Kiwis want to keep our land, will Key listen?

Written By: - Date published: 8:57 am, January 31st, 2012 - 35 comments
Categories: accountability, assets, overseas investment - Tags:

I/S at NoRightTurn says we should hold Key to his latest pathetic excuse making for his inaction on the sale of our farmland overseas

———————————

John Key’s excuse for the Crafar farms sale? His hands were tied. But he’s promising to change the law if we make enough noise about it:

”Obviously that’s a sovereign right that we have.”We can change the law but at this point I would have thought it would be a bit of a knee-jerk reaction.

”We should look at it, if the flow of sales starts to accelerate and people really become very concerned.”

I think we should take Key at his word, and start expressing that concern. Either he’ll be forced to keep his promise, or he’ll be exposed as a two-faced liar who will say anything to try and get an issue to go away. Either way, we help create the conditions for a law-change to restrict these sorts of damaging asset-sales, which can only be a Good Thing in the long term.
———————————–
Of course, New Zealanders already are expressing  their concern: in letters to the editor, on talkback, on the blogs, on the online polls. It’s just that Key has no intention of listening. If he really cared, he would have kept his promise that he wouldn’t let New Zealanders become “tenants in their own country”.

35 comments on “Kiwis want to keep our land, will Key listen? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. higherstandard 1
    31 January 2012 at 9:15 am

    Is it just land that he is suggesting should not be sold to non-NZ entities, if so is it all types of land ?

  2. marsman 2
    31 January 2012 at 9:52 am

    I’s not just the sale of the farms but the fact that Landcorp are supposedly going to lease them for $20 odd million per year and run them. That would pay for the farms in ten years! Where is the smart economics in that? Did Shipley have anything to do with the deal and how much did she get paid?

  3. mickysavage 3
    31 January 2012 at 10:20 am

    Whether it is retaining our land or retaining our power stations I think the principle is the same.  Our economic nationalism and control of our future is at stake.  Time for a campaign?

    • The Baron 3.1
      31 January 2012 at 10:46 am

      Oh noes, “the maestro” Greg Presland is going to run a campaign. Here’s hoping it is as good as the award winning clusterf*ck in Helensville – one of yours wasn’t it, Greggie? Hard seat admittedly, but you and Jeremy managed to take it backwards at a rate of knots.

      God, all the Crosby Textor employees that monitor this blog must be suffering in their jocks right now…

      • felix 3.1.1
        31 January 2012 at 10:52 am

        Ah I’m glad you’re back. On Friday you accused me of being a racist and I’m still waiting for you to provide a single example of any such behaviour.

        Tick tock.

        • mickysavage 3.1.1.1
          31 January 2012 at 11:04 am

          Yep Baron you answer felix and I will answer you.  BTW you are wrong but it is not the first time.

          • Pundit X 3.1.1.1.1
            31 January 2012 at 11:36 am

            @Baron Mickey was more closely involved with New Lynn and if memory serves me it was a very successful campaign. Be afraid Baron, be very afraid..

      • Draco T Bastard 3.1.2
        31 January 2012 at 12:15 pm

        Oh noes, The Baron is being sarcastic…whatever shall we do?

      • tc 3.1.3
        31 January 2012 at 12:49 pm

        A grasp of the facts his NACT idols would be proud of…..a career in the MSM awaits or are you already there baron crafting an editorial perhaps.

    • Jilly Bee 3.2
      31 January 2012 at 12:13 pm

      Yep, for starters I need another tee shirt to add to my Save TVNZ7 and one of my New Year Resolutions is to do more walking.

  4. how long 4
    31 January 2012 at 10:21 am

    Do we put up with the sale of our sovereignty under the excuse that we need all the money we can get to pay our debts.
    This money crap is beyond reason we are slaves to the international finance system we have no integrity when it comes to ownership of our country and we dont even recognise the trap we are in created by the expansion of China in the Pacific.
    Our country is in its most vunerable state in history and yet we still keep burying our heads in the sand about what will save our future seriously we should be talking to the Aussies because I dont think this Govt can do anything but sell us off so why not offer the whole country to Australia.

    • tc 4.1
      31 January 2012 at 11:24 am

      ” I dont think this Govt can do anything but sell us off .. ” well that is the MO of the NACT.

      The rest is just spin and PR fluff designed to fool the masses, it’s carefully structured program based on a second term will be rammed through under urgency as the quickest way of getting the job done and watch them leave in droves to cushy post gov’t roles.

    • Populuxe1 4.2
      31 January 2012 at 3:59 pm

      I wasn’t aware we were selling our sovereignty – the Chinese would probably do a better job of running this country than the NACTS (he said only slightly sarcastically)…

      • Colonial Viper 4.2.1
        31 January 2012 at 4:07 pm

        No we’re not selling our sovereignty, we are selling the land and the sovereignty goes with it as a freebie.

  5. prism 5
    31 January 2012 at 11:35 am

    A comment this morning about this that the matter of the foreign sale is an emotive issue. Yet the concerns about balance of payments, and the ability of NZ farmers to get entry to this vital, growing investment is lessened by blocks of farms being sold off as one entity to the money-saturated. Also there is the situation of foreigners getting a big percentage in Fonterra.

    It’s silly to describe the concern as simply emotive or racist, though Rod Oram pointed out thisv morning when he was discussing this, that there had been a number of purchases in the SI by Germans of recent times that have not received much publicity.

    Then again, the Germans haven’t been revealed as adopting such sharp practices in their food production as introducing melamine into the milk as the Chinese did, I think because in the tests used it indicates a higher protein level. We don’t want our brand of 100% good to be dirtied by connection with such practices. Germans have, I think suffered from poisoning from vegetables through unclean water, but that presumably wasn’t from deliberate adulteration.

    • insider 5.1
      31 January 2012 at 12:13 pm

      “We don’t want our brand of 100% good to be dirtied by connection with such practices. ”

      Fonterra was a major shareholder and provided board members, so it already is…You’re about four years behind the times

  6. Lanthanide 6
    31 January 2012 at 11:40 am

    It’s not the first time he’s made promises he had no intention of keeping:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv/6340208/Coro-and-cooking-time-swap-a-failure

    “At the time, Prime Minister John Key told Radio Live listeners he would “talk to someone important” about the move.

    But documents released from TVNZ under the Official Information Act show Mr Key had no correspondence with the broadcaster on the issue. Ratings of the soap and the reality cooking show were also both below expectations in their new slots.

    A spokeswoman for Mr Key this week said anyone listening to the programme would have realised his comments were “light-hearted banter”.

    “It is not appropriate for the Prime Minister to intervene in TVNZ’s programming decisions.””

  7. Jum 7
    31 January 2012 at 11:42 am

    Anyone care to answer this bozo, D Advocate?

    PM: Change to foreign ownership law possible
    Danya Levy
    30/01/2012

    ***Poster: D Advocate #156 10:43 pm Jan 30 2012
    Today, I am Chinese and I have $1 billion in my account.
    I go to my Auckland lawyer and create a company registered in NZ.
    I invest my $1 billion in that company and use it to buy land in NZ.
    Is that land owned by New Zealand or China?
    A year later, I get my Kiwi passport and have dual Chinese/NZ citizenship.
    Is that land owned by NZ or China?
    A NZ company buys land worth $10 billion. It lists on the NZX. 3000 Chinese people and companies buy 85% of the shares individually.
    Is the land owned by NZ or China?
    Not so simple, is it?
    The world, my dear little NZ hobbits, has changed around you and – despite your wailing and gnashing – you are too small and too poor to do anything about it I am afraid.

    Insiders tipped to buy Dairy Holdings PM: Change to foreign ownership law possible Record dairy production gives rise to unexpected trade surplus Crafar farms sale to Chinese group approved Federated Farmers joins milk row Accusations of ‘weak-kneed leadership’ on Crafar Key plays down Chinese Crafar deal concerns

    • aerobubble 7.1
      31 January 2012 at 1:24 pm

      Good twist, if we were Chinese we’d treat all foreign investors the same and deny any foriegner (any non-resident) the same and turn all our land into leasehold (claimable by descentants like in China).

      Then there would be no problem with Key’s racism that the Chinese hate foriegners unlike NZ who allow anyone to buy property freehold.

      Its a sick world when Chinese racism is used to call NZ racist by their own racist PM.

      • Wayne 7.1.1
        31 January 2012 at 6:36 pm

        Then there would be no problem with Key’s racism that the Chinese hate foriegners unlike NZ who allow anyone to buy property freehold.

        Fuck you are stupid. Chinese in China aren’t allowed to buy land. Nothing to do with racism you dumb fuck. Unless it is Chinese being racist against themselves.

    • Colonial Viper 7.2
      31 January 2012 at 1:45 pm

      Parcels of land over 5 ha. must be owned by NZ citizens or by those who hold NZ PR.

      If the buyer is a company, a minimum of 90% of shareholding of that trust must be held be NZ citizens or PR holders.

      If the buyer is a trust, the beneficiaries of the trust must be NZ citizens or PR holders, and the trust must be administered by legal and accountancy practicioners licensed to practice in NZ.

      Not brain science is it haha

  8. Jum 8
    31 January 2012 at 11:43 am

    PS – no edit function. ‘Insiders tipped…….deal concerns’ should be a link, but didn’t happen. It’s on the Nat’s Stuff site.

  9. Irascible 9
    31 January 2012 at 2:54 pm

    While NZers watch their heritage disappear into the coffers of foreign corporates and hedge fund speculation J,KeY concentrates on the details to be published in his obituary and on history books: “He will be remembered as being well liked by the NZ electorate.”
    The analysts will point out that under his regime the state, New Zealand, disappeared to become a subsiduary holding company held by a consortium of foreign corporates and found its public services being bought & sold on foreign stock exchanges without any benefit being passed on to the emplyees of NZ inc.(subsiduary of Warner Bros, China Investments, Lehman Bros and associated hedge funds ) but KeY remained “well liked.”

  10. vto 10
    31 January 2012 at 3:24 pm

    Here’s mine own one-line statement on the law change – no land is to be owned by a person that does not live in NZ.

    That includes beneficial ownership. It includes any share in an entity which owns land. None. Zip. Lease can have a similar effect as ownership so would need strict control – as a pointer the RMA deems leases over 20 years a subdivision as I recall. And renewals and any other cleverness.

    It includes all land, residential, farming, national parks, the seascape and marine environment, the airspace, everything, the lot.

    The definition of “living in NZ” would need fleshing out but common sense would drive that – principal residence measure of some sort.

    In addition, all land currently owned by such non-NZ dwellers would have to be sold over a long period, say 20 years.

    Was thinking today ……. gosman’s hare-brained idea that selling all land would be the most beneficial of all highlighted a view. If you could have one or the other – either all of our land owned by foreingers OR all of our land owned by NZers, which would you want? And which would be the most beneficial? I mean, drawing things to their logical conclusion is one tool that can be valuable in assessing a situation. And this is one such of those.

    Actually maybe gosman can answer that? Which would be best for New Zealand? All land owned by foreigners, or all land owned by New Zealanders? (or am i tempting fate …………)

  11. Tanz 11
    31 January 2012 at 4:44 pm

    Does Key ever listen (to anyone but him?) and why should we have to make a big noise to be heard?
    Worse PM ever? Certainly one of the most arrogant.

  12. Tanz 12
    31 January 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Tried to edit my errors above, system seems to be not working!

    • Colonial Viper 13.1
      2 February 2012 at 12:26 am

      Cameron is getting out of the US and setting up a base here in resource, food rich NZ.

    • Frank Macskasy 13.2
      2 February 2012 at 12:34 am

      Populuxe,

      Cameron is moving to NZ with his family. So any export-dollars from those farms will (hopefully) stay here in NZ.

      I have no problem with that.

      In the same vein, if the Shanghai Pengxin-owners of the Crafar Farms want to move to NZ to live; be part of the community; and retain export profits here in NZ – then I’ll be the first to welcome them. They’d be no different to the thousands of other immigrants coming to NZ.

      Again, I have zero problem with that.

      Which is hardly surprising as my own parents were immigrants…

      • felix 13.2.1
        2 February 2012 at 1:10 am

        What? You mean you mean you’re applying the same standard to people from China as to anyone else?

        But they’re a different race Frank!!

  14. Frank Macskasy 14
    2 February 2012 at 12:37 am

    Back on-topic…

    Will Key listen to New Zealanders? I suspect not. Key won’t listen to anyone except National Party media advisers, and the Electoral Commission when it declares Labour the winner of the next election.