We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark for the role of UN Secretary General.time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it is vital to
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations requires strong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many pressures from
those that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the environment. Indeed – the leadership required will be of the kind that holds true
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them.
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was PM, and many decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set us far back
from achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined.
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to present her
have a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area.
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New Zealand Maori and Pacific peoples, under her “Closing the Gaps” policy. After winningcondemned by a number of UN human rights officials and rapporteurs.
the election all references to this policy were dropped from official documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark’s government (1997-2008) the >“gaps” in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and violent invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included the
lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from their beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and >interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in balaclavas brandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for hours on
end with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular event has been
Many families remain traumatised by this event, and it was acknowledged to have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.of Indigenous People’s. New Zealand was one of only four nations that
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single largest land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005 Foreshore and >Seabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, and is regarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental >Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a discriminatory law and a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so controversial
that it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament, where Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted in the >formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact that Helen Clark’s party, under pressure from competing interests, could not care for
the interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration for the Rights
voted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in favour. Clark’s government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable andclimate change, supported continued coal production and refused to make
incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative arrangements. This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in
parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate Change with the strongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its implementation New >Zealand’s emissions have increased, and we now have one of the fastest rates of emission increase in the world. Helen Clark’s government refused to
commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong leadership on
NZ’s agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG emissions in NZ) responsible for their emissions.intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera River “Black
That, in the time of Helen Clark’s leadership, New Zealand’s freshwater crisis
Drain”, where legislation intended to protect our environment was amended by Helen Clark’s government to allow the continued intensive pollution of
this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall freshwater quality declined significantly between 1998 – 2007, the period of Helen >Clark’s term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that would tackle climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our oceans, protect >natural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen Clark’s government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying for the legacy >of this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe environmental challenges we have ever faced.
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark’s tendency to cater to the establishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which would be >disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative decision-making. >We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong leader, one committed to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights. Clark’s
clear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and indigenous people, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that you DO
NOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
https://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com> wrote:requires
BR <buggeroff@spammer.com> wrote:
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:39:41 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark for the >>>role of UN Secretary General.
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations
holdsstrong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many pressures from >>>those that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the >>>environment. Indeed - the leadership required will be of the kind that
backtrue
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them.
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was PM, and >>>many decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set us far
tofrom achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined.
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to present >>>her time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it is vital
Maorihave a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area.
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New Zealand
theand Pacific peoples, under her "Closing the Gaps" policy. After winning >>>the election all references to this policy were dropped from official >>>documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark's government (1997-2008)
balaclavas"gaps" in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and violent >>>invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included the >>>lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from their >>>beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and >>>interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in
lawbrandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for hours on >>>end with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular event has >>>been condemned by a number of UN human rights officials and rapporteurs. >>>Many families remain traumatised by this event, and it was acknowledged to >>>have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single largest >>>land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005 Foreshore and >>>Seabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, and is >>>regarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental >>>Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a discriminatory
thatand a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so controversial >>>that it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament, where >>>Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted in the >>>formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact that Helen >>>Clark's party, under pressure from competing interests, could not care for >>>the interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration for the >>>Rights of Indigenous People's. New Zealand was one of only four nations
thevoted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in favour. >>>Clark's government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable and >>>incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative arrangements. >>>This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in >>>parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate Change with
ratesstrongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its implementation New >>>Zealand's emissions have increased, and we now have one of the fastest
leadershipof emission increase in the world. Helen Clark's government refused to >>>commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong
"Blackon climate change, supported continued coal production and refused to make >>>NZ's agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG emissions in NZ) >>>responsible for their emissions.
That, in the time of Helen Clark's leadership, New Zealand's freshwater >>>crisis intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera River
byDrain", where legislation intended to protect our environment was amended
protectHelen Clark's government to allow the continued intensive pollution of >>>this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall freshwater >>>quality declined significantly between 1998 - 2007, the period of Helen >>>Clark's term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that would >>>tackle climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our oceans,
legacynatural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen Clark's >>>government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying for the
indigenousof this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe >>>environmental challenges we have ever faced.
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark's tendency to cater to the >>>establishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which would be >>>disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative >>>decision-making.
We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong leader, one >>>committed to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights. Clark's >>>clear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and
sheThat aside I think she would actually be very good at the job - not becauseShe fits perfectly into the UN, AKA Useless Nations. She's a career >bureaucratpeople, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that you DO >>>NOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
https://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
I don't want to see a nasty socialist like Clark in charge of
anything, but most of the above is complete horseshit.
Bill.
would be in a position to assist this country but because I believe she isone
of those that believe there should not be vetoes which have emasculated theUN.
Tony
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:39:41 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>of UN Secretary General.
wrote:
We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark for the role
decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set us far back
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations requires strong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many pressures from
those that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the environment. Indeed – the leadership required will be of the kind that holds true
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them.
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was PM, and many
climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our oceans, protect >>natural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen Clark’s government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying for the legacy >>of this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe environmental challenges we have ever faced.from achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined.
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to present her time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it is vital to >>have a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area.
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New Zealand Maori and Pacific peoples, under her “Closing the Gaps” policy. After winning
the election all references to this policy were dropped from official documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark’s government (1997-2008) the >>“gaps” in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and violent invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included the >>lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from their beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and >>interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in balaclavas brandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for hours on
end with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular event has been condemned by a number of UN human rights officials and rapporteurs.
Many families remain traumatised by this event, and it was acknowledged to have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single largest land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005 Foreshore and >>Seabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, and is regarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental >>Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a discriminatory law and a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so controversial
that it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament, where Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted in the >>formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact that Helen Clark’s party, under pressure from competing interests, could not care for >>the interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration for the Rights of Indigenous People’s. New Zealand was one of only four nations that >>voted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in favour. Clark’s government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable and >>incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative arrangements. This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in
parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate Change with the strongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its implementation New >>Zealand’s emissions have increased, and we now have one of the fastest rates of emission increase in the world. Helen Clark’s government refused to
commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong leadership on climate change, supported continued coal production and refused to make >>NZ’s agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG emissions in NZ) responsible for their emissions.
That, in the time of Helen Clark’s leadership, New Zealand’s freshwater crisis intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera River “Black >>Drain”, where legislation intended to protect our environment was amended by Helen Clark’s government to allow the continued intensive pollution of
this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall freshwater quality declined significantly between 1998 – 2007, the period of Helen >>Clark’s term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that would tackle
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark’s tendency to cater to the establishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which would be >>disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative decision-making.
We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong leader, one committed to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights. Clark’s >>clear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and indigenous people, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that you DO
NOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
https://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
I don't want to see a nasty socialist like Clark in charge ofShe fits perfectly into the UN, AKA Useless Nations. She's a career bureaucrat
anything, but most of the above is complete horseshit.
Bill.
BR <buggeroff@spammer.com> wrote:That aside I think she would actually be very good at the job - not because she would be in a position to assist this country but because I believe she is one of those that believe there should not be vetoes which have emasculated the UN. Tony
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:39:41 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>She fits perfectly into the UN, AKA Useless Nations. She's a career >bureaucrat
wrote:
We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark for the >>>role of UN Secretary General.
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations requires >>>strong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many pressures from >>>those that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the >>>environment. Indeed – the leadership required will be of the kind that holds >>>true
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them.
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was PM, and >>>many decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set us far back >>>from achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined.
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to present >>>her time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it is vital to >>>have a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area.
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New Zealand Maori >>>and Pacific peoples, under her “Closing the Gaps” policy. After winning >>>the election all references to this policy were dropped from official >>>documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark’s government (1997-2008) the
“gaps” in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and violent >>>invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included the >>>lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from their >>>beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and >>>interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in balaclavas >>>brandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for hours on >>>end with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular event has >>>been condemned by a number of UN human rights officials and rapporteurs. >>>Many families remain traumatised by this event, and it was acknowledged to >>>have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single largest >>>land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005 Foreshore and >>>Seabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, and is >>>regarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental >>>Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a discriminatory law >>>and a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so controversial >>>that it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament, where >>>Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted in the >>>formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact that Helen >>>Clark’s party, under pressure from competing interests, could not care for >>>the interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration for the >>>Rights of Indigenous People’s. New Zealand was one of only four nations that >>>voted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in favour. >>>Clark’s government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable and >>>incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative arrangements. >>>This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in >>>parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate Change with the >>>strongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its implementation New >>>Zealand’s emissions have increased, and we now have one of the fastest rates >>>of emission increase in the world. Helen Clark’s government refused to >>>commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong leadership >>>on climate change, supported continued coal production and refused to make >>>NZ’s agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG emissions in NZ) >>>responsible for their emissions.
That, in the time of Helen Clark’s leadership, New Zealand’s freshwater >>>crisis intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera River “Black >>>Drain”, where legislation intended to protect our environment was amended by >>>Helen Clark’s government to allow the continued intensive pollution of >>>this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall freshwater >>>quality declined significantly between 1998 – 2007, the period of Helen >>>Clark’s term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that would >>>tackle climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our oceans, protect
natural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen Clark’s >>>government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying for the legacy
of this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe >>>environmental challenges we have ever faced.
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark’s tendency to cater to the >>>establishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which would be >>>disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative >>>decision-making.
We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong leader, one >>>committed to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights. Clark’s >>>clear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and indigenous >>>people, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that you DO >>>NOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
https://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
I don't want to see a nasty socialist like Clark in charge of
anything, but most of the above is complete horseshit.
Bill.
On Tuesday, 19 April 2016 09:12:41 UTC+12, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote:Agreed and I have always admired her skill - anybody that could organise the last labour government into something approaching a cohesive team has to have enormous skill. Good luck to her.
Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
BR <buggeroff@spammer.com> wrote:That aside I think she would actually be very good at the job - not because >>she
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:39:41 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark for the >> >>>role of UN Secretary General.
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations
requires
strong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many pressures from >> >>>those that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the
environment. Indeed - the leadership required will be of the kind that
holds
true
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them.
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was PM, and >> >>>many decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set us far >> >>>back
from achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined.
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to
present
her time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it is vital >> >>>to
have a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area.
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New Zealand
Maori
and Pacific peoples, under her "Closing the Gaps" policy. After winning >> >>>the election all references to this policy were dropped from official
documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark's government
(1997-2008) the
"gaps" in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and
violent
invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included the
lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from
their
beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and
interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in
balaclavas
brandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for hours on >> >>>end with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular event has >> >>>been condemned by a number of UN human rights officials and rapporteurs. >> >>>Many families remain traumatised by this event, and it was acknowledged >> >>>to
have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single
largest
land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005 Foreshore and >> >>>Seabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, and is >> >>>regarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental >> >>>Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a discriminatory >> >>>law
and a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so controversial >> >>>that it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament,
where
Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted in the
formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact that Helen >> >>>Clark's party, under pressure from competing interests, could not care for
the interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration for the >> >>>Rights of Indigenous People's. New Zealand was one of only four nations >> >>>that
voted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in favour. >> >>>Clark's government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable and
incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative
arrangements.
This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in
parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate Change with >> >>>the
strongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its implementation New >> >>>Zealand's emissions have increased, and we now have one of the fastest
rates
of emission increase in the world. Helen Clark's government refused to
commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong
leadership
on climate change, supported continued coal production and refused to make
NZ's agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG emissions in
NZ)
responsible for their emissions.
That, in the time of Helen Clark's leadership, New Zealand's freshwater >> >>>crisis intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera River
"Black
Drain", where legislation intended to protect our environment was amended >> >>>by
Helen Clark's government to allow the continued intensive pollution of
this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall
freshwater
quality declined significantly between 1998 - 2007, the period of Helen >> >>>Clark's term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that would
tackle climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our oceans,
protect
natural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen Clark's
government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying for the >> >>>legacy
of this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe
environmental challenges we have ever faced.
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark's tendency to cater to the >> >>>establishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which would be
disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative
decision-making.
We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong leader, one >> >>>committed to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights. Clark's >> >>>clear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and
indigenous
people, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that you DO >> >>>NOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
She fits perfectly into the UN, AKA Useless Nations. She's a careerhttps://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
I don't want to see a nasty socialist like Clark in charge of
anything, but most of the above is complete horseshit.
Bill.
bureaucrat
would be in a position to assist this country but because I believe she is >>one
of those that believe there should not be vetoes which have emasculated the >>UN.
Tony
Also I suspect Clark is not the type to be sucked into the rampant corruption >around the UN.
On 19/04/2016 9:23 a.m., Tony wrote:the
JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 April 2016 09:12:41 UTC+12, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote: >>> Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
BR <buggeroff@spammer.com> wrote:
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:39:41 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark for
fromrole of UN Secretary General.
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations >>>>>> requires
strong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many pressures
andthose that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the >>>>>> environment. Indeed - the leadership required will be of the kind that >>>>>> holds
true
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them. >>>>>>
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was PM,
farmany decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set us
vitalback
from achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined. >>>>>>
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to >>>>>> present
her time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it is
winningto
have a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area. >>>>>>
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New Zealand >>>>>> Maori
and Pacific peoples, under her "Closing the Gaps" policy. After
onthe election all references to this policy were dropped from official >>>>>> documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark's government
(1997-2008) the
"gaps" in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and >>>>>> violent
invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included the >>>>>> lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from >>>>>> their
beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and >>>>>> interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in >>>>>> balaclavas
brandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for hours
hasend with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular event
rapporteurs.been condemned by a number of UN human rights officials and
acknowledgedMany families remain traumatised by this event, and it was
andto
have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single >>>>>> largest
land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005 Foreshore
isSeabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, and
Fundamentalregarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and
discriminatoryFreedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a
controversiallaw
and a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so
Helenthat it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament, >>>>>> where
Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted in the >>>>>> formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact that
forClark's party, under pressure from competing interests, could not care
thethe interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration for
nationsRights of Indigenous People's. New Zealand was one of only four
favour.that
voted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in
withClark's government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable and >>>>>> incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative
arrangements.
This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in >>>>>> parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate Change
Newthe
strongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its implementation
makeZealand's emissions have increased, and we now have one of the fastest >>>>>> rates
of emission increase in the world. Helen Clark's government refused to >>>>>> commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong >>>>>> leadership
on climate change, supported continued coal production and refused to
freshwaterNZ's agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG emissions in >>>>>> NZ)
responsible for their emissions.
That, in the time of Helen Clark's leadership, New Zealand's
amendedcrisis intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera River >>>>>> "Black
Drain", where legislation intended to protect our environment was
Helenby
Helen Clark's government to allow the continued intensive pollution of >>>>>> this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall
freshwater
quality declined significantly between 1998 - 2007, the period of
theClark's term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that would >>>>>> tackle climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our oceans, >>>>>> protect
natural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen Clark's >>>>>> government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying for
thelegacy
of this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe >>>>>> environmental challenges we have ever faced.
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark's tendency to cater to
oneestablishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which would be >>>>>> disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative
decision-making.
We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong leader,
Clark'scommitted to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights.
DOclear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and >>>>>> indigenous
people, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that you
becauseThat aside I think she would actually be very good at the job - notNOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
She fits perfectly into the UN, AKA Useless Nations. She's a career >>>> bureaucrathttps://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
I don't want to see a nasty socialist like Clark in charge of
anything, but most of the above is complete horseshit.
Bill.
isshe
would be in a position to assist this country but because I believe she
theone
of those that believe there should not be vetoes which have emasculated
corruptionUN.
Tony
Also I suspect Clark is not the type to be sucked into the rampant
thearound the UN.Agreed and I have always admired her skill - anybody that could organise
havelast labour government into something approaching a cohesive team has to
enormous skill. Good luck to her.
Tony
Anyway if it's not her it will be someone else.
On Tuesday, 19 April 2016 13:44:26 UTC+12, Fred wrote:
On 19/04/2016 9:23 a.m., Tony wrote:
Anyway if it's not her it will be someone else.
So they say... Russia will insist on an Eastern European.
So we'll get a Bulgarian instead of a vulgarian.
JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 April 2016 09:12:41 UTC+12, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote: >>> Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com> wrote:Agreed and I have always admired her skill - anybody that could organise the last labour government into something approaching a cohesive team has to have enormous skill. Good luck to her.
BR <buggeroff@spammer.com> wrote:That aside I think she would actually be very good at the job - not because >>> she
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:39:41 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark for the >>>>>> role of UN Secretary General.
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations >>>>>> requires
strong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many pressures from >>>>>> those that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the >>>>>> environment. Indeed - the leadership required will be of the kind that >>>>>> holds
true
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them.
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was PM, and >>>>>> many decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set us far >>>>>> back
from achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined.
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to >>>>>> present
her time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it is vital >>>>>> to
have a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area.
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New Zealand >>>>>> Maori
and Pacific peoples, under her "Closing the Gaps" policy. After winning >>>>>> the election all references to this policy were dropped from official >>>>>> documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark's government
(1997-2008) the
"gaps" in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and >>>>>> violent
invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included the >>>>>> lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from >>>>>> their
beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and >>>>>> interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in
balaclavas
brandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for hours on >>>>>> end with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular event has
been condemned by a number of UN human rights officials and rapporteurs. >>>>>> Many families remain traumatised by this event, and it was acknowledged >>>>>> to
have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single >>>>>> largest
land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005 Foreshore and >>>>>> Seabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, and is >>>>>> regarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a discriminatory >>>>>> law
and a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so controversial >>>>>> that it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament, >>>>>> where
Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted in the >>>>>> formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact that Helen >>>>>> Clark's party, under pressure from competing interests, could not care for
the interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration for the >>>>>> Rights of Indigenous People's. New Zealand was one of only four nations >>>>>> that
voted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in favour. >>>>>> Clark's government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable and
incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative
arrangements.
This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in
parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate Change with >>>>>> the
strongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its implementation New >>>>>> Zealand's emissions have increased, and we now have one of the fastest >>>>>> rates
of emission increase in the world. Helen Clark's government refused to >>>>>> commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong
leadership
on climate change, supported continued coal production and refused to make
NZ's agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG emissions in >>>>>> NZ)
responsible for their emissions.
That, in the time of Helen Clark's leadership, New Zealand's freshwater >>>>>> crisis intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera River >>>>>> "Black
Drain", where legislation intended to protect our environment was amended
by
Helen Clark's government to allow the continued intensive pollution of >>>>>> this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall
freshwater
quality declined significantly between 1998 - 2007, the period of Helen >>>>>> Clark's term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that would >>>>>> tackle climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our oceans, >>>>>> protect
natural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen Clark's >>>>>> government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying for the >>>>>> legacy
of this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe
environmental challenges we have ever faced.
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark's tendency to cater to the >>>>>> establishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which would be >>>>>> disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative
decision-making.
We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong leader, one
committed to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights. Clark's >>>>>> clear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and
indigenous
people, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that you DO >>>>>> NOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
She fits perfectly into the UN, AKA Useless Nations. She's a careerhttps://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
I don't want to see a nasty socialist like Clark in charge of
anything, but most of the above is complete horseshit.
Bill.
bureaucrat
would be in a position to assist this country but because I believe she is >>> one
of those that believe there should not be vetoes which have emasculated the >>> UN.
Tony
Also I suspect Clark is not the type to be sucked into the rampant corruption
around the UN.
Tony
On 4/19/2016 1:46 PM, JohnO wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 April 2016 13:44:26 UTC+12, Fred wrote:
On 19/04/2016 9:23 a.m., Tony wrote:
Anyway if it's not her it will be someone else.
So they say... Russia will insist on an Eastern European.
So we'll get a Bulgarian instead of a vulgarian.
The way she shot through here when she lost the election
is enough for me to expect it back here when she loses there
On 19/04/2016 9:23 a.m., Tony wrote:It'll be a socialist no matter who gets the job Clark imo would be good
JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> wrote:Anyway if it's not her it will be someone else.
On Tuesday, 19 April 2016 09:12:41 UTC+12, nor...@googlegroups.comAgreed and I have always admired her skill - anybody that could
wrote:
Mutlley <mutley2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
BR <buggeroff@spammer.com> wrote:That aside I think she would actually be very good at the job - not
On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 23:39:41 +1200, Liberty <liberty48@live.com>
wrote:
We the undersigned strongly oppose the nomination of Helen Clark >>>>>>> for the
role of UN Secretary General.
The world stands at a historical precipice, and the United Nations >>>>>>> requires
strong, bold leadership that will not buckle to the many
pressures from
those that stand to benefit from continued abuse of people and the >>>>>>> environment. Indeed - the leadership required will be of the kind >>>>>>> that
holds
true
to the identified goals and cannot be swayed from achieving them. >>>>>>>
Helen Clark came under just this type of pressure whilst she was >>>>>>> PM, and
many decisions were then made that, at a global level, would set >>>>>>> us far
back
from achieving the many important goals that the UN has defined. >>>>>>>
Although Helen Clark, and indeed this government, will be swift to >>>>>>> present
her time as Prime Minister as a valuable credential, we feel it
is vital
to
have a full, robust assessment of her track record in this area. >>>>>>>
In particular we wish to highlight the following:
That Helen Clark came into power on promises of equity for New
Zealand
Maori
and Pacific peoples, under her "Closing the Gaps" policy. After
winning
the election all references to this policy were dropped from
official
documentation, and during the term of Helen Clark's government
(1997-2008) the
"gaps" in social outcomes actually increased.
That Helen Clark authorised the sustained illegal surveillance and >>>>>>> violent
invasion of Maori homes around the country in 2007. This included >>>>>>> the
lockdown of the entire community of Ruatoki. Families were torn from >>>>>>> their
beds, marched from their homes, forced to the ground, searched and >>>>>>> interrogated at gunpoint. A schoolbus was boarded with police in >>>>>>> balaclavas
brandishing automatic firearms. Children were kept in sheds for
hours on
end with no food, water, or access to a toilet. This particular
event has
been condemned by a number of UN human rights officials and
rapporteurs.
Many families remain traumatised by this event, and it was
acknowledged
to
have set race relations within NZ back by 100 years.
That in her time as Prime Minister, Helen Clark oversaw the single >>>>>>> largest
land dispossession event of modern times, through the 2005
Foreshore and
Seabed Act. This act alienated 10 million hectares of Maori land, >>>>>>> and is
regarded by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights and
Fundamental
Freedoms of Indigenous Peoples Professor Stavenhagen as a
discriminatory
law
and a breach of the human rights of Maori. This act was so
controversial
that it resulted in 50,000 people marching in protest to parliament, >>>>>>> where
Helen Clark refused to come out to meet them, and also resulted
in the
formation of a new political party in recognition of the fact
that Helen
Clark's party, under pressure from competing interests, could not >>>>>>> care for
the interests of indigenous people.
That Helen Clark refused to sign the United Nations Declaration
for the
Rights of Indigenous People's. New Zealand was one of only four
nations
that
voted against the agreement, of which 144 other nations voted in >>>>>>> favour.
Clark's government labelled UNDRIP divisive, un-implementable and >>>>>>> incompatible with New Zealand constitutional and legislative
arrangements.
This document remained unsigned for the remainder of her time in >>>>>>> parliament.
That Helen Clark responded to the dire emergency of Climate
Change with
the
strongly criticised Emissions Trade Scheme. Since its
implementation New
Zealand's emissions have increased, and we now have one of the
fastest
rates
of emission increase in the world. Helen Clark's government
refused to
commit to a significant number of the policies needed for strong >>>>>>> leadership
on climate change, supported continued coal production and
refused to make
NZ's agricultural sector (responsible for the largest GHG
emissions in
NZ)
responsible for their emissions.
That, in the time of Helen Clark's leadership, New Zealand's
freshwater
crisis intensified, characterised by cases such as the Tarawera
River
"Black
Drain", where legislation intended to protect our environment was >>>>>>> amended
by
Helen Clark's government to allow the continued intensive
pollution of
this river. Nationally, studies have confirmed that our overall
freshwater
quality declined significantly between 1998 - 2007, the period of >>>>>>> Helen
Clark's term as Prime Minister.
When surveyed on their willingness to commit to 25 policies that >>>>>>> would
tackle climate change, clean up New Zealand's rivers, save our
oceans,
protect
natural heritage and exercise environmental leadership, Helen
Clark's
government refused to make clear commitments, and we are paying
for the
legacy
of this conservative approach today, with some of the most severe >>>>>>> environmental challenges we have ever faced.
These cases are clear examples of Helen Clark's tendency to cater >>>>>>> to the
establishment, and lead conservative levels of change, which
would be
disastrous when we live in times that demand bold, innovative
decision-making.
We believe the role of UN General Secretary requires a strong
leader, one
committed to issues such as environmental and indigenous rights. >>>>>>> Clark's
clear inability to champion the wellbeing of the environment, and >>>>>>> indigenous
people, makes her unsuitable for this role. We therefore ask that >>>>>>> you DO
NOT support her bid for the role of General Secretary.
This petition will be delivered to:
She fits perfectly into the UN, AKA Useless Nations. She's a career >>>>> bureaucrathttps://www.change.org/p/united-nations-helen-clark-is-not-a-suitable-candidate-for-un-secretary-general
I don't want to see a nasty socialist like Clark in charge of
anything, but most of the above is complete horseshit.
Bill.
because
she
would be in a position to assist this country but because I believe
she is
one
of those that believe there should not be vetoes which have
emasculated the
UN.
Tony
Also I suspect Clark is not the type to be sucked into the rampant
corruption
around the UN.
organise the
last labour government into something approaching a cohesive team has
to have
enormous skill. Good luck to her.
Tony
On 4/19/2016 1:46 PM, JohnO wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 April 2016 13:44:26 UTC+12, Fred wrote:
On 19/04/2016 9:23 a.m., Tony wrote:
The way she shot through here when she lost the electionAnyway if it's not her it will be someone else.
So they say... Russia will insist on an Eastern European.
So we'll get a Bulgarian instead of a vulgarian.
is enough for me to expect it back here when she loses there
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 37:57:46 |
| Calls: | 2,096 |
| Files: | 11,142 |
| Messages: | 949,843 |