Stalking, climate change litigation and do polls really matter?

In this weeks episode we examine the Government's new stalking legislation, which will create a standalone stalking offence for the first time in New Zealand. We discuss why existing laws have often failed to adequately capture patterns of obsessive and threatening behaviour, what conduct the new offence will cover, and whether the proposed penalties and protections strike the right balance.We then turn to the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Smith v Fonterra. We break down what the Court actually decided, why the case is being viewed as a significant development in climate change litigation, and the implications of allowing novel climate-related claims to proceed through the courts. We also discuss the Government's response, including its decision to introduce legislation aimed at limiting or overturning the effect of the ruling, and the political debate that has followed. Alongside this, we unpack the lobbying controversy that has emerged around the proposed law change and what it reveals about the influence of interest groups on the policymaking process.Finally, we dive into the world of political polling. Polls can dominate headlines and shape political narratives, but what do they really tell us? We explore how polls are conducted, why different polls can produce different results, and whether polls merely reflect public opinion or actively influence voter behaviour. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.