Thursday, 7 April 2011

WHY SUBSIDISE THE UBER WAKA?


Well as taxpayers you subsidise the symphony orchestra and the ballet.

They are both a net burden on the taxpayer. People are saying the last big Maori cultural centre went bust. It did - probably because some skinny arsed pommy sheila wanted to showcase brown people.. And it was all too twee.


So to all those who say that NZ should not fund the waka. Well apply the same logic to the Ballet and the Symphony orchestra and chop their funding as well.

Orchestras and ballets are not unique to NZ. Maori are. They are a selling point for the country.

Will the Waka get tourists to come here - of course not. Will it get them to come again and have a longer lingering look. If its done right - yes.

Will it showcase something that is uniquely NZ? yes. Can it be used again? yes.

Each iwi has the chance to promote its region. I think that Ngai Tahu will be all over this opportunity as it gives them a unique spring board to promote their growing network of tourism ventures in the South Island.

Maori have the drive and passion to make this a success.

And can some journalist with a bit of time on their hands please ask Shane Jones to provide evidence of where he has added value to any Maori owned assets. He has always played with other peoples money. And we want to see the evidence where his "skills" have added value.
The kumara vine is awash with concern for the Maori fisheries enterprises.

Go on- have a look - ask some hard questions - there is definitely something fishy going on.







7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Agree with your analogy on funding other cultural entities, well said.
My objection is the plastic waka. It's not authentic. Reminds me of the ubiquitous plastic tiki.
Fish: Give us a few hints. Ngai Tahu did not do well in the fishing allocation and Shane Jones had his brown hand deep in the kelp.
Richard

Anonymous said...

Well, I don't want to subsidise a group of stone age cannibals

Moist von Lipwig said...

The picture you have selected to make your point, illustrates perfectly, that given the choice of being threatened by a painted primitive brandishing a club, and watching a ballet, I would choose the latter.

Writer Of The Purple Sage... said...

Taxpayers once again subsidise 10% of the population, to promote a culture which is THEIRS not the COUNTRY's. Maori culture is PART of NZ, it is not ALL of NZ.
NZ already forks out $220 MILLION ANNUALLY to keep a dying language alive! Why have maori been GIVEN a $2mill.structure on prime waterfront land? Hmmm, election year...hmmm....
Perhaps (as their numbers will soon surpass those of maori) we need to consider an ASIAN cultural performance site, also on prime real estate. Maybe a giant WOK...???

Anonymous said...

Codename 'Mata' - concerted effort from some Maori fisheries 'leaders' to give the Japanese more fisheries assets for no greater control of Sealord. Here Nissui-san, please have some more of our assets... The relationship with Nissui has never delivered the promised benefits back to iwi and one wonders of the idiocy of those in control about this deal. Shane Jones will no doubt be in support though... Another nail in the coffin of the collective model. 2016 - give the assets back to iwi; many will lose them but at least it will be through their own incompetence, not the incompetence of a bunch of nobodys.

Cactus Kate said...

I think it's well known everyone's opposition to funding orchestra and ballet so better argument needed than "they get their heads in the trough as well".

nasska said...

Just in case everyone was waiting for my agreement before axing the ballet, giving the NZSO the DCM & scuttling the waka....

Go right ahead.