Heritage laws

Hey Moxie,

Saw your post on the other board on this subject, we down here have unfortunately had such a law inflicted on us recently and it is already causing problems due to its short sighted and rediculous wording. As with alot of legislation lately an amendment to our "Protected Objects Act 1975" was hurried and not well thought out. Check out (4) below

F Register(1) The chief executive must establish and maintain a register of objects, or categories of objects, of national significance.

(2) The register—

(a) must include (but is not limited to) any protected New Zealand object in respect of which the chief executive has refused to grant an application for permission to export; and

(b) may include any protected New Zealand object—

(i) that its owner submits for inclusion in the register; and

(ii) that is of such significance to New Zealand or part of New Zealand that its export from New Zealand would substantially diminish New Zealand's cultural heritage.

(3) An object may only be removed from the register if it no longer meets the criteria specified in subsection (2).

(4) The register is not available for public inspection.

Sections 7A to 7H were inserted, as from 1 November 2006, by section 10 Protected Objects Amendment Act 2006 (2006 No 37).

Beautifully vague huh. In translation "we might put your stuff on a register but you can't check the register to see if we have."

I have had it on good authority that one of the definitions that warrants inclusion on this register is "aircraft of a type flown by the Royal New Zealand Airforce (RNZAF)" also aircraft or parts over 65 years old.

I don't think I need to tell you how this has negative potential on NZs expanding restoration industry.

If you are wondering why I am posting here and not where you bought up the subject, it's because a couple of years ago I was accused very nastelly (off the board) by one of of the old boy network pommy gits about how I was deluded and mistaken about the identity of an aircraft that
I have worked on! (and I have to admit my skin is not as thick as yours) and after seeing other people being treated the same way I decided I could not be bothered with that sh*t. (But I will admit it has been better recently.)

PS this is the mental image I have of the above-mentioned pommy git.

Hi Hairy,

Thanks for the post what is very interesting about the thread is only one person Tom has engaged in debate yes JDK has put up his remarks and Bruce is starting to be part of the discussion but where is all those folks who are for this huh.

As for NZ yea I've yet to post that I was hoping someone Downunder would, could you put it up I ask you because your part of the scene down their and like you said know it first hand. As for the Pommy I wouldn't worry about him or any of the Plan-Talk Birds since I called them out over some stuff they have been rather timid, it seems that after there beloved leader Steve Patterson was found to be a well lets just say not such a nice person after all. I don't think you will have any trouble from them beside Bruce is on our side when it comes to them anyway.

So I'm asking as a fellow nutt case could you please post it in the thread I think it will stir the discussion up a tad because right now its been down right civil.

I see you just could not wait, could you.

Just one correction, the phrase is ...of a type used by the RNZAF which means that the specific a/c does not have to have RNZAF history but the aircraft type did i.e ALL Tiger Moths. Also it is all a/c and parts over 65 years old.

Geez I might just have to start flamin' ya.
Now I suppose I have to go over there and make the above correction.

PS. Whats the story with Mr. Patterson, all I know is that he suddenly just dropped off the boards and all his 'planes ended up at Courtesy.
He didn't seem a bad bloke when I met him.
PM if nessasary

PPS. check your PMs.