So...Tainui want something they never made

I find it very difficult to reconcile Tainui's ownership claim to the Waikato River, even if it is through spiritual means, a tupuna, or sacred ancestor. For some reason, I find it difficult to even sense a justification in that when so many people up and down the central North Island of New Zealand, so many other Iwi, Hapu and people in general benefit from the great Waikato River.

It is just by shear fortune that the Waikato River runs through Hamilton, Ngaruawahia, Huntly, through in essence Tainui's back yard that they have it in the first place. It disappoints me that Tainui (albeit Tuku Morgan himself and perhaps one or two others) are acting independant of the Tainui organisation as whole, but this seems to me, a money grabbing opportunity.

People up and down the Waikato, businesses and the like would be very concerned as to what Tainui would do with the river if they did own it. Hell I would be very concerned if my sole business operation depended on the river. Such as...oh now let me see, Genesis Energy. If Tainui owned the river, what is then stopping them from essentially removing the rights to the water, unless they got a HUGE ownership of the company. CHA-CHING $$$$ and everyone in the Tainui management is being driven around in 40 foot limos and owns waterfront properties with huge boats on coastal docks. While the rest of Tainui langusihes is the same level of poverty and worthwhile ventures go un-noticed. Such as, why dosen't Tainui inject money into helping the education system become better for those Maori kids who leave school instead of blaming the government. No education system is perfect. Why dosen't Tainui create a better stop smoking programme, to reduce the number of Maori who are smokers, or a fat-free programme, to reduce Maori health programmes.

I watched over the years as my own Iwi squandered thousands of dollars on a fight between themselves and a Hapu far down south for a block of land no-one was going to use, and yet on our own Marae land, stand a building which should be condemned and one that has stood for nearly 15 years, is to this day still un-finished. I have seen a waka which was held with so much mana and pride when it was first brought onto the Marae, become so derelict that it is no longer sea worthy and no one from the iwi itself will invest in it to become the statement of pride it once was. Now, there is little or no money going into the community. To the kids who need it. The ones who suck on fizzy and pies for breakfast, cocco pops for lunch and fish and chips for dinner. Maori I think its time to step up to the plate and work towards a future that does not revolve around a century or more of hate and anger.

Who created the water? Didn't God do that? So Tainui wants to own something, that is made by divine powers? The Government doesn't even do that. Sometimes I think they overstep the bounds of their administration but for the most part, the Waikato is not a restricted waterway. Anyone can go to it. Anyone can fish from it. Anyone can bathe in it, and so help me if anyone wants to strait but you could drink from it.

See, I see this from this perspective. If they can claim that they own the water, what is to stop them claiming that they own the air? Water and Air are two resources everyone has regardless of race, creed, colour or background free access too.

I do not believe in this claim by either Tuku or Tainui (if in fact this was backed by Tainui as a whole). I do not believe that it is based on anything substantial. Its a money grabbing opportunity by a few and only a few would gain. What would Tainui propose to do with it? That was a question I asked my iwi if it got this land...what is it going to do with it?

Hang on, I feel a Tui ad coming on. Tainui own the Waikato River

YEAH RIGHT!!!

An Age of Moral Convenience

You know, I heard this discussion going on the other day and it was an interesting one to say the least. In todays overly politically correct society, I think we have gone too far on some things and not enough on others.

We live in an age of moral convenience. Where we pick in what we see things as being morally reprehensible against what in other situations we could care less about. Take our two convicted cops and their sexcapades of recent public note. Had we not had the recent media or legal buzzes going on, or not known they are/were police officers would we have really cared how many people they had at their fun party? Who knows, Bob and Jill your average neighbours might have a swing now and then.

For example, I do not think that civil unions are morally right and I know there are others in this country who think the same, those who dont and those who in some cases (no pun intended) have 10 cents either way. I don't believe that the prostitution reform act was morally right.

So..does this not ring with the question...if a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it make a noise?

Personally, what those nyphs did is no business or care of mine. Its not my cup of milo, but each to their own. People like coke, I personally prefer pepsi, but you know, six of one, half a dozen of the other. But had I not known about their parties in the paper, or their legal issues, would I have been any wiser to the fact that these guys tended to get off (excuse the pun) on group things?

As for the bible in schools, for a Christian, I find myself saying I don't think its worth the hassle or arguments that it likely would arise. Pro Bible people would lobby for it to be in the schools, anti groups would do their thing and the poor kids are in there just trying to learn. I think then the debate would be over which version to use, KJV, NKJV, New World? Which one?

I actually learnt to read, reading scripture. When I was 7 my school teacher pulled my parents in and talked about my lack of reading ability. I had trouble dealing with basic english I think as when they put a book in front of me, I was slow off the mark but I could read to my age bracket. But then when my dad put a book of scripture in front of me, hold me back, I was off to the races.

I think one can command a better use of the english language through reading scripture than reading some things in the womens weekly or at times, while I like it, the funny writings of Dr Seuss. So while I think it has a place, I dont think it does in public schools. If one goes to St Johns, St Peters or even CCNZ, one accepts that this kind of education is a part of the system, but as for a public school, I think I would try to keep any part of religion and state as far apart as possible.

Reason? State has screwed morals, so what part does it have in making religion a part of its education system.