Index | Top Stories | General News | Sports | Court News | Environment | Letters | Features | Archive | Subscribe | About Us

Letters to the Editor

Week ending Wednesday, February 3, 2009

Send us a Letter to the Editor

We will not publish any material which we consider to be defamatory

Don’t use police as a ‘political football’
‘Restorative justice’ is the answer
Tourism job ad suggestion
Good luck!
We DO need a new political model, Mr Tongia
Te penitini e te inu oko mama
A secret ballot is the only way
Reform won’t propel us forward
Recycle or face disaster
True colours showing
Tap Pryor comes ‘out of closet’
Hoteliers told to pay
Papa Arapati would make it happen
A call for some political action
Let’s have a vote
Warning bells
Matariki FM wants better cyclone info
Avoid messing round with a run-off for pm
Reform should include ministries and civil servants
Where is our leader?
Police assurance a huge relief
What’s the rush?
Kia vai rai te noo’anga o Nukuroa
Stick with 24 MPs plus 1
More positives than negatives
Les Priest’s god is the moral law giver
Let’s just sit on our golden egg
Tap’s suggestion ‘horrifying’
Where to now?

Dear Editor,

I am disappointed that Mr Makiuti Tongia chose to use the Police as a ‘political football’ in his letter published on 26 January 2010.

Such comments are in my view irresponsible, misinformed and alarming and portray police as available for use at the “whim” of government or politicians for political purposes including the application of illegal force.

I would like to reassure the community that when it comes to enforcing the laws of our country, the Police will do so independent of the Executive or any other member of the community.

This matter was thoroughly considered in the English Case of R v Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ex parte Blackburn whereby Lord Denning stated that

“...like every constable in the land, he [the Commissioner of Police] should be and is independent of the executive.... No Minister of the Crown can tell him that he must or must not keep observations on this place or that; or that he must or must not prosecute this man or that one... The responsibility for law enforcement lies on him. He is answerable to the law and to the law alone.”

The Common Law position can be summarised as follows:

Police officers hold public office and are not in ordinary parlance servants of the Executive;

In matters of law enforcement, the police exercise an original authority, not one delegated by the Executive;

The Executive have no powers of control over a Police officer’s original authority;

In matters of law enforcement, the Police are answerable to the public through the Courts;

The original authority vested in Police officers in matters of law enforcement are those actions done in obedience to the Common Law and Statute Law.

Mr Tongia mentioned, “...Marurai’s recent antics with 10 police staff as special security for Te Atukura recently is a warning bell and dangerous precedent.”

The decision to deploy police officers to Te Atukura was an operational one made by the Commissioner and not by the Prime Minister.

People must understand that where a breach of the peace is likely to occur anywhere in the Cook Islands, police officers will be deployed to prevent that from happening or apprehend and prosecute those responsible. Operational deployment of police officers are decisions made by the Commissioner without any prompting from anyone including politicians.

Mr Tongia asked the question, “So what is to stop him[Prime Minister] from arming police next time or even this week and ordering them to shoot on sight? Nothing.” The answer to this is simple: It will NOT happen.

The Prime Minister in his capacity as Minister of Police fully understands his position on operational policing matters, and he has not and will not go there. If there is any likelihood of such happening, then under my watch as Commissioner of Police, I will stand firm to the principles stated above.

Maara Tetava

Commissioner of Police

Dear Editor,

Regarding the letter ‘Punish the parents’ in your January 15 edition, it has been my pleasure to volunteer with youth, in many different capacities. I have come to believe, there are no “bad kids”, just a lot of troubled ones.

The lack of adequate parenting is the leading cause of children going astray.

To suggest that the police are allowed to use “a clip around the ears” still condones violence. Violence breeds violence.

In Canada (my home), statistics show putting a first offender through the juvenile justice system, there is an 80% repeat rate. The answer to this is “restorative justice”: 82% of perpetrators who participate in RJ will never re-offend. As a trained RJ facilitator, I have yet to experience a failure.

To succeed, certain factors need to be met:

the police need to be supportive and adopt RJ concepts

the perpetrator must be willing to actively participate

likewise the victim(s)

The benefits: no court time or legal costs, RJ works with volunteers. Both the victim and their supporters are heard, as is the perpetrator and their supporters.

In opening remarks, the facilitator starts by saying to the perpetrator, that the circle is not there to judge them as a good or bad person, only to hear the answers to four sets of questions.

The victim is also asked four set questions.

Then the supporters on both sides are questioned. Watching the perpetrator listen to the victim and then their own parents, is nothing short of astounding. The victim and perpetrator decide together, what restitution and amends will be made.

Restitution is almost always immediate. Amends are kept to a short timeframe for ease of monitoring.

When all have had their say and the terms of a mutual agreement worked out, the facilitator closes the circle and retires to draw up the agreement. At this point there is the breaking of bread, when light refreshments are available.

Every RJ circle I have been involved in, has ended with both the victim and perpetrator hugging each other.

Forgiveness is a wonderful thing, and RJ brings it about.

John Grieve

Holidaying in Rarotonga

Dear Editor,

If, as reported in CINews, the head honcho of the Cook Island Tourism Corporation has thrown in the towel, how is it we have not yet seen an advertisement for his replacement?

Sorry to see you go John, you’ve done lots for CI Tourism, you’ve achieved heaps in a short time.

As it will be a job for the boys, I guess the ad for your replacement will read as follows (with apologies to the Seabed Commissioner’s requirements):

Applicants are invited from unqualified, inexperienced and unmotivated persons.

The successful applicants would ideally have:

- Held appointed positions on local boards and have gotten away with heaps;

-  Held an elected office at some time (Don’t let the fact that you were not re-elected deter you from applying);

- Be fluent in Chinese (Mandarin) and Maori – English is not required as a bevy of translators will be provided;

- Crap communication skills, including public spruking;

- A background in taxi driving, or some other unrelated industry;

- A history of collecting personal air points (or the ability to learn fast);

- A good understanding of Government policies and procedures, and how to beat the system;

- A solution based, proactive attitude with flexibility and ability to slum off in a variety of situations;

-   Be easily led.

- Remuneration and allowances are negotiable (except international air travel, that’s definitely cattle class)

-  Term is for three years, but eligible for reappointment. (Watch out though, don’t buck the system.)

Prospective Araura applicant

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

Mou Piri would like to clarify the position of our group. First we repeat we are nonpolitical.  We especially did not form to support the aims of the Economic Task Force.

We are a group of citizens concerned with our elected politicians continually refusing to act on what was clearly the people’s wishes for political reform, improved governance, reduced party influence and increase transparency.

The 1998 Commission of Review clearly states the wishes of Cook Islanders. It did not request enactment of all suggestions immediately, but a proposed gradual change to an improved system.

Mou Piri does not believe to have all the answers for political reform. The 1998 Commission of Review is a way to begin the process.

Mou Piri does not know what proposals Messrs Short and Crocombe have put to cabinet. We do know that when proposals to limit political tyranny have been raised in the past, both parties and politicians have been unanimous in their decision to ignore them.

We also clearly remember in the last two elections where both parties used the promise of political reform and promised to make changes as soon as elected – nothing that didn’t support their personal agendas has been done.

The PM is approaching the other 19 MPs to support reform. We wish him luck but expect a drawn out debate and we the citizens wait on the sidelines yet again. We urge you to sign our petition to show our MPs that only by supporting reform can they be assured of your support in the next election.

Are the MPs prepared at last to decide to listen to the people who elected them or simply remain out of date and out of time?

Mou Piri

Dear Editor

Mr Tongia, why do you always resort to scaremongering? The PM’s use of the police as a security solution to irate demo tantrums and threats seems a sensible precaution to me.

At least Mr Jim is neither paranoid nor vainglorious like Sir Geoffrey and Sir Terepai that demanded police motor cycle escorts to accompany them on social visits.

As for your comments about arming the police and ordering them to shoot on sight, Puhlease!

I’m beginning to understand why the NZ government didn’t want you in a Cook Islands representative position.

From there your spin really disintegrates –we haven’t had a system that’s worked for a hundred years. We have an unchanged system that has fallen into disrepair over 45 years.

We are NOT the envy of anyone that counts (and I don’t believe “apeing” is a good choice of words for other nations).

Our politicians didn’t “reform” the system from 25 to 24 seats, they just used it to get rid of Joe in a power play.

But YES you’re correct – you haven’t had the political will and coverage to implement change. And YES you haven’t stopped talking about it – at every election time – you just haven’t DONE anything about it, right?

YES, you are correct in saying it’s a financially unsustainable system.

I am however flabbergasted to learn that your view of politics is that we would have to increase the constituency (treating) funds 10 fold to, as you put it, “take care of financial and social obligations to your extended political families”.

You obviously completely miss the whole point of National seats, which is to move away from family/village/island/party pressure politics and give people the chance to vote for who they believe can do a good job for the country without being bribed to do it.

Finally your last paragraph comes close, ‘just prune and cut the nonproductive and old branches of our adopted BUT UN adapted model to give it new growth and purpose’.

I’ll let the readers mark your scorecard!

Roll on Reform

(Name and address supplied)

E Tama,

Eaa tikai te tumu i tiria iai te arataki o te Democratic Party, Sir Terepai Maoate KBE, e te parai minita Marurai mei roto i te cabinet?

Te tumu okotai, kua akara a Marurai ki te ikianga maata e tu mai nei. Te umuumu nei ite taoonga prime minister no te mea kare aia i te arataki. Kare aia i te mema taito no te Democratic Party. E mema mei roto ite First Party, New Alliance Party e te Alliance Party.

Aka’apa ia te arataki Sir Terepai e te toko iti, e kare ona tika’anga kia apai i te kavamani ki roto i te angaanga pitiniti.

Inara, e angaanga pitiniti te angaanga kavamani. Ka oko pa kau te kavamani. E pitiniti tera. Ka tutaki aronga angaanga. E pitiniti tera. Ka akatu apinga ki runga. E pitiniti tera. Ka ruru apinga ki raro. E business tera. Ka kaiou moni. E pitiniti tera. Ka tutaki kaiou. E pitiniti tera.  Ka kimi ravenga no te iti tangata. E pitiniti tera. Eaa i reira te tarevake?

Teia tetai ‘apa mei roto atu i te vaerua o te toko iti chamber of commerce. Kua vareae e kua mataku ko te peke ta ratou ngai angaanga pitiniti i te kavamani.

Koai ra te kavamani? Ko tatou ko te iti tangata Maori e te iti tangata rikiriki. Koai teia e mataku nei ia tatou? Ko te toko iti o te au papa’a o te chamber of commerce.

Aka’apa ia te mou moni, e kare i oora i te tika’anga tender no te au kau taunga-consultants o te peniteni, ki te katoatoa. Inara, e tika’anga to te mou moni ite iki i tana taunga consultant tau te ka matara te angaanga.

Kua maranga te angaanga i tana nga consultants i iki ma te tau e te meitaki.

Aka’apa ia te mou moni no tana upoko koreromotu i papau, e ka pou maata te moni a te iti tangata. Inara kua riro te Upoko Koreromotu i papau ia, ei tiaki paruru e te taporoporo ite moni a te iti tangata. Kare e akapou anga moni maata i tupu.

Aka’apa mai tetai ‘ona kamupani, e kua arai ia aia ite tuku manako ki roto ite uipaanga a te kavamani e te au kau taunga - consultant o te benzene. Inara, kua oronga iana tetai tuatau no te katoatoa ite tuku manako. Kare ra teia kamupani i kiriti i tona manako. Kia topiri te tuatau no te kave manako, te aka’apa ra.

Kare katoa e ture a te kavamani no te akaue ia koe tangata, kia aere ki tana uipaanga, mari me e akava’anga toou. E ture ra tana e, auraka koe kia tomo ki tana uipaanga me kare koe i pati ia. Me kua tarevake au, ka tomo tatou ki te uipaanga cabinet i teia nga ra. Kare ra o tatou tika’anga.

No reira teia kavamani i ringi ei ite akava kia tiaki koropini ia, a Te’atukura. Eaa teia?  Kia  kore tatou iti tangata Maori, e takai ki roto i tana uipaanga. Na tetai tai ngauru akava i tiaki i Te’atukura, kare ra tatou i mangio atu ia ratou. Te akaaroa.

Aka’apa ia te arataki o te Democratic Party, e kare aia i tiki i te manako e te tika a te ruru minita o Marurai. E ‘amo tena.  Teia te tika. Kua oronga te cabinet i to ratou manako, e ta ratou turu, i te ra 7 o Okotopa mataiti 2008, kia akatupu ia te akakoro’anga no te penitini e te inu oko mama.

Ko Marurai te tama akatere ’au o taua uipaanga cabinet ra, tei akatika e tei akamana i te  akapouanga moni na te kavamani. Tuanga 2, Ture 2008/2009. Kua tika ite maata ‘anga ia ratou cabinet.

Uatu teia au mea rikiriki, ka aruaru atu rai ta tatou kavamani Democratic Party kia oko mama te moni o te ‘inu e te penitini. E puapinga teia no tatou pa enua tokerau, pa enua tonga e tatou katoa i Rarotonga nei.

Me mama te oko o te ‘inu e te peniteni, tere te basileia ki mua. Tere te  angaanga pitiniti a te au ravakai, te aronga tanutanu, te aronga tari turoto, aronga akarere pairere, te pai utanga kako, te aronga oko topi teata, topi imene, are oko kai, oko kakau, punanga nui, e te vai atura. Tere maru te basileia ki mua.

Mama mai te tutaki uira a te Aponga Uira no te au ngutuare. Mama mai te oko penitini no te au pereo bus, patikara, toroka, e te motoka o te aronga angaanga ao, angaanga po.

Maru mai te ora’anga no te au metua pakari, no te au taeake pakipaki tai, no te au metua koi moni matiroeroe. Mama mai te oko taramu penitini na te pa enua tokerau ei ranga parau, angai poe, tiki rito e te akari ki runga ite au motu. Mama mai te kimi ravenga no te ngutuare ite angaanga tautai.

I teia ra, te oko nei te pa enua i te penitini e te inu, ki te moni maata. Te oko nei e a taramu benzene ite mataiti no te kimi ravenga kia kaikai te ngutuare. E pou maata teia no te pa enua, e te kite nei te arataki i teia apainga teima’a.

Kua noo ana aia ki rotopu i te iti tangata pa enua tokerau, pa enua tonga. Kua angaanga taote ana ki reira. Kua kite ite ora’anga ngata o te iti tangata pa enua. Kua kimi ra, e te kimi nei rai ite tauturu no ratou e tatou katoa.

Te tuke maata teia ia Sir Terepai. E tangata angaanga e te atinga i tona ora’anga no tatou iti tangata Maori. E tangata mou taoonga no te ture, no te enua e te evangeria. E tavini maroiroi.

Makiuti Tongia.

President Democratic Party

Dear Editor,

For Taraota Tom or anyone else for that matter to claim that the petition on Sunday flights presented a year ago represents the majority of the people on Aitutaki is at best a falsehood and at worse a lie.

The names on the petition were never validated by anyone to see if they really were voting residents of Aitutaki.

It is a FACT that parents wrote the names of their children on the petition, some of whom were too young to read or write. It is a FACT that a teenage girl had her name put on the petition without her knowledge or permission and said she never would have signed it. It is a FACT that people were pressured by their families and orometuas to sign the petition whether they wanted to or not.

So to claim the petition represents the majority of the people of Aitutaki is a joke.

The only way to really find out how the people of Aitutaki feel about Sunday flights is to have a secret ballot.

That way people could vote however they wanted. No one would have the right to tell them how to vote. No one would have the right to ask them how they voted and would never know because the vote would be secret. And even if people felt they had to answer how they voted, they could say whatever they wanted since no one could legally see their ballot.

Taraota and his group in no way speak for the majority of Aitutakians. It’s just wishful thinking on their part.

Referendum supporter

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

I would like to express my views on political reform.

Rather than substantial radical reforms where we are unsure of the exact outcome, I support reform where we are guaranteed to know that the change will benefit the long term interest of the country.

I also support a reduction in the number of MPs in Parliament to justify and reflect the significant decrease in the country’s population. More than happy to see the total number of MPs decrease from 24 to 19.

Of the 12 recommended reforms proposed by Tata Crocombe and Iaveta Short, only five of these merit any serious consideration. These relate to the limiting the term of office for the PM and combining seats. The other seven are simply ridiculous.

But how can both Crocombe and Short be so naive as to believe that adoption of their 12 recommended reforms “...would dramatically move the country forward...”? What compelling evidence do they have to prove or guarantee that such major political change would propel the country forward in leaps and bounds, let alone fix the problems that currently exist?

Simply put, I am not convinced that major political reform will be for the better.

Come to think about it, I believe it is wrong to blame the country’s poor governance on the current political system.

Nothing isreally wrong with the current system asides from the obvious fact that there are far too many MPs for such a small population.

Rather, the finger of blame for the country’s poor governance over the years should really be pointed squarely at those we elect into the system – the MPs themselves.

If our MPs were really honourable, competent people who were genuinely committed to the long term welfare of our small nation, it is likely this country would be better off and the public would not be bitching and moaning about reforming the political system.

Therefore, if we really feel that our current bunch of politicians have failed to manage the affairs of this country in a proper manner, let’s not change the system but bring change to those who are currently in the system.

So rather than wait for our current MPs to decide whether to agree to political reform, perhaps voters should undertake political reform themselves by voting out all those MPs who they believe have failed to live up to their expectations. That way we have the chance to vote into parliament competent people who are genuinely dedicated to doing what’s best for this country.

Sounds too far fetched? I do not believe so. It only takes your vote to make the difference.

Toketoke enua

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

I find it amazing that government wastes so much on advertising for the public to recycle without taking some decisive action on maximising recycling and maximising the lifespan of our solid waste dump.

The simple facts are:

The Rarotonga site is filling up much faster than originally planned. This means in less than 10 years we need to look for another dump site. Lord help us because I cannot think of any land on Rarotonga whose owners will give their land for this purpose.

Recycling is not an option for our small islands it’s a must. So why waste money on promoting voluntary recycling when it should be made mandatory.

This means all households being required, and provided with the proper receptacle, to separate plastics, glassware, organic and other refuge.

Only then should household waste be carted away by the rubbish collectors.

Our rubbish collectors should be made immediately to recycle properly what is already separated by households. And their capacity to collect more recyclables improved considerably.

In NZ supermarkets don’t provide plastic bags free, we should go one better and ban them from the Cook Islands. Our small island environment can’t survive an annual abuse of 4 million plastic bags.

Government is now collecting $2.5 million a year from the airport departure tax. If all this money is spent on our solid waste problem, we should be able to address and rectify our solid waste problem on Rarotonga immediately.

Once again we can see this problem going the same way as so many other problems of the country, too much hot air and very little common sense and decisive action.

Anti-flies

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

Even after one month, Marurai’s illegitimate and minority cabinet has shown its true colours backed up by advisors Short and Crocombe.

Their actions are leading towards anti-parliament by refusing to recall parliament; anti-government by acting out of parliamentary processes; anti-outer islands by proposing to reduce outer islands seats based on emotion rather than proper consultation; anti-MPs by refusing to involve the majority of MPs as stipulated under the constitution of the Cook Islands; anti-democracy by doing things without going back to the people for proper mandate.

They should be properly labelled as the ANTI-PEOPLE MOVEMENT. Their acting out of parliamentary protocol shows a rebellion against the wishes of every citizen in the Cook Islands, a deliberate shift away from the established Westminster model that our forebears had fought to honour for us today.

They are blindfolding the public by hiding behind political reform, knowing full well they cannot do this without the two-thirds majority in parliament. Guess who will have the last laugh!

People, this is a movement designed for the richer to stay richer and us little people to stay lower and poorer. Remember the old saying, “when money comes through the door love goes out through the window”. Guess who is showing real leadership these days by travelling overseas to negotiate, not Marurai?

Yes you guessed it, the advisors are already grooming themselves for prime ministership before the general election. Marurai, your days are numbered from all counts.

Salient Observer

(Name and address supplied)

Tap Pryor speaks out with a warning that nodule exploration is in jeopardy. 09031902

Forget seabed mining if cabinet ‘chickens out’

Dear Editor,

You know better than anyone how many anonymous letters I have written to Cook Islands News in support of the Marurai Government of Five. Now I want to come out of the closet to say that the Five are about to kill the nodule opportunity.

While boasting of a commitment to transparency, they are killing it secretly and for totally nonsensical reasons.

Here are the facts. The last government passed seabed minerals legislation, but the Five have not even called the Executive Council to make it into law. Why? Because they have no intention of signing an exploration licence before the September election.

The PM and the Deputy PM (who is also Minister for Natural Resources) say behind closed doors that there’s no appropriation to proceed and, since they cannot call parliament in session, they cannot obtain funds under the MFEM Act to proceed. However, the fact is that no appropriation is required. None!

The QR needs to sign the legislation into law (no cost). The solicitor general can in a day create a seabed authority (no cost). The next day the minister for natural resources can name himself acting commissioner (no cost). Next, the acting commissioner can name the required advisory board who can serve voluntarily (no cost).

With all that done at no cost, the minister can sign an exploration licence and receive – not spend – a million or so dollars on that day.

As soon as the cyclone season is over, an exploration vessel will arrive, dock in Avatiu harbour and hold open house for the public to come aboard to see the equipment that will suck up nodule samples from 6000 metres depth. Then, the vessel will go out to sample for a few months before going home while the samples are being studied.

Can anyone tell me the harm in allowing that to happen? If the exploration company decides not to proceed, the information gained belongs to us. If they like what they find, they will return for a mining licence in 24 to 36 months from now.

Once the nodules have been recovered, processed and sold on a commercial scale, the Cook Islands Government will receive an estimated $300 million a year of new revenue or three times the 2009-2010 budget. A third of that will be royalty, a third taxes on the mining company (which will be a local company to allow such taxation) and a third from income taxes from all the new employment. There are said to be enough nodules for that to continue for 500 years.

How many realise that there have been three previous explorations of our seabed by Russian, Japanese and American research vessels? No legislation was in place. Permission was given, but no fee was charged and all information gathered was passed on to us to add to our seabed knowledge. The only difference today is that those paying for the exploration have a commercial motive.

Horrors! Instead of putting the results in books, they actually would harvest relatively small amounts per year of what’s down there and sell the copper, cobalt, nickel and manganese that results. Horrors! That would make the Cook Islands independently wealthy before 2020. Horrors! We would have unlimited scholarships for our children. Horrors! We could have medical services equal or better than the best anywhere. Horrors! We would have no debt and could become instead a donor nation. Horrors! Most of the jobs would go to Cook Islanders, inducing many to return from overseas.

Let’s say that the Five meet this week and chicken out as their spokesperson tells me they will.

Forget seabed mining! There is one company, Endeavour, with the cajones to take a $30 million dollar look at the possibility and to invest a billion dollars if they like what they find.

But, the former government has jerked them around since December 2006, so if the Five do that this week, it will be the last straw and the Canadians will go somewhere else.

Seventeen years ago, Sir Geoffrey invited the great engineering company, Bechtel Corporation, to look at the possibility of harvesting nodules, but metal prices were not quite high enough. After spending $1.0 million, Bechtel declined. I’m virtually certain that, if the Five refuse Endeavour the right to explore now, it will be another 17 years before another company cares to look. Is that what you want?

Tap Pryor

Former co-director of

the Bechtel study

Dear Editor,

In regards to this new tourism marketing group formed by Tata Crocombe and Greg Stanaway, both break the law in so many ways and we’re still listening to them.

They’re both are not paying Saturday or Sunday penal rates and clearly they both expect their employees to work for minimum wage yet we’re still expected to pay for our staff meals.

To Greg Stanaway, of all people, you should know in tourism in New Zealand and Australia most hotels give out complimentary meals and drinks to ALL STAFF.

And the pay rates here in the Cook Islands are truly appalling with little training and upskilling – what upskillng?

To Tata Crocombe, all workers working over 40 hours plus, even if it’s 60 or 80 hours, still only get a flat rate, straight across the board.

Both you Mr Crocombe and Mr Stanaway know that tourism is a 24 hour operation and you both still believe you can contribute more to this economy by screwing Cook Islanders, Fijians, Indians and Filipinos.

Clearly this tourism group is only going to benefit those on it.

What I find so disturbing with these two is the fact that they’ve ran these hotels for as long as they have and the majority of their employees in high positions are all papaa.

Why? Why? Why? My argument is this: the majority of Cook Islands are Cook Islanders. If you want us to listen to you two, then you should make all your HODs be none other than Cook Islanders.

Put our people first because I can tell you now your words are falling on deaf ears.

You both need to put changes in place to your hotels before thinking you can contribute to the rest of the nation.

We, the Cook Islands people, will listen but first listen to us.

Albert Tini

Dear Editor,

In the early 1970s, it came on the radio that the Premier would be making an important announcement in two days’ time. I remember that at 7:00 on the night, my parents and aunties and us kids all gathered around the radio to hear what it was about.

He came on and said in Maori that there was something valuable found on the bottom of our ocean that would someday make this nation very rich. I was only 9 or 10 years old, but it seems like yesterday.

He said, “Kua kitea ia te tai apinga puapinga i raro it to tutou moana te ka riro i te akapuapinga i to tatoa patireia.” He said a lot more of course, but that’s what I remember.

I wonder what Papa Arapati would say today when government is still dragging its feet. I’m sure he would make it happen.

Kia Toa

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

Through all the political squabbling we see continual reference to the 1998 Commission of Political Review. That report showed clearly what the Cook Islands people wanted in detail, however the government of the time and subsequent governments ignored virtually all of its findings.

So please explain, CIP and Demo executives, why can’t you read it carefully and then propose your own platform for reform for the public to see. Face it, the facts and all the recommendations are there in front of you. Then present it at the upcoming public meeting.

Following this, although I find it rather a stretch of the imagination, how about a conference (that the public could observe) where both parties could debate your differences and resolve them to the point where both parties could agree to one common binding programme for the post election government to guarantee to implement.

Such a bipartisan conference for reform should be run on a parliamentary basis with all MPs required to attend, party members allowed to vote by their conscience, with a vote to finalise the document.

We appreciate that not all suggestions for change could necessarily be achieved at once but it should be possible to include some of the most important changes that the majority of Cook Islanders clearly want, and at the same time create an electoral commission to provide a method for future changes.

Right now a referendum would be pointless as there are far too many options being bandied around and whoever writes the referendum questions simply in a practical sense couldn’t accommodate all the options people desire.

So step up and be counted, you were elected to be policy makers, you have your advisers and caucus and executive to advise you, you both keep repeating you represent the people, well the people’s wishes are clearly defined in the 1998 report and obviously are still very much the same today, just far less of us!

By doing this you could reassure the public of your commitment to their wishes, defuse the political firestorm we are in and move on to an election where the reform legislation is in place to be enacted at the first sitting of parliament.

If absolutely necessary, the joint agreement could be presented to the people in referendum form to gain their majority approval prior to the election.

No more excuses please, show us your policy skills.

It would be an advantage to everyone also to make copies of the 1998 report available to the public for them to be able to follow the process.

Grandfather of 15

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

The time has come for Prime Minister Marurai to give the real people the opportunity to show their support for his decisive action in removing former DPM Maoate – who is an arrogant man. I am a voter in his electorate and do not wish to be included as ‘one of my people’ thank you.

Surely those attempting to displace PM Marurai have felt the tide of public opinion over the Toa fiasco and the continual overseas jaunts by former cabinet ministers and their HOM servants.

Now we learn that the three ministers who resigned will continue to receive their ministerial salaries for another three months. What a dreadful waste of public money so desperately needed elsewhere. Come on koe, Aunty Mau, Tangata, Kete – tell the public that you will not accept this ‘windfall’, do the right thing.

As for the so called group of concerned MPs made up of CIP and disgruntled Demos – what a bunch of failures, all looking for a turn at the feeding trough. Enough is enough, it is time for the people to speak.

Come on PM, call the bluff of these arrogant geriatric MPs and call a snap election.

Call for each candidate to declare their position on political reform, Toagate etc.

Many of the current bunch seeking to remove Jim are the same people who deliberately chose not to reply to the last survey put to them by Cook Islands News – again such arrogance to the people who put them there and pay for their salaries and perks.

I for one am convinced that given the chance by way of a snap election the people will act, vote in people of real integrity and get rid of those arrogant old cronies of the former DPM and those ineffective Demo and opposition MPs – when did we hear anything of substance from the likes of [silent] members Tupa, Nicholas, Rua, Eggleton and Tangi.

Another forlorn hope is for both CITV and Radio together with Cook Islands News to recruit some proactive reporting staff who will go after the real news of the day and put these members’ on the spot rather than rely on media spin generated by highly paid ministerial support staff including closet journalists.

Just Another Voter

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

I have been following the political turmoil of our fair island of late. The team in right now, excellent choice!

But beware PM of who you surround yourself with. I’m no angel but these guys make me look like a choir boy.

Surrounding yourself with the rich and successful won’t mean they will give you the best advice. In fact, they are no different to the politicians trying to oust you – self serving, greedy, profiteering, egomaniacal cretans.

To be rich and successful, the best trait to possess is greed. These guys have it in bucketfuls. This trait is the driver of the current recession. All fair in the private sector, however the government platform should be one that allows any willing and able citizen to succeed in his/her chosen field, not be repressed by legislation created by the ‘experts’ you surround yourself with.

The voting public should have a big say in the reform process by way of a referendum.

Whatever you do PM, do not trust these guys.

The mess in the land courts is partly their doing. Snake in the grass, keep them away from the pen and paper mate, they’ll have you stitched up in a jiffy.

To the other MPs, go hard, you all know what you got to do, my best wishes for the ‘new future’.

As always, hold your head high, a skip in your step, a smile on your dial, and always remember,

Bob’s your Uncle

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

Matariki FM agrees with your smoke signaller’s comment in the Cook Islands News of Friday January 29 that “we need standards and protocols for anyone on air at a time like this”, referring to the recent cyclone warnings.

However, we suggest the signaller is unaware that at times of cyclone warnings or tsunami warnings, the only person who can authorise and release official information in respect to cyclones, tsunami or any disaster is the Police Commissioner.

The bulletins received from the Meteorological Service at Matariki FM are technically written and very difficult to unravel let alone translate into Cook Islands. Matariki FM has its own in-house standards and policy which is based on the New Zealand Broadcasting Standards and Radio Diversity Hand Book.

The staff at Matariki FM are not meteorologists but we do the best we can to inform the public. Iva Eitiare and I have 20 years combined broadcasting experience and were both board members on Wellington Access Radio and runner up in the New Zealand Radio Awards 2003.

Furthermore, Matariki FM is professional in its dissemination of information and invites the signaller to join the Matariki FM team for future broadcasts of the kind referred to in the Smoke Signal, on the assumption that he or she is a professional.

Tropical Cyclone Nisha was the first cyclone but the third natural emergency broadcast Matariki FM has been involved with; the previous two being the tsunamis of Samoa and Vanuatu last year as well as the Emergency Management Cook Islands (EMCI) drill held in April 2009.

In every emergency operation broadcast Matariki FM has been involved with, including cyclone Nisha, Matariki FM has constructively raised its concerns and frustrations with the responsible authority.

The issues are lack of intercommunications between government agencies and broadcasters, technically written bulletins received by broadcasters, bulletins written in English only, lack of or too much information, and uncertainty of frequency and timing of information dissemination.

Matariki FM did not receive all the Special Weather Bulletins (SWB) and nor did it receive one single phone call from the Meteorological Service for broadcast.

In an email sent to EMCI on Thursday January 28, I said Matariki FM were unhappy with the inconsistent dissemination of and technically written SWBs. SWB 1 arrived two and half hours late, SWB 4 was exactly the same as SWB 3, SWB 5 arrived at the same time as SWB 6 and SWB 8 did not arrive at all.

The email also mentioned that Matariki FM did not want to be responsible for giving the wrong information and secondly Matariki FM did not want to broadcast second hand information.

William Framhein

Matariki FM

A smoke signaller writes: “Two of the proposed political reforms are about the election of the prime minister. One is that the PM should be voted for directly, the other that person coming top in the national MP election should be PM if he/she gets 50 percent of the vote. If not there’s a run-off. Time consuming. It’s possible that not everyone wants to be PM (unlikely but possible) so the two options could be combined. Say three people are standing for PM (Jim, Pai and Norm) and another seven for national MPs. Part a) lists the 3 candidates for PM. Part b) lists all ten candidates including Jim, Pai and Norm. In part a) you select the person you want to be PM. In part b) you select the other people you want to be national MPs. That way the losing PM candidates can still be national MPs and you don’t have to mess around with a run-off.”

12 MPs, 3 YEAR TERM

With regards to the growing discussion over the number of members of parliament our small country really needs, one reader suggests this option: Penrhyn 1, Manihiki 1, Rakahanga 1, Pukapuka/Nassau 1, Atiu 1, Mauke 1, Mitiaro 1, Mangaia 1, Aitutaki 1, Rarotonga 3 (one seat per vaka, with Palmerston included under Te Au O Tonga). Total 12 MPs. Simple and effective, and each island gets its own member as before. Democracy is seen to be done. This also cuts the number of MPs down to half the current number. Sure, some of the voting or population numbers don’t stack up, but everyone gets representation. Term of office from four years down to three. The term as prime minister limited to two terms. One of the proposals from Tata Crocombe and Iaveta Short, such as the newly formed and permanent ‘Boundary or Gerrymander’ Commission, would not be required under the scenario shown above. Its inclusion would cause incredible problems in the future, and lend itself to much ‘influence’ to obtain certain results.”

MP CUT WOULD FUND SHIP

“Recent calculations show that by reducing the number of MPs with all their expenses from 24 to 15 would save enough money to buy a purpose-built ship suitable to provide passenger and cargo service on a regular basis to the outer islands,” a signaller says. “Now I ask those from the outer islands, would you rather hang on to your MP or have regular boat service and the chance for tourist development? Let’s look at it – they have been promising a boat for how many years now? Apologies to Tapi but we’re talking a real ship, you know, cabins, toilets, showers and with a current certificate of seaworthiness etc.”

CANDIDATES’ VIEWS WANTED

One of our readers writes: “Rumour around the rock is that an action group is being formed to confront each politician with a list of specific questions to find out their personal attitude toward political reform – which they all say they support of course. If they refuse the interview, well we’ll know what that means...their answers, when published in the newspaper, should interest the voters.

INSIDE THE TOURISM REPORT

A signaller writes: “Tata Crocombe’s state of the nation – oops I mean tourism – report was interesting in what it omitted. For example, where were the thanks to CI Tourism and John Dean for doing the work that increased the number of visitors to our shores? And who has been talking with the airlines to increase the number of flights? Tata? I don’t think so. He’s been too busy being a chairman and setting up committees of ‘key players’ (does that mean his mates?). It sounds like empire building but don’t forget that Tata is a businessman, owner of the Rarotongan Resort, and what’s good for the Rarotongan is not necessarily what’s good for the rest of the country.”

Keep the smokies rolling in! Smoke Signals will be accepted by e-mail (smokesignals@cookislandsnews.com), text to 188 or a phone call to the newsroom on 22999.

Dear Editor,

The current talk about electoral reform focuses on MPs and voting systems, mostly variants of the US and British system. It may be that with the Pacific culture, a more consensus-seeking system would suit the Cook Islands better.

Transparency International, an NGO focusing on governance issues, reported that together with NZ and Sweden, Denmark consistently scores the highest in the reports on transparency and accountability. There is a high degree of public satisfaction with its own people with the political institutions, and 85% voter turnout at elections.

In Denmark, there is a constitutional monarchy with proportional representation and legislative power is vested in government and the Parliament. The difference is that the political parties are all small so they have to co-operate, with many parliamentary committees that see draft legislation fully explained and negotiated, so when it goes to Parliament most of the consultation has already been done.

On a recent tour by a Koutu Nui group of the Southern Group Islands and the three vaka of Rarotonga (funded by UNESCO), there were calls for more responsiveness from MPs and for more of a say on legislation BEFORE it gets passed. .

While I agree that reducing MPs in some of the smaller electorates is good, but it is not only about saving money. Fair representation is also an important part of democratic government.

The Danish system copes with the imbalance between large population in the capital and less-populated regions by having larger electorates in the capital and smaller electorates in the outlying areas. This might suit the similar imbalance we have between Rarotonga and the Outer Islands.

It is also felt that there should be a residence requirement e.g. to have lived in the electorate for three months since the last election.

We should remember that government is not just parliament – it is also the civil servants that make up the ministries.

I think that for reforms we need to at both parliament AND the government ministries and their staff.

Outer island officials were glum about the way that outer island budgets prepared by island admin-istrations are slashed by MFEM in Rarotonga, without explanation. They would like more meaningful devolution so that outer islanders decide on how money should be spent on their island.

Outer islanders called for more fairness, i.e. neutral treatment by staff at government departments, so we need to shine the spotlight on our civil servants and whether they comply with the MFEM Act.

The Audit Office appears to be under-funded and yet the 2008 Report by Transparency International stresses the importance of strengthening oversight and accountability in keeping down corruption.

There needs to be oversight at the lowest level so that there is proper authorisation of works orders for government expenditure by an authorised person within their delegated authority.

The other factor that the same report stresses is law enforcement. Many Cook Islanders feel that if a civil servant acts beyond their authority, they should be subject to serious penalty rather than suspension on full pay.

Fair Representation

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

Excuses! Excuses! Excuses!

That’s all I read in the paper these days and hear from the Prime Minister, the Demo party, including the CIP.

No PROACTIVE responses, just reactive, pathetic, negative, finger pointing, passing the blame excuses.

I have followed the reports on the Toagate Scandal and found it unbelievably amazing that the Prime Minister did not know about this. Who is the leader here?Then I read about the merger between the CIP and Demo MPs – shockingly disgusting and more excuses.

Today, I read with interest Papa Tap’s letter and the report on the seabed minerals and again, am unbelievably amazed at the Prime Minister’s response. Again I ask, Who is the leader here?

Unfortunately, in my view, the problems we, the burdened taxpayers are facing, are due to the lack of leadership.

The reactive responses by our Prime Minister and his advisors have proven that they have let the circumstances shape us, instead of proactively adjusting the circumstance to positively conform to our needs.

The seabed minerals are a perfect example. Here is an opportunity for all Cook Islanders to benefit from. Why are we not pursuing this vigorously?

Again I ask, WHERE IS OUR LEADER?

Papa Tap’s letter was very informative on this matter, unlike the media release from the Prime Minister’s office in today’s paper. Endeavour, come free us from our debt, I pray.

Burdened Taxpayer

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

It is comforting to know that the police commissioner will stand firm to the principles of good law and that he will protect the interests of the public  from those in executive power who may choose to break the law and vice versa.

That’s a huge relief and sends a very strong reassuring message to the public. The court cases that he quoted add credence to his official stance and are very enlightening, educational, encouraging and convincing.

It adds to the integrity of the man himself and the police force under his command. So meitaki maata for reassuring me and the public.

Thank you also to the letter writer, Roll on Reform. We may not agree on certain issues of political reform and or political overhaul. But I have no problem with the differences of opinion. And I forgive you for your personal attacks and congratulate you for sharing your views on political reform. Meitaki maata.

As to the prime minister passing the buck of political reform delay, to the 2007 cabinet, well I disagree with him. I remember clearly his comments to the Democratic Party central executive in our morning meetings with him in 2007/2008.

He basically said that political reform was a matter of good timing and 2007/2008 was too early a time to push for it. He felt that 2010 as election year would be the best time to take advantage of it. We disagreed. Nevertheless, meitaki maata for pushing it three years later, today.

Meitaki maata to Kata. Thank you. Kia orana e kia manuia.

Pumaana te ngakau i te kite anga e, ka mou marie te pu maata o te akava ite ture ei paruru no tatou katoatoa.

Aiteite ua te aronga nunui mei te aronga rikiriki i mua i te mata o te ture. Mataora toku ngakau i teia pakari tei rauka i teia taeake.

Kua tau katoa tana au ture i oora mai ei kaveinga paruru i tona turanga e to tatou katoa, ki tana angaanga akava.

Ka riro teia ei topiri mai i te irinaki o te iti tangata ki roto i to ratou au akava kia rave i te mea tau, e i te umuumu kia riro ratou ei paruru meitaki no te basileia. Meitaki maata.

Meitaki maata katoa kia Roll on reform, uatu kare i aite to taua manako no te akatuke e te akaou ite akatere anga kavamani.

Kare oku manamanata no reira. Ko te mea maata kua oora ia te manako ki te atea e te akameitaki nei  i toou au manako uatu taau akakino iaku.

No runga i te prime minister e pari nei  ite taroaroa o te reform ki te ruru cabinet o te mataiti 2007, kare au e ariki. Maara iaku ta matou tuatua me uipa te central executive o te Democratic Party ki roto i tona opati ite au popongi mei te mataiti 2007 ki te mataiti 2008 no teia tumu manako o te akaou ‘anga e te akatuke ’anga akatere kavamani.

Kua arai mai aia no te mea kare i tau te tuatau i nana ei, mari kia tae ki nga marama o te mataiti ikianga o te 2010, ka akaara mai ei, kia akara anga meitaki tana kavamani. Kare matou i ariki ki tona manako.

Uatu ra teia, kia akameitaki ia  teia oora ‘anga manako i teia ra. Te Atua te aroa.

Kia orana e kia manuia.

Ei basileia kakara.

Makiuti Tongia

President Democratic Party

Dear Editor,

Over the past month, there’s been so much publicity about political reform. But since Marurai and his cabinet have been in power, it’s all been ballyhoo about political reform to cover the real truth.

The fact is Marurai and his cohorts have been brainwashed to reform in order to clear the political road for the ‘advisers’ to Marurai’s crowd – those who find it impossible to win political seats through the proper electoral process.

Political reform should be treated seriously and that takes time. There’s no need to rush through it, as long as the whole population is properly consulted. This is definitely not the case.

The simple question should be to ask all constituencies as to whether they are prepared to give up their constituency rather than leaving it to some power-crazy dinosaurs on Rarotonga to decide. Manihiki and Rakahanga are disgusted along with Mitiaro and Mauke, Atiu, Aitutaki and Mangaia.

They are all dead against the reform for the simple reason – take note Marurai and your advisers.

The outer islands are where the most needs are, economic and social, and where the political representative is most needed.

These national seats are one big joke. This is a formula for the well-to-do to gain power to exercise domination over the poor majority. Back to the old days when only the few and rich conquer while the mass suffers.

Watch out, these are the modern day Hitlers, Stalins and Mussolinis of the Cook Islands in disguise.

The Silent One

(Name and address supplied)

E Tama,

Kia orana i te aroa nui o to tatou metua Atua,

E kura patianga mei roto atu i te au pu tokotoko e tamarumaru nei ia Nukuroa enua e pera te aronga mana o te enua, te au upoko inaina e tae rava atu ki te unga ma te potiki,

i te patoi pakari atu i te tamanako’anga tei akanoonoo ia ki roto i te atikara numero 11 o te political reform e kia kapiti ia e tai (1) tuanga ikianga o Mitiaro e Mauke, e kia riro e okotai o raua vaa araara ki roto i te are amani ture o to tatou ipukarea.

Manako nui o teia kura tei akakeukeu ia e te taokotai’anga o te enua tangata ki roto i te uipaanga enua, ra 22 o Tianuare 2010.

1. Patoi anga i te tamanako’anga, e kia kapiti ia e tai (1) no’o’anga ikianga no Mitiaro e Mauke; 2. Kia tipu ia mai tetai no’o’anga mei roto i te tuanga noonga ikiianga o te basileia (national seat) e kia vai rai to Nukuroa Enua tuanga ikiianga nona anake rai.

Meitaki nui, te Atua te aroa.

Na Frederick Tereva, Konitara Tutara, Nukuroa Konitara Enua; Temaeu Teikamata Ariki, Po Tetava Ariki, Kauono Tou Ariki

Dear Editor

Recently MPs have been the target of unfair criticisms – too many, over-paid, under-worked etc. People moan about having far too many MPs.

Niue has a population of just over a 1000 with 22 MPs. We have 15,000 with only 24 MPs, so what’s the big fuss!

New Zealand went through their parliamentary restructuring and guess what, they actually increased the numbers of MPs instead.

In 1965 we had 22 MPs with a national operating budget of $2 million, now our annual appropriation has increased 70-fold to $140 million with only 24 MPs.

Have we ever sat back a moment and learned from our past? I see nothing wrong with the current status, let’s maintain it, but let Palmerston have its own MP to bring the number to 25.

Already tourists to the Cook Islands have reached the incredible 100,000 mark, and there are more to come.

We have now increasing migrant/contract workers in our workforce. Expect more Cook Islanders particularly in the older age group, preparing to return for good.

While we focus on our declining population, we failed to realise the increasing number of foreigners/papa’a arriving and marrying our locals, and yet we want to reduce MPs – the ‘makers and controllers’ of our laws.

How can we be sure when the carpet doesn’t get pulled from under our feet in years to come?

It took the New Zealand Maori 150 years to realise the mistake in allowing for foreign domination.

Are we going to repeat such painful experience for our mokopuna to suffer?

Maintain or increase our MPs for a safer and Cook Island-controlled future.

Be Warned

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

My wife and I vacationed in Rarotonga and Aitutaki two years ago spending a week on each island.

Our two-week vacation contributed much to the local economy.

We will be celebrating our 25th wedding anniversary in April and we have decided to return. But we’ll be visiting only Rarotonga this time, staying at the Crown Beach Resort despite several negative concerns about Rarotonga (not the resort which is first class all the way).  Admittedly we were apprehensive due to poor sanitation (the infestation of flies) and the surge of crime with tourists being targeted in the area, even on-site at the resorts. We thought about, and really wanted to go to the outer islands, but inconvenient flight schedules, very high prices and the lack of proper tourist infrastructures made us change our minds.  So after looking at the positives and negatives on returning to the Cook Islands, we decided to return. There were more positives than negatives.  The positives were primarily the people who are genuinely warm and friendly and Rarotonga is a beautiful place to vacation and to just relax. There is a wide selection of fine places to visit and to eat (though the prices at some culinary establishments are inexcusably excessive) and there are many beautiful places to explore and enjoy.

But please, keep your criminals locked up and do your utmost to control the infestation. If not, then this may be our last visit to the Cooks.

Ron Heckman

Morgan, Utah, USA

Dear Editor,

I’m replying to a letter by Les Priest “Is God too busy?”

Les comes across as an atheist but confusingly he also comes across as an agnostic by his “if” and “I imagine” remarks about God and evilness.

Les’s personal belief “that there is no God” is inconsistent with known knowledge and human experience.

Many may be intrigued to know how the power of prayers work, e.g. The scientific journal “Southern Medical Journal” (Vol. 81, No. 7 July 1988) printed an article on a double blind study of the Positive Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer in a Coronary Care Unit Population at San Francisco General hospital in which those who were prayed upon were statistically better.

Specific answered prayers are one of the most powerful experiences that convict a Christian of God’s existence.

Les inadvertently also exposes his serious lack in both theological and philosophical religious knowledge which are two disciplines that deal with the issue of God, by his crude generalisation dand lack of basic knowledge to make distinctions between the Christian God specifically Jesus who occupied time-space dimension history versus the other mythical gods.

If he does not agree that all the other gods apart from the Judeo Christian God are mythical then on what rationale or condition does he say otherwise?

Does Les know the general consensus of what scholars (including sceptics) agree on or concede to, concerning the historicity, death and resurrection of Christ, eg Hans Conzelmann (German), Gerd Ldemann (French), Francis Durrwell (English), Dr Gary Habermass etc by combing through the over 1400 sources published on the subject.

Has he found the answers that higher critics stumble with when examining the accuracy of Bible prophecy (Daniel 2 & 7, Revelation 13 & 17, Mathew 21, Luke 21 etc) lending credence to the fact that God exist out of time.

To say there is no God because there is evil in the world is a second order question since Les needs to posit the existence of God in order to ask this question.

May I ask how does he distinguish between what is evil and good just as the moral laws of God? Can he justify his judgment on what is evil or not since he has no standard in which he can identify evil?

Les agrees that there is evil and so knows there is good as well. So if there is good and also evil, then he must agree that there must be moral laws so as to distinguish between good and evil. And if there are moral laws so as to distinguish between good and evil, then there must be a moral law giver, for if there is no moral law giver then there will not be any moral laws. And if there are no moral laws then there is no good, and if there is no good then there’s no evil. Then what is Les real question?

I conclude that God is good for I know His plans, plans to prosper, thoughts of peace and not evil. Where Christ the Light of the world dwells, darkness vanishes.

Kenny Valoa

Sydney

Dear Editor,

I make reference to the letter in your newspaper the other day from ol’ papa Tap Pryor who appears desperate for this government to urgently proceed with the exploration of the country’s manganese nodules as soon as possible.

The way I see things, if the value of the minerals contained in these deep-sea nodules are expected to sky-rocket once these very minerals become increasingly scarce over time, why the urgency for government to sell both the exploration and mining rights immediately?

Would it not make better sense to hold off – 10 to 20 years – before we begin to even contemplate exploiting the manganese nodules in our EEZ?

That way we are in a far better position to negotiate with multinational mining companies in order to maximise the revenue earned from this exploitation.

And contrary to Tap’s views, if there is a global demand for these nodules sometime in future, you can be guaranteed that a number of reputable mining companies will be scrambling to secure lucrative contracts from the government of the time for the right to mine our country’s manganese nodules.

Seriously, you do not have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the longer we wait to extract the nodules, the greater the value of these nodules and the cheaper it becomes to exploit as a result of advanced mining/extraction technology.

Just as important, the more advanced the mining technology the greater the chance that the pollution caused from the extraction process will be minimised, thus preventing harm to both the many fish species that thrive in our wonderful seas and our fragile islands.

Although I would love to see this country earn, as soon as possible, hundreds of millions of dollars a year from the mining of these nodules and for the people of this country, including myself, to grow wealthier, I would much rather prefer to be patient and wait until such time that we can optimise the revenue earned from the exploitation of our manganese nodules.

And if this means sitting on our golden nodules egg for another 20 to 50 years then so be it.

Rather than be greedy, I’m more than willing to leave it to my children or their children to make the decision whether or not mining companies should be allowed to exploit these manganese nodules.

Toketoke enua

(Name and address supplied)

Dear Editor,

Tap Pryor has concerns about the ‘nodule opportunity’ he sees as about to be killed by the government and states that no appropriation of funds is required to pass and implement the seabed mining legislation and for the minister to sign an exploration licence.

What a horrifying thought that is!

The objectives of the Seabed Minerals Bill are to establish a legal framework for the efficient management of seabed minerals in the Cook Islands and to ensure that any mining is carried out in a manner that is consistent with international accepted rules and standards.

It is also to promote transparency in decision making related to seabed mining and to implement measures to maximise the benefits of seabed mining for present and future generations.

The bodies need to be set up, the processes need to be put in place before any licences, permits or titles of any kind can be issued.

The environment, the sea is extremely important to me and my descendants. The sea feeds us and nourishes us every day.

Before any person or company is permitted by the Cook Islands government to commence with deep seabed mining, as a Cook Islander I want to know what processes they will be using to extract the minerals from the seabed and how they plan on disposing of unwanted tailings.

I want to know what impact the mining will have on our seabed and the surrounding environment and what other mining experience they have previously had and the impact environmentally they made.

Any mining company or body should have answers to these questions.

The Cook Islands should be learning from other countries before we proceed with issuing any permits.

Instead of always looking at the money and what we are missing out on, we should be ensuring that irreparable and long term damage is not done to what we already have.

Marie Francis

Dear Editor,

It seems that the short honeymoon for Marurai and his cabinet is already at stalemate.

No new initiatives except they’re back-pedaling and going over ideas and initiatives already thought of by the Demo government.

This little team is already exhausted as they no longer have the insight to think outside the square.

In your paper of Tuesday February 2, acting mineral and natural resource minister Marurai along with Rasmussen met and discussed the seabed minerals with their central agencies committee made up of Ivaiti, Epati, Elikana, and Mokoroa.

None of them, including Marurai and Rasmussen, hardly knows anything about seabed minerals. None were involved in the lengthy discussions with the Commonwealth Secretariat.

There was a seabed mining select committee tasked to consult widely before its final recommendations to parliament. This committee was well informed and dedicated.

At least involve Junior Maoate, chairman of the select committee, and Tap Pryor ,an eminent marine biologist, to provide informed advice.

Where to now with the seabed mining, Marurai?

Lost Nodule

(Name and address supplied)

Index | Photo Gallery | Memory Lane | Cooks Info | FAQs | Subscribe | About Us