Northern Advocate Letters: July 12

Water claim

I hear that the Waitangi Tribunal is giving serious consideration to the part-Maori claim for the ownership of NZ water. Really?

To have any validity then the claimants must surely show that the water in the rivers and lakes that they are now laying claim to is the same water that existed at the time of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.

A lot of evaporation has occurred during the past 170 years and a torrent of fresh water has descended from the skies since then so it would seem logical that the water that fell on both pakeha and Maori subsequent to the treaty must belong to all inhabitants.

Why is it that part-Maori assert that the treaty is a "partnership" and in the next breath lay claim to exclusive ownership of this country's natural resources?

And here is dumb old me thinking that a partnership meant sharing. In my view the country could have saved millions of dollars by replacing the entire Waitangi Tribunal with a rubber stamp that said "Maori - YES. Rest of NZ - NO."

Guess I'd better go and ask old Rangi down the road if it's okay for me to have a bath - and how much it will cost.

 - Mitch Morgan, Kaipara

Bad decisions

It is with concern that I observe the consequences of decisions made unilaterally by councils which have had negative impacts on their constituents.

Two such examples which immediately spring to mind of course are Kaipara and Christchurch.

In both cases the councils concerned have decided to go ahead with projects and promote policies without bothering to seek a clear mandate on whether or not there was genuine support from the people to whom they are responsible -the ratepayers.

The fact the Hundertwasser concept is of dubious value, and in all probability would not receive a majority support of ratepayers, if there was a meaningful poll, and yet still has been pushed through by the present council demonstrates that a similar culture of arrogance and non inclusiveness is present in local government here.

Hundertwasser is touted as a magic bullet for the perceived ills of Whangarei.

I would suggest that we would all be served better by a step back from government by pressure group opinion.

Far better to simply address the relevant issues concerning our town and sorting each of them out in the manner which is most appropriate, case by case.

A clean town, a well lit and safe town, a town with efficient and effective public services would in my opinion be far more attractive to visitors than one rather odd looking building.

I am also certain that such a town would be infinitely more preferable for the citizens of Whangarei.

 - GM Tinker, Whareora

Slanted view

I am writing in regard to a recent editorial published in your paper titled, Honesty simply a naive dream, by Wyn Drabble.

Forgive me if I am reading too much into it but it appears to me that this editorial carried a somewhat right-of-center slant. It echoes National's theme of a "sensible" budget that will ensure a brighter future for all New Zealanders while deriding the opposition and, more noticeably, Winston Peters.

The author believes it would be "a joy" to hear the opposition agreeing with the budget. And I must agree it would - should it be in concurrence with a budget that was actually sensible and ensured benefits to all New Zealanders. However, this one is too far from it, This one most certainly does not.

But my main qualm is not that. The author acknowledges a naivete in wishing for more agreement and honesty from our politicians. For a more open and robust debate that can create compromise we must become more educated and aware as a voting public.

Presently, politics is a game of points and polls that panders often to the lowest common denominator. We cannot be naive enough to believe that the mouths of politicians can ever utter the truth.

We must take it upon ourselves instead to search for it, to force it upon them. Sadly, I fear it is naive to think that such a public could exist. We are too interested and blinded by what the editorial describes as the "childish" game.

 - J. Mackay, Whangarei

Paying the price

I cannot understand why the state thinks it should export our people to Australia to find work like they are some sort of commodity to be bought and sold on the world market. What this will do is bring more immigrants into our country and create a melting pot of discontent just like it is right around the globe.

Tangata whenua have a stake in their country "Aotearoa Land of the Long White Cloud" that was theirs in the beginning and that's not about to change anytime soon.

He whom created them will not give up their inheritance they paid the fill price for in "peace".

 - Jane Tana, Whangarei