Understanding the Others point of view!

Kia Ora,

After my last post I thought, after discussion we have been having on Linkedin, I would carry on in same vein but a bit closer to home. This is because most on either side are not ready to look at it from the others perspective or even realize they are been manipulated & this could very well led to conflict of some type.

The first issue is the Foreshore & seabed. Most of this will come from a Maori point of view because I was involved at the time when the issue came to a head in governance of a Maori organization. Some of what came up surprised even us. Also because there is little talk & people are confused by the arguments they do hear or just switch off when the issue is raised.

Now we have the Coastal Coalition who have been manipulated into thinking that New Zealanders are going to loose access to many areas of coast line around New Zealand.

This was never the reason behind the initial claim to the Maori land court or the Appeal courts decision. It shouldn't change now. Though some are advocating no access but they seem to have forgotten what their Tupuna(ancestors) wanted. To live together & as the proverb used alot in Ngai Tahu says "For us & our children after us."

New Zealanders have this belief that everyone has access to the beach. They also believe they have the right to walk beside any river due to the Queens Chain.

It just isn't true.

The 'Queens' chain was never official but it was taken up in part in some areas such as Canterbury & Marlborough in the early planning. It is those roads or dirt tracks either side of a watercourse usually these days with a gate on it(around here to stop boy racers amongst others). You are allowed to access those areas. Other areas it was never acted on at all & you only have access at the grace of the owners.

Meanwhile the beach or foreshore & seabed area is a whole different kettle of fish.

Now the early settlers liked the idea of everyone having access to the beach. Maori view was they were only the Kaitiaki or guardians so everyone could access the land, they just had to respect it & local customs. The idea was to preserve food for all even in times of famine. So everyone just left things as they were.
**REPRINT** Gunther, R. T. (Robert Theodore), 1869-1940. Pausilypon, the imperial villa near Naples, with a description of the submerged foreshore and with observations on the tomb of Virgil and on other Roman antiquities on Posilipo, by R. T. G{uml}unther ... wi**REPRINT**
The Maori view of all land was they were held accountable by their ancestors to look after the land & never realized that they were giving full custody of the land to the settlers in most cases.

A comment was passed during the debate that on some of the early land sales that the British wrote up(not Maori) they bought the foreshore & seabed of areas to be used as harbours. Therefore signifying that in the early settlers & British eyes Maori did own the foreshore & seabed. Which if in Maori ownership could not be bought & sold privately therefore everyone would have access to that area.

Then shortly after some realized this, resulted in the bringing in of a new form of Maori land ownership that today results in some beaches been privately owned usually not by Maori. But I will deal with that in the next blog.
Contesting the Foreshore: Tourism, Society and Politics on the Coast (Amsterdam University Press - MARE Publication Series)
When the issue blew up back in 2003 the government of the day was doing two things.

One by not taking it fully through the court system but changing the rules mid tack the government was denying Maori the rights given to them under the Treaty of Waitangi to the use of the court system. The same rights any other New Zealander is entitled too.

The second point that was raised was the government was sticking to its GATT commitments that all New Zealand land including the foreshore & seabed be open to foreign ownership or leasing. Of course if that happens it is likely that within a few years no New Zealander will be able to access the beach.

In fact as soon as the Foreshore & Seabed Act was passed there were a whole lot of licences granted for drilling, dredging etc covering areas considered foreshore & seabed to foreign companies. It was noticeable that many of these were covering Maori reserve land or foreshore & seabed near Maori settlements.
Maori Property in the Foreshore and Seabed: The Last Frontier
The other issue was words used & what they mean.

Recently on Close Up on TV one there was a clip about some Public reserve land been taken for use by private owners. The local council were considering their options including selling.

Now our legal advice at the time of the foreshore & seabed debate was that they couldn't if it was public reserve(as most domains that many of us grew up with are now called) but if it was in Public Domain then the government & only the government(in this case local government) could sell or lease it to someone.

The governments have said of course Public Domain means for all. Don't believe them. Most of New Zealand are aware of the leadership disputes within Ngai Tahu. One of the points of argument is the words used in one section of the Act passed to confirm the settlement with Ngai Tahu.
Maori Party: Maori Party Activists, New Zealand Foreshore and Seabed Controversy, Tariana Turia, Pita Sharples, Hone Harawira
Now one of those involved in the negotiations told me it was meant in one way during the negotiation. A legal authority I spoke to on a governance course told me that in law the words mean quite a different thing. No matter in what spirit it was negotiated, although in recent times judges have allowed some leeway as long as certain people are not making a private gain out of it.

So when using Public Domain the Coastal Coalition think they are getting one thing & Maori know from experience they are getting quite something else where all will loose. It is the classic divde & conquer.

Whilst everyone is at each others throats & some are provoked to extremism, the governments & those behind them use it to get what they want.

Others will see it more in a personal light where the likes of Ngati Porou in particular & even my own runanga actually do own stretches of foreshore & seabed. In our case we have to my knowledge never stopped anyone going on it. We do ask for respect of the Urupa(burial grounds) dotted around the bay.

The Coastal coalition if it can sit down with Maori might realize that probably the only way to preserve the beaches in New Zealand ownership is through as Manaia Mahuta said(& was slapped down by her own Prmie Minister for suggesting it) confirm Maori Ownership with a caveat for all New Zealand citizens to have the right to access it. Native rights have primacy in international courts so greater protection against the likes of foreign companies. Use the advantage one has to the advantage of all.

Where as if the government has control they will always act in your best interests. Yeah Right!

It actually requires each other to understand the others view, realize actually we want virtually the same thing, cut the government out to stop the manipulation otherwise we all loose. It might just get very very ugly then if we don't.

http://www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

New Year; Same old Chestnut!

Kia Ora,

Seems we have a lot of very dumb people here in New Zealand. It is a new year but they are still doing the same things with the same consequences then blaming the police.

Yes it is the police chases or fleeing drivers as they are now referred too.

For those that are not aware what has happened here it is.

Police were called to people acting suspiciously & were for once in the last few years able to show up.

On arrival not one but two stolen cars left the scene & were pursued. The chase moved onto the motorway where speeds were reported up to 200km per hour in initial reports.

The driving got so bad that as required under current procedures police pulled out of the chase, but about 45 seconds later the vehicle crashed killing the 16 year old driver.

His Family have blamed the police.

So who is to blame?

Well for one it is not the police. They were able to attend a call to suspicious activity, found crime in progress & acted.

First to blame is the drivers.

They did the crime so they do the time as they were caught.

Next is the family as what were 15 & 16 year olds doing out stealing cars at night? Bit harsh but that is a big part of the problem.

Then there is society. When we are regularly having these chases with young people at the wheel, usually after committing other cirmes, drunk or on drugs & if the police had stopped them they would of attacked the police most likely. Something is seriously wrong.

Not to mention the idiots like the representative of the trust interviewed. Just like the Green party spokesman on law & order they have no idea what they are talking about. They are part of the problem not the solution.

It is their woolly headed thinking that actually makes these kids think they have the right to run from & then attack police officers or innocent members of the public.
America's Courts and the Criminal Justice System
Then there is the poor response by the justice system here in New Zealand.

On the NZ TV Programme Crash Course they add in clips from around the world with police chases. One in particular in the most recent showing was from the US. It appeared the chase had just started when the fleeing vehicle went through a red light, hit a SUV which wrapped around a lamp post(luckily from comments not killing the innocent driver) & then the driver tried to run from police.

Now in New Zealand they would of, especially at age the driver was the other night, got a telling off for been a naughty boy & if they even actually had a licence(which they usually don't) it would be suspended.

What did they get in the US? Twenty years jail. That is the sort of deterrent needed to stop people running & like the US driver education as part of the education system.
Disbelieving suspense: suspended sentences of imprisonment and public confidence in the criminal justice system.: An article from: Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology
In the end it is the driver who has the most responsibility.

Police in my opinion should never abandon a chase as these guys then just use it as an excuse to drive dangerously. Most can't handle a vehicle as well as they think they can & are putting others at risk.

I feel no sympathy for the drivers or those in the fleeing vehicles but I do to any innocent hurt or killed along the way.

Imagine how a police officer feels?

If they chase someone innocent could be killed, if they don't someone innocent could be killed. If they get away then now they know the police will pull out they will do it again & each time it is more likely someone will die. No problems if it is those in the fleeing car as they made the choice.

At present the only option I see left to police is more helicopters, so vehicles can be tracked from the air. It would also assist in other crime responses such as armed robberies. The only thing is the government is looking to police like all government agencies to cut back on expenditure.

Therefore no helicopters, therefore chases to continue.
Maconochie's Gentlemen: The Story of Norfolk Island and the Roots of Modern Prison Reform
What also concerns me is the high proportion of young Maori involved in this criminal activity. As someone who has been in governance positions for Maori organizations it was quite clear that though there was an intention to help our people, it has never been fully realized.

From there has grown a desire to make a difference in our communities not just through security & give people better options.
The Prison System and Its Effects: Where From, Where To, and Why? (Criminal Justice Law Enforcemt)
But it is not just me who needs to look at this but everyone.

To quote JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" or society.

For me it seems a long way off but if you have to try.

The touchy feely way doesn't work. It has failed & has resulted in a world on verge of anarchy. There has to be consequences for peoples actions.

Empathy yes! Woolly headed no! Firm but fair.
Perceptions of Justice: Issues in Indigenous and Community Empowerment
Currently the police get all the blame & it has resulted in a police service that no longer relies on gut instinct so much as by a set process. So it is no longer proactive but reactive.

In most situations they are not to blame. Yes they would always review it to see if it could of been carried out better in that particular situation given that set of circumstances.

"How could of I handled this better?" Is the first question that each officer should be asking themselves.
Legal Pluralism and the Colonial Legacy: Indigenous Experiences of Justice in Canada, Australia, and New Zealnd
But they should not be going into circumstances saying "How do I cover my arse?"

The police are not to blame, but the fleeing drivers, immediate family in many cases, society & the justice system. Not to mention poor government policy over many years & no real backing of the police(although the current Minister does her best with good vocal support) with legislation with teeth. Not for every new piece of legislation an out clause.

http://www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

You have to ask is Honesty really the best policy? Corruption is rife!

Kia Ora,

A conversation last week with a former police officer set me thinking. We were talking about the NZ police today & his comments echoed those of current long serving police officers. Techniques might of changed but in reality the basics of how to police never change. But he is always getting told by young officers he doesn't understand policing today.

Ten years ago it was normal for police to encourage you to report suspicious activity & responded to them as not only did it impact on crime, even if the reported activity wasn't as suspicious as first reported it put the police in the area & also had an impact on crime.

Compare that to today where a call to report suspicious activity more often than not you are treated as the criminal with the grilling you get on the phone & then it is unlikely a patrol will show up.

That is not the police on the beats fault as they are under resourced & undermanned, but there is also a focus on getting arrests as opposed to impacting on crime from above when talking to experienced officers.

Not helping their cause though is the corruption that is rife amongst New Zealand bureaucrats which means their favourite method of dealing with issues is do nothing.

My recent experiences with bureaucrats which came to a head in the last week show why they police have to deal with so many upset people.

Not to mention security guards who also due to the low wages in the NZ Security Industry are likely to be having to deal with some of those departments in their own life.

The old bureaucrats trick of focussing on a red herring, to the side of the real issues, is to the fore.
Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences, and Reform
As someone who has been bluntly honest my whole life (apart from those few drunken episodes for which most of us are not caught) it galls me to see those who have no care for others getting ahead by dishonest endeavours backed by bureaucrats.

Gone is the bureaucrat whose goal in life was to make life simpler for their community & like soldiers, police etc knew what the word service actually meant.

People have said it happens in all countries where bureaucrats hold things up. But as an Australian said who immigrated to NZ to launch a business opportunity he saw, "Mate setting up a company was the easiest anywhere, but after that nothing but apathy."

Having been around the world abit the worst I have seen is here in New Zealand. In the Middle East I actually found their open use of back handers quite liberating as it got things done. You just hired a fixer, budgeted for it & gone on with things.

In NZ to offer money would offend but then the hold ups due to requirement for committees (always remembering a camel is a horse designed by a committee) make the whole thing untenable.

New Zealand likes to think it has the perfect governance model, but it doesn't. That is those in governance give direction to those bureaucrats who are to deliver. Having been in Governance roles where I was also the beneficiary has shown that more often than not those in governance roles are actually in tune with those who are supposed to benefit.

Unfortunately the bureaucrats assigned to deliver are more often than not on a different agenda(the TV programmes 'Yes, Minister' & 'Yes, Prime Minister' spring to mind) altogether. Or to quote Ronald Reagan "the scariest words someone can hear is, We are from the government & we are here to help" or words to that effect.

It is why I find the TV programme 'Under cover Boss' so refreshing as it shows those in governance or top management actually finding out what the issues actually are for their business.
Governance (Key Concepts)
Bureaucracy today is more about how inefficent you can be. That causes frustration which in turn causes people to get upset. More often than not the first person who has to deal with it is the lone security guard.

Compare that to organized crime in particular here in New Zealand the gangs who in their own way tend to look after their people. Those that are better at it have less issues & make the job of the police harder as no one will talk against those who have looked after them when things have been bad.

Leadership is not all about been loud or giving someone the 'bash' to keep them in line. People skills are the first thing bureaucrats need to learn.
Corporate Governance Best Practices: Strategies for Public, Private, and Not-for-Profit Organizations
Oh the comment in the title of this book about best Practice. First thing I know from having been on the shop floor as soon as anyone says it, on the floor everyone knows its not.

If the bureaucrats could get their act together there would be a lot less upset people, the country would be saved millions if not billions of dollars. As I have said to one government agency in this last week, "I could run ... better with my little finger." Not only that have better people skills.

Corruption is rife amongst our bureaucrats & it really makes you think "is it really worth it been honest?" You are already seeing bureaucratic corruption at its finest in the aftermath of the Christchurch Earthquake.

http://www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz

How do you protect your Assets?

Kia Ora,

Well the news came out of the Australian mining company board all being lost on a flight in Africa. So what does that have to do with Assets?

The greatest assets you have are the people at all levels with the knowledge that makes your business what it is.



In particular which you are looking at instituitional knowledge as held by thosde who may head your company.

You would of thought companies would of learnt from the Manchester United experience in 1953, loosing so many of their team. But like everything else it seems we havfe to keep learning the same lessons.

Several years ago I was appointed to a position in the area of governance & arrived late to the AGM.

As a trained bodyguard though I was blown away on the trip back when not only were the majority of those in governance on the same flight, also all the top tiers & boards of the subsidaries were on the same flight.



It was only when I made the point from the point of view of a bodyguard, that they looked around & realized how much they would of lost had that aircraft crashed.

Again it is part of the on going risk assessment you must make in the industry at all levels.

True there are times when like Saturday night despite your best planning things go wrong & Murphy's law kicks in, but you limit that which could go wrong.

http://www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz