Category: Democracy
During last week’s discussions at Waitangi, the Prime Minister stated that he favoured a four-year term for Parliament and a fixed election date. Labour’s David Shearer, the Green’s Metiria Turei, New Zealand First’s Winston Peters, and United Future’s Peter Dunne all agreed. ACT’s John Banks said he didn’t think the public would support a move to increase the job security of politicians, and the Maori Party said they didn’t have a view.
The Constitutional Advisory Panel has kicked off its public consultation efforts. One of the issues the panel will look into is the term of Parliament, most likely by assessing whether it should be increased to four years, and whether we should have a fixed election. Of all the matters it is discussing, this seems likely to be the one that is most likely to see some traction.
It was a week for political speeches. It began last Monday with the soaring rhetoric of US President Barack Obama’s inaugural address, which included inspirational references to nationhood and equality: “Now, more than ever, we must do these things together, as one nation, and one people… We are true to our creed when a little girl born into the bleakest poverty knows that she has the same chance to succeed as anybody else, because she is American, she is free, and she is equal, not just in the eyes of God but also in our own”.
The latest round of full and final settlements was supposed to put an end to racial issues and let us get on with the serious business of living together and surviving as one people, planning for the future. At the very least, the settlements should surely have given us a breathing space of a few years, before our local Mafiosi turned up again for the next instalment of the protection money. But no.
There are turning points in public affairs when parliamentary parties cross an invisible line. We saw it when former Prime Minister Helen Clark forced her government to support the anti-smacking law against the wishes of the public. No, the sky didn’t fall in, but a resolve developed that ensured she lost her premiership.
Do you think we live in a democracy? In our system of representative democracy if those we elect are not listening to and carrying out the wishes of those that have elected them, then what democracy do we have?
Extract from an interview between the Minister of Treaty Negotiations Chris Finlayson and TV3’s Duncan Garner: "So would it allow for instance an iwi with a customary title say in the Bay of Plenty to do a partnership deal with if you like the Chinese government who come forward with a 100 million dollars and say we want to build a number of resorts on your land, lease it to us over 100 years, would Maori with customary title and iwi be able to get away with that?"
The article that follows under the headline “Business beware: Maori sovereignty is landing on a beach near you” was originally published in my National Business Review website column.
The government’s discussion document outlining their proposal for foreshore and seabed legislation was launched at the beginning of Easter.[1] The period for submissions ends on April 30th. The Attorney-General Chris Finlayson, who is leading the process, has stated that he is interested in the views of New Zealanders. Yet, because of his unseemly haste, most non-Maori have no idea that the review is underway. Considering the importance of the foreshore and seabed in the lives of all New Zealanders, this situation is both unacceptable and undemocratic.
Ah, the foreshore and seabed. Are we not thoroughly sick of it by now? And yet we will all have to ‘provide feedback’ on the government’s consultation document. The Attorney-General, Chris Finlayson, says that he is ‘very interested in hearing New Zealanders’ views. They matter.’ And seriously, it is really important that we do provide feedback.
Loading ...
