Category: Constitutional Reform
The decision by New Zealanders to keep MMP means that any changes that come as a result of the “review” of MMP will be those the politicians prefer to implement. This piece discusses the scope of the “review”, some desirable changes to MMP and the need for our politicians to put any changes to our voting system to voters.
By agreeing to the Maori Party’s demand for a Constitutional Review, as part of their 2008 and 2011 Confidence and Supply Agreements, the National Party is advancing the agenda of radical forces determined to change our constitutional arrangements in their favour. Their goal is to elevate the Treaty of Waitangi into ‘supreme’ law to give tribal members superior rights and privileges that would forever be outside the reach of elected Members of Parliament who might want to change it in the future.
Control over the interpretation and symbolism of the Treaty of Waitangi was one of the most effective of the brokerage mechanisms used by the emergent neotribal elite. It enabled a strategic march through the institutions of a democratic society by nondemocratic neotraditionalist forces.
The Speech from the Throne is delivered by the Queen’s representative, the Governor General, at the opening of a new Parliament. Traditionally, the speech sets out the reasons for summoning Parliament after a General Election by announcing in broad terms, the outline of the new government's legislative programme for the next three years.
Some huge challenges lie ahead. In a country where all New Zealanders, irrespective of racial origin should have equal status and equal rights, the Maori Party - once more a partner in government – wants to take the country further down the path to racial separatism. Using the fallacious argument that they have special governance rights as Treaty ‘partners’ with the Crown – a view that is already endemic within the government service – the Maori Party wants to enshrine the Maori seats and the Treaty of Waitangi in a new New Zealand Constitution. This would give superior rights to the Maori elite in the governance of New Zealand, turning them into a permanent ruling class and everyone else into second class citizens. Their plan must be derailed
The Rugby World Cup is showing New Zealanders what is possible when we all unite behind a common purpose. Imagine how far we could go as a country if we all got behind a goal like lifting our living standards! Becoming a wealthy county again would certainly be within our reach.
For some years I taught constitutional law at the University of Canterbury. I was also a debater, in those days when debating was a more popular activity than it is now ~ and it would happen, from time to time, when I appeared to speak in a debate, that the chairman, in introducing me, would tell the audience that I was a remarkable man, because (among other things) I lectured in constitutional law, and this in a country that did not possess a constitution! I would smile politely at this merry jest and pass on to the subject of my discourse.
A Maori academic who says that immigration by whites should be restricted because they pose a threat to race relations due to their white supremacist attitudes, is leading an Independent Maori Working Group on constitutional reform. According to Iwi Chairs Forum member Margaret Mutu the group will develop a constitution to be given to the Crown as a model for New Zealand. She claims that their working party has the blessing of not only the Maori Party leader Pita Sharples, but also National Party leader and Prime Minister John Key.[1]
As a representative democracy New Zealand’s system of government is supposed to be ‘of the people, by the people, for the people’. So why do our ruling parties go to such great lengths to prevent the public from having a proper say on how we are being governed? With an election just around the corner, isn’t it time that voters collectively demanded the right to hold governments to account?
I have been campaigning for more direct democracy in our political system since 2003, but just recently I looked at some old newspaper clippings from 1985 and realised I was even talking about referendums way back then. Having an interest or passion for politics is rather peculiar in this day and age. It is not uncommon at the first signs of a political discussion, for the person standing in front of me to have an immediate attack of ocular revulsion (eye rolling). I often wonder why I've always had this interest.
Loading ...
