Latest news with #TePatiMāori
Otago Daily Times
09-06-2025
- Politics
- Otago Daily Times
Letters to the Editor: Oamaru House, power and talking rubbish
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including Oamaru House, power supply and talking rubbish. Oamaru House offers vital support for many People from all walks of life across North Otago, Southland, and Central Otago have relied on Oamaru House during some of their most vulnerable moments. This stress-free accommodation, located conveniently close to Dunedin Hospital, has offered more than just a place to stay - it has been a home away from home. The potential loss of Oamaru House would be deeply felt, not only by those who use it now, but also by future patients and families who depend on the certainty and comfort it provides. In a time when so many aspects of life are becoming increasingly hard to navigate, especially during medical crises, Oamaru House has consistently been a source of relief. I've always found it reassuring to simply make a call, book a room, and know I'll have a safe place to stay within walking distance of the hospital, with parking onsite. That one simple convenience removes a major layer of stress when facing far greater challenges. We cannot afford to lose this vital support. I urge everyone to remain open-minded and supportive of any collaborative efforts that may arise to ensure this much-needed service can continue for the people who rely on it. Linda Wilson Oamaru Penalty excessive As a Pakeha, I fully support Te Pati Māori doing a haka in response to the appalling judgement of the government regarding the Treaty Principles Bill. The 21-day suspension is excessive in an institution that is a product of colonisation and which has breached the Treaty of Waitangi many times. It mirrors the lengthy history of disproportionate punishment Māori have endured that has entrenched inequity and institutionalised racism. There is a lengthy list of government MPs whose behaviour has been appalling but the only consequences have been a slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket. The punching down will continue with the Regulatory Standards Bill. This is a dangerous piece of legislation that I hope millions of us will oppose by sending in submissions. The government appears to want Aotearoa New Zealand to be an oligarchy so those annoying bottom-feeders won't get in the way of enriching their wealthy mates. Lou Scott Dunedin Think of the future I see Radio NZ has picked up on climate change scientists accusing the government of ''ignoring scientific evidence''. This is a worry as Kiwis need to invest in the future, not a dead-end delusion. The $15 million upgrade for Milford Sound Fiordland is a case in point, but then the money is easily and most likely to be absorbed in lawyers and consultants before any improvements can be built. It is a shame that this government could not take the job of governing well as seriously as punitive punishment for people they deem unworthy. When you have the privilege of power you should try to do a good job navigating the world's potential hazards. Please don't just give up on the right direction. Aaron Nicholson Manapouri Power supply going right down to the wire I have been following the growth projections and associated infrastructure issues in the Wakatipu basin with respect to the power supply. The only power supply to Queenstown is supplied from the national grid at Cromwell to Frankton, Queenstown. The supply consists of two 110kV lines sharing single towers along the route. Every time I travel through the Nevis Bluff I look with some trepidation at the towers located above this bluff prone to failure. In engineering we design critical infrastructure with a factor of N-1. This is a security rating, i.e. if N = 2 and if you lose 1, there is still 1 remaining. This is true for the individual lines but not the tower line. This exposes Queenstown to a total blackout should the towers fail due to an earthquake or rock fall. PowerNet is installing larger transformers at Frankton to supply the increased load. To supply them, PowerNet is increasing the temperature rating of the lines. What this means is the lines are going to be redesigned to allow for changed design parameters due to increased line sags due to higher current flow. The change in tower forces will be calculated and structure changes made but this does not address the N-1 risk. Steve Tilleyshort (Retired engineer) Mosgiel A very proud Southlander talks rubbish In reply to Cr Vandervis' letter (4.6.25) where he gives AB Lime some great free advertising and indicates Dunedin is doing Southlanders a favour by sending us their waste. There is money to be made from waste. Yipee, it's coming to Southland. Yes, isn't it great Southland has businessmen and women with foresight who can also provide employment for many of its residents and can get on with a job? Perhaps we have a more enabling council. But one has to remember that every truckload of waste from outside of the province that comes into our landfill is one less of ours in the long term. But I am sure our enterprising businessmen/women have this all factored into their equations because a 200-year timeframe can suddenly whittle away. Dunedin ratepayers and residents really need to start asking questions of their representatives and getting them to challenge/ask pertinent questions of council staff because having an item of the table or being bandied about for 32 years is rather a long time. Yes, I know, good things take time - like whisky and cheese - but in this timeframe one could have, potentially, had a child and become a grandparent or planted a forest (pine) and harvested it and had another almost ready for its first pruning. So, as a child of an ex-ratepaying Dunedinite with family still in your fair city, how much has this exercise cost the council thus far? What is there to show for the money spent? People need straight answers. In these times ,Dunedin ratepayers and residents need must haves, not nice to haves. Yes, Cr Vandervis may think I am parochial with his attempted deflective remark regarding rugby and I would just like to remind him we do have the NPC series coming up where some more of our best can shine. Jacqui Legg Winton Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@
1News
14-05-2025
- Politics
- 1News
Te Pāti Māori MPs suspended for performing haka in Parliament
Three Te Pati Māori MPs have been suspended from Parliament by the Privileges Committee for performing a haka during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill last year. Co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer were "severely censured" and suspended for 21 days, while Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke was suspended for seven days. In a decision released on Wednesday night, the Privileges Committee found the trio had acted "in a manner that could have the effect of intimidating a member of the House in the discharge of their duty". "There is no question that the behaviour of Ms Maipi-Clarke, Ms Ngarewa-Packer, and Mr Waititi could have the effect of intimidating other members." The report said it was not acceptable to approach other members on the debating floor and "particularly unacceptable" for Ngarewa-Packer to "to appear to simulate firing a gun" at another member of Parliament. The haka at the centre of the matter was conducted during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill, which was voted down at its next reading. Labour's Peeni Henare had also been brought in front of the Privileges Committee, and it was recommended he apologise to the House. The Te Pati Māori trio were referred to the Privileges Committee but ignored initial summons to appear in-person, claiming an injustice as they had been denied legal representation and were unable to appear together. The suspension meant the Te Pati Maori co-leaders would miss the Budget debate, and they would not be paid during the standdown period. Privileges Committee chairperson and National minister Judith Collins said the issue was not about the haka, tikanga, or the Treaty of Waitangi. "It does not matter — our gender, our ethnicity, our beliefs. In this Parliament, we are all simply Members of Parliament, and like any institution it has rules." Collins confirmed the punishment was the "most significant" ever handed out by the Privilege Committee. "It is also, of course, the worst instance that we have ever seen." Te Pāti Māori said it strongly opposed the findings and the penalties recommended by the Privileges Committe. 'We reject both the characterisation of our actions, and the severity of the proposed sanctions.' In a statement, the party called the punishments unprecedented as "the three longest suspensions in the history of Parliament in Aotearoa". "This decision will not only silence three MPs; it will silence a quarter of te iwi Māori by taking their representatives out of this House." Te Pāti Māori MP for Te Tai Tokerau and member of the Privileges Committee Mariameno Kapa-Kingi said 'the process was grossly unjust, unfair, and unwarranted, resulting in an extreme sanction. This was not about process, this became personal.' The Labour Party agreed that the conduct constituted contempt of the House but said it was "concerned that the penalties proposed are unduly severe". The Green Party opposed the suspension and said the level of punishment was "unprecedented and completely out of proportion to the breach of Standing Orders".
Scoop
24-04-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Dunne's Weekly: An Issue No-one Can Afford To Lose
A tense and intriguing political chess game is being played out in Parliament's Privileges Committee at present. It is a game none of those involved can afford to lose, yet inevitably someone will. On the face of it, the issue at hand is whether the spontaneous haka performed by three Te Pati Māori MPs during the vote on the First Reading of the Treaty Principles Bill last year was a breach of what is quaintly referred to as Parliamentary Privilege. The concept of Parliamentary Privilege dates back hundreds of years and devolves from the procedures of Britain's House of Commons devised to enable Members to speak freely in Parliament without fear of legal consequences or loss of freedoms (or their heads at that time). Anyone who inhibits in any way Members of Parliament from freely expressing their opinions in Parliament or going about their normal Parliamentary business is in breach of Parliamentary Privilege and is therefore subject to the judgement of the Privileges Committee – effectively Parliament's court – for their actions. In this instance, the allegation before the Committee is that by performing a haka while the vote was being taken on the Treaty Principles Bill, the Te Pati Māori MPs were disrupting the free expression of Parliament's views on the Bill at that time and were therefore breaching Privilege. However, the issue now runs more deeply than that. Te Pati Māori's ill-informed dismissal of what it calls Parliament's 'silly little rules' about Privilege, potentially poses an even greater challenge to the system. They say their actions highlight Parliament's lack of recognition of tikanga, and that simply must change. On the other hand, Parliament's Speaker Gerry Brownlee in a somewhat rare and unusual intervention on a matter still under consideration by the Privileges Committee has described Te Pati Māori's position as 'complete nonsense.' He says a distinction must be drawn between Parliament's rules and procedures and upholding tikanga. Brownlee says separate work is already underway through the cross-party Standing Orders Committee to see how tikanga can be more fully integrated into Parliament's rules, with a report due before the end of this term of Parliament. For that reason, he dismisses Te Pati Māori's haka actions as 'grandstanding'. But Te Pati Māori rejects the notion that the broader work around tikanga should be treated separately from the haka protest. According to co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer the question of tikanga was central to the three MPs' decision to perform the haka. Therefore, she argues, they must stand up to the Privileges Committee, which she fears wants to 'criminalise the haka and criminalise our tikanga' by finding against them. For its part, the Privileges Committee will want to steer a careful course. The Committee is made up of senior MPs from all parties and is chaired by the Attorney-General Judith Collins who is also a KC. Its focus will be on whether the three MPs' actions breached Parliamentary Privilege, and if it finds so, what sanctions should be imposed on them. The committee is unlikely to delve too deeply into the wider question of tikanga, leaving that to the Standing Orders committee work already underway. Should the committee conclude the three MPs have breached Privilege, the delicate issue will be what sanction it recommends Parliament should impose. For the sake of Parliament's integrity and credibility any penalty should be significant – it cannot look like a slap with a wet bus ticket. However, at the same time, it cannot be unreasonable, which would simply inflame the current situation further and embolden Te Pati Māori's line that it is the victim of a repressive, racist system. In short, Collins and her committee are going to have to apply a judgment of Solomon. What is at stake here is the credibility of the body of Parliamentary practice and the protections of Privilege built up over hundreds of years. Therefore, the Privileges Committee cannot act in a way that could be interpreted as arbitrarily weakening that long-standing strong tradition for contemporary political convenience. Should it do so, the institution of Parliament will be the loser. Ironically, the situation is a little easier for Te Pati Māori. An adverse finding from the Privileges Committee would certainly be a blow to the Party's credibility to work within the system (in the same way as is its ongoing failure to provide proper accounts to the Electoral Commission in breach of the law). At the same time, however, it would confirm Te Pati Māori's narrative that the whole system is geared against them, and that in Ngarewa-Packer's words 'This is the cost of standing up. We've had this before, and, you know, we just have to pay it again.' In the end, the issue is less about the Treaty Principles Bill haka, which is sideshow puffery, than it is about achieving a reasonable balance between Parliament's historical traditions and contemporary tikanga. That will only be achieved through constructive engagement by all sides, not more of the game-playing seen so far.
