ORC Manuherikia proposal slammed
The Otago Regional Council’s rejection of scientific opinion on the future of the Manuherikia river in favour of vested users and landowners is a disgraceful act of incompetence, and a slap in the face of the community.
I have watched the decline of the river’s health for 70 years, but it is over the last two decades in particular that most harm has been done. The source of the problem is the unsustainable growth of pastoral dairy farming in the valley, undeniable, but constantly fudged for years by right wing farming interests in pursuit of financial gain. They claim that the public is anti-farming, but in general it is not. It is against unsustainable industry of any nature.
The solution is not to prolong remedial action, build dams or introduce more water, but to limit the dairying to, say, the extent of the 1980s or ’90s. The problem is not unique, of course, with polluted waterways in river systems of Southland, Canterbury and widely elsewhere becoming a burden to society. Even the McKenzie country is blighted with the curse of pivot irrigation dairying.
After decades of debate and mountains of paperwork the science is incontrovertible and delayed remedies will be a catastrophe. The ORC needs to show some intelligence and spine.
Gordon Keys
Alexandra
Two things not the same
Ian McGimpsey’s letter (21.9.23) was a real head-in-hands moment. The terms indigenous and indigenous peoples are not the same. Civis used Paul Moon’s excellent definition of why Māori are New Zealand’s indigenous people. Similar definitions are supplied by the United Nations and Amnesty International.
Mr McGimpsey argues that anyone born in New Zealand, regardless of race, are “native” or indigenous people. This is nonsensical. Every culture that has arrived in New Zealand post-colonisation maintains some link back to their home country.
For example, Pākehā culture - that of pipe bands, rugby and cottage pie - won’t ever escape its ties to Mother Britain. Since Māori culture and language developed in New Zealand and the Māori people are found nowhere else in the world, they are the indigenous peoples of New Zealand.
Attempts to refute Māori of this status is a shallow attempt to rid them of what Mr McGimpsey calls “special rights’’ - afforded to them as the original custodians of this land we all share.
J Eunson
Wellington
Rural myth buster
A rural myth persists that our export focused economy is better served by a National government. Bill Southworth (ODT 15.9.23) reminds us that under Labour, our averaged GDP has been 9.62%, while under National it has been just 4.6%. Since 2017, Labour has in place or is pursuing 64 free trade agreements (FTAs).
In the last year we have entered into an FTA with the UK that will boost our GDP by over a billion dollars. FTAs have managed to bypass or lessen the input tariffs of many of the countries we trade with. The FTA with the EU has, since 2017, grown by 39% and is forecast to reach $56.8 billion by 2026.
In July, New Zealand hosted representatives from 10 Asia Pacific economies to a Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans Pacific Partnership. The government is working with farmers and growers to generate an extra $44b, amounting to a total of $99b in exports by the end of the decade. Farmers these days are well aware that international customers are demanding higher standards in such things as sustainability and animal welfare. With this in mind the government has pledged more than $118 million for advisory services for farmers, growers and foresters. Labour is charting a strong pathway into our farming future, and they most definitely have the farmers’ backs.
Terry Hannan
Weston
A defining election issue and how to define it
Your correspondent Paul Elwell-Sutton (20.9.23) is correct. Co-governance is a defining election issue. His understanding of the issue is, however, badly astray. He needs to ‘‘Honour the Treaty’’.
In Article 1, Maori ceded sovereignty to the British Crown ‘‘forever’’. That leaves no room to suggest power-sharing co-governance.
Via Article 2, the British Crown assured all New Zealanders’ security in the ownership of their property.
The concept of ownership protected by law was new to Maori in 1840, and the words used to express this concept in Te Tiriti have been given mischievous 21st century meaning in English that conflicts with Article 1.
This becomes obvious from the instructions of Lord Normanby to Hobson and from the commentary of Sir Apirana Ngata.
In Article 3, the British Crown granted all New Zealanders the rights, privileges and duties of British citizens; in law, all are equal.
No suggestion there, either, that some, on grounds of ethnicity, may share power with the elected government and so enjoy unelected authority over others.
Indigeneity is an irrelevant concept in New Zealand, where we are all migrants or descendants of migrants.
Paul Elwell-Sutton needs to cast aside his erroneous and racist ideology and Honour the Treaty.
Were he to do so, he would understand that democracy and co-governance cannot co-exist.
We can have one or the other, but not both, and the Treaty entitles us to democracy.
John Bell
Forbury
St Clair beach looking sorry, uncared for
How lovely to enjoy a walk to St Clair beach on a superb sunny winter day in Dunedin, reminding me what a great place this is to live.
Such a pity then to turn the corner at the beach to see all the fencing covered in a thick coating of rust, along with many of the seat frames.
This is a well visited place by both locals and tourists and it looks appalling and uncared for.
Could someone please advise what urgently needed maintenance is planned to rectify such an eyesore?
Janine Race
Dunedin
[Ben Hogan, Dunedin City Council transport manager, replies: We are glad to hear your correspondent is enjoying our fantastic coastal environment at St Clair. The Esplanade is subjected to particularly harsh - and corrosive - conditions, but our team works hard to make sure the seawall railing is regularly maintained and structurally sound. We do not replace these assets for aesthetic reasons only, as our focus is on ensuring the most efficient use of ratepayers’ money, but our work helps ensure the area remains a great place to visit.]
Health question
Can the Minister of Health please explain the huge difference between healthcare in the North and South Islands? It is very obvious that only the North Island matters when is comes to healthcare.
We don’t exist in the South Island. It is not fair and not right. We need equal access to healthcare.
Raewyn Bryant
Maryhill
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
