7

Cullen thinks "Indigenous Peoples" has no meaning

by Whaleoil on February 20, 2008


New Zealand Parliament – 11. Terrorism Suppression Act—Government Conduct

Cullen answered a question in parliament today and said;

“…what one might call, indigenous peoples—a term, of course, that has no meaning…”

I can’t believe that he actually said it, but there it is in the transcripts of parliament, in black and white. It is undeniable that he said it. What is worse is that he said it on behalf of the Prime Minister. When another minister answers on behalf that is exactly the same the actual minister uttering the words.

Now we know why Clark refused to front at Waitangi. She simply thinks that indigenous peoples has no meaning. There goes her attempts at reconciliation with Maori, and the Maori party in particular.

She via Cullen has shown the contempt Labour shows Maori as the indigenous people of Aoteroa-New Zealand.

Labour should be looking quickly to replace Clark and Cullen before all respectability evaporates. With racist attitudes like that they have no right to govern

Tagged: • • •

Related posts

  • michaels

    And that comment if picked up, should be way bigger than the Glenn scandal.
    He and Klark should tender their resignation immediately.
    But who too?? Goff??
    They don’t seem to know who’s in charge so maybe they should pack their bags and leave a note on their desks.
    To whom it may concern…………

  • Lindsay

    Imagine the state of apoplexy Clark and co would be in if Key had made that statement!!

  • mojo

    ‘Indigenous’ is of manifold meaning and largely these days portrays the notion simply of a more advanced culture, or way of living, predominating (the awful word, ‘colonisation’) over a less advanced or more primitive one. Lauding such ‘indigenous cultural life’ has resulted in a retrenchment in perceived/contrived culture which arguably has done a disservice to society as a whole in creating that ‘victim, you owe me’ mentality.
    Mischievous, this time, Whale Oil, mischievous.

  • JC

    Naughty. Here is the context:

    “Dr Pita Sharples: Will the Minister be reconsidering New Zealand’s stand to oppose the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, given that the foreign affairs Minister of the new Australian Labor Government is consulting stakeholders with a view to reversing Australia’s opposition to the declaration; if not, why not?

    Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: We have no such plans at present, as I have explained to the House before. A large number of the countries that voted for that declaration have no, what one might call, indigenous peoples—a term, of course, that has no meaning in a country, say, like the United Kingdom. Some of those countries voted for the declaration made it quite clear they had no intention of implementing it should any issues arise. The countries that voted against the declaration shared two features: first, they have indigenous populations; and, second, they carry out obligations when they sign up to them.”

    Try not to emulate the Labour hacks please.

    JC

  • Whaleoil

    Duh,c check the tags on the post….S A T I R E spells satire.

  • Dave

    Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: We have no such plans at present, as I have explained to the House before. A large number of the countries that voted for that declaration have no, what one might call, indigenous peoples—a term, of course, that has no meaning in a country, say, like the United Kingdom

    Thats what he said. He didnt refer to New Zealand.Someone should ask him whether the term indigenous peoples has meaning in this country.

  • michaels

    SMACK FUCKING SMACK FUCKING SLAP SLAP SLAP IN THE FACE OF LABOUR…
    OH WHAT A BEAUTIFUL WEEK IT IS EVEN IF NONE OF YOU BASTARDS WANT TO GIVE ME A JOB.

    Smacking ban petition has reached its target
    Thu, 21 Feb 2008 08:06p.m.

    Organisers of a petition against the law that bans smacking will announce tomorrow they have gathered enough signatures to force a citizens-initiated referendum.

    The petition will be handed to Parliament at the end of this month to meet the March 1 deadline.

    After that all the signatures will be checked to make sure they are valid.

    One of the organisers, Kiwi Party leader Larry Baldock, told NZPA last Friday another 5000 signatures were needed to reach the 300,000 target.

    Tonight he said more than 6000 had been gathered since then.

    “We will be announcing a really surprising figure,” he said.

    Parliament passed the bill that outlaws smacking as a punishment in May last year, and within weeks opponents started organising the petition against it.

    The petition asks: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?” and “Should the Government give urgent priority to understanding and addressing the wider causes of family breakdown, family violence and child abuse in New Zealand?”

    The result of a referendum, which will be held at the same time as the election if the petition is successful, will not be binding on the Government.

    To force a referendum, the petition must be signed by 10 percent of registered voters – 285,019, as of tonight.

    That figure has been exceeded, but the problem is that many signatures are almost certainly going to be declared invalid during the checking process.

    More than 60,000 signatures were declared invalid in a petition on sentencing laws that was presented in 1999.

    Mr Baldock said tonight he expected to lose between 10 percent and 15 percent, so collecting was still going on.