https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that,
perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance think they’ll be locked
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there. They dream of a
world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and
these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be
reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore
them and get on with things."
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader,
he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully
dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have
to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
On Thursday, 26 January 2023 at 19:32:54 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:government assets and services such as health infrastructure, water infrastructure and elections. You know this, but keep peddling the same lie over and over again because you are a filthy little Goebbelian propaganda bot. Fuck off.
https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that, perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance think they’ll be locked
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there. They dream of a world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore them and get on with things."
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader,
he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have
to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !You've been told over and over and over again that Finlayson is talking about the Tuhoe model - a Maori group co-governing a local resource such as the Tuhoe national park. Nothing to do with the current co-governance discussion of national and local
https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that,
perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance
think they’ll be locked
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there.
They dream of a
world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and
these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign
secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really
understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be
reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore
them and get on with things."
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader,
he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully
dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his >statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed >towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have
to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 7:47:33 PM UTC+13, JohnO wrote:government assets and services such as health infrastructure, water infrastructure and elections. You know this, but keep peddling the same lie over and over again because you are a filthy little Goebbelian propaganda bot. Fuck off.
On Thursday, 26 January 2023 at 19:32:54 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/You've been told over and over and over again that Finlayson is talking about the Tuhoe model - a Maori group co-governing a local resource such as the Tuhoe national park. Nothing to do with the current co-governance discussion of national and local
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that,
perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance think they’ll be locked
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there. They dream of a
world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and
these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign
secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really
understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be
reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore
them and get on with things."
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader,
he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully
dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his
statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed
towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have
to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
Go easy on Rich. He can't help being a serial liar or lacking comprehension or learning skills. It comes with his belief that only left whinge politics is the only government that can succeed despite history listing it's failures...Soviet Rich? After all you insist on behaving like a totalitarian wanker and support them! But it's okay Rich I'll just keep calling you the lying Rich or Rich the loser :)
Why would I want to be addressed as KKK Bowes Rich? After all it's only fucking losers like you who prefer to be racist as evinced by several Labour politicians making racist remarks about better people than they or you can ever be! Should I call yo
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 19:28:43 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/A reasonable article and I accept that Findlayson has a valid point of
view - but it is wrong. There is no acknowledgement that for over 180
years there has been no mention of co-government as has been set up
with the Water reforms legislation. Where I mention co-governance it
is a reference to co-governance as prescribed by this legislation.
He wrongly describes the agreements he negotiated with various iwi as >co-governance when in fact they are co-management between elected
local authorities and iwi (in the case of the Waikato River
Authority). This co-management (as I have cited in several threads).
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that, >>perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance
That is a particularly insulting way to talk about those that oppose >co-governance. I oppose these provisions. I am not a frightened (a
childish concept) and I don't fear the changes - I simply oppose them
on the basis that we must never have nationwide resources currently >controlled by elected local bodies controlled by appointed Water
Entity directors, half of which are appointed by iwi interests.
think they’ll be lockedCorrect - but co-governance is not the way to do this.
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there.
An overly-emotive and insulting epithet. I despise those who
introduce such language to a debate and dismiss their credibility
because of it. It is a deliberate slur.
They dream of aExcept when the change is legislated without the mandate of a platform
world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and
these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign >>secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really >>understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be >>reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore
them and get on with things."
in an election manifesto. Co-governance has come from He Puapua - a
report commissioned by Labour without the knowledge of their coalition >partner and kept hidden until leaked. There was no mention of the
Water reforms or co-governance in Labours manifesto going into the
2020 election.
No decision can ever be imposed without voter support.
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader,
he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully >>dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his >>statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed >>towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have
to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
Perhaps, Rich, you might care to consider how Labour have imposed
their will without consent with the Waters reforms. Their popularity
is sliding and they will most likely be have their role reduced to the >Opposition as the watch National repeal this legislation as promised.
To Chris Findlayson I would say that no-one can ever impose a solution
which the majority of voters disapprove of, no matter what you may
think. After 180-odd years there is no justification for radical
change to governance in NZ.
It is worth noting that there have been no proposals such as those
outlined in He Puapua.
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 20:23:05 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 19:28:43 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/A reasonable article and I accept that Findlayson has a valid point of >view - but it is wrong. There is no acknowledgement that for over 180 >years there has been no mention of co-government as has been set up
with the Water reforms legislation. Where I mention co-governance it
is a reference to co-governance as prescribed by this legislation.
He wrongly describes the agreements he negotiated with various iwi as >co-governance when in fact they are co-management between elected
local authorities and iwi (in the case of the Waikato River
Authority). This co-management (as I have cited in several threads).
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that, >>perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance
That is a particularly insulting way to talk about those that oppose >co-governance. I oppose these provisions. I am not a frightened (a >childish concept) and I don't fear the changes - I simply oppose them
on the basis that we must never have nationwide resources currently >controlled by elected local bodies controlled by appointed Water
Entity directors, half of which are appointed by iwi interests.
think they’ll be lockedCorrect - but co-governance is not the way to do this.
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there.
An overly-emotive and insulting epithet. I despise those who
introduce such language to a debate and dismiss their credibility
because of it. It is a deliberate slur.
They dream of aExcept when the change is legislated without the mandate of a platform
world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and >>these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign >>secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really >>understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be >>reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore >>them and get on with things."
in an election manifesto. Co-governance has come from He Puapua - a
report commissioned by Labour without the knowledge of their coalition >partner and kept hidden until leaked. There was no mention of the
Water reforms or co-governance in Labours manifesto going into the
2020 election.
No decision can ever be imposed without voter support.The Treaty of Waitangi can be argued as much as you like; it was never
voted on by the British Parliament of the Day, but it is binding on
all of us in New Zealand. We have got through many of the land
grievances, and are now covering the wider issues such as air and
water. Finlayson spent a decade learning about it and talking to other lawyers and tribunal judges and to Maori - his is a practical solution
that will benefit all New Zealanders - and it is consistent with
National policies - until Luxon . . .
There are some National Party members who will like the rejection of
the Treaty nowbeing pushed, but I suspect that many believe that while
such lies may be enmough to get him elected, it will sadly have not
effect when faced with the Law.
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader,
he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully >>dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his >>statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed >>towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have
to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
Perhaps, Rich, you might care to consider how Labour have imposed
their will without consent with the Waters reforms. Their popularity
is sliding and they will most likely be have their role reduced to the >Opposition as the watch National repeal this legislation as promised.
To Chris Findlayson I would say that no-one can ever impose a solution >which the majority of voters disapprove of, no matter what you may
think. After 180-odd years there is no justification for radical
change to governance in NZ.
It is worth noting that there have been no proposals such as those >outlined in He Puapua.
On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 23:27:36 -0800 (PST), John Boweslocal government assets and services such as health infrastructure, water infrastructure and elections. You know this, but keep peddling the same lie over and over again because you are a filthy little Goebbelian propaganda bot. Fuck off.
<bowes...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, January 26, 2023 at 7:47:33 PM UTC+13, JohnO wrote:
On Thursday, 26 January 2023 at 19:32:54 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
https://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/You've been told over and over and over again that Finlayson is talking about the Tuhoe model - a Maori group co-governing a local resource such as the Tuhoe national park. Nothing to do with the current co-governance discussion of national and
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that,
perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance think they’ll be locked >> > out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there. They dream of a >> > world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and >> > these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign >> > secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really
understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be
reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore >> > them and get on with things."
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader, >> > he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully
dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his >> > statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed >> > towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have >> > to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
Soviet Rich? After all you insist on behaving like a totalitarian wanker and support them! But it's okay Rich I'll just keep calling you the lying Rich or Rich the loser :)Go easy on Rich. He can't help being a serial liar or lacking comprehension or learning skills. It comes with his belief that only left whinge politics is the only government that can succeed despite history listing it's failures...
Why would I want to be addressed as KKK Bowes Rich? After all it's only fucking losers like you who prefer to be racist as evinced by several Labour politicians making racist remarks about better people than they or you can ever be! Should I call yo
Just using the words of Chris Finlayson, John. His settlements wereThey were co-management NOT co-governance you gormless twit. Besides nowhere in the Treaty is co-governance mentioned. Hell the concepts only recently been invented by gormless twits like you and your useless Labour/Green/Porangi pary's! All that was
welcomed when they were made - by both the then National-led
Government and by Maori.
The Treaty of Waitangi can be argued as much as you like; it was never
voted on by the British Parliament of the Day, but it is binding on
all of us in New Zealand.
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 22:17:15 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Indeed, it bestowed no rights to Mapori that were also acknowledged byThe Treaty of Waitangi can be argued as much as you like; it was never >>voted on by the British Parliament of the Day, but it is binding on
all of us in New Zealand.
It is certainly not binding. It is not a constitution and it has no
place in 21st century New Zealand. It's purpose was to establish
equality under the law. It was never contrived to bestow extra rights
on Maori.
All the money spent on appeasing treaty activists and Maori tribalCan you give an example?
elitists costs everyone else, including most working Maori.
The time is long overdue for getting rid of any and all race based >legislation, and that includes the abolition of the Maori seats in >parliament.
Bill.
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 20:23:05 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 19:28:43 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
A reasonable article and I accept that Findlayson has a valid point ofhttps://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/
view - but it is wrong. There is no acknowledgement that for over 180 >>years there has been no mention of co-government as has been set up
with the Water reforms legislation. Where I mention co-governance it
is a reference to co-governance as prescribed by this legislation.
He wrongly describes the agreements he negotiated with various iwi as >>co-governance when in fact they are co-management between elected
local authorities and iwi (in the case of the Waikato River
Authority). This co-management (as I have cited in several threads).
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that, >>>perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance
That is a particularly insulting way to talk about those that oppose >>co-governance. I oppose these provisions. I am not a frightened (a >>childish concept) and I don't fear the changes - I simply oppose them
on the basis that we must never have nationwide resources currently >>controlled by elected local bodies controlled by appointed Water
Entity directors, half of which are appointed by iwi interests.
think they’ll be lockedCorrect - but co-governance is not the way to do this.
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it
really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can
actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there.
An overly-emotive and insulting epithet. I despise those who
introduce such language to a debate and dismiss their credibility
because of it. It is a deliberate slur.
They dream of aExcept when the change is legislated without the mandate of a platform
world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and
these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign >>>secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really >>>understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be >>>reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore >>>them and get on with things."
in an election manifesto. Co-governance has come from He Puapua - a
report commissioned by Labour without the knowledge of their coalition >>partner and kept hidden until leaked. There was no mention of the
Water reforms or co-governance in Labours manifesto going into the
2020 election.
No decision can ever be imposed without voter support.
The Treaty of Waitangi can be argued as much as you like; it was never
voted on by the British Parliament of the Day, but it is binding on
all of us in New Zealand.
We have got through many of the land
grievances, and are now covering the wider issues such as air and
water.
Finlayson spent a decade learning about it and talking to other
lawyers and tribunal judges and to Maori - his is a practical solution
that will benefit all New Zealanders
- and it is consistent with
National policies - until Luxon . . .
There are some National Party members who will like the rejection of
the Treaty nowbeing pushed, but I suspect that many believe that while
such lies may be enmough to get him elected, it will sadly have not
effect when faced with the Law.
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is
either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader,
he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully >>>dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New
Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his >>>statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed >>>towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have
to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal
contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
Perhaps, Rich, you might care to consider how Labour have imposed
their will without consent with the Waters reforms. Their popularity
is sliding and they will most likely be have their role reduced to the >>Opposition as the watch National repeal this legislation as promised.
To Chris Findlayson I would say that no-one can ever impose a solution >>which the majority of voters disapprove of, no matter what you may
think. After 180-odd years there is no justification for radical
change to governance in NZ.
It is worth noting that there have been no proposals such as those
outlined in He Puapua.
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 22:17:15 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 20:23:05 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 19:28:43 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
A reasonable article and I accept that Findlayson has a valid point of >>>view - but it is wrong. There is no acknowledgement that for over 180 >>>years there has been no mention of co-government as has been set uphttps://e-tangata.co.nz/comment-and-analysis/chris-finlayson-co-governance-should-be-embraced-not-feared/
with the Water reforms legislation. Where I mention co-governance it
is a reference to co-governance as prescribed by this legislation.
He wrongly describes the agreements he negotiated with various iwi as >>>co-governance when in fact they are co-management between elected
local authorities and iwi (in the case of the Waikato River
Authority). This co-management (as I have cited in several threads).
It is worth reading in full, but if you are not prepared to do that, >>>>perhaps this description fits :
"People who are frightened by co-governance
That is a particularly insulting way to talk about those that oppose >>>co-governance. I oppose these provisions. I am not a frightened (a >>>childish concept) and I don't fear the changes - I simply oppose them
on the basis that we must never have nationwide resources currently >>>controlled by elected local bodies controlled by appointed Water
Entity directors, half of which are appointed by iwi interests.
think they’ll be lockedCorrect - but co-governance is not the way to do this.
out of access to our natural resources, for example. When what it >>>>really means is that involving iwi in a myriad of decisions can >>>>actually result in a better country.
The people I call “the KKK brigade” are out there.
An overly-emotive and insulting epithet. I despise those who
introduce such language to a debate and dismiss their credibility
because of it. It is a deliberate slur.
Every government picks up ideas from the previous government - this is
They dream of aExcept when the change is legislated without the mandate of a platform
world that never was, and never could be. They are the people — and >>>>these words aren’t mine but are taken from a former British foreign >>>>secretary — that you can call the “sour right”. They don’t really >>>>understand tangata whenua. They don’t like change.
There are always going to be people like that, and you have to be >>>>reasonably charitable towards them for a while — and then just ignore >>>>them and get on with things."
in an election manifesto. Co-governance has come from He Puapua - a >>>report commissioned by Labour without the knowledge of their coalition >>>partner and kept hidden until leaked. There was no mention of the
Water reforms or co-governance in Labours manifesto going into the
2020 election.
No decision can ever be imposed without voter support.
The Treaty of Waitangi can be argued as much as you like; it was never >>voted on by the British Parliament of the Day, but it is binding on
all of us in New Zealand.
Incorrect. It was binding on those that signed it, and after 182
years it is unlikely any of them are still alive.
It is an important historical document. Unfortunately many (including >Findlayson) are reading far to much into it in respect of modern-dayHe is merely reading into it the application of law that he would not
rights.
We have got through many of the land
grievances, and are now covering the wider issues such as air and
water.
I accept there may be some injustices committed by Treaty signatories
that have resulted in multi-generational unfairness and financial
loss. That is what the Waitangi Tribunal was set up to address.
Finlayson spent a decade learning about it and talking to other
lawyers and tribunal judges and to Maori - his is a practical solution
that will benefit all New Zealanders
That is simply political rhetoric. Findlayson is irrelevant.
- and it is consistent withIncorrect. Labour have enacted Water Reform legislation that includes >provisions for all water assets throughout NZ to be managed by 4 Water >Entities, each of which has a Board of Governors that is co-governed.
National policies - until Luxon . . .
This is a total change of policy from Labour, not announced until
October 27th 2021 by Minister Mahuta. It is therefore Labour who have >totally changed direction, and National have simply reacted to this
and the new Acts passed by Labour.
There are some National Party members who will like the rejection ofMore rhetoric. National will win the election because Labour had no
the Treaty nowbeing pushed, but I suspect that many believe that while
such lies may be enmough to get him elected, it will sadly have not
effect when faced with the Law.
mandate to enact co-government that has been embedded in the Water
reforms legislation. National have no policy announced on water
reform yet, but they have committed to repeal the Water reforms
legislation that Labour have imposed on NZ.
______________________________
Worth also thinking about is that, on those terms, Chris Luxon is >>>>either ignorant, and with this amount of time since he became leader, >>>>he may also be badly advised; certainly he appears to be wilfully >>>>dismissive of an important contractual relationships within New >>>>Zealand. Certainly his mana with Maori will have taken a hit over his >>>>statements at Ratana, but if he did get elected, he may well be headed >>>>towards some difficult court cases where it is possible he would have >>>>to resile from his statements and actually comply with a legal >>>>contract, even if he does not like it.
Perhaps John Bowes would prefer to be addresses as KKK Bowes !
Perhaps, Rich, you might care to consider how Labour have imposed
their will without consent with the Waters reforms. Their popularity
is sliding and they will most likely be have their role reduced to the >>>Opposition as the watch National repeal this legislation as promised.
To Chris Findlayson I would say that no-one can ever impose a solution >>>which the majority of voters disapprove of, no matter what you may
think. After 180-odd years there is no justification for radical
change to governance in NZ.
It is worth noting that there have been no proposals such as those >>>outlined in He Puapua.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 111:28:03 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,950 |