Hard News: What we have really lost
155 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 7 Newer→ Last
-
Why ask for ownership to be returned unless they want more power over the management of the area?
The bit I'm missing here is why that would be a problem. What on earth are you so scared of? That Maori willl behave like the Crown has? Well when have they ever done that?!
Maori leaders have consistently demonstrated a generosity of spirit in this regard.*
Just because one has an advantage under the current regime, for example access to conservation land, does not make it right. It merely makes it convenient.
*See, for example, the Orakei Block, enormous chunks of the South Island etc etc ad nauseum.
-
While most of us live near the shoreline, and treasure that fact, very few New Zealanders will ever venture to Te Urewera.
I have to disagree with this Russell. I've walked the track round Lake Waikaremoana twice and understand it to be a very popular three day tramp. While I love the shoreline, I also treasure our inland beauties as do countless others. The Tongariro Crossing is meant to be one of the best one day walks in the world.
I can still remember my first tramp in the Ureweras and the unspoilt podocarp forest which took my breath away. I haven't done my research into injustices to Tuhoe. I want them to have justice. OTOH, I feel very uneasy about messing with the status of a national park.
-
By saying 'at best' you are salting the pot; it suggests that this is the most minimal description that can be applied to the accused
I understand what you're saying. But my "at best" implied the assumption that there was no possibility they could or would have hurt anyone. Given what they were doing and saying, I think the possibility existed that they could hurt someone.
One of them did, after all, seek to obtain grenade launchers, and several of these were subsequently seized from the dealer he shopped with. This does make me think it could have got worse than clowning.
-
Sigh... Well this discussion didn't take long to turn into a pile of poo, not surprising considering the attitude of Mr. (snea)Key. I wonder what his mining buddies found that made him change his mind, I guess we will never know the answer to that one.
We have a major problem in this country as far as land ownership goes, when I fist came over from the UK I was astounded at the amount of land that does not have public access. Considering the population of the UK compared to NZ and a comparable amount of land British citizens have far more access to vast tracts of countryside, common land, fens, moors, plains, forests etc. and all this comes down to a land grab by the Crown who divvied it up to their mates... nothing changes much does it?. -
I want them to have justice. OTOH, I feel very uneasy about messing with the status of a national park.
This is the common "I want you to have justice, just as long as it doesn't interfere with what I want" justice.
-
I feel very uneasy about messing with the status of a national park.
I feel uneasy about all the confiscated land and, frankly, I'd rather ease that discomfort by giving it back to the legitimate owners (who have expressed desire to keep it a publicly accessible National Park) than preserve my ability to wander about such seized land.
-
I say let's slice the baby in half.
-
Sigh... Well this discussion didn't take long to turn into a pile of poo, not surprising considering the attitude of Mr. (snea)Key.
Oh, it's not a pile of poo, really. Some people are saying some things and some other people are rebutting them. Nothing I'd think about moderating.
-
I feel very uneasy about messing with the status of a national park.
By making it a national park under Tuhoe stewardship? Which, as I understand the proposal, was what it would've been.
If there's no change to access, why is this such a scary concept?As for the delay due to the size of the courtroom, although trials with multiple defendants are becoming more common with drug conspiracy charges they're still distinctly in a minority. Adding a new courtroom to the existing Auckland High Court would be quite a difficult task, given the building's design and construction. The need to provide secure access to the holding cells and the judges' chambers from the new room(s) without compromising the security of existing rooms would be tricky to achieve. All the more so that the existing courtrooms would have to remain usable throughout construction activity.
-
I want them to have justice. OTOH, I feel very uneasy about messing with the status of a national park.
This is the common "I want you to have justice, just as long as it doesn't interfere with what I want" justice.
Pretty much also Not In My Back Yard. At least if the Crown wants some of your back yard they will happily compensate for land acquired. I would be extremely annoyed if the Crown chose to steal my bit of land so understand the immense frustration that Tuhoe must be feeling right now and ever since it was stolen off them. I'd feel much better if the Ureweras was given back to it's rightful guardians.
-
This is the common "I want you to have justice, just as long as it doesn't interfere with what I want" justice.
I know what you mean. I'm an old tramper and I am just trying to articulate my fierce love of the bush and mountains and a probably irrational fear that something will be taken away ... I'm trying to to tap into John Key's rationale for pulling back. Although I'm not a national voter, there might be a rich vein of other voters who would hate to see a change of ownership ...
-
I say let's slice the baby in half.
I recall a mine owner having that opinion some time ago. :-)
Oh, it's not a pile of poo, really.
Not a big pile, not yet but you know me Russ. ;-)
-
I own 900 square metres of land in Massey, West Auckland. Naturally my motivation for acquiring this land was so that I could declare sovereignty over it and I am looking for others of a like mind to buy any attached parcels of land.
Seriously though, the mountain peaks in what became the centre piece of the Tongariro National Park were giften to the Crown by Te Heu Heu of Ngati Tuwharetoa on the condition that they were protected.
What's the problem with doing a similar thing but the other way round?
-
I'm trying to to tap into John Key's rationale for pulling back. Although I'm not a national voter, there might be a rich vein of other voters who would hate to see a change of ownership ...
I suspect the "Rich Vein" is not voters but something a bit more glittery but there are voters who just love to hate the idea of Maori getting any kind of compensation for their losses.
-
It is now clear that Tuhoe believed - with good reason - that Te Urewera was going to be returned to them.
That Cabinet reneged on the deal adds to the truly shameful history of Crown dealings with Tuhoe.
But - it isnt finished yet: utu (which means proper balance as much as anything else) will see what had been duplicitously seized, returned in circumstances of honour.
Kai Tahu waited for 150 years...
-
not voters but something a bit more glittery
What, gold in them thar hills? No ...
-
Although I'm not a national voter, there might be a rich vein of other voters who would hate to see a change of ownership ...
You reckon Tuhoe thought that about the change of ownership in the 1800's? Or dont they matter? It was theft, thought that was against the law, then and now.
-
Oh, it's not a pile of poo, really.
Not a big pile, not yet but you know me Russ. ;-)
[Screams faintly as Giant Big Pile of Poo blots out sun.]
-
You reckon Tuhoe thought that about the change of ownership in the 1800's?
I feel guilty for arguing about this when I haven't done my homework and read the history. My original point point was that I disagreed with Russell's post. He maintained that most NZers would not venture into the Ureweras and put that forward as one argument in favour of giving the land back. Confiscated land should be returned, yes. I've just got this awful habit of trying to analyse my own knee jerk feelings and reactions and trying to figure out how they fit into the pool of national feelings out there.
-
@Russ... It always gets dark around this time... honest.
-
I'm trying to to tap into John Key's rationale for pulling back.
He seems to think, or believe even, he is pandering to his electorate. And while my chromatic leanings are historical bluer than red (well, maybe my blue shirt has mauve strips), I find it hard to associate with any of this. Is this Govt even familiar with the concept of 'Historical Precedence'? Or is Tuhoe to be treated differently, which seems to have been the case going back 150+ years.
Sir Paul Reeves said:
"I can think of other examples where previous governments have vested land in Maori - one would be Okahu Bay in Auckland, which is vested in Ngati Whatua. It's their land and they got that back but there's a co-management arrangement with Auckland City Council.
"I think Tuhoe would say for the first 10 years let there be a co-management arrangement, and I didn't see how it was fundamentally different from what has been done elsewhere. But I think the present political realities might be weighing heavily on the Prime Minister's mind."
and
"Tamati Kruger sounds like an eminently-reasonable man, a principled man who knows what he wants. Settle with him. Deal with it."
Tuhoe had a valid claim to the restoration of their land, he said.
"I read Judith Binney's book, which talked about the disgraceful way that land was lost . . . taken.
What's so contentious about that? Obviously Judith Binney isn't in the government advisory committee, but perhaps she should be, or they could at least get someone to read the books.
-
That Cabinet reneged on the deal adds to the truly shameful history of Crown dealings with Tuhoe.
Yes, that's what I tried to say in the post.
I know I've put the odd nose out of joint with my view of the "freedom fighters", but Tuhoe as an entity seems admirable to me. Paul Reynolds is good value on their embrace of the internet, to the extent of running an ISP.
And I like the website of the Tuhoe Establishment Trust. It's lucid and informative. Normally, I'd object to a Flash banner with sound on the home page, but there's something quite good about being spoken to on arrival.
Also, from the 'Tuhoe Today' section of Te Wiki:
Tūhoe people have a reputation for their continued strong adherence to Māori identity and for their unbroken use of the Māori language, which 40% of them still speak (2001 figure).
Of the Tūhoe people, estimated to number between 33,000 and 45,000, about 19 per cent still live on their tribal lands; most of the rest live in towns on the fringes of Te Urewera and in the larger North Island cities. At least 5,000 live in Australia. Tūhoe continue to maintain camps in Te Urewera and help run conservation programmes for endangered birds such as the kiwi and the kokako. Many Tūhoe return to their homelands every two years for the Te Hui Ahurei ā Tūhoe (Tūhoe Festival), which features kapa haka, debates, sports competitions, and fashion shows. The event provides an important opportunity to maintain ties between friends and relatives.
-
My original point point was that I disagreed with Russell's post.
I know. Will still express my sorrow, which is about guardianship and forgiveness, that has been religated to yet again, another time ( I hope Islander :) Carry on Cecelia (was that a movie?) :) Don,t mind me.
-
Don't mind me.
I won't mind you if you don't mind me and my half-baked opinions:)
At least we're not the passionless people, eh?
-
Aye :)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.