BULLSHITE AND ALWAYS FOLLOW THE DAM MONEY ‘ACT PARTY’ TREATY CONCERNS

Climate change: Mike Smith wins right to sue seven polluters including Fonterra, Z, Genesis Energy. Smith is an influential member of the Iwi National Leaders Forum, whom have back door entry to the Te Pati Maori Party in Parliament. Smith refers to the role of tikanga Maori and Smiths relationship to coastal waters. This appears to be the case of building up more renewable energies. Smith had already had his case thrown out of Court but the Supreme Court has now decided that he does has a case to be answered, so he gets his day in court once again

Smith states the government is failing its duties under the Treaty of Waitangi to protect Maori, whom he said are much more vulnerable to so called catastrophic climate change than any other peoples. Saying that agriculture sector contribute to approx. ½ of NZ’s Greenhouse emissions. Smith says the government was failing unless it reduced total greenhouse gases by half by 2020 and zero by 2050.

2017 Government  stock take on adapting to Climate Change identified Maori as a most vulnerable group because of their significant reliance on the environment as a cultural, social economic resource. With Climate Change Minister James Shaw saying that Maori are disproportionately impacted by the effects of climate change. Surely this case of Smiths now permitted by the Supreme Court will open the flood gates to claims by those whom have much self interested gain. Follow the money

Researching a book authored by David Seymour titled ‘Own Your Own Future’ A Liberal Vision For New Zealand in 2017..Page 22 ‘MMP allows small parties to have a large influence. The Maori Party have proven this by being prepared to threaten John Key with a walk out, which would leave the balance of power to Peter Dunne. They have managed to negotiate million after millions of taxpayer funding for various Maori centric projects and separatists legislation this being a gradual shift in the entire way in which government operates

Fast forward to page 162 on Environment in Seymour’s book. Green MPs are the biggest users of free parliamentary air travel, they spent more on air travel than NZ First MPs. This is a Party that flew three MPs to Paris to talk about Climate. Green Party only having one scientifically trained MP. The political right have two doctors, a geneticist, a zoologist and a neurological scientist and a few agricultural scientist

Page 163 The Free market economy make better environmental custodians. Seymour calls the free market economy as 4v P’s, Property Rights, Pricing, Prosperity and Private Initiatives. Saying the problem with the Green Party and their doing  environmentalism by posture of principle.

On page 170 ‘Chapter titled ‘In ACT We Tend to be Optimistic’ “ The reason the doomsters get the future wrong is that they under estimate or even ignore technological change. If you predict the future on the basis of current technology you will be wrong. Not just a little wrong but wildly wrong. There are a few  pessimists gone wrong over the years eg Malthus on population 1798, Ehrlich in 1968 (The Population Bomb) The Club Of Rome in 1972 (Limits to Growth) to Al Gore claiming in 2006 that we had only 10 years left to save the planet.  Al Gore has been very influential, as to Obama and now the WEF as made a fortune from his inconvenient truth.

“That in the last 30 years we have witnessed the greatest reduction in global poverty in the history of the planet. Tragically the Labour Party, Greens, NZ First still don’t get it that free-markets and globalization thing

Saying on page 171 “Forecasts of global fossil fuel use is based on current technologies will be wildly overstated. I think we should all be skeptical of the intense politicization of climate science debates. It is always suspicious when science issues seem to line up with political positions. The left/Right divide tends to correlate with alarmist sketic positions, and that’s weird whatever side you come from. Seymour stating he is a Luke  warmist as outlined by Matt Ridley when it comes to man made climate change. Is skeptical about the degree as to how dangerous man made climate change is, he just has a moderately informed opinion

What does Matt Ridley say:- Climate Change is doing more good than harm. The message he gives is “carry on warming” in an article in the Spectator as he challenged the widespread belief that climate change has a negative effect on the world.  Saying that current scientific consensus is largely ignored by mainstream media. Matt identifies economic benefits of climate change

Fewer winter deaths, a better chance of life benefits lower energy costs, cut heating bills. An increase in global plant growth High CO2 level is actually good news, has a positive effect on plant growth, on food supply and agricultural yields, in the Sahel region of Africa where levels of famine have declined. There’s no evidence that climate change has caused higher rates of death in extreme weather. This is a predicted conclusion by IPCC, An independent study by Indur Goklany that shows that the death rate from droughts, floods and storms has dropped 98% since the 1920’s. People have better protection and have got much richer.

The trouble is that the mainstream media, and even the IPCC, cherry-pick the bad news whilst ignoring the good. This leads to damaging anti-climate change policies: Negative economic and environmental impact. Matt contends that these policies have “driven people into fuel poverty, made industries uncompetitive, driven up food prices, accelerated the destruction of forests, killed rare birds of prey, and divided communities”.

Large input – negligible returns..Britain will spend around £1.8 trillion over the course of this century on climate policies, in the hope of lowering the air temperature by just 0.005°C.                    For Matt, the key question is: is it worth trying to impede a change in the future at the expense of causing a great deal of harm in the present.

Seymour says he is a luke warmist as outlined by Matt Ridley and here you have it. Hence its all down to NZrs contributing to being good global citizens and all this renewable energy will do nothing to change the climate.

Seymour’s says there is a strong case for us New Zealand’s to contribute to being good global citizens on page 172 of his book. We effectively have Zero impact on global warming outcomes. But of course, always follow the money… The World Bank directs grants to Indigenous Peoples, works closer with Indigenous Peoples, the financing, transitioning to carbon markets. Indigenous Peoples Rights to mitigate climate change, wind and solar farms. Climate Investment Te Pati Māori Climate Policy Plan for unique Indigenous Biodiversity

Te Pati Maori ‘whanau, hapu, iwi must remain at the forefront of climate action and solutions, they must be our own, Crown supports Iwi/Maori led clean energy projects, start up funding, partnerships, financing. Ensuring that Crown works with Iwi to establish climate change adaption. Iwi/Maori lead transition to Zero emissions economy, producing industries in the Maori economy, economic, social opportunity for Iwi businesses to be the cutting edge of green technology, as Maori economy continues to grow

Maori Party established a  $1 Billion scheme responsible for supporting Iwi/Maori owned community energy projects, solar energy and insulation, funding projects to create Maori jobs, bring down energy costs for whanau.

The Crown reviewing renewable energy, meaningful action in terms of involving Iwi/Maori. The Maori Party establishing a national Maori strategy for renewable energy, partnership agreement between Crown (Govt) and specific Iwi/Hapu that are keen to lead renewable energy with significant investment in large scale projects. With partnership finance. Maori Party ban coal mines phase out coal burning by 2030. Fund Iwi/Maori as to adaption of managed retreat policies. Economic social opportunities for Iwi/Maori businesses to be the cutting edge of renewable green technology, growing asset bases.

Back to Mike Smith, Influential member of the National Iwi Leader Forum that has a revolving door into Parliament through the Te Pati Maori Party. That has been in many talks with Christopher Luxon. Of course Christopher Luxon does not want Seymour’s Treaty Principle Bill to go to national referendum. NZ has no democracy. There is no democratic state of New Zealand.

Hence this is why I personally believe the supreme Court has now allowed Smith to take 7 large companies to Court as to Man Made Climate causing himself and idegous peoples harm. Just follow the dam money.

WakeUpNZ

RESEARCHER: Carol Sakey

https://www.chartwellspeakers.com/matt-ridley-climate-change-good-harm/,

https://www.maoriparty.org.nz/climate_change

https://www.maoriparty.org.nz/policy-oranga-whenua

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/mike-smith-wins-the-right-to-sue-polluters-including-fonterra-z-energy-genesis-energy/MCKH27Q6VFCTTKI4IYX2FYGUWU/

...

THE MAORI PARTY Blog Posts View all Categories

MAORI FRESHWATER POLICY ‘IWI INTERESTS AND RIGHTS’

THE MAORI PARTY FRESHWATER POLICY 6th August 2021

Stating that successive governments had failed to acknowledge the rights, interests os whanau/hapu/Iwi/Maori over freshwater. The Maori Party stated they would prioritise ensuring that the Rangatira and kaitiaki rights and interests of tangata whenua are  implemented across freshwater management and allocation. To overturn  the Crowns position that  *everyone owns the water and will adopt a position that acknowledges customary, decision making rights and interests in freshwater.  Acknowledge the intrinsic whakapapa of freshwater, support hapu and Iwi to negotiate those whakapapa rights to be acknowledged in Law.  Restart negotiations with the Government and Hapu/ Iwi to develop a policy framework on how  Iwi/Maori rights and interests are implemented in freshwater management and allocation

Substantially increase funding to the Te Mana o te Wai fund to support the efforts of whanau/hapu/Iwi to protect, restore catchments and aquifers.  Te Mana o te Wai is  the first principle for freshwater management in Aotearoa – a paradigm Iwi shift. To develop a commercial user pays policy to help ensure fair allocation and support for tanga whenua led catchment restoration. Develop an allocation system, undertake significant reform of the Resource Management Act to ensure that Iwi/Maori rights and interests in water are addressed in RMA processes, including decisions in water takes and discharges.

To honour the rangatira and kaitiaki rights and interests of mana whenua over freshwater. Under British Common Law, naturally flowing freshwater is not owned by anyone but is treated as for the ‘public good’ This is a legal position in New Zealand. There are unresolved issues as to Māori rights to freshwater.

Nick Smith the Minister for the government freshwater policy at the time referred to Maori /Iwi interests as to the governments fresh water policies at an Auckland public meeting saying:-“There would be an obligation on local councils to consult with Iwi about the use of water, in which they might have a special interest”, he also reminded the audience that the government had repeatedly said that ‘nobody owns the water’

This position is supported by Crown obligations to the 1835 Declaration, Te Tiriti, UNDRIP and by our  tino rangatiratanga as tangata whenua.  “The Waitangi Tribunal said that the Crown should be working d Hapu/Iwi . The Crown should be negotiating with whānau, hapū and iwi directly, not just engaging with their own self-appointed Māori representatives.  The Government’s recently proposed NPS is a good step forward,  embeds the Te Mana o te Wai principles and obligations. The Māori Party would go further by ensuring that Te Mana o te Wai is guiding all activities, and that is embedded within a reformed RMA.

The Māori Party supports a policy of user pays for commercial consents to freshwater as part of the new regime. Revenue raised from water charges should go to mana whenua given their rangatira and kaitiaki rights and interests, and specific charges and how they are distributed to mana whenua should be determined in the negotiations between tangata whenua and the Crown. This funding could be used to support mana whenua-led restoration work.

The Māori Party would push for any new water allocation system to conform with Te Mana o te Wai and iwi/hapū rights and obligations, including the recognition that each whānau/hapū/iwi maintains their own mana over their waterways. Saying  “we would not support allocation based on grandparenting and or perpetual use rights and would ensure that the first takes and discharges provided for are to iwi/hapū, who have a customary right to access an equitable share of the allocable quantum in their area”.

The Māori Party would acknowledge the intrinsic whakapapa and ecological rights of freshwater, and support whānau, hapū and iwi to negotiate for the whakapapa rights of their awa and roto to be acknowledged in law. The hapū and iwi of Whanganui have led the way internationally in terms of recognising the whakapapa of waterways in law. Again refers to Havelock North  and human health risk.  In the last government the Māori Party was able to win the landmark Te Mana o te Wai policy framework, which included a fund for mana whenua-led restoration projects.

The Waitangi Tribunal found that that hapū and iwi Māori have rights and interests in freshwater under Article 2 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The Tribunal report also noted the failure of the Crown to be Treaty compliant.

National said that “no one owns water” while Labour said that “everyone owns water”. The Maori Party left links on their website to provide evidence for their  case.

Carol Sakey

LINK  https://www.maoriparty.org.nz/fresh_water

...