Tag Archives: Horowhenua

A Horowhena farmer gets off an $80k fine for illegally draining a lake because he couldn’t afford to pay it!

“In the Levin District Court on Monday, Fyfe Charles Williamson was sentenced to 80 hours’ community work  after a judge accepted the farmer was unable to pay the massive fine allowed under the Resource Management Act…

The significant damage and risk Williamson’s actions caused to native wildlife and fauna would have resulted in an $80,000 fine, if the farmer could have paid it, the judge said …”   

So the chap gets off because the fine is too big?? Where else can that happen? Note how mainstream whore media reframe the whole thing. ‘Narrowly avoids’ … what a farce this is. We have a law to protect the environment, but only from certain people who can afford the fine! Remember the guy who got a jail sentence for catching fish where he wasn’t supposed to in the Rotorua lakesto feed his family? No mercy for that man, who had to spend 12 months away from his family, and this Horowhenua man kills thousands of fish, having knowingly broken the law … gets 80 hrs community service because he can’t afford $80,000. Wouldn’t that normally just translate to an equivalent jail sentence?  Justice for the wealthy farmer, none for the poor man feeding his family. Also deemed racist at the time compared with other contemporary crimes.  Please, before you all jump up and down about that, don’t shoot the messenger. That was from newshub and really in the cold light of day it does look as they say doesn’t it?

Remember this is why they sent thousands to ‘the colonies’ particularly Australia, stealing bread for their families got them deported quick smart. Sounding more familiar by the day. All getting very Dickensian isn’t it? And note on the farcical toothless Resource Management Act …. Dr Mike Joy has called it out thus on social media: “The RMA is a joke, and a very bad one at that, and this is a prime example.”

Here is the article from Stuff:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/112689717/horowhena-farmer-narrowly-avoids-80k-fine-for-illegally-draining-a-lake?fbclid=IwAR23G5LFWLCUBsui2Sz609CTFui5qmWfxthRGM0u-rNLDau_yyRecDzdcIQ

And the following from newshub:

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2016/05/convicted-trout-poacher-nz-justice-system-racist.html

Advertisements

Horowhenua Mayor supports alternatives to 1080 (recent protest in Levin)

Note: if you find this video is not playing for you, please let me know. I’ve had someone say it isn’t already, however it is playing for me. Be keen to hear more feedback. May do an alternative upload, going by the recent hacks of videos.

Mayor of the Horowhenua Michael Feyen has expressed these sentiments previously as the Hikoi of a Poisoned Nation came through the Horowhenua last September. His own personal emphasis is on alternatives, namely trapping, as opposed to the extensive use of poisons.

Thanks to the people who protested, providing sensible information to the public so they can make INFORMED decisions about the effectiveness of 1080 regarding the conservation of our environment & wildlife.

People must now seek permission to film Horowhenua DC’s PUBLIC meetings – what’s to hide?

You can watch the discussion around this here at the publicly streamed HDC meeting. It will be up for some months but not forever (See other links in the POST SCRIPT at the end of the article). From hereon in anyway, if you wish to film HDC’s public meeting you must seek permission first. It’s about protecting staff, same as the rationale for vetting staff emails. Staff safety. Unless your name is Cr Ross Campbell that is.

Since Mayor Feyen was elected we’ve had live streaming of Council meetings, initially to FB also however with what appears to be a growing trend in censorship & control at the Horowhenua LG level (the intercepted emails, the stonewalling of the people’s mayor, the refusal to open the books, the shut down of a local land owner’s water supply … I could go on) the FB streaming’s been stopped. You can listen to the discussion around that at the HDC website. (Good luck on finding it, it was the meeting prior to 10/10). The available stream at HDC’s site appears to be edited by the simple fact it switches view periodically & frequently what is being said cannot be heard or cuts off midstream.

A local person who spoke in the public speaking time, outlined that he has been filming meetings for 8-9 years with never a problem. Independent filming meant there was always an independent & true record of the proceedings available should any other system fail.

Apparently at the tea break of the said meeting on 10/10/18, he requested permission to film and was denied. No time wasted in putting the said tweaks to operations into action.

This all also takes place around the event of the aforementioned Cr Campbell fearing for his safety & announcing at the last meeting that he had sought Police advice & from thereon in would be carrying a pen size camera to use if any threatening behaviour should recur. That of course went down like a lead balloon. Going by the responses, few were bothered for his safety, rather he was ridiculed for his precautionary measures. If you take time to listen to the meeting you will hear the many comments around that (hopefully).

In case you didn’t know Cr Campbell was assaulted in 2004 so he has every right to be taking precautionary measures. You can read about that event here. (At the link be sure to read the related articles as another assault allegedly relating to Council issues occurred in 2016).

Likewise, former Cr and Mayoral candidate Mrs Anne Hunt who also spoke on 10/10/18, told of how she had received death threats as a Mayoral candidate. You should hear that on the stream (hopefully). She spoke similarly the day Cr Campbell was unseated which media completely ignored. These threats are clearly not something to be ridiculed. And yet your elected councilors (well some of them anyway) seem little bothered about them.

So people, if you want to hear the public meetings & see for yourself the bad schoolboy-like behaviour of some of the councilors, you’ll need to be there in person. Streaming will continue but I personally wouldn’t be too reliant on its being the full uncut version you’ll see somehow. In my opinion anyway.

Finally, it’s not that easy to find & access the public stream on HDC’s website. It’s what folk have been complaining about since it left FB. I’ve just looked & can’t find it so had to return to the link placed on HDC’s FB page. Too bad if you’re not on FB. You could phone HDC for directions.

POST SCRIPT:

Mayor Feyen has just posted this link for the streaming, keep the link for future reference: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/7dRfxBRYt8m

Here also is a link for Part 2 of the HDC Council meeting involving restrictions on filming these public meetings.  http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/117579383

Here are 2 NZ Mayors who would like to see alternatives to 1080

Good to hear from prominent people in the community who are concerned about the extensive use of poisons in our environment posing potential risks to our health. Here, just prior to the pro-clean-water anti-1080 hikoi in September, Emile Leaf was welcomed informally on the road (6th Sept) by Horowhenua’s Mayor Michael Feyen. He expressed his personal preference for alternatives to 1080 being used. There is another also in this camp, the Mayor of Queenstown … we posted an article on that  a month or so back.

It would be a good idea to contact the Mayor & Councilors of your own particular region & see if any others are pro alternatives.

Header Photo: please advise if this is your excellent image & would like credit or would like it removed. Thank you.

41290299_2255950674634813_1828919244981534720_n
Pictured near Ohau (left to right) are Emile Leaf, Mayor of Horowhenua, Michael Feyen & Dan Lane

The ongoing censorship of Horowhenua’s Mayor – whatever happened to democracy & free speech in NZ?

“My messages as Mayor … are very very seldom what I write … they’re always doctored to be worded differently. I like to give out some news and I usually go for all of the positive stuff, but this one really irks me… the last one, I didn’t even write any of it in the last Community Connection, and this one here has got the Deputy Mayor’s name & as I said, I wanted … in my one … I wanted to put in the Maori Apellate Court judgement which relates to Lake Horowhenua Trust …”

LISTEN FURTHER:

If you are new to the goings on at Horowhenua District Council go to this link for our coverage. You could also search Veronica Harrod’s articles by using the search box in the right hand column of the News page or go to her public Facebook page. Veronica has provided excellent coverage on topic. (Our LG Govt Watch pages are in need of an update however there is important info there on the history nevertheless).

A small window of insight that mainstream media predictably has never mentioned is the public statement made by a former councilor Mrs Anne Hunt who divulged at the first Council meeting after the last LG elections (when Mayor Feyen’s choice of DM Cr Ross Campbell was unseated)  that when she stood for Mayor in 2010 she was warned if she won ‘they’ would make her life hell. Media as I say, ignored this disturbing revelation, as did all those present that day. Nobody even challenged it as being untrue. You can read about that at this link. You will also see there Mayor Feyen’s revelations at that meeting, which mainstream also ignored:

“.… we simply weren’t accorded any democratic rights in the last three years. We had our access keys taken from us, we were dumped off committees with no explanation, people saw us constantly having derogatory comments  thrown at us by the past mayor, we were always interrupted when we asked questions, when we asked questions in writing we seldom got an answer.

Certainly disturbing how mainstream in my opinion slants their reporting in favour of the majority there. And if you’ve been to any of HDC’s public meetings you will have noted that there is frequently only one other person in favour of the new Mayor’s initiatives. That is the unseated DM Cr Campbell. Subsequently a Mayor with the majority of public votes is not supported by a majority of Councilors. As was stated at the outset, the law is an ass. (In this case LG law if you will).

 

The big taxpayer-funded pay rises: $50,000-plus boost for top public CEOs

Pardon my graphic description but here we have pigs at the trough again. A reminder of the corruption our country now labours under. I was raised in the era when renumeration was more in line with reality. The real workers are squeezed onto minimum minimum wage with loud squeals if they ask for more, taxed one third on second jobs, while these shrewd suited apologies for humanity wallow in obscene wealth. Who needs a million dollars pa to survive? And we have the usual lame lipservice justification … “How much we pay chief executives requires a careful balance between ensuring we can attract and retain highly qualified and skilled leaders while being prudent … when spending public money.”

Bollocks. Spending public money? Why the CE in Horowhenua Council recently gifted public assets to private developers Willis & Bond to the tune of $1.86 million. Prudence? Public money? Pleeeze.
EnvirowatchRangitikei

1509978_745670518844847_403082449805717955_n.jpg
A reminder of how neo lib economics favours the top echelon … we are fed the illusory lie that all can succeed under this system

The big taxpayer-funded pay rises: $50,000-plus boost for top public CEOs

The chief executives of Housing NZ, the Ministry of Education, Tourism NZ and the Accident Compensation Corporation were among those who reaped at least $50,000 more in pay and bonuses over the last year.

Figures released by the State Services Commission show ACC chief executive Scott Pickering was paid $760,000-$770,000, which is $150,000 more than the year before. Housing NZ Corporation CEO Glen Sowry received between $520,000 and $530,000 – at least $50,000 more than the year before. And Education chief executive Peter Hughes got at least $60,000 more than the year before with between $620,000 and $630,000.

READ MORE:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11551945

Public remain in the dark about plans by Horowhenua District Council to transfer up to 40 percent of public assets to the yet to be legally registered property trust called Horowhenua NZ Trust

More excellent investigative reporting from Veronica Harrod

Is it a bird, is it a plane, is it superman? No, it’s a giant wrecking ball and its coming near you soon.

The public remain in the dark about plans by Horowhenua District Council to transfer up to 40 percent of public assets to the recently established property investment trust called Horowhenua NZ Trust.

The only item on the 6 June agenda to be discussed in a publicly excluded part of the meeting refers to “Legal Matters: Settlement Options – Historic Dispute” which, if this refers to the transfer of public assets, appears to be deliberately worded to hide council’s intention.

Council will discuss and vote on this item in a publicly excluded part of the meeting on the grounds, “The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).”

One of the big problems residents have is how the commercial confidential clauses of the Local Government Act deny the public opportunities to be a part of discussions in the public interest. Also, the public don’t know how councillors vote on publicly excluded matters or whether councillors have undeclared conflicts of interest.

It is the only clause of the Local Government Act available to council’s, who may be motivated by self and vested interest rather than public interest, because it allows council’s to side-step obligations to be transparent and accountable.

But when council’s get into bed with land and property developers to the extent this council has then serious concerns about how the commercial confidentiality clause of the Local Government Act is being used are justified.

The most glaring example of this was the sale of the former council owned pensioner housing portfolio to one of the biggest land and property developers in the country Willis Bond for a firesale price of $5.2 million resulting in a loss of $1.86 million.

The Office of the Auditor General is making a determination on this matter and conflicts of interest but, to put it mildly, residents aren’t holding their breathe that an investigation of any real merit will be pursued.

In a report on supporting the establishment of the Horowhenua NZ Trust economic development manager Shanon Grainger stated, “The Trust operates through a Trust Deed in standard fashion. That Deed holds trustees to account, trustees operate under the standard legislation and case law applying to trustees. This is a high level of accountability with sanctions and remedies.”

But the public don’t know how the Trust will operate because the Trust has not been legally registered, there is no Trust deed to refer to and who the specific directors are still has not been announced.

Mr Grainger also said the Trust model was, “explicitly detached from local government so that local government politicians are not compromised, and investors are not compromised.”

Yet members of council’s in-house economic development board are Trust directors in the first instance and three councillors are on the board including deputy chair of the economic development board councillor Wayne Bishop who is also the deputy mayor.

Compounding concerns is the fact Cr Bishop has three land and property development companies, and an extensive and growing number of Horowhenua land and property development projects, and the Trust is being assisted by the council’s chief executive David Clapperton who established a company classified under the land development/subdivision category in November 2016.

These facts alone appear to contradict Mr Grainger’s comment the Trust is “explicitly detached from local government.”

Not only has the council publicly stated it intends on transferring up to 40 percent of assets to the Trust but an unknown amount of ratepayer funds that council spends on “economic development” will also be funnelled to the Trust.

The only public comment made about how much council spends on “economic development” was a vague statement made by Mr Clapperton the dollar amount was unknown because it is within the Representation and Community Leadership budget of $4.1 million annually!

Plans by the council and the yet-to-be legally registered Horowhenua NZ Trust move relentlessly forward even though the public are being consulted on a myriad of plans and strategies that, if adopted in their present form, will unleash an explosive number of land and development, demolition and construction projects across the district.

Clearly though this trend of council’s getting into bed with land and property developers is undergoing a 21st Century renaissance. Listen to what is happening at New Plymouth District Council: “The council wants to sell part of Peringa Reserve – including half of a public golf course – to housing developers for $35 million. Opponents say it is protected recreational space and should be kept. RNZ Taranaki reporter Robin Martin has more.

The New Plymouth district council has come under fire for describing a proposal to sell part of a coastal reserve as “land recycling”. The council wants to sell part of…
RADIONZ.CO.NZ
 
Note: As the additional link on New Plymouth shows, councils up & down the land are using the tried & true method of relieving you of your public assets your forbears worked to provide for succeeding generations. Public Private Partnerships. Listen to Joan Veon on that topic (see our Agenda 21/30 pages). Buying your assets for a song literally via the back door. This link  will take you to related examples of this in NZ including Joan Veon’s information. Let’s not forget these transfer of assets seem to be happening with no rhyme or reason as to their value, witness the transfer of Horowhenua’s pensioner flats to Willis & Bond property developers with front company Compassion Housing formed a week before the sale, at a loss of $1.86 million (ie sold that much below their true value, a right royal gift for W&B. Enjoy (if you can). EnvirowatchRangitikei

New info on the recent 6-helicopter entourage over Fiordland by the head of NZ’s Dept. of Conservation & 30 odd international bankers

In brief, this entourage may be connected to an environmental group called The Nature Conservancy group as stated by another source. It is a group that partners with corporations to fund conservation. This trend sees companies known for their polluting practices dubbed by many as ‘greenwash’ corporates. Just another sneaky way into yet another cash cow … the environment. And all a part of UN’s Agenda 21/30. Read the full article below.

RELATED LINKS:

1) WHY WERE THE HEADS OF NZ’S DEPT. OF CONSERVATION & HONG KONG’S GOLDMAN SACHS TOURING PARTS OF FIORDLAND RECENTLY IN A SIX-HELICOPTER ENTOURAGE?

2) NEW INFO ON THE RECENT 6-HELICOPTER ENTOURAGE OVER FIORDLAND BY THE HEAD OF NZ’S DEPT. OF CONSERVATION & 30 ODD INTERNATIONAL BANKERS

3) SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL HAS TOLD A CORRESPONDENT THAT THE RECENT HELICOPTER TOUR OF FIORDLAND BY 30 ODD INTERNATIONAL BANKERS & DOC WAS ‘PHILANTHROPIC’ … AND NARY A WHISPER FROM MAINSTREAM MEDIA?


Recent info supplied by Carol Sawyer about the sighting of a DoC, banking helicopter entourage over Fiordland has brought comment at our Facebook discussion from a visitor who is a former Labour Party MP. She assured me that the entourage was not paid for by DoC (although that was a minor concern compared to 30 odd international bankers eyeing up the landscape from on high). She says a reliable source told her in confidence that the members touring were from The Nature Conservancy (TNC) group.  Carol who supplied the original information, also from a confidential & reliable source maintains firmly that these were definitely international bankers.

A little research into the TNC which I’d not hitherto heard of, proved very interesting. It is a Hong Kong group and is headed by a former Goldman Sachs CEO.

If what this visitor to the discussion is saying is true, and if it’s said in terms of ‘all’s well, it’s just about conservation & DoC weren’t paying’, then we in fact do have cause for concern. Check out their corporate partners: “Pepsi Co, Disney, IBM, Goldman Sachs, Walmart and Cargill. In Asia Pacific, … Neutrogena in Australia and Rio Tinto in Mongolia. In Hong Kong, …  Dragonair, Pacific Coffee Company, FORTUNE China, HSBC Private Bank, the Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Hong Kong Commercial Radio, Moet Hennessy Asia Pacific, Time Asia, Sun Hung Kai Properties and the Hong Kong Airport Authority”. And there it is again, Goldman Sachs. They’re featuring quite prominently. And Key’s friends from Merrill Lynch.

If you navigate from the NZ website for TNC, there is another list of global companies that have partnered with them. On that very long list are Dow Chemicals, Shell & Coke to name three, who are all ill qualified to fit any green profile by any stretch of the imagination.

Speaking broadly, a not so new breed of ‘environmental’ people have clearly been dominating the green movement for some time particularly since neo liberal economics and are in fact all for profit. Strange bedfellows they shroud their activities in a deceptive cloak of green & sustainable rhetoric but don’t be fooled. The bottom line of corporations is profit. (Read Behind the Green Mask on that. The author Rosa Koire’s site is here).

TNC has been operating here in NZ since 2016:

“As part of a three-year strategic plan, in 2016 we worked with government officials, local communities, indigenous (Iwi) leaders, businesses and local conservation groups to identify science-based solutions to poor water quality and runoff.”

You can read at the link what else they’re up to. Clearly with their input our waterways are no cleaner and our clean water reserves are still either under threat, or being bottled and sent off shore for the sole benefit of foreign corporations that plunder us with impunity. While the councils that gave the consents sit by and twiddle their thumbs, plunging their rate payers into deeper and deeper debt. Doesn’t make sense does it? Why do you virtually give away a valuable water resource to an offshore corporation but charge your own people top dollar? Why do you not sell it instead & benefit your district and its ratepayers? Favours for your corporate mates I’d suspect. And further cheap land available when the ratepayers’ find they can’t meet the rates. See what happened in Kaipara. 

Copy of no-money-2070384_1280.jpg

For an explanation on the councils’ debt agenda go here & read Dr Naomi Jacobs’ exposé. A useful exercise on consents is to attend one of your council’s consent hearings. The last one I sat in on, the chair of the ‘independent panel’ (one of three corporates well versed in the RM Act) made a Freudian slip & said ‘when the consent is granted’ … ‘I mean, if the consent is granted’. The consents were of course granted & the folk who lived next door to the moderate sized Bonny Glen refuse tip that the Rangitikei council sold in the early 2000s to an offshore Chinese corporation, were faced with living next door to a tip quadruple the size and all the drop in property values, the stench, the trucks through town, the rats, feral cats and the leachate in the waterways that go with that.  (Sustainable practices). The hearings were held far from the residents’ who were to be affected of course, many of whom doubtless had jobs to go to, a time worn tactic employed on Māori to relieve them of their lands.

There is big money in refuse.

So TNC’s vision as stated at their website is:

“…to leave a sustainable world for future generations, in Hong Kong and around the world.

Sounds great doesn’t it? (Hong Kong note, one of the entourage was head of Hong Kong Goldman Sachs). If you are familiar with Agenda 21/30 you will have spotted that word ‘sustainable’. It’s what is woven throughout local & regional councils’ websites world wide as a purely lip service stab at getting you to believe it’s about conservation. It is a line that really is wearing thin. I mean really thin. Any smart thinking person can see there’s been nothing sustainable going on since the corporate takeover of all things precious and dear on the planet three decades ago. That would be since the early nineties when Bush first announced the New World Order directly after the Gulf War. That by the way was when the US military injected their soldiers with that ‘mysterious’ illness called Gulf War Syndrome. Followed by theRio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests, adopted by more than 178 Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992″. Since then our countries have also become corporations, along with their respective former government departments. Since the signing up of those nations to this Agenda 21 agreement now known as Agenda 2030, we have had our fresh waters trashed, lands pilfered, forests plundered and our oceans trashed & pilfered as well. Did I miss anything? There’s little left anywhere of anything pristine yet the lies continue to roll out for the gullible to swallow, on the plan for sustainable development. What bollocks.

This blog thread on TNC is interesting. Read the comments also at the link.

“The CEO of TNC is Mark Tercek who was formerly “managing director at Goldman Sachs where he played a key role in developing the firm’s environmental strategy. He headed the firm’s Environmental Strategy Group and Center for Environmental Markets, which worked to develop and promote market-based solutions to environmental challenges”. I concur with their thoughts, climate disaster & pollution are not opportunities for investment!

Noted also are the level of salaries these CEOs earn & we are urged to cease donating to them, it being better to donate to groups that use the money to do the work not pay obscenely large salaries of $250K.  Note also the salaries of our heavily indebted councils across NZ. District Councils are the Trojan horse for Agenda 21/30.

Tercek is also a member of several boards and councils, including Resources for the Future and the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. He is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Think Bilderberger and secrecy & New World Order on the latter organization. That is cause for concern just by itself (that is if you don’t believe the lie of the happy global village with all things equal. Is it looking anything like equal three decades in?)

Tercek is also the author of a book called Nature’s Fortune: How Business and Society Thrive by Investing in Nature.

They sure do.

14484651_1472593802754892_3596900895775183479_n.jpg

Corporations always have this awkward marrying of profit and economic sustainability & guess which always wins out?  A quick glance around your local district councils and their modus operandi will tell you that. It’s never the environment. It’s all in the clever wording. They have to balance the two. “…each [corporate] engagement has, at its core” says TNC, “the potential to help us achieve our goal of protecting lands and waters on which all life depends.” Note the operative words there are “the potential”. Nice and non committal, non conclusive … followed by the emotive protectorate verbiage about land and water “on which all life depends”. (Note: If you’re unfamiliar with the absolute bottom line of corporations ie profit, do watch The Corporation doco).

There are other global environmental organizations being run by global banking elites. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) for instance was at one time (2010 according to the source) managed by an ex Goldman Sachs Managing Director Larry Linden. The current WWF CEO Carter Roberts “has built partnerships with some of the world’s largest corporations, including Walmart, Cargill and Mars” and is also a member of the CFR.

The WWF is an organization with a little known dark side. It’s not just about cuddly Panda bears. You can learn about that at the following link:

A new book “accuses the WWF of “selling its soul” to corporations in exchange for their donations, as well as forging alliances with powerful, non-sustainable businesses that are destroying the planet and “greenwashing” their operations under the conservation group’s label.” WWF it’s reported is also involved in “the beatings and torture of indigenous peoples in the name of “conservation”.

So, the marriage of corporations & the banking fraternity with conservation & under the banner of ‘sustainable development’, the guise of all things green, is a complete scam and a sham. Again, don’t fall for it.

“The interest in NZ by these people is all about resources and more sinister technologies. Everyone wants a piece of ‘Little Texas’, and this unregulated airspace and associated tech opportunities.  Lets NOT forget our close location to the Pole and the large wealth of resources therein. Christchurch is the world’s ‘mine’ door.” (Comment from thecontrail.com).

You can be assured Kiwis, that the clearing off of our lands with all the poison is not about conservation.  Watch the four times award winning film on NZ’s wholesale poisoning program that your government/corporation doesn’t want you to see.

Watch now for NZ partnerships. Who is cosying up to who? As the saying goes, “There’s gold in them thar hills”. On land acquisition, it being the end game of a group that wants global governance, check out their Public Private Partnership modus operandi. The late Joan Veon* told us that:

“Private Partnerships (PPP)are an arm of the world’s growing Public corporatocracy & their bottom line is to take control of the assets of Government”.

The Horowhenua District Council last year announced they would be using PPPs to sell off their surplus land having already all but gifted their community housing assets to a large property developer. Similar has happened in Tamaki with our State homes, all exposed thanks to Penny Bright’s investigative work.

So, regarding the entourage over Fiordland, it’s watch this space. We may in due course see some new plan emerge to conserve the Fiordlands. Not for profit of course.


*Joan Veon in the course of her work alongside and with the UN researched extensively andinterviewed high profile public figures on these matters during the ’90s when things were kicking off. You can read and listen to her at this link. There are many more of her lectures on Youtube. (When I post Joan’s PPP video on Facebook it gets marked as spam).

To learn more about UN’s Agenda 21/30 visit our main menu. The agenda is already in NZ, see the Agenda 21/30 in NZ page also.

Post Script:
I am keen to hear from any of you out there who knew about and were familiar with the TNC group and their conservation work. I would’ve thought it would be headline news and any activity over Fiordland with their corporate partners (?) on conserving that place would be also? But no it flew literally right under the radar. By helicopter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why is HDC allowing the felling of a protected Totara tree on a formerly Council-owned Foxton property, by the new owners Willis & Bond / Compassion Horowhenua? (amended article)

The original article posted earlier stated that the tree was a Kauri … apologies, it is in fact a Totara, but still a protected species. This is the original with amendments.

The Totara in question is on a property now owned by Willis & Bond / Compassion Horowhenua Housing. They are the new owners of Johnston Street community housing that was formerly Council owned. The tree to the right of the fence in the photo is to be cut back, that one is on Council property (Seaview Gardens). However the other tree to the left is to be felled. This native Totara is not currently listed as a ‘notable tree’, the only thing I understand that could prevent its being felled.  The by-laws apparently have recently changed in the Horowhenua preventing the species from being protected there. So how is this a forward move? Felling a protected native species? Have local iwi been consulted on this? Here we have the usual UN ‘sustainable’ spin that balances sustainable economies with sustainable environments … guess which one wins out, every time?

Copy of Jan 2018 015

It should in my opinion be cut back (for easier ongoing maintenance of the buildings if that is what is required) … but not felled. That is very backward thinking.

The following article reflects the direction Councils are taking in their professions of Treaty Partnership with regard to native trees. Their websites tend to pay lip service only to the Treaty. It is described in the article how the Auckland Council failed to support a rāhui placed on the Waitakere Forest to protect Kauri, another protected species.

“The council’s Environment and Community Committee chose to reject the rāhui request made byTe Kawarau-a-Maki, deciding instead to close only high-risk and medium-risk tracks.”

Read the article: Why aren’t people listening? Māori scientists on why rāhui are important

So it would appear the Horowhenua District Council is moving in a similar direction? With recent by-law changes the protected species is now set for the chop.

Note: I have requested of Council today (5th Feb) that the tree be made ‘notable’. They’ve referred my request to a ‘Strategic Planner’ to respond. Please consider requesting the same by sending an email to:

CustomerServices@horowhenua.govt.nz

EnvirowatchHorowhenua

 

Why is HDC allowing the felling of a protected Totara tree on a formerly Council-owned Foxton property, by the new owners Willis & Bond / Compassion Horowhenua?

The Totara in question is on a property now owned by Willis & Bond / Compassion Horowhenua Housing. They are the new owners of Johnston Street community housing that was formerly Council owned. The tree to the right of the fence in the photo is to be cut back, that one is on Council property (Seaview Gardens). However the other tree to the left is to be felled. This native Totara is not currently listed as a ‘notable tree’, the only thing I understand that could prevent its being felled.  The by-laws apparently have recently changed in the Horowhenua preventing the species from being protected there. So how is this a forward move? Felling a protected native species? Have local iwi been consulted on this?

Copy of Jan 2018 015

It should in my opinion be cut back (for easier ongoing maintenance of the buildings if that is what is required) … but not felled. That is very backward thinking.

The following article reflects the direction Councils are taking in their professions of Treaty Partnership with regard to native trees. Their websites tend to pay lip service only to the Treaty. It is described in the article how the Auckland Council failed to support a rāhui placed on the Waitakere Forest to protect Kauri, another protected species.

“The council’s Environment and Community Committee chose to reject the rāhui request made byTe Kawarau-a-Maki, deciding instead to close only high-risk and medium-risk tracks.”

Read the article: Why aren’t people listening? Māori scientists on why rāhui are important

 

So it would appear the Horowhenua District Council is moving in a similar direction? With recent by-law changes the protected species is now set for the chop.

Note: I have requested of Council today (5th Feb) that the tree be made ‘notable’. They’ve referred my request to a ‘Strategic Planner’ to respond. Please consider requesting the same by sending an email to:

CustomerServices@horowhenua.govt.nz

EnvirowatchHorowhenua