He is right. Aotearoa has changed its understanding of democratic norms, and we are establishing different political and economic rights based on a person’s whakapapa.
Some of the more excitable elements on the fringes of our fractured community have latched onto the He Puapua report as evidence of an accelerated time-frame for this constitutional restructuring, but these changes have been underway for a generation and, as Jackson noted, have arrived.
He Puapua is remarkable in its scope and ambition. It has Orwellian statements such as, by 2040, “All New Zealanders will embrace and respect Māori culture as an integral part of national identity…”, and has some grandiose plans that defy political reality.
It lapses into Cultural Revolutionary rhetoric and over-reaches, but it reflects the thinking of a large swathe of the Wellington cultural elite.
The report isn’t a road-map to anywhere, but highly paid and respected public servants put this document together. It is a publication that would not have been written two decades ago and that is its significance.
He Puapua draws on the Key government’s decision to sign the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
In the press release in 2010, Key “acknowledges that Māori hold a special status as tangata whenua, the indigenous people of New Zealand and have an interest in all policy and legislative matters”.
Since then, the development of parallel political and economic structures has continued and accelerated under the Ardern administration. However they would have continued, but at a slower pace, if Bill English had been in power for the last five years.
Those hoping Luxon will return us to the New Zealand of the 1950s have not been following his career, which has consistently tacked with the prevailing wind rather than sailing against it.
The focus at the moment is the Three Waters co-governance model and this is interesting for a number of reasons.
First, once established the nature of these new entities means that they are free from democratic control.
With disparate local councils appointing half of the boards, and iwi the balance, there will not be any political leader with the ability to direct or fire those managing these assets.
Ratepayers and other users of the water infrastructure will have no mechanism to influence how these organisations are being run unless they seek the support of the various iwi.
Second, the Three Waters legislation mandates that the four regional water bodies must engage “…early and meaningfully with Māori…” and give effect to Te Mana o te Wai.
This concept is not defined in the legislation but by a policy document issued by the Ministry of the Environment and subject to administrative, not legislative, change.
As currently defined, Te Mana o te Wai explicitly places the health of the water bodies ahead of the essential needs of the people, as well as mandating working with tangata whenua.
Even without effective governance control, by legislating for this engagement considerable authority is being vested in those beyond democratic accountability
The effect is a shifting of political power away from the process of voting for political office holders to manage the state’s assets, and towards a new political caste. The changes are not restricted to the water assets.
RNZ and TVNZ will be merged into a new entity under the Aotearoa New Zealand Public Media Bill and, by law, this new entity must be governed by a board that has skills and experience in te ao Māori and tikanga Māori, and engage with Māori about relevant strategies and policies.
The Resource Management Act is being dismantled and a new regime for managing the land is being developed.
Under the existing act there is a role for tangata whenua, but in the new legislation, the Natural and Built Environments Bill, this will be expanded.
The concept of Te Oranga o te Taiao, not yet defined, will be instrumental to how land in New Zealand will be developed.
Even in the recently passed Fair Pay Agreements legislation, those engaging in collective bargaining must use their best endeavours to seek feedback from Māori employers and employees and to consider whether they need a specific person to represent them.
The extent and breadth of these developments is remarkable and so is the speed that they are being implemented.
What is also fascinating is the acceptance of this new political dynamic and the generational divide when confronted with this change.
The Māori Health Authority is now in place and is tasked with providing race-based health services, a programme introduced by a progressive government with remarkably little public disquiet outside a small cohort of professional contrarians.
Most have accepted, in this new order, a health and increasingly a welfare system that responds on race and not need is acceptable; or they do not care enough to speak out.
Adults are created by our childhoods and mine, like most of my generation, was raised on very different cultural gruel that those who are coming of age today.
Our children have been raised in classrooms that placed an emphasis on te reo Māori over TE Lawrence, and Kupe before Kipling.
They live in a different world, and it is one us older citizens do not recognise and not one in which we feel comfortable.
There remains in conservative circles a belief that the tide can be turned back, that an omnibus piece of legislation or major reform agenda can roll back a regime that has been decades in the making.... to continue reading, please click here: https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/130375041/damien-grant-like-it-or-not-weve-got-a-new-democracy
Damien Grant is an Auckland business owner, a member of the Taxpayers’ Union and a regular opinion contributor for Stuff, writing from a libertarian perspective.
It lapses into Cultural Revolutionary rhetoric and over-reaches, but it reflects the thinking of a large swathe of the Wellington cultural elite.
The report isn’t a road-map to anywhere, but highly paid and respected public servants put this document together. It is a publication that would not have been written two decades ago and that is its significance.
He Puapua draws on the Key government’s decision to sign the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
In the press release in 2010, Key “acknowledges that Māori hold a special status as tangata whenua, the indigenous people of New Zealand and have an interest in all policy and legislative matters”.
Since then, the development of parallel political and economic structures has continued and accelerated under the Ardern administration. However they would have continued, but at a slower pace, if Bill English had been in power for the last five years.
Those hoping Luxon will return us to the New Zealand of the 1950s have not been following his career, which has consistently tacked with the prevailing wind rather than sailing against it.
The focus at the moment is the Three Waters co-governance model and this is interesting for a number of reasons.
First, once established the nature of these new entities means that they are free from democratic control.
With disparate local councils appointing half of the boards, and iwi the balance, there will not be any political leader with the ability to direct or fire those managing these assets.
Ratepayers and other users of the water infrastructure will have no mechanism to influence how these organisations are being run unless they seek the support of the various iwi.
Second, the Three Waters legislation mandates that the four regional water bodies must engage “…early and meaningfully with Māori…” and give effect to Te Mana o te Wai.
This concept is not defined in the legislation but by a policy document issued by the Ministry of the Environment and subject to administrative, not legislative, change.
As currently defined, Te Mana o te Wai explicitly places the health of the water bodies ahead of the essential needs of the people, as well as mandating working with tangata whenua.
Even without effective governance control, by legislating for this engagement considerable authority is being vested in those beyond democratic accountability
The effect is a shifting of political power away from the process of voting for political office holders to manage the state’s assets, and towards a new political caste. The changes are not restricted to the water assets.
RNZ and TVNZ will be merged into a new entity under the Aotearoa New Zealand Public Media Bill and, by law, this new entity must be governed by a board that has skills and experience in te ao Māori and tikanga Māori, and engage with Māori about relevant strategies and policies.
The Resource Management Act is being dismantled and a new regime for managing the land is being developed.
Under the existing act there is a role for tangata whenua, but in the new legislation, the Natural and Built Environments Bill, this will be expanded.
The concept of Te Oranga o te Taiao, not yet defined, will be instrumental to how land in New Zealand will be developed.
Even in the recently passed Fair Pay Agreements legislation, those engaging in collective bargaining must use their best endeavours to seek feedback from Māori employers and employees and to consider whether they need a specific person to represent them.
The extent and breadth of these developments is remarkable and so is the speed that they are being implemented.
What is also fascinating is the acceptance of this new political dynamic and the generational divide when confronted with this change.
The Māori Health Authority is now in place and is tasked with providing race-based health services, a programme introduced by a progressive government with remarkably little public disquiet outside a small cohort of professional contrarians.
Most have accepted, in this new order, a health and increasingly a welfare system that responds on race and not need is acceptable; or they do not care enough to speak out.
Adults are created by our childhoods and mine, like most of my generation, was raised on very different cultural gruel that those who are coming of age today.
Our children have been raised in classrooms that placed an emphasis on te reo Māori over TE Lawrence, and Kupe before Kipling.
They live in a different world, and it is one us older citizens do not recognise and not one in which we feel comfortable.
There remains in conservative circles a belief that the tide can be turned back, that an omnibus piece of legislation or major reform agenda can roll back a regime that has been decades in the making.... to continue reading, please click here: https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/130375041/damien-grant-like-it-or-not-weve-got-a-new-democracy
Damien Grant is an Auckland business owner, a member of the Taxpayers’ Union and a regular opinion contributor for Stuff, writing from a libertarian perspective.
6 comments:
I strongly suspect Damian is right.
Either way, we will end up with some form of co-governance. Non-Maori NZders largely have themselves to blame for this.
They have gone with the flow, been seduced by the media claims of how we're one of the most liberal countries in the world and how well we have done in trying to right the wrongs done to native Maori. But never well enough. Endless claims of wrongs, never any rights.
Kiwis can be terribly self-satisfied, but always in a nice way, and love to be preened and told how wonderful we are. At some point - probably back in the late 90's or early 2000's, we should have called a halt to the whole grievance industry. But we didn't and now it's a runaway train.
There's no political will to stop it and certainly not a public will.
Apathy and acceptance are Kiwi watchwords.
Mate - ya dreamin'.
This process of sucking up to the poor, hard done by collection of individuals claiming to be more important than everybody else is embedded in the National conscientious. Its been around since the treaty signing.
Why weren't the Maori seats abolished when there usefulness had ended, they should have gone before the end of the 19th century.
Yet here we are 2022 and still our elective process is manipulated by them. This modern collection of non Maori, Maori are under no illusion just how much power they hold over an uneducated, apathetic guilt ridden population. Your absolutely spot on. Any faith given to mainstream political parties is very unlikely to see a turnaround. If the National party are successful in regaining power, the best we could hope for is a slow down.
Are you speaking for yourself Dee M?
You are possibly partly right but most Kiwis don't even understand what has happened/is happening. It is so secretive and devious. So I don't think it's apathy, more ignorance. Most people live busy lives and don't have time for the luxury of checking out sneaky politics. Our MSM is culpable for most of the ignorance these days.
MC
I don’t believe these changes are “going unnoticed” so much as there is so little that mere citizens can do about them until next election. However 99% of my friends and acquaintances are significantly opposed to these undemocratic changes being thrust onto society, and thankfully enough of us understand what is happening to ensure a change of government next year!
Totally agree with Anonymous 5.18 pm. The public have little or no idea of what is developing. They are less informed than 90 years ago. I quote the example of a street of professionals; only 10% had any idea of the new mandated zoning and its potential devastating effect on their owned homes. Colleagues who, unlike me, spend all their time on practical pursuits, have only the vaguest notion of current developments. He Puapua means nothing to them. They could not define co governacce. Or (like Jacinda) quote the 3 Treaty articles or the latest interpretation of.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.