Crown ownership by any other name would smell as bad

13 comments on “Crown ownership by any other name would smell as bad ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Draco T Bastard 1

   6 September 2010 at 2:21 pm

   but iwi are still prevented from re-obtaining ownership of land that was taken from them

   It wasn’t taken from them because they didn’t have it (The seabed). They probably have some claim to the foreshore and negotiations should apply to that.

   BTW, can you please stop conflating the two as you do in this article (most notably in the above quoted sentence)? They are distinctly different.
2. Lew 2

   6 September 2010 at 3:56 pm

   DTB,

   It wasn’t taken from them because they didn’t have it (The seabed).

   They did. I’ve schooled you on this before, try to keep up. It’s also covered very clearly in the Foreshore & Seabed Review Panel report, which clearly you haven’t read. Marty is dead right to conflate them because, in terms of traditional practice, there’s almost no distinction.

   The rest of his reasoning is pretty much dead right as well, with the caveat that these changes could prove to be more than cosmetic (though it is a faint hope) and even if only cosmetic, have at least been agreed as a result of meaningful consultation (with the Iwi Leadership Group, most notably).

   L
   • Akldnut 2.1

     6 September 2010 at 10:17 pm

     DTB I believe this issue went through the courts in 1870 – 80 (or there abouts) where gold miners wanted to tunnel from Thames (Grahamstown) under the foreshore into the Hauraki gulf (firth of Thames).
     Ngati Maru the local iwi said said no because the foreshore and seabed belonged to them, this was upheld by the courts of the day. The Govt (I believe) stepped in and did some swift negotiating on behalf of the European miners and they had to pay by the ton for any gold removed. Which turned out to be bugger all but it was the first foreshore case in NZ, upheld then and subsequently by the courts. But our govt is based on the English version so subsequent govts have asserted riparian rights. The problem being that this was never the case in NZ, our education system failed to teach us this and as a result many are astonished that find that Maori own the lake beds, seabed and foreshore when for generations it was believed the govt owned them.
3. Jim Nald 3

   6 September 2010 at 4:46 pm

   Sounds like John Key and his team opted to access Labour’s legislation on Word and used ‘find and replace’ ?

   Easy peasy whoopdeedoo !
4. Rex Widerstrom 4

   6 September 2010 at 4:55 pm

   Let’s hope Chris Finlayson does a good job of emphasising this is all about semantics then.

   Presumably this is at the urging of the Maori Party? Can’t someone have a word with them and warn them that a symbolic victory might open the way to a resurgence of a party which would aim to thwart everyhting they stand for?!
   • Jim Nald 4.1

     6 September 2010 at 8:29 pm

     Not quite sure what to make out of this:

     “The introduction of the bill was delayed by at least a fortnight and both Maori Party co-leaders Pita Sharples and Tariana Turia are out of the country this week.”

     http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4101408/Seabed-and-foreshore-common-area
     • Marty G 4.1.1

       6 September 2010 at 9:53 pm

       they can’t even be bothered being in the country when their big bill is due?

       or the leader of the House , Gerry Brownlee, didn’t tell them when it would be coming up
       • Jim Nald 4.1.1.1

         7 September 2010 at 8:34 am

         Re-read this and was reminded of what my grandmother said:
         Judge them not by what they say, but what they do.
5. Jenny 5

   6 September 2010 at 9:56 pm

   ————————–

   From: Tere Harrison
   Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2010 20:48:49 +1200
   Subject: Dayle Takitimu – Open Letter to the Maori Party

   Dear Maori Party,

   The unilateral opening up of our ancestral lands and seas to drilling and
   mining by this Government is the most significant threat to the survival of
   our peoples and our way of life we have experienced in this generation.
   Whilst the foreshore and seabed issue, which essentially conceived the Maori
   Party, was essentially about conceptual ownership of the coastal marine
   space the granting of permits and exclusive prospecting licences is a real
   and tangible threat to the livelihood of our people throughout the
   country.

   For those iwi that want drilling and prospecting kei te pai, thats their
   decision. For those of us who do not, and who are concerned about the
   environmental impacts of these activities on our tribal territories who
   are concerned about our mokopuna and the crazy risks the Government are
   taking with our whenua and moana (and illegal because they unjustifiably
   breach the Treaty of Waitangi) we have a long, hard political fight ahead of
   us.

   We are trying to get information flowing between iwi, trying to lobby
   politically, trying to get accurate information into the public domain and
   trying to throw everything we can at the government in terms of legal or
   civil action. Its a hard fight, but we have an obligation to our mokopuna to
   do it these activities are so far removed from our worldview they are
   dangerous and they are about exploitation beyond our means (and beyond the
   means of future generations).

   The big question is in light of this the struggle where are the Maori
   Party?

   Why haven¹t we heard from you?

   Why are you silent at a time Maoridom needs you most? In the corridors in
   Wellington,

   Why can¹t we hear you advocating for us?

   Why can¹t we see you in the media?

   Where are you?

   What do we need to do to be on your radar?

   Is being Maori and being a Treaty partner with an issue not enough?

   Apart from one media message on 3 June 2010 by Ururoa, and attendance at our
   Taumata Korero in Auckland by Hone in August we have heard NOTHING from the
   Maori Party; where are you?

   Major submissions were due today on the draft Energy Strategy which proposes
   more drilling and more mining. We pushed and pushed our populations to make
   submissions, and we had to rely on mainstream organisations to help us with
   analysis and templates where were you?

   Whanau ora is choice; but what about the wellbeing of our mokopuna when
   their whenua is too barren to grow kai?, when their moana is so polluted
   they can¹t get a koura?, when their ancestral whenua has been raped and
   plundered so much their whanau has no oranga what then?

   What do you need from us to step up to this issue and make some noise on our
   behalf? We can hear the Greens, loud and clear. We can¹t hear you.

   Ko te inoi atu kia akoutou, me kaua koutou e noho wahangu i runga i tenei
   kaupapa; he whakahirahira rawa atu tenei ki a tatou.

   Dayle Takitimu
   Lawyer, Te Whanau a Apanui
   • Jenny 5.1

     6 September 2010 at 10:10 pm

     Is the Maori Party Confidence and Supply Agreement with National approaching it’s use by date?

     In my opinion Tere Harrison’s open letter to the Maori party represents the start of a fight for the soul of the Maori Party. For them to ignore it, will be at risk of eternal (political)damnation.

     In my opinion the Maori party is now being constrained in its full advocacy on behalf of their constituents by its tactical coalition with the right wing National Party.

     Both of the two Maori Party MPs mentioned by name in Tere Harrison’s letter, Te Uroa Flavell and Hone Harawira have expressed in public, sentiment’s that the coalition agreement is only valid up to the 2011 elections.

     Any followers of my comments on this blogsite would be aware I support the present tactical accomodation of the Maori Party with the National Government.

     In my opinion this was a brilliant and unexpected tactical move by the Maori Party. This tactical move dumbfounded their opponents inside both of the two major parliamentary parties who sought to ignore and belittle their contribution and keep them away from the levers of power, pushing them into the parliamentary sidelines.

     For the Maori Party to have succumbed to being sidelined in this way would have meant giving up any hope of having any independent influence in the house, which would have meant ignoring the mandate of the many Maori who supported them into parliament.

     This tactical accomodation no matter how necessary, comes with a cost. The Maori Party leadership are fully aware that a second term of coalition with this right wing tory government will see the destruction of their party.

     In my opinion this would be a sad loss, to the detriment of our unique parliamentary system.

     In my opinion the loss of the Maori Party from our political landscape, would be a loss not just felt by, Maori, but Pakeha, Manuhiri, all. Only the most dyed in the wool bigot, or one eyed sectarian would try and deny that the Maori Party have made positive and worthwhile contributions to parliament.

     The Maori Party’s tactical coalition with National, if carried beyond the first term will see the destruction of the Maori Party.

     No serious commentator of politics would deny this.

     The question is are the Maori Party MPs willing to pay this price?

     Are any Maori Party MPs preparing to follow in the footsteps of a La Jim Anderton or Tau Henare to see the destruction of their party and sit out their careers on the back benches of one or the other of the two major political parties?
     • Lew 5.1.1

       6 September 2010 at 10:21 pm

       Jenny, bang on.

       L
     • Jenny 5.1.2

       6 September 2010 at 10:31 pm

       .
       It is becoming very clear that with the detonation inside the ACT Party, the Maori Party if it can stay together has the potential to be King Maker after the 2011 parliamentary election.

       If the Labour Party are serious about contesting this election with the aim of recovering the Treasury Benches from the Nats then they must start lobbying the Maori Party with the purpose of seeking an accommodation that best serves the interests of their core constituencies.

       On current polling this is the only way to ensure a Labour led government is returned to parliament in 2011.

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 6 September 2010 at 2:09 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS