Rotorua Daily Post readers respond to Rotorua District Council plans to develop a new partnership model with Te Arawa.
Who will pay?
So far no mention has been made of the costs of having eight extra people sitting at the council table, an unspecified number attending committee meetings, establishing sub-committees, engaging consultants and the cost of council staff and administrative costs.
The community will presume that costings have been done, although given the recent financial history of our council perhaps we cannot be absolutely sure of this.
What do you think? Comment below
The Lakeside communities pay an extra rate called the "Lakes Community Board rate" for the unwanted Lakes Community Board. Is it envisaged that Te Arawa-owned land will pay a similar designated rate or will the costs fall on all ratepayers?
Why is this proposal being rushed through with such inadequate consultation either with Maori or the general community? I am not sure that such lack of consultation fulfils council's obligations under the Local Government Act to have adequate community consultation for such a major change in the way that council operates.
The proposal needs much more discussion with all sectors of the community.
ROSEMARY MICHIE
Rotorua
Editor's response: The Rotorua District Council has said the cost of the proposal is not yet known as Te Arawa has not had the opportunity to confirm which model it wants to go with.
Treaty misread
Your correspondent, Geoff Parker (Letters, May 10, 2014) has clearly misread the Tiriti o Waitangi.
Article 1 of Te Tiriti Waitangi does not give the British Queen sovereignty over New Zealand.
Article 1 says: The Chiefs of the Confederation give up to the Queen of England forever all the governorship (kawanatanga) of their lands.
Article 2 (which your correspondent continently ignores) says in part: "The Queen of England agrees and consents (to give) to the chiefs, hapus, and all of the people of New Zealand the full chieftainship (rangatiratanga) of their lands, villages and all of their possessions (taonga, everything that is held precious) but the chiefs give to the Queen the purchasing of those pieces of land which the owners are willing to sell".
Clearly, Maori retained rangatiratanga (sovereignty), the Queen through Hobson gained the right to govern the tauiwi (foreigners) who were coming to New Zealand.
Article 3 gave Maori protection and all the rights enjoyed by the people of England.
Therefore, the Tiriti o Waitangi ensured that Maori retained their rangatiratanga (sovereignty) and ownership of all that they possessed and for allowing the Queen to govern the tauiwi (foreigners) Maori gained the additional benefits of enjoying the same rights as the people of England.
I would suggest to your correspondent that any prudent council would be wise to engage fully with those who hold the sovereignty within the council's jurisdiction, a point that is obviously not lost on mayor Steve Chadwick.
S NOEL JORY
Rotorua
Want to have your say in print? Click here to find out how.
Curly question
The Rotorua Daily Post spilt the beans on the council proposal to give Te Arawa a greater voice on council. As a democratically elected council it already has a significant Maori voice, witness that three of four councillors shown in the Post article are Maori or have a Maori partner, and that there are others on the council.
The proposed new Arawa board of eight are all to be appointed, not elected. That will really kick democracy into the gutter. For extra impetus they will sit on council committees in some matters, such as resource management act decisions. That act already slows development and increases costs without adding another layer to the process.
Merepeka Raukawa-Tait admits, "Te Arawa moves at its own pace and setting any timelines for them to respond is dangerous territory".
Now the curly question - Who will pay for all this? I'll let you guess.
My suggestion if all this goes through - ratepayers boycott the rates process.
JIM SPIERS
Rotorua
Equality of voice
Is the appointment of a Te Arawa Board attached to the Rotorua District Council a "fait accompli"?
We, a group of 10 concerned ratepayers, would not have known about this proposal had it not been for the courage of a district councillor who divulged information to the press.
This board, which will replace the Te Arawa Standing Committee, will have eight members who, in addition to promoting cultural issues, will be able to vote on general issues of council.
We have not been told about the costs of holding two hui-a-iwi or the salary or monetary remuneration of the proposed chief executive who will "carry out the board's functions" or the meeting fees for eight board members.
Is it fair to impose more debt on ratepayers?
The mayor (Rotorua Daily Post, Saturday, May 3) states that Maori are the largest contributors of rates to the council. We think this needs clarification.
Which brings us to equality of voice. Every three years we all have the opportunity to vote for those persons who offer themselves to work for our benefit on the council.
We are fortunate this council has at least five members with ties to the tangata whenua. Why then is it necessary to appoint unelected representatives who will be able to vote on local issues given that our democratically elected councillors have the skills and the mandate from the electorate to determine and rectify perceived relationship difficulties.
(Abridged)
BLANCHE KINGDON
Rotorua
Defies belief
It defies belief the number of people who think unelected Maori should just be installed on to the council.
What happened to democracy? The council already has at least three Maori elected on to council and well done to them who got elected the same way everyone else does.
T Nopera (Letters, May 10, 2014) there are plenty of other folks who own land and are landlords, how many more would like to be unelected councillors?
Farmers are a prime example. They own a huge amount of land in New Zealand.
They have a minority vote or voice on councils or government and better than Maori they fund at least 65 per cent of this country's export income. Their concern is also disenfranchised; maybe they should have unelected folks on council too.
M T Ariki Bramley (Letters, May 10, 2014) you really have lost your way, Geoffrey Palmer dreamed up some Waitangi principles, which don't come from the treaty, and as far as the common law is concerned he removed the majority of that which is dangerous.
Once again no mandate from the people.
The Treaty of Waitangi states all New Zealand citizens have equal rights under British sovereignty, no more no less.
It becomes apartheid when there are race-based privileges to a select few.
CHRISTINA HUMPHREYS
Katikati
Not deep thinkers
We owe Mike McVicker a vote of thanks as he and the negative publicity that council will receive will put a halt to the idea of dividing the council into Maori and non-Maori and the wish of Maori to become a privileged class in New Zealand.
I worked with a number of the present councillors for years and some are not deep thinkers and know very little about the world that we live in and certainly virtually nothing of the history of this world.
How any person can attempt to divide a society into two different racial groups with the hassles in Nigeria and their children. The Middle East has governments that are incompetent and willing to divide their own societies into various groups and then attempt to eliminate those that don't fit down to the last man, woman and child.
The idea that Maori would be equal partners or that they would treat the created lower classes of people, that is non-Maori, as good citizens needs to only to think of the Chatham Islanders and any other tribal entity that could be overrun before they had the strength to defend themselves. Our mayor needs to grow up.
CLIFF LEE
Mamaku
Undemocratic
Upon my complaint to the Rotorua District Council about its race-based power-sharing proposals, councillor Charles Sturt replied that I "do not understand (Rotorua's) dynamics".
Maybe he's right but I do understand the difference between right and wrong, good governance and corruptible systems.
Te Arawa may be large landowners and a great bunch of people, but that's no reason to throw out democracy's foundation tenets - "one person, one vote" and "one law for all".
These are what have reduced corruption and allowed western democracies to thrive.
Te Arawa representatives must have no greater right in government than the bus driver or kindergarten teacher next door. If they want voting powers on the council, stand for election like the rest of us have to.
Councillor Sturt's preference seemed to be for me to stay out of Rotorua's business.
Equally, does he look the other way when kids are being abused next door? Does he feel New Zealand should have stayed out of South Africa's business instead of fighting their apartheid system?
Does he think the world should look the other way when Nigerian schoolgirls are kidnapped for the slave trade? As they say, evil prospers when good people do nothing.
FIONA MACKENZIE
Whangaparaoa
Rotorua Mayor Steve Chadwick responds:
The Rotorua District Council is committed to developing a new partnership model with Te Arawa.
The time to publicly debate this will be once Te Arawa has held their hui-a-iwi with members and made recommendations to the council for consideration. Rotorua residents can be assured that no significant change to existing arrangements will be made without a process of public consultation as required under legislation.
Maungatapu School in Tauranga will receive three new classrooms for its growing roll.