Post by Kiwi Frontline on Apr 17, 2016 9:09:25 GMT 12
DANGEROUS TIMES FOR MAORI ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
A toxic cluster of political forces is gathering on several fronts: freshwater policy; Resource Management Act (RMA) reform; Te Ture Whenua Act reforms for communally owned Maori land; and the opposition of some Maori to the new Kermadec marine sanctuary.
Stirring the pot on the first two issues is New Zealand First. Its leader, Winston Peters, smells provincial votes from disaffected National Party supporters by painting iwi representation elements of RMA reform as undemocratic and separatist.
These elements were part of a deal between National and the Maori Party to advance a watered-down version of RMA reforms to go ahead.
Peters replaced Ron Mark, NZ First's sitting member on the select committee considering the bill, at its first hearings last week. He will do so whenever political opportunity dictates.
In doing so, he seeks to weaken the two-MP Maori Party, while presenting NZ First and its 12 MPs as a viable alternative partner for National to carry out much deeper reforms of the RMA that it has failed to progress.
He doesn't expect the government to bite, leaving him free to play his habitual political outsider role.
Meanwhile, the Maori Party has played into his hands by supporting the campaign to create Maori wards in local government.
Even though Maori elected in local wards might provide an alternative to unelected iwi representatives in resource use decisions, the initiative plays poorly to an existing body of opinion that says Maori are constantly "over-reaching" in resource and Treaty claims.
Back at the select committee hearings, Peters gave a foretaste of his approach, demolishing a representative of DairyNZ, who claimed broad support among dairy farmers for the iwi representation reforms.
Since provincial MPs report iwi resource claims are among the commonest gripes they encounter in their electorates, Peters looked to be on fertile ground claiming Wellington headquarters wasn't in touch with its grassroots.
Expect more of this.
On freshwater reform, the government has lost appetite for deciding on new allocation methods before the 2017 election, precisely because the claims of the Iwi Leaders Group for freshwater rights are so fraught with political risk.
Te Ture Whenua Act reform has come under sustained attack from a range of Maori interests, with a Waitangi Tribunal report faulting the consultation process and an appeal to the United Nations indigenous rights body.
This is driving the Maori Party mad, since pejorative terms like 'raupatu' are being thrown around.
The current bill has been 17 years in the making, a party strategist, Hinerangi Barr, wrote recently.
"Maori landowners have repeatedly asked for more control over the governance of their land so it is easier for them to use as they see fit, while retaining its intergenerational ownership," Barr said.
The proposed reforms "strengthen protections around land protection".
"How then can opponents call this a modern-day land grab?"
Perhaps because this is really about the fight for Maori votes between the Labour and Maori parties.
Finally, there is the opposition by Maori fishing interests to the Kermadecs marine sanctuary.
Perhaps there are parallels to the foreshore and seabed issue. But the Maori leaders pushing this case are seriously out of step with public opinion.
The slur that the involvement of the Pew Foundation, a United States-based philanthropy that helped campaign for the sanctuary, is proof of foreign bullying is particularly quixotic. Pew's efforts were rebuffed for years, and the announcement of the sanctuary at the UN a surprise.
Principled it may be, the courts will now decide. But the Kermadecs opposition risks wider efforts to give legitimate expression to Maori economic aspirations, which are under enough attack as it is.
Dominion Post 14/4/16
www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/78895119/Pattrick-Smellie-Dangerous-times-for-Maori-economic-development
A toxic cluster of political forces is gathering on several fronts: freshwater policy; Resource Management Act (RMA) reform; Te Ture Whenua Act reforms for communally owned Maori land; and the opposition of some Maori to the new Kermadec marine sanctuary.
Stirring the pot on the first two issues is New Zealand First. Its leader, Winston Peters, smells provincial votes from disaffected National Party supporters by painting iwi representation elements of RMA reform as undemocratic and separatist.
These elements were part of a deal between National and the Maori Party to advance a watered-down version of RMA reforms to go ahead.
Peters replaced Ron Mark, NZ First's sitting member on the select committee considering the bill, at its first hearings last week. He will do so whenever political opportunity dictates.
In doing so, he seeks to weaken the two-MP Maori Party, while presenting NZ First and its 12 MPs as a viable alternative partner for National to carry out much deeper reforms of the RMA that it has failed to progress.
He doesn't expect the government to bite, leaving him free to play his habitual political outsider role.
Meanwhile, the Maori Party has played into his hands by supporting the campaign to create Maori wards in local government.
Even though Maori elected in local wards might provide an alternative to unelected iwi representatives in resource use decisions, the initiative plays poorly to an existing body of opinion that says Maori are constantly "over-reaching" in resource and Treaty claims.
Back at the select committee hearings, Peters gave a foretaste of his approach, demolishing a representative of DairyNZ, who claimed broad support among dairy farmers for the iwi representation reforms.
Since provincial MPs report iwi resource claims are among the commonest gripes they encounter in their electorates, Peters looked to be on fertile ground claiming Wellington headquarters wasn't in touch with its grassroots.
Expect more of this.
On freshwater reform, the government has lost appetite for deciding on new allocation methods before the 2017 election, precisely because the claims of the Iwi Leaders Group for freshwater rights are so fraught with political risk.
Te Ture Whenua Act reform has come under sustained attack from a range of Maori interests, with a Waitangi Tribunal report faulting the consultation process and an appeal to the United Nations indigenous rights body.
This is driving the Maori Party mad, since pejorative terms like 'raupatu' are being thrown around.
The current bill has been 17 years in the making, a party strategist, Hinerangi Barr, wrote recently.
"Maori landowners have repeatedly asked for more control over the governance of their land so it is easier for them to use as they see fit, while retaining its intergenerational ownership," Barr said.
The proposed reforms "strengthen protections around land protection".
"How then can opponents call this a modern-day land grab?"
Perhaps because this is really about the fight for Maori votes between the Labour and Maori parties.
Finally, there is the opposition by Maori fishing interests to the Kermadecs marine sanctuary.
Perhaps there are parallels to the foreshore and seabed issue. But the Maori leaders pushing this case are seriously out of step with public opinion.
The slur that the involvement of the Pew Foundation, a United States-based philanthropy that helped campaign for the sanctuary, is proof of foreign bullying is particularly quixotic. Pew's efforts were rebuffed for years, and the announcement of the sanctuary at the UN a surprise.
Principled it may be, the courts will now decide. But the Kermadecs opposition risks wider efforts to give legitimate expression to Maori economic aspirations, which are under enough attack as it is.
Dominion Post 14/4/16
www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/78895119/Pattrick-Smellie-Dangerous-times-for-Maori-economic-development