The government, however, is pushing back hard, arguing that Ngāi Tahu’s claims have no legal standing beyond historical settlements.
Blaming intensive dairy farming, Ngāi Tahu argue that successive governments have failed to protect water bodies and breached Treaty obligations.
The iwi seeks legal recognition of its rangatiratanga (chiefly authority) over freshwater, claiming past government commitments were “empty words” that have led to a near-disastrous state of water quality.
Ngāi Tahu’s legal team is led by one of co-governance’s main architects, former Attorney-General Chris Finlayson KC.
He says the Treaty of Waitangi guarantees the iwi’s authority over natural resources and that the 1997 Deed of Settlement did not extinguish its freshwater rights.
Finlayson argues that the Crown must go beyond consultation and design freshwater policy in partnership with Ngāi Tahu.
The Crown rejects these claims, asserting its sole right to control and regulate freshwater under existing laws. Government lawyers argue that some or all of Ngāi Tahu’s rights have been modified, suspended, or extinguished, that Treaty settlements already resolved such claims, and that the court should not interfere in policy decisions or parliamentary sovereignty.
They frame Ngāi Tahu’s lawsuit as an attempt to override democratic governance by demanding direct influence over resource management.
Read more over at Newsroom
The Centrist is a new online news platform that strives to provide a balance to the public debate - where this article was sourced.
The iwi seeks legal recognition of its rangatiratanga (chiefly authority) over freshwater, claiming past government commitments were “empty words” that have led to a near-disastrous state of water quality.
Ngāi Tahu’s legal team is led by one of co-governance’s main architects, former Attorney-General Chris Finlayson KC.
He says the Treaty of Waitangi guarantees the iwi’s authority over natural resources and that the 1997 Deed of Settlement did not extinguish its freshwater rights.
Finlayson argues that the Crown must go beyond consultation and design freshwater policy in partnership with Ngāi Tahu.
The Crown rejects these claims, asserting its sole right to control and regulate freshwater under existing laws. Government lawyers argue that some or all of Ngāi Tahu’s rights have been modified, suspended, or extinguished, that Treaty settlements already resolved such claims, and that the court should not interfere in policy decisions or parliamentary sovereignty.
They frame Ngāi Tahu’s lawsuit as an attempt to override democratic governance by demanding direct influence over resource management.
Read more over at Newsroom
The Centrist is a new online news platform that strives to provide a balance to the public debate - where this article was sourced.
13 comments:
"Finlayson leads legal team" - no surprise. No doubt for a huge fee.
He is the chief architect of the destruction of NZ's democracy.
This is so scary.
There is a false assumption in Ngai Tahu's argument that rangatiratanga equates to good land and water management. History shows it is the complete opposite. When it comes to intensive dairy farming, Ngai Tahu aren't ones to talk.
Well, the Treaty either guaranteed these freshwater rights or it did not. It does not appear that a Treaty anywhere would include water or air. Many of us own land but we don't "own" the water, air, sky or sea. Come on New Zealand, you are being played. You have no guilt to pay reparations for. Findlayson is using his expertise. Surely the Crown has some brilliant legal minds at their disposal?
Sadly the very real feeling is that we do have brilliant minds but they too are infected with the brainwashed mind virus that make out maori can do no wrong.....odd and scary in equal proportions.
As I have repeatedly laboured, any co governace with 50/50 trace maori/others voting is invariably in effect maori control. Presumably with no direct descendants, the chaos he leaves NZ in is of no concern to Finlayson. Rangatiratanga implied chiefly control of a tribe to the extent that did not clash with the law of the land as applied to all as British subjects. As a seemingly benign tribe Ngai Tahu have been much indulged. Typical maori gratitude is now evident.Even just co governece will in effect be maori control.
NZ government and by association the NZ people have to demand an end to the race based claims and reparations . Immediate legislation to cancel all the Maori seats and enforce taxation on all companies that are evading taxation through quasi trust status , which also includes religious trusts ie Sanitarium to be fair to all NZ companies and trusts . President Trump would just sign an executuive order for Ngai Tahu to pull your head in or this is the penalty after next week. NZ has had enough of apartheid behaviour .
In any other country this would be a major News story.
Follow the money. Does it mean Ngai Tahu is maybe not doing so well with what it received from Treaty Settlements and needs to find an additional income stream – or is that river? This is Ngai Tahu’s version of Three Waters. Think dams, lakes, hydro power, then power prices. After that wastewater, irrigation schemes, town and country water supplies. After that think economic control. The kingdom of Ngai Tahu will be set up then to rule the South Island.
What does Finlayson want his epitaph to be? What does he expect it to be? What will it be?
Isn't this the sort of nonsense that Luxon et al promised National would end if it was elected in 2023 ? He's done nothing about it since being elected. All we hear and see ad infinitum is him hiding behind the phrase "we have to get the economy/growth moving in the right direction", which he has failed miserably to do.
It also reminds us of Luxon's mentor, John Key, and his offsider, the other traitor of democracy, Chris Finlayson.
Finlayson = hubris
It already does in principle - now it really will. Elizabeth Rata warned that Ngi Tahu could become " rentier overlords " - property owners could pay an extra fee ( in addition to council rates) to the tribe Wake up, NZ!
Post a Comment