Saturday, October 28, 2006

Different Rules for MP's

Todays Herald reports that special arrangements had to be made with speaker Margaret Wilson before they could raid discraced Labour MP Phillip Field's parliamentary office. This raises several questions.

Firstly, surely "a criminal investigation" should be allowed to occur unhampered by any sort of political interference? An elected official who has committed a criminal offence is still a criminal.

Why can the police only raid a MP's office when parliament is not sitting? What makes our representatives think that they are above us? If a police investigation needs to take place, no matter who is involved, it should. There is a charge for obstructing a police investigation that the rest of us mere mortals face if we do so.

Why did the (Labour) speaker have to be informed? It sounds suspiciously like this is allowing evidence to be removed.

Why has it taken so long for the police to move on this? Political interference?

Why were the hard drives of the computers not removed for forensic investigation? To copy the drives will not reveal deleted information. This is another whitewash investigation into Phillip Field by the Labour government.

Surely Parliamentary Privilege is there for MP's to be able to make statements or ask questions without the fear of libel/slander charges and not to give the MP's a cushy life?

Do you believe Helen Clark when she said that she new nothing of the raid?

I will not be holding my breath to see what becomes of this investigation.

No comments: