More weaseling on Guantanamo

Jarvis Pink has received a response from Progressive leader Jim Anderton on the Guantanamo motion. Unfortunately, it's just a little bit weasely:

The Labour Progressive government has a simple position on Guantanamo Bay, which I share, namely that all people there should be treated in accordance with international humanitarian and human rights law. It is especially important that human rights and international laws are respected in the context of countering terrorism. That applies everywhere, including to Guantanamo Bay.

I have noted the media attention given to the report from the United Nations human rights organisations, and, personally, I share their concerns. Whether the appropriate way of expressing those concerns is by a resolution in parliament is another matter to which I will give consideration in due course. Certainly the issue was aired at Question Time on 23 February.

And the response at Question Time was exactly the same bland sophistry we see above: a statement that people should be treated according to international law, but with no acknowledgement that they are not being treated that way, and no desire to speak up about it. After all, we can't risk upsetting the Americans by speaking up for our (supposedly shared) core values - especially not when we're trying to suck up enough to get a free trade agreement.

Once upon a time, the Progressives were better than this. Once upon a time, they could be relied upon to support human rights without fear or favour. Sadly, that seems to no longer be the case.

I wonder how Matt Robson feels about this?