If you insist on a pedantic interpretation, then of course the treaty will never be honoured. But you’re the only one doing this. Maori certainly aren’t.

jh, this is about the fifth time you’ve posted essentially the same question in the last few weeks. We’ve taken some time in answering you, but you refuse to consider that honouring the Treaty doesn’t have to mean going back in time 170 years. Sorry, but I for one am getting bored. Maybe you should just read a few books.
…………..
You can’t change the terms just because honoring the treaty is unrealistic. The Treaty states that chiefs maintain their tino rangitiratnga and guarantee undisturbed possession of forests and fisheries. That is what the treaty says… you are suggesting new terms which suggests a different treaty.

It looked good amongst the turgid competition. Gotta say…..

Anti-children:
Smacking law reduces discipline, increases misbehaviour in those children that don’t respond well to “time-out” style punishments, which in the end will be far worse for children than if they had had a quick smack when they were young.

Pro-greenwash but anti-environment:
Supported ETS, sounds environmental but does nothing for the environment and costs us money we could use to actually help the environment.

Reasonable summary of the Green’s policies in my opinion. Well-meaning but impractical.

I come over here for the discussion however, because although the Green policies are often flawed the Greens and the posters here often have a real concern for the environment and people, and it is interesting to discuss differing perspectives of how to get to the solution that we both tend to want. I also come over here for discussion on environmental issues because it is the most active NZ political environmental blog. And you seem a nice bunch of people on the whole, however much we disagree!

Furthermore I know the Green party do actually care about the environment, and MPs do seem to read this blog, and if I can in some small ways influence their thinking on environmental issues then it could be helpful, they are actually voting on these issues, hence my involvement in the ETS discussions here for example.

Second point: What life for those children in the peoster under the Treaty as the greens
“confirm the original Maori version to be the correct one”
and that guarantees tino rangitiratanga and “undisturbed possession of forests and fisheries: which covers all the sea land , national parks, conservation estate in NZ.
During the Foreshore and seabed hikoi they hold up a sign saying “Honor The Treaty”……… or don’t they really mean it?

I will have a read…

Um,

http://www.greens.org.nz/policy/economic