NRT: Voting against democracy

14 comments on “NRT: Voting against democracy ”

• Comments are now closed

1. felix 1

   7 April 2012 at 9:43 am

   Pete George.

   Every single United Future mp voted against this. All of them.

   Surely you, as a defender of democracy, can no longer support the party.
2. Vivienne 2

   7 April 2012 at 10:46 am

   Is this Bill English, John Key et al redirecting the contry/economy as Colin James described it on The Nation this morning?

   And is this new direction to a dictatorship for the benefit of the high rolling gamblers who are propped up through socilisation of their loses?

   New Zealand’s new direction. Ugly.
   • seeker 2.1

     7 April 2012 at 4:03 pm

     +1 Vivienne, unfortunately….especially “New Zealand’s new direction. Ugly.” And “ugly” are the people who support this frighteningly ugly government.
3. burt 3

   7 April 2012 at 11:45 am

   So is this the same NRT who supported 14 years of retrospective validation for an unknown amount of misspent money for political advertising now complaining about democracy. Sensational, no wonder comments are not permitted on his blog.
   • Mel 3.1

     7 April 2012 at 1:05 pm

     @burt

     Ad hominem responses do not enrich the debate at all but merely try to sideline the issue.

     @vivian

     Yes the new direction of New Zealand is ugly.

     By denying democracy to Cantabrians, NACT, United Future and the Maori Party have shown the true colours of our current Government. A government in which laws are enacted to benefit the rich and any consequent losses are socialised and paid for by others.

     We have moved from democracy to plutocracy some time ago. Hopefully, more and more ordinary New Zealanders are waking up to the fact the National’s ‘Brighter Future’ was only for the rich.
4. Dr Terry 4

   7 April 2012 at 1:18 pm

   Quite right Mel, but is it realistic to hope that more ordinary New Zealanders are waking up? Still, they seem to be sound asleep and oblivious to what is happening all around them. This calls for a lot of patience, as change for the better might yet be a long way off. Problem is, that those who do wake up, set off for a happier life in Australia.
5. Galeandra 5

   7 April 2012 at 3:46 pm

   Peeeeete! Peeeete!
   Nope, still too busy Easter trading.
   • Colonial Viper 5.1

     9 April 2012 at 12:25 am

     Still no sign of Pete George. Strange, he’s normally all over this place like a bad rash.
     • felix 5.1.1

       9 April 2012 at 1:03 am

       Yeah it’s odd alright. He’s been all over the other threads since this one’s been up too.

       Guess he just missed it.
6. Red Rosa 6

   7 April 2012 at 5:55 pm

   The ECan sacking was all about irrigation water for dairying in Canterbury, via the Central Plains and Hurunui schemes.

   Ngai Tahu have about 10k hectares adjacent to the Hurunui they are keen to develop for dairy, along the lines of their Eyrewell development next to the Waimak.

   So the National and Maori parties not such strange bedfellows on this one.

   And government promises of $00m’s to fund Canterbury irrigation run in tandem with asset sales on the same scale.

   Seems clear enough.
   • Draco T Bastard 6.1

     7 April 2012 at 7:55 pm

     Yep, selling out of NZ for the gain of the few.
   • bad12 6.2

     7 April 2012 at 9:56 pm

     Not nearly that clear at all, We dont want to start a drag the debate into the gutter,but, will defend in this instance Ngai Tahu and it,s right to have as much a share in the Canterbury water resource as is given to any other farming entity,

     Obviously the Canterbury aquifer is not an infinite supply of water and while SOMETHING needs to occur in planning for allocation between both ”town” and ”country” AND the protection of the aquifers integrity singling out Ngai Tahu for ”special” treatment is to say the least ”unhelpful”,

     The Maori Party in terms of electorate seats no longer hold the Te Tai Tonga seat which encompasses the Ngai Tahu rohe, and, We expended a certain amount of mana in a number of forums to ensure this occurred and will continue to occur,

     We simply view the Maori Party as being trapped in it’s current relationship with the National party by one of it’s members intransigent dislike of the other options available,

     Barking occassional dislike of some small slight from the National Party in an attempt to cling onto what support it has left is small comfort for the Maori in the wider society negatively effected by the National Governments economics and We ”see” the point being at the next election the Maori Party having Parliamentary representation of 1,

     However,as above,denoting the users of the Canterbury aquifer or the proposed users by ”race” is hardly helpful to the debate, Ngai Tahu in effect are like us all captured by the system of political and economic management that we labour under and We hardly expect Ngai Tahu to simply not engage in business and in effect remain the flax skirt wearers fimly locked into the have nots decile…
     • Puddleglum 6.2.1

       9 April 2012 at 12:15 am

       “allocation between both ”town” and ”country” ”

       Someone might be able to put me right, but my understanding is that 90-95% of water use in Canterbury is outside of Christchurch.

       So, it’s not really a townie versus cockie stoush. It’s about the increasing amounts of water rights being granted for farming (especially dairying). 
7. Robert Glennie 7

   9 April 2012 at 10:33 pm

   Too many New Zealanders are still under the influence of our worst attitude: “She’ll Be Right”. It is an attitude that I think will cost us dearly in the near future. We are slipping on most respectable scales of economic, social and national development.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS