Maori water claims may affect asset sales

21/07/2012 7:52:56 a.m.

Dave wrote:

Maori already have as much rights of access to water as any other New Zealander and that will not change. Water was here before Maori and non-Maori arrived and will be here after we go. It is not changed by the Electricity dams and power companies do not consume water, they only use the pressure of it's flow and send it on it's way unhindered and completely intact. Ownership of water is a non-issue as long as Government (as our representatives) continue to hold guardianship and managing rights of water as they do now.

10/07/2012 11:59:26 a.m.

Fiona Campbell wrote:

In the pakeha law, philosophically no one owns the water. But government has excised sovereignty right , authority and kin to ownership in the terms of management of the resources (water).In the Maori world it is believed the water belonged to Papatuanu ku the earth mother, those 11 iwi are excising a sovereign or mana over freshwater. A kaitiakitanga to it. QUESTION TO YOU ALL????. When New Zealand was colonized, Maori rights to water were recognised under “ Aboriginal customs or native title” meaning full ownership of land, forests and fishers and state. Over time the grown have taken the authority to manage the water, and the key issue here is “how did that take place?”

6/07/2012 5:26:15 p.m.

Seannachie wrote:

Just putting Maori in the prospectus for Mighty River Power does not address Maori concerns. Any dividends from shares will not offset the increases in power prices caused by asset sales. Along with legal opposition to the sale all power users of Mighty River Power will need to consider changing power company to avoid higher power prices once the proposed asset sale is imminent. The only real beneficiaries of this deal will be Cabinet Ministers with their $40-50,000 Tax cuts for the Rich at the expense of higher power prices for the rest of us. Time for a change of Government to end the rort.

5/07/2012 1:29:21 p.m.

Chargone wrote:

@Tom: the treaty was signed so that there Was a central government. it wasn't British forces that would have wiped the Maori out, it was uncontrolled European settlers. Joining the Empire was seen as a solution to that (and was a much better deal than ending up as a Dutch of French colony, which were the other likely outcomes) the New Zealand wars were mostly a set of rebellions in response to the treaty being enforced badly or not at all and government abuses, along with cultural clashes and misunderstandings. the last one didn't End until part way through WW1, though as time went on the government forces were less 'British regular army' and more 'reinforced New Zealand constabulary' the central government did win some battles, and can ultimately have been said to win all the wars... but they Lost So Very Many battles along the way. learned all sorts of lessons about trench warfare, fortifications in mobile warfare, all sorts of good stuff which would have been a huge help in ww1 if the British hadn't managed to somehow lose the models and documents about it somewhere in their colonial office's archives in between times... sad, really.

3/07/2012 4:47:43 p.m.

for goodness sake wrote:

maori dont own the land or the water they have title over some land just as the crown has title all this in-fighting and carry-on is what is sending this country broke its moronic move on the past cant be fixed but the future can be improved

3/07/2012 4:43:51 p.m.

Tom wrote:

Maybe I missed something but didn't the Crown win any of the battles against Maori during the Maori wars, I was sure the treaty was signed to prevent the Maori getting wiped out as more and more British forces arrived. If I am right, how come they are ending up owning everything and getting paid millions as well?

3/07/2012 3:36:22 p.m.

Martin wrote:

Agree with Paul. The asset sales will go through like it or not. If Maori owns water I can tax them for the weather not coinciding with my plans, acid rain, cleaning my gutters and the cost of my plants dying when drought creates water restrictions. etc Sounds ridiculous? So does owning water.

3/07/2012 3:18:47 p.m.

Papa Tuanuku wrote:

At least Tainui is also opposed:
http://business.scoop.co.nz/2012/07/03/tainui-ce-we-have-no-interest-in-asset-sale-shares/

3/07/2012 2:32:09 p.m.

Paul wrote:

If there was ever a more ridiculous claim than ownership of water it would be a claim for the air we breathe. Water like air is a completely renewable element from the atmosphere from anywhere in our planet at some time or other. Even underground water from ancient springs originated there. Because it comes from the atmosphere, the Chinese have as much right to claim ownership of our water as anyone else. But, because our dams were built on 'Public' land with public money, water is under the guardianship of the Crown but owned by no-one. Any Government agreeing with Maori on this issue clearly has a death wish for the next election.

3/07/2012 1:59:36 p.m.

Chargone wrote:

not the Biggest fan of this... but it's not so bad that the benefits of disrupting the stupidity of these asset sales don't outweigh the risks. (well, to my mind. not that i'm an expert on Anything relevant.)