Open mike 02/11/2023

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 2nd, 2023 - 56 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

56 comments on “Open mike 02/11/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Muttonbird 1
    2 November 2023 at 8:00 am

    "Some of those people who have been going around the country moaning about co-governance: One, they don't know what they are talking about; and two, they are people that I've always described as the sour right.

    "They don't like change, they dream of a world that never was and never could be, they ignore the facts unless it suits them, they are utterly miserable."

    Chris Finlayson describes the ACT Party and its voters.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/11/election-2023-what-stands-in-the-way-of-the-act-party-s-plan-for-a-treaty-of-waitangi-referendum.html

    • Dennis Frank 1.1
      2 November 2023 at 8:21 am

      ACT is using this triad:

      It would define the principles of the Treaty as:

      1. All citizens of New Zealand have the same political rights and duties

      2. All political authority comes from the people by democratic means including universal suffrage, regular and free elections with a secret ballot

      3. New Zealand is a multi-ethnic liberal democracy where discrimination based on ethnicity is illegal

      Delusional defiance of contract law won't get them far. Treaty principles can only be identified in Te Tiriti, not by collective hallucination. Racial harmony in Aotearoa depends on what Maori believe they contracted into in 1840.

      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/11/election-2023-what-stands-in-the-way-of-the-act-party-s-plan-for-a-treaty-of-waitangi-referendum.html

      • pat 1.1.1
        2 November 2023 at 10:10 am

        I suspect ACT's attempt to define what the principles of the treaty mean will serve an important (if controversial) purpose….who can honestly say what the phrase "Priciples of the Treaty of Waitangi " means in practice?

        If we are to use the Treaty as a basis for how we are governed then it might be important to determine exactly what it means.

        • Dennis Frank 1.1.1.1
          2 November 2023 at 10:57 am

          I agree, but that triad of theirs looks suspiciously like a blatant attempt to escape from reality. Seymour is gambling on viability of their reframe but on what basis would it get traction? Pakeha solidarity? Not a chance.

          If the principles were durable nowadays it would be evident to many; contemporary wordings would already be circulating. More than 30 years of contemplation hasn't distilled into anything like that. Co-governance hasn't been proclaimed nationwide as a treaty principle – yet it is a feasible contender, having accumulated a bunch of laws implementing the notion…

        • AB 1.1.1.2
          2 November 2023 at 10:57 am

          The principles of the Treaty are ours to work out. That's because by talking about the principles we have pragmatically retreated from the actual words of the Treaty. In particular from the Maori version of Article 2 because it emphasises the "status and authority" of Maori over lands and taonga – a notion that is intolerable to the contemporary non-Maori majority because it implies something greater than mere property rights.

          The important thing is not to let the ACT Party decide what the principles are.

          • pat 1.1.1.2.1
            2 November 2023 at 11:28 am

            "The Māori version of article 2 uses the word 'rangatiratanga' in promising to uphold the authority that tribes had always had over their lands and taonga. This choice of wording emphasises status and authority."

            Your link

            I suspect that most people would have no firm position on article 2 as there is no agreement/.understanding of what that entails….indeed there isnt even a consensus on the meaning of rangitiratanga.

            If you object to the use of the 'principles' of the Treaty as opposed to the meaning of either/both versions then you will likely make any agreement even more improbable as the principles were determined to allow the Treaty to be applied in contemporary context.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_the_Treaty_of_Waitangi

            • AB 1.1.1.2.1.1
              2 November 2023 at 12:11 pm

              I don't object to the talking about "the principles". I think we are stuck with them just as you say – because the actual wording is unclear and open to very different and maybe quite radical interpretations. By talking about the principles we have an opportunity to de-radicalise the discussion and to acknowledge the practical implications of nearly 200 years of history since it was signed.

              But we can still mess it up badly. And it seems to me that the political opportunism of NACT in wanting to regain office at all costs this year, has made it more likely that we do.

            • Dennis Frank 1.1.1.2.1.2
              2 November 2023 at 12:24 pm

              That heptad from 1987 seems to be viewed as the status quo:

              The Court of Appeal, in a judgment of its then President Sir Robin Cooke, decided upon the following treaty principles:

              • The acquisition of sovereignty in exchange for the protection of rangatiratanga.
              • The treaty established a partnership and imposed on the partners the duty to act reasonably and in good faith.
              • The freedom of the Crown to govern.
              • The Crown's duty of active protection.
              • The duty of the Crown to remedy past breaches.
              • Māori to retain rangatiratanga over their resources and taonga and have all citizenship privileges.
              • Duty to consult.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principles_of_the_Treaty_of_Waitangi

              What is interesting about it is the lack of co-governance: the Crown is specified as sovereign. The partners refer to Crown plus chiefs who signed, so the relevance to now is questionable.

              • pat …
                2 November 2023 at 12:55 pm

                While ACT may have intended its referendum as a vote catcher they may in fact end up doing the country a favour in that a discussion about the place of the ToW in NZ governance may result….and not necessarily in the way they intended.

                • Dennis Frank …
                  2 November 2023 at 1:23 pm

                  Precisely. Consciousness-raising is good. Folks get to clarify their thinking and discuss any opaque points.

                  We ought to retain the original intent of the British govt along with acknowledging what the chiefs believed they signed up to, but relevance today is more in spirit than letter of the law to me.

                  That said, can't deny legal precedence established in court, which can only be replaced by parliamentary majority.

        • Michael P 1.1.1.3
          2 November 2023 at 3:20 pm

          100%

          I can't see how anyone acting in good faith could take issue with people wanting to know and have defined exactly what 'the principles' are. This is not a racist or anti Maori or any other. It is a perfectly reasonable position to hold and is simply a request for information and clarity.

          If you can't tell me what the principles are then don't expect me to abide by them….How could I, I don't know what they are…..

          Then there's the legal side of things…..

          All that aside I don't agree with what is documented here as the ACT party's principles. I think Iwi should come up with a definition of the principles that they all agree with and then pass this onto parliament for debate, voting or whatever process is needed. Obviously anything to do with defining the principles of the treaty would require widespread agreement from all parties including the crown.

      • Mike the Lefty 1.1.2
        2 November 2023 at 3:42 pm

        ACT's underlying paranoidic fear is that the sins of their Mr Monopoly ancestors will come back to haunt them and they are determined to shut the Maoris up and prevent that from being publicised.

  2. Ad 2
    2 November 2023 at 8:13 am

    Good gravy just give us the Specials already. And a coalition agreement.

    Well and truly time we had a clear government again.

    • Muttonbird 2.1
      2 November 2023 at 8:28 am

      Labour still in charge, Hipkins still the PM. The situation shows the propaganda that NZ voted for change is a myth.

      • tc 2.1.1
        2 November 2023 at 12:40 pm

        Give it a chance I'm sure once rimmer, Baldrick etc strike a deal after results are finalised the wealth transfer, public transport knee capping, cuts to already underfunded area's etc will resume.

      • Mike the Lefty 2.1.2
        2 November 2023 at 3:47 pm

        National has totally hoodwinked the electorate if they believe this new government will be one of change. National is not and never has been a party of change.

        • Belladonna 2.1.2.1
          2 November 2023 at 4:16 pm

          The 90s are calling!

          I'm pretty sure that the National Party led some pretty significant changes.
          Not saying they were necessarily 'good' changes – but pretty significant movement on the social and political landscape.

          • Mike the Lefty 2.1.2.1.1
            2 November 2023 at 4:18 pm

            If reactionary and regressive policies count as change I guess you are right.

            • Belladonna 2.1.2.1.1.1
              2 November 2023 at 4:27 pm

              Change is change.

              Also, remember, that it was this National Government which passed MMP. Not to say they wanted it – but to do them credit, they implemented the will of the electorate following the referendum.

              • observer …
                2 November 2023 at 5:03 pm

                It was a binding referendum, so they had to implement it.

                It would be fair to say they didn't have to hold the referendum in the first place (although Bolger had promised one, so it would have been a very unpopular U-turn). But after the result the decision was no longer theirs to make.

                • Belladonna …
                  2 November 2023 at 7:47 pm

                  Given the other policies that Bolger did a quick U-turn on, holding a referendum (when the National Party very clearly did not want a change away from FPP) – would have been just another broken promise. At the very least, to change from binding to indicative referendum (at 53.8%, they could have made an argument that the desire for change wasn't 'overwhelming')

                  And, equally fair to note, that the Lange government did not go to the polls in 1987 with a referendum, nor did the Palmer/Moore government in 1990.

        • Sabine 2.1.2.2
          2 November 2023 at 5:00 pm

          Everyone was so over the current crew, that they voted for the other crew, not expecting any change.

          And fwiw, i think Chippy rather spend some times with his new Coalition partner then with his party and his government.

    • observer 2.2
      2 November 2023 at 1:40 pm

      You sound like Paddy Gower.

      The result doesn't arrive faster if we sit in the back seat and ask daddy "Are we there yet?".

      Graeme Edgeler patiently explains:

      Final vote delay criticisms not fair, but daily updates could work – Edgeler | RNZ News

      Once a government is formed, only its policies and actions will matter. Not one single voter will cast a vote at the next election "because they took too long 3 years ago".

  3. Sanctuary 3
    2 November 2023 at 8:19 am

    New Zealand households send 18% of their income to enrich the largely Australian shareholders of the major banks, but everything is fine and perfectly normal in our little economic colony of Australia.

    "…The Reserve Bank yesterday said by mid 2024, New Zealand households will be spending around 18 per cent of their income on interest payments…"

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/301000306/newsable-tricky-times-might-prompt-wave-of-small-new-businesses

    • Michael P 3.1
      2 November 2023 at 3:33 pm

      Does it really matter where the shareholders are from?

      At the end of the day they are large banks and whoever owns them doesn't change the fact that they are ……..(list descriptive expletives here)

      But to be fair, banks can (mostly) only behave within the rules and laws that our politicians set for them.

      I guess you have to be fair to the politicians as well in that we are the ones who elect them so some blame may lie with us.

      Although to be fair to us, I can't think of any parties or people up for election who were advocating the sort of things that I think should happen to the banking sector

      So I blame the banks and banking / monetary system, which I always have and always will detest; and to a certain extent gutless politicians.

    • SPC 3.2
      2 November 2023 at 4:50 pm

      Half the shares in their banks are owned by international funds …

  4. Bearded Git 4
    2 November 2023 at 8:23 am

    Jacinda and Ashley (and co) were so wonderful in the Covid response. History will be kind to them. Luxon would have caved in to business and opened the borders.

    Compare and contrast NZ with the UK and its disastrous Covid response and huge death toll.

    "As the pandemic approached, then raged, no one – from the prime minister to the cabinet secretary to the health secretary – seems to have realised how bad they, specifically, were at their own jobs. Now that we’re seeing some of the receipts for their backstage chaos and deadly incompetence, the major takeaways are this country’s systemic inadequacy and the sheer monumental unsuitability of the specific set of people charged with dealing with the crisis. It’s like putting the Real Housewives in charge of the Manhattan Project.

    I do, however, think it was notable in this day and age that every single Downing Street pandemic press conference bar one was fronted by a male politician. Covid decision-making didn’t pass the Bechdel test. The mood was months and months and months of guys who knew best standing at a podium telling the public they had it all under control. Look, you know, I’m a big advocate for this kind of positive discrimination, but hearing about the backstage bitching, the emotionalism, the cliques, the endless drama … well, like me, you may be wondering if men are really suited to these important jobs. Might they not be happier simply staying at home?"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/01/boris-johnson-dominic-cummings-covid-inquiry-no-10

    • Dennis Frank 4.1
      2 November 2023 at 8:33 am

      yes I liked this bit:

      we learned from the diary of the government’s former chief scientist, Patrick Vallance, that Johnson came to believe that Covid was “nature’s way of dealing with old people”. Yes, if you were one of the many, many old people who voted for Boris Johnson in 2019, this week was the moment it formally emerged that he was extremely relaxed about you moving on to the great suckers convention in the sky.

    • dv 4.2
      2 November 2023 at 11:10 am

      A fun estimate of the tax paid from those that survived is abt 300 m per yr

      (20000 people at est ave tax of 15 k each)

    • patrick 4.3
      2 November 2023 at 7:28 pm

      The UK's response was disastrous by what measure? Cumulative excess deaths (the only measure that matters) stands at around 10%, about the same as Spain, Italy and Singapore. Another group of countries are clustered around 5%, including Norway, Sweden and Australia. Over the course of the pandemic the UK was at the upper end of stringency of pandemic restrictions comparing with other developed countries. Interestingly, there is almost no correlation between stringency of restrictions and excess death rate. Sweden never closed its schools and never locked down, and yet its results are better than most developed countries.

      New Zealand is unique in that it closed itself off from the world completely for a long period. No other developed country could do that to the same extent, except for Australia. It had the odd side effect of making excess deaths significantly negative for a long period as we skipped two flu seasons. If you remove that effect then our excess deaths sit at around 5%.

      It's very fashionable to comment about how disastrous the UK response was, but little of the commentary is based on data. Most of it appears to spring from a dislike of Boris Johnson.

      • Bearded Git 4.3.1
        2 November 2023 at 11:51 pm

        Read the Guardian reports on the UK Covid enquiry Patrick…it turns out that the UK response was a complete shambles. (Anybody paying attention knew this already)

        I calculated on a pro-rata population basis that NZ would have had 14,000 extra deaths if we had mimicked the UK response. Other people say 20,000.

        But forget the deaths and cast your mind back to our economy working well with the closed borders. Rugby and cricket games attended by many thousands without fear of infection. The economy cranking along.

        We were so lucky to have Jacinda and Ashley there, and not some slave to business like Luxon/Johnson. Try to back away from your political prejudice and look at the actual numbers.

  5. Dennis Frank 5
    2 November 2023 at 8:41 am

    Seems like a potential Green solution:

    Olivine is found across the South Island and contains iron, silicon and magnesium – all sought-after materials. Typically, vast amounts of planet-heating carbon emissions are produced mining and refining these minerals around the globe. https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/133134895/the-ordinary-rock-we-drive-on-holds-a-planetsaving-secret

    Now, Christchurch scientists Chris Oze and Megan Danczyk have a carbon-free way to pull them from olivine. The pair needs $10 million to build their first plant before their idea could “reverse” climate change, Oze said.

    From next year, the proposed $10m pilot plant could transform one tonne of olivine per day into refined minerals – saving up to three tonnes of carbon pollution. Olivine – “the most abundant rock on Earth” – is combined with acidic liquid, and transformed into an elemental soup using renewable electricity, Danczyk said. The iron, silica and magnesium are separated and can be sold – replacing other mining operations.

    Typically, cement factories emit lots of carbon dioxide when they transform limestone into lime – but the team’s silica can replace up to 30% of the lime required. “Cement’s one of the largest carbon dioxide emitters, globally,” Danczyk said. The iron could go to steel-making factories, again helping to reduce the impact of these high-emitting facilities.

    But the magnesium has got the project the most attention – even catching the eye of the X Prize, a global climate tech competition sponsored by Tesla and SpaceX chief executive Elon Musk. Fellow billionaire Bill Gates is also supporting Aspiring Materials through his green tech programme.

    The scientists are American but doing Green tech here in Aotearoa, An enterprise worth developing for our future, with US/NZ collaboration.

  6. Dennis Frank 6
    2 November 2023 at 9:42 am

    As we await the election's final results tomorrow, here's where we're at:

    Labour’s woes are, though, just one example of a wider malaise facing political parties the world over, especially on the left. It is almost a cliché in some circles to talk of the “interregnum”, but that is where political parties find themselves: in a world where neoliberalism, however defined, is near-dead, but no coherent political platform has emerged to replace it.

    https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/30-10-2023/labours-next-big-task-is-finding-its-policy-again

    Author Max Rashbrooke is a senior research fellow in the School of Government at Victoria University. I presume he discounts the Green alternative due to the 30 years the Greens have spent failing to impress it into the minds of influential academics. The Greens in parliament would probably suggest lack of relevance for that.

    Across the Atlantic, “Bidenomics” is reinvigorating industrial policy, lifting working-class incomes and driving action on climate change

    If so, Biden will win a 2nd term. Is his formula applicable here? Yes, with a tweak or 2. The Greens have established the basis for using the 2nd & 3rd elements of that triad, so we just need Labour to provide the first.

    • newsense 6.1
      2 November 2023 at 11:19 am

      Rashbrooke is NZ institute or some such isn’t he?

      I’ve always looked at his stuff warily. He’s not as bad as Bryce, but he’s not enormously interested in helping out the lower echelons with any urgency.

      • Dennis Frank 6.1.1
        2 November 2023 at 11:35 am

        Could be getting him wrong though: https://www.maxrashbrooke.net/

        Whenever I've heard him on RNZ in the past he has seemed to have socialist interests at heart. I see there's a youTube talk he gave to the Fabian Society (where leftists were hanging out a century ago).

        Re your reference to lack of urgency, that could just mean he's typical Labour, eh?

        • newsense 6.1.1.1
          3 November 2023 at 2:55 pm

          Haha very good. Yes, what with the specials favoring the left it was a bit pointed that Labour got none of them.

          And so far the media is scarcely reporting, if at all, that the Greens have picked up a seat.

  7. newsense 7
    2 November 2023 at 11:16 am

    Dunno if this got covered yesterday- but welcome to National world where workers entitlements are paid because of charity and a generous ‘donation’.

    Unwrapping this a bit- if the workers were working and the company didn’t have the money to pay their salaries and holiday pay, then there should be convictions. We’re talking about theft in my book, done by trading while insolvent.

    We’re going to see more absconding of responsibility. We’ve already seen that their climate change strategy is na-uh. We’ve heard Bill English priming charities to pick up the human cost leaving beneficiaries 17K behind will do.

    Here there’s talk of an investor ‘pulling out’, but surely the buck has to stop with somebody? They’re in a business and that sounds like a BS excuse to me.

    These are contractual rights, workers property which they’ve already worked for being transferred to someone else. It’s not a gift or a donation. It is someone partially covering theft by someone else.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/133220032/supie-workers-to-receive-final-pay-after-substantial-anonymous-donation

    • Belladonna 7.1
      2 November 2023 at 12:54 pm

      I think this is to do with the insolvency provisions – where staff and contractors are considered to be unsecured creditors – and only get paid out after the secured creditors (typically banks, and other finance companies) have had their cut.

      I've felt for a long time that this is wrong. We see it happening every time one of the developers goes broke – the sub-contractor tradies don't get paid, can't retain (unpaid-for) goods and materials, and often struggle to even get their tools back off site.

      I'd like to see a law change, which would require companies to:

      • Bank annual leave entitlements as/when they are accrued – in a trust account.
      • Personal liability from directors/owners if staff payments (e.g. IRD PAYE, Kiwisaver, annual leave entitlements) are not correctly accounted for and transferred [It's too easy for companies to 'raid' this money to cover up profitability issues]. And, if that means that the director/owner loses their house, my grief would be controllable.
      • Pay tradies/sub-contractors, in full, first, out of progress payments (not last, after the banks)
      • Ownership of goods/materials remains with the subcontractors, until paid for by the developer. Lack of timely payment can attract penalties.
      • In insolvency cases, direct liability to staff (wages) and subcontractors (work to date) is paid for, before secured creditors. If there is not enough in the current accounts to do this, then this can be clawed back from directors/owners. This should be administered by the Insolvency Practitioner, and immediate liens placed on all property owned by (or in a beneficiary trust for) the directors/owners, until this charge is fulfilled.
      • Director responsibility should be backdated 6 months – no resigning the week before, to get out of the responsibility.

      And the kind of financial sleight of hand, where all of the business assets are owned by one ‘company’ while the staff are paid by another (with no assets) – should be a legal fiction so far as the Insolvency Practitioner is concerned (i.e. it might make financial sense for a profitable company, but shouldn’t be a way of evading responsibilities for one being wound up).

      https://archive.ph/LGjf4
      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/supie-collapse-why-online-supermarket-didnt-have-enough-cash-to-pay-staff/LSRPISR3AZERLCUZ7HPDDPFUHU/

      • Johnr 7.1.1
        2 November 2023 at 7:06 pm

        I'm with you Bella. I've been fortunate enough to never have been affected.

        But I've seen so many of my workmates and tradie colleagues go to the wall that I'm surprised more violence hasn't occurred.

        Something has to change or we peasantry won't survive

        • Belladonna 7.1.1.1
          2 November 2023 at 7:29 pm

          I haven't been personally affected either, but had many conversations with friends and family who are in the 'tradie' economy. The way that developers continue to (legally) rort them is astounding (AND has a major impact on building costs- since the builders have to cover the costs incurred as a result of the poor-business-practice of the developers).

          Yet to see any political party brave enough to address this issue. Right won't – because it would be a 'bar' to legitimate capitalism – and they don't want to piss-off the major developers, banks and financiers involved; the Left won't – because they regard self-employed as mini-capitalists – and it's much less important than the chardonnay-socialist issue of the day.

          This is the kind of ‘working class’ policy which really matters in West Auckland (and the equivalents in other cities).

      • Patricia Bremner 7.1.2
        2 November 2023 at 9:35 pm

        Agree Belladonna. That would be responsible.

      • newsense 7.1.3
        3 November 2023 at 3:13 pm

        It’s the mindset of how that is reported too which prevents any change.

        People are considered ‘lucky’ to have a job, rather than they have skills which the employers need.

        Here we’ve seen a kind ‘donation’ to cover someone’s IMO verging on criminal negligence. The focus is on how plucky the company is and how good the donator is rather than the basically theft of pay and holiday pay.

        We’re told an investor went for cigarettes and didn’t come back. How is that allowable? I’ve not seen that questioned or explained.

        We’ve seen the slow pace of justice with Mainfreight. We need to see a change in reporting and mindset to allow a climate for any other changes. As you say without action by unions and worksites, don’t expect anything to happen. This election was a classic of what couldn’t be done.

  8. Adrian 8
    2 November 2023 at 11:56 am

    What makes you. presume a Nat paid the donation..? More a leftie action I would have thought..

    • Belladonna 8.1
      2 November 2023 at 4:19 pm

      I don't think there was any assumption in the original comment over whether the donor was left or right. However, having 150K in ready money, may inform that conclusion.

  9. SPC 9
    2 November 2023 at 1:05 pm

    Case 11 of the UNGA oversight of UNSC dereliction of purpose

    Russia begins its end of year bombardment of civilian areas of Ukraine.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67283305

  10. observer 10
    2 November 2023 at 1:52 pm

    Headline, coming soon … the future of the "waka jumping law".

    It's gone under the radar so far, but if/when there is some kind of deal between National and NZF, there might be some amusing amnesia:

    National Party electoral spokesman Nick Smith said the bill was “the worst” of the entire term of Parliament and was passed solely because Peters was worried about a repeat of his term in power in the late 1990s, when several of his MPs split off to keep the Jenny Shipley-led government intact.

    “This law change is the product of the paranoia of one member who simply wants the power to be able to fire his caucus as a consequence of his personal experience in 1996, and never in a democracy should our electoral law be dominated by one particular person's vendetta and experience.”

    Dead rat spat back up: Green Party vote to repeal waka jumping law with National, infuriating Winston Peters | Stuff.co.nz

    It's such a bad law that Luxon will scrap it accept it.

    • Sanctuary 10.1
      3 November 2023 at 3:20 pm

      The Waka jumping law is one of those things everyone in the governing elites hate because it dares to hold them to a standard of behaviour that the vast majority of ordinary people find completely reasonable.

  11. Incognito 11
    2 November 2023 at 3:54 pm

    Dame Anne Salmond has written a piece against holding a referendum on Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/ideasroom/dame-anne-salmond-on-treaty-referendum

    Her third objection is “a referendum at a time when the descendants of the rangatira who signed Te Tiriti are a relatively small minority in the wider population would give them relatively little say in the matter”.

    I agree with this objection 100% (cf. my comment https://thestandard.org.nz/seymours-bad-faith-treaty-policy/#comment-1969019).

    • observer 11.1
      2 November 2023 at 4:08 pm

      I wouldn't believe Luxon on many things, but I do believe him when he says he won't have a Treaty referendum. Buying a huge row, to achieve nothing? Not just a question of principle: among the many negative consequences, he'd be losing members of his own caucus.

    • Ad 11.2
      2 November 2023 at 4:18 pm

      Luxon is in a prime position to form the pathway to our bicentennary with the Treaty just 17 years away. If anyone remembers Sesqui 1990.

      Ardern did her honourable best to build a new bridge to engagement with te ao Maori with the formation of Matariki.

      If the last two years have shown us anything, it's shown us some really dumb ways to engage the broader population about the Treaty (not assisted by bad faith actors from within parts of Maori and European alike touring and marching up and down the country).

      I expect Luxon will concentrate on fiscal and economic rectitude issues, alas.

      I have a lot of faith in the whole of the people of New Zealand that we can hold an intelligent conversation about our constitutional arrangements, and that they include the Treaty.

      It took both sides of the House to show we did it with MMP, we did it with the Honours system, we did it with the Supreme Court.

      If Labour, Greens and Maori Party said that together they are preparing for 2040 in a manner that won't silence people and will lead to a clear constitutional platform, then the collective left would immediately have something to work on together going into 2025.