Open letter to Doctor Tucker
Dear Dr Warren Tucker
Thank you for your letter of 26/6/09. I hope you don't mind me posting my reply here in the form of an open letter, it will save me the price of a stamp and I'm assured by reputable people that you visit this site with some regularity.
When, on 25/3/09, I asked you for access to all the information your department hold about me you asked for 140 working days to construct a reply.
I notice that you didn't use all that time and it only took you 63 working days to come up with an answer. Even that seems rather a long time to respond, within the terms of Section 32 of the Privacy Act that:
"I can neither confirm nor deny the existence or non-existence of that information".
I'm aware that Section 32 allows you to determine that "information held by the SIS may remain sensitive for reasons of security or privacy for many years".
I'm just wondering which past protest is giving you such big problems? Most of the union officials and cops from the early marches I went on would be retired or dead. It's now socially acceptable to have been anti Springbok tour. Nuclear free has become a capitalist tourism selling point. China has gone from a revolutionary threat to a top trading mate for our ruling class. You won a few and we won a few,that's just the way it goes.
Or is it the Saturday Spark sales in Cuba mall? Sure, our circulation has increased a bit in the last year or so, but not yet, I'm afraid, to the extent that we could consider calling up all our regular readers to come with us and storm the Treasury.
I'm aware that, in theory, I have the option of complaining to the Privacy Commissioner and requesting an investigation of your decision, but the Commissioner's probably a really busy person, and, for that matter, I am too. I suspect also, that in these matters, you, or your boss John Key would get the last say anyway. I'm sure you'll agree with me that young John has pulled too many boners recently for an ordinary working taxpayer like me to repose much confidence in him.
That's why, Warren, although its not that big a deal, I'm suggesting that when you read this you might be able to improve on your offer informally and just flick me a snippet of something you've got lying around that I could put in my scrapbook. Doesn't have to be fancy, a brief report on some demo that Sue Bradford and I were both at would do fine. I wasn't arrested nearly as often as she was, but we both inhabited the same communist group for a while.
yours sincerely,
Don
Comments
Haha is this self promotion?
Haha is this self promotion? The next election is a while away : )
Jared
It's seems a fair enough
It's seems a fair enough thing to post here Jared.
Believe it or not Jared
Believe it or not Jared Workers Party members do sometimes think of things that don't start with the letters "election"
humour...
Geez team, lighten up! A bit of humour never hurt anyone : )
neither confirm nor deny
Don is wrong in assuming that the reason for withholding that information lies in his past. Here is what the Privacy Act says about it - it's Don's present activities (writing a song about the October 15 raids, perhaps?) that allow Mr Tucker to neither confirm nor deny anything:
Privacy Act 1993
Part 4 - Good reasons for refusing access to personal information
27) Security, defence, international relations, etc
(1) An agency may refuse to disclose any information requested pursuant to principle 6 if the disclosure of the information would be likely—
(a) To prejudice the security or defence of New Zealand or the international relations of the Government of New Zealand; or
(b) To prejudice the entrusting of information to the Government of New Zealand on a basis of confidence by—
(i) The government of any other country or any agency of such a government; or
(ii) Any international organisation; or
(c) To prejudice the maintenance of the law, including the prevention, investigation, and detection of offences, and the right to a fair trial; or
(d) To endanger the safety of any individual.
"John has pulled too many
"John has pulled too many boners recently"
In fairness, you should have noted that many taxpayers have also pulled his.