Sunday, November 14, 2010
Mike Butler: Disingenuous or dim?Labels: foreshore and seabed, Mike Butler
He claims the bill is in “the best interests of all New Zealanders”, but it is actually only in the interest of the leaders of some tribes who stand to benefit. Others who miss out oppose the bill, and the Maori Party is split over the bill, with Hone Harawira demanding that the bill put the foreshore and seabed into Maori title.
He claims the bill is the result of extensive consultation, but in fact Attorney General Chris Finlayson rushed through a series of meetings earlier in the year, predominantly at maraes, and was forced by an Official Information Act request to show that of the 1500 people who put in submissions, 77 percent opposed repeal of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, and 91 percent opposed the government’s overall approach as outlined.
Foss claims that the bill restores the right of iwi and hapu to test customary title through the courts, but he doesn’t say anything about the proposed process whereby claims could be settled politically through secret deal-making with Ministers and rubber stamped through an Order in Council.
Is Foss being disingenuous, or just dim?
at 7:55 PM