“GETTING AHEAD of the story” is one of the most important aspects of crisis management. As the PR mavens are fond of reminding their clients: “Explaining is losing.” If Jacinda Ardern’s Labour Government is not very careful, however, it will soon find itself having to explain why it has failed to reject out-of-hand an official document which calmly anticipates the end of democracy as most New Zealanders understand it.
The Report of the Working Group on a Plan to Realise the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Aotearoa/New Zealand is one of the most remarkable documents ever submitted to a Minister of the Crown. Set forth on its pages is a twenty-year plan to transform New Zealand from one of the world’s oldest and most respected continuous democracies into what would effectively be a political condominium, presided over by co-equal Maori and Non-Maori rulers. A state in which the economic and cultural power of non-indigenous New Zealanders would be much diminished, and the authority, wealth and influence of its indigenous people greatly expanded.
Entitled He Puapua, the report’s authors: Claire Charters, Kayla Kingdon-Bebb, Tamati Olsen, Waimirirangi Ormsby, Emily Owen, Judith Pryor, Jacinta Ruru, Naomi Solomon and Gary Williams; are refreshingly upfront about the scope of their endeavours. In an explanatory note on the report’s title they sate:
‘He puapua’ means ‘a break’, which usually refers to a break in the waves. Here, it refers to the breaking of the usual political and societal norms and approaches. We hope that the breaking of a wave will represent a breakthrough where Aotearoa’s constitution is rooted in te Tiriti o Waitangi and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.”
For most people “the breaking of the usual political and societal norms and approaches” is another way of describing revolutionary change. Certainly, it is difficult to interpret the Declaration Working Group’s (DWG) blueprint for change as anything less. It is highly unlikely, however, that when the Prime Minister spoke of “transformation”, she was referring to He Puapua’s proposed revolutionary reconstruction of the New Zealand state.
Even so, when the Minister of Maori Development, Nanaia Mahuta, presented her paper entitled DEVELOPING A PLAN ON NEW ZEALAND’s PROGRESS ON THE UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES to the 18 March 2019 meeting of the Cabinet Māori Crown Relations: Te Arawhiti Committee, it is rather surprising that her colleagues were not temporarily deafened by political alarm bells going off in their heads.
Did none of those present think to parse out the potentially disastrous political consequences of commissioning a “Declaration plan” which, according to Mahuta, “could be a national plan of action, a strategy, or some other tool that provides a map that demonstrates and guides progress across government. I expect the Declaration plan to include time-bound, measurable actions that show how we are making a concerted effort towards achieving the objectives of the Declaration.”
Clearly not, because that is precisely what the DWG presented to the Minister seven months later. Te Puni Kokiri’s response to the document was certainly not discouraging: “The DWG provided the Minister with their final report, He Puapua, on 1 November 2019. The DWG’s report was highly insightful and provided a positive starting point to guide our thinking and will be used as part of the work programme to develop a Declaration plan.”
Somewhere, however, someone decided that, on reflection, it might be better to keep the content of He Puapua under wraps. It was not until October of 2020 that Mahuta consented to the release of a highly truncated version of the report.
Unsurprisingly, given the content of He Puapua, opponents of the now decades old “Maori Separatist” agenda were not slow to recognise its radical implications for the future of New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements. Former Act MP, and founder/director of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, Muriel Newman, even managed to secure of copy of the whole 123-page document.
Newman’s judgement of the report’s contents was savage:
In essence, once a Treaty-based constitution is in place and tikanga is embedded in the common law, under Vision 2040 Maori separatists will control the country.
This is not pie in the sky. It is already underway.
There has been no public debate about the Declaration, nor was it mentioned in the Labour Party’s election manifesto.
The only information freely available about this UN plan to replace New Zealand democracy with tribal rule – and enact the biggest overhaul of public affairs this country has ever seen – was a general announcement by Minister Mahuta in 2019, and now, a year and a half later, the partial publication of a document revealing Jacinda Ardern’s dangerous intentions.
Are the National Party and Act aware of the existence of He Puapua, its contents and recommendations? Maybe not. In October of 2020 both of the right-wing parties were in the midst of an election campaign and its aftermath. It is just possible that they missed the importance – and even the fact – of its release altogether.
Besides, as Newman points out, it was under the Prime Ministership of National’s John Key that New Zealand signed-on to the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Or, more precisely, it was Key who authorised the Maori Party co-leader, Pita Sharples to fly off secretly to New York in April 2010 to surprise the world with his country’s acceptance at the United Nations.
At the time this was considered something of a coup for both Sharples and Key. After all, the Labour leader, Helen Clark, had consistently refused to support the Declaration while she was prime minister. Clark, like Winston Peters, was convinced that its provisions would have dire consequences for the country’s democratic institutions. Peters’ summation was typically trenchant: “The United Nations Indigenous Peoples Declaration… is the final step on the road to separatism. This is the road to Zimbabwe.”
But if Newman is right, and National is steering clear of the whole issue out of embarrassment, that still leaves unexplained Act’s failure to respond to what can only be considered the most extraordinary political gift.
For a classical liberal party like Act, the idea that a fundamental transformation in the nation’s constitutional, legal, political, economic and cultural arrangements could be contemplated in secret, and enacted piecemeal, without the prior passage of an authorising referendum, piles anathema upon abomination.
Act’s leader, David Seymour, should be demanding from the present Minister of Maori Development a categorical rejection of He Puapua’s “roadmap”. At the very least he should be seeking a rock-solid commitment from Willie Jackson – and the Prime Minister – that the creation of a bi-cultural state, founded squarely upon the prevailing reading of te Tiriti o Waitangi and the provisions of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, will only proceed on the basis of a two-thirds referendum majority.
Will he, though? The possibility has to be conceded that Act – along with National – will dismiss He Puapua as just one more example of Te Puni Kokiri’s magical thinking. If this is, indeed, their response, then they will be vindicating the prediction made nearly 40 years ago by Donna Awarere, author of the ground-breaking series of articles published in Broadsheet under the title “Maori Sovereignty”:
The strength of white opposition will be allayed by the fact that Maori sovereignty will not be taken seriously. Absolute conviction in the superiority of white culture will not allow most white people to even consider the possibility.
The likely consequences for Labour, however, if “white people” are persuaded to take the ideas and plans contained in the DWG’s report seriously, are potentially so dire that the only realistic way to get ahead of this story is to kill it – and He Puapua – stone dead.
This essay was originally posted on the Interest.co.nz website on Monday, 12 April 2021.
"the only realistic way to get ahead of this story is to kill it"
Do you seriously think Labour, much less the Greens and Maori Parties have the wit or wisdom to see where this will lead?
There is, among the Government and the Greens, a complete lack of respect for the enshrined principles of equality before God and the law. I observed no "wrestling with God" over the abandonment of those sacred principles in the extraordinary decision to remove our petition rights over the Maori local government wards. No inspired call to higher principles, no heartfelt concern about the erosion of long fought for freedoms. Nothing.
War it is then. I guess this is what a dying democracy looks like.
Having read this article the first words to enter my mind were "Chicken Licken".
You take Maori nationalists seriously, don't you Chris?
On a good day I see them for the harmless, naive idealists that they are. Most days I see them as wankers and poseurs. A view that is reinforced every time I see Rawiri Waititi.
They are about as much of a threat to the political status quo as the SUP, ie no threat.
Frankly, Malcolm X had a better chance of becoming Grand Dragon of the Alabama KKK than Maori nationalists have of getting power in New Zealand.
And as for Donna Awatere, even she no longer believes the bullshit she wrote almost half a century ago.
I haven't received a reply from the Christchurch City Council who were "gifted " a name for the new metro Sports complex. I asked them if they thought we were 5years old and finished with the break in the waves "Bye Scum".
"Scientific research is deeply implicated in the forms of colonialism" - Linda Smith. I'm surprised Maori lower themselves to be associated with the Royal Society
Royal Society Te Apārangi
John Hurley Tēnā koe. Royal Society Te Apārangi Pou Tiaki Kahu Hotere and myself Tarah Nikora Tumu Tūhonohono send he tono an invitation to hui with you kanohi ki te kanohi to kōrero about your raruraru with our kaupapa, mahi and whare. Ngā mihi Tarah Nikora.
[Means we can speak Te Reo Nani -Na Na -even if you catch us with our pants down]
John Hurley Just curious.
What's that comment based on? Your vast knowledge of scientific research, colonialism or Maori?
It was the flag changing Key government that gave Otautahi it's make over
Spoonley wrote the book
I am hoping this gets into the mainstream media soon. I'm about to write to the editor of the NZH suggesting he gets some balls
In the UK the Brexit vote was taken as definitive by the Conservatives and acted on. On just a tiny margin over 50% (3% in polls is regarded as taking account of possible faults 'within the margin of error')! The Cons were warned about not unbalancing the Irish Agreement but blithely, stupidly, arrogantly even, went ahead with Brexit - now they're 'at it' again in Belfast with Brexit being a big part of their unhappiness. We must learn from the stupidity of others not to do things! The UK is an old country too smug to up-date its processes. We are young and thriving, just.
We must not make unsettling changes because some have convinced a others that 'It's the 'right' thing to do', and we know best. Labour has already used up its 'Get Out of Jail' cards after their maladjustment of the economy in 1984. Neither faults in history, or the latest fiery dissent should sway us to throw out systems that have taken us so long to develop. We must though build on those systems to advance lines that thoughtful Maori leaders have advocated and bring in adequate legislation that enables Maori to advance, with room for further examination after monitoring effects and change to get the best system possible that both sides find an improvement. Let hard-line nutters on both sides fulminate.
This is how I see the matter would go forward in general. Getting a Stage One implementation dealing with one section of the problem, and then say three Stages more, to worked on and implemented within five years. The Stages would be set in law and trialled and any faults that cropped up, would be ameliorated by small changes that did not alter the tenor of the law and its intent by both parties, Maori and Pakeha would form an Eminent Working Group of a size recommended by knowledgeable people informed in the optimum size for good discussion and decision making. The Group would be representing the Founders of the Colony that once was a Dominion, but is now laying the foundations for a new structure for the 21st Century. Note that there will be input from the other nationalities and ethnicities who would meet separately and view the work and projected measures of the Eminent Working Group.
One year's discussion and plan to implement Stage One, that introduced in the 2nd year and also in that year Stage Two discussed, agreed and implemented and Stage One reviewed and some amendments passed, (and observers from the various other nationalities and ethnic groups about their reasonable hopes and satisfactions with the system).
Then 3rd year Stage Three agreed and implemented and Review of Stage One and Two and amendments passed, then 4th year Stage Four, the final one implemented and Stage Three, Two and One reviewed in that order with amendments.
Then 5th year, Stage Four looked at as with the others, and a report drawn up by the enduring Maori and Pakeha august, informed and committed members of the Planning Group.
This would be kept moving so that it didn't get bogged down in inertia. It would be a little like Roger Douglas' speed, except with more thought, and concern for satisfactory outcomes to all. Government would ensure that it received the funding it needed. Much understanding has been reached through the work of the Treaty of Waitangi Tribunal and fine detail about concerns that some groups might want to pursue would not be undertaken as not appropriate for the broad work of the Eminent Working Group.
That's an idea that could possibly be of value to working calmly, practically and on mostly cordial terms to start a new New Zealand/Aotearoa political system.
It would be difficult to build a new template for living and being in NZ. But we can manage difficult things, no need to talk ourselves down. As old British colonist Rudyard Kipling said in 'If'...
If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise:
I think this means listening, not jumping to the idea that either side knows and understands all, patiently setting down the problems, and discussing solutions to them.
"Explaining is losing". I first read that as a mantra of Whale Oil/Cam Slater's repeatedly on his blog, possibly influenced by Carrick Graham. Given that provenance, I would suggest it may not be the soundest of advice 😅
I wonder what Ms Ardern plans to do once two-thirds of the country no longer requires her to be Prime Minister.
New Zealand given its grotesque mismanagement and decline of the public service still has the advantage of a hundred years of nation building. Naturally the rise of maori sovereignty provides a threat to that nation. Non maori aren't comfortable with naori being a legitimate power and have there sights squally on maori who some might say are rebels, terrorist and wreckers in regards to social norms like committing war crimes in Afghanistan, smuggling weapons to genocidal maniacs in Saudi Arabia, infecting Samoa with the flu (twice) yknow nothing terrible.
The pressing matter how ever is the ascendency of maori as a peir to peir treaty partner.
Maori are engrained with a deep sense of mistrust for the neglect imposed on them by non maori and are eager to assert itself on the treaty infrastructure as a legitimate rival. Maori have for decades committed there labour to the state. Meanwhile from non maori perspective the savage uncivilised maori are bluggers, lazy, separatists, privileged and racist. Yknow all the things that non maori are not.
Maori toil away in the mines of WINZ and are left with a pittance to build up a treaty partnership of there own. Poor sickly and fatigued maori must build themselves up from under the weight if subservience.
Over the past 300 years conflict between maori and non maori had been quite high. With the introduction of Covid19 into the mix conflict again remains high as all sides seek to weaponise corona for there own ambitions.
Well, well "one of the world’s oldest and most respected continuous democracies"
The Realm of New Zealand is a monarchy. A constitutional monarchy if you like, but a constitutional monarchy without a constitution as such, which means when push comes to shove it reduces to a monarchy.
This regime is respected neither by the mass of its own people nor by the international community which correctly perceive New Zealand as a mere client state of Britain, Australia and the United States - its "Five Eyes" imperialist and colonialist partners.
If the colonial regime was as soundly based and correctly positioned as you imply, then why would it have given birth to such a bizarre document as "He Puapua"?
The fact is that the regime can claim legitimacy either through Hobson's Declaration of Sovereignty, which would be to openly admit that it is a colonial power, or through the Treaty of Waitangi, which is to commit itself to the kind of political folly that underlies "He Puapua".
That means, in effect, that there is no way out for the regime which you pompously characterize as "one of the world’s oldest and most respected continuous democracies".
Your appeal to the supposed racial biases of non-Maori ("A state in which the economic and cultural power of non-indigenous New Zealanders would be much diminished, and the authority, wealth and influence of its indigenous people greatly expanded") won't wash. Working class Pakeha know that they are being screwed, and they know that it is not Maori who are screwing them. Maori know that they have been screwed, and that the British Crown is responsible.
If you want real democracy, Chris, you are going to have to sacrifice colonialism. Yet I have seen nothing to suggest that you actually believe in democracy. You seem to believe in the Realm of New Zealand as it is and as it has been for the past 181 years. A colonial state with entrenched British sovereignty.
That kind of state is unsustainable. The immense social and economic contradictions in New Zealand society will see to that.
You may succeed in turning your blog site into a haven for right-wing racists (you have already gone a good distance to that end) but how will that help you? Racism, whether of the sort that is found in the columns of Bowalley Road or in the pages of He Puapua, has no relevance to the future of our nation.
You forgot to mention that the plan is already being enacted. One of its steps was the introduction of a compulsory history curriculum.
I suspect that the government has already decided that the authors "ambitious" constitutional agenda will not proceed. Minister Mahuta has been given her win on Maori wards. That will be basically be the beginning and end of it. Significant constitutional changes can't be sneaked in. The PM will be fully aware of the dangers of following that path. She will know she does not have that mandate.
However, the government could go further, at least in terms of allocation of taxpayer funds. So that more health, education, justice and welfare funding goes direct to kaupapa Maori entities. That is a tap that can be turned off and on. In fact the Labour/NZF government did turn that tap off compared to the National/Maori Party governments.
I am pretty sure that with a much more active Maori caucus the tap will be turned on again. Most probably in next months budget.
They'll 'agree' with anything.
Still enjoying the large print. I was thinking of putting 'years' instead of 'forms' in comments on my high school experience of the Maori story in History. But then, sadly, I realised everyone here grew up in forms -- rather 'illuminated' by the large print. No one in Intermediates now calling politicians 'Piggy' or 'Mouse'.
I guess your correct. Jacinda and Grant Roberyson will make it as difficult as possible to change anything.
I like to be real to. Maori are well with in there rights to make adjustments to there wage settings and other legislative change.
As a founding member of the United Nations we have developed a strong record of involvement in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and various declarations on the rights of the child, women, prisoners and others. The progressive lobbyists have often cited the right to housing as an area NZ falls down on, as NZ has on many other areas. Chris has recently looked at the Ombudsman decision regarding women's prisons, which was influenced by UN defined rights, as an area NZ is not up to the standard we aspire to, or have committed to. We take less notice of the UN decolonisation list when they raise Tokelau against the wishes of the Tokelauans. We do, however, ensure that we can show it is their wishes.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by the General Assembly 2007 majority of 144 states in favour, 4 votes against (Australia, Canada, the United States and New Zealand). Australia accepted it 2009. Canada 'endorsed' the declaration 2016, and legislation is before the Parliament. Obama drew from it, without legislating.
As a signatory, we make submissions on direction and progress. That a report would be made to that end and presented to the NZ Cabinet would seem something to be expected when we committed as a signatory.
In Te Weehi v Regional Fisheries, Justice Williamson left little doubt that customary rights is recognized in NZ law. That was 1986. A progress report would seem overdue on customary and indigenous rights.
Talk about fiddling while Rome burns. This proposal is outrageous and, as Chris concludes, needs to be killed in its tracks. How any sane political party, or parties, could contemplate such radical changes to this country’s constitutional structure defies logic. They seek political suicide?
To make such proposals and execute them in secret with no prior publicity or consent must signal minds that are deranged. Indeed those involved in this chicanery must be fully aware of the likely reaction of the mass of the population.
The fact that the inhabitants of this country, when the first Europeans arrived, had been here only for a few hundred years rules out any suggestion that they are “indigenous.” Consequently, it cannot possibly qualify under the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People. Furthermore, today most of those who identify as indigenous are of mixed blood.
Maximum publicity and a new independent political party are needed to check this insidious scourge. To continue with this ludicrous charade can end in only one way, blood and tears.
Wayne Mapp, the PM has shown no such awareness of the dangers to date, her capitulation to the separatists agenda continues apace. The will to resist some seriously outrageous demands, along with the wisdom to foresee the consequence, seems to be entirely absent.
The campaign is being waged on two fronts. Apart from the recent and obvious there's an ongoing subliminal indoctrination initiative aimed at the public via the media and government departments including health and education. Exemplified, as Lindsay has pointed out above, with the new history curriculum and it's distorted and insulting take on our history and it's heroes.
I was speaking with a senior teacher, they are under clearly expressed orders to promote all things Maori; language, myths, religion and culture and to assert Maori primacy generally. The schools are promoting, overtly and covertly, the "de-colonisation and re-indigenisation" of the school and it's curriculum; the mission statement of one of our local schools says exactly that. The hideous and divisive critical race theory lies are now being fed to our kids as fact.
Thanks to the efforts of Muriel Newman we have a pretty clear picture of the future being planned for us. Worth a read in full: https://www.nzcpr.com/the-end-of-democracy/
This is the prescription of Paul Spoonley's Recalling Aotearoa
I watched him on ANZSOG Plenary Q&A. Andrew Markus discusses the plight of NZr's in Australia. Spoonley is passive, but what really gets him going is Diversity. He appears to actually believe that "classic migration societies" are dependent on migrants and he finishes with a strong warning citing a German Federal Minister who (allegedly) said that the Syrian refugees were for "population supplementation". China and India may not be able to spare their best and brightest in the future. What the hell we gonna do?
This is the academic who has never been taken to task ever since the R word became the governing principle. R is tapu. Journalists are followers not independent thinkers.
A klei8l;uio;ui;uio/;u That is how I feel after somehow losing all my previous comment. The beautifully designed keyboard that has magic keys in it that inadvertently touched send your thoughts into limbo. I don't like it but is there a different design available? That I think is the message that we receive from the devotees of techno-madness in this current era - don't try thinking it will get you nowhere! Let us do or direct your thinking for you, we will manage your lives and you just go along for the ride. You aren't really capable of thinking for your self are you, admit it! 'Rage, rage against the dying of the light. Dylan Thomas' must be the response.
The other comments here are mostly a bunch of sad dark thoughts lost in a damp dark cavern without a glimmer of light. I hope that mine will be a pinpoint of light and I send it out to the just to find connection with their bright flashes.
The Barron Will you please put two or three paras in your normal comment bloc? I really want to read your stuff but it is hard to when presented like a brick of words.
I think it worth urging hesitancy in imagining decolonisation as akin to the Spanish Reconquista. While colonisation is one people or culture imposing control over another people or culture, a decolonisation programme is not the later imposing over the former.
Both the indigenous and the introduced are changed by colonisation, decolonisation is therefore applicable to both parties. It is important that the indigenous are able to express a form of self-determination. This is not Tangata Whenua imposing determination over Tauiwi, although obviously Tauiwi must make accommodation for this self-determination. The same for cultural expression.
The other thing in the new settler societies is that there must be a way in which the indigenous and the settlers are able to have shared space and governance. If both parties have decolonized their minds from imposition upon to accommodation and understanding for, then that will be worked through over time and in context of the rights of the indigenous and those of universal human rights.
David George 13/4 at 7 am
Referred to is Muriel Newman a died-in-the-wool rightie. So I had a look at her thoughts.
She is doing a job on PM Ardern. And Vision 2040 which is important for our future but I don't know much about it yet. But Ms Newman says this:
As Dr Tony Sewell, Chairman of the UK’s Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, explained last week, disadvantage is not influenced by ‘race’: “The evidence shows that geography, family influence, socio-economic background, culture and religion have more significant impact on life chances than the existence of racism.”
His report, which sought to better understanding ethnic disparity in the UK, highlighted the importance of family structure: “In many areas of investigation, including educational failure and crime, we were led upstream to family breakdown as one of the main reasons for poor outcomes. Family is also the foundation stone of success for many ethnic minorities.”
It is the same in New Zealand – it is not race that causes social deprivation, but factors such as the breakdown of the family, educational failure, and intergenerational welfare dependency.
Vision 2040, however, seeks to perpetrate the racial disparity myth, to justify handing control of key government services to tribal groups. In areas such as child protection and health, the planning for this transformation is well advanced.
I would imagine that DrSewell would see all these other factors having primacy, things that could be changed and that people are most concerned about. Race can't be changed but is so important that it sits behind everything, either as a cause or a factor. The part I've put in bold is what anti-welfare people use as bludgeons to hit people over the head with. They look at the symptoms and never at the cause. One thing leads to another - and they don't want to see the connections. Also that other people don't see living like a conformist middle-class white as satisfying. Someone from a society with other drives than possessing the three B's - bach, BMW, boat, because they are not after simple materialistic goals may not have found other goals to draw them in and motivate them. This is where learning about tikanga can make a big difference.
It used to be said that New Zealanders knew they had made it when they could tick off the three B's above. Though in this article people are said to have gone past this in aspiration to comfort and enjoyment according to the report from the Commission for Financial Capability below. Nowhere is there mention of aspiring to live in a functioning society with opportunities for equality, education, and jobs affording living wages and secure housing for all. These matters go beyond the materialistic ones of 'financial capability'.
Financial adviser Lisa Dudson said that was still an aspiration for some people. "It's enjoyable having those things and a good status symbol of success, which many people like to have."
Commission for Financial Capability research showed this was more common among people who were struggling a bit.
They were more likely to think of wealth as material items and emphasised that it would mean comfort and enjoyment. https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/110926849/heres-what-makes-us-feel-wealthy-now
One soon finds out how love can get nasty if one disagrees.
Eel trap city.
Wayne Mapp said...
I suspect that the government has already decided that the authors "ambitious" constitutional agenda will not proceed.
On the other hand the symbolic has been handed to them. They are allowed to erase an identity and place themselves at the top.
ACT have released this statement, nothing from National yet that I'm aware of:
ACT is calling on the Prime Minister to publicly reject the recommendations of a Cabinet-commissioned report which aims to give effect to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
“He Puapua represents a significant and serious departure from the idea that all New Zealanders are equal before the law,” says ACT Leader David Seymour.
“In March 2019, Cabinet commissioned He Puapua and, after multiple requests, has finally released a heavily-redacted version of the report.
“For those who believe this report can be easily dismissed and isn’t going anywhere, some parts of He Puapua are already being implemented by the Government – for example, exempting some Maori land from rates, establishing Maori wards, giving Maori greater rights under the RMA, and a new history curriculum were all proposed by the report.
“Will the Government openly tell New Zealanders whether it intends to implement the remaining recommendations?
“The report proposes:
• A Treaty-based constitution
• Public education programmes across all sectors, including conscious and subconscious bias training, to deal with structural racism
• Significantly increased return of Crown lands and waters to Maori ownership in addition to Treaty settlements
• Progressively bringing all legislation into line with the Declaration
• A Maori court system
• A Maori Parliament.
“Ultimately, this is a question about what the Treaty really means.
“Does it mean that all New Zealanders are equal before the law?
“Or does it mean we are a partnership between two collectives, and our rights depend on who our grandparents are?
“ACT believes all New Zealanders should have equal rights and opportunities. This report isn’t going to deliver that.
“This is a divisive plan and it will set one group of New Zealanders against another.
“The Government must stop exploiting our differences and focus on the common dignity of all New Zealanders.
“ACT exists to have honest conversations about difficult issues like this and to unite New Zealanders behind good ideas.”
Thank you Greywarbler, you've raised some valid issues but I suggest you read the He Puapua recommendations as I think you've largely missed the point.
We are largely, and thankfully, free to pursue our aims and aspirations; material, recreational, educational, spiritual and artistic and so on. That huge diversity of aim, despite the conforming social pressures common to all societies, is testament of a tolerant and free country.
The aims of the DRIP are a direct assault on those freedoms, I really don't understand how anyone can treat the whole issue so casually.
That UK report showed that race and gender had very little to do with life success, in fact the worst performing category were, perversely, young working class indigenous British men. But correlation is not causation, once you drill down into the multiple common factors of a failed and miserable life race becomes largely irrelevant. It only looks relevant because certain behaviours are often intrenched in some communities. Fatherlessness (the big one) truancy, illiteracy and poor academic achievement generally, violence and substance abuse in the home and immediate community and so on.
The best performing (in terms of generally accepted life success, health and wellbeing and financial security) of the worlds ethnicities (despite a history of some serious victimisation at times) are the Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese/North East Asians - where ever they go. They've also the highest average general cognitive ability and a culture of conscientiousness and competence. Coincidence?
If there is a problem of crime, underachievement and meaninglessness it would be very foolish to make easy assumptions and falsely attribute blame. You won't solve a problem if you don't properly understand it's causes. You might even do a great deal of harm.
PM Ardern was clearly rattled in Parliament yesterday, flailing about trying, and failing, to justify this travesty. Muhuta, playing deflection, reminded that DRIP was signed up under the Key coalition.
I suspect that Key and Co only went along with it to get the Maori "whinge-fest in perpetuity" to STFU for five minutes, honestly believing that no Kiwi government would be mad enough to go along with it. On that score, at least, he was mistaken.
Sounds like it's all go. The propaganda campaign and indoctrination of school kids already under way; Maori water royalties/taxes and separate parliament to follow.
Royal Society [above Back in the 1960's my father subscribed me to a thing called Understanding Science - Prisms, atoms, magnifying "little beasties"].
John Hurley did you take them up on their offer??? 👀
Tamara Poi No
John Hurley why not?
John Hurley I'm curious, why haven't you? Wouldn't it be good to understand their kaupapa so then you could then make informed statements instead making assumptions on behalf of Māori?
Christine Hickey 👀 of course a white male looks at my comment and laughs Simon Henshall 🙄
Tamara Poi Would make a good Webinair but the issue is Post-colonial theory versus science.
John Hurley can Māori not have science woven in amongst traditional knowledge? How else do you think Māori navigated across the expansive seas? Post colonial theory?
And there's another white male laughing at my comment.. Paul Gallagher KT 🙄
Tamara Poi Knowledge and science aren't the same thing. Science is a universal methodology and it required a written language?
There's a difference between the cleverness of an operator and the cleverness of a technology. There are unknowns about Polynesian navigation such as the push factor and it's reliability.
Perhaps to you John Hurley, and seeing your perspective and perhaps assuming your European ancestry, I can understand how science and knowledge being separate aligns with your worldview.
However, the beauty with Māori and many indigenous cultures globally, is that we understand the interconnectedness between all things.
No one person is right nor wrong. It's just our differences in perspective.
Tamara Poi "Everything is made of atoms"?
I should think that the library will still be proclaimed as the Central Library for immediate identification. Then under it the Maori words, and then by the doors inside or outside, the Maori words in full and their translation. That would be the proper way to present the name, and that should be how the Maori names are introduced all round the country. Otherwise it seems an exercise guaranteed to frustrate and upset those who don't speak or read Maori fluently. Many young Maori were rapped on the knuckles for uttering their own language at school in colonial times, and we don't want to repeat the process again.
New 'hate speech' legislation is being designed to illegalize predicted argument and outrage from the population as the reality of race-based government becomes clearer.
Post a Comment