We All Need The Deed
The Tree Council, Forest & Bird Waitākere and the Waitākere Ranges Protection Society are all delighted to see that Auckland Council finally intends to fulfil its legal obligation under the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act 2008 (the Act) by producing a Deed of Acknowledgment recognising the important role tangata whenua have in the area.
This Deed is a legal requirement of the Act and Auckland Council is not obliged to consult publicly on its content, or whether it should be produced, so we acknowledge the transparency of the decision making process entered into in this consultation.
However, we are disturbed by the misinformation and racist anti-iwi sentiment that is being circulated by a small minority in a campaign seeking to distort the facts and derail the process. We expect that Auckland Councillors will not be misled by this disingenuous mischief-making and will support the partnership proposed in the Deed. It is not some kind of land grab or undermining of democracy, as is being claimed.
Forest & Bird Waitākere's Chair Annalily van den Broeke says that ' the reality is that the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Act is legislation passed in 2008 that says the place is special, should be protected and made even better than it is, and that everyone needs to work together to make this happen. The Deed is simply the mechanism to ensure that the three parties of The Crown, Auckland Council and tangata whenua will work together to ensure the Act is implemented effectively. It is long overdue and should have been produced soon after the Act was passed in 2008, over 17 years ago '.
The Tree Council's Secretary Dr Mels Barton says that ' the problem that this proposal seeks to address is the fact that Auckland Council has neglected the implementation of the Act, so that the national significance of the area is not recognised by most people. There is no plan for its management, decision making is siloed, enhancement and monitoring is not resourced and cumulative impacts are ignored. All of these things are legally required to be implemented by the Act and are also long overdue. The Deed and the actions that will flow from it will greatly enhance the integrated management of this special area - and everyone will benefit as a result of a more healthy Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area '.
The Waitākere Ranges Protection Society President Anna Fomison ' is confident that the public cares deeply about the protection and enhancement of the Waitākere Ranges and the significant benefits that the area provides to the people of Auckland. Not just for recreation, but for cleaning our air, providing our clean drinking water, absorbing our carbon emissions and the conservation of the largest indigenous forest in the region and the ecosystems that it supports that are so important for a healthy future for us all. We all need the Deed to deliver a healthy and vibrant Waitākere Ranges for future generations.'
The Tree Council, Forest & Bird Waitākere and the Waitākere Ranges Protection Society encourage the public to make a brief submission to Auckland Council supporting the Deed of Acknowledgement before the closing date of 28 April. The more people that make a submission the better.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
2 hours ago
- 1News
Live stream: David Seymour fronts at post-Cabinet media conference
David Seymour is is taking questions from the media following the regular meeting of Cabinet. The ACT leader, who took over as Deputy PM from Winston Peters this month, is in the hot seat as acting Prime Minister while Christopher Luxon is in Europe. Cabinet met today after a two-week break, which included "scrutiny week" when MPs get to grill ministers about their departments and ministries. The meeting came against the backdrop of war in the Middle East, with an RNZAF C-130 en route to the region to help evacuate Kiwis. Luxon has also been in China where he met President Xi Jinping.
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
Labour Will Repeal Regulatory Standards Bill
Labour will repeal the Regulatory Standards Bill in its first 100 days in Government. 'The Regulatory Standards Bill has no place in a fair and democratic New Zealand and Labour is committed to repealing it in our first 100 days if elected next year,' Labour justice spokesperson Duncan Webb said. 'This Bill is another concession by Christopher Luxon to ACT that puts corporate interests ahead of the public good, making it harder to pass laws that protect people and the environment. 'Under the Regulatory Standards Bill, laws that would keep people healthy and safe, like requiring landlords to heat homes, limiting the sale of vapes, or keeping our air and water clean would be at risk. 'It allows David Seymour to create his own hand-picked 'appeals body of regulatory economists' to criticise laws that are out of line with his minority views. 'Put another way, it takes power away from communities and hands it to corporate friends of the ACT Party. 'Christopher Luxon was too weak to stand up against it, but Labour will repeal it,' Duncan Webb said.
Newsroom
5 hours ago
- Newsroom
Anne Salmond: Victim of the Day
Over the past week, something remarkable has happened. The Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand has fronted an online campaign of harassment of scholars who have shared their views about his Regulatory Standards Bill, naming each of them as a 'Victim of the Day.' Each scholar has been accused of 'Regulatory Standards Derangement Syndrome,' a description borrowed from Donald Trump's followers, who accuse his critics of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome.' The portraits of each scholar are placed on David Seymour's Facebook page under this banner, and labelled 'Victim of the Day,' with online responses invited. The use of the term 'Victim of the Day' is, at best, careless. In the United States at present, political violence is escalating, with senators and their families being physically assaulted, even shot and killed. This has been associated with online incitements against individuals. No one in New Zealand, least of all the Deputy Prime Minister, can be unaware of these developments. In the United States, too, direct attacks by the Trump administration on universities, university scholars and their students have escalated from attacks on individual academics to attempts to take direct political control of what is taught on university campuses, by whom, and to whom, backed by the deployment of armed force including police and ICE agents. When universities such as Harvard have resisted these attempts, they have been punished by defunding their research and threats by the Trump administration to their right to admit international students. These and other attacks are happening to universities and other scientific institutions across the United States. At a time like this, it is extraordinary that a Deputy Prime Minister here should initiate an online campaign of intimidation against university scholars, using Trumpian rhetoric and tactics to harass them for exercising their academic freedom. In the United States, as in New Zealand, the independence of universities and academic freedom are designed as checks and balances on executive power, with the rule of law and the freedom of the press. All of these freedoms are being assailed in the United States at present. In New Zealand, the concept of academic freedom is specifically enshrined in legislation. Section 161 of the Education Amendment Act 1990 states: '161 Academic Freedom 1. It is declared to be the intention of Parliament in enacting the provisions of this Act relating to institutions that academic freedom and the autonomy of institutions are to be preserved and enhanced.' This requires that academics are free to offer commentaries within their fields of expertise without direct intimidation and harassment by politicians. The Act goes on to state: '2. For the purposes of this section, academic freedom, in relation to an institution, means – a. the freedom of academic staff and students, within the law, to question and test received wisdom, to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions.' Without this kind of freedom, new ideas and discoveries are unlikely to emerge. In academic inquiry, they must be rigorously tested against the evidence, including robust exchanges and peer review. For this to work well, the debate has to be reasoned and civil. Academic freedom is a very old doctrine, designed to protect universities from those who seek to control research and teaching to advance particular political agendas, as in the United States at present. Such ambitions are typical of totalitarian, autocratic regimes, with the USSR and South Africa under apartheid as previous examples. This can come from any political direction. In New Zealand, for instance, the Education Act 1989 was drafted in response to an attempt by the Fourth Labour Government to take control over 'what was taught, by whom and to whom' in New Zealand universities. That effort was vigorously resisted, and as a result the Education Act was passed and enshrined academic freedom in our legislation, along with a section that requires universities to 'act as critic and conscience of society.' That, I think, is exactly what the 'Victims of the Day' were doing when they were attacked by the Deputy Prime Minister. From an array of different disciplinary perspectives, they were analysing and discussing the Regulatory Standards Bill as contributions to public debate. In many ways, the campaign launched and fronted by the Deputy Prime Minister is lame, even laughable. At the same time, it is an abuse of high office. For the Deputy Prime Minister of this country to deploy Trumpian rhetoric to single out individual scholars as 'Victims of the Day' is deplorable, given the requirements of the Education Act. It is also troubling, given its direct links with the political assault on universities that is happening in the United States. Worse still, this is a senior politician who has vigorously argued for freedom of speech in universities. Above all, every New Zealand citizen has the right to speak their minds about matters such as the Regulatory Standards Bill without being personally intimidated by politicians. If scholars whose academic freedom is legally protected under the Education Act can be singled out in this way, the freedom of speech of all New Zealanders is at risk. In New Zealand, the Cabinet manual requires ministers to 'behave in a way that upholds, and is seen to uphold, the highest ethical and behavioural standards. This includes exercising a professional approach and good judgement in their interactions with the public, staff, and officials, and in all their communications, personal and professional.' This 'Victim of the Day' campaign does not match this description. It is unethical, unprofessional and potentially dangerous to those targeted. Debate is fine, online incitements are not. Ultimately, all ministers are accountable to the Prime Minister for their behaviour. As one of David Seymour's 'Victims of the Day,' I ask that Christopher Luxon upholds the Cabinet manual, and requires the Deputy Prime Minister to withdraw and apologise to those he has targeted and harmed in this despicable campaign. I am formally lodging a complaint with the Cabinet Office, and look forward to its response.
