FORESHORE & SEABED @ CRISIS POINT...ACT NOW

[STRAIGHT STRIKE 37]

Former M.P. Dr Muriel Newman is at the forefront of an organisation called Coastal Coalition.....PLEASE, EVERY NZer must log into this site, read and add their name http://www.coastalcoalition THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE MUST FOR THE FUTURE OF ALL NZ'ers.

[Rooboy 1]

The chickens are coming home to roost.

I don't think the National Govt's repeal of the Foreshore and Seabed Act, which gave ownership solely to the Crown, reflected the wishes of a great many who voted for them at the last election. It certainly does not appear to reflect the wishes of many posting on this forum.

So what's your party playing at National supporters? How much are you willing for them to give to Maori in order to secure an ongoing alliance with Maori?

[STRAIGHT STRIKE 37]

Foreshore & Seabed claims are about "Mana".......mmmmm, "mana", is that money in Maori language??? can anybody confirm.

[jack 431]

I think your definately wrong there David....Its about preventing foriegn ownership of our country....You better get your communist/chinese language book out....If you keep this up...

[STRAIGHT STRIKE 37]

and attempt to BUY with their own and this is all under strict scrutiny.....they dont take !!!,that is the difference,but as Tukuorangi Morgan recently stated "the Treaty of Waitangi claims will not stop, New Zealand must be returned to the Maori". Have a GOOD READ of the coastalcoalition web site.

[Philocon 1]

Former M.P. Dr Muriel Newman is at the forefront of an organisation called Coastal Coalition.....PLEASE, EVERY NZer must log into this site, read and add their name http://www.coastalcoalition THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE MUST FOR THE FUTURE OF ALL NZ'ers.

Former?! She's still an MP. Former deputy leader due to a power struggle between the neo-liberal purists (both of them) and the red neck neo-liberal populists (all three of them). But still an MP.

[Philocon 1]

Former?! She's still an MP. Former deputy leader due to a power struggle between the neo-liberal purists (both of them) and the red neck neo-liberal populists (all three of them). But still an MP.

Oops sorry wrong person confused with Heather Roy. They all sound the same when chanting the same mantra.

[STRAIGHT STRIKE 37]

Oops sorry wrong person confused with Heather Roy. They all sound the same when chanting the same mantra.

To put it in language you will understand....it is obvious you are an oxygen thief.

Are you a cuzzie of Harawira,because not many believe you have posted your correct name on here.

However ALL readers on here please look at the latest coastalcoalition news : Maori want "their" juristiction not only to 12 miles from the shore....but to the 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone !! What a joke

[Philocon 1]

To put it in language you will understand....it is obvious you are an oxygen thief.

Are you a cuzzie of Harawira,because not many believe you have posted your correct name on here....joke

Well then take moves to have me removed then if you really believe that. Like most other such forums rules re signing up require one to supply correct information even when using a non de plume for posting. So in using a false name and address when joining means I have breached this rule as well as laws relating to ID theft etc. Personal abuse and name calling is a last resort when you have no valid argument and that seems to be pretty apparent here.

still to prove I am using someone else's name or inventing false details you'd need to come up with evidence. Still making things up hasn't seemed to be a problem for you till now and repeating abuse often enough you just might find someone who will take you seriously unlike the other right wing crap you post. There are many right wing posters who can debate issues intellectually, civilly and rationally. Would be nice if you were to join them - oh sorry must dash and take a closer look at that pig that just flew past the window.

[Philocon 1]

...However ALL readers on here please look at the latest coastalcoalition news : Maori want "their" juristiction not only to 12 miles from the shore....but to the 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone !! What a joke

Show where the newly announced bill does this? I don't support the bill but it really doesn't do any of the things you claim. In fact in some ways it doesn't change things much from the present Act passed in 2004. In that ironically the original bill which the then govt initially supported proposed "public domain" concept but Turiana Turia opposed it & so did Winston Peters but Dunne & United Future supported. National & ACT opposed it too so there wasn't sufficient support to pass it in that form. Peters supported crown ownership and Dunne refused to support that idea but it didn't matter as NZ First gave them enough votes to pass it with Crown ownership insertedinstead. Now Turia and National have done a reversal and support the idea of "public domain" and enshrine the existing customary rights negotiations provisions with some provision for Maori to test it in court but the court conditions are so stringent they are unlikely to achieve much. There's still no freehold title just customary rights aas already exists. Despite all the posturing it's bugger all change and more semantics, heavily laced with hypocrisy and change leading to no change.

The real question is will the Maori Party voters realise that Turia and Sharples are not actually delivering to them what they pretend they are. They sure have fooled the Coastal Coalition though into thinking something major is happening when it simply ain't. But then cosmeticians often fool people who don't look at things in any depth or have a limited and amnesiac memory.

[Properispomenon 1]

:y:, Phil...

[Rooboy 1]

Thanks for that informative history lesson Philcon. Now let me see if I have this straight.

Labour initially proposed and National opposed, what National now proposes, but Labour now opposes, because Labour wants to continue with what National initially proposed.

Politics is a great game isn't it?

[Properispomenon 1]

Politics is a great game isn't it?

It's gonna get greater, Rooboy...

You'd imagine that the only way Labour could even get close the National at next year's election would be if they can somehow get the Greens, the Maori Party and the Winston Party onside with them...

Just imagine the backroom dealings that will be required...

[Philocon 1]

Thanks for that informative history lesson Philcon. Now let me see if I have this straight.

Labour initially proposed and National opposed, what National now proposes, but Labour now opposes, because Labour wants to continue with what National initially proposed.

Politics is a great game isn't it?

You almost got it.

Labour initially proposed and National opposed, what National now proposes, then Labour proposed another but National opposed that too, then changed their minds. Labour isn't opposing the change but pointing out that it's merely window dressing and isn't really changing anything. National is now proposing what they initially opposed and opposing what they initially opposed and then later proposed but now oppose. Quite simple really! There was an add for a new non alcoholic drink on the market years ago starring an Australian actor Jack Thompson I think it was. It was called Claytons. If you can get hold of a video of that ad and watch it you'll get some idea of the new bill "The drink you have when you're not having a drink" Just change it to "The bill you pass when you're not passing a bill" and you have it.

Bit like the satire comedian Dave Smith I think it was at the time of Kirk govt in 1972 when Hugh Watt was Minister of Labour and carrying out Labour's pledge to abolish the Remuneration Authority. Playing Watt in a skit being interviewed he vowed to abolish the Remuneration Authority but had trouble getting his tongue around it which Watt did sometimes with long words. He then went on to say he was replacing it with a Pay Authority which was easier to pronounce. Although on that occasion the govt did abolish it. Maybe Finlayson or key have trouble pronouncing Crown, if so a simple spelling change to Krown would have done the trick assuming they can't get their tongues around the letter C but cope with K quite well.

[Philocon 1]

It's gonna get greater, Rooboy...

You'd imagine that the only way Labour could even get close the National at next year's election would be if they can somehow get the Greens, the Maori Party and the Winston Party onside with them...

Just imagine the backroom dealings that will be required...

Fair way out from the election yet and it was the arrangement in the last govt so don't jump to conclusions too soon just yet. Look across the ditch. With MMP Labour only needs around 35% or o of the vote to stitch up such a centre left deal. With the ACT vote dipping and Dunne's holding at best the Nats options are more limited especially as their two coalition partners are dependent on MPs holding on to seats rather than getting across the 5% threshold.

Such backroom deals are not new. They went on previously under FPP just as much. The difference was it was between factions and few people were aware of them other than the participants. Today many of those factions are parties under MMP. The Greens, Progressives, Maori Party, part of ACT, part of NZ First, part of United Future etc were factions within Labour. Most of ACT apart from a few key players and founders, part of NZ First, part of UF, etc were factions within National.

[Properispomenon 1]

Such backroom deals are not new. They went on previously under FPP just as much. The difference was it was between factions and few people were aware of them other than the participants. Today many of those factions are parties under MMP. The Greens, Progressives, Maori Party, part of ACT, part of NZ First, part of United Future etc were factions within Labour. Most of ACT apart from a few key players and founders, part of NZ First, part of UF, etc were factions within National.

Ah, I wasn't trying to be rabidly anti-Left, Philocon - though, God knows, with 'leaders' like Phil, Annette, Trevor et al, it is easy to be!

Yep, all the parties are at it...

No-one really told us before MMP was so popularly chosen as our new voting system that it would lead to all sorts of horse-tradings like you mention. These days its 'Vote for us. We believe firmly in Principles A, B, C, D and E. And are definitely against Principles F, G, H, I, J and K. But, hey, if we're within a sniff of forming a Government we'll abandon all those beliefs and sleep with anyone...'

[Philocon 1]

Ah, I wasn't trying to be rabidly anti-Left, Philocon - though, God knows, with 'leaders' like Phil, Annette, Trevor et al, it is easy to be!

Yep, all the parties are at it...

No-one really told us before MMP was so popularly chosen as our new voting system that it would lead to all sorts of horse-tradings like you mention. These days its 'Vote for us. We believe firmly in Principles A, B, C, D and E. And are definitely against Principles F, G, H, I, J and K. But, hey, if we're within a sniff of forming a Government we'll abandon all those beliefs and sleep with anyone...'

No I wasn't worried about whether you are "rabidly anti or pro left." It's about the debate and quality of it and I've never challernged you on that. My point is that the deals didn't start with MMP they just became more apparent. the scenario you mention happened under FPP too but with party factions and the details of negotiations never saw the light of day except when there was blood spilt on a conference or caucus floor because the factional argument had got out of control.

Perspectives on individual political leaders whether Goff, King English key etc are going to be influenced by subjective philosophical and ideological perceptions as much as assessment of their abilities. Hell I even do that when looking at internal factional leaders within the party I support let alone across the spectrum. Also what I might see as a strength in a leader you probably think is a weakness and vice-versa. Still at least we still try and resolve those differences with exchange of ideas and the ballot box, rather than military coups - although reading some of these forums at times I sometimes start to wonder....

I don't think you'll ever change the dealings and negotiations that take place in politics and it would be naieve to think we ever would. PR I believe does make them more obvious but I believe it's real strength is that if the electorate votes for a general right or left of centre mix of parties they are more likely to get a govt that reflects that mix under PR than a winner take all system like FPP. With the exception of our first MMP election when nobody really had come to grips with it, all our subsequent elections have reflected the direction of the vote irrespective of whether you personally like or dislike Helen Clark, Winston Peters, Jenny Shipley, John Key, Peter Dunne etc. No system apart from one based on a gun barrel will eliminate leaders you don't like or wheeling and dealing - either openly or in secret.

Individual politicians and leaders come and go. but policies and ideas outlast them and are ultimately more important. Mickey Savage died a long time ago but the social security system his govt put in place, despite being severely modified even watered down is still with us. if he had died several years earlier and Peter Fraser had overseen it the situation would still be the same today.

[STRAIGHT STRIKE 37]

No I wasn't worried about whether you are "rabidly anti or pro left." It's about the debate and quality of it and I've never challernged you on that. My point is that the deals didn't start with MMP they just became more apparent. the scenario you mention happened under FPP too but with party factions and the details of negotiations never saw the light of day except when there was blood spilt on a conference or caucus floor because the factional argument had got out of control.

Perspectives on individual political leaders whether Goff, King English key etc are going to be influenced by subjective philosophical and ideological perceptions as much as assessment of their abilities. Hell I even do that when looking at internal factional leaders within the party I support let alone across the spectrum. Also what I might see as a strength in a leader you probably think is a weakness and vice-versa. Still at least we still try and resolve those differences with exchange of ideas and the ballot box, rather than military coups - although reading some of these forums at times I sometimes start to wonder....

I don't think you'll ever change the dealings and negotiations that take place in politics and it would be naieve to think we ever would. PR I believe does make them more obvious but I believe it's real strength is that if the electorate votes for a general right or left of centre mix of parties they are more likely to get a govt that reflects that mix under PR than a winner take all system like FPP. With the exception of our first MMP election when nobody really had come to grips with it, all our subsequent elections have reflected the direction of the vote irrespective of whether you personally like or dislike Helen Clark, Winston Peters, Jenny Shipley, John Key, Peter Dunne etc. No system apart from one based on a gun barrel will eliminate leaders you don't like or wheeling and dealing - either openly or in secret.

Individual politicians and leaders come and go. but policies and ideas outlast them and are ultimately more important. Mickey Savage died a long time ago but the social security system his govt put in place, despite being severely modified even watered down is still with us. if he had died several years earlier and Peter Fraser had overseen it the situation would still be the same today.

Mickey Savages Social Security system ....think how much the many cunning crafty Maori have milked off the Pakeha Governmentover all those years,the silly man probably thought Maori were NZers until the seperatists/racists A/Hs like you appeared.

[Philocon 1]

Mickey Savages Social Security system ....think how much the many cunning crafty Maori have milked off the Pakeha Governmentover all those years,the silly man probably thought Maori were NZers until the seperatists/racists A/Hs like you appeared.

The greater the sound and fury, the more it signifies nothing. Keep those posts coming; each one just confirms the stupidity and lack of substance of your arguments. Sometimes it is better to keep quiet and just let people suspect you might not really know what you are talking about, than to post something and remove all doubt.

[Philocon 1]

An aspect of the scaremongering that ACT and NZ First embark on on the Seabed & Foreshore issue and what many don't seem to realise is that the group that is really shafted by the new bill is Maori and the Maori Party themselves not the country as a whole or non-Maori as the campaign would imply.

Private title-holders will still have the right to deny access to S&F through their coastal land or land they control on the foreshore, likewise private, local and central govt agencies such as Port Authorities etc. They have no test to undergo to establish their rights to that part of the coast they control. Iwi on the other hand will have to meet such stringent criteria to establish their limited customary rights many may not achieve it and some may not even try. Contrary to what the chicken-licken like scaremongerers are crying,this bill may in reality offer less opportunity for Maori to establish traditional customary rights and access etc than the current legislation - apart from very limited access to the courts.

The con has worked for those rallying to the campaign referred to here and politically may benefit NZ First and ACT in their appeals to shore up their niche vote.

However I think there is a substantial part of Maoridom that it has not conned and threatens to split the Maori Party and especially its leadership. So for a govt that makes out it doesn't like Hone Harawira, it is doing a great deal to shore up his long term political future as the heir apparent to the leadership of the MP and undermine the current leadership. Mind you they are getting great cooperation from the current leadership of that party in the process. Reminiscent of the old adage about turkeys voting for an early Christmas.

[Double Kwik 0]

Foreshore & Seabed claims are about "Mana".......mmmmm, "mana", is that money in Maori language??? can anybody confirm.

have to search ones "soul" to get an idea, of what it means.:cool: