Posts by Mikaere Curtis
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
What i am saying to say is the way we interpret it and the way apply it has to evolve along with the evolution of the people and nation of New Zealand, or it will become a faultline in our history that will eventually cause a massive earthquake when it gives way.
Um, isn't this what we are doing by entering into discussion about the principles of Te Tiriti ? The evolution is a real partnership between Crown and Maori, implemented at iwi and hapu level.
Tom, what is wrong with the Crown being respectful to Maori ? What is wrong with Maori being treated as the stakeholders they are ?
As Pita Sharples says, "we're here forever", and bi-culturalism is our way of resolving the "faultline" you mention. The subtext seems to be that Maori have no place in shaping the future our our state.
As for your imagined future, I would refer you to that plaque on One Tree Hill which spoke of "smooth[ing] the pillow" of the dying Maori race, except the council saw fit to censor that rancidly racist rant some years ago.
I accept no obligation to people who died well before anyone who now lives was born.
You've just chucked out common law. I agree with the sentiment that how we implement the intention of an historical agreement is contingent upon current exigencies, however, you and Tom both seem to be arguing for mono-culturalism. Dude, that's the problem, not the solution.
-
But the best way to be sure would be to simply for us to do the right thing snd create another, absolutely valid state entity - the REPUBLIC of New Zealand.
Sounds great, we could enshrine Te Tiriti in a written constitution - would that make you happy ?
Or do you actually cleave to this quaintly colonial notion that it's OK for the state to embody Pakeha culture, but not OK for it to embody Maori culture ? IOW, Pakeha good, Maori bad ?
-
Could the Crown and its fellow signatories have extinguished existing title in the foreshore and seabed when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed and its various rights were granted?
Aboriginal title is common law, and not an artefact of Te Tiriti. In order to use Te Tiriti to extinguish aboriginal title, they have had to have argued in favour of Maori submitting themselves to English law, except for those bits that might actually be useful in protecting their taonga.
If so, were they in error not to have done so?
I'm not sure what the big problem is. Sure, there is extreme rhetoric coming from a minority on both sides, but the moderate Maori position has been clear all along: no fee simple title (i.e. can't be alienated) and general public access for all (except for designated areas e.g. wahi tapu and special occaisions such e.g. a rahui is being place on the beach because someone drowned there).
Sounds like a reasonable position to me, and a good point from which to extend discussion. Discussion in good faith can be very constructive. One of the problems from the last attempt to deal with this issue is that the Government and National were more about ramming through legislation that pandered to whipped-up, ill-informed public opinion than engaging in meaningful dialogue.
-
As soon as a I found out that Tivo was in with Telecom, I ordered MySky HDI. It's not that I loathe Telecom, it's more that Sky has channels that would be really cool to record.
Actually, it boils down to the one channel: Food TV.
It's like our default setting - it's on when I get home from work, and pretty much stays on unless there's something else really compelling to watch.
My wife is a foodie, and she loves her Food TV, to the point where she applied for Master Chef NZ. She was accepted to the interview stage, and as it happens, she just rang - she got through to the next stage where she will prepare a dish for the judges.
Anyway, I'm looking forward to watching my replay of the All Blacks on Sunday morning, as and when it suits me :)
-
Um, what's wrong with :
If you're girly I'll make you braid my hair and listen to me talk about boys and girls, which believe me I can do for a really long time.
On visibility, I've noticed a trend lately in fantasy novels for some of the newer writers to have a gay main character. It's quite refreshing, especially in a book like The Steel Remains by Richard Morgan where homophobia is standard and the goadingly unrepentant gay hero is totally kick-arse.
-
We all use a lot of Maori in our everyday language but the fact that only 18,000 people speak Maori after decades of spending billions on special schools etc really does make it look like a language that is never going to be used much outside the select clique who curently use it.
Andre, your numbers are just plain wrong. Also, can a clique actually be "select" if it is largely made up of the self-selected?
Say TVNZ had reached a deal with the govt to bid for the FTA coverage (for example by decreasing their dividend for a year) - no one bar a few NBR writers would care - but because it's "The bloody Maoris" ....
OK, I'm not invoking the "R" word, but if this kind of deal had been struck (and thereby circumventing the restrictions on Charter funding), would the media have approached the story in the same way ?
When Aotearoa TV collapsed, the media were all over it. But when TVNZ wasted (IIRC circa 5m) on that hopeless UK MTV channel (which it had to drop because it was a complete failure), it did not receive anywhere near the same level of coverage.
I'm not convinced that Sharples has made a strong case to appropriate TPK funding for this, either, and I agree with Russell that this is an exceptional situation that needs scrutiny. However, it does seem that the Key government's standard operating approach is At The Whim of the Minister (e.g. McCully and overseas aid, Brownlee and Schedule 4). In a culture where ministers oversee personal fiefdoms, where action trumps consideration, is it any surprise to see these kinds of decisions ?
-
At the crux of this issue is the intent behind the behaviour. Were the Lincoln uni students attempting to validate Nazi behaviour? It does not seem the case to me. It appears that they were simply implementing the German theme, in a very bad taste way.
There is no getting away from the fact that Nazism is a now media artifact, and is inextricably linked with Germany.
I do not think it is helpful to point out that in Germany that only the extreme right would wear Nazi gear. The difference is that your neo-fascists are doing it for real. For a start, their uniforms would not be as half-arsed as the Lincoln student's ones. Nor would they dress up as holocaust victims.
Not everyone who dresses up as a Nazi is making a statement about Nazism, other than to concur that it did happen. Surely the ultimate demise of Nazism is to become fodder for dress up parties ?
So, how would I feel about a similar event that from my own history being used in a similar way. For example, a History of Te Arawa theme party where some people came as the Nga Puhi invader Hongi Hika, and some came as his victims. Well, it is part of my history, and it did happen, and we can't deny history. If the purpose was to say "You deserved this" or "Murderous invasion is cool", then, yeah, I'd have a lot to say about it.
Has anybody got an information on what message the Lincoln students intended to convey ?
-
Perhaps we need an allowance for MPs that live in Wellington, yet have electorate consituencies elsewhere. In addition to the budget they have for their constituancy office, they could get a "visting my electorate" allowance. This would be lower than a Wellington housing allowance for MPs who actually live in a different electorate.
And it would have enabled English to move his whanau to Wellington, whilst still getting an allowance that could assist the costs of doing electorate work, without needing to stretch the definition of "Where I Live" beyond any sensible definition.
List MPs who live in Wellington would not get this, and in practice they tend to adopt constituencies local to where they live anyway.
-
I think Kingsland is a designated "zone" under the proposal, which does seem kind of strange in that it is highly residential...
Phew, I must have missed that. Having now read the proposal, the whole thing stinks of doctrinaire authoritarianism. Would our natural "entertainment precincts" have developed if they had been restricted in their opening hours whilst other nearby areas had been less restricted ?
Restriction is the reason why West Auckland is dominated by a booze barn culture.
As for 10pm off-licence closing, this is another stupid idea. Shows what time the CitRats want everyone to go to bed...
-
The concept of being able to have a decent night out at your local bar seems a good one to me. Being able to walk home = low temptation of drink driving.
I can see an argument for some kind of noise control after a certain time in locations that in close proximity to dwellings, but what's so noisy about Kingsland that it has to shut down at 11pm ?