In this Update we cover the new attempts to erode democracy that are hijacking the reforms of the Resource Management Act (RMA) and the further complications with Three Waters that are expanding the loss of democratic accountability from just water infrastructure to just about anything involving water.

*BREAKING NEWS*

Government undermines our constitutional foundations

But first, another controversy broke over the weekend as constitutional lawyers caught up with the unprecedented entrenchment amendment, under urgency, of the Three Waters legislation.

Under the cover of urgency and precluding any opportunity for public consultation or consideration by select committee, this Government has inserted a dangerous amendment into the Three Waters legislation at the last moment. 

In the Waters Services Entities Bill, there will now be a requirement for a super-majority of 60% of MPs to amend or repeal a particular section.

The use of a super-majority is normally used only in constitutional matters, such as the term of Parliament. The insertion in this instance demonstrates the Government’s total contempt for the will of the people and is a direct attempt to circumvent democracy. 

But, for now, back to the rest of the attacks on democracy.

The common thread for these is the insertion of new, unclear, and untested Maori words and concepts into our law, and then requiring compliance with these new concepts across complex and varying issues.

The uncertainty thrown up by this kind of law-making is causing havoc and the need for councils and courts to figure out what the law actually means will result in more delay and expense, along with less democracy and accountability.

RMA reform hijacked

The RMA reform announced last week was proudly introduced by Minister David Parker when he confirmed the introduction of the Natural and Built Environment Bill and the Spatial Planning Bill.

While most parties agree reform is urgently needed, this already very complex area of law has two outrageous additions included by David Parker.

First, the new regional planning committees must have at least two Maori representatives on them. Not 50/50 co-governance as some were clamouring for, but still another undemocratic intrusion. And it turns out these committees can have 50/50 co-governance, if the relevant councils want them to – do you trust your council to stand up for your democracy?

Second, the new legislation contains a requirement that councils “recognise and uphold te Oranga o te Taiao.”

So we have another case of Maori words with a Maori concept being slipped into an English language Bill and an English legal framework.

This term, new to statute in New Zealand, is defined in the Bill but the scope is so broad that to suggest it will reduce complexity, as the Minister assures us, is naïve in the extreme.

Dr Oliver Hartwich, Executive Director of The New Zealand Initiative, presented an excellent analysis of the legislation in his article in the Australian (paywalled).

He observes that “Tikanga is mentioned 31 times, Matauranga Maori comes up 26 times. Kaitiakitanga can be found in seven places. They all beat “property right”, which features only three times.

Dr Hartwich rightly observes that the Bill is taking the integration of purported Maori custom into the New Zealand legal system to a new level.

The nuanced definitions and attempts to recognise special interests are all underpinned by the so-called duty to give effect to the principles of The Treaty of Waitangi.

Besides the policy goals, each time this happens, everyone operating in the relevant space (and resource management affects everyone) is left uncertain of where the bounds of the new law are until the courts rule on it. But the courts also wind up with enormous space to define what these concepts mean, as there is very little in the way of agreed definition.

We the public lose direct democratic accountability over our politicians to achieve policy outcomes, as they hand over that power to the courts and new unaccountable bureaucracies with their vague law-making.

At least for now, we have the most direct form of democratic accountability still available to us, with a vote at the next election.

At the heart of each piece of new legislation or policy introduced by this Government – whether it is about education, health, water, environment, resource management, or local government – is a consistent and egregious fundamental principle, that New Zealanders are to be afforded different consideration based upon ancestry.

It is hard to escape the conclusion that the rapid and almost overwhelming pace at which these changes are being foisted upon us is intentional.

Distract, Divide and Overwhelm is a sound strategy for any power grab.

Submissions on the Natural and Built Environment Bill close on 30 January 2023. Perhaps influenced by the 80,000+ submissions received on the Three Waters legislation, the Government is hoping that New Zealanders will be too busy and distracted to challenge yet another enormous piece of divisive legislation.

When asked directly, the Prime Minister cannot guarantee that non-Maori and Maori will have the same level of representation and openly states that she believes one person, one vote is an “overly simplistic” approach to democracy. For this reason alone, we must brace ourselves for another battle that demands New Zealanders are treated equally before the law.

The layers of racial bureaucracy will see the wheels of progress grind to a halt, our nation further divided and all of that for no better outcomes for those who are in need, Maori or otherwise.

The many waters of Mahuta

The complexity of Three Waters reached an even greater muddle of confusion due to the change introduced at the second reading on 16 November 2022. The Bill is now awaiting Third Reading and will likely become law before Christmas.

Now included in the Bill is additional clarification of how the Te Mana o te Wai (the respect or authority of the water) provision should be applied. This expands the potential scope of the complex, co-governed Three Waters bureaucracy out to the coast (that’s right, foreshore and seabed all over again), geothermal water, and hydroelectric facilities.

The ambition is galling.

When the water entities are already structured in a co-governance model, with elected representation forming only 50% of the boards, that added layer of the Te Mana o te Wai obligations results in a further reduction in the influence the democratic sphere will have over water. The Prime Minister is lying when she claims that there is no expansion in scope to the Three Waters legislation.

Layers of Representation

While every Government agency and all new legislation are inserting obligations to a certain interpretation of The Treaty of Waitangi, the radical changes to Local Government New Zealand’s guidelines to your Council’s Standing Orders are another direct assault on democracy.

It is important that silence not be seen as tacit acceptance or endorsement of these new proposed Standing Orders

Stand up for democracy and tell your Mayor to do the same by actively rejecting the divisive and anti-democratic proposal to change council Standing Orders.

Less than three weeks ago, Hobson’s Pledge publicised the new standing order guide from Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ).

Standing Orders are the procedures that your council uses to conduct their meetings and the way they debate. Their purpose is to enable local authorities to exercise their decision making responsibilities in a transparent, inclusive, and lawful manner.

LGNZ send a guide to these standing orders, along with a template to use, to councils at the start of each term and they have made significant changes to this year’s guide from the last version in 2019, without announcement, fanfare, or scrutiny from the media.

These guidelines assert a new special status in decision making for Maori and iwi that will limit the democratic authority of those who were elected by the voters at large (which included Maori).

Tell your Mayor (and the Chair of your regional council, if you have one) to reject these radical and undemocratic changes at defenddemocracy.nz.

The new guidelines claim that iwi and hapu “have a mandate based on their role as the indigenous governors of the land”.

LGNZ does not explain how they came to these conclusions and, without a fundamental change in our constitutional law in the last three years, there is no legal basis for inserting this new status for iwi, even though they try to make it sound like councils have to comply.

You can read the guidelines here: StandingOrder_16_09_22.pdf (lgnz.co.nz)

Councils will be bureaucratically crippled in their decision-making by the cultural minefield that these recommended standing orders require.

Should your council adopt these guidelines there will be:

1. Different rights based for some based upon ancestry
2. More bureaucracy
3. Delays in decision making
4. Increased costs
5. Less accountability

As the newly elected mayors and councillors begin their work serving your community, it is essential that they are reminded of their responsibility to be representative of all their constituents.

Send a message at our easy to use tool and demand that everyone have an equal say in your community. We make it simple to find your mayor with just your postcode.

Our communities need to be inclusive and representative of all New Zealanders, regardless of their ancestry. Do not allow this radical manifesto to differentiate one group of New Zealanders ahead of the rest. We must not be divided against ourselves and this wedge of bureaucracy will do just that.  

Hobson’s Pledge is continuing to push back against racism and will continue demanding that all New Zealanders are treated equally before the law.

This update is a little longer than usual, to cover all the latest developments in the co-governance agenda.

*BREAKING NEWS*

But first, just yesterday Hobson's Pledge received a copy of the He Mata Whariki, He Matawhanui report on proposals for reform to local government in New Zealand. 

We are working through the details, but it is clear that another nail is being set for hammering in to the coffin of New Zealand's democratic heritage.

More than ever, it is clear we must defend unity and equal suffrage.

Watch this space.

Jackson's folly hits a predictable snag

Astoundingly, there are many New Zealanders who believe that co-governance is merely due recognition of the Treaty of Waitangi. In reality though, it is a failed social experiment that has been unable to deliver a tangible benefit to anyone, including Maori.

The inability to reach final decisions due to co-governance is crippling progress, as endless consultation and consensus decision-making (read giving one side a veto) has become the new norm.

This is evident in nearly every public service that is tasked with improving outcomes for New Zealanders.

 

Read more ↗

I am hoping you might indulge me as I write about the events of this week and how it demonstrates the dangerous path of division we are being forced down by a Labour Government controlled by its Maori caucus that is yet again demonstrating racist bullying that no other elected representatives could get away with.

On Wednesday I discovered a new hero, something that is rare in New Zealand at the moment.

ACT’s Karen Chhour demonstrated what it means to be a proud, dignified New Zealander who also represents Maoridom in a manner which is inspiring.

In her fight to protect the rights of vulnerable children, she was attacked by an individual that can only be described as a bully and a thug.

Supported by the derisive laughter of his peers, Kelvin Davis attempted to belittle the ACT MP, not by challenging the facts at issue, but by attacking her identity.

>> Click here to watch the news coverage <<

Sitting in the lofty heights as the self-appointed determiner of what Maori are and are not allowed to think and feel, he denied Karen Chhour her identity.

Let us not forget that Kelvin Davis, before Labour came into Government, made it a bottom line that he would resign from Parliament if Charter Schools were scrapped. Charter Schools were quickly scrapped under the Labour Government and, demonstrating the backbone of an invertebrate, Kelvin fell silent on his bottom line, with his forty pieces of silver including the deputy leadership.

Charter Schools were the most successful educational system for at risk and vulnerable Maori kids, achieving outcomes that were unprecedented. It seems, however, that once in government, Kelvin was not interested in what’s good for Maori; he’s only interested in advancing himself and a narrative of separatism.

Let us not get bogged down in the need to achieve real benefit for Maori when we can instead deliver a bunch of virtue signalling nonsense that benefits only an elite class of Maori, who can slap each other on the back enjoying the success of bullying those who are trying to advocate for the vulnerable.

But, of course, I will be classified by Kelvin as having the “vanilla lens” that prevents me for exposing a fraud and bully when I see one. I can’t possibly speak until, according to the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party,  I “cross the bridge that is Te Tiriti o Waitangi” so I can get to understand my Maori world better.

I wonder by whose measure the understanding of my “Maori world” is tested. After six years of advocating for equality of rights for ALL New Zealanders in my role with Hobson’s Pledge, the attacks on my right to speak as a Maori are truly water off a duck’s back. Unlike the Kelvins of this world, I don’t claim to speak for ALL Maori. I am not afraid of my views being challenged and I will debate the issues and demand accountability. I do not need to resort to name-calling and insults that belittle those who have a different point of view. But in Kelvin’s case, I have decided an exception can be made.

Karen Chhour demonstrates the growing awakening of Maori who have tired of the bullies and thugs who claim to speak for “us”. She speaks for accountability, and demands delivery of better solutions without being distracted by this narrative that Maori are incapable of achieving on merit because of events that unfolded two hundred years ago.

Yes, New Zealand can do better in protecting the vulnerable and improving outcomes but this takes serious conversations by intelligent people. And, despite Kelvin’s protestations, being Maori or not has nothing to do with your competency to find solutions.  

Read more ↗