Baffled by stance, considering track record
Re: Be careful what you wish for . . . Jan 14 column and comment trail.
Nobody disputes your record of community involvement over 40 years Clive. As I said, times are changing.
Why are you so threatened by an opportunity here for the wider Maori community to be part of our local council as a Tiriti partner (a legal requirement, as it happens) and be involved with policies and decisions that will affect them?
Why deny them a seat at the table to give meaningful input, and be able to vote on all the committees that affect the nuts and bolts of our day-to-day lives?
Surely you must know that what Pakeha take for granted will be a good thing, sometimes is not a good thing for Maori, hence the need for a mechanism that takes notice of another point of view.
The area of kaitiakitanga of our rivers is an example, where GDC has a dismal record of not enforcing harvesting conditions for forestry, resulting in major slash problems from our valleys all the way to the sea.
I am baffled that a person who has your track record of working with Maori can't see that more effective Maori representation will be a good thing.
Chief Justice Eddie Durie:
“We (Maori) must not forget that the Treaty is not just a Bill of Rights for Maori. It is a Bill of Rights for Pakeha too. It is the Treaty that gives Pakeha the right to be here. Without the Treaty there would be no lawful authority for the Pakeha presence in this part of the South Pacific . . . . We must remember that if we are the Tangata Whenua, the original people, then the Pakeha are the Tangata Tiriti, those who belong to the land by right of that Treaty.”
(Durie, quoted in Borrows 2019, p. 45).