Category: Politics
A solidarity picnic against a land protest at the Far North Taipa Sailing Club has shown what to do when authorities are reluctant to enforce a trespass order – take direct action. Since the organised protest picnic against a Maori land protest may indicate a turning point, the following quick look at 43 years of treatyist activism shows how the movement has relied upon occupations, marches, and litigation.
Maori protest action has created a pall over the Far North community of Taipa. It’s the one that is in the news at the moment, but everywhere Maori activists have been allowed by the authorities to take the law into their own hands, the community has been forced to suffer the consequences. Invariably, the protesters bully and intimidate local residents, making their lives a misery. Fuelled by the government’s proposed foreshore and seabed law, which would see Maori gain ownership of vast tracts of New Zealand’s coastline, such radical protest action may well become commonplace. If it is not nipped in the bud, locals will be denied the right to the peaceful enjoyment of their community through constant harassment and threats from Maori sovereignty activists, and local businesses will bear the financial cost.
In his iconic book “Free to Choose”, Milton Friedman explained the strategy used by many governments when they want to pass legislation that will benefit a minority of citizens at the expense of the majority: “When a special interest seeks benefits through highly visible legislation, it must not only clothe its appeal in the rhetoric of the general interest, it must persuade a significant segment of disinterested persons that its appeal has merit. Legislation recognised as naked self-interest will seldom be adopted”.
Opinion Piece by Prof. Roger Bowden The new Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill brings to mind the old saying ‘marry in haste, repent at leisure’. The problem is that it’s the National and Maori parties that joined in unholy matrimony, and it’s the rest of us will do the repenting. For this is a Bill hastily cobbled together and it shows.
“Conventional politicians ignore structural reform because they think they are in power to please people, and pleasing people does not involve making them face the hard questions. They use the latest polls to fine-tune their image and their policies, in order to achieve better results in the next poll. In other words, their aim is really to be in perpetual power. Their adherence to policies which focus on their immediate problems rather than the country’s future opportunities, brings accumulating difficulties. It becomes increasingly clear to people that the problems have not been solved and that opportunities have been thrown away. And so, such governments are voted out.”
Opinion Piece by Dr Don Brash As most readers know, the 2025 Taskforce was set up as a result of the coalition deal between the National and ACT parties immediately after the 2008 election. That deal involved the Government committing to policies which would lift living standards in New Zealand to the Australian level by 2025, and setting up an advisory group both to advise how best to achieve that goal and to report on progress towards it on an annual basis. Those two latter roles are the responsibility of the 2025 Taskforce.
Something very suspicious is happening. The Prime Minister and Attorney-General insist that their proposed new foreshore and seabed law will allow free public access, and accuse Dr Hugh Barr, of the Coastal Coalition, of telling ‘untruths’ when he disagrees. But when the Attorney-General says that he will nevertheless propose amending the bill in order to make things 100% clear, the Maori Party threatens to abandon its support for the bill, Hone Harawira calling ACT’s leader ‘a little fat redneck’. Why might Maori be angry, if things were only to be made clearer, and nothing were actually to change?
“A discussion document released today said the Government preferred to declare the foreshore to be public domain, but reassert the right of Maori to seek modified customary title through the courts. Mr Key said the public domain concept was a pragmatic way to heal a ‘weeping sore’, but if there was not wide support then the current law could remain in place. The intent here is to put this issue to bed in a satisfactory way to the bulk of New Zealanders...” - NZ Press Association, March 31 2010
The rescue of the 33 Chilean miners, trapped half a mile underground for almost ten weeks, has been a remarkable story of human innovation and progress. In another age, they would have all died. But technology and international cooperation banded together to create an inspirational feat of recovery, which some have called a ‘smashing victory for free-market capitalism’.[1]
What is freedom of expression? Without freedom to offend, it ceases to exist, wrote Salman Rushdie.
Loading ...
