Wednesday, 3 February 2010


We were alerted to two documents that have been leaked to the Tangata website that show that the Foreshore and Seabed issue is in trouble.

The first we understand, is an early draft of an "alternative proposal" to the Foreshore and Seabed Act.

Its custodians are apparently the Iwi Leaders Forum.

The second is rebuttal, and although the language is a bit intemperate the premise and analysis is sound.

The " Alternative proposal" is a ( kuri ) dog .. for these reasons.

Its shows a scant understanding of property rights or commerce.

And it shows an even scanter understanding of tikanga.

It proffers a solution that is all about status – that will piss Pakeha off – but offer no real legal or commercial benefit for Maori.

The cock up with the Foreshore and Seabed act was that it did not recognise property rights or due process.

As a nation we need not fear ownership of small bits of the Foreshore and Seabed by Maori - indeed we should embrace it. With rights come responsibilities.

Instead this document is a wishy washy salve to political objectives ( note it even refers to " feel good" factors) and not a rights based approach.

What New Zealanders want is something that is fair and legally robust.

While the Iwi Leaders Forum denotes a group with mana and intellect this paper is a simplistic attempt to take more than can be morally justified but less than that which might be legally justified

It trades off the tiny bit of the foreshore Ngati Apa may have been able to get, in exchange for a nebulous bit of feel-good nonsense around the whole South Island coast line .

The fact of the matter is that there is no simplistic feel good national solution to this problem – it has to be based on the law and due process iwi by iwi

The paper was apparently written by controversial Maori strategist and influencer Sacha McMeeking.

If so we wonder how much she was paid for it?

simplistic solution to complex issue



Evelyn Cook said...

I haventime to read the whole piece thoroughly and I am about to rush to a meeting but a quick scan shows no sign of 'whānau' in these papers. I get tired of everyone, especially the iwi forum and their mouthpieces, forgetting that before hapū and iwi there are whānau, many of whom hold the rights, exercise the rights and have forgotten more about the whakapapa and tikanga of the Foreshore and Seabed than Ms McMeeking an co have read about during their university studies.

Maybe they all need to have some history lessons delivered by the flaxroots instead of some academic.

Marty Mars said...

Good scoop BB

I agree that the UN declaration of indigenous Rights that this country still has not endorsed, should be one of the pillars of any negotiation. And i say that whoever wrote in red on the document gets my vote.

kehua said...

Aye, `plastics` rule.

Anonymous said...

BB , you make Sasha look reasonable.

Anonymous said...

"Maybe they all need to have some history lessons delivered by the flaxroots instead of some academic."

By "flaxroots" you mean troughers

Supporting this racist bullshit will remove the incumbent government

Evelyn Cook said...

Anon @ 1.28pm

I meant exactly what I said. I get very tired of academics who have never set foot on their own tūranga prior to their graduation from some mainstream tertiary institution belittling the knowledge and experience of those who learned at the feet of the old people. Those to whom we refer with pride when we talk about Ngāi Tahu's long struggle to have it's grievances heard.

While those at the flaxroots may not always have the academic credibility of some of our highly paid staff, they keep the ahi kā, they care for the tūpāpaku, gather kai and care for the resources of Takaroa and Papa-tū-ā-nuku, all without pay.

Are these the 'troughers' of whom you speak?

I don't believe that I have ever used similarly disrespectful words about those with whose opinions I disagree and would respectfully suggest that you choose to do the same. Likewise, I would be grateful if you would not presume to ascribe meanings to my words that I am sure you know are far from my intention. It should be clear to all who read my words, that I say what I mean and I mean what I say. Not only that, but I make every effort not to use derogatory terms about either individuals or collectives.

Finally, I do not believe that looking critically at 'our own' whether it is within or without our own iwi. Debate is healthy, complacency is unwise.