by frog
Published in THE GAME by frog on Thu, July 16th, 2009
Tags: general debate
General Debate, July 16, 2009
Published: July 16, 2009
13 Comments
Hide comments with a score of
or less
Hide comments with a score of or less
Leave a Reply
Please use 
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
“Amid all the Maori Party talk about the foreshore and seabed being “stolen” (a palpable lie), it is worth reminding ourselves of the act’s purpose: “To preserve the public foreshore and seabed in perpetuity as the common heritage of all New Zealanders”.
That phrase, “the common heritage of all New Zealanders”, offers a clear path forward for the Labour Party. A path which, on the vexed question of Maori- Pakeha relations, would lead it in a new, and much more wholesome direction than the path it has been following since the early 1980s.
Essentially, for the past quarter-century, the Labour Party has been driven by the politics of identity – the ideologies underpinning the new social movements of anti-racism, feminism, gay rights, the rights of the disabled, and environmentalism.
These were the causes of the largely middle-class, university educated professionals who poured into the Labour Party and (to a lesser extent) the trade union movement, in response to the authoritarian and confrontational political style of the Muldoon-led National government of 1975-84.
And, just as these new middle- class professionals swiftly overwhelmed and supplanted the working-class membership of the “old” Labour Party, their new identity politics overwhelmed and supplanted the socially conservative, but economically radical, working-class politics that had guided the party since its birth in 1916.
The great problem with identity politics is that it takes as its focus a series of factors for which the individual is not responsible, and over which he or she has no control. Our race, gender and sexuality are attributes we inherit – they have nothing to do with personal choice, and, for the most part, they are factors we can do nothing about.
This is less of a problem when, in terms of socio- economic, cultural and political status, you’re on the debit side of the historical ledger, because then the world can be forced to make good the discrepancy.
If, however, you’re not black, female, or gay, life can get pretty rough.
White, heterosexual, males, in particular, are expected to pay, and go on paying, until the scales are evened-up.
But, 25 years on, it has become painfully clear that the application of identity politics has benefited no-one so much as the social strata that promoted it in the first place – middle-class, university educated professionals.
Working-class women still earn less than their brothers. Working-class Maori still fill our prisons.
Working-class gays are still persecuted. Working-class disabled people are still shut out from a full and equal life. Working-class environments remain bleak.
That’s why emphasising our common heritage and, more importantly, promoting our common future, promises to pay such hefty political dividends.
Apart from emphasising the things that unite us – our common humanity – it’s a political credo which reaffirms human beings’ ability to change their world.
Our place in this country need not be dictated by an accident of birth – whether we are Maori or Pakeha; but by how much each of us is willing to contribute to the goals that we, as a nation, set ourselves.
If Mr Goff and Labour refuse to seize this opportunity to democratise and collectivise the politics of national aspiration, then you may be certain that Winston Peters and NZ First will grab it with both hands.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/columnists/2582684/Winston-opens-a-can- of-worms
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
1. Did anyone read Good Motive, but Bad Law By Grant Illingsworth QC (Chch Press Wednesday, July 15, 2009)? Just to paraphrase the article he doesn’t agree with Sue bradford and Toad, so he’s wrong (of course)
2. “Having suffered initial rebuff for outright Maori tribal sovereignty (tino rangatiratanga) demands, the Maori sovereignty movement, of which the Maori Party is an instrument, appears to have opted instead for a hydra-headed approach to gaining sovereignty by stealth through myriad claims pressed on multiple fronts and through different venues and processes.
One example would be the way the Department of Conservation has become progressively infiltrated by and subordinated to Maori tribal interests.
The total picture of what is going on becomes lost in the maze of complexity that has resulted.
This loss has been compounded by active collusion between Maori claimants, the Treaty of Waitangi industry, and successive governments to shut other New Zealanders out of the discussion and rely instead on camouflage, ambush and fait accompli tactics to get their way.
But just as the foreshore and seabed issue has been driven from a Maori tribal sovereignty perspective and has implications for the cost structure and opportunity costs of the New Zealand economy, so too has Wai 262.
The Maori sovereignty objectives of the tribal claimants in Wai 262 are set out in the Tribunal’s statement of claim:
“For the purpose of this statement of issues, kaitiaki in respect of taonga works, biological and genetic resources in indigenous and/or taonga species, the environment, te reo Maori, tikanga Maori and matauranga Maori, means the individual(s), whanau, hapu or iwi (as the case may be) whose relationship of kaitiakitanga and tino rangatiratanga with those taonga gives rise to an obligation and a corresponding right to:
protect
preserve
control
regulate
use
develop and/or
transmit
those taonga and the relationship of kaitiakitanga with them; and the kaitiakitanga is intended to have a corresponding meaning.”
“For the purposes of this statement of issues ‘tino rangatiratanga’ includes the right of kaitiaki to make and enforce customs in relation to their taonga.”
It is a fair bet that the demand for Maori tribes to be able to exercise the sorts of sovereign powers – especially those of regulation and enforcement – claimed in Wai 262 would be top of the list for foreshore and seabed rights as well.”
“The extent of claims over native species and natural resources is spelled out in a non-exhaustive list of “Taonga Species” given in an appendix to the Wai 262 statement of claim:
“Kumara (Ipomoea batatas), pohutukawa (Metrosideros species), koromiko (Hebe species), puawananga (Clematis species), tuna (eels), indigenous forests, pupuharakeke (Placostylus hongii), tuatara, kereru (New Zealand native pigeon), tohora (whales), indigenous fish species, freshwater and marine flora, ngutukaka (kaka beak), kiekie, parareke, toropata, manuka, ti kouka, kanuka, totara, matai, whinau, pingao, toetoe, kawakawa, tutu, mamaku, tui, titi, New Zealand flaxes (Phormium species), kiore (Pacific rat), tuere, kawau, tipori (Cordyline fruticosa), toheroha, kokowai (red ochre), karengo, kuaka.””
“There is also evident overlap in the implications of granting Maori tribes property and regulatory rights over the foreshore and seabed and doing the same for the likes of “indigenous fish species” and “marine flora” in the Wai 262 shopping list.”
http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/michael-coote/ticking-time-bomb-awaits-mo st-unlikely-alliance
Links:
[1] http://www.waitangitribunal.govt.nz/doclibrary/public/wai262/SOI/SOI.p df
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Go the Toads!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Because it has interesting ramifications to ALL organizational efforts
http://www.bbsonline.org/Preprints/OldArchive/bbs.dunbar.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
so biculturalism is anathema to socialisation?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“the Maori sovereignty movement… appears to have opted instead for a hydra-headed approach to gaining sovereignty by stealth through myriad claims pressed on multiple fronts and through different venues and processes”
Actually this agenda wasn’t created by the Maori sovereignty movement (which is pretty small these days) it was a creation of the governemt which decided that a Maori movement could have its teeth pulled by offering up compensation to particular iwi through a number of processes – the Waitangi tribunual being the primary one. Many Maori may have bought into this, but they didn’t create the situation.
“Our place in this country need not be dictated by an accident of birth – whether we are Maori or Pakeha; but by how much each of us is willing to contribute to the goals that we, as a nation, set ourselves.”
This is just Chris having yet another swipe at Maori by dubbing anything connected with Maori “identity politics”, which seems to be his personal hang-up. Funnily enough after appealing to “our common humanity”, he immediately starts offering to nationalism – which is simply identity politics that has a longer pedigree.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
What do the Greens have to say about the Government (DIA) censoring our Internet? Also see NZ Herald article.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Dame Sian Elias has ‘condemned ‘most of the Government’s law and order policies’, calling them, ‘punative and knee jerk’.
Corrections Minister Judith Colins has declined to comment, but Sensible Sentencing Trust Hothead Garth McVicar calls her suggestion,
‘totally corrupt’.
Yes, that seems likely, the views of our first female cheif judge, with 40 years experience, ‘totally corrupt’.
That Garth! What a scally-wag!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Now that NOHSAC’s gone…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“What a scally-wag!”LOL greenflee coming from you then toads rather odd link I am convinced the greens need serious mental health treatment.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
dadfooooooorrjustice!
Where’ve ya been dad? I saw your nasty little debut here yesterday – you got wiped by the Frog and quite rightly. Toady got your pecker up with his attempt to clean up some waste oil eh! Funny what squirmed out of the woodwork over that. Go hard Toady!
As for McVicar (does anyone trust vicars these days?) he’s a lost soul, he is. The Dame .v. the Vicar – Sian Elias’ 40 years experience against the Vicars ill-informed rant? Hmmm…let’s see…..
I know! I’ll as d4j, famous for his balanced views on such matters…now…how to get hold of him..???
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I am at the Christchurch Courthouse everyday greenflee. As a McKemzie Friend I am extremely busy on the front line as you can imagine. The Dame has a horse or two running tomorrow, the word is on the grapewine they ready to go. Must go judge won’t wait. More cannon fodder boom boom.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Well thanks d4j, I’d never heard of a ‘McKenzie Friend’, having kept an un-blotted copy book all this time, but now I know.
Are you a Basil Brush fan also? Wonders! They never cease!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)