Quick question

Written By: - Date published: 8:17 am, July 24th, 2009 - 26 comments
Categories: maori party - Tags:

What does the Maori Party think of National’s plan to relax rules on foreign investment?

26 comments on “Quick question ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Doug 1
    24 July 2009 at 8:36 am

    I would not worry about what the Maori Party think.
    I would worry about TVNZ openly calling Phil Goff, Phil Goof.

  2. indiana 2
    24 July 2009 at 8:53 am

    They probably think, chur bro, no worries as long as we get our fair cut of the deal too, aye.

    [Cut the racism.]

  3. bill brown 3
    24 July 2009 at 8:57 am

    If the harbour bridge gets sold, will they still be able to plant their flag on it?

  4. starboard 4
    24 July 2009 at 9:11 am

    ..who gives a rats…

  5. vto 5
    24 July 2009 at 9:17 am

    Are the rules really being changed that much, in the bigger picture? Or is it really just cleaning up the pile of shit laid by Cullen et al that was changing the rules on AIA?

  6. marty mars 6
    24 July 2009 at 9:28 am

    english looking after his foreign mates – easy to see why he is a failed leader

    Not sure what the maori party think but I think it’s discraceful, but then my view is national interests = maori interests

    as for the post IB, what do you care? Why not attack the actual bullshit plan instead of thinly disgused baiting of maori?

    • IrishBill 6.1
      24 July 2009 at 9:39 am

      I’m not baiting Maori. I feel the same way bout this issue as you do. I’m asking a question about the Maori Party designed to raise the issue of one of the contradictions thrown up by their coalition with National. Are you suggesting that such questions should be off limits? If so, why?

      • marty mars 6.1.1
        24 July 2009 at 9:56 am

        How can this be a contradiction when they haven’t given their response yet?

        • IrishBill 6.1.1.1
          24 July 2009 at 10:07 am

          Fair enough, they may support increased foreign investment. If they don’t (and I assume they don’t but I’ve been surprised by them before) there’s a contradiction. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.

          • marty mars 6.1.1.1.1
            24 July 2009 at 10:17 am

            And fair enough from my side. We are on the same side IB, and I too am awaiting their response with interest and don’t worry, if it’s not to my liking, I’ll be going as hard at them as you.

  7. ak 7
    24 July 2009 at 10:03 am

    Wouldn’t be surprised if they’re busy designing a nice “Buy NZ” flag. They didn’t fare too well under the previous colonisers, perhaps a culture with similar experience of anglo-rapacity and an underlying socialist culture of communality will be an improvement….

    Either way, it’s just the first glimmer of the inevitable new yellow global dawn – and the beginning of the end for NACT: literally selling the farm.

  8. coolas 8
    24 July 2009 at 10:35 am

    As a shareholder in A/Airport I was pissed to miss out on $20k profit from sale. But as a Maori I support restricting foreign investment.

    ‘Let’s tell the world we are open for business,’ is a scary statement coming from a National finance Minister, & the Maori Party seem so seduced by power they’re blind to the privatisation, foreign sell-out agenda. Sharples in particular seems so puffed up by his elevation to power he’s lost sight of the Toanga of land, land, land for the people, people, people. Not foreign people. New Zealand people.

  9. Quoth the Raven 9
    24 July 2009 at 11:16 am

    As a cantabrian I’m concerned about what Ngai Tahu and its farmer cronies are doing in Canterbury – destroying another river. Is this being caretakers/guardians of the envrionment? Is this mana enhancing or just money enhancing? What does the Maori party think of this?

    • coolas 9.1
      24 July 2009 at 11:30 am

      Couldn’t agree more. If Ngai Tahu’s attitude to business is extended to Foreshore & Seabed rights we could see massive environmental destruction. The dairy farming projects in Canterbury are a shocker. Remember Tipene was Stephen for half his life before deciding to be Maori. He and his elk seem to want to show they’re just as good at business as Pakeha. It’s some weird point proving.

  10. Brett Dale 10
    24 July 2009 at 1:38 pm

    They are probably happy that they belong to a coalition that is not xenophobic or have a chip of their shoulder about capitalism

    • Quoth the Raven 10.1
      24 July 2009 at 2:07 pm

      I guess if National and MP are not xenophoic then they’ll start opening our border to immigration, allow more refugees to settle here, etc. Or is it just the free flow of capital and not people they care about Brett?

  11. Relic 11
    24 July 2009 at 2:07 pm

    The MP at the moment are seriously under the influence of Shonkey and the hollowmen, and will go where they and Wodney say for a bit longer. The MP is still in the same post election bind, it is pushing an aspirational line that will not deliver for the majority of its desired constituents. It does not represent all Maori, all iwi, but it would like to. Good luck with that.

    The MP leaders can spit on Labour, a class analysis and their critics, but where are they going to hide after three years when all the statistics are horrific?

  12. The Voice of Reason 12
    24 July 2009 at 2:30 pm

    I don’t think there are any contradictions if the Maori party support the Nat’s move to liberalise foreign ownership. The Maori Party leadership (as opposed to their voters) are right wing bourgies anyway and quite comfortable with most of the economic liberalism that runs through this government.

    My pick is they won’t say a word about it voluntarily and if backed into a corner, the usual weasel words about the price of being in government will come out.

  13. Rex Widerstrom 13
    24 July 2009 at 3:26 pm

    And in a far off, mist-shrouded graveyard the coffin marked “Winston Peters’ career: never to be reopened” begins to crack…