Should new SIS laws be open to public debate?

14 Apr 2011 01:30p.m.

Kelly wrote:

Yes they should. They need to be able to provide evidence as to why they need their powers increased, robust information and detail. Just giving it to them makes no sense unless doing it this way covers up untoward behaviour. Which is probably the case.

11 Apr 2011 11:54a.m.

Jim wrote:

What SIS? See they are secret LOL!!!

11 Apr 2011 11:38a.m.

lone wrote:

Who watches the watchers? Just ponder the fact that the only terrorist action committed on NZ soil was done by the French. The police solved this crime. Where was the SIS is all of that? Probably listening in on the phones of NZ citizens. Decisions made behind closed doors should always be questioned.

11 Apr 2011 12:07a.m.

kane wrote:

We dont need to know who their investigating we do need to know how they do it... They have far ranging powers now... Besides being able to hold someone with charges or course I dont know any-more powers they could have wanted... Unless it very bad like being able to drug people to get information our torture good god hope not... Maybe they are looking for the power to detain people without course for our SIS team to use in Afghanistan... I would hate to see any kiwis being treated like that buy our SIS though... Its the only power they dont have and would be a very good reason to keep it quite from the public... I dont think the public of NZ would be happy with them having that power...

07 Apr 2011 04:15p.m.

Luke wrote:

The law is going to be public once passed, So everyone will know what is the law and what the SIS can and can't do. But It is the discussion that is secret, because certain classified information will be discussed during those meetings, we can't expect our leaders to have a full discussion about what is required on a topic such as this if it is open to the world to hear. Reading some of the comments below people are dangerously misled about what is going on here. These are the leaders who we elected, that is democracy. Sometimes it is just not feasible to announce every detail to the New Zealand people without that information falling into the hands of the people we are to be protected from. Remember we have had mossad spies in the country not so long ago.

07 Apr 2011 02:28p.m.

Mike wrote:

There are many MP's with criminal convictions.

Lets have an open listing of these past criminal actions. We would find a corelation of parties with the most criminal convictions being the most opposed to SIS.

Its a case of self-interest by criminals, not defending our rights, but trying to safe-guard their own interests.

If you dont want to be a target of SIS (with a file on you), dont break NZ laws, dont associate with known criminals, dont discuss things like killing Helen Clarke (which was the source of the NZ terror raids) with others. Now thats not too much to ask. Now is there anyone who has had a file on them who can claim they haven't done any of this? Keith Locke as part of his protesting past has broken laws, and associated with convicted criminals. If the SIS hadn't made a file on him they wouldn't have been doing there job!

The police looks after individuals to some extent. SIS looks after the coutries interests. Anti-govt movements will always be something they monitor.

07 Apr 2011 11:31a.m.

Madness wrote:

All laws should be public. How can we abide by them if we don't know them. I am a bit distressed by this but Wolfman I am not a criminal. Yes they have more to worry about but their should be no secrets. I am loving watching Mr Keys cooking his goose and totally putting himself out of the running. We only have Labour to replace him but at least they don't tell us "bullshite" about what they stand for. I'm voting labour and NZ first, they have to be better than the Nazi's we have!!!!!!!

06 Apr 2011 11:51p.m.

Dan wrote:

@Wolfman "If you haven't done anything, you have nothing to fear, it's only the fanatics and criminals that are complaining." Do you seriously think the SIS will only use their powers against those who are criminals? Surveillance is used against law abiding citizens as well as criminals.. for example the SIS had a file on green MP Keith Locke. Why should law abiding citizens EVER be subject to this kind of intrusion on their privacy? As for the passing of this law I just have one thing to say; we're either a democracy or we aren't, which is it?

06 Apr 2011 11:03p.m.

Wayne wrote:

John Keys is an extremely dangerous man to our way of life in this country. He bullshitted us with false election promises to gain power. Why would you need outfits like the SIS against NZ citizens? Only if you wanted to suppress their freedom of speech!! Time to stand up Kiwi's and tell these thugs where to go and think where you cast your vote in the next election.

06 Apr 2011 10:38p.m.

Nico wrote:

Yes,there should not be any secret laws. Other wise we would end up with people being judged by secret judges, in a secret tribunal and being secretly detained in a secret jail: That would a terrible step backward (toward nazi and ussr communism days?) for a democratic country that was so much ahead of its time when it was one of the first to allow women to vote...