Tag Archives: Auckland Council

Ihumātao | How Fletchers Collected a Waiver Card in ‘Neo-Feudal Monopoly – The Ihumātao New Zealand Edition’

More truth you won’t be finding in mainstream media … a long read on Ihumātao. EWR

From snoopman.net

In this exposé, The Snoopman reveals Fletcher Building Ltd was granted waivers that lay bare the institutional racism of the Crown, the Council and the Courts. Not only were ministerial waivers required for a crucial breach of the Overseas Investment Act to get the Ihumātao land deal approved before the conditional sale agreement time-window ended.

With official documents – some heavily redacted – a picture of collusion is shown to have taken place between the Auckland Council, the Overseas Investment Office, the Key Ministry Cabinet, the Environment Court and the Ardern Coalition Government. Across the governance system, a horrendous story emerges of avoidance to conduct a serious sustained investigation to establish why exactly the bona fide tangata whenua of Ihumātao were stonewalled in their attempts to assert customary rights, while the ‘master plan’ of transnational bank-owned Fletcher Building was fast-tracked.

The contrived ignorance posturing extends to three Māori Labour Caucus members of the Ardern Coalition Government whom knew at least as far back as September 2015 that the Ihumātao Peninsula was never Te Kawerau ā Maki iwi’s traditional ancestral lands. This means the Ardern Coalition Government enjoined itself in the contrived ignorance game of the Auckland Council, the Courts and other Crown agencies whom pretended that Te Warena Taua represented the local iwi of Ihumātao.

Fletchers Collected a Waiver Card in Neo-Feudal Monopoly game

Fletcher Building has maintained throughout the Ihumātao land dispute that every move it made was within the law. It would be more accurate to say the law had their back.

To get the Ōruarangi housing development at Ihumātao through a significant regulatory hoop, a joint waiver was required by two Key Ministry Crown Ministers in early September 2014 to over-ride breaches to the Overseas Investment Act of 2005.

This special treatment reflects the institutional racism endemic in the Crown, the Auckland Council and the Courts since all forums have overlooked the downplaying, dismissal and denigration of local iwi and hapū interests in the land – as The Snoopman showed in his exposé “Te Warena Taua – The mandated kaumātua who authored his own use-by-date?”

People Power: Fletcher Building’s plans to develop the historic Ōruarangi Block for residential housing next to the mini-volcano, Puketāpapatanga-a-Hape, at the edge of the Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve on the Ihumātao Peninsula – faltered when SOUL’s supporters converged following the 150-strong Police operation of July 23 2019 to evict 10 ‘squatters’.

The Wallace-Blackwell Family company, Gavin H Wallace Limited, owner of ‘the Wallace Block’ – as the highly contested land at Ihumātao is locally known – failed to advertise the farm land on the open market prior to sale to the transnational construction company, Fletcher Building.

The Overseas Investment Office required a waiver because the Overseas Investment Act was breached since sales of rural properties located adjacent to ‘sensitive land’ such as historic reserves are meant to be advertised for sale in the 12-month period preceding an application to approve a purchase by an overseas buyer.

FletcherOIOWaiver3Sept2014-1

Breach of Overseas Investment Act Approved: Two Crown Ministers waivered the requirement in section 16 of the Overseas Investment Act 2005, that farm land be advertised for sale on the open market in the 12 month period prior to sale to an overseas buyer.

READ MORE

https://snoopman.net.nz/2020/02/01/ihumatao-how-fletchers-collected-a-waiver-card-in-neo-feudal-monopoly-the-ihumatao-new-zealand-edition/?fbclid=IwAR3EQVwDfjsOGiYZXg0Kbgf34I3YOclgKT2HHodThaqGF2MmlYLgP3UOgOU

 

 

DoC’s lawyers ask the judge that their scientist not be questioned in the Hunua Ranges 1080 drop case

A wee ‘small’ reminder of the honesty of the plebs who run the NZ corporation …

Remember this post on social media? September just gone? QUOTE: 

“I was there last week
Doc wouldn’t let our lawyer cross examine their scientists and court allowed that. Lawyer won hands down against doc
They couldn’t prove 1080 safety…..TOTAL CORRUPTION
Our lawyer proved by DoC’s own files they were lying …but we LOST”

NOTE: SINCE THIS POSTED, I’VE HEARD THE DROP IS NOT GOING AHEAD AT THIS STAGE. STILL IN COURT…. (PS 19/1/2019 … it DID of course go ahead).

Why do they not want their scientist cross examined? Couldn’t stand the heat? Don’t have the back up science for their data? Could be anybody’s guess but certainly not rocket science. Whatever side of the fence you sit on the 1080 issue, this is about justice of which there appears to be very little these days, remembering Graeme Sturgeon for instance & his ‘win’ that left him with $23K court costs. Looking from afar here we are being sent a very clear message which I’m sure you can figure out for yourselves.

41676320_625646767829627_4412680830481072128_n.jpg

Further comment from Facebook today:

“I was there last week
DoC wouldn’t let our lawyer cross examine their scientists and court allowed that. Lawyer won hands down against DoC
They couldn’t prove 1080 safety…..TOTAL CORRUPTION
Our lawyer proved by DoC’s own files they were lying …but we LOST”

Environment Court orders halt to Auckland Council’s 1080 drop in Hunua Ranges

[NZ Herald] A trust opposing Auckland Council’s 1080 poison drop in the Hunua Ranges has won a court injunction temporarily suspending the operation.

The council had already begun covering the bush with non-toxic pre-drop pellets, to be followed up with 1080 within seven to 10 days, despite being aware of the application to the Court from the Friends of Sherwood Trust.

Judge Jeff Smith said the pre-feed drop had commenced just prior to a telephone conference.

“The Council proceeded with the drop in the knowledge of this application and therefore at its own peril in the event that the interim orders are granted for the long term.”

READ MORE

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12122012&ref=NZH_fb

HEAR ALSO AN INTERVIEW BY RADIO NZ with LAWYER SUE GREY

https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018661838/anti-1080-lobbyists-halt-hunua-pest-control

 

Between 2012 & 2014, Auckland Council tested wild pigs for brodifacoum (rat poison) residues … of the 14 tested, 13 were positive for poison residues (Clyde Graf)

From Clyde Graf

Many people in New Zealand rely on wild pigs to feed the family.

Between 2012 and 2014, Auckland Council tested wild pigs for brodifacoum (rat poison) poison residues. Of the 14 pigs tested, 13 of them were positive for poison residues.

The Department of Conservation aerially spreads brodifacoum bait across offshore islands to eradicate targeted wildlife. The DoC policy for using the poison on the mainland is however, far more strict. (see below)

Oddly, brodifacoum can be brought over the counter at hardware stores all around New Zealand, and some regional councils dish tonnes of the stuff out to local communities to spread around – like on the Coromandel Peninsula, where there are pigs present.

Perhaps a review of the use of this poison is warranted??? And while they’re at it, put a moratorium on 1080 poison as well …

OIA request details below:

brofidacoum testing 1

 

brofidacoum testing 2

Are councils in bed with Agrichemical companies? They cite grossly inaccurate figures in their defense

Are councils in bed with Agrichemical companies? Both the Auckland & Rangitikei District Council are favouring chemical weed control over non-chemical, in spite of the heightened health risks highlighted recently by WHO. They cite outdated & incorrect data to support this preference. 

Some Aucklanders are currently objecting to a flip flop on their Council’s current weed management policies. A petition has been circulating (and is on FB also  if you would like to sign it) calling (like the Rangitikei) for a ban on the use of glyphosate on Auckland’s streets and parks. Some parts of Auckland are chemical free in terms of weed management however not all, and council is doing a u turn on their current policy of minimal chemical use, indicating in their Ten Year Plan a preference for chemical control.

Copy of Copy of Dec 2014 041
Public areas are sprayed without any warning before, during or after the fact

Auckland’s Weed Management Advisory (a Community-led organization that helped create the Council’s Weed Management Policy 2013 of minimum agrichemical use, which the Council seems intent on doing away with) are also calling for a BAN on Glyphosate and have put a leaked briefing document up on their website. You can read it here. This is the Long Term Plan featuring quotes for alternative methods of weed management as opposed to management with glyphosate, typically, Roundup. Georgina Blackmore, the petition organizer, states that the figures cited should be taken with a pinch of salt … in fact a very large amount of salt. They are using she says, old, inaccurate and misleading information. “Disingenuous” says Auckland councilor John Watson. The Weed Management Advisory has accused the Auckland Council of putting the public at risk. Read their press statement here.

This line is a very familiar tale. Our own Rangitikei District Council cited inaccurate figures when justifying their rejection of glyphosate-free weed management in our public spaces. We had tried to counter this outcome by citing Auckland contractors who are currently employing mechanical weed control methods. The latter stated emphatically that their costs were a marginal 10-15 percent more than Roundup, and expected soon to even match it. Similarly, with the current Auckland scenario cited here, other Auckland contractors are saying their costs are even less than glyphosate.

When the request for tighter parameters and controls around glyphosate spraying was originally put to the RDC, citing the extensive independent research available on the myriad health risks associated with Roundup use,  an internal report was requested by RDC on alternative cost-effective weed-control methods.  Councilor Lyn Sheridan asked why health effects were not investigated by RDC and the response by CEO Ross McNeill was, ‘…they weren’t asked for’. They are missing the point here.

We need to be asking, why are Councils so bent on, so adamant, about choosing chemical control, and with a chemical that has recently been re-classified by WHO as a Class 2A carcinogen?  Claiming there is insufficient proof of health risks is myopic at best.

Currently, as of 2011, one in three New Zealanders will contract cancer

That statistic is extremely high and surely deserving of closer examination of the research into environmental causes and the elimination of the probable ones?

116
Walkways and adjacent herbage where both school children & general public regularly walk is sprayed heavily with Roundup/glyphosate

The thing about Roundup is (and you will hear this in the audio link below) we the public are given no warning in advance of spraying, no signs are put out when they are spraying (so people can walk on it before it’s dry without even knowing) it is sprayed on public walkways where school children walk with no prior warning and it is sometimes sprayed on windy days.

Read Georgina’s piece here on her recent findings and her interview on Radio with Auckland Councilor John Watson and Professor Ian Shaw from Canterbury University.

Link to the audio HERE

Read the Scoop’s press release on Weed Management Advisory’s findings here:

Auckland Council Accused of Putting Public at Risk

Auckland Council Accused of Putting Public at Risk

“A complete ban on the spraying of glyphosate, also known as Roundup, on all public land in Auckland is called for after a New Zealand toxicologist confirms heightened risks of the chemical. Leaked documents show Auckland Council trivialising the serious health risk…..”  http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1507/S00578/auckland-council-accused-of-putting-public-at-risk.htm

Auckland Council Budget Committee’s paper on weed management citing false figures for non chemical control:  https://weedmanagementadvisory.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/briefing-note-auckland-council-weed-managment-april-2015.pdf 

Article from Georgina Blackmore (Ban Glyphosate in Auckland NOW at Facebook)

“In an interview I gave on bFM this week about our campaign to ban the use of Glyphosate on Auckland Roads and Parks, Councillor John Watson and expert of Toxicology Professor Ian Shaw both agreed that we need to be seriously looking at what alternatives we have to spraying Glyphosate…” Read at SOURCE:  https://www.facebook.com/BanGlyphosate/posts/417049618496545