Thoreau was in New Zealand?

If not, he wasn’t a pakeha.

Nor was Sun Tsu.

Like or Dislike: 0  1 (-1)

SPC:
“Well I suppose, it’s only natural the Green Party would connect a number of principles together – continuing local ownership, guarantees to preserve the local environment and co-operation with the local indigenous people.”

so what are those principles:
1. Continuing local ownership.
Starting in 1840 establish which tribal group held which area and formalise title.
Divide the map into common areas versus those areas where “owned” by people have indigenous ancestry.
Allow iwi to apply resource rentals to the forests and fisheries and police their territory.

2. guarantees to preserve the local environment.
control development and resource extraction. This is a violation of tino rangitiratanga.
If you believe that Maori are “kaitiaki” you don’t need guarantees.

3. co-operation with the local indigenous people.

but not Thoreau as he is a pakeha.

Like or Dislike: 1  1 (0)

“Maori” want title to the foreshore and seabed but the greens like to play this down as a little bit here and there or a minor background role. Over time the relationship between Maori “owners” and “visitors” would likely change and establish a norm. If there is friction these issues will grow as they do in disputes between neighbours.

Like or Dislike: 1  0 (+1)

I think the greens proposal to change how maori ownership of the seabed/foreshore would work is a sensible change. I cant see how maori would be angry that they would get the customary rights the want for their land and the only condition being not to sell it. After all isnt land more important to them than money?

Like or Dislike: 1  2 (-1)

Well I suppose, it’s only natural the Green Party would connect a number of principles together – continuing local ownership, guarantees to preserve the local environment and co-operation with the local indigenous people.

It’s unsurprising that a property owner/claimant would seek absolute sovereignty over their property, and simply offer only their word that this would maintain local ownership and preserve the environment.

After all, the ACT party and Greens were there only political support on the issue and they swing between the two parties as it suits. As the ETS legislation showed, self-interest is a powerful force and sometimes – unless there are guarantees – the environment comes second.

Like or Dislike: 0  3 (-3)

“After years of discussion the issue remains how to create a constitution based on Te Tiriti o Waitangi and what that might look like. Tangata whenua are moving on this issue and the challenge is how we respond. Then there is the necessity to replace the Foreshore and Seabed Act with a strong Te Tiriti based law that upholds customary rights and looks after the coast for the benefit of all people.”
—-

“GREENS’ FORESHORE COMPROMISE THREAT TO TINO RANGATIRATANGA

A spokesman for the New Zealand Maori Council says a proposal by the Green’s to prevent the sale of customary foreshore and seabed land over-rides Maori tinorangitiratanga rights.

The Greens have suggested an amendment to the Maori Land Act to the panel looking into the Foreshore and Seabed laws but council spokesman Maanu Paul says it is not a good idea.

“It says that tino rangatiratanga for Mori ought to be conditional. That you ough not to have the power to determine the destiny of your takutai moana, of your foreshore and seabed. That it ought to be tied so that you can’t sell it. Tino rangatioratanga over any treaty asset under article two has to be unfettered,” Mr Paul says.

He says the proposal involves tinkering with the law to accommodate unfounded pakeha fears of how Maori will handle settlement money.

He says the selling of assets is something pakeha do while treaty settlements show that Maori don’t sell off their land but look after it for future generations”

In other words the greens support a nobbled tino rangitiratanga (one that they have a say in)….

you can have T/T as long as we agree!!!

Like or Dislike: 2  2 (0)

Like or Dislike: 4  1 (+3)

“Some of the most influential thinkers in this country’s constitutional development”…Moana Jackson, Annette Sykes..

Of course I know the Greens deny the testimony of those who were present when Annette Sykes celebrated the terrorist attacks of 9-11.

Let’s be clear, if the likes of some of those thinkers got their way, it wouldn’t be a very pretty sight for many property owners who are not of the race those individuals consider superior.

Speaks absolute volumes about where a Green MP and by implication the Green Party positions itself politically with far-left Marxist celebrators of terrorism.

Like or Dislike: 5  3 (+2)

Being surrounded by watermelon ice creams was pretty sweet.

Like or Dislike: 3  3 (0)

He whakautu tuturu tena e bliss!

Like or Dislike: 2  4 (-2)

Like or Dislike: 4  0 (+4)

People

Stop feeding the trolls!

Like or Dislike: 1  3 (-2)

It’s that ugly boil on your shoulders, Bro.

Oops, sorry, that’s to upoko.

Like or Dislike: 7  5 (+2)

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Like or Dislike: 6  20 (-14)

@samiam

Better than Whales (or at least better than the one in court today).

@big bro

Te Reo is an official language of New Zealand.

Like or Dislike: 5  4 (+1)

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Like or Dislike: 7  25 (-18)

And toads are good looking?

Like or Dislike: 1  0 (+1)

Like or Dislike: 3  0 (+3)

@kahikatea – probably because it is ugly (the NZ one, that is), although I think this whole flag debate is a distraction from the real constitutional issues the country should be debating.

@toad February 8, 2010 at 3:24 PM – And he did.

Like or Dislike: 4  5 (-1)

Like or Dislike: 4  1 (+3)