Treaty ‘rights’ a trap

David Round has some major concerns with the wonky constitutional review underway. While we complain about Fiji’s constitutional changes yet our own are appearing to be significantly gerrymandered by Maori:

You need kidney dialysis. But you cannot get it, because people of Maori ancestry, although less deserving of treatment on purely clinical grounds, have priority. You have paid your taxes all your life. You die.

Impossible? At present, yes – we hope. But several years ago when an elderly man in Northland was ruled ineligible for dialysis – on solely clinical grounds – the Maori Council declared elderly Maori people were “taonga” and therefore entitled to treatment under the Treaty of Waitangi, which would give them priority over non-Maori. 

If, then, we were saddled with a written constitution which referred to the Treaty and its alleged “principles”, we could easily have racial discrimination in health care.

Why should that surprise us? The Treaty’s words are now twisted to mean their exact opposite. The Treaty said Maori and settler were to be equals under the Queen’s government. In Captain Hobson’s words, “Now we are one people”. But by the modern “principles”, “Maori” are not the Queen’s subjects but her “partners” in governing New Zealand.

The “taonga” Maori were promised are now not just their physical property – what the word undoubtedly meant in 1840 – but anything Maori might take a fancy to.


Do you want ad-free access to our Daily Crossword?

Do you want access to daily Incite Politics Magazine articles?

Silver Subscriptions and above go in the draw to win a $500 prize to be drawn at the end of March

Not yet one of our awesome subscribers? Click Here and join us.

As much at home writing editorials as being the subject of them, Cam has won awards, including the Canon Media Award for his work on the Len Brown/Bevan Chuang story.  And when he’s not creating the news, he tends to be in it, with protagonists using the courts, media and social media to deliver financial as well as death threats.

They say that news is something that someone, somewhere, wants kept quiet.   Cam Slater doesn’t do quiet, and as a result he is a polarising, controversial but highly effective journalist that takes no prisoners.

He is fearless in his pursuit of a story.

Love him or loathe him.  But you can’t ignore him.

52%