|
|
Post by GO30 on Feb 23, 2024 12:51:00 GMT 12
The Waitangi Tribunal is one of the main organisations that had helped a lot in making NZ is racist as fuck and as long as it exists there is zero sign of any change coming.
A LOT of it's output promises Maori false hope and sets expectations that will never ever be achieved. Not to mention all the troughers rolling in the WT gravy are directly contributing to Maori homelessness, poor health and shit outcomes, along with all others on this land.
If I had a job at the WT tribunal and someone asked me what I did I think I'd prefer to answer 'I stomp on kittens in-between impaling puppies on sticks'.
|
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Feb 23, 2024 13:01:25 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Feb 23, 2024 14:22:08 GMT 12
The Waitangi Tribunal is one of the main organisations that had helped a lot in making NZ is racist as fuck and as long as it exists there is zero sign of any change coming. A LOT of it's output promises Maori false hope and sets expectations that will never ever be achieved. Not to mention all the troughers rolling in the WT gravy are directly contributing to Maori homelessness, poor health and shit outcomes, along with all others on this land. If I had a job at the WT tribunal and someone asked me what I did I think I'd prefer to answer 'I stomp on kittens in-between impaling puppies on sticks'. No. The government which passed the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 which set the Waitangi Tribunal up and gave it its power is to blame. The Waitangi Tribunal exists because of no other reason than that legislation. And further, it wasn't till 1977!? that the Waitangi Tribunal was given the power to hear claims prior to 1975. Again the Government of the day gave it that power... Government can give and government can take away. But they won't, because they are spineless and won't walk the talk... Pretty sure it was Muldoon... But those brain cells are broken. |
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Feb 23, 2024 16:14:54 GMT 12
The Waitangi Tribunal is one of the main organisations that had helped a lot in making NZ is racist as fuck and as long as it exists there is zero sign of any change coming. A LOT of it's output promises Maori false hope and sets expectations that will never ever be achieved. Not to mention all the troughers rolling in the WT gravy are directly contributing to Maori homelessness, poor health and shit outcomes, along with all others on this land. If I had a job at the WT tribunal and someone asked me what I did I think I'd prefer to answer 'I stomp on kittens in-between impaling puppies on sticks'. No. The government which passed the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 which set the Waitangi Tribunal up and gave it its power is to blame. The Waitangi Tribunal exists because of no other reason than that legislation. And further, it wasn't till 1977!? that the Waitangi Tribunal was given the power to hear claims prior to 1975. Again the Government of the day gave it that power... Government can give and government can take away. But they won't, because they are spineless and won't walk the talk... Pretty sure it was Muldoon... But those brain cells are broken. Original act was passed by the Rowling Labour government October 1975, just before they were voted out Power to hear claims pre 1975 granted by Lange Labour government, Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act 1985 For once we agree on something! |
|
|
|
Post by eri on Feb 23, 2024 16:19:48 GMT 12
Crown lawyers have told the Tribunal a Bill to disestablish the authority could be introduced as early as next Tuesday – just days before an urgent hearing into the Māori Health Authority begins in Wellington.
If that happened, the urgent hearing could be dismissed, because the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider issues that were before Parliament.
GOOD
|
|
|
|
Post by DuckMaster on Feb 23, 2024 17:41:48 GMT 12
Crown lawyers have told the Tribunal a Bill to disestablish the authority could be introduced as early as next Tuesday – just days before an urgent hearing into the Māori Health Authority begins in Wellington.
If that happened, the urgent hearing could be dismissed, because the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider issues that were before Parliament.
GOOD Wow. |
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Feb 29, 2024 8:06:43 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by fish on Feb 29, 2024 8:28:41 GMT 12
That is great, but I do wonder when the govt will start actually doing something, creating something, or improving things? All they are doing in their 100 day plan is dismantling what the last lot did. As a country we are never going to advance if, each election cycle, the new lot undo EVERYTHING the last lot got done. I mean, full credit to Luxon, he actually has a plan (Unlike Jacinda did, or didn't as the case was), and he is implementing it with a strict programme. But I'm not seeing any net benefit. Just a demolition job. Politically, the place is starting to look like the Chch red-zone. Just a pile of rouble with some rats running around. At some stage this govt is going to have to actually start creating something. All I've heard so far is urgent inquiries and specialist investigative committees. (note, they are being very careful not to call them 'focus groups'). |
|
|
|
Post by harrytom on Feb 29, 2024 10:29:34 GMT 12
That is great, but I do wonder when the govt will start actually doing something, creating something, or improving things? All they are doing in their 100 day plan is dismantling what the last lot did. As a country we are never going to advance if, each election cycle, the new lot undo EVERYTHING the last lot got done. I mean, full credit to Luxon, he actually has a plan (Unlike Jacinda did, or didn't as the case was), and he is implementing it with a strict programme. But I'm not seeing any net benefit. Just a demolition job. Politically, the place is starting to look like the Chch red-zone. Just a pile of rouble with some rats running around. At some stage this govt is going to have to actually start creating something. All I've heard so far is urgent inquiries and specialist investigative committees. (note, they are being very careful not to call them 'focus groups'). Wont supply classrooms but tax cuts still going ahead.No action as far as the nurse shortages,plenty applying but getting denied.Maybe introduce a bond system where those from overseas can get up to speed Act wants to bring assault type weapons after a qualifying period.Wants to undo the Treaty. NZF doing away with smokefree legislation.Cameras on fishing vessels gone or going. Nothing really coming out to get the country going,its all a wish list or as you said,undoing previous Govt policies. Only few days left of the 100days and nothing set in concrete. |
|
|
|
Post by Cantab on Feb 29, 2024 13:56:31 GMT 12
Patience, I'm pretty confident the coalition has a plan mapped out, probably stretching through the next few election cycles.
These people aren't stupid.
6years takes a lot of fixing.
Its only been 3 months.
Definitely entertaining watching them wind up the lefties.
|
|
|
|
Post by jim on Mar 1, 2024 9:34:04 GMT 12
some lobby groups doing good work - in my inbox this morning from Elliot Ikilei ...
Just a quick note to introduce myself as the newest member of the Hobson's Pledge team.
A quick bit about myself: I am a husband, dad, and proud New Zealander. I have ancestors from Niue, England, and Tonga, and I hail from the iwi, Te Āti Awa, and the hapū, Ngāti Raukawa. My kids are all that plus mixed with Chinese heritage. Multicultural!
I have worked with at-risk young people and communities for 20 years and have fought for equality in various contexts.
Like many Kiwis I've been watching the downward spiral of race relations in New Zealand in horror.
We live in one of the greatest countries on Earth with a proud history of democracy but now we find ourselves with different rights and representation based on if we have Māori blood.
I have Māori blood.I don't want this racist separatism.
Don and I go way back. We first met at a school in South Auckland where he was helping to empower the families and youth in our low-income areas. Since then, I have seen his work with Hobson's Pledge evolve over the years into a massive movement based on the simple idea that all Kiwis should have the same rights and representation. Nearly 150,000 Kiwis are signed up to Hobson's Pledge's supporter list.
I'm joining the Hobson's Pledge team because this is not the New Zealand I grew up in. The apartheid-style policies that have been implemented by recent governments have shocked me and then angered me.
I'm also joining because I have had enough of media and politicians acting like all Māori are on board with the extremism of Te Pati Māori.These extremist groups are attempting to rewrite history.
The recent Tūrangawaewae, Kīngitanga, and Waitangi events have shown that anti-equality groups will subject Kiwis to division, deception, manipulation and gaslighting.
We have a battle ahead to overcome what I consider to be a broken fourth estate.
They aren't going to report on this fairly.
They aren't going to be honest and say Hobson's Pledge stands for equality.
No.
They will print dramatic headlines and call us all racists.
I'm not going to take it lying down. I'm joining the team at Hobson's Pledge to stand up for justice, democracy and equality.
I don't care what your skin colour is or who your ancestors were. I will stand with you. Shoulder to shoulder and heart to heart.
He iwi tahi tatou. We are one people.
I'll be in touch soon
|
|
|
|
Post by ComfortZone on Mar 7, 2024 18:31:31 GMT 12
The email sent by Peter Williams writing from the Taxpayers Union regarding the direction National seems to be taking regarding our democracy and who owns the water. Everyone should be very wary of the direction National seem to be taking on this issue. We voted for it to be thrown out, now there appears to be a U turn taking place AGAIN
'This email is longer than usual, but is the most important email I've sent in a long time.
It relates to what many of us would consider the critical issue facing New Zealand: which direction the Government takes in terms of ‘Treaty principles’, democratic accountability, and so-called ‘partnership obligations’.
It is becoming clear the new Government is continuing down Labour's path of undemocratic and costly co-governance due to pressure from the bureaucracy who are using incorrect or misinterpreted legal advice to force co-governance into our democracy.
I am asking for your support so the Taxpayers' Union can mount a public campaign calling on the new Government to do what the last Government wouldn’t: release the legal advice underpinning this nonsense. New Zealanders need to know what reasons, if any, underpin the Wellington consensus. The people need it to discuss, analyse and debate whether the Treaty of Waitangi should really trump democratic decision making.
The legal assertions that led to Three Waters 'co-governance'
In recent years, opportunistic politicians (cheered on by captured Government officials) have claimed that the question of who “owns” water in New Zealand has become vexed.
Recall that the whole basis of Labour’s Three Waters policy was the claim by Nanaia Mahuta that she had received advice from Crown Law that said Three Waters-style ‘co-governance’ was required for the Crown to comply with its obligations under the Treaty.
To say that this legal interpretation was a departure from the historical norm that the Crown is sovereign (and therefore Parliament has full rights to decide the laws that will govern natural resources) is an understatement.
Last year, the Taxpayers' Union raised funds to support the Water Users' Group request to the High Court for a declaration of what the law actually says about the alleged partnership. The then Labour Government threw the kitchen sink at us. They even tried to get a court order suppressing further public reference (including in court) to Ms Mahuta’s claims about the legal advice on co-governance. That could have stopped us from talking to you about it. .
The Water Users’ Group asked the court to order disclosure of the advice, at least to the lawyers and the court, though it was information that every New Zealander should be free to see. The two KCs pointed out that Ms Mahuta had publicly disclosed not just the fact of the advice but the alleged conclusions to justify Three Waters. On conventional reasoning that had waived her claim to legal privilege. The Court refused to suppress mention of what had been Nanaia Mahuta's Three Waters Cabinet papers. After all, she had authorised making them publicly available on the Beehive website.
But it became clear that we would be throwing good money after bad to continue to support the judicial review. The High Court expressed no interest in seeing the advice, despite the ramifications on New Zealand's democracy! Nor did the Court of Appeal. And from reviewing some other recent decisions of senior courts, the Water Users’ Group lawyers could not be confident that orthodox and historical legal principles would prevail against the new judicial activism on the Treaty.
Nevertheless, supporting the legal case did at least force media and political attention to the potential corruption in the Three Waters governance proposals.
And eventually, National, ACT, and NZ First all committed to scrapping Three Waters.
Now the new Government appears to be falling into the same trap.
While we all hoped that Christopher Luxon's Government would decisively reject the path towards race-based rights that undermine democratic accountability of public services and natural resources, I’m sad to report that simply isn’t the case.
The legal underpinning and justification for Three Waters co-governance, weaponised by Labour and its allies in the media and bureaucracy, has not gone away. In fact, it's getting worse.
The Government is set to keep co-governance of fresh water: rivers, lakes, and rules for agricultural run off will be subject to 'te Mana o te Wai'
As far as we know this is not yet in the public domain, but the Taxpayers’ Union has been informed by a very reliable source within the Government that the reason the new Government has not repealed David Parker’s unworkable fresh water National Policy Statement is because ministers have been advised that changing the race-based (and impossibly high) water standards cannot be done without iwi consent.
These are the water quality standards that are so high that, according to expert advice to the last Government, it is not even certain rivers inside the national parks will meet them! Prior to the election, the parties now in Government committed to abolishing the standards (which also contain the race-based provisions) .
The Standards require regional councils to create plans that promote “te Mana o Te Wai” (literally meaning, ‘the Mana of the water’).
It's not even a disguised version of co-governance. Local council plans must allow tangata whenua to be "actively involved in decision-making processes relating to Maori freshwater values" as defined by relevant tangata whenua. Regional councils must also "work with tangata whenua to investigate the use of mechanisms ... such as transfers or delegations of power [and] joint management agreements."
It's not often the Taxpayers' Union march to the defence of local councils, but the requirements put them in an impossible position.
The social and economic wellbeing of communities who collect and use the water must come second to whatever a local iwi says upholds te Mana o Te Wai.
These obligations, introduced by the last Government, remain in place. That means regional councils up and down the country are spending millions of ratepayers' money to create these new policies that implement te Mana o Te Wai.
The election gave a very clear democratic mandate that these anti-democratic water provisions would be gone within the first 100 days. But officials are telling Ministers "you can't do that".
Ministry for the Environment officials told Ministers that Cabinet and Parliament cannot act unilaterally because iwi have property interests in water.
To put it simply: Just a few months into the new Government, Ministers are effectively being overruled by officials because officials are still asserting an apparent Treaty obligation that fresh water must be co-governed.
We can not allow what is just an assertion to become repeated enough so that it becomes "the truth"
A few weeks ago, Chris Hipkins made a claim on TVNZ’s Q&A that
“Māori have a legally established interest in the water, they went through the court process to do that. So the 50/50 co-governance model that we were proposing for the water entities was one way of recognising that.”
Chris Hipkins' claim is misleading at best. But there is a real risk that it becomes accepted as a (false) "fact". While there may have been recognition of the possibility or likelihood of interests in a limited number of water bodies, our lawyers tell us that there has been no legal establishment of rights that would equate to anything as radical as the race/ancestral privileges that were to have been conferred under the Treaty or euphemism known as co-governance.
Nevertheless, we now know that Ministries in Wellington believe it is the law and are using the assertion to overrule the new Government's democratic mandate.
I am asking for your support to mount a fight for democratic control of water, before it is too late.
The constitutional crisis Wellington don't want us to talk about
I do not think it is an exaggeration to state that there is a quiet constitutional crisis going on in Wellington – just who has sovereignty? Are officials responsible for carrying out the wishes of Parliament, or are they bound to some sort of supreme Treaty law or co-governance framework? I am sad to say that we are becoming more aware of areas where officials are operating under the latter.
All roads lead back to the infamous Three Waters advice which the public has still not seen. Will you help us force the new Government to make public the advice? Only then can New Zealanders can have the debate, and challenge the 'accepted wisdom' in Wellington that water must be co-governed.
The spring from which this co-governance concept was hatched was the original piece of Crown Law advice that Nanaia Mahuta referred to in her Cabinet Papers to claim that Three Waters co-governance was necessary for the Crown to comply with the Treaty. We say that New Zealanders ought to know what the Government is hearing from its own lawyers on the alleged Treaty Partnership obligations – especially now that the same argument is being used to undermine the promises made by the Government prior to the election.
I don't really care whether Nanaia Mahuta was telling the truth or not. This is much more important than political point scoring. If she over-egged or misled her Cabinet colleagues about the contents of the Crown Law advice, that would be a great first step in rebutting this nonsense! That's just one reason why we need to mount a public campaign to force the new Government to release it.
If the advice is as radical as Ms Mahuta, Mr Hipkins, and the bureaucrats all claim, then we must uncover the anti-democratic arguments to expose them for what they are: inconsistent with liberal democracy and democratically accountable government.
Unless we show that the arguments lack a real legal foundation, the assertion that the Treaty trumps the ability of Parliament to regulate water will soon become accepted as ‘law’. The public need to see the advice so there is a chance to offer counter-arguments.
And the key issue: what role should lawyers play in determining whether and how fast New Zealand’s democratic principles go down the river? Whatever the answer, it should be done in the open, not within Crown Law suppressed from public scrutiny.
Just like Three Waters, we need to force the politicians and media to ask the tough questions. Unless the Taxpayers’ Union do it, who else will?
The tough conversation New Zealand needs to have
You’ve seen the way the media (and, sadly, Christopher Luxon’s National Party) are desperate for New Zealand to avoid the so-called ‘Treaty Principles’ debate. Like you did for Three Waters, will you support the Taxpayers' Union so we can go where the media will not?
Christopher Luxon has little interest in furthering what he perceives to be a vexed race-issue in a media environment where it will not receive a fair hearing. Why would Mr Luxon go out on a limb, when what the media will term the “expert legal advice” could well force him to take a stand? That's why, ironically, the Prime Minister needs third party groups like the Taxpayers’ Union to lead this – just like we did for Three Waters. To do that, I am relying on your generous support.
Release the advice: Who owns water in New Zealand?
|
|
|
|
Post by sabre on Mar 8, 2024 8:22:27 GMT 12
The honeymoon is over. They were always going to push on with it though as it is a UN policy and Luxon is a devoted globalist.
|
|
|
|
Post by GO30 on Mar 10, 2024 13:15:36 GMT 12
All this whoha about real estate agents having to do a course about Maori looks like it'll blow up again, shes gonna fight.
I spoke to a close newish agent who has just got his RE accreditation about it. He did have to do the course, it was compulsory last year, now it is an option.
He said all he did, on the direction of some seniors, was start the videos then mute the volume and do other shit until it was finished. So it's very easily avoided but then there is a quiz following. He said no worries it was multi choice and you just keep ticking boxes until one answer turns green. Once all the quiz boxes are ticked green it will report back you have passed. I asked so did you learn anything? He said 'Sure did, how to use coloured resins in flash clear finished wooden tabletops'. I said 'Errr, WTF does that have to do with real estate and/or Maori?', 'Nothing, while the videos were playing I was watching you tube videos'.
One does wonder why they even bother having it or bitching about it if it is that very easily avoided.
|
|
|
|
Post by harrytom on Mar 10, 2024 15:56:02 GMT 12
All this whoha about real estate agents having to do a course about Maori looks like it'll blow up again, shes gonna fight. I spoke to a close newish agent who has just got his RE accreditation about it. He did have to do the course, it was compulsory last year, now it is an option. He said all he did, on the direction of some seniors, was start the videos then mute the volume and do other shit until it was finished. So it's very easily avoided but then there is a quiz following. He said no worries it was multi choice and you just keep ticking boxes until one answer turns green. Once all the quiz boxes are ticked green it will report back you have passed. I asked so did you learn anything? He said 'Sure did, how to use coloured resins in flash clear finished wooden tabletops'. I said 'Errr, WTF does that have to do with real estate and/or Maori?', 'Nothing, while the videos were playing I was watching you tube videos'. One does wonder why they even bother having it or bitching about it if it is that very easily avoided. Same as a work health n safety cant continue till all boxes get a tick,same deal multi choice.I did say waste of time,just tell hr I was away that week.then you get a pass. |
|
