Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Aoraki is Ngāi Tahu, Ngāi Tahu is Aoraki

It has been interesting watching the slippery lies and dis/mis-information from john key around Tuhoe and their settlement negotiations.

The line now is that if Te Urewera was given back to Tuhoe to manage then this would create some precedent that other iwi would take up. What a load of bull. Is that what has happened with treaty settlements so far - no. It is just more made up misinformation from the representative of the people of this country - shit no wonder he won the Dim Bulb award.

From NZH
"Prime Minister John Key says giving the Te Urewera National Park to Tuhoe could have opened the way for other iwi to put strong cases for ownership of national parks, including Whanganui, Egmont, Ngauruhoe and possibly Aoraki/Mt Cook."
"The Ngai Tahu settlement includes provision for Aoraki/Mt Cook to be gifted to the iwi and then re-gifted to the nation. However, that clause has not yet been acted upon and it is up to Ngai Tahu to decide when to trigger it."
So Aoraki has not yet been gifted back - well I say let us never do that. Let us keep Aoraki away from the clutches of those who would treat him with disrespect and exploit him. We must NEVER give our sacred mountain away - it is not ours to give, it is our mokopuna's and their's.
"Mr Key's justification for the decision was rejected by Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia.
"None of those cases is similar to Tuhoe so you can't compare those iwi to Tuhoe. This is an opportunity for the Crown to make good and doing what is right, not looking over the shoulder at other iwi and trying to make Tuhoe think that because of those other iwi they're not going to get their settlement."
Key is a major embarassment - I'm calling him Dim. B. Key after the new award he got.

11 comments:

Ruahines said...

Kia ora Marty,
Key is pandering to the red neck vote, along with "heroes" like Colin Meads, who don't want the uppity Maoris to get to full of themselves. Same old lowest common denominator politics we always see trotted out circling the wagons around racism once again. What I find completely pathetic is the stance that these parks and wilderness areas are somenhow better protected under the firm benevolent hand of National and Gerry Brownlee. Are we forgetting these money grubbing bastards want to dig them up and sell them off?
Robb

Marty Mars said...

We agree Robb - there seems to be very little protection if you are a national park or wilderness area, which i am sure is the opposite of what most people would believe.

Anonymous said...

Kia ora

Ed Hillary was another pakeha cultural icon who had no respect for tangata whenua and now the cheeky sods want to put his name on Te Tapuae o Uneuku and or on a ridge of Aoraki.

I don't think all National Parks are that sacred but certain parts of them are. It is however interesting that Maori are not supposed to harvest flora or fauna from within a National Park but it might be okay to have a bull dozer drive through it.

Ngai Tahu were prevented from investigating putting in a gondala which would get so manymore people into the wilderness areas, now it seems folks can just follow the dump truck to the local mine.

As for giving Aoraki back, we think if we wait long enough Maori and pacfic peoples will outnumber the pakeha naysayers and Aoraki will again be ours.

Anonymous said...

Well, looks like a certain ethnic group will not be happy until they have their hands on every part of New Zealand's outdoor estate.

The beaches, the Urerewas, and now Mt Cook.

Tell me Marty, how much are you going to charge us white folks to take a stroll? Charge a photograph?

A nice big size ten boot is going to be stomped all over the kiwi outdoor recreational tradition.

Millsy

Anonymous said...

millsy is lookiong at the wrong party

It is Pakeha who will not be statisfied until they have their hands on and full control of everything. They started in the 1800's and they have nearly got it all.

The got it by stealing it at the point of a gun, fraud and by legislative might in a Parliament which has a male pakeha majoirty.

In treaty settlements the Crown doles out small parcels, often requiring iwi to either buy the lands and / or with heaps of restrictions.

People like Millsy accept paying rent to the landlord as long as the landlord is not Maori - unless it is a peppercorn rent like it used to be in Greymouth. Racism is alive and well - there is no one law for one it is there to protect the pakeha interests.

Anonymous said...

Typical Maori, always wanting to lock New Zealanders out of their own country.

The National Park is a treasure to all New Zealanders. I would love to go and tell all those children out there that you want to keep them from accessing our national parks because iwi want their hands on it.,

Anonymous said...

Where do these people get the idea a: that all Maori want to own all National Parks and b: that if they owned them the public would not continue to enjoy access?

There are lots of nationally significant sites in private non-Maori ownership where the public are excluded. I also bet the public will be excluded from the bits of the National Parks that the bull dozers are in looking for precious minerals. The public are already not able to access the bits of National Parks that have concessions unless they pay the concessionaire.

When the Crown sells high country stations to pakeha under the tenure review system there is no reservations for widespread public access - yet when the Crown sold Ngai Tahu three High Country stations (yes they had to buy them) public access was guaranteed.

Same with Te Waihora - public access guaranteed but now we have people who think that they should benefit from it being in Maori ownership by not having to pay to take eels from there on a commercial basis. If they want to take eels from the Crown estate they have to pay. What is the problem? - oh I know - paying Maori for the same thing you pay other people is not cool.

I wonder if the same people think they shoud ride Shotover Jet or Whalewatch for free becasue it is Ngai Tahu owned? Funny thing is they both have to pay the Crown for their concessions.

Ngai Tahu have a lot of National Parks in our area - certainly more than any other iwi and possibly more than the whole of the NOrth Island. I would not want us to own them and manage them, we can't afford it. And would I want to prevent the public accessing them if we did own them - hell no.

Would I want to charge people - no more or less than the Crown or the private operators who already do collect fees for various things.

I might add that you have to pay to go into National Parks in the USA - not that much but you do have to pay. It is an honest charge. Here we all pay, it is just done via our taxes and so the users pay the same as the non-users.

Ruahines said...

To Anon.
I am Pakeha, not a "typical Maori". I am fairly stunned at how threatened pakeha claim to feel and the dubious conclusions drawn. Where has it been claimed by any Maori group, at anytime, that their aim is to "lock New Zealanders out of their own country". Please cite one real example. Please explain how it is not okay for iwi to want involvement with their ancestoral lands. Your baseless fear of children being denied access does not hold water, and has gone tenfold into the realm of redneck hysteria. And please explain why all the pakeha so tearfully claiming ownership and connection to our wilderness voted in the very government who wants to start bull dozing and ripping them apart to make money from them. The real issue I think is that the definition of treasure in regards to these wilderness areas is completely different between so many.

Anonymous said...

I never voted National. And I am against mining in our National Parks.

Ngai Tahu are fine to run the shotover jet, etc, I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with, is the privatisation of National Park estate by handing the title over to an unaccountable iwi elite who will charge through the nose for New Zealanders to access.

Look at Mt Tawawera. Look at other parts of the conservation estate where access has been restricted because iwi now own it.

Crown ownership of our National Parks are the only way that New Zealanders can enjoy our lakes, rivers and forests.

Ruahines said...

Kia ora,
Your same argument can be made in reverse. Look at Tongariro where the money being made by, sometimes shoddy, tours and bus companies has nothing to do with Maori. Or what about all the access being denied to the foreshore by wealthy white landowners as well. Why is it okay for wealthy elites, ie, Julian Robertson and Shania Twain to come in and buy huge tracts of land to use as they wish? I do most of my tramping and exploration in the nearby Ruahine ranges, and have for the last 18 years. In the last 4-5 years the amount of helicopter traffic dropping hunters in on huts, as if is their personal property, and the amount of choppers once again gleening off easy deer, has increased markedly. These operators pay a small concession to DOC and then charge people like wounded bulls to fly them in. Having been at a hut and had hunters dropped upon me numerous times, or finding a hut a complete mess after they have left, is no pleasant experience. These hunters are most unlikely to be worrying about hut book entries or fees as well. I have yet to see one Maori helicopter pilot, and few, if any, whom have been flown in. Greenstone theft in the South Island is another example. My point is why is it okay and acceptable for these sorts of underground economies and abuses to happen which benefit a few and all dismissed with a nudge and a wink under Crown control as just god ol' Kiwi number 8 wire stuff. Again, I have seen nor read any such notion that Maori have asked for, or demanded, or even want, control of all our national Parks, State forest Parks, rivers, parks, hills and lakes. The Urewera is a completely different case with a vastly different history than any other area.

Evelyn Cook said...

sweeping statements about iwi, whether Ngāi Tuhoe or Ngāi Tahu, shutting people out or charging for entrance to National Parks is typical kakī whero exaggeration. Sometimes I feel as if we have gone back to the late 1980's and early 1990's where such over the top statements filled the Letters to the Editor columns in the South Island daily papers. The mandated iwi leadership have NEVER said any such thing to the best of my knowledge but there are ample recorded cases of private landowners refusing access across their land to Queen's Chain, beaches, fishing places etc.

As for Aoraki and the question of ownership, it was my privilege, along with one of our tāua, to be present when Ngā Upoko discussed the possible formal reception of and returning of ownership of Aoraki. Their position was that 'ownership' of Aoraki had never been given nor sold to the Crown, except on Te Tai Poutini, ergo no ceremony was required. This was supported by contingents from the south and the north of te motu.

One other argument against participation in such a farce would be the ongoing breaches of both the Ngāi Tahu Settlement Act and Te Tiriti o Waitangi. While successive governments act dishonourably, why should iwi Māori 'celebrate'.

Co-management of such special areas as Aoraki, Te Urewera etc should be a given not something up for negotiations with votecatching as the driving force.

As long as we have people like Key and Brownlee with their fingers in the pie, we can expect no real effort in understanding the values of tāngata whenua. They only understand money and power and they need the votes of the red necks to keep that.