Bombing at Manchester concert, 19 dead

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Bombing at Manchester concert, 19 dead

1 | ... | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1799095 13-Jun-2017 09:12

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

We have a requirement to redress the wrongs and then move on and that is why we have the Treaty Settlements.

Treaty settlements have no end date. We will never "move on" from them. Best to scrap the whole progress as well as the treaty. It does nothing but divide the nation.

This is both true and untrue. The treaty settlements themselves do have an end date.

However we are transitioning from the settlement phase of the grievance industry to the separatist phase. The separatist phase is defined by push for special legal governing status and non-ownership property rights.

So we will never move on. In my view there will be significant deterioration in race relations into the future.

If only the settlements were full and final compensation! Separatist politics based on historical wrongs is never going to end nicely.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1799099 13-Jun-2017 09:15

joker97:

A contract is a contract. Just because people down the road doesn't like a contract their grandfather signed doesn't mean the contract is invalid.

Maori claims have nothing to do with the Treaty, they should be treated as breaches of the law at that time.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1799117 13-Jun-2017 09:36

New Zealand is doing it correctly we are addressing the issues and not denying and creating the seeds of unrest. @Wiggum you clearly do not understand the issue and the process, thankfully there are many that do.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30015 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1799170 13-Jun-2017 10:33

Wiggum:

joker97:

A contract is a contract. Just because people down the road doesn't like a contract their grandfather signed doesn't mean the contract is invalid.

Maori claims have nothing to do with the Treaty, they should be treated as breaches of the law at that time.

Doesn't that mean all land that pakeha & crown currently owns would then be given back to Maori in its entirety? That would be bad.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#1799255 13-Jun-2017 12:24

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

You believe we shouldn't right real wrongs?

I believe that the wrongs, that I or my parents had absolutely nothing to do with, should not be my problem as a taxpayer.

The law is that you can't own something if you didn't obtain it legally. That applies to land just as much as to cars or anything else. If your parents "bought" property off someone who didn't own it, they don't own it either. This applies to the Government too... it can't just take ownership of something. There is no time limit on this... it goes all the way back to the first entity (person, company, or government) who bought the land off the Maori in 1840 (or whenever) or confiscated it illegally in 1863 (or whenever).

The NZ Government did/does "own" lots of land that was acquired illegally. The NZ Government (and therefore every NZ taxpayer) has had the benefit of that land illegally. So it *is* your problem, just like every other NZ taxpayer. Without knowing what land your parents own (if any) I can't say whether they are living on land that doesn't belong to them or not. It would be impossible, or at least impossibly expensive, and quite unjust to unwind all of those land transfers so that the land is registered to its correct, legal, owners. So the Govt quite sensibly is settling with those correct, legal, owners to transfer the land to the people who (incorrectly) believe they own it.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1799345 13-Jun-2017 14:03

frankv:

The law is that you can't own something if you didn't obtain it legally. That applies to land just as much as to cars or anything else. If your parents "bought" property off someone who didn't own it, they don't own it either.

Ownership rights are equally if not more important than technical legal ownership.

Now the treaty settlements are basically over, maori are trying to gain ownership rights over things they do not own.

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 969

#1799357 13-Jun-2017 14:13

surfisup1000:

frankv:

The law is that you can't own something if you didn't obtain it legally. That applies to land just as much as to cars or anything else. If your parents "bought" property off someone who didn't own it, they don't own it either.

Ownership rights are equally if not more important than technical legal ownership.

Now the treaty settlements are basically over, maori are trying to gain ownership rights over things they do not own.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1799361 13-Jun-2017 14:19

surfisup1000:

frankv:

The law is that you can't own something if you didn't obtain it legally. That applies to land just as much as to cars or anything else. If your parents "bought" property off someone who didn't own it, they don't own it either.

Ownership rights are equally if not more important than technical legal ownership.

Now the treaty settlements are basically over, maori are trying to gain ownership rights over things they do not own.

I would like to see some examples of this.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#1799421 13-Jun-2017 14:42

MikeB4:

surfisup1000:

Ownership rights are equally if not more important than technical legal ownership.

Now the treaty settlements are basically over, maori are trying to gain ownership rights over things they do not own.

I would like to see some examples of this.

I think Te Urewera National Park is an example?

It is now administered by the Te Urewera Board which comprises joint Tūhoe and Crown membership. The board will govern Te Urewera, develop and approve a ten-year management plan and undertake landowner functions such as deciding on concessions and permissions to undertake certain activities in Te Urewera. The Tuhoe (as part of the Te Urewera Board) have therefore acquired some of the ownership rights to the land, which was previously (believed to be) owned by the Crown (I think). However, this was part of the treaty settlement with the Tuhoe, not a subsequent thing.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1799486 13-Jun-2017 15:34

MikeB4:

surfisup1000:

frankv:

The law is that you can't own something if you didn't obtain it legally. That applies to land just as much as to cars or anything else. If your parents "bought" property off someone who didn't own it, they don't own it either.

Ownership rights are equally if not more important than technical legal ownership.

Now the treaty settlements are basically over, maori are trying to gain ownership rights over things they do not own.

I would like to see some examples of this.

Everywhere. Off the top of my head...

Auckland councils Maori statutory board - non-elected, but they have rights over council decisions.

Taupo ironman -- iwi invoice the race organisers for the use of lake taupo.

RMA -- iwi payments are required for various activities (a high profile case is Bob Jones who had 13 iwi turn up on his doorstep demanding $4500 for permission to replace a window in his building)

Maori consultation (ie, payment) is required in many situations under the RMA. If this serious power over other peoples property for little good reason.

Water rights -- maori are currently advocating for control over fresh water. There was a full page ad opposing this in the weekend papers.

Maori consultation and representation is being written into local and national government law, where maori are required to be consulted over various matters and included in council activities such as staffing ceremonies.

Settlements were fine by me. Racial discrimination built into law, not so good.

networkn

Networkn
32876 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15478

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1799496 13-Jun-2017 15:48

Everywhere. Off the top of my head...

Auckland councils Maori statutory board - non-elected, but they have rights over council decisions.

Taupo ironman -- iwi invoice the race organisers for the use of lake taupo.

RMA -- iwi payments are required for various activities (a high profile case is Bob Jones who had 13 iwi turn up on his doorstep demanding $4500 for permission to replace a window in his building)

Maori consultation (ie, payment) is required in many situations under the RMA. If this serious power over other peoples property for little good reason.

Water rights -- maori are currently advocating for control over fresh water. There was a full page ad opposing this in the weekend papers.

Maori consultation and representation is being written into local and national government law, where maori are required to be consulted over various matters and included in council activities such as staffing ceremonies.

Settlements were fine by me. Racial discrimination built into law, not so good.

You forgot Iwi trying to charge air NZ for flying over Lake Taupo :)

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1799497 13-Jun-2017 15:49

surfisup1000:

MikeB4:

surfisup1000:

frankv:

The law is that you can't own something if you didn't obtain it legally. That applies to land just as much as to cars or anything else. If your parents "bought" property off someone who didn't own it, they don't own it either.

Ownership rights are equally if not more important than technical legal ownership.

Now the treaty settlements are basically over, maori are trying to gain ownership rights over things they do not own.

I would like to see some examples of this.

Everywhere. Off the top of my head...

Auckland councils Maori statutory board - non-elected, but they have rights over council decisions.

Taupo ironman -- iwi invoice the race organisers for the use of lake taupo.

RMA -- iwi payments are required for various activities (a high profile case is Bob Jones who had 13 iwi turn up on his doorstep demanding $4500 for permission to replace a window in his building)

Maori consultation (ie, payment) is required in many situations under the RMA. If this serious power over other peoples property for little good reason.

Water rights -- maori are currently advocating for control over fresh water. There was a full page ad opposing this in the weekend papers.

Maori consultation and representation is being written into local and national government law, where maori are required to be consulted over various matters and included in council activities such as staffing ceremonies.

Settlements were fine by me. Racial discrimination built into law, not so good.

Off the top of my head, Tuwharetoa gifted the land that is Tongarairo National Park to the Government on the condition that they retail control of Lake Taupo. The also provides protection of lands and resources for Maori including Fisheries, water access, etc Tenths. Maori are the Tangata whenua and should be consulted that is how a civilised society operates, unilateral decision making marginalises and fragments.

If as a nation we return to a condition where we unilaterally deny those rights or unilaterally ignore the treaty we will so the seed of unrest in New Zealand and could result in Manchester like violence. The Treaty negotiations and settlements mean that this is dealt with in a peaceful, professional and respectful manner.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

fizzychicken

318 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 86

#1799500 13-Jun-2017 15:52

thread title: bombing at manchester concert

let's take a look....

current topic: treaty settlements

that's some good tangent right there. I need a TL:DR

https://keybase.io/fizzychicken

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1799501 13-Jun-2017 15:54

fizzychicken:

thread title: bombing at manchester concert

let's take a look....

current topic: treaty settlements

that's some good tangent right there. I need a TL:DR

I relates in as much as it is dealing with what can be seen as the root cause of unrest and the conditions for violence or violent regimes and groups to flourish.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1799514 13-Jun-2017 16:35

MikeB4:

Off the top of my head, Tuwharetoa gifted the land that is Tongarairo National Park to the Government on the condition that they retail control of Lake Taupo. The also provides protection of lands and resources for Maori including Fisheries, water access, etc Tenths. Maori are the Tangata whenua and should be consulted that is how a civilised society operates, unilateral decision making marginalises and fragments.

If as a nation we return to a condition where we unilaterally deny those rights or unilaterally ignore the treaty we will so the seed of unrest in New Zealand and could result in Manchester like violence. The Treaty negotiations and settlements mean that this is dealt with in a peaceful, professional and respectful manner.

We are never ever going to agree and this is way off topic. It has absolutely no similarity to the events that caused the manchester bombing.

1 | ... | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26