An extraordinary exchange took place on The Platform Radio Station between host Sean Plunket and Deputy PM Winston Peters, who said there's no such thing as Treaty Principles. However, Labour and Greens not only believe there are Principles, but they form part of the "constitutional framework of this nation", to quote MP Willie Jackson. As for NZ's legal profession, it has entered the political fray, in the form of the Kings Counsels, siding with Labour.
ACT also believes there are Principles, but they've been confusingly concocted by politically activist judges, so must be clarified by legislation. Is someone missing from this list? The Prime Minister. Platform host Plunket told his audience that since becoming PM, Luxon has declined to be interviewed by him. That's like Trump turning down Fox News, since The Platform is right-wing. Most incredibly, Plunket said he had no idea whether the PM accepted that Treaty Principles exist, or not, let alone their status in NZ law.
Since Main Stream Media journos can't do interviews anymore - they shout at our leaders and want to tell us how to think - lets ask our own questions to the PM.
Since Main Stream Media journos can't do interviews anymore - they shout at our leaders and want to tell us how to think - lets ask our own questions to the PM.
First: "Deputy PM Peters says there's no such thing as Treaty Principles. Your next Deputy PM Seymour says there are Principles but they need to be clarified in legislation. Labour and Kings Counsels also say there are Principles & they like the existing ones. What's your position?"
Second: "If you do believe there are Principles, what's their legal status? Are they part of NZ's constitutional framework, as asserted by Labour & Kings Counsel? If so, are they enshrined & settled to the extent they cannot now be altered by Parliament?"
If our PM is not able to address the nation in this time of economic & political crisis, and answer these questions, then he's consigning NZ to uncertainty, division, acrimony and stagnation, since this is no side issue. For the sake of Kiwis of all ethnicities, can the PM tell us where we stand before the law?
If our PM is not able to address the nation in this time of economic & political crisis, and answer these questions, then he's consigning NZ to uncertainty, division, acrimony and stagnation, since this is no side issue. For the sake of Kiwis of all ethnicities, can the PM tell us where we stand before the law?
The status of the Principles, which our legal profession says include "equitable outcomes", will determine whether NZ becomes poor, but where people are equally poor, or prosperous, but where some prosper more than others. Some folks prefer the former; others the latter. Who's to judge?
We're just asking the PM to tell us which road NZ is going down, so we can decide whether to leave, depending on our own preferences. I suspect we already know what he will say: "I'm not sure. The answers are being developed - they've been developing over these past 180 years and will continue to be developed" ~~ That answer will sink the country.
Sources:
https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/combined/HansDeb_20241114_20241114_40
Professor Robert MacCulloch holds the Matthew S. Abel Chair of Macroeconomics at Auckland University. He has previously worked at the Reserve Bank, Oxford University, and the London School of Economics. He runs the blog Down to Earth Kiwi from where this article was sourced.
Sources:
https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/combined/HansDeb_20241114_20241114_40
Professor Robert MacCulloch holds the Matthew S. Abel Chair of Macroeconomics at Auckland University. He has previously worked at the Reserve Bank, Oxford University, and the London School of Economics. He runs the blog Down to Earth Kiwi from where this article was sourced.
No comments:
Post a Comment