Open mike 14/03/2010

8 comments on “Open mike 14/03/2010 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. caring citizen 1

   14 March 2010 at 11:41 am

   I found this article on the Radio NZ website (link – http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2010/03/13/1247f806c186 ) and am extremely concerned that now there seems to be an overt attempt to shut down any speech making publicity from the left. I guess we always knew it was there because Granny Herald is allowing the new ‘Daddy” state make decisions for us with impugnity, but now we actually have evidence. It seems there was a deliberate move made to prevent Carmel Sepuloni from speaking to her constituency at the Pasifika Festival yesterday. I wonder if this will be in the Herald. On past record I believe not.

   Key’s super-city representation claim rejected
   Updated at 7:56am on 14 March 2010

   The Tongan Advisory Council says Prime Minister John Key is on another planet if he thinks Maori and Pacific Islanders will not struggle to be elected to Auckland’s super city-council.

   The Race Relations Commission has said the super-city will not do enough to ensure Maori and Pacific Islanders have a say.

   But Mr Key says ward-based elections for the council will ensure diversity.

   Tongan Advisory Council chairman Melino Maka says Pacific Islanders will be worse off under the super-city.

   He says both Maori and Pacific Islanders need dedicated seats on the new council.

   Mr Key, speaking at Saturday’s Pasifika Festival, said the turnout at the festival showed there was a strong Pacific voice. He said ward-based elections would allow people to choose candidates that represent their part of Auckland.

   Labour MP’s bias claim
   Meanwhile, Labour Party MP Carmel Sepuloni says some Auckland City councillors and the National Party worked to court the Pacific Island vote by trying to exclude opposition MPs from the Pasifika Festival.

   The Tongan MP says that at Saturday’s Pasifika Festival she went up to the stage to say a few words to her community. But organisers told her they were under instructions not to allow any politician on stage except Mr Key or Auckland Mayor John Banks.

   Ms Sepuloni says the council and National Party sought to use the event as a platform for themselves.

   The council says no instruction whatsoever was given to prevent Labour MPs from going up on stage.
   • prism 1.1

     14 March 2010 at 1:49 pm

     That’s really what could be called stage managing. Banksie such a cute little nickname, would find it very agreeable theatre.
2. marty mars 2

   14 March 2010 at 2:10 pm

   When TVNZ opens an item with these words

   “At a time when the government is considering opening up more conservation land to mineral exploration, Rio Tinto is giving some back.”

   http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/rio-tinto-returns-mining-land-community-3414287

   you know the mining pr phoney war is over

   http://mars2earth.blogspot.com/2010/03/mining-pr-campaign-begins-in-earnest.html
3. Quoth the Raven 3

   14 March 2010 at 2:46 pm

   This article in New Scientist talks of a paper that argues that commons forests outperform government controlled forests.

   The authors suggest that locals would also make a better job of managing common pastures, coastal fisheries and water supplies. They argue that their findings contradict a long-standing environmental idea, called the “tragedy of the commons”, which says that natural resources left to communal control get trashed. In fact, says Agrawal, “communities are perfectly capable of managing their resources sustainably”.

   This links in with the work of Elinor Ostrom who won the Nobel prize in economics last year:

   Elinor Ostrom has challenged the conventional wisdom that common property is poorly managed and should be either regulated by central authorities or privatized. Based on numerous studies of user-managed fish stocks, pastures, woods, lakes, and groundwater basins, Ostrom concludes that the outcomes are, more often than not, better than predicted by standard theories.
   • Jenny 3.1

     14 March 2010 at 3:42 pm

     QTR am I right in concluding that your comments are a critique of the Seabed and Foreshore legislation?
     • Quoth the Raven 3.1.1

       14 March 2010 at 3:47 pm

       Hadn’t thought about it in that context. One could well draw that conclusion I suppose. I was just showing some evidence that private commons ownership is preferable to government control.
       • Jenny 3.1.1.1

         14 March 2010 at 5:23 pm

         Mmmm, interesting. I really thought that is what you were alluding too. In fact I thought I was being stupid to ask what I thought was an obvious question.
       • Galeandra 3.1.1.2

         14 March 2010 at 8:47 pm

         By ‘private commons ownership’ perhaps you mean management by ‘local’ or ‘user’ citizens?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS