Nickie Muir: Ownership not about race

Nicky Muir

WHERE do you come from? I get this question surprisingly often especially if I'm not speaking English.

I answer "west Auckland" or, alternatively, "Waipukurau" depending on whether I'm going for upbringing or birthplace.

This is often not the wanted answer - Pakeha (and it usually is Pakeha) want to hear I'm from somewhere exotic and not that I too, am Pakeha thereby messing with their definitions and hopefully their own identity. Good to stretch boundaries. What sticks is when people think they can read my politics or motives based on what my face tells them - my ethnic identity.

Which is why I'm feeling the love for NZ Chinese right now, especially those who want to buy a house in Auckland.

I don't think non-residents should own NZ property and I don't think that's racist. The racist rhetoric, however, is a direct result of the Government's ideological refusal to collect hard data or enquire into whether or not foreign non-residents, (South African, British or Russian millionaires, yup, the white ones count) are buying land here as the new form of gold in a stormy economic climate.

Frankly they'd be stupid not to. Nothing earns money like a piece of rotting villa in Auckland right now.

That the National Party has finally conceded to at least tracking IRD numbers is testimony to the fact that the market should not always rule and is a welcome start, but it needs to extend to a proper land ownership register in order to have an evidence-based discussion rather than an emotional emetic. This was the case in Queensland after Bob Katter's Australian Party had been noisy about Chinese "running amok" buying up Australia.

The facts showed that far from the Chinese being the main buyers of Queensland soil - they didn't even factor in the top five countries - 5.6 million hectares were foreign owned, which sounds rather a lot until you realise it's only 3.22 per cent, and 40 per cent of the foreigners who owned land in Queensland were British. If it's about who's owning who - land is identity and power, what else was Te Tiriti about?) we might want to look at the corporates especially the mining, forestry and agribusiness companies that might think NZ looks like a good thing.

What are the economic and environmental risks of people running businesses who then don't have to live with the consequences? Residential properties are one thing, but a closer look at the mining sector in Australia shows 83 per cent of profit goes to foreign-owned companies and that Aussies are right royally shafted when it comes to benefits from that industry.

The sale of Australia's largest cotton farm at 93,000 hectares to the Chinese sparked discussions - the eco-politics of it soaking up 500,000 mega-litres a year of water should also be of interest. Perhaps then it's not where someone comes from but rather asking: "Who's the kaitiaki, and where are the money and jobs going?" that's important.