it was aiming to get a full package . It notes: The timing after that depends on the Minister’s Office and will likely be a week at least.
* **April 03**: Department of Conservation staff note the timing of the proactive release did not sit well with its responsibilities under the OIA.
* **April 08**: Department of Conservation refuse Forest & Bird's request on the basis the information is going to be made publicly available soon and will be released by the Office of Chris Bishop, Minster responsible for RMA Reform.
* **April 11**: The Department of Conservation note following a conversation with the Minister of Conservation's office it was not hopeful the release would occur before submissions closed but that the Ministers office *'would prefer we didn’t release the documents separately to the proactive release process’*
* **April 19**: Submissions to the Fast-track Approvals Bill close
* **April 24**: The Department of Conservation emails Forest & Bird apologising for the delay.
* **May 27**: Information published online
* **June 11**: The Office of the Ombudsman finds the refusal to release the information was unlawfully and unreasonable.
> **June 11**: The Office of the Ombudsman finds the refusal to release the information was unlawfully and unreasonable.
Anyone knows what the consequences are for this unlawful behaviour, if any? Is breaking the law now acceptable?
I don't know why we keep using their propagandistic spin calling it a 'fast track'. It's a bill to open a backdoor that bypasses 30 years of built up protections and regulations, not to speed up consent processing time.
They are corrupt. Their mission is to ignore democracy and sell off the country to the highest bidder while pocketing the "gifts" from the lobbyists and the foreign investors.
Blatant corruption. Remember how they yelled and screamed whenever the last Govt did anything like this? Funny how they're happy to do the same now they're in power. Wake up, NZ!
The smooth tongued guy knows what he can and can’t do. He’s been a National MP right after simping as [a tobacco lobbyist (here he in 2012)](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1az6p4p/who_is_this_from_2012_when_nz_created_its_vision/).
He’ll get a mention in the papers, most people won’t care or understand why it’s important, and he’ll be back to spinning his webs with skill.
To be honest, this action of him is completely on brand. Someone was saying “well at least he’s not Shane Jones.”
Nah, he’s the same. He just puts on a better mask.
- [Chris Bishop says we don’t apologise for fast track despite its impact on the environment](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bawmri/no_apologies_for_fasttrack_consent_process_even/)
- [Bishop admits new fast-track bill will damage environment and override court protections for wildlife and conservation areas](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bb3n5u/chris_bishop_admits_new_government_fast_track/)
I have to question why the timeline is out of order. I suspect it's a mistake.
Specifically, events on the left-hand side go 19th March -> 8th April -> 19th April.
You read it per image - so on the 1st image, you have 8 March on left / 14 March on the right / 19 March on left
The next image is 20 March on the right.
TLDR - Follow each image, not just vertically down. HTH.
So blatant corruption in order to help fast track. Is there not a law? When are police going to pay em a visit? Swear me in, I will go arrest him right now. I have the afternoon off.
Courtesy u/bodza The RNZ timeline seems to have a few dates out of order. Here is the timeline with that corrected: * **March 08**: Forest & Bird submit OIA to the Department of Conservation asking for the advice it had provided to Ministers regarding the Fast-track Approvals Bill * **March 14**: The Department of Conservation forwarded a list of documents likely to be included in the OIA to the Minister of Conservation's Office and noted that agencies were working to pull together a proactive release package. The Minister’s Office said it had seen an email stating the entire release package was going to be managed through Minister Bishop’s Office and would be released in roughly five weeks. * **March 14 (continued)**: The Department expressed concern five weeks would mean the release *‘couldn’t inform submissions’* and said *‘we should be aiming for faster’*. The Minister’s Office concurred and noted that it was awaiting an update from Minister Bishop’s Office about *‘when they’re aiming for but I just meant it will likely be less than 5 weeks’*. * **March 19**: The Department of Conservation provides material for release to the Minister of Conservation. The Department was directed to participate in the broader Government proactive release. At this point, it was expected to occur approximately a week prior to select committee submissions closing. The Department noted as submissions to the Bill had opened, there was some urgency to provide key information. * **March 20**: The Minister of Conservation agreed to ‘the proactive release of all the attached briefings and memos as part of a wider package to be released by the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform’ subject to the proposed redactions. The Minister’s Office forwarded the Department’s papers to Minister Bishop’s office. * **March 27**: The Ministry for the Environment update agencies involved in the release. It says not all agencies had provided material for the proactive release and ‘at this stage’ it was aiming to get a full package . It notes: The timing after that depends on the Minister’s Office and will likely be a week at least. * **April 03**: Department of Conservation staff note the timing of the proactive release did not sit well with its responsibilities under the OIA. * **April 08**: Department of Conservation refuse Forest & Bird's request on the basis the information is going to be made publicly available soon and will be released by the Office of Chris Bishop, Minster responsible for RMA Reform. * **April 11**: The Department of Conservation note following a conversation with the Minister of Conservation's office it was not hopeful the release would occur before submissions closed but that the Ministers office *'would prefer we didn’t release the documents separately to the proactive release process’* * **April 19**: Submissions to the Fast-track Approvals Bill close * **April 24**: The Department of Conservation emails Forest & Bird apologising for the delay. * **May 27**: Information published online * **June 11**: The Office of the Ombudsman finds the refusal to release the information was unlawfully and unreasonable.
> **June 11**: The Office of the Ombudsman finds the refusal to release the information was unlawfully and unreasonable. Anyone knows what the consequences are for this unlawful behaviour, if any? Is breaking the law now acceptable?
Where's the crackdown?
u/Goodie__
Full speed ahead to push through all their corporate masters wish lists before everyone wakes up to what a compromised bunch of burglars they elected.
not every one voted for them :) only the greedy and ignorant who thought their couple of bucks a week in lower tax would make them millionaires.
I don't know why we keep using their propagandistic spin calling it a 'fast track'. It's a bill to open a backdoor that bypasses 30 years of built up protections and regulations, not to speed up consent processing time.
I've been calling it '3 wankers'
Incredibly apt! Well done!
They are corrupt. Their mission is to ignore democracy and sell off the country to the highest bidder while pocketing the "gifts" from the lobbyists and the foreign investors.
Blatant corruption. Remember how they yelled and screamed whenever the last Govt did anything like this? Funny how they're happy to do the same now they're in power. Wake up, NZ!
Uh. _Did_ the previous government doing something like this?
Maybe not directly, but anything that could be *perceived* that way was called out.
We are so lucky to have orgs like f&b to hold the govt to account
You say “orgs”, Police Minister hears “gangs”. It’d be disturbingly easy to add Forest & Bird to the list.
Ok so it was illegal. When’s the arrest? If there are no consequences then what’s the point in making it illegal?
The smooth tongued guy knows what he can and can’t do. He’s been a National MP right after simping as [a tobacco lobbyist (here he in 2012)](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1az6p4p/who_is_this_from_2012_when_nz_created_its_vision/). He’ll get a mention in the papers, most people won’t care or understand why it’s important, and he’ll be back to spinning his webs with skill. To be honest, this action of him is completely on brand. Someone was saying “well at least he’s not Shane Jones.” Nah, he’s the same. He just puts on a better mask. - [Chris Bishop says we don’t apologise for fast track despite its impact on the environment](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bawmri/no_apologies_for_fasttrack_consent_process_even/) - [Bishop admits new fast-track bill will damage environment and override court protections for wildlife and conservation areas](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bb3n5u/chris_bishop_admits_new_government_fast_track/)
Speeding is illegal.
What's your point?
And if you are caught then you receive consequences.
I have to question why the timeline is out of order. I suspect it's a mistake. Specifically, events on the left-hand side go 19th March -> 8th April -> 19th April.
You read it per image - so on the 1st image, you have 8 March on left / 14 March on the right / 19 March on left The next image is 20 March on the right. TLDR - Follow each image, not just vertically down. HTH.
Follow the line down the middle. The images are branched off that line and the whole thing is very clear.
It works for me too but based on another similar comment, I’m wondering if it looks different on different screens!
Now I wonder if it depends on how it comes up on your screen. But a kind Redditor just posted it in text and I will paste it above.
They are entitled to be entitled cunts.
Not disagreeing but also don't forget Labour literally ran internal courses on how to stall an OIA request.
Unlawful should imply criminal consequences for the law breakers.