Labour flip-flops again
December 10th, 2010 at 7:35 am by David FarrarAudrey Young in the NZ Herald reports:
Labour has again changed its position on the foreshore and seabed, withdrawing its support for the bill repealing the current law while it is part-way through the select committee process. …
And they note the multiple flip-flops:
* 2004: Labour Govt passes Foreshore and Seabed Act asserting Crown ownership, preventing Maori from claiming customary title in court, but setting up alternative regime of rights.
* 2009 April: Labour in Opposition renounces F&S Act saying it would support law restoring right to go to court.
* 2009 Nov: Leader Phil Goff says there is nothing wrong with the way F&S Act is working and repeal would be cynical.
* 2010 Sept: Labour supports new bill designed to repeal F&S Act.
* 2010 Dec: Labour withdraws its support for the bill.
If we wait long enough, I’m sure we’ll get position No 6.
Related posts:
- Goff flip-flops on Harawira
- NRT on Labour’s climate flip-flops
- Iwi now argue against property rights
- The Foreshore & Seabed proposals
December 10th, 2010 at 7:40 am
Labour is flip flopping about trying to sort out the politics on the issue. This places them on the side of Hawarewa which should not be too difficult for National to do.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 8:01 am
Flip flop is nothing but a cynical political manouver by the socialists.
Vote:Given his ample experience on flip-flopping, Key, the vacuous Labour-lite disciple, should be able to do the same soon.
December 10th, 2010 at 8:07 am
All politicians are flip-flop, as they don’t have backbones and often fall over in the Cantab Nor Wester wind.
Would a real pollie with integrity please stand up, please stand up!!
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 8:21 am
Would a real pollie with integrity please stand up, please stand up!!
I second that motion. What happened to your candidacy?
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 8:22 am
Isn’t this just another Labour attempt to win the Maori Vote? There is after all an election coming soon and to not support the proposed repeal is just another way of clawing votes away from the Maori party, with Phil’ being able to say in justification, that Labour NEVER supported the legislation. It all comes down to ‘Political Expediency’ after all. . .
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 8:34 am
This is one flip flop I am in favor of. John Key said if the public doesn’t want this law change, he won’t go ahead with it. This is what is happening. Now he is saying that we the public don’t understand the bill and he will go ahead with it. I heard him on the radio yesterday. He and Finlayson are only giving half truths to the public. David, that isn’t a downright lie or flip flop? Gst, not raising taxes, reduce government spending? These aren’t flip flops?
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 8:37 am
@ Komata – Labour won’t win the Maori vote back; they made too may enemies last time. Tariana Turia had this to say in the House yesterday:
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 8:42 am
GST, not raising taxes, reduce government spending, welfare reform, ETS?”
Vote:Aren’t these flip flops?
December 10th, 2010 at 8:55 am
I don’t doubt that political reasons influenced Labour to change their position but it could also have been that they have come to realise that it is a badly drafted piece of very poor legislation full of fish hooks which should be dumped.
Vote:It is a pity that John Key seems to be changing from his original position to one of ramming it through becuase he doesn’t want National to loose something in Parliament.
The whole flip-flop argument is foolish becuase why shouldn’t intelligent people change their minds when fresh information comes to hand. It is brainless idiots who hold to positions irrespective, and similar people harp on it.
December 10th, 2010 at 9:05 am
Labour are saying they won’t support the legislation because there’s no assurance Maori won’t come back and have a second bite at the apple at some later stage.
It wouldn’t matter what legislation was put in place… Maori will come back for another bite at a later stage.
This is what makes Labour look like a bunch of plonkers.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 9:13 am
pressure’s on flavell etc with just two votes in this now…..
is this a wider test of a future coalition partner……
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 9:43 am
Tariana Turia had better bloody realise looking like an uncle for the Nats is not a good look.
Trying to push a policy where Maori get second class rights in comparison to visitors to NZ tends to piss Maoridom off.
The Nats have their own uncles who they drag around to Nat meetings trying to say, hey we have our own hories.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 9:44 am
Trying to force the Maori Party’s collective hand? Surely Labour wouldn’t want to see a split there.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 9:46 am
A touch off topic, but we shouldn’t have to wait very long to get to position 6.
Vote:If you read the Kama Sutra you’ll find that it is really interesting.
I don’t think TM could resist it for very long at all.
December 10th, 2010 at 9:51 am
Oh Dear.
Actually Labour’s new position is the right thing to do. I have not read it but I surmise:
1) Legislate to ensure free public access to the fully and partially wet sand (Maori Leadership publicly state they support this)
2) Legislate to ensure that whatever interest Maori have in the wet sand they cannot alienate it (Maori Leadership say they want this)
3) Legislate to restore the law to pre Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 and allow the Court (High Court?) to determine what is a property dispute which is the role of the Courts. (Maori Leadership have been in two minds on this – uncertainty of result and cost)
It’s National and the Maori Party who are in a tight space. Labour, Greens and ACT are in a similar place.
National’s approach has been a “take our deal or get nothing i.e. no repeal” approach – hardball. The Maori Party have recognised this: so they say “we will take the deal NOW and come back when we have more political power to get a better deal” Nationals Bill incentivises this behaviour actually because it allows politicans to wheel and deal to create titles under the Law.
Thus National has not achieved some of its stated aims: to reconcile different views of the law and achieve a lasting solution.
I suspect National’s Bill if enacted wont last. First off there will be a contemporary Waitangi Tribunal Claim on tests applied in National’s law particularily if Maori don’t get as extensive statutory titles under the scheme of National’s law as they expect (as the Nats are privately telling everyone).
The Attorney General made some interesting comments yesterday regard legislating to attempt to fix a property dispute.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 9:55 am
You know who flip-flopped on tax cuts?
Yeah, so take this “look! A Flip-Flop!” business and keep it in your pants.
[Since we seem to be in jeer-leader mode this morning. Anyone would think it was election time...]
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 10:00 am
National ought to be thanking their lucky stars that Labour (et al) have decided to vote against it. The Maori party were about to do it so they could show that they wouldn’t take any old thing that get’s shoved at them. That would have gone down well with Maori and made National look like plonkers while showing the Maori Party to be the tail that wags the dog. Labout getting in first takes the wind out of the Maori Party’s sails and robs them of pulling off a power play. The perception will be that the Maori Party couldn’t get their act together.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 10:14 am
Perhaps we can do something useful with these Liarbore politicians. I suggest we stick a pole up their arses and put them on top of every government building in Wellington, make great weather vanes.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:15 am
Labour is probably least concerned, the Maori tribal leaders jumped ship with Turia.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:16 am
As r0b says by far the biggest flip floppers are the Nats. Iwi kiwi billboards anyone?
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:21 am
Poor micky…
As much as he yells and screams it seems that nobody is listening.
I wonder how he deals with the fact that Key is the most popular PM this nation has ever had.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:28 am
(except for savage, kirk, and lange)
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:30 am
Labour had no intention of supporting the Marine and Coastal Area Bill through the second reading, this new bill repeals Labours 2004 effort which they ( Labour ) would be loathe to repeal because originally it was their bill. What this means is that Labour would still not permit Maori to have their day in court or test the legislation in court, so the status quo for Labour still remains fascist, an unfortunate by product of socialist inspired political parties.
Vote:The bill looks likely to fail, the majority in the house is just one vote that could be subsumed by opponents.
December 10th, 2010 at 11:31 am
And hasn’t Helen Clark achieved the most prosperous Post-Prime Ministerial career?
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:40 am
Turia and her bunch of Nat lap dogs are a disgrace to Maori. Mana enhancing my arse!
Vote:All my whanau are disgusted with them and as for “they think that every Maori in the country is against it, but what they don’t realise is there’s not one Maori in the country that’s forgotten what they did” – this is also true for what her and her puppies are doing by supporting this bill
December 10th, 2010 at 11:44 am
grumpy @ 9:43 Do I understand it that anybody in NZ other than Maori is a visitor. Is that what you are saying?
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:55 am
(except for savage, kirk, and lange)
Including Savage, Kirk and Lange.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 11:57 am
“And hasn’t Helen Clark achieved the most prosperous Post-Prime Ministerial career?”
Not difficult given that she used our money to purchase a job with the UN, check out the ever increasing “donations” to the UN under Klark’s reign, unsurprisingly they increased year on year as she came to realise that her time as PM was coming to an end.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
[Since we seem to be in jeer-leader mode this morning. Anyone would think it was election time...]
or that there is a major scandal brewing over the Wongs business affairs and someone needs to do some distracting anti Labour spin…
…and so with a few choice whistles, the good shepherd rarks up the dogs to scratch their fleas for all to see, then proceeds to round up the sheeple up and guide them to safety, away from the crying of the boys yelling WOLF WOLF !!!
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
flip flop flip flop…’whos that flip flopping over my beach’ wails the seaside taniwha ?
’tis i, the humble politician seeking to redress your concerns’
‘and pray tell what might they be ?’
YOU TELL ME…
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
National is selling out the non-Maori majority on the foreshore issue.
Karl du Fresne has a good blog on it today (link below).
This is going to lead to tribes doing behind-closed-doors direct deals with the Minister.
And that minister is list MP Chris Finlayson, who as a lawyer won Ngai Tahu their sweetheart deal in the South Island.
As Finlayson said in his maiden speech to Parliament:
So we will have Finlayson and tribes doing virtually private deals on the foreshore.
The du Fresne blog:
http://karldufresne.blogspot.com/
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 1:40 pm
Thank you Jack for the link to Karl’s blog.
His closing remark is worth repeating: “Only one more MP needs to do a flip-flop before National and the Maori Party lose the numbers to push the bill through. Rumblings of discontent in the National caucus are being reported almost daily. Even Labour has belatedly come around to the view, promoted by ACT and favoured by National when in opposition (in other words, before political expediency persuaded it to cosy up to the Maori Party), that the only place to resolve claims over ownership of the foreshore and seabed is in the courts.“
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 1:42 pm
It’s National and the Maori Party who are in a tight space. Labour, Greens and ACT are in a similar place.
………………………………..
The difference is that one group support the idea that under the treaty and as original inhabitants Maori own the foreshore and seabed (Greens, Maori Party ) and the others don’t really have an answer other than that is unacceptable to the majority (and no way in hell).
““The Greens support responsible access to the foreshore, which is compatible with Customary Ownership governed by tikanga Maori and the concept of public domain.
“The clearest example is Lake Taupo, where ownership of the lake bed rests with Maori but everyone enjoys recreational access.”
http://www.indymedia.org.nz/article/66614/foreshore-and-seabed-protecting-public-a?page=1
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 1:50 pm
I don’t suppose they have been taking notice of Chris Trotters big fish:
“Even today, this deep contempt for the majority remains clearly evident in the Left’s language. To question the ideology of Maori nationalism is to reveal oneself as a racist “redneck”. Working-class communities attempting to defend their jobs from the demands of environmentalists are dismissed as “feral” or “white trash”. The slightest challenge to the sacred precepts of Orthodox Feminism will provoke torrents of vitriolic abuse.
Traditional Labour politics was very different. The premise here was that a working-class party can only be the political vehicle for working-class needs and aspirations. Labour politicians, if they were worth a damn, saw themselves as nothing more than the frothy margins of the popular tide: markers of the masses’ reach. For these sort of leftists the will of the majority was sacred.”
Vote:http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com/2010/07/arrogant-left.html
December 10th, 2010 at 2:11 pm
grumpy @ 9:43 Do I understand it that anybody in NZ other than Maori is a visitor. Is that what you are saying?
…………….
That’s what’s what’s taught at Auckland University (along with gastroenterology)
Professor Mutu
6. Our tikanga determines that :
We are tangata whenua – we are the hosts for all who visit this country (and hence need to determine immigration policy)
We have a duty of manaaki manuhiri – we are obliged to look after our guests and ensure they are well-treated and respected.
And if they decide to stay then they need a good understanding of our tikanga so that we can all live here in harmony.
We also need a good understanding of our guest’s tikanga so that we know how to look after them properly.
Pākehā settlement and introduced legal system has not and can not change these fundamental values and principles but it has made it very difficult for us to carry out our responsibilities.
http://www.goingbananas.org.nz/…/Going_Bananas_August_07_Maori_Roots_Multicultural_NZ.ppt –
MARGARET MUTU: For centuries now, Maori have considered themselves to be what we call mana whenua, mana moana, which includes the European concept of ownership. So we do consider ourselves to have been the owners of the foreshore, the seabed and all of our lands.
And what the Crown is proposing here is to remove our ownership. Effectively, the Crown is proposing to steal our foreshores and seabed off us.
Vote:: http://abc.net.au/common/copyrigh.htm
December 10th, 2010 at 2:17 pm
I don’t care who flip flops as long as this racist pandering and un National Bill fails.
In the meantime Key and the AG seem to have lost a lot of credibility with core Nat supporters,and rightly too.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Jimbob, One has to smirk at the numbers who are so proud that they have the right to a British, Irish or septic passport.
The first question that comes to mind is to which country is their first loyalties.
Time we changed the rules want to be a kiwi fine, you have a kiwi passport only, unless of course you are happy with the idea of so called kiwis trying to steal our passports.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
hj @ 2:11. Thanks for that info, I suspect Hone and co. are of the same mind.
Yes grumpy I see what you mean, I know a few people with duel passports, they are usually telling everyone who will listen what they have done in their other country, but not much about NZ.
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
A very good press release by Hilary Calvert
National Must Do Its Duty On Foreshore Issue
ACT New Zealand Maori Affairs Spokesman Hilary Calvert today urged National Party members of the Maori Affairs Select Committee to insist that the Government heed the public and withdraw the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill.
“Yesterday’s submissions hearing in Tauranga must have been particularly difficult on National MP Simon Bridges. After all, Tauranga is his electorate and it was his constituents who were submitting in opposition to his Party’s Bill,” Ms Calvert said.
“Among those were Nga Papaka o Rangataua, who said the Bill ‘does not achieve justice for our people’; and Kaitiakitanga who said ‘the legislation remains manifestly unjust’. Even the Bay of Plenty Regional Council was concerned that the Bill opened up ‘more potential for claims – the extent of which appears to be unknown’.
“ACT Deputy Leader John Boscawen and I have been travelling around the country with the Maori Affairs Select Committee hearing submissions and the message is the same: everyone – Maori and non-Maori alike – is vehemently opposed to this Bill.
“Members of Parliament have a duty to represent the views of the people who elected them – this is particularly true of an electorate MP like Mr Bridges. As such, they cannot in good conscience continue to support legislation that submitter after submitter does not want passed into law.
“Nearly every Party has heeded ACT’s call to represent their supporters and oppose the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill – and the Maori Party will likely pull its support at the end of the public submissions process. National should withdraw the Bill now, rather than stand as the only Party willing to ignore its obligation to represent its supporters,” Ms Calvert said.
ENDS
http://www.nzcpr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=990
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
I hate the term ‘flip-flop’. Do we really want politicians that stick doggedly and blindly to a policy, no matter what?
Vote:December 10th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
I agree with you on that generally redeye, it’s an awful term overused and misused. Adjusting to changing situations and times should be normal. But on this Labour have been all over the place, seems more like opportunism than reasonable adjustment.
Vote:December 11th, 2010 at 9:06 am
It’s not a black and white issue (even as witnessed by the various viewpoints above), despite the political/cheer leader/extremest noise.
Eg In terms of one aspect, from the Jack5′s Karl du Fresne link:
So prior to Tuku Morgan discussing the differences “between National’s proposed legislation and Labour’s Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004″ (as occuring here) the biggest issue is the legal hurdle.
So as KevinH pointed out, of course Labour won’t support this stage of the proposed legislation as it will repeal their bill and seeing the usual type of misinformation campaigns being spread in recent months and political shouting ratching up to confuse the public, so now is a good time to make good and as a bonus try and split the Maori Party (make no mistake, Labour wants to “KILL” the Maori Party, that has been their aim along as we all know as it is in the public eye, so this is simply more of the same). Ditto Trotter weighs in from the anti-capitalist (anti-Maori leadership) angle to make it appear that the left are unified but of course their reasoning varies).
In the meantime if the Maori Party (and National) can hold together, it will undo Labour:
* Remember according to Morgan, “The biggest issue with the bill, he said, was that it set the bar too high for iwi to prove customary use of the coastline, and thus establish customary rights”. So this is where the Maori Party and National (and fucking ACT – dickwads) should be in sync: let the court’s decide (rather than politicians – politicians being politicians couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery, let alone act in the interests of the nation as a whole).
So high 5 to Turia and co for sticking with National’s proposed legislation, for despite the “bar” being too high, the foot is in the door to legally address any issues (and if needbe the bar can be reviewed). So why in effect are Labour (ACT, Greens, Progressives) denying Maori their day in court?
Vote:December 11th, 2010 at 10:07 am
The Greens believe it should be for the govt. to prove that Maori don’t own the foreshore and seabed.
“The legislation we are debating today, although it poses as a new approach, effectively does the same thing. It starts from an unproven and untested assumption that the Crown has primary rights in this area, and that any claim must be made from that basis. Any Māori claim to rights will be tested against an unreasonably high bar that is unlikely to be surmounted or to produce meaningful or positive results for Māori. An alternative base assumption is that Māori do indeed have existing, sustaining rights, and that the onus is on the Crown to disprove Māori rights in the foreshore and seabed. Such a core assumption puts a very different complexion on the debate.”
Wahi Tapu is seen as problematic. Another aspect is tha Tariana Turia has indicated that this is all they can do for now but they will keep at it (future generations)
Vote: