The Watchdog

Keeping citizens in the loop

Health Freedom NZ ACTION ALERT! GE ingredients in food/GE crops/GE experimentation on the rise in ‘clean, green’ NZ!

HFNZBanner
1 Health Freedom NZ Newsletter Action Alert 

Please help this go viral by posting on your blogs and websites, emailing your lists, posting on Facebook.

Hi ,

This is an Information and Action Alert

The infiltration of GE ingredients in our food, GE experimentation and the release of GE crops into our environment, have made great strides in past months. HFNZ has always seen GE bio tech as a great threat to Health Freedom and has been under resourced to do anything.

Rather than having our own GE spokesman or woman, we have recently teamed up with GE Free New Zealand to support them in their campaigns and help raise awareness.

We see GE, GMOs and GE technology being used in our food chain as a threat to Health Freedom because:

1.    There is no testing of GE food by the food safety authorities, and independent feeding trials show impacts on organ health, reproductive rates and survival of offspring. Studies have shown cows and rats die after consuming GE soy and corn.

2.    Scientific experiments and overseas experiences show the harmful effects of GE crops released into the atmosphere, with superweeds, resistance in pests, an increased need to use toxic sprays on GE crops and cross pollination pollution of non GE and organic crops.

3.    GE companies can and do prosecute farmers whose crops have been found to contain the patented GE material in their crops. Some have had their entire yields and sometimes their farms confiscated through this form of bio-colonialism.

Currently there are a suspected 40 GE ingredients that have been approved to enter New Zealand food supply; Fonterra is under scrutiny over potential feeding of GM crops to dairy cows. GM [Genetically Modified/ GE Genetically Engineered] contamination is also likely from approval for GE pine trees to be grown outdoors;
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10712065

There is inadequate legal requirement for safety testing of GE foods, to require food manufacturers to tell consumers if their food has been made using GE/GM organisms, and for public health monitoring of the harm that they can cause.

You are the custodian of your body and health we think you have a right to know what you are eating. We will be posting information on our website and Facebook page in due course.

IMMEDIATE ACTION

Write, email or call Fonterra’s CEO, Andrew Ferrier and ask him to

(1) Make a genuine commitment to a GM-free policy considering they say they are committed to sustainability they should already have one;

(2) Keep GE feed out of their farms;

(3) Take action to stop GE contaminating any alfalfa they use as feed, as the US has recently approved GE alfalfa.

(4) Remind him to stop using palm kernel , a by-product of forest-destruction and is not congruent with their sustainability policy.

FONTERRA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP LIMITED
Private Bag 92032,
Auckland
New Zealand
+64 9 374 9000
http://www.fonterra.com/wps/wcm/connect/fonterracom/fonterra.com/home/contact+us

Join the GE Free Shoppers NZ Campaign on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/GE-Free-Shoppers-NZ/205314966146372

Write on Fonterra’s Facebook Wall your concern that their products may contain GE contamination. Request they make a commitment to a GM and GE free policy or you will ceise buying their “Products for Life”.
http://www.facebook.com/KukiMon#!/pages/Fontera/109849645704511

Also the Group
http://www.facebook.com/KukiMon#!/pages/Fonterra-Brands/161596240541568

INFORM YOURSELF

Visit the True Food Guide http://www.truefood.org.au/truefoodguide/ and get educated as to what GE foods are in our supermarkets. This is an Australian organisation which is just as relevant for New Zealand since our Food Safety Regulator is Trans-Tasman.

The American one for American imported goods is:
http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/download.html

Visit http://www.GEFree.org.nz and watch this video from the Institute  For Responsible Technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU2O3VpR1QE

Help promote the “Rally for the Right to Know” on Washington DC March 26th

The spread of GE crops, feed, ingredients and technology is largely an activity spawned by Big Farmer in America with Monsanto at the head of the game. Since what American food corporates do, greatly effects our food chain here in New Zealand, we believe supporting American efforts to stop Monsanto is well worth the effort.

Genetically modified foods…….. Are they safe? The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) doesn’t think so. The AAEM asked physicians to advise patients to avoid GM foods. Find out more http://www.responsibletechnology.org/gmo-dangers

You can help by emailing everyone the details of the Rally found at
http://www.facebook.com/rallyfortherighttoknow2011#!/rallyfortherighttoknow2011?sk=info

and promoting that Facebook page with your Facebook friends, on your blogs, websites etc.

Thank you

The Team at HFNZ & GE Free NZ

 

March 18, 2011 Posted by | Anti-GE, Human rights | 2 Comments

Public Watchdog Penny Bright asks Kiwiblog how much would have been raised for Christchurch earthquake victims by auctioning copies of the following KEY ‘shonky’ Tranz Rail documents ?

18 March 2011

(My comment at the end of this post)

www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2011/03/outbidded.html#comment-809717

Outbidded Add this story to Scoopit!.

The debate and auction were great fun. I’ll do a seperate post on the debate.

We managed to get a total of $10,000 pledged by 5 pm yesterday to buy Winston’s no sign. The bidding started at $1,000 and there were three bidders, and then two bidders and then it hit the $10,000 we had pledged. I kept bidding unti $10,500 but then folded.

The great thing is that by bidding we got the winning amount up to $10,500, which all goes to families of earthquake victims who worked for The Press And CTV.

Congrats to businessman Ted Thomas who won the auction with a very generous donation/pledge.

For me this was mainly about raising money for a good cause. We can always create our own NO sign for 5c, and have it appear during the campaign (and we will). So I would encourage those who pledged money to consider still donating to the relief fund for families of earthquake victims who worked for The Press And CTV. I will be.

If you wish to make a donation, the details are:

‘Press Gallery Quake Fundraiser’
03-1537-0013148-009

And once again thanks to the scores of readers who pledged their support for the auction. You helped make the auction a success.

No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)

Tags: , ,
This entry was posted on Friday, March 18th, 2011 at 9:27 am and is filed under New Zealand, NZ Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

16 Responses to “Outbidded”

  1. Murray (7,044) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 9:43 am Why not sell “No” t-shirts in the same spirit?
  2. fizzleplug (64) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 9:47 am I would have thought it was outbid, surely. Outbidded looks not quite right (and Firefox puts a squiggly line underneath it – although I’ve just noticed Firefox puts a squiggly line under Firefox, so can they be trusted?).
  3. Murray (7,044) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:02 am http://cheezburger.com/Juno/lolz/View/1159872256
  4. pdm (693) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:22 am fizzle – I am with you. It is outbid but perhaps DPF is trying to create a new word for inclusion in Dictionaries.
  5. Pete George (9,425) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:25 am There’s a squiggly line under fizzleplug – can you be trusted? Maybe you can be on this, I though “outbidded” looked strange. 

    outbidded – no dictionary results

    NO auction – good fundraising results

  6. Monty (668) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:26 am Tee shirts are a great idea. Where can I get one?
  7. nasska (260) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:28 am How about “outbidden”?
  8. Pete George (9,425) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:48 am Tee shirts are a great idea. Where can I get one? – No. 

    How about “outbidden”? – No.

  9. Murray (7,044) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:56 am Cafepress. 

    Special Winston t-shirt: HELL No!

  10. DrDr (37) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 12:09 pm How about a picture of Winnie’s face with a big X or no-nukes type symbol on it and a big NO underneath.
  11. alwyn (17) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 1:41 pm Do you have any idea what Mr Thomas plans to do with the sign?
    I hope he isn’t going to treat it like the painting that Helen Clark autographed.
  12. Tauhei Notts (836) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 1:51 pm Does anybody know if Ted Thomas was bidding on behalf of the Vela brothers?
  13. Viking2 (3,602) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 3:32 pm Perhaps as in the good ol USA:
    Out Biden.
  14. hj (800) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 5:11 pm Congrats to businessman Ted Thomas who won the auction with a very generous donation/pledge. Immigration agent, property developer, alcohol industry?
  15. reid (6,469) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 7:29 pm The sign, used by Mr Peters repeatedly at a press conference when facing questions about a $100,000 donation from expatriate billionaire Owen Glenn, was bought by Ted Thomas, the chief executive of technology company Superstructure. 

    The money will go to help the people of Christchurch. Asked if he was a fan of Mr Peters, Mr Thomas said, “Not really”.

    Well let’s hope he reads Kiwiblog as well and is prepared to let his investment go on a road-show in November.

    P.S. I thought Key was quite astute in announcing a rather high entry price early on, thereby ensuring it didn’t turn out to be a penny-dreadful affair.

  16. publicwatchdog (49) Says:
    March 18th, 2011 at 10:37 pm

    Gosh – I wonder how much money would have been raised for Christchurch earthquake victims by auctioning copies of the following KEY ‘shonky’ Tranz Rail documents ?

    1) A copy of the share registry records which proved John Key had shares in Tranz Rail (which he failed to disclose) at a time that Tranz Rail was an ‘Item of Business’ before the House?

    2) A copy of John Key’s Official Information Act request to Michael Cullen, attempting to flush out commercially sensitive information about Tranz Rail, when he had an undisclosed financial interest?

    3) A copy of John Key’s complaint to the Ombudsman, when Michael Cullen (on the advice of Treasury) refused to release commercially sensitive information under the OIA?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFTYZVQo-A8&feature=related

    Perhaps some members of the Press Gallery weren’t aware that I had made a complaint to both the Police and SFO about John Key’s attempt to flush out commercially sensitive information information about Tranz Rail at a time he had an undisclosed pecuniary interest, ( then took a private prosecution under s. 228 of the Crimes Act 1961) – because there was never as much as a sentence about this in the NZ Herald?

    Unlike the constant ‘MAN ON THE MOON’ headlines in the NZ Herald, about Winston Peters and NZ First prior to the 2008 election?

    Obviously, the same people who worked so hard to sling political mud at Winston Peters and NZ First in 2008, must be worried, or we wouldn’t be seeing the same (desperate) tactics?

    Keep going! :)

    Penny Bright
    Effective Public Watchdog

March 18, 2011 Posted by | Fighting corruption in NZ, Human rights | Leave a comment

The HIKOI TAKUTAI MOANA 2011 WILL make it to Parliament before the Coastal and Marine Areas Bill is passed!

18 March 2011

I rang and checked today with the Maori Affairs Select Committee.

The Coastal and Marine Areas Bill is still at the ‘Committee of the Whole House’ stage.

(The stage before the Third Reading).

The earliest debate can resume is at 3pm on Tuesday 22 March 2011, after ‘Question Time’.

www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1103/S00304/parliament-rises-for-week.htm

Parliament Rises For Week

Thursday, 17 March 2011, 5:59 pm
Article: ParliamentToday.co.nz

Parliament Rises For Week

The House rose at 5.56pm interrupting the committee stage debate on the title and commencement clauses of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill .

Parliament will sit next Tuesday at 2pm.

*
ParliamentToday.co.nz is a breaking news source for New Zealand parliamentary business featuring broadcast daily news reports on Parliamentary Business.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

So!

The Hikoi WILL make it to Parlament before the legislation is passed.

Here is the timetable, outlining where the Hikoi is planning to be:

Left Rerenga Wairua on Monday 14th plans to meet the bill at parliament steps on the Tuesday 22nd March
14th March – Rerenga Wairua, Kaitaia, Kawakawa
15th March – Whangarei, Te Hana, North Shore
16th March – Harbour Bridge crossing, Auckland CBD
17th March – Hauraki, Kerepehi Marae, Tauranga, Te Puke – Mangauika
18th March – Rotorua, Te Arawa
19th March – Heretaunga
20th March – Palmerston, Foxton
21st March – Porirua TBC
22nd March – PONEKE – March from Te Papa to parliament, Peaceful protest

Hikoi opposing (Takutai Moana) and Deep Sea Oil Drilling and Mining

Mike Smith invited you · Share · Public Event
Time
Tuesday, March 22 at 9:00am – March 23 at 10:00am

Location
Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa 

Wakefield St

Created By

More 

Info

In 2004 an estimated 50,000 people demonstrated against the Foreshore and Seabed Bill, now the new bill is before Parliament and its drawing condemnation from a wide range of Maori people including a significant number of Maori leaders. On Monday a group of young people together with kaumatua began a hikoi to Wellington and don’t forget this is a social justice issue for all New Zealanders to be involved in so there will be Pakeha people for the environmental movement joining the hikoi to add their support to the hikoi’s opposition to deep sea oil drilling and mining …. let our Pakeha whanau and friends know that they are welcome to participate!

Contact these organisers for futher details of exact locations at given times of the day

Contact:
Tracey-lee 021 0721166 – Northshore
Denise Messiter 027 6443359 – Hauraki
Dotti 021 2432174 – Rotorua
Te Ao Pritchard 027 4578326 – Palmerston
Mike Smith 021 504486 – Foxton, Wellington
Reuben Porter – 027 2001840
Wikatana Popata – 021 1340586
Ropata Paora – 021 2051571

\

HIKOI TAKUTAI MOANA 2011

Location
RERENGA WAIRUA KI PONEKE

Created By

More Info
Tena tatou te iwi Maori me nga whanau tau iwi katoa.
COME AND SUPPORT THE HIKOI TAKUTAI MOANA HEADING TO PONEKE. 

THE TAKUTAI MOANA BILL IS THE BIGGEST CONFISCATION OF MAORI LAND IN HISTORY!!!

…- Maori have to prove that they are true kaitiaki of Moana, foreshore & seabeds

– Govt says you are invited to prove customary title under this bill

– If you think you have a claim, then you have to prove since 1840 you have always been beside the moana (that is if your lands weren’t confiscated…)

– They also say you need to go to court to prove it, (nothing in the bill says the govt will assist you to do so)

– Once you gain customary title, then it entitles you to NOTHING other than to be consulted on the issues pertaining to the takutai

– Govt says they dont OWN it, you dont OWN it then who has kaitiakitanga rights over it THE CROWN!!

– PRIVATE OWNERS can charge the public to use the beach
BUT
– MAORI UNDER CUSTOMARY TITLE can’t.. its called PUBLIC SPACE ONCE IN CUSTOMARY TITLE…(Maori NEVER EVER see themselves as owners, we are kaitiaki or protectors)

THE LIST GOES ON…… and it gets worse!

SUPPORTERS
– OTHER GROUPS (pakeha, unionists, women’s groups etc) would prefer for the takutai to remain in Maori kaitiakitanga then to allow GOVT to sell it’s precious minerals and resources to FOREIGN INVESTORS

come on Aotearoa, if you want our lands to stay in the hands of Maori and all New Zelanders, for all papatuanuku’s special taonga remain with us THEN COME AND SUPPORT THIS HIKOI IN PONEKE

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Speech: Harawira – wake up and smell the kaimoana

Thursday, 17 March 2011, 9:52 pm
Speech: Hone Harawira

Maori Party – wake up and smell the kaimoana before it’s too late!!

Part 3, Committee in the House – Marine and Coastal Area Bill
Hone Harawira – Te Reo Motuhake o Te Tai Tokerau
Thu 17 Mar 2011

Mr Chairman, members of both the National and Maori Parties have deliberately tried to disrupt the flow of my korero, particularly during Part 3 of this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, so as we turn to Part 4 I look to their being perhaps a little more understanding and accepting of the fact that issues that I raise during this bill, I don’t raise because of any personal animosity, but because of a genuine and widely-held belief that this bill is not in the best interests of the Maori people, or the Maori Party, or indeed parliament itself.

And as I turn to this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, I pledge not to raise internal Maori Party caucus issues, nor to personalise the relationship between members of the Maori Party caucus and Ministers of the National government, because this debate should not be about what one person may or may not have said to another in the privacy of a caucus meeting, nor should it be about the relationship between MPs in this house, even though such unsubstantiated trivialities were levelled against me during the debate over Part 3 of this bill last night.

Mr Chairman, this debate should in fact be about the principles underpinning the legislation that the house is discussing, so as I turn to Part 4 of this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, I will, as I have done in all previous speaking opportunities during this debate, try to focus on the issues highlighted by this bill, and the public statements of relevant players in the development of this legislation, because Maori people deserve to know exactly how they will be affected by the decisions of those parties and persons promoting this legislation; and Mr Chairman, because I am a Member of Parliament elected to represent the specific interests of Maori, it is that particular area that I intend to focus my comments on.

So, Mr Chairman, if I might be allowed, I would like to begin my contribution to this debate by asking whether or not the Maori Party knows that the legally prescribed detail found in this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, and other legislation like it in the field of treaty settlements, and the oversight, governance and management of natural resources is setting a dangerous trend for Maori, by forcing us into the legal environment where the value of traditional Maori principles, or Kaupapa Maori, will be determined and legal precedents and benchmarks established which will impact on those principles forevermore?

And does the Maori Party realise that allowing the courtrooms to become the battleground for determining the rightness or otherwise of Kaupapa Maori found in this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, is detrimental to the principles themselves, and to the world view that they represent?

And will that make the Maori Party reconsider the position that they announced the other day … that “This bill is in the House on our initiative. Make no bones. This is a Maori Party Bill. We are pleased to stand here in support”?

And does the Maori Party realise that by so doing, they are sanctioning the legal capture of Kaupapa Maori as found in this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, thereby limiting the effectiveness of those principles, by tying them to legal concepts which themselves are derived from a society that has over time developed into the resource-exploiting, consumer dominated society that we see today, a society which in many ways is at conflict with the Maori world view that Kaupapa Maori are based on?

And will realising that they have actually done that, make the Maori Party think about withdrawing their view that … “This is a Maori Party Bill and we are pleased to stand here in support”?

And does the Maori Party realise that by giving their support to the Marine and Coastal Area Bill, they are endorsing government’s attempts to codify those principles that I have already mentioned, in a way that our tupuna would not agree with and that our people will not accept, and that by supporting this bill, the Maori Party is setting the stage for decades of litigation as Maori seek to reclaim ground lost through the passage of this bill?

And if they do realise the mistake the have made, will it help the Maori Party think about dumping the position that they announced the other day … that “This is a Maori Party Bill and we are pleased to stand here in support”?

And does the Maori Party realise that by giving their support to this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, they are setting the stage for the spectacular loss of Maori connection to the foreshore and seabed, by forcing Maori into the High Court, where $100,000 is the price of an opening address, half-a-million is the cost of progress, and unfortunate rulings are the order of the day?

And when they realise how this bill forces Maori into the court of great cost and no return, do you think that the Maori Party might actually disown the position that they announced the other day … that “This is a Maori Party Bill and we are pleased to stand here in support”?

And does the Maori Party know that by their support of this Marine and Coastal Area Bill, they may be signalling the end of all treaty claims to the foreshore and seabed, because once this bill is passed, the foreshore and seabed will no longer be in Crown hands, it will become “common space”, owned by no-one, and therefore unable to be claimed by Maori?

And when they realise how this bill will put an end to all treaty claims to the foreshore and seabed, do you suppose it might finally make the Maori Party finally wake up and say – perhaps we made the wrong decision when we announced the other day … that “This is a Maori Party Bill and we are pleased to stand here in support”?

And does the Maori Party know that their support of clause 105 of this Marine and Coastal Area Bill where Maori are required to prove customary title, is inconsistent with the position widely held by Maori throughout the country, that Maori should not have to go to court to prove what the whole world already knows anyway – that Maori were here first, why do we have to prove it?

And will the Maori Party finally accept that their position, that “This bill is in the House on our initiative. Make no bones. This is a Maori Party Bill We are pleased to stand here in support” is simply untenable to Maori and unacceptable to all those who support the principle of justice.

Mr Chairman, I began my speech by saying that I hope that those from the Maori Party and the National Party who heckled me last night (and thankfully not today) while I was speaking, understand and accept that the issues I raise during this bill, I don’t raise because of any personal animosity towards them, but because of a genuine and widely-held belief that this bill is not in the best interests of the Maori people, or the Maori Party, or indeed parliament itself.

Mr Chairman, the arrogance of the government in refusing to participate in this debate is widely noted by all New Zealanders; the decision by the Maori Party to adopt the same attitude is duly noted by all Maori as well.

tu te ao maori
tu te rangatiratanga
tu motuhake
tena tatou katoa

________________________________________________________________________________

www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1103/S00301/marine-and-coastal-area-takutai-moana-bill-part-four.htm

Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill – Part Four

Thursday, 17 March 2011, 5:25 pm
Press Release: The Maori Party

Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill – Part Four

Rahui Katene, MP for Te Tai Tonga

Thursday 17 March 2011

Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Bill.

I want to take a call to speak to Clause 97 and Clause 105 of Part Four.

Clause 97 allows the High Court to refer a question of tikanga to the Maori Appellate Court for its opinion, or to obtain the advice of a pukenga. The concept of pukenga of course comes from the Maori Land Court and the Maori Appellate Court, where the Court seeks the assistance of those experts who have experience and knowledge of tikanga Maori.

It has really saddened me to hear the nature of the kōrero from the Act Party around tikanga.

One of the major achievements the Maori Party has secured through this Bill, has been in ensuring tikanga permeates the legislation –and in that way, we see the value accorded to Maori customary values and practices being reflected right throughout.

And I am mindful of the challenge left by a former MP and esteemed Maori leader, Ta Apirana Ngata, in his much quoted words, E Tipu e Rea. In that passage Ta Apirana encouraged Maori to grasp the tools of the Pakeha world, while at the same time cherishing ‘nga taonga a o tupuna Mâori’ – the treasures of our ancestors. It was, if one likes, the notion of promoting excellence in both worlds.

And I have to wonder, whether the Act Party has grasped the notion of living in a Treaty-based nation – in which partnership means to cherish the foundations of the two Treaty partners – walking in two worlds, Aotearoa New Zealand.

A commitment to nationhood driven from the Treaty would mean this House would never again be subjected to the cultural assault of tikanga being described in the terms of ‘Alice in Wonderland’.

For the sake of generations to come, I want to make it explicitly clear what we in the Maori Party understand of tikanga as consistent with kaupapa Maori – kaupapa such as kotahitanga, rangatiratanga, whanaungatanga.

Tikanga are our practices – that which is ‘tika’ – true and accurate. Tikanga are derived from kaupapa Maori, the foundation of Maori culture, and the basis of Maori worldviews.

Ironically, the reference to Alice was made during the kōrero we had on the preamble. A preamble which monumentally introduces for the first time in any public environmental or resource management related legislation; the kaupapa of manaakitanga – and the tikanga that are derived from it.

In Ngai Tahu, for instance, the concept of manaakitanga, as that tikanga which tangata whenua practise towards manuhiri, enabled whalers from foreign shores to remain on the takutai and set up whaling stations.

The tikanga surrounding manaakitanga is such that the more hospitality which tangata whenua display, the more mana they demonstrably possess.

Ngai Tahu has great mana – as we have seen with their response to recent events that have struck the people of their rohe – and so, as many people of great mana have done throughout New Zealand’s history, they gave without hesitation.

Manaakitanga – as mana in action – only works when the system of reciprocity on which it is based, is understood.

So when this legislation states that it should be enacted to reflect the principle of manaakitanga, we are not entering a virtual rabbit-hole of unknown quantities. We know exactly what it is that we seek, and that is to restore the balance of mana and to uphold tikanga.

While this bill does not consolidate mana motuhake as some may wish to see, it does propose a relationship in keeping with those tikanga derived from the kaupapa of kāwanatanga and rangatiratanga. There is great mana in this.

In order for the fruits of this exchange of mana to fully materialise it is imperative that local and regional authorities step up to the mark in their exercise of kāwanatanga.

Giving mana to those expressions of rangatiratanga by the kaitiaki of our takutai moana, such as in their input to the planning document.

While a misguided few look to role models such as Alice, I know there are those amongst us who look to our own Pacific role models. Figures such as Māui who looked beyond the horizon, using the wisdom of his ancestors with the boldness of his youth, to seek change in his world.

The other key clause I want to refer to in Part Four is that related to Clause 105.

This is an extremely significant clause which has attracted great interest from those who have taken the time to read the Bill.

I do have to say, in passing, that it is hard to tolerate some of the statements I heard in the public arena from people – unfortunately including some MPs – claiming they are opposing the Bill without having to read it. I don’t understand the logic that someone can be opposed to something if they don’t actually know what it is they are opposing.

But back to Part Four – the Burden of Proof clause, clause 105, is a major initiative of this Bill – and indeed, was something instigated by discussions with the Member for the North.

The 2004 Act required Maori to prove extinguishment of customary title had not occurred. Proving something had not happened over a 170 year period was a significant burden on Maori.

The Takutai Moana Bill now places that burden on the Crown where it should be. If the Crown cannot prove extinguishment then customary title will be recognised, provided the other elements of the test are met.

Sub-clause two of 105 provides that, for customary marine title, an applicant group must prove that the specified area is held in accordance with tikanga; and has been used and occupied by the applicant group, either from 1840 to the present day; or from the time of a customary transfer to the present day.

Sub-clause 105(3) provides that, it is presumed, in the absence of proof to the contrary, that a customary interest has not been extinguished.

The amendment is required as the Government’s intention regarding burden of proof was unclear.

The clause as re-drafted is explicit that applicant groups must only prove the positive elements of the tests; for example, the group has held the area, or customary right has been exercised, since 1840 in accordance with tikanga.

This means the Crown, is responsible for proving that the applicant group’s use and occupation of the area has not been exclusive or that there has been a substantial interruption to the group’s occupation of the area or that there has been extinguishment at law.

The intention of clause 105 is to make it clear where the burden of proof lies for the evidence relating to the tests for protected customary rights and customary marine title. And I want to really highlight this initiative as it is something which I believe establishes a very clear precedent for working in a way in which tangata whenua and the Crown operate as Treaty partners. Clause 105 is a very important issue. It picks up what the Court of Appeal said in the Ngāti Apa case: that the burden of extinguishment lies on the personal body that seeks to have it extinguished—in this case, the Crown. So the Crown has the burden of extinguishment, and the advice that I have received from iwi is that it is a just and proper thing to do. Tena koutou katoa.

ENDS

March 18, 2011 Posted by | Fighting corruption in NZ, Human rights | Leave a comment

How much money will be raised for Christchurch earthquake victims by auctioning copies of Key ‘shonky’ TranzRail documents?

18 March 2011

(My comment at end of this post)

www.nbr.co.nz/article/yes-winstons-no-sign-10600-nn-88556

Yes to Winston’s no sign for $10,600

Winston Peters’ infamous NO sign did not help him escape the $100,000 Owen Glenn controversy three years ago, but it has raised $10,600 for Christchurch earthquake victims.

The sign the New Zealand First leader once used as a prop was auctioned as part of a Press Gallery fund-raiser in the Backbencher pub for the Canterbury Television and The Press newspaper’s families, and victims of the February earthquake.

The winning bid of $10,600 was made by Ted Thomas, chief executive of Superstructure, a technology and consultancy business.

Mr Thomas said he was not a fan of Mr Peters but wanted to donate to quake victims.

“I am going to show it to staff and then find a place in my company’s board room for it,” he said.

The auction raised about $13,000. Ticket sales of $4500 will go to the Red Cross fund.

At a press conference in February 2008 Mr Peters held up the big NO sign, when denying he knew his party received a $100,000 donation from Monaco-based businessman Mr Glenn.

When the conference ended Mr Peters passed the sign to TVNZ political editor Guyon Espiner and it has since been framed and hung in TVNZ’s parliamentary office.

A parliamentary inquiry found on the balance of evidence Mr Peters had known about the donation and he was censured for not disclosing it.

Various authorities investigated but no charges were laid.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Comments and questions

4

“Various authorities investigated but no charges were laid”

Is that because at the time, Clark / Labour were up to their eyeballs in lies and deceit denying everything, trying to keep him off-shore away from local media – as the political fall out from such contractictory disclosure would have been a real (and was) a real embarrasment contradicting Clarks deliberate lies – that no amount of tax payer funded spin could change?

Was that why the “investigations” had such a limited scope of enquiry?

Or was it more that Labour couldn’t afford to remove Peters because then their tiny moniroty coalition government would have collapsed in scandal and sordid lies and half-truths, obfuscating the true story behind the army of tax payer funded spin doctors?

And Labour wonder why NZ have had enough of their self-serving kingdom building antics. Bring on the landslide victory to National come election day!

Anony mouse | Friday, March 18, 2011 – 8:43am
In response to Anony mouse | Friday, March 18, 2011 – 8:43am

Right On Anony,
We need to be reminded from time to time what a time waster Winston was. A fundamentally dishonest performance through many years in Parliament. He achieved almost nothing. Fired from 3 governments. And he pigged out on the perks and baubles of power.

Anony Mous Jnr | Friday, March 18, 2011 – 8:59am

This sign should be signed by Winston Peters, and re-auctioned to raise more monies for our Christchurch earthquake victims…..

No Time | Friday, March 18, 2011 – 9:10am

If it’s acceptable to ‘politicise’ fundraising for Christchurch earthquake victims – then I wonder how much money would be raised for copies of the following documents?:

1) A copy of the share registry records which proved John Key had shares in Tranz Rail (which he failed to disclose) at a time that Tranz Rail was an ‘Item of Business’ before the House?

2) A copy of John Key’s Official Information Act request to Michael Cullen, attempting to flush out commercially sensitive information about Tranz Rail, when he had an undisclosed financial interest?

3) A copy of John Key’s complaint to the Ombudsman, when Michael Cullen (on the advice of Treasury) refused to release commercially sensitive information under the OIA?

Winston Peters was never accused of ‘feathering his own nest’.
What was John Key doing with Tranz Rail?
How ‘shonky’ was that?

John Key – now Prime Minister of NZ, ‘perceived’ to be the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ (along with Singapore and Denmark according to Transparency International’s 2010 ‘Corruption Perception Index’.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFTYZVQo-A8&feature=related

When I made an official complaint to both the Police and SFO about John Key’s attempts to flush out commercially sensitive information about Tranz Rail, at a time he had an undisclosed pecuniary interest – then took a private prosecution against John Key under s. 228 of the Crimes Act 1961 (www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM330230.html?search=ts_act_Crimes+Act+1961_resel&p=1#DLM330230- ) there was not one sentence in the NZ Herald about ANY of these matters.

Compare that to the constant ‘MAN ON THE MOON’ headlines in the NZ Herald, about Winston Peters and NZ First prior to the 2008 election.

I guess National must be VERY worried about Winston Peters and NZ First for this arguably inappropriate stunt to go ahead?

Penny Bright
Effective Public Watchdog 🙂
waterpressure.wordpress.com

Penny Bright | Friday, March 18, 2011 – 1:29pm

March 18, 2011 Posted by | Fighting corruption in NZ, Fighting corruption internationally, Human rights | Leave a comment