Waitangi Tribunal

All of Little’s good work undone by ‘courageous’ pandering to Maori

Andrew Little, ably assisted by a compliant media, has supposedly built up his cred to better proportions than the previous leaders since Clark.

The claims though were specious and come from people who should know better were just plain wrong.

Whatever level of acceptance Andrew Little had managed to claw his way to, though, has been destroyed by his interest in exploring Maori making their own laws…kind of a Maori sharia proposal.

Labour leader Andrew Little has proposed looking at giving Maori greater self-governance, possibly including the ability to make some of their own laws.

Mr Little made the comments yesterday, referring to a Waitangi Tribunal finding last year that Northland Maori did not cede their sovereignty when signing the Treaty.

Prime Minister John Key was criticised by elders at Waitangi for dismissing that report. Mr Little said the Waitangi Tribunal report found Maori should be able to make their own laws on matters affecting them. While that would be “highly problematic” he said it should be looked at.

Mr Little acknowledged it could concern some New Zealanders. “The fear is always that these things turn into a ‘they are getting special privilege’ or ‘they are getting a control we would never be able to have’. We have to be sensitive to that, but we’ve also got to understand for iwi now and those who have had their settlements and developed their own economic base, there are some things we might want to say they can be responsible for that is consistent with historical obligations.”

He said it was time to look at what would happen after the settlements were completed.

He said some Native American tribes had law-making powers over their territories in the United States where recognised tribes were exempt from some laws – including taxation – and could create their own laws in many areas. Mr Little said allowing separate law-making was “highly problematic”.

“But we shouldn’t be so dismissive of any claim by iwi over what they do. We do have to function as a nation-state and we don’t want to compromise that. But let’s have a look at it.”

Mr Key said allowing some iwi the ability to make their own law would be “divisive” and he did not support the suggestion.

Read more »

David Hone Heke Rankin on the Waitangi Tribunal and the entire Treaty gravy train

It may surprise many New Zealanders, but a growing number of Maori are fed up with the Waitangi Tribunal, and the entire Treaty gravy train. There is a stereotype of Maori collecting millions of dollars in settlement money and living the easy life. The reality is very different. Here are a few facts:

1. The Tribunal makes up history as it goes along. A growing number of New Zealand historians are pointing this out, although most of them are labelled as racist for doing so. Facts are omitted in Tribunal reports, and evidence is shaped in some cases to fit predetermined outcomes. As an example, I gave evidence at a Tribunal hearing about my ancestor Hone Heke, the first chief to sign the Treaty. However, because the oral history of our whanau did not fit with the Tribunal’s narrative, my testimony was excluded. Yet, several radicals with little knowledge of our history had their testimony included because it fitted with the separatist agenda. This leads to point 2.

2. In the 1970s, many of us hoped that the Tribunal would be an organisation that would achieve reconciliation. It has turned out to be a body that is bringing in apartheid to New Zealand. This sounds dramatic, until you see how it advocates for race-based access to certain areas, and race-based management policies for Crown land.   Read more »

Trotter on John Key’s history lesson

Chris Trotter isn’t taking the lefty stance of mocking John Key’s version of history after the stupid Waitangi Tribunal decision.

THE PRIME MINISTER, John Key, has been much mocked over the past week for his claim that New Zealand was settled peacefully. Hoots of derision have echoed through the Twittersphere from those who profess to know their New Zealand history a great deal better than the Prime Minister.

Are they right? Is Mr Key wrong?

It might help to place the Prime Minister’s comments in context. His remarks followed the Waitangi Tribunal finding that the tribal chieftains of the far-North did not cede sovereignty to the British Crown when they signed the Treaty of Waitangi on 6 February 1840.

This finding is considerably more controversial than anything the Prime Minister decided to offer by way of commentary. The Auckland-based historian, Paul Moon, has already derided the Tribunal’s historical conclusions, and his intervention is unlikely to be the last.

The tribunal’s decision will likely be ignored.

A crucial element of the settled view is that the Maori chieftains who signed the Treaty, many of whom had enjoyed long and mutually beneficial relationships with the Europeans who had taken up residence in New Zealand since Cook’s exploratory voyages of the late eighteenth century, knew exactly what they were agreeing to at Waitangi on 6 February 1840.

Captain William Hobson was guaranteeing them the inviolability of their traditional territories and the safety of their people. In the light of what had befallen the iwi and hapu of Niu Tirani (New Zealand) between 1769 and 1840, the existential value of these guarantees is readily appreciated.

The indigenous population of these islands at the time of first European contact is estimated at 100,000. Between 1800 and 1830 as many as 30,000 Maori were killed and/or driven from their traditional lands by enemy iwi and hapu armed with the devastating military technology of the Pakeha. The protection of Queen Victoria (symbolising the world’s most powerful nation) was what they needed. Hobson offered it. The chiefs grabbed it with both hands.    Read more »

David Rankin on the Waitangi Tribunal decision

Today the Waitangi tribunal tried to rewrite law by issuing their decision that that Maori chiefs who signed the Treaty of Waitangi did not cede sovereignty.

Shortly thereafter David Rankin of Ngapuhi issued a press release:

Iwi leader says Tribunal ignored testimony and defames his ancestor

The Ngapuhi leader David Rankin (a descendent of the nineteenth century warrior chief Hone Heke) says that the Waitangi Tribunal report on Maori sovereignty, which is released today, defames his famous ancestor.

Mr Rankin gave evidence at a Waitangi Tribunal hearing which led to this report.  His testimony included details of the oral history of the treaty signing and how the rangatira [chiefs] at the time regarded political developments that were occurring:

“When our tupuna, Hone Heke, signed the Treaty of Waitangi, he did so because he know it was the only option in terms of having a relationship with the British Crown.  But the tribunal is now telling us that all those chiefs saw the Declaration of Independence, which a few had signed in 1835, as being the basis of their relationship with the British.  That is a lie and that is not what the tribunal was told.

Mr Rankin says the Tribunal report defames the memory of Hone Heke, and of his whanau’s oral histories, and that if the tribunal refuses to alter the report to reflect the testimony he provided at the hearing, he will lodge a Treaty claim against the tribunal itself, which will be a first in Treaty history, for prejudicial effect.

On top of that Paul Moon, a notable historian has also come out saying much the same thing.  Read more »

Rodney Hide on The Cunliffe

Rodney Hide discusses The Cunliffe and his apology culture at the NBR:

David Cunliffe didn’t misspeak in apologising for being a man. Far from it. His apology is what core Labour philosophy demands. Mr Cunliffe should also be apologising for being white, rich and heterosexual.

It’s now deep Labour Party madness that your colour, wealth, sex and sexual orientation dictate your views and your politics. You think you reason and choose but it’s illusory. Your class and group define and rule you.

It gets worse. You are also responsible for all the other members of your group and this collective responsibility travels mysteriously down through the generations. Hence the Waitangi Tribunal.

As a white, wealthy and educated man, Mr Cunliffe has much to be sorry for. He can’t escape his pigeonhole but he can prove his awareness by apologising. That’s all he can do. And he can atone.

He can never appreciate what it’s like to be an oppressed minority. But he can listen. He can sympathise. And he can do what the oppressed through their collective experience dictate without question and without judgement. To question is to reinstate the rich, white, male hegemony.

That’s part of Labour’s ideology: that rich, white men rule the world and cause all the trouble. The cure is simple enough: break up the hegemony. Hence the man-ban and the endless affirmative action.

Perhaps they could start by banning The Cunliffe.

The Labour Party itself illustrates the policy.

Labour’s New Zealand Council must have two Maori, a woman, a unionist, a young person, a Pacific Islander and a Rainbow. It sounds like the start of a long joke but it’s not: that’s the Labour Party’s Constitution. And there’s poor Mr Cunliffe: white, rich, male. And there’s his deputy: white, rich, male.    Read more »

Colin Craig’s Whaleoil Approved/ Disapproved Policies

Colin Craig is featured in the Sunday Star Times in an article by Andrea Vance. They look at his top ten policies.

Lt’s run my rule over them and look at what is crazy and what is acceptable.

Craig’s List [WO: Haha, most voters won’t get that joke]

Who are the Conservative Party – and what do they believe? Steve Kilgallon comes up with 10 of their more interesting policy platforms:

1. Spending beyond their means: Leader Colin Craig says he’d like to match Australia’s defence spending at a “percentage level”. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute’s figures, Australia’s defence budget is US$26.1 billion. Ours is $1.358 billion. If Craig’s sums are based on GDP, it means an extra $1.55 billion; if it’s on population, it means another $4.87 billion. Either way, it’s a lot of guns.

More Guns, but what is he going to cut to fund everything else? A bit gay.

2. If it wasn’t immediately obvious, more guns: Craig would consider introducing national service in return for free tertiary education. And let everyone else have a gun too: the right to bear arms, and the “Castle Doctrine” (basically, the right to shoot burglars).

First bit hasn’t been costed so totally gay. The Castle Doctrine should be a bottom line. I am a big supporter of the right to bear arms and the right to defend your house.  Read more »

Dodgy maori ratbags on the take

Native Affairs looks at the rorts going on within the Kohanga Reo industry.

When you read it you will wonder  at  how come the Charities Commission hasn’t been all over this like a rash.

At the peak of the Kōhanga Reo movement there were 824 language nests around the country, today just 451 remain.

Last year the Kōhanga Reo Trust took an urgent claim to the Waitangi Tribunal, they asked for more autonomy and less accountability.

They argued that crown policy had all but crushed the movement, and that 172 Kōhanga were at risk of closure, in effect they were pleading poverty.

While this claim was being made, some of the spending at the top of the movement appears not to be in keeping with the kaupapa of Kōhanga Reo.  Read more »

A taniwha in the clouds?

Fresh out of luck after losing the water battle, maori bludgers are now trying their hand tilting at clouds, or rainbows or other unseen forces in order to stand over commercial organisations with their brown-mail. They’ll claim a new flying taniwha is angry anytime soon.

The government’s plan to auction 4G spectrum in September or October faces delay, with Maori claimants to spectrum rights reactivating a dormant claim to the Waitangi Tribunal by seeking an urgent hearing on it.

Pundits are picking anywhere between $200 million to $400 million for Crown coffers from the auction of airwaves freed up by the switchover from analogue to digital TV – which are suitable for the new fourth-genertion mobile networks being rolled out by Telecom, Vodafone and 2degrees. A similar auction across the Tasman raised $A1.96 billion for the Australian government.    Read more »

A sensible Maori leader

Mark Solomon has broken ranks with the greedy, grasping Maori Council who are intent on gang style standover to extract cash form the government:

An influential iwi leader may have given the Government’s legal team a boost as it prepares to mount a defence to a Maori Council bid to stop its flagship asset sales programme.

Ngai Tahu iwi leader Mark Solomon told TVNZ’s Q and A yesterday that he does not believe that any sell-down of the southern state power company Meridian would have any impact on Ngai Tahu’s rights and interests in water.

That is exactly the argument the Crown will be mounting in the High Court at Wellington tomorrow against the part sale of the first SOE off the block, Mighty River Power.

He also disagreed with the finding of the Waitangi Tribunal that it would be a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi if the Government proceeded to sell shares without first providing Maori with a remedy to recognise their rights.

He pointed out that that tribunal had also said that a sell-down of 49 per cent did not prevent the Government from addressing the rights and the interests of Maori – a contradiction the Government has similarly pointed to on several occasions.

“Personally I do not believe that the sell-down of parts of Meridian will affect Ngai Tahu’s rights and interest to water,” Mr Solomon said.

Bob Jones on the Treaty Gravy Train

Bob Jones is a national treasure. His column yesterday in the Herald was a ripper:

So, the comical Ngaruawahia ex-truck driver who can’t speak Maori and struggles with English but calls himself King of Maoridom despite his realm ending at his letterbox has declared Maori own the rain. That’s excellent news. I assume His Majesty will accept liability for inflicting millions of dollars of flood damage annually through Maori rain supply mismanagement. He can ponder that when sitting on the only throne he’ll ever occupy, namely in his lavatory.

Pulling the royal pretender’s strings is his court jester, Underpants Morgan, a man evidently of Welsh ancestry and probably a direct descendent of Cardiff-born Henry Morgan of piracy notoriety. But that was the 17th century. Try this owning-everything-by-right racket in the valleys today, boyo, and you will discover your Welsh kin are not big on humour.

Another blowhard claimed Maori own the wind. He has a point, given the amount they generate at these hooey babblefests.

But be assured, soul-selling barristers, driven by their wallets, will shamelessly go to bat for them, twisting and turning the meanings of an anachronistic 170-year-old vague treaty.

Don’t hold back Bob. Really tell us what you think.

Let’s cut to the quick. Despite the euphemistic deceit about “resources” and the “Crown”, what these parasites seek is for hard-struggling Kiwi workers to give them money without them having to work for it. It’s that simple. They’re a disgrace, not only to Maori but to the human race.

John Key should call an early election on this “who owns the rain, wind, air and everything else” issue and National would receive a massive majority. The dilemma facing Labour is tricky. David Shearer is a sensible man, as are most of his parliamentary colleagues who would all deplore this despicable attempt at bludging off taxpayers. But what to do – vote with the Government, abstain, or vote against?

Labour should firmly state their support for clarification legislation otherwise they’ll wave goodbye to their blue-collar voters who will be up in arms over this we’re-entitled-to-live-off-you-all claptrap.

He echos my stand-over theme too.

It’s all reminiscent of 1951 when the waterfront gangsters held the country to ransom, deplored then even by the Federation of Labour. Prime Minister Holland went to the country with the winning election question of “who runs the country?” Labour was doomed after their leader, Walter Nash, weakly stated he was “neither for nor against”. That fence-sitting contributed to National ruling the roost for 27 of the next 33 years.

He is disdainful of the Greens.

The Greens face a similar position. Some of them would assert that Maori should receive free breakfast in bed and cars, both clearly promised in the Treaty as the Waitangi Tribunal would undoubtedly confirm. But should they side against the public anger on this issue, they would be decimated in a snap election.

Sigh…that would indeed be bliss. Perhaps it is time for that election.