Wellington Scoop
Network

Hikoi to join Ohariu residents in protest at Peter Dunne’s Johnsonville office

News from People’s Power Ohariu
Representatives of the “Aotearoa Is Not For Sale hikoi” will meet People’s Power Ohariu supporters at 8.00am on Thursday morning in a protest at Peter Dunne’s Johnsonville office.

“The protest will not be seeking a meeting with Peter Dunne who has flatly refused to answer questions from People’s Power Ohariu or to personally receive the report of over 600 submissions collected by the Ohariu Citizens’ Select Committee”, says People’s Power Ohariu spokesperson John Maynard.

“We are shocked and surprised at the arrogant tone in which Mr Dunne has chosen to express himself to residents in his own electorate”.

The hikoi has been travelling through towns and cities on its way to Wellington and will be marching at midday Friday 4 May from Te Papa to Parliament.

“Peter Dunne has declined to support the Sky City casino deal because he says he doesn’t know enough about it. However he has said he doesn’t want to waste time giving consideration to the provisions of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement which is expected to directly undermine the New Zealand Government’s law-making sovereignty.

“Neither will Peter Dunne reveal what he knew about the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement either during last year’s election campaign or at the time he signed his confidence and supply agreement with the Government”.

Over 600 submissions opposed to the asset sales were received by the Ohariu Ciitizens’ Select Committee which will itself appear before the Finance and Expenditure Parliamentary Select Committee 12.50pm Wednesday 2 May. (Committee Room 3 Parliament Buildings)

Read also
Hikoi marchers in Queen Street – in their own words

3 comments:

  1. Cynical, 1. May 2012, 15:52

    Peter Dunne campagined on the fact that he was pro selling limited amounts of state-owned asset (49%), excluding KiwiBank, water, and Radio New Zealand.

    His electorate voted him in, with this information known to them.

    For him to vote against the limited sale of these assets, as the group “People Power Ohariu” want, would mean him going against the will of the very people who put him into office.

    There is nothing shocking or arrogant about his actions in this matter… yet. He has been completely honest and forthcoming on this subject.

     
  2. John Maynard, 1. May 2012, 20:53

    In his campaign meeting at the Johnsonville Uniting Church, I asked how he would prevent partially owned state assets from becoming foreign owned companies under New Zealand law once the total overseas shareholding became greaeter than 25.9%. Peter described with his hands how “something could be put around them” to prevent this. I am surprised that Peter made this suggestion because I think this is prevented by our existing free trade and investment agreements. In any event he has not “put something around them” to protect them.

    The will of the people of Ohariu has never been demonstrated as to be in support of the sale of state owned assets. This was not a referendum on asset sales – it was a general election and Peter himself knows the strength of the opposition in the electorate to asset sales.

    Peter has wisely declined to endorse the Sky City casino conference centre because he doesn’t know enough about it.

    I believe he has extremely unwisely voted to support the sale of state assets when he doesn’t know how much our law making sovereignty will be undermined by the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement. Furthermore he says he doesn’t want to “waste his time” finding out. I would applaud him if he was as sensible about the TPPA as he is about Sky City.

    Perhaps his answers to our polite email requests should be made public, then there will be no doubt in the electorate about the arrogance he has displayed.

    John Maynard

     
  3. Cynical, 2. May 2012, 15:57

    To quote the group’s other spokesperson – a known Mana Party activist Ariana Paretutanganui-Tamati – “It is absolutely ludicrous that in our country a group of 61 people can make decisions that have serious, serious, implications for our country and our children’s future and our land.”

    Yet, this is exactly the result that you’ll have if Peter votes against the asset sales, too. 61 – 60, 60 – 61, there is no difference.

    If Labour/Greens/other left parties had managed a 61 seat to 60 seat majority, are you or your group saying that they would have no right to bring in CGT, to raise taxes on the ‘rich’, to increase the benefit or minimum wage? Of course not! Your group is just bitter over the fact the Labour/Greens/left didn’t win the election and therefore National and their partners have the right to govern as they say fit.

    To quote Dr Michael Cullen “We won, you lost, eat that!”