I read in Clive Edwards’s interview that he accused me of proposing the Media Operator’s Act. This is wholly untrue but as Edwards is running for parliament his wild accusations are, I suppose, understandable. I was opposed to the anti media laws on the grounds that they were not our style of doing things in this country.
The truth is that Clive Edwards believed himself clever enough to harness the Constitution in his personal vendetta against the Taimi Tonga newspaper and its editor Kalafi Moala. He failed in this endeavour because of his ignorance of the law. Proof of this unfamiliarity with Court procedure is that he was unable to understand that changes to the Constitution should be attended by changes in the Judge’s Rules if they are at all to succeed. This is why his measure failed - something I probably forgot to mention to him at the time. Had it truly been I who had sponsored the amendment, you can be assured that it would have succeeded. That, surely, should be proof enough that I did not have anything to do with it.
Part of Clive Edwards’s campaign of misinformation is to give the false impression that after the two representatives are appointed ministers the number of representatives for the people shall be reduced to seven. This is patently false but is to be expected from one of Edwards’s low breed of character.
After the general election, there will be a by-election to replace those who have been appointed ministers, hence the numbers of representatives shall be replenished to nine. The same shall apply for the Representatives of the Nobility.
On a more general note though, no set of rules are perfect unless they are applied with justice and compassion. One of these is the unwritten convention that discussions during Privy Council audiences are to be kept private. For this reason, it has always been the policy to appoint ministers from the ranks of Gentlemen and it is in this regard that Clive Edwards’s appointment to the cabinet was a mistake. Of the three dismissed Ministers, he is the only one to have broken this convention.
Floundering about like a beached whale looking for someone to blame for his public disgrace instead of glancing in the mirror is, after all, and provided he can tell the difference any more, degrading.
Clive Edwards’s interview (Part One)