Et tu, Winston?
New Zealand needs statesmen who are concerned for the next generation, not politicians who are concerned for the next election. The electorate may well ask, is Winston Peters concerned with the next generation or the next election?
Will Winston Peters advise the nation why NZ First has recently given, in secrecy, its approval and support to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice for the decriminalisation of abortion? He could have stopped this contentious Bill from being presented to Parliament. Why then did he not stop it?
I believe that this is a great injustice and a violation of human rights. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states in its preamble that ‘the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.’
This bill will entail the removal of the unborn classified as unwanted from the protection of the Crimes Act so that they
may have their lives terminated as “a reproductive health choice for women.” It will then be no longer a crime to kill an unborn child.
Protection is currently provided in the Crimes Act for the right to life of the unborn child under section 182. It is a serious crime to kill an unborn child, and the convicted may be imprisoned for up to 14 years.
Why has Winston Peters clearly changed his position on his defence of women and the right to life of the unborn child? Have they been sacrificed for political gain? At the Family First conference in Auckland in 2014, when interviewed by national director Bob McCoskrie, he stated that “abortions should be legal, safe and rare.”
He was asked if he supported the Green’s policy of decriminalising abortion. He replied, “No we don’t.” He said he believed that life began at conception and that the child had a right to life.
Winston Peters now presumably supports Model C, which is preferred by Andrew Little. Under Model C there would be no statutory test until 22 weeks of pregnancy. There is no recognition of the child’s right to life or the duty of the state to protect the lives of its future citizens.
After 22 weeks, the health practitioner who intends to perform an abortion would need to be satisfied that the abortion is appropriate in the circumstances, having regard to the woman’s physical and mental health and wellbeing. This model provides abortion for any reason up to 22 weeks. Right to Life believes that this model effectively provides abortion on demand up to birth.
The Royal Commission, in its report to Parliament in 1977, said, on upholding the status of the unborn child, “The unborn child, as one of the weakest, the most vulnerable and most defenceless forms of humanity, should receive protection. From a biological point of view there is no argument as to when life begins. Evidence was given to us by eminent scientists from all over the world. None of them suggested that human life begins at any other time than at conception.”
It is still not too late. Right to Life requests that NZ First steps back from the brink of disaster and withdraws its support for the war on women and their precious unborn. NZ First could courageously be the champion of women by promoting legislation that recognises the unborn child from conception as a human being endowed by its Creator with an inalienable right to life.
KEN ORR Right to Life the atmosphere 24/7.
Across the ditch our Oz mates produce most of their electricity from their plentiful coal reserves. Nuclear power? Most Japanese say no thanks to that, with good reason.
Large parts of Europe keep warm with piped Russian oil. They depend on it. The list goes on forever, down to your handy lawnmower.
The great food-producing areas, like many states of the USA, are having oncein-50-year floods almost annually. Pretty hard to sell a home in the once very popular Gulf of Mexico Miami area. So many of the world’s great cities barely above king tide levels, and many below storm surge levels, as is much valuable coastal cropping land around the world.
You can jump up and down and rant, but enormous changes to human lifestyles are coming. Human dieback in many regions will have to be faced. People are going to lose their fossilpowered toys. For example, the tourist trade will become a trickle.
When? Well some industries in the United States are moving their factories north, to more settled weather areas. People are reading scientific papers and wondering. Young people are realising the Donald Trumps of this world are refusing to face the reality of climate change.
General concern is probably only five years away, to be followed in 10 to 15 years by panic and basic lifestyle changes for everyone.
For future hope read Christ’s words. Face facts. Man’s inventiveness and resultant pollution of the environment, plus greed, is going to take some fixing.
Correspondent Ross Forbes’ research is correct. Climatic heating deniers are in the old Kiwi “She’ll be right mate” days of yore that have led to present-day realities.
There is a long list of scientific possibilities that will help correct the mess we have made. All expensive, like advanced solar heating and powergenerating. More human hands involved in food production. Electric rail to transport food to the cities. Environmentally sound, smaller but convenient homes. Large ships that combine container freight with passengers.
Electric tractor and farm bike? Sail out for a snapper or row ! Great exercise.
Laws will have to be strict. Caught dealing drugs twice . . . a bullet?
Let’s hope Christianity flourishes amid the greatly changed future world today’s children will inherit. I’m angry that kids of today will perhaps never hear the loud dawn bushland chorus or swim in crystal clear rivers, I did as a boy, or sail with hundreds of dolphins at the bow. Magic sunsets with thousands of sea birds of many varieties heading for their roosts, or eat a whitebait patty cooked on the riverbank.
We have demanded too much from Mother Nature. There has to be a major correction. SAM McHARG
Kerikeri “There is no power for change greater than a community discovering what it cares about.” So said organisational consultant Margaret J Wheatly.
A great example of this is a not so quiet stirring now occurring at Whangaroa. A number of locals are so concerned for the health of their harbour that they have informally called for a land development rahui (a prohibition against a particular area or activity, typically temporary, placed in order to protect a resource). They want a halt on development until issues are investigated and measures taken to rectify problems they are witnessing in their harbour. These include sediment build-up contributing to the loss of pipi beds, and white sand beaches to picnic on all but disappearing in less than a generation.
The issues they are concerned about have developed over many, many years, and there is no single culprit, or an easy solution.
This is not the only harbour under serious threat. Kaipara Harbour currently has around 700,000 tonnes of sediment entering it every year. It is one of the largest harbours in the world, and if nothing is done it could become the world’s largest mudflat, not something to encourage in any measure. The local kaitiaki have plans to reduce this by 60 per cent, and are making excellent progress in getting commitments to make this happen.
We must remember that this is not just about the health of Whangaroa. This is an issue impacting harbours across our district, and New Zealand. Our waterways are precious taonga, not a commodity, or a dumping ground. So what can be done to address what some might see as an overwhelming task or even an impossibility? Firstly, something must be done, overwhelming or not. The journey must commence, before one of our most treasured harbours loses its natural resilience, declines further, and runs the risk of becoming a lifeless body.
Whatever the solution may look like, it must be led by local people. They are the kaitiaki, it is their backyard, their taiao. Their aroha for their place will ensure decisions are made in the best interests of the ongoing wellbeing of the harbour, now and for future generations. And to be fair, it is future generations that will most benefit from sound decisions made today.
The key to success will be an innovative, collaborative approach, the community empowered to lead, and the rest of us, especially government agencies, in behind to support and provide resources as required. It needs to be smart, it needs to be timely, and it needs to be inclusive. It will take courage and some very brave conversations that will require an open heart and a vision for what can be.
I believe it is possible. I am looking forward to the coming conversations that will see a collective mandated to lead, one that I believe will set a framework for others to follow.
"This is an issue impacting harbours across our district, and New Zealand. Our waterways are precious taonga, not a commodity, or a dumping ground. "