No law change sees NZ footing Rena bill

17 Oct 2011 08:05p.m.

Glocks wrote:

I'm sure I heard someone suggest that the RMA might override NZ's maritime laws.... We have some very clever lawyers in this country, who have in some instances have even helped people to get away with murder. Surely they can find some obscure clause or precedent that will allow us to seek fair and reasonable compensation for this mess.

17 Oct 2011 08:02p.m.

James wrote:

Why doesn't the government bust out one of there new "retrospective" laws?

16 Oct 2011 02:13p.m.

Rena F. wrote:

National or Labour - doesn't matter...all part of the same system disguised as a democracy. In other words, the banking cartel runs the world - if you think voting for one party over another will change anything, you've got rocks in your head. Our government does what it wants, not what the PEOPLE want. It is time the people take back their power as these corrupt oil companies, etc. are ruining are Earth with their pollution and the governments DO nothing to make these polluters pay for the damage to our environment. It is time the people throw out the cronies in parliament for a real life democracy - where our votes actually MEAN something.

16 Oct 2011 12:50p.m.

Ian H wrote:

They need to change the law. At present it creates an incentive for troubled shipping companies to wreck their ships on our chores and walk away with most of the insurance money.

16 Oct 2011 11:22a.m.

Dodger wrote:

Hindsight is a beautiful thing! This is MMP and therefore all parties are at fault, for wasting their time on vote-catching bills like anti-smack, microchip, prostitution, foreshore…. But then, who would have expected the Rena to crash onto a known reef. Perhaps it was being pursued by the Maritime police, and it crashed onto the reef, minutes after the Marine police gave up their pursuit, just like those idiots on land fleeing police cars. Let the experts get on with doing the clean-up. We don’t need armchair experts and politicians scoring points. The blame game can come later. We are all going to bear cost!

16 Oct 2011 09:34a.m.

Kiwi wrote:

This government is only too eager to pass ridiculous laws(of which they would probably find too hard to live with if/when they are not government)rather than logical or common sense laws.For example pressure was probably placed for passing of survelience law than increasing the responsibility of ship owners to compensate for mass damage caused by their ship(s).This law would have been put into the Procrastination/Too Difficult To Think of Basket.NZ$12million compensation is not much for a company that owns the Rena.They can build cruise ships and state how environmentally concerned the the cruise ships are in their adverts.But this time money will over-ride their conscience where the NZ environment is concerned.I can say Costamare will get off lightly whilst plying the seas around the world in more pursuit of money.
This government has now resorted to downright lies and blame games.The thing is they,the National government,seem to be intent on not taking responsibility for their actions.
Still this government is hell-bent on getting oil drilling done with no thought of tomorrow or the future.
The government procrastinated about many things e.g an Oil Recovery vessel.And yet did not mind spending alot of taxpayers money during a recession of 34 beemers(selfish waste of money)that had bum warmer seating.Time for this government(and all future governments)when it comes to taking responsibility for events by instaling the acknowledgement of Lee Iacocca's "the buck stops here" meaning at the top for whatever happens.Not trying to blame anyone else but themselves.I am sure many NZers and voters are fed-up with lies,double talk and juvenille behaviour by those whom our taxes are paying their wages for very little to show for it.Last election I voted National.My theory was it was either the devil or the deep blue sea.Poor choice on my part when National broke one election promise after another.Their refusal to take responsibility for their actions has changed my vote.

16 Oct 2011 08:24a.m.

Dave wrote:

It just goes to show yet again, that the govt is more reactionary, than pro-active. The downside is that in the end it costs more to the New Zealand tax payer.

15 Oct 2011 11:52p.m.

JR wrote:

The one tiny thing in Joyce's favour in that interview was that he didn't resort to politicing and trying to shift the blame to Annette King. However.... Whilst I will freely admit to finding Steven Joyce odious at best, this could have been one of those things that was overlooked, and we have to accept it. Be it down to National and/or Labour. But then we had the tragedy in Christchurch. In the aftermath of Christchurch and the spanking the government's finances are taking, surely it would have been common sense for someone in government should to have ordered a review of NZ's disaster financial planning. Be it for an oil spill, large plane crash, tsunami, whatever. Whilst we may only be talking a relatively small amount of money in governments terms of $17m, my concern is what else has been 'overlooked', possibly in favour of more news friendly projects. Also taking into account that oil pollution has been in the news so often over the last 18 months, along with this governments fetish for pushing things through under urgency, it leaves Mr Key and Mr Joyce with questions to answer. Maybe JC could ask next time one of them is on?

15 Oct 2011 03:43p.m.

Peter Ellis wrote:

Its a shame the Govt couldnt be bothered passing legislation to ensure the polluters pay the full cost of not only the clean up but compensation for loss of kai and wildlife in the meantime. They obviously thoght it wasnt as important as the right to covert filming for them ,which was rushed through overnight in comparison.

15 Oct 2011 02:46p.m.

jan.. wrote:

The country demand payments in full for all the damages and it could rise up to over $29.1m..National Key' has done enough damages to my country and is he going to pay for the damages before he leaves office? or is he leaving all his dirty laundry for Mr.Goff to clean-up?..