https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting
Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga
would be protected.

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during
Michael Cullen's time.).

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all
New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: “There is fear, but
because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the
opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a
society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality.
For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the
fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of
engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who
always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a
former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe
people whose basic world view is negative. "

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, January 28, 2023 at 10:41:14 PM UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:

https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting
Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga
would be protected.

Bullshit! No mention of co-governance in the Treaty Rich. Hell co-governance wasn't even a concept back then. You did what the chief told you or gor tossed out of the tribe!

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during
Michael Cullen's time.).

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all
New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: å…¸here is fear, but because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a
society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality.
For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the
fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of
engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a
former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe
people whose basic world view is negative. "

Just because people don't agree with you or the useless twats you blindly support doesn't mean they have a negative attitude Rich. Just that they're smarter than losers like you and the government you blindly support!
bte co-governance and co-management are different things though the distinction doesn't get theough your lack of comprehension...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-01-28, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:

https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting
Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga
would be protected.

For sake of arguement, let us take this as a given. The question I would ask
is Co-governance as per 3 waters the way to do it without a huge amount of discontent?

The folks are angry about a small group of people taking control, some what under handly, of public assets for their own gain.

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during
Michael Cullen's time.).

More evidence for the arguement that co-governce and co-management as terms are rapiadly becoming confused.

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all
New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: “There is fear, but because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the
opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a
society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality.
For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the
fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of
engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

The debate in regard to the Government's Covid response was one of stiffing debate and shooting any heads above the parapet. The Government showed very little inclination to debate, or allow others to do so.

Please do not try and (re)write history.

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who
always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a
former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe
people whose basic world view is negative. "

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 22:37:03 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting
Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga
would be protected.

So how come co-governance was never mentioned either in the Treaty or
in the 179+ years between the signing of the Treaty and the leaking
of the He Puapua report.

He Puapua was clearly a template to define co-governance, however it
was not even publicly acknowledged at the time it was commissioned and
was leaked, not announced. None of this is mentioned in the Minter
Ellison report - but the provenance of modern co-governance is a
critical factor in whether non-Maori find it acceptable.

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve >co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during
Michael Cullen's time.).

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive >governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all
New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: “There is fear, but
because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the
opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a
society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality.
For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the
fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of
engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

I find the use of the word 'fear' interesting. I don't fear
co-governance and I did not fear lockdowns. I disagree with the first
and I initially agreed with the rationale for the second. There is
nothing to fear from either and I view the use of the word 'fear' in
this context as motivated to induce emotion in place of objectiveness.

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who
always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a
former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe
people whose basic world view is negative. "

All of which is irrelevant.

The upcoming election is the first opportunity for us as a nation to
have a debate about co-government. It is up to those political
parties that support it to get the message out to all of us, and to
accept the consequences.


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 12:26:13 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 22:37:03 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting
Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga
would be protected.

So how come co-governance was never mentioned either in the Treaty or
in the 179+ years between the signing of the Treaty and the leaking
of the He Puapua report.

He Puapua was clearly a template to define co-governance, however it
was not even publicly acknowledged at the time it was commissioned and
was leaked, not announced. None of this is mentioned in the Minter
Ellison report - but the provenance of modern co-governance is a
critical factor in whether non-Maori find it acceptable.

Since Cullen and the Finlayson had put together co-governance
arrangemnts that were welcomed by all parties and have worked well,
why would He Puapua need to define it? I think that paper was about
something quite different.

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve >>co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during
Michael Cullen's time.).

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive >>governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all
New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: “There is fear, but >>because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the >>opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a
society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality.
For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the
fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of
engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

I find the use of the word 'fear' interesting. I don't fear
co-governance and I did not fear lockdowns. I disagree with the first
and I initially agreed with the rationale for the second. There is
nothing to fear from either and I view the use of the word 'fear' in
this context as motivated to induce emotion in place of objectiveness.

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who >>always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a
former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe
people whose basic world view is negative. "

All of which is irrelevant.

Then why do you fear co-govrnance?

The upcoming election is the first opportunity for us as a nation to
have a debate about co-government. It is up to those political
parties that support it to get the message out to all of us, and to
accept the consequences.

Exactly - the 'all decisions must be made by the Prime Minister' mode
of National, vs consultation and wide agreement for the way Labour do
things.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 14:03:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 12:26:13 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 22:37:03 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting
Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga
would be protected.

So how come co-governance was never mentioned either in the Treaty or
in the 179+ years between the signing of the Treaty and the leaking
of the He Puapua report.

He Puapua was clearly a template to define co-governance, however it
was not even publicly acknowledged at the time it was commissioned and
was leaked, not announced. None of this is mentioned in the Minter
Ellison report - but the provenance of modern co-governance is a
critical factor in whether non-Maori find it acceptable.

Since Cullen and the Finlayson had put together co-governance
arrangemnts that were welcomed by all parties and have worked well,
why would He Puapua need to define it? I think that paper was about
something quite different.

They did nothing of the sort.

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve >>>co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during >>>Michael Cullen's time.).

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive >>>governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all
New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: “There is fear, but >>>because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the >>>opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a >>>society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality.
For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the
fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of >>>engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

I find the use of the word 'fear' interesting. I don't fear
co-governance and I did not fear lockdowns. I disagree with the first
and I initially agreed with the rationale for the second. There is
nothing to fear from either and I view the use of the word 'fear' in
this context as motivated to induce emotion in place of objectiveness.

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who >>>always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a >>>former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe
people whose basic world view is negative. "

All of which is irrelevant.

Then why do you fear co-govrnance?

He doesn't and neither do I.
Speaking only for myself I detest it, but that is not fear.

The upcoming election is the first opportunity for us as a nation to
have a debate about co-government. It is up to those political
parties that support it to get the message out to all of us, and to
accept the consequences.

Exactly - the 'all decisions must be made by the Prime Minister' mode
of National, vs consultation and wide agreement for the way Labour do
things.

Nonsense, this Laboutr government have consulted with almost nobody
for the past 2+ years.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 15:13:43 +1300, Tony <LizandTony@orcon.net.nz>
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 14:03:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 12:26:13 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:

On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 22:37:03 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting >>>>Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga >>>>would be protected.

So how come co-governance was never mentioned either in the Treaty or
in the 179+ years between the signing of the Treaty and the leaking
of the He Puapua report.

He Puapua was clearly a template to define co-governance, however it
was not even publicly acknowledged at the time it was commissioned and >>>was leaked, not announced. None of this is mentioned in the Minter >>>Ellison report - but the provenance of modern co-governance is a
critical factor in whether non-Maori find it acceptable.

Since Cullen and the Finlayson had put together co-governance
arrangemnts that were welcomed by all parties and have worked well,
why would He Puapua need to define it? I think that paper was about >>something quite different.

They did nothing of the sort.

He Puapua provided guidelines to co-governance.

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve >>>>co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during >>>>Michael Cullen's time.).

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive >>>>governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all
New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: “There is fear, but >>>>because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the >>>>opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a >>>>society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality.
For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the
fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of >>>>engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

I find the use of the word 'fear' interesting. I don't fear >>>co-governance and I did not fear lockdowns. I disagree with the first >>>and I initially agreed with the rationale for the second. There is >>>nothing to fear from either and I view the use of the word 'fear' in
this context as motivated to induce emotion in place of objectiveness.

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who >>>>always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a >>>>former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe
people whose basic world view is negative. "

All of which is irrelevant.

Then why do you fear co-govrnance?

He doesn't and neither do I.
Speaking only for myself I detest it, but that is not fear.

Correct. Implying fear is a way of disparagement of those who oppose co-governance. Either that or Rich and others do not understand the
difference between fear and opposition.

The upcoming election is the first opportunity for us as a nation to
have a debate about co-government. It is up to those political
parties that support it to get the message out to all of us, and to >>>accept the consequences.

Exactly - the 'all decisions must be made by the Prime Minister' mode
of National, vs consultation and wide agreement for the way Labour do >>things.

Nonsense, this Laboutr government have consulted with almost nobody
for the past 2+ years.

This government attempted to entrench some parts of the Water Services
Entities Act through a SOP purely to avoid consultation. Entrenchment
was withdrawn when widespread opposition was apparent. That was a
substantial breach of trust with the electorate. Public opposition in
general was ignored. Labour's popularity has declined accordingly and
rightly so.


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 16:25:19 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 15:13:43 +1300, Tony <LizandTony@orcon.net.nz>
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 14:03:56 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2023 12:26:13 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:

On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 22:37:03 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

https://www.minterellison.co.nz/insights/co-governance-the-misunderstood-political-hot-potato-and-likely-election-dominator

So Co-governance in some situations (and water is one) are meeting >>>>>Treaty obligations with respect to the obligation that Maori taonga >>>>>would be protected.

So how come co-governance was never mentioned either in the Treaty or >>>>in the 179+ years between the signing of the Treaty and the leaking
of the He Puapua report.

He Puapua was clearly a template to define co-governance, however it >>>>was not even publicly acknowledged at the time it was commissioned and >>>>was leaked, not announced. None of this is mentioned in the Minter >>>>Ellison report - but the provenance of modern co-governance is a >>>>critical factor in whether non-Maori find it acceptable.

Since Cullen and the Finlayson had put together co-governance
arrangemnts that were welcomed by all parties and have worked well,
why would He Puapua need to define it? I think that paper was about >>>something quite different.

They did nothing of the sort.

He Puapua provided guidelines to co-governance.

Yes that is correct. I should have made it clear that I was referring
to the deliberate confusion by himi mentioning Cullen and Finlayson .

I had also not realised that the Waikato scheme which does involve >>>>>co-governance (as the term is used in this article) happened during >>>>>Michael Cullen's time.).

In reality there has been considerable common views between successive >>>>>governments on how to get through Treaty issues with benefit to all >>>>>New Zealanders. As Finlayson says in the article: “There is fear, but >>>>>because we have created an unhealthy climate that has stifled the >>>>>opportunity for sensible and robust debate, which is healthy in a >>>>>society. There is a tendency in this country for a group mentality. >>>>>For instance, very few people questioned the lockdown. That is the >>>>>fear that people have: keep your head below the parapet instead of >>>>>engaging in civil and intelligent debate."

I find the use of the word 'fear' interesting. I don't fear >>>>co-governance and I did not fear lockdowns. I disagree with the first >>>>and I initially agreed with the rationale for the second. There is >>>>nothing to fear from either and I view the use of the word 'fear' in >>>>this context as motivated to induce emotion in place of objectiveness.

and as Rob Campbell said: "There are certain people in the country who >>>>>always assume the worst: I describe them as The Sour Right, a term a >>>>>former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, used to describe >>>>>people whose basic world view is negative. "

All of which is irrelevant.

Then why do you fear co-govrnance?

He doesn't and neither do I.
Speaking only for myself I detest it, but that is not fear.

Correct. Implying fear is a way of disparagement of those who oppose >co-governance. Either that or Rich and others do not understand the >difference between fear and opposition.

The upcoming election is the first opportunity for us as a nation to >>>>have a debate about co-government. It is up to those political
parties that support it to get the message out to all of us, and to >>>>accept the consequences.

Exactly - the 'all decisions must be made by the Prime Minister' mode
of National, vs consultation and wide agreement for the way Labour do >>>things.

Nonsense, this Laboutr government have consulted with almost nobody
for the past 2+ years.

This government attempted to entrench some parts of the Water Services >Entities Act through a SOP purely to avoid consultation. Entrenchment
was withdrawn when widespread opposition was apparent. That was a >substantial breach of trust with the electorate. Public opposition in >general was ignored. Labour's popularity has declined accordingly and >rightly so.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)