The result of the election has been an enormous relief. Especially as clearly many Maori voted against the rush to a coup d’etat which would install tribal governance by their hierarchy.
Also a relief is the fact that the Coalition Agreements undertake to reverse so much that had been done by a Government suffering from a form of delirium induced by experiencing the power of being able to govern alone. They had apparently become desperate to maintain the backing from the Maori seats.
In my book “The Corruption of New Zealand” I trace
significant steps in the destruction of the promise of the Treaty of Waitangi
to have the same law for all. The largest steps amongst these are the failure
to repeal the establishment of the Maori seats as originally intended and the
setting up of the Waitangi Tribunal. Again, thankfully, the Coalition has these
in its sights.
But reversing all of that will only get us back to the
position where 50% of the prison population is Maori with vital statistics for
Maori significantly poorer than the average. I am clearly of the view first
enunciated by Elizabeth Rata that these issues are because 50% of the whole
population live below the poverty line. It is well established that the
children of the better-off have better health, live longer and do better at
school. That is not surprising.
Even if you only have one child and the cost of a doctor’s
consultation is zero the cost of time off work and transport will give you
pause in going to the Doctor if you have problems in the normal costs of
survival. Similarly with the costs of books and other appurtenances for
education.
Thus, while the present list of undertakings by the Coalition
are being completed we must act to reduce inequality. And there have been many
practices which have quietly become embedded because of the political power of
the Maori block of seats. And correction of these practices may contribute a
little to go towards reducing inequality.
Consider that, instead of the 28% tax on profits for
companies, the so called Maori authority credit is a 15% charge on profits and
the cash distribution is then not taxed.
There are stories of Iwi being offered Government properties
with a lowered valuation and a further 5% discount. Usually there is said to be
no limit on the time for acceptance. So the IWI has time to wait and see if the
market value increases and also to make a sale before accepting the offer.
There are also stories of Ngai Tahu having built an office
block in Christchurch after the earthquake offering it at such high rentals
that there were no takers until the Government departments were ordered to do
so.
An interesting Dompost article on 10/3/22
said;“Ngati toa Rangatira has bought 40 school properties north of
Wellington as part of the Iwi’s Treaty settlement, making it the largest
landlord of the Ministry of education ...........the ownership would provide a
perpetual income for the iwi.”
Apparently the valuation had been about $345million but the title
was transferred and the properties leased back. The lease of course would be
paid from the Education Budget and, presumably, hidden there in the same
fashion as the leases for the naval base in Devonport and various other
properties transferred to Iwi in Treaty Settlements.
I have no details of any of such leases but this is crafty
accounting which misleads the public. The Assets obviously disappear from the
Government Balance Sheets and the ongoing costs are, I suppose, mentioned in
notes as contingent liabilities. They are probably costed on a discounted cash
flow basis. This could, using high school algebra, be calculated as being for
perpetuity (infinity) but is likely to only be calculated for a 5 or 10 year
term. But the true discounted cash flow cost must be at least the valuation figure or it would not have been
accepted. And such costs will not appear as Government liabilities on the
balance sheet. Or so I suppose.
I have had excellent service from IRD and Social Welfare with my
OIA ( Official Information Act) requests) but sorting out the total of all
these issues would require multiple questions to different departments. I hope
that someone will do it. Or, preferably, that separate information will be
provided annually for all government leases disclosing the amounts paid from
each department and to whom. It is likely that, when interest rates become more
normal, it would be better for Government to borrow more money and buy out the
leases. We could then see what we really owed and not be led to believe that
money is being spent on defence or education when it used to simply be on
Government property.
The same problems have also appeared in the dealings of Councils.
Porirua recently decided to sell some land, offered it first to their chosen
Iwi ( named as a “Partner”) and will only offer it openly if the Iwi decline.
They have also chosen “Partners” for plumbing and the like.
In the interests of having not only the same law for all but of
administering the laws in the same way I believe that we need a Royal
Commission to look at all these issues. Making use of the Serious Fraud Office
in some cases.
Perce Harpham, a retired businessman, was a pioneer of the New Zealand computer industry.
6 comments:
I was part of a Nelson based group of investors who bought the main post office building in Christchurch. Since ALL NZ government buildings put up for sale have to be first offered to iwi, we had to wait around 7 months until all the iwi declined to make offers before we could make our offer.
The government created 'race based' corruption and fraud runs very deep indeed, funded by, but hidden from the good ole taxpayer/ratepayer of 'apartheid' New Zealand.
I wouldn't trust a government appointed Royal Commission to provide 'we the people' with the hard, cold facts on this matter either.
This is how corruption takes root, and flourishes.
At an international conference on corruption, New Zealand was said to be the second least corrupt country in the world. The rest of the world must be in a parlous state!
Kevan
Kawena, Someone from the govt. probably bribed the panel to give us a good position.
I have some knowledge of the Ngati Toa Wellington region school site lease deal and after many decades in a property professional capacity I can, hand on heart, declare that had that deal been offered to the wider public you would (at that time) have been trampled in the rush from those keen to get a piece of the action. It was an exceedingly attractive deal and the true cost to our education system and the taxpayer will only be realised in time.
Given the antecedents of the acquirer, it seems yet another case of them enjoying the spoils of war.
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.