Oct - Dec


Hawke's Bay Today 31/12/16 
USE ENGLISH AND MAORI IN RIGHT CONTEXT
What does the word “taonga” mean?

I’m referring to the article in (December 27) Hawke’s Bay Today.

We are an English-speaking country, foreign visitors to New Zealand won’t understand what the word “taonga” means.

It would be etiquette for reporters to have respect for readers of our daily newspapers by speaking in our English language so everyone understands what is being said.

Maori is a minority language, use it where appropriate.

Also it is arrogant to use Maori language preceding English which should be spoken or printed first then followed by the Maori meaning.

People need to learn to use both languages in the right context.
J S
Waipukurau

Waikato Times 31/12/16 
TRIPS ON TAXPAYER
I’ve been following the amazing Waikato Times story on the school trips, and in particular the $695,511 spent on a fact finding mission to Hawaii by the whole school and some parents, of Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Ruamata in Rotorua. Not only amazed but totally gobsmacked that NZ taxpayers are funding these soire´ es, or as principal Cathy Dewes so nonchalantly puts it, ‘‘We’ve retraced the footsteps of our ancestors’’. ‘‘We went back to the place where our canoe left from and came to Aotearoa from.’’

There are two issues here, worthy of further discussion/investigation. (Apart from the obvious bad grammar in the statement.)

One. How on earth has this school managed to secure such large amounts of taxpayer dollars almost totally unnoticed, and with the proverbial blind eye being turned?

Two. After all these years of being brainwashed by iwi and indeed a learned professor in Auckland that Maori are indigenous to New Zealand, here we have a school principal totally negating these claims.

Note to myself. Get the kids enrolled at this school, might get a free trip to Europe!
W P Ohinewai

Northern Advocate 30/12/16 
OUTRAGEOUS TRIP
It is so easy to spend other people's money. And taxpayers' the easiest of all, it seems. Kura Kaupapa Maori 0 Raumata took 130 students, 21 teachers, 73 caregivers to Hawaii for a "finding our roots" trip.

That's $700,000 less $37,000 raised, leaving the taxpayer contributing at $663,000. And 21 teachers for 130 students?

How about all decile one school students going on such a trip? It would need to include England, Ireland, Scotland, possibly now China, Korea, India, perhaps a dash into Denmark, definitely the Netherlands, for sure Taiwan.

It appears that large sums of money are given out by our government like confetti or a lolly scramble, and some time later, maybe, the Audit Office picks it up. Outrageous, scandalous irresponsibility.
R L
Whangarei

Northland Age 29/12/16 
LET THE PAST GO
'First I am a New Zealander,' by Casey Costello (December 15). What a very sensible view of the ever-increasing, on-going dispute between Maori and those Europeans born after the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. Any dispute of Maori in regards to the Treaty of Waitangi and its signing is between Maori and the British government, as things changed in 1900, when we cut ties with Australia.

There is no restriction on Maori, and many opportunities are available to them, many taking the opportunity which both Maori and Pakeha have, along with other ethnic groups. 1, as a Pakeha, praise those who have advanced their lives, as moving forward is the only solution to improving one's life, no matter what ethnic group we are.

Nobody denies Maori their culture or any other beliefs as is the case with all other ethnic groups. It's up to them to keep their culture, beliefs and language alive.

Sadly, we do not have people with guts, either Maori or Pakeha, to say the time has come to put the past behind us and move on, to make our country better for all, and offer our children and generations to come a united society, undivided.

I know many honest hard-working Maori, many of whom have studied just like other ethnic groups. I do not believe skin colour is a barrier for Maori or other darker-skinned people in opportunities of employment or business. I know and have seen many employed in many different roles, and cannot see any reason to fault them. In fact it pleases me to know that they are moving on and making changes in their lives and those of their families. They are the greatest role models any child could wish for.

Injustices of the past have affected millions around the world, and we are so lucky that we are here in New Zealand, even if it's not perfect. Life is not about us; it's about making life better for our children and generations to come, as no one would wish for the conflicts that have divided other countries.

No matter our race or colour, if we are born in New Zealand then we are New Zealanders first, but can still maintain our own cultures, language and beliefs within our families. I would say it's a great gift to believe in other cultures language and beliefs if we choose, getting to know each other better, working for a better place for ourselves, children and future generations to come.

As it is said, united we win, divided we fall, so let's all be united as one, New Zealand first, for our children and generations to come.
J B
Diggers' Valley


SPECIAL NEEDS
One cannot deny the various philanthropies of Gareth Morgan, but at times his reasoning seems to be over-ridden by enthusiasm and the need to control.

He studied the Treaty of Waitangi, and, without regard for the wording of its three articles, he wrote a book about it.

In a media article he suggested that another House, comprising Maori, be added to Parliament to look after their special needs. Australia, Canada and Great Britain, he said, had a second House, but it is doubtful that the Australian Senate is filled with Aborigines, Canada's Senate with First Nation people or the House of Lords has any Anglo Saxons at all.

If his proposed Opportunities Party gains any traction in Parliament, one may assume that much of its time will be directed towards meeting the special needs of that small, elitist coterie of Treaty revisionists.

They constitute but a small number of the 14 per cent of Maori in the population, but the average Maori gains no benefit all from the settlements they have gained. Accountability by them seems not required, and their businesses remain untaxed.
B J
Omokoroa


THE BLAME GAME
I was disgusted to read in yesterday's NZ Herald, Maori Party MP Marama Fox's claim that an overhaul of CYF is risking creating a 'stolen generation' of Maori children". Ms Fox stated that 63 per cent of CYF children and 71 per cent of young people in prison are Maori, and Ms Fox then made the shameful claim that it wasn't Maori families that failed their children; the system failed their children. What utter garbage.

Would Ms Fox kindly explain why 63 per cent of Maori children were in CYF's care in the first place?

I have yet to hear Maori take responsibility for how their families turn out, and Maori leaders are the worst. When all families put their children first, stop drinking, partying, taking drugs etc, and put positive input into their lives such as love, food, necessities, education, etc, all families, including Maori will have positive outcomes. We are totally and utterly sick of the blame game when Maori fail.
J H
Tauranga

Waikato Times 29/12/16 
NZ, UN & ISRAEL 2
Having signed the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, this hypocritical government has now sponsored a UN resolution seeking to take away the rights of the indigenous people of Palestine – the Jews.

I first became ashamed of being a New Zealander when I attended a rugby test match at Athletic Park in the late 1970s, and witnessed the crowd (or most of them) booing the Wallaby goal kicker.

I became more ashamed of being a New Zealander soon after that when our unrepresentative House of Representatives enacted a Nazi-like law providing for the slaughter of in utero children. Now, I’m ashamed once more. It would seem that Mr Key saw the writing on the wall.

On the one hand, he saw the Opportunities Party doing to him what the New Zealand Party did to Muldoon. On the other hand, being well aware of this UN hypocrisy about to happen with his blessing, he saw that the backlash from decent NZers would sweep him out of power, as we've seen elsewhere around the world recently.

Goodbye, National Government. Bill English has been delivered a ticking bomb, and he's too stupid to realise it.
L L
Wellington

Waikato Times 28/12/16 
LAND WARS DAY
Bryan Johnson (Letters, December 20) questions the Key Government’s support for a Land Wars commemoration and its impact on race relations and sees a continuation under Bill English.

One thing that has me bemused and should be asked of the Government is why the demanded "Land Wars" commemoration is only, it seems, being discussed with and by iwi. Of the approximately 3000 who died in these wars, some 1000 were British soldiers and militia. It seems their descendants are not being consulted.

My forebears arrived in 1841 and some lost their lives in the Waikato and Taranaki wars. No one has approached me or my family.

Maori Development Minister Te Ururoa Flavell said he has secured $4 million over four years to support the commemorations, to be known as "Raa Maumahara National Day of Commemoration". I have the unease this money will used only by iwi for history revision and so to weave a new korowai of victimhood to improve their ideological interests and financial position.

If the wider public, and particularly the descendants of early settlers, are not involved and their views included, then these so-called commemorations will, like Waitangi Day, become another day of ugliness and division.
R P
Tauranga

The Press 27/12/16 (In a few words section) 
AN ANTHEM FOR US ALL
Richard Harman (Dec 24) suggests Poi E as our new national anthem. Has it occurred to him that this song has no English words, as well as there being many who would find it difficult to begin learning an anthem that would have no meaning for them? Then there are those whose first language is not English and who would struggle to learn words in yet another language, unless Richard is proposing to rewrite the lyrics.
V S
Halswell

The Press 26/12/16 (fIn a few words section) 
KAIKOURA HARBOUR COST
Ngai Tahu, which runs Whale Watch, flies under a charity banner and does not pay tax. It should contribute towards the cost of dredging Kaikoura harbour.
N F
South Brighton

Waikato Times 24/12/16 
KEY 'TEFLON MAN'
Amid the bouquets and brickbats that have accompanied the retirement of John Key, those who have been most effusive in praise of his personal qualities and political acumen have not reflected on some aspects of his leadership that are not so laudatory.

His broken electoral promise to remove the Maori electoral seats, his delegating decision making on unpopular issues such as the RMA and the iwi water issue, his reluctance to accept that the population comprehensively rejected non-elected Maori being appointed to councils, his unequivocal acceptance of most Waitangi Tribunal's directives, valid or not.

His silence on the spurious claim that the Treaty represents a partnership of the Crown with Maori., the adoption of The Foreshore and Seabed Act giving much of the control of our coastline to iwi. His placing the Maori Party with 1.5% of the electoral vote above the needs of the whole population.

He has shown his consummate ability in handling difficult problems by ignoring their existence. A Teflon Man indeed. But no doubt his successor will continue his party's racist policies.
B J
Omokoroa


BLAME GAME
I was disgusted to read in a recent newspaper article that Marama Fox's (Maori Party MP) claim that an "overhaul of CYF is risking creating a "stolen generation" of Maori children'. Ms Fox stated, 63% of CYF children and 71% of young people in prison are Maori and Ms Fox then made the shameful claim "it wasn't Maori families that failed their children, the system failed their children".

What utter garbage. Would Ms Fox kindly explain why 63% of Maori children were in CYF's care in the first place.

I have yet to hear Maori take responsibility for how their families turn out and Maori leaders are the worst.

When all families put their children first, stop drinking, partying, taking drugs, etc and put positive input into their lives such as love, food, necessities, education,etc, all families, including Maori, will have positive outcomes.

We are totally and utterly sick of the "blame game" when Maori fail.
J H
Tauranga

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 23/12/16 
WE ALL NEED HOUSES, FOOD, CLOTHING ETC..
Re: ‘Maori do need race-based policies' (The Weekend Sun, November 4). M Leabourn's letter in which he alleges the Government does not make special provisions for Maori ‘needs'.

I would like to know what are the special needs of part-Maori today?

We all need houses, food, clothing, education and healthcare, which is available to all.

When Charles Darwin visited these shores in The Beagle, he wrote the land was barren, the natives hostile, and they lived in hovels. After Maori took over the land from those already here, just what did they do to improve the quality of life? Actually nothing, for they stripped the land of trees, and ate nearly everything that walked or flew, including the 12 species of moa.

Conservationists they were not, luckily colonists have since done their upmost to restore many species. We know inter-tribal fighting, cannibalism and slavery were rife, but if it was such a wonderful culture and lifestyle why did Maori leaders first beg King William, and then Queen Victoria, to send troops to put an end to the looming extinction of Maori, especially after the Musket Wars.

If Maori want to participate in government then let them put candidates forward for election. It is ludicrous to suggest the 18 per cent part-Maori be given co-governance and it is up to them to be elected like everyone else. We are one nation.
M B
Tauranga City.


THE LIST OF UNDERACHIEVING IS ENDLESS...
On the question of former Prime Minister John Key's sudden departure, I will go with Winston Peters' assessment that the timing is simply not credible and something's amiss.

All the eulogizing about Mr Key is nauseating, he's basically achieved nothing as leader in eight years at the helm other than exude a ‘warm fuzzy feel-good' daydreaming philosophy. Immigration rates a fail, education and health are stuttering, and housing policies are a mess.

Key's National Government's race-based initiatives on freshwater, marine and coastal, Resource Management Act amendments etc and compelling councils to kowtow to vested Maori interests with the push for unelected race-based representation are palpably wrong and will ultimately lead to the destruction of racial equality if unchecked.

Frankly, the list of underachieving is endless and as for balancing the country's books, that's just a joke based on creative smoke and mirrors stuff and inevitably the false consumption and services based NZ economy will tank sooner rather than later.

So, when the going gets tough, when all the rhetoric no longer works and justifiable criticism starts hitting home then just before everything turns to custard, he's riding off into the sunset!

Parliament breaks up for two months from mid-December, and surely common sense tells us nothing will be done during that time so why couldn't Key's announcement have waited till the New Year? Unless, of course, he is aiming to make the honours list?

Whatever the conspiracy theories might be its starting to look like they may have some merit.

Mr Key is no loss but those who will replace him now and after the 2017 Elections could be scary stuff so fasten your safety belts. Put in a nice way Key's departure is a welcome relief.
R P
Matapihi


THANK YOU
A big ‘thank-you' to Rodney Hide for, in his recent Herald on Sunday article, giving us a reflection on the mind and character of multi-dollared, political aspirant, Gareth Morgan. What he may lack in finesse he certainly compensates for in his knowledge of excoriating expletives and vindictive vernacular. A man of many talents, he studied the Treaty of Waitangi, “are we there yet…” and to enlighten an ignorant public wrote a book on the subject. Its title should have been ‘Munchausen's Guide to Te Tiriti' for its wealth of fanciful conclusions.
B J Omokoroa.
Northland Age 22/12/16 
BUCKLE UP
On the question of Key's sudden departure, I will go with Peters' assessment that the timing is simply not credible and something's amiss.

All the eulogising about Mr Key is nauseating. He's basically achieved nothing as leader in eight years at the helm, other than exude a 'warm fuzzy feel-good' day-dreaming philosophy.

Immigration rates a fail, education and health are stuttering, and housing policies are a mess. Key's National government's race-based initiatives on fresh water, marine and coastal, RMA amendments etc, and compelling councils to kowtow to vested Maori interests with the push for unelected race-based representation, are palpably wrong and will ultimately lead to the destruction of racial equality if unchecked.

Frankly the list of underachieving is endless. And as for balancing the country's books, that's just a joke based on creative smoke and mirrors stuff and inevitably the false consumption and services-based New Zealand economy will tank sooner rather than later.

So, when the going gets tough, when all the rhetoric no longer works and justifiable criticism starts hitting home, then just before everything turns to custard, he's riding off into the sunset!

Parliament breaks up for two months mid-December, and surely common sense tells us nothing will be done over that time, so why couldn't Key's announcement have waited till the New Year? Unless of course he is aiming to make the honours list?

Whatever the conspiracy theories might be, it's starting to look like they may have some merit.

Mr Key is no loss, but those who will replace him now and after the 2017 elections could be scary stuff, so fasten your safety belts.

Put in a nice way, Key's departure is a welcome relief.
R P
Matapihi


REVEALING INSIGHT
A big thank-you to Rodney Hide for, in his recent Herald on Sunday article, giving us a reflection on the mind and character of 'multi-dollared, political aspirant' Gareth Morgan.

What he may lack in finesse he certainly compensates for in his knowledge of excoriating expletives and vindictive vernacular.

A man of many talents, he studied the Treaty of Waitangi, (`Are We There Yet? ...'), and to enlighten an ignorant public wrote a book on the subject. Its title should have been Munchausen's Guide to Te Tiriti, for its wealth of fanciful conclusions.
B J
Omokoroa


TE VINO?
Now here is something hard to swallow — wine. Yes, you heard right — wine.

Our guilt-ridden race-orientated legislators have issued a Wine and Spirits Amendment Bill that allows Maori special rights to control the proposed names of wine.

No doubt this is a "right" bestowed upon today's part-Maori by the imaginary `Principles of the Treaty,' invented by Sir Geoffrey Palmer. (Mr Palmer must have seen a different Treaty from the one that I have read, as the only obvious principles that I could see were that Maori ceded sovereignty to the Queen in return for the rights of British citizenship and that all New Zealanders were now united as one people under one law.)

But really! Maori approval having to be sought to name a wine? I had thought that our appeasers had reached the ultimate heights in insanity, but apparently I was wrong.

So what might the future hold? Parents beware — if you want to name your child other than Rang! or Moana you may have to appear before a Maori select committee to seek their ok. James and John, Janet and Jacqueline may no longer be politically correct.

Winston — please get the balance of power in the next election. I think I am going to throw up.
MITCH MORGAN Kaipara
Hawkes Bay Today 21/12/16 
WHO’S REALLY RUNNING COUNCIL?
Recently, Hastings Mayor Lawrence Yule, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council chairman Rex Graham and Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated chairman Ngahiwi Tomoana announced they would jointly convene a hui on water issues in March next year.

Why, when the TANK group has already been established to deal with the rivers and the water issues of Hawke’s Bay and this also includes Ngati Kahungunu?

My first question is, who is pulling the strings and who is now running our councils. Is it Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated chairman Ngahiwi Tomoana or is it the real elected councillors of Hawke’s Bay?

My second question is, are Lawrence Yule and Rex Graham the only elected representatives of Hawke’s Bay? Apparently, assurances have by these three been that the hui was not intended to be “exclusive”, so why were Napier, Wairoa and CHB excluded in the first instance. Does this issue not impact them and the people they serve, the ratepayers?

Do Yule and Graham not have cellphones or access to the use of technology to communicate with other councils on such an important matter?

My third question is, what exactly did Ngahiwi Tomoana mean when he stated that “the timing meant that they were not able to consult with the regional leaders”. I smell a rat.

So, the question must be asked, what timing Mr Tomoana? What is happening that we as citizens of Hawke’s Bay need to be aware of and what behind-closed-door deals are Rex Graham and Lawrence Yule undertaking with you, if any?

The attempt to have the ownership of all the water in Hawke’s Bay, rivers and underground sources is firmly on the agenda of Ngati Kahungunu Inc. Why, it is their belief that they have that right under the Treaty of Waitangi and is based on their philosophical and cultural belief, or is the real reason a commercial belief, an interesting question?

If you are an orchardist, a horticulturalist, a farmer, an industrialist or just a citizen ratepayer of Hawke’s Bay I strongly suggest that you watch this issue closely and play an active part to question and to challenge these two elected members and others.

If you don’t, you could well be paying a water tax for water that nobody owns to Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated, a non-elected organisation who represent only 21 per cent of our total HB population.
G A
Napier

Waikato Times 21/12/16 
PLACE NAME ‘NONSENSE’
Enough of this nonsense Mr Holbrook. The ‘‘correct’’ pronunciation of a place name is that used by the local community. It does not matter what Ranginui Walker and others may want, ‘‘au’’ will always be pronounced ‘‘ow’’ in Taupo and ‘‘ou’’ will always be pronounced ‘‘oo’’ in Kaikoura - just as Peter Williams does.
L P
Hamilton

Marlborough Express 20/12/16 
FRESH WATER
Largely overlooked or not realised, by the media, are Treaty of Waitangi claims. It is proceeding apace be it quietly.

A Cabinet paper obtained under the Official Information Act shows policies for iwi control of fresh water are still being worked on behind the scenes, with plans to release a further proposal after the election.

To complicate matters, iwi rights to fresh water are again being considered by the Waitangi Tribunal – for a second time. Reports indicate they are expected to recommend financial remuneration measures for tribes, to 'compensate' them for the public's use of fresh water. This is something else that will need to be vigorously opposed.

It goes further. It's not only the control of fresh water that iwi are apparently pursuing, but the power to decide resource consent applications as well.

One is left pondering on the inequality issues particularly since many involved in making wholesale claims are of very minority Maori blood. And after all, there was no difference between Maoris coming here 14th century and Europeans 19th century. Both were migrants, self introduced.

So while the Treaty's intent was 'one people' by sleight of hand and gullible politicians, New Zealand is becoming divided.
B J
Wellington

The New Zealand Herald 20/12/16 
MORGAN’S TREATY
A big thank-you to Rodney Hide for his Herald on Sunday article giving us a reflection on the mind and character of political aspirant Gareth Morgan. A man of many talents, Morgan studied the Treaty of Waitangi, and to enlighten an ignorant public wrote a book on it, Are We There Yet . . .. Its title should have been Munchausen’s Guide to Te Tiriti, for its wealth of fanciful conclusions.
B J
Omokoroa.

Waikato Times 20/12/16 
MORE OF THE SAME
So our new prime minister is treading the same path that John Key trod towards exclusive, ethnic privilege and racial disharmony with his support for holding a memorial day to commemorate the, so called, ‘‘Land Wars.’’

This commemoration is a thinly disguised effort by the Tainui iwi to project their profitable version of the conflict perhaps in the hope of inducing Mr Finlayson to give away even more of the taxpayers’ money.

Mr English has also found it pragmatically and politically propitious to reverse his moral stand on ‘‘same sex marriage’’. ‘‘O what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive.’’ Walter Scott, 1808
B J Omokoroa
The Northern Advocate 19/12/16 
WINE INSANITY
Now here is something hard to swallow — wine. Yes, you heard right — wine.

Our guilt- ridden raceorientated legislators have issued a Wine & Spirits Amendment Bill that allows Maori special rights to control the proposed names of wine.

No doubt this is a “right” bestowed upon today’s partMaori by the imaginary “Principles of the Treaty” invented by Sir Geoffrey Palmer.

(Mr Palmer must have seen a different Treaty from the one that I have read, as the only obvious principles that I could see were that Maori ceded sovereignty to the Queen in return for the rights of British citizenship and that all NZers were now united as one people under one law.)

But really! Maori approval having to be sought to name a wine?

I had thought that our appeasers had reached the ultimate heights in insanity, but apparently I was wrong.

So what might the future hold?

Parents beware — if you want to name your child other than Rangi or Moana you may have to appear before a Maori select committee to seek their okay. James and John, Janet and Jacqueline may no longer be politically correct.

Winston — please get the balance of power in the next election. I think I am going to throw up.
MITCH MORGAN
Kaipara

Bay of Plenty Times 19/12/16 
PARTY FOR TREATY REVISIONISTS
One cannot deny the various philanthropies of Gareth Morgan but at times his reasoning seems to be over-ridden by enthusiasm and the need to control. He studied the Treaty of Waitangi and, without regard for the wording of its three articles, he wrote a book about it.

In a media article he suggested another House, comprised of about half Maori, be added to Parliament to look after their special needs. Australia, Canada and Great Britain he said had a second House but it is doubtful that Australia’s Senate is filled with Aborigines or Canada's Senate with First Nation People.

If his proposed Opportunities Party gains any traction in Parliament one may assume that much of its time will be directed towards meeting the special needs of that small, elitist coterie of Treaty revisionists. They constitute but a small number of the 14 per cent of Maori in the population but the average Maori gains no benefit all from the settlements they have gained. (Abridged)
B J
Omokoroa


PUT CHILDREN FIRST
I was disgusted to read Marama Fox’s claim in the Herald that an “overhaul of CYF is risking creating a ‘stolen generation’ of Maori children”.

Ms Fox stated, 63 per cent of CYF children and 71 per cent of young people in prison are Maori and Ms Fox then made the shameful claim “it wasn’t Maori families that failed their children, the system failed their children”. What utter garbage.

Would Ms Fox kindly explain why 63 per cent of Maori children were in CYF’s care in the first place. I have yet to hear Maori take responsibility for how their families turn out.

When all families put their children first and put positive input into their lives such as love, food, necessities, education, etc all families, including Maori, will have positive outcomes. (Abridged)
J H
Tauranga

Herald on Sunday 18/12/16 
DUMP THE ACT
So many will agree with Rodney Hide on the Resource Management Act, long a stumbling block (Rodney Hide: Let's dump RMA for good, December 4).

Local bodies charge fees differing by thousands among their councils.

Depending on the integrity of councils, hapu and iwi have played the Act like a violin and are getting their demands more entrenched in that Act.

The passing of the Hurunui/Kaikoura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Act has smoothed a process, which can only be emulated in the future in all facets of infrastructural achievements.
R.E. S
Bay of Plenty


HAWAII TRIP INEXCUSABLE
In an age where schools scrimp, save and fundraise to make ends meet, it is astounding Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Ruamata spent $700,000 on a school trip to Hawaii.

Tracing Maori migration roots is laudable, but the expenditure of public funds on this is inexcusable.

Principal Cathy Dewes indicated much more than the $40,000 contributed by parents was raised over several years. Even if half was from vote education, there is no justification for this level of spending.
C B,
Hillsborough

Otago Daily Times 17/12/16 
MIXED VIEWS ON MAORI CONSTITUTIONAL WORKING GROUP'S ROLE
IT'S quite certain any political scheming which involves the Maori supremists Moana Jackson and Margaret Mutt' bodes ill for New Zealand as a nation, and therefore equally so for Maori. It was only three years ago New Zealanders, by means of 5259 written submissions to the Government's Constitutional Advisory Panel, firmly rejected the Jackson, Mutu and Maori Party's attempt to saddle our country with a written constitution based upon a false and racially-divisive interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi.

As this decision was democracy in action, it naturally meant nothing to the above cabal of tribalists, nor their politically correct "liberal" white enablers. Hence, without missing a beat, they continue to beaver away at their elitist/ separatist agenda as if the public had not spoken at all. The ongoing racial agenda to plant a disastrous "can of worms" into our long-standing, time-proven, and perfectly adequate constitutional arrangements appears to be without end.

All this trickery was presented to the public as a "constitutional conversation". However, it seems the Maori revolutionaries and their white neo-Marxist comrades believe that no "conversation" is ever over until it is concluded in their favour. Already non-Maori New Zealanders are legally second-class citizens. This is wrong on every level.
C R
Northeast Valley

[Moana Jackson and Prof Margaret Mutu reply: "Tena koe . It would be tempting to respond to the personal invective in Mr Rawle's letter. However, it is more productive to state the facts about the work of the Independent Maori Constitutional Working Group — facts which Mr Rawle ignores and work which he completely misunderstands.

"The working group was established after years of concern among Maori that the Treaty of Waitangi was not properly acknowledged in the current constitutional system—as such it was neither a new nor a "supremist" initiative. It was endorsed by the Iwi Chairs' Forum and other lead Maori organisations who appointed its members. Its brief was simply to hold discussions with Maori and others about how a constitution might be better based upon Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

"For five years the working group held 252 hui around the country while its associated rangatahi group organised 70 forums for young people. It took more time and received more submissions than any other comparable group.

Its report was released on Waitangi Day this year. However, the work continues with ongoing discussions with groups ranging from Rotary clubs to migrant organisations and other community groups. The Treaty requires nothing less. We would even be happy to meet with Mr Rawle."]

NZ Herald 17/12/16 
FOX STANCE MISSES POINT ON VULNERABLE CHILDREN
To say I am livid at the comments Marama Fox has made regarding the overhaul of CYF would be an understatement.

As a former CYF caregiver, foster and emergency placement parent I find her comments to be demeaning to me, as a "fair- skinned" New Z ealantler.

Almost all of my children I cared for were Maori — beautiful children who came from some appalling homes, from violent and abusive parents. They usually arrived filthy, hungry, scared from their family who couldn't care less for them.

These children received love, a hot bubble bath, clean clothes, haircuts, were showered with love, presents and most of all a safe, loving and secure environment.

The social workers I dealt with, mostly beautiful Maori women, never implied I was not the right person to be caring for these children. Never.

Parents who are abusive to their children are from (usually) dysfunctional homes, the grandparents and extended family are not always the best caregivers to these vulnerable children.
J J
Kinloch

Rotorua Daily Post 17/12/16 
POINTS OF INTEREST
John Pakes (Letters, December 16) wants us to believe that there Is no difference between the two places given to Te Tatau and one place each given to the Lakes and Rural community boards on the two committees of council.

Does he not know the difference between an 'interest group' or 'community of interest', as defined in the Local Government Act, and a constituency with many interest groups?

Think what would happen if all interest groups were given equivalent representation!

How does he justify two people selected by one interest group being given the same voting power as two people with a mandate from two different constituencies?

I don't buy the co-governance being promoted by Mr Pakes. (Abridged.)
H B
Rotorua

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 16/12/16 
HOW LONG WILL VOTERS’ TOLERANCE LAST?
The positive feedback on criticism about National Government's performance was heartening, with the main observation being the points made should be elaborated on.

The Resource Management Act possibly needed streamlining but garnering support from the Maori Party in return for race-based deals was untenable, especially when NZ First offered to support legislation provided iwi provisions were dropped.

The freshwater saga continues; everyone agrees ‘no one owns the water' yet National continues to have secret talks with iwi cobbling up deals to alienate control while also encouraging regional councils to do likewise via race-based elected and unelected people having input on councils and committees.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement without the United States of America's support is finished. Yet National continues to promote and support something that is heavily criticised. As for the flag referendum, Kiwis spent $27 million just to satisfy one man's whim and flight of fancy.

The crazy, unbridled immigration policy – with a net 70,300 – which defies belief has cost New Zealand dearly, fuelling housing costs, affordability and availability while giving developers a carte blanche to print money.

How much longer will Kiwis, who should support only parties that are concerned about all New Zealand citizens, tolerate this unmitigated nonsense? The large attendance at Katikati recently to hear Winston Peters reflects the mood of voters.
R P
Mount Maunganui.


PRACTISE TO DECEIVE
So our new Prime Minister is treading the same path that John Key trod towards exclusive, ethnic privilege and racial disharmony with his support for holding a Memorial Day to commemorate the so-called ‘Land Wars'.

This commemoration is a thinly disguised effort by the Tainui iwi to project their profitable version of the conflict perhaps in the hope of inducing Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson to give away even more of the taxpayers' money.

Mr English has also found it pragmatically and politically propitious to reverse his moral stand on same sex marriage. As Walter Scott said in 1808: “O what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive”.
B J
Omokoroa.

Bay of Plenty Times 15/12/16 
INCLUDE ALL SIDES
Bryan Johnson (Letters, December 14) questions the Key Government’s support for a Land Wars commemoration and its impact on race relations and whether it will continue under Bill English.

One thing that has me bemused and should be asked of the Government is why the demanded “Land Wars” commemoration is only, it seems, being discussed with and by iwi. Of the approximately 3000 who died in these wars, some 1000 were British soldiers and militia. It seems their descendants are not being consulted.

My forebears arrived in 1841 and some lost their lives in the Waikato and Taranaki wars. No one has approached me or my family.

Maori Development Minister Te Ururoa Flavell said he has secured $4 million over four years to support the commemorations, to be known as “Raa Maumahara National Day of Commemoration”. I have the unease this money will be used only by iwi for history revision and so to weave a new korowai of victimhood to improve their ideological interests and financial position.

If the public, and particularly the descendants of early settlers, are not involved and their views included, these socalled commemorations will become another day of ugliness and division.
R P
Tauranga

Northland Age 15/12/16 
THE NEW BROOM
So our new prime minister is treading the same path that John Key trod towards exclusive, ethnic privilege and racial disharmony with his support for holding a memorial day to commemorate the so-called Land Wars.

This commemoration is a thinly disguised effort by the Tainui lwi to project: their profitable version of the conflict, perhaps in the hope of inducing Mr Finlayson to give away even more of the taxpayers' money.

Mr English has also found it pragmatically and politically propitious to reverse his moral stand on same sex marriage. "0 what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive." - Walter Scott,1808.
B J
Omokoroa

Marlborough Express 14/12/16 
CUSTOMARY FISHING
In my retirement I travel around in my small campervan most of the year. In my van I have gear to enhance my activities, such as fishing for food. This includes a small flounder net. I use this in coastal areas. I stop and usually manage to catch a flounder or two for a feed. Even caught four once, so also able to share with the local landowner who let me camp on his property.

In some areas of the Marlborough Sounds this netting is not allowed, to preserve stock. I strongly agree with this. Some ancestors of the local iwi are allowed to use long commercial type nets to catch fish in these areas for family occasions. Having found my great-grandfather came from Unst Island in the Shetlands my Viking blood stirs me to thinking I can go back to my island and put out hundreds of metres of net to get some fish for a special memorial visit event I intend to make soon.
B G
Blenheim

Dominion Post 14/12/16 
INCARCERATION STAT
Incarceration Nation (December 12) featured Auckland University sociologist Dr Tracey McIntosh claiming that from the time of European settlement "... there was a desire to incarcerate significant numbers of our people", "our people" being Maori.

This is simply not true. According to the Official New Zealand Yearbook of 1900, of the admissions to prison in 1898, Maori numbered only 134 of 1724 -or 7.8 per cent. That year more women than Maori were admitted to prison.

The significant growth in the Maori prison population share - 51 per cent at September 2016 - came with urbanisation and welfarism.
LINDSAY MITCHELL
Eastbourne

Waikato Times 14/12/16 
TIERED CITIZENSHIP
I have written to papers many times decrying the fact that their seems to be three levels of citizenship in New Zealand/Aotearoa.

Is it racist, not PC, or simply forbidden by convention, to mention that the highest level of citizenship is for those with Maori heritage, then Pakeha, and lastly immigrants, in descending order of rights and importance?

World examples of where countries which have several different tiers of citizenship and associated rights, subsequently falling into civil war over race and religion, make it imperative that free discussion be allowed as a safety-valve, so that the situation will not become a time-bomb, and ‘‘blow’’.
D P
Te Awamutu

Bay of Plenty Times 14/12/16 
NEW PM TREADING SAME PATH
So our new prime minister is treading the same path that John Key trod towards exclusive, ethnic privilege and racial disharmony with his support for holding a Memorial Day to commemorate the, so called, “Land Wars”.

Mr English has also found it pragmatically and politically propitious to reverse his moral stand on same sex marriage.

“O what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive.” Walter Scott, 1808. (Abridged)
B J
Omokoroa

Daily Post Rotorura 14/12/16 
MEMBERS DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED
John Pakes’ letter (December 12) attempts to use the recent addition of Lakes and Rural community board representatives to each of two committees of council to legitimatise the “back door” access already provided to two unelected nominees from Te Tatau o Te Arawa to each of the same committees.

He suspects racism was behind the resistance and concludes that recent silence means acceptance. Nonsense.

The democratically elected Lakes and Rural community boards’ members were mandated by the community to help govern our people. They govern with the people’s consent. Te Tatau o Te Arawa is the authentic political arm of Te Arawa and was elected by their diaspora to advance their tribal interests.

The rest of us have not given our consent for them to be given automatic and permanent governance power.

Indeed, in October, 41,397 votes went to RDRR-endorsed candidates who promised the restoration of democracy.

They nearly won power, in my view confirming how deeply divided Rotorua is over the Te Arawa Partnership Plan.

Mr Pakes must accept that many resent the disproportionate influence that Te Tatau has on council and their attempts to normalise race-based governance as “the Rotorua Way”.

We will seek the restoration of democracy in everyone’s interests. But only after a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
REYNOLD MACPHERSON
Rotorua


VOTING RIGHTS
In response to John Pakes’ letter (December 12) where he implies that there was no hue and cry over the Rural and Lakes community boards’ members having voting rights on council committees, he must have forgotten that these members were democratically elected to their positions through the election process.

That is what differs from the means by which the Te Arawa members get to have voting rights.

Those people were simply appointed by a board. They did not gain their power through an open democratic election process.
P H
Rotorua

Northland Age 13/12/16 
SAD SONG
On Sunday morning my television was on and I was watching it out of the corner of my eye.

A programme came on called The Hui. At the end a group of Maori school girls sang a song in Maori, but the English subtitles were on-screen.

I was horrified as the words came on the screen. They included -- to the tribes of the nation ... we will fight forever ... cut down the flagstaff... overthrow the rule of the government — and much more. As these girls, who are really still children, were singing these inflammatory words, their faces became contorted with hate.

These are impressionable children. Who wrote these words, and then asked children to sing this? I have tried to contact TV3 to ask if they are aware of what is being shown on their station but have received no reply.
R B
Tauranga


MARITIME GRAVEYARD
It is a tragedy, the loss of life of those people who drowned when the fishing boat capsized going into the Kaipara Harbour, which is already a graveyard for ancient ship wrecks.

Since about the 1500s there are officially recorded 1900 known shipwrecks. However, all around New Zealand there are many more from Kaipara Harbour to Manganui Bluff; 100km of coastline, approximately 110 officially recorded.

Also found are another. 7 wreck sites. Some have their date identified and others will when conditions permit.

Another two have been located on the east coast, and also found was the location of the legendary Tamill ship near where the Tamill bell was found.

One Spanish shipwreck, called Cicillia Maria, had 22 crew on board; the Waitaha witnessed a massacre of this ship's crew around the 1700s. All but the captain were killed and eaten. They thought the captain was a god, so he was taken to the Bay of Islands, where he was given a lady to live with.

His name was Pieta (Peters). This name is still around in Maori families to this day. Does this name ring a bell with anyone?
I B
WANGANUI

The Daily Post Rotorua 13/12/16 
APPOINTMENTS RACE-BASED
Whilst I must agree with the title of John Pakes letter “Groups deserve place at table” ( Letters, December 12) I cannot support the sentiment or logic he promotes.

Firstly, the reason the polarising issue of Te Arawa became the most divisive one for many years was quite simply the fact that these were race-based appointments to council, which inherently flies in the face of democracy.

At least in the case of the Rural and Lakes Community boards, these members were elected by the community, and not appointed to council because of the colour of their skin, or determined by the time their ancestors arrived in New Zealand.
M M
Rotorua

Otago Daily Times 9/12/16 
IS RACIAL DISHARMONY PART OF KEY'S LEGACY?
YOUR balanced editorial "The John Key legacy" (ODT, 6.12.16) was spoiled by repetition of the nonsense that Don Brash "played the race card" via his oft-mentioned Orewa Rotary Club speech and that he continues to do so in the name of Hobson's Pledge Trust.

How on earth can it be racist to advocate for a society in which all citizens enjoy equal legal status and entitlements regardless of their ethnicity and regardless of when they or their ancestors arrived here?

You claim that such an ideal "would have meant putting New Zealand on the edge of racial disharmony". Perhaps you should explain what different sort of society you would prefer to live in.

If anyone has brought New Zealand to the brink of racial disharmony it is the current John Key-led National Administration which, via its reform of the Resource Management Act, plans to give substantial control over the nation's natural resources such as fresh water to unelected, unaccountable iwi nominees. Once the wider public finally wakes up to the reality of the back-room deals that have been done with the iwi leaders group. we may very well endure a period of significant racial disharmony. but that will not be Don Brash's fault.
J B
Dunedin


IN the eulogy of John Key, your editorial states "Dr Brash played the race card ... putting New Zealand on the edge of racial disharmony".

Nothing could be further from the truth. What he spoke of at Orewa was "the dangerous drift towards racial separatism ... and ... the now entrenched Treaty grievance industry", saying "there can be no basis for special privileges for any race". That is the basis of his "Hobson's Pledge" movement today — "He iwi tahi tatou" —"We are one people now".

It has been John Key who has played the race card in deals with the Maori Party to get his own way. Sending Peter Sharples secretly to sign the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and six or more special rights for the Maori tribal elite in amendments currently proposed to the Resource Management Act are but two examples.

Recent reports show that, in Taranaki for example, Maori extremism is increasing while much is corrupt in the so-called "Treaty of Waitangi" settlement process. Examples are the false Tribunal claims that Ngapuhi never ceded sovereignty and Ngati Tuwharetoa never gave Tongariro National Park to the nation. My Key has played his part in that.
[Abridged]
BRUCE MOON
Nelson

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 9/12/16 
‘MADAM, THERE IS NO PARTNERSHIP!’
The new Governor General, Dame Patsy Reddy, in her opening speech said: “I will respect and honour the unique partnership between the Crown and Maori as enshrined in our founding document…” in doing so she has shown extreme ignorance of the wording and intent of the Treaty and a racial bias that is grossly inappropriate for her role as the representative of the Queen. It is judicially, constitutionally and logically impossible for the Sovereign to be in partnership with her subjects. Prime Minister John Key picked a real ‘patsy' to promote his party's exclusive pro-Maori patronage. It is surprising one of Dame Reddy's professional experience should make such a false and deleterious statement. “Madam, there is no partnership!” Check the Treaty.
B J
Omokoroa.

Dominion Post 9/12/16 
NONSENSE LEGISLATION
News that the development of Shelly Bay is proceeding is welcome but not that it is by-passing the Resource Management Act (RMA). Shelly Bay is a huge development, and like all developments will be there, if not forever, then certainly a lifetime or two.

That it was filed under the Housing Accords Special Areas Act, which was set up three years ago supposedly to create affordable housing, demonstrates the nonsense this legislation is. No residence there will sell for under $1 million. It is wrong that Wellington has bought into this charade by designating half a dozen such areas as special housing areas.

The RMA was established for the very good reason to protect our environment and give the community a say. This and other developments are proceeding under the "trust us, we know what is best for you" concept. Councillor Andy Foster correctly says the community needs a say on the such developments.

The ill-conceived special areas concept was sold on the basis of being a temporary fix while this Government fulfilled its wish to gut the RMA. Now the Maori Party has been bribed to accept changes to the RMA, it's past time Wellington dropped support for special areas.
S L
Seatoun

Southland Times 9/12/16 (Also in Northern Advocate 9/12/16) 
NZ SHIP WRECKS
It is a tragedy, the loss of life of those people that drowned when the fishing boat capsized going into the Kaipara Harbour which is already a grave yard for ancient ship wrecks.

Since about the 1500's there are officially recorded 1900 known shipwrecks. However, all around New Zealand there are many more from Kaipara Harbour to Manganui Bluff, 100ks of coastline approximately 110 officially recorded.

Also found are another 57 wreck sites, some have date identified and others when conditions permit. Another two have been located on the East Coast and also found the location of the legendary Tamill ship, near where the Tamill bell was found.

One Spanish ship-wreck called Cicillia Maria had 22 crew on board, the Waitaha witnessed a massacre of this ship's crew around 1700's. All but the captain was killed and eaten. They thought the captain was a god so he was taken to the Bay of Islands where he was given a lady to live with. His name was Pieta (Peters), this name is still around in Maori families to this day. Does this name ring a bell to anyone.
I B
Wanganui

Northland Age 8/12/16 
HISTORICAL RELICS
The National government, following on from the English / Paki accord reached in August 2016 at Huntly, effectively in league with the Maori Party and tribal interests, `proclaimed' there will be an official commemoration to mark the NZ Land Wars (tribal rebellions) of the 1860s, the first to be held on October 28, 2017 at Tai Tokerau Marae, Northland.

That's the anniversary of the Busby-promoted brain-fade known as the 1835 Declaration of Independence, signed by 34 northern chiefs. Yes, that's right, only 34. This piece of nothingness was sidelined by the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 and confirmed at the Kohimaramara Conference in 1860 but all are historical relics now anyway.

The current aberration has come about by grievers, appeasers, revisionists, and vested interest Maori groups seeking to give some validity to what is revisionist claptrap.

The New Zealand government looks to have ignored the wishes of most Kiwis to endorse and promulgate this nonsense— no referendum, no submissions, and no public consultations.

If anyone wants a celebration, they can hold one in their own time and at their own cost without any financial support from New Zealand taxpayers, who have already paid dearly. Anyway, why would anyone be holding this commemoration at the Tai Tokerau Marae, because northern Maori ceded sovereignty, they were not involved in the treasonous tribal uprisings, and none of their land was confiscated?

Conclusion — this is incongruous. It is interesting that Stuff made the initial media release on October 31, 2016, and then immediately stated no comments would be taken on the article- now isn't that a giveaway?

Kiwis only option to stop this rorting is to toss out the current National government and not to elect a Labour/ Green coalition at the 2017 election. The only viable alternative therefore seems to be for voters to give NZ First their party vote, which may result in 20-25 seats, representing the balance of power, and stop these bouts of race-based madness which 80 per cent of Kiwis abhor.
R P
Mt Maunganui


NO BIRTHRIGHT
One theme that evolved very strongly from the NZ Herald's article on Kaikohe (Our kids at risk: Losing and regaining mana in Kaikohe) was education, or rather the lack of education, which was attributed to bad teaching methods and unprofessional comments such as those referred to by community leader, Ngapuhi runanga general manager Erena Kara, " Maori kids grow up with subliminal messages like,' Oh I didn't expect you to be in the science class.'

Pastor Mike Shaw, on family relationships, mentions the term 'slave mentality'. The tribal practice of `slavery' was prohibited by the Treaty 175 years before. He continues "We can't do it, we haven't the resources, it's because we've been colonised-all this deficit thinking."

He also says, "unemployment attacks the mana of a man and makes him feel worthless."

If community leaders are voicing these excuses, one cannot blame the average ill-educated, unemployed person for resorting to them.

`Mana,' or 'respect,' is not a birthright. It has to be earned by what one does and not by what one doesn't do. Poor education because of truancy, unemployment because of absenteeism and criminal records, domestic abuse, the break-up of families and welfare dependency because of alcohol do not increase mana. Accepting personal responsibility and striving against adversity do.
B J
Omokoroa

The Northern Advocate 7/12/16 
MAORI LEADERSHIP
Re: Marie Kaire letter Sneaky deal.

Kia ora Marie, you’re not afraid to highlight the truth ie Maori Party making deals with National. But what has the Maori party done for us Maori?

Nothing has changed. And what about “Tau back at rununga’s helm despite exit calls” ( Advocate, November 28).

Our leadership falls into question. Why are we led by a convicted liar and doing nothing about it? Sonny Tau needs to go.

He doesn’t have support of all hapu or takiwa. In fact he has split Ngapuhi.

Nearly all takiwa are in dispute: half support him, half don’t.

The ones who do are of the old school, “the system has judged him so we won’t”, even though his actions are criminal and not that of a “role model” to our future generations. Shame on you for condoning such actions. Stand up Ngapuhi and be counted. Stop allowing this kind of behaviour.
S K
Mangakahia Takiwa delegate

Waikato Times 7/12/16 
WHAT PARTNERSHIP?
The new governor-general, Dame Patsy Reddy, in her opening speech said, ‘‘I will respect and honour the unique partnership between the Crown and Maori as enshrined in our founding document . . .’’

In doing so, she has shown extreme ignorance of the wording and intent of the Treaty and a racial bias that is grossly inappropriate for her role as the representative of the Queen.

It is judicially, constitutionally and logically impossible for the Sovereign to be in partnership wth her subjects. John Key picked a real "patsy" to promote his party's exclusive pro-Maori patronage. "Madam, there is no partnership!" Check the Treaty.
B J
Omokoroa

The Northern Advocate 6/12/16 
MANA IS EARNED
One theme that evolved very strongly from the Herald’s article on Kaikohe was education — or rather the lack of education — which was attributed to bad teaching methods and unprofessional comments such as those referred to by community leader, Ngapuhi Runanga general manager Erena Kara, “Maori kids grow up with subliminal messages like, ‘Oh I didn’t expect you to be in the science class’.” Or Pastor Mike Shaw on family relationships mentions the term “slave mentality”. The tribal practice of “slavery” was prohibited by the Treaty 175 years before. He continues: “We can’t do it, we haven’t the resources, it’s because we’ve been colonised — all this deficit thinking.” He also says “unemployment attacks the mana of a man and makes him feel worthless”. If leaders are voicing these excuses, one cannot blame the average illeducated, unemployed person for resorting to them.

“Mana” or “respect” is not a birthright, it has to be earned by what one does and not by what doesn’t do.

Poor education because of truancy, unemployment because of absenteeism and criminal records, domestic abuse, the break-up of families and welfare dependency because of alcohol do not increase mana.

Accepting personal responsibility and striving against adversity do.
B J
Omokoroa

Northland Age 6/12/16 
THE LIE CONTINUES
The new Governor-General, Dame Patsy Reddy, in her opening speech said, "I will respect and honour the unique partnership between the Crown and Maori as enshrined in our founding document ..." In doing so she has shown extreme ignorance of the wording and intent of the Treaty and a racial bias that is grossly inappropriate for her role as the representative of the Queen.

It is judicially, constitutionally and logically impossible for the Sovereign to be in partnership with her subjects.

John Key picked a real patsy to promote his party's exclusive pro-Maori patronage. It is surprising that one of Dame Reddy's professional experience should make such a false and deleterious statement. Madam, there is no partnership! Check the Treaty.
B J
Omokoroa


FROM THE GRAPEVINE
Here is a disturbing tale straight from the grapevine. How petty is this? A wine and spirits Amendment Bill has been passed which allows Maori special rights to control the proposed names of wine. Yes —that is correct — a winemaker will be accountable to tribal demands as to what he can name his wine. The insanity continues!

With less than 1 per cent support, the ongoing demands from Flavell and Fox are running the country — changes to the Resource Management Act with much separatist legislation contained within, the demand for fresh water in spite of all denials to the contrary, and so much more. Very few of those who identify as Maori support them. The tragedy is that all Maori are tainted by their unreasonable demands.

In Kaikoura, good Maori citizens opened up their marae immediately after the earthquake to help those who needed food and shelter. I have much respect for those people, but none for the greedy, grasping, ever-whining duo of Flavell and Fox. Next year it must be a pre-election promise that National will not even consider the Maori Party as an ally.
R B
Tauranga

NZ Herald 3/12/16 
BIG CHANGES AHEAD FOR CITY'S VOLCANIC PEAKS
If you are concerned about not being able to drive to the summits of the Auckland volcanic peaks, then I urge you to read the Tupuna Maunga Integrated Management Plan on the Auckland Council website. This sets out some fairly broad proposals for management of all of Auckland's volcanic peaks and surrounding parks.

While much of it Is somewhat ambiguous, the clear direction Is to remove Inappropriate structures and recreational facilities. The idea seems to be to encourage the cones and surrounding areas to revert to native flora and fauna, allowing probably only pedestrian and cycle access. Vehicle access will certainly be restricted. Current recreational facilities, include archery, tennis, soccer, rugby and a scout den. Stock grazing is to be phased out.

The tihi. or craters, are considered sacred by Maori so any access to these Is likely to be very restricted.

Aucklanders should have their say before It Is too late.
M B
Botany Downs

NZ Herald 3/12/16 (A quick word section) 
In her swearing in speech as Govemor-General, Dame Patsy said she would 'respect and honour the unique partnership between the Crown and Maori, as enshrined in our founding document, Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Her so-called "partnership" Is a monstrous modern fabrication.
BRUCE MOON.
Nelson

Bay of Plenty Times 3/12/16 
SPECIAL TREATMENT
Regarding Buddy Mikacre's letter (November, 26). that successive governments have favoured Maori, does not make it right — only patronised. The Maori electoral seats, Waitangi Tribunal and a Maori Land Court confirm special undemocratic treatment.

More than $40,000,000 is spent annually on largely unsuccessful promotion of te reo.

Many of the unique Maori problems, In my view, result from an inability to handle the move from tribal-controlled rural areas to cities, to make individual decisions and take individual responsibility, and the reluctance of kaumatua to relinquish tribal control.

In 2009 a tribal initiative, Whanau Ora. was formed by Maori Party's Tariana Turia to provide for Maori health. It is government-funded. In 2015 the Auditor General, Lynn Provost. reported: "It is not easy to describe what it is and what it has done" A large amount of the budget has never been accounted for. (Abridged.)
B .J
Omokoroa

The Press 3/12/16 (In a few words section)
I find it ironic that Ngai Tahu, which operates as a charitable trust, wants taxpayers to fund the dredging of Kaikoura’s South Bay harbour so it can recommence its Whale Watch business.
R B
Cashmere

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 2/12/16 
WE ALL NEED HOUSES, FOOD, CLOTHING ETC..
Re: ‘Maori do need race-based policies' (The Weekend Sun, November 4). M Leabourn's letter in which he alleges the Government does not make special provisions for Maori ‘needs'. I would like to know what are the special needs of part-Maori today?

We all need houses, food, clothing, education and healthcare, which is available to all.

When Charles Darwin visited these shores in The Beagle, he wrote the land was barren, the natives hostile, and they lived in hovels. After Maori took over the land from those already here, just what did they do to improve the quality of life? Actually nothing, for they stripped the land of trees, and ate nearly everything that walked or flew, including the 12 species of moa. 

Conservationists they were not, luckily colonists have since done their upmost to restore many species. We know inter-tribal fighting, cannibalism and slavery were rife, but if it was such a wonderful culture and lifestyle why did Maori leaders first beg King William, and then Queen Victoria, to send troops to put an end to the looming extinction of Maori, especially after the Musket Wars.

If Maori want to participate in government then let them put candidates forward for election. It is ludicrous to suggest the 18 per cent part-Maori be given co-governance and it is up to them to be elected like everyone else. We are one nation.
M B,
Tauranga City.

Gisborne Herald 2/12/16 
DISAPPOINTED — BUT IT’S BOARDROOM POLITICS
Re: No official response to ‘offensive’ letter, December 1 story. 

I feel obliged to comment on Thursday’s article about the Health Board’s refusal to respond to Manu Caddie’s letter.

I was disappointed I couldn’t muster enough support for my suggestion they do so.

That’s boardroom politics, and I’m satisfied that I was given the chance to have my say.

Anybody who has been involved with local body politics in Tairawhiti over the last decade will be familiar with this classic Caddie approach to discussing important issues.

The reason I found Manu’s letter offensive wasn’t because of what he said about “white folks”. It was the way he, by inference, heaped scorn on the efforts of all the members of those committees that incidentally include some wonderfully-dedicated Maori members.

He’s also wrong to suggest all the committees are chaired by “status quo middle-class Pakeha members”, which is Manu-speak for “white males who have long outlived their usefulness”.

Last time I noticed, two of the most important committees were chaired by Maori.

Although I agree the three new members he promotes as worthy leadership contenders will bring welcome qualities to any committee, I doubt they’ll be any more dedicated or capable than the ones they replace.

Unfortunately, the colour of their skin won’t make an ounce of difference to their ability to help solve some of our real problems either.

Changing the terrible Maori health statistics for the better is a slow process and unfortunately will require considerable change in the personal lifestyles of many who are at risk.

The Health Board has welcomed the recommendations for doing things differently that have been advocated by Maori themselves.

During the time I’ve been on the Health Board, I’ve been impressed with the support given to the introduction of the Whanau Ora system of healthcare delivery, particularly on the Coast.

We’re also very receptive to the suggestions that come from the TRONP committee, which keep us informed about the issues that are seen as priorities for the Iwi population.

If there’s a problem with the way we’re co-operating with the Ngati Porou Hauora board, we’d be told about it before the ink was dry.
C B
Gisborne

Marlborough Express 1/12/16 

ON AOTEAROA 
Further to BJ’s letter ( Express, November 28), I invite your readers to look for the ‘‘mystical land of Aotearoa’’ in the Treaty of Waitangi. 

They will find that our country's name there is Nu Tirani. How many know that the Kingite rebels of the 1860s had their own flag with the name `Niu Tireni' on it with the same in Government proclamations in Maori in the 1940s? "...Aotearoa", like the lost continent of Atlantis, looks mythical to me. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

The New Zealand Herald 1/12/16 
FIRST CONES, THEN BEACHES?
Your report on Auckland Council’s decision to close all of Auckland’s volcanic cones to motor vehicles makes me very sad. The proposal effectively blocks access for the thousands of people in the city and its environs who, like me at close to 80 years of age, are not sufficiently disabled to warrant a disability concession card but would be unable to walk the access roads — some of which, like that to the Maungarei / Mt Wellington summit are long and steep.

It is a wonderful thing to be able to drive up there with a picnic lunch on a fine breezy day or to share the sweeping views of the city, harbour and gulf with visitors from abroad. It can be an experience that lifts the spirit. But such small pleasures will be lost to us for ever.

One wonders what this council and its advisers have in store for us next. Denying access to Auckland’s beaches perhaps?
D R,
Stonefields.

Northland Age 1/12/16 
ONE WAY FORWARD
As we view the political spectrum in this land of Aotearoa, it becomes increasingly obvious that Winston Peters and New Zealand First is the only way forward for us to become one people and one nation.

He is following in the footsteps of my great-great-great-uncle Northland MP John McCleod. He built the first railway in Auckland which ran from Riverhead to Kumeu on the Kaipara Harbour. He opened the first bath house at Parakai, built the town of Helensville, then moved north, building the railway at Kawakawa, which was used to carry coal, which was shipped to Auckland. He also discovered the lime seam south of Whangarei, which is still in operation today. None of which, as a Pakeha, I can go back and make any daim to.

Winston's stand on the latest RMA legislation deserves our deepest respect and backing because as he has foreseen, this government is hell-bent on dividing our people along racial lines. When the true fact of the matter is we all descended from tribes in North Africa. DNA science has proved this.

We all arrived out here on a waka making us all immigrants to this land. Your indigenous peoples goes out the window, because the only true indigenous people on the planet are those tribes still living in North Africa from which we all descended.

Winston is the most experienced man there, once being deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Finance, and then Minister of Foreign Affairs. This country needs to unite as one, as the Treaty of Waitangi states, and as the chiefs who signed it intended it to be.

Whether you are black, white, red, brown or yellow, in this land, the true fact is you are North African. We just had a Maori Governor-General, about time for a Maori Prime Minister.
May God bless us alL
K C
Parapara


INFORMED OPINION
I have just received an unsolicited letter from a retired gentleman, a kaumatua of the Tainui tribe, who spent time working in the district court and NZ police.

He wrote: "My view is that it's a no-win situation as long as we have the Chief Judge of the Maori Land Court as chairman of the Waitangi Tribunal and the Crown Attorney-General (both Parliamentary appointments) holding hands . . . I am of the view that the Waitangi Tribunal should be reviewed, abolish the Maori Land (dare I say it `Apartheid) Court . . . and that all applications be heard at the High Court (the one court for all New Zealanders.)
B J
Omokoroa

Bay of Plenty Times 1/12/16 
POOR RETURNS
Your correspondent Buddy Mikaere (Letters, November 25) tells us that many Maori and Pacifica people inhabit the areas of social disadvantage.

I am sure this is true and of other ethnicities as well. There are many social structures and funding to address this problem but the individuals themselves need to be motivated and willing to make that change for the betterment of their own lives.

A horse can be led to water but it cannot be made to drink.

Many of these people may be economically disadvantaged but are time rich.

As an example we often hear cries that the Maori language is in decline but language is learned by most persons in the home and family environment and requires little resources yet it has been reported that more than $300 million a year is spent on te reo for diminishing returns.

The only conclusion to be drawn from this is Maori do not want to save the language or would rather others do it for them.

If Mr Mikaere knows of motivated persons who are willing to take up the opportunities available in many fields and are prepared to see them through yet for some reason are unable to do so I am quite sure that can be rectified. The question is how many want to.

Is it a hand up that is sought or a hand out.
G F
Tauranga

The New Zealand Herald 30/11/16 
BANNING CARS UNDEMOCRATIC 
Your correspondent D R Stubbs is correct. The unilateral decision by self-appointed Tupuna Maunga Authority to ban access by cars to several Auckland volcanic cones, with Mt Eden already included, is totally undemocratic.
 
These parcels of land belong to us all. This decision is yet another example of the continuing out of control behaviour of Auckland Council, where agreements to a situation such as this are unreasonably influenced by the votes of six unelected Maori representatives. 

How can this decision possibly be allowed to prevail, and why is there not a public outcry ? If a vote of Auckland ratepayers was taken, there would be an overwhelming majority to immediately reject this spuriously based decision. 
H LE G, 
Remuera. 

The Northern Advocate 30/11/16 
PARADISE LOST 
New Zealanders had these, and have been taking them for granted. 

* Clean waterways. 

* Responsible conservation of the environment. 

* Equality in justice, respect for human rights, and fairness. 

* Affordable education and health resources for all. 

* For most, the benefits of having English, probably the greatest of human languages, as a first language. 

* A government that not only belonged to the people, but was run by the people, for the people. 

It was so precious New Zealanders fought in two world wars to keep it. These are all going, going ... She'll be right. Yeah. Nah. 
M M 
Maungakaramea 

Marlborough Express 28/11/16 
LAND OF THE LONG WHITE CLOUD 
I read an article in your Midweek by reporter Oliver Lewis who referred to something happening in Aotearoa. I was not sure where this was as I was under the impression I live in New Zealand. 

I’m not aware the Geographic Board have changed the name of New Zealand or perhaps I missed it? 

But I am wondering if I need a head shrink. Have I a locational crisis with bewilderment as to whether I am in New Zealand or in Aotearoa? 

Or do I need Search and Rescue to find me as I seem it is possible I have wandered from New Zealand to Aotearoa. Oh damn old age. I feel so confused. 

I have similarly noticed the TV3 weather lady referring to this mystical land of Aotearoa also. She also begins her forecasts with kia ora. At least, I always politely acknowledge her with a good Kiwi ‘‘gidday’’. 
B J 
Wellington 

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 25/11/16 
CONSTITUTIONAL OUTRAGE? 
Environment Minister Nick Smith, backed by the Maori Party has announced changes to the RMA Act with the requirement for local Councils to enter into agreements with iwi on how they can be involved in the resource management process. 

The Labour Party's David Parker labels the changes as horrendous, and it is opposed by developers, environmental groups, the Law Society and others. Sir Geoffrey Palmer calls it a constitutional outrage. 

The John Key-led National Government further entrenches racism within our society by giving one race priority over other cultures. This they have done under cover of the brouhaha during the United States of America elections. 
MJ A 
Pyes Pa. 


BITING THE HAND THAT FEEDS ME 
I get annoyed when I read letters such as those written by P Dey and M Leabourn as published in The Weekend Sun of November 4. Regardless of who got here first (P Dey's letter), Maori lore has told us forever that when they arrived on these shores they were met by a fair-skinned race of people. 

Their history, handed down by word of mouth, also states they copulated with this race of people before they killed them or ran them off to what is now The Chatham Islands. Thus began the dilution of the Maori bloodline, which continued unabated with every subsequent race who helped to colonise NZ. The race of people we now call Maori is so diluted as to be non-existent, and members are permitted to claim Maori blood if in fact they “feel like Maori”. 

With regard to M Leabourn's letter other races and countries have been colonised and have adapted to their new way of life without too much difficulty, so why not Maori? Before the arrival of the colonisers, Maori were basically a stone age people who had the most basic weaponry and apparently led a hunter gatherer existence. They were a warrior people and were well on the way to extinction, by means of fighting and killing themselves when the British arrived. 

And when Queen Victoria offered them the same rights as British subjects they accepted with no questions asked. It is the modern day interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi and in my view the benevolence of successive governments which has compounded the plight of Maori along with their reluctance to drag themselves into the 20th or 21st Centuries. It is a statement of their ability to succeed, when you see the success a lot of Maoris make of their life when they get out from under the welfare system of NZ and make a new life for themselves across the ditch or in any other country. 

As for their culture, if my people headed the statistics for incarceration, poor education, teenage pregnancy etc etc etc I would be doing everything in my power to turn them around and make it a people to be proud of. And I certainly would not be biting the hand that feeds me as appears to be the case today. 
P B 
Katikati. 

The Wellingtonian 24/11/16 
NZ WARS 
Your November 10 article, ‘‘Lest we forget the New Zealand wars’’, is more than a little fanciful. Perhaps a few facts might help. 

When Waikato Maori belonging to the King movement were fighting against the government in 1860-1863, against the wishes of their first leader, Te Wherowhero, Governor Grey sent a warning that ‘‘those who wage war against Her Majesty, or remain in arms, threatening the lives of Her peaceable subjects, must take the consequences of their acts, and they must understand that they will forfeit the right to the possession of their lands guaranteed to them by the Treaty of Waitangi.’’ 

Rebellious actions continued, and after they were defeated land was indeed confiscated. This was neither ‘‘indefensible’’ nor ‘‘abandonment of the Treaty of Waitangi’’, but commonly accepted under international law, indeed in keeping with the Treaty and Maori lore. 

A Parliamentary investigation soon resulted in the return of close to one-half the land, and more was to follow. On many occasions – in 1878, in 1882 and in 1888 – Government representatives went to meet with the second leader, Tawhiao, to offer the return of further confiscated land that had not then been sold. All these offers were turned down as Tawhiao refused to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen. That was the real breaking of the Treaty. 
JOHN ROBINSON 
Wellington 

Northland Age 24/11/16 
WHAT DEMOCRACY? 
Now that some of the power of the controllers of international finances, banking, governments and a biased media has been diminished or possibly threatened by the results of American presidential elections John Key may consider reviewing his political aims. He may wish to rescind ethnic favouritism of Maori at the behest of his parliamentary partners. 

Favouritism evidenced in many aspects of our national life such as education, resources, political representation and private consultations. Perhaps he may start to listen to and act for the other 85 per cent of the population. When a great majority of the country firmly rejected unelected positions on councils and regional authorities they were officially ignored. The activities of the Waitangi Tribunal and the millions of dollars in Treaty settlements made by Chris Finlayson go unchallenged. The government intends to include the iwi clauses in the RMA reform, giving co-governance to a small elitist coterie of part-Maori. What kind of democracy is that? 

The unfortunate premise is that, traditionally, when the next government elections come around no other political party will have the courage or social conscience to mention or challenge these undemocratic anomalies. I have on three occasions written a personal letter to each MP, had 10 per cent acknowledgement from secretaries but no comment from the member and no actions taken. Is this how Members regard their constituents? And so the imbalance will continue. 
B J 
Omokoroa 

Bay of Plenty Times 23/11/16 
REVIEW FOR KEY? 
Now that some of the power of the controllers of international finances, banking, governments and a biased media has been diminished or possibly threatened by the results of American presidential elections, John Key may consider reviewing his political aims. 

He may wish to rescind favouritism of Maori. 

Favouritism evidenced in many aspects of our national life such as education, resources, political representation and private consultations. 

Perhaps he may start to listen to and act for the other 85 per cent of the population. 

When a great majority of the country firmly rejected unelected positions on councils and regional authorities they were officially ignored. The activities of the Waitangi Tribunal and the millions of dollars in Treaty settlements made by Chris Finlayson go unchallenged. 

The Government intends to include the iwi clauses in the RMA reform. What kind of democracy is that? 

The unfortunate premise is that, traditionally, when the next Government elections come around no other political party will have the courage or social conscience to mention or challenge these undemocratic anomalies. 

I have on three occasions written a personal letter to each MP, had 10 per cent acknowledgement from secretaries but no comment from the member and no actions taken. 

Is this how members regard their constituents? 

And so the imbalance will continue. (Abridged) 
B J 
Omokoroa 

The Northern Advocate 23/11/16 
BEEHIVE, BEWARE 
“He knows nothing and he thinks he knows everything. That points clearly to a political career.” 

Thus spake George Bernard Shaw. There are those who enter Parliament, and we never hear of them again, and there are those who enter Parliament and we hear from them regularly, for all of the wrong reasons. 

Britain has voted to pull out of the European Union, and the United States has elected an apparent misogynist and racist for a president. Donald Trump has been elected democratically. Give the man a go. He may make America great again! 

Holland, France, and Germany vote next year, and most of the citizens of those countries want out of the EU. I asked a friend of mine, who brought his wife (an English teacher) and two children out from Macedonia, why he came to New Zealand. He answered: "I looked at a map of the world and saw that New Zealand is as far from Europe as I could get." He held his hand up and shook it as if to imitate boiling water. "Europe is simmering," he continued, "And it will soon boil over, and I want my family as far from there as possible when it does." 

Our Government goes to the polls as welL Either the New Zealanders will ignore the racism in the present Govern-ment's apartheid legislation, or they will deliver one powerful shock. Tighten your seat belts, folks, we are in for an exciting ride! 
KEVAN G MARKS 
Kaipara 

The Northern Advocate 22/11/16 
RACIAL DIVIDE 
It appears that a growing tide of resentment is showing regarding part-Maori favouritism. Certain political moves, both national and local, are seeing a backlash, albeit at this time a ripple. 

M Morgan, K Marks and others are a tad fed up with the hypocrisy surrounding the majority of our citizens. 

M Kaire writes a darned good letter, but I am afraid this writer deliberately paints a gloomy picture of part-Maori. 

Would she not recognise the achievements of many working part-Maori, who have homes that they have worked for? Will she acknowledge that many make sure their children are educated, also that their kids are fed and clothed? 

I suggest, while some folk keep bleating, 'poor me' and keep on receiving hand outs, it perpetuates the reasoning (if I keep it up, I can get something for nothing). 

Adding to the above, we have a clear demonstration of apartheid. Why should part-Maori, non-elected persons, have seats on councils? Why do we have part-Maori sports teams? Goodness me, I shudder to think what the outcome would be if we had teams based on race, ie, no Maori allowed. Maybe one should own up to the fact that a number of part-Maori institutions/trusts have gone belly-up. Why? 

The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights, as quoted by Ms Kaire, cuts both ways. It applies to everyone. No matter what the PC crowd think, many ordinary people object to the "Maorisation" of our country. 
B J C 
Whangarei 

Northland Age 22/11/16 (Also in Wanganui Chronicle 22/11/16) 
MAORI LANGUAGE 
Maori Development Minister Te Ururoa Flavell announced, "We must normalise te reo Maori" so that New Zealanders can " ... start their te reo Maori journey". 

Perhaps the minister is un-aware that not only have non-Maori started their journey but are major contributors to what is now called the Maori language. 

When the early colonists arrived the Maori vocabulary consisted of approximately 40,000 words. It is now probably more than 450,00 words, with the additional 110,000 being variations of the English language, dropping consonants for which Maori had no equivalent and adding vowels at the end. 

For example let us consider the very English name John Hadfield. No letter J in the Maori alphabet, so substitute H. Since all Maori words end in a vowel let's add an 'e'. Result —John equals Hone. Now for Hadfield. 'Ha' is OK but no 'd', so replace with 'ra'; no T so use 'w' the letters lie' become i, and as there is no 'I' or 'd replace with 'ra' so it ends in a vowel. So now what do we have? Surprise, surprise — Hone Harawira, whose given name at birth was John Hadfield. 

The same applies to many "Maori" names and variations on words borrowed from the English language. A few years ago two (no doubt well-paid) Maori scholars proudly announced they had invented 10,000 new Maori words in the preceding year, those words all being "converted" from the English language. So far from preserving the original Maori tongue, we are being fed a conglomeration of two languages rolled into one. Perhaps part-Maori children attending total immersion schools would better understand the origins of te reo if they learnt the English language first. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 


DON'T MEDDLE 
Re Anna Herbert-Graves'Value of Tikanga". We had better look at it again. After describing eye-witness accounts of the preparation of the flesh of their victims for cooking by the Maori invaders of the Chatham Islands, Michael King in Moriori, p.66, continues: "For Maori participants in this drama, what took place was simply tikanga, the traditional method of supporting new land claims.. .. nothing more or less than what had occurred on battlefields throughout the North Island in the two decades of tribal musket warfare." 

So there we have it, note, a mere five years before the signing of the Treaty! Maybe this ought to be the "Land Wars" commemoration which some tribes and a compliant Government are intent on foisting upon us Ms Herbert-Graves proceeds with "If Te Tiriti is about a relationship between the Crown and us, then a constitution has to work out the tikanga". Well, if by "us" she means her part-Maori accomplices, then that relationship was established in 1840 with all Maori becoming British subjects and the constitution has worked well since with no need whatever for any tikanga. 

She continues with "If the constitution guarantees rangatiratanga and is based on the treaty relationship that's the main value you need for us". There is no need for her "If'. She has only to read Article second of the Treaty to discover that and she had better accept that in 1840 "rangatiratanga" meant simply the right of possession of property, fundamental in English common law which applied with the transfer of sovereignty but non-existent in "tikanga". 

As Hongi Hika had pointed out not long before "taonga" meant no more than property acquired by the spear. So, yes, we have a constitution which works well and we should be fools to let Ms Herbert-Graves and her like meddle with it. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

NZ Herald 22/11/16 
SCHOOL FUNDING 
The Ministry of Education plans to base school funding on a database that records ethnicity. 

The official data quoted in your article lists 19 risk factors of which three are purely racial. These three risk factors must be ignored. There are things more important than achieving NCEA level 2. 

Preference based on race or ethnicity must be avoided. The alternative would be the same mindset that in the past created racial quotas stopping qualified Jews studying at American and at Russian universities. 
In 1972, NZ ratified the UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination so any special funding based on race is illegal. Another reason is the unreliability of ethnic data; the other 16 risk factors are clear so a child either has or has not a CYF notification. 
B A
Birkdale.

Dominion Post 21/11/16 
BLOODY MEMORIAL 
In your article The War that history forgot (October 15) historian Vincent O'Malley writes about the 1863 British invasion of the Waikato. He concludes by saying "Maori did incredibly well just to survive". 

On November 19, we could remember another invasion where the people did not survive, the 1835 invasion of the Chatham Islands by Maori tribes. At over 300 years old, it was the world's oldest pacifist society - it was annihilated in an orgy of violence. 

O'Malley writes of how the three day battle of Orakau in 1864 ended with a massacre. The Moriori, true to their code of Nunuku did not fight, but they were massacred anyway. Moriori survivors were enslaved, forbidden to marry Moriori, to have children with each other or to speak their language. The last Moriori of unmixed ancestry died in 1933. The end of this unique culture was a lost to humanity. 

By 1881 and militarily beaten, many Maori had themselves discovered pacifism at Parihaka. They were arrested, dispossessed and moved on but not massacred. If we are to tell the history of these islands, let us have the whole blood-soaked panorama despite how it reflects on us all. 
B B 
Island Bay 

Waikato Times 21/11/16  (also inThe Northern Advocate 17/11/16 ) 
MAJORITY RULES 
Now that some of the power of the controllers of international finances, banking, governments and a biased media has been diminished or possibly threatened by the results of American presidential elections, John Key may consider reviewing his political aims. He may wish to rescind ethnic favouritism of Maori at the behest of his parliamentary partners. 

Favouritism evidenced in many aspects of our national life such as education, resources, political representation and private consultations. Perhaps he may start to listen to and act for the other 85% of the population. 

When a great majority of the country firmly rejected unelected positions on councils and regional authorities they were officially ignored. The activities of the Waitangi Tribunal and the millions of dollars in Treaty settlements made by Chris Finlayson go unchallenged. 

The government intends to include the iwi clauses in the RMA reform. What kind of democracy is that? 

The unfortunate premise is that, traditionally, when the next government elections come around no other political party will have the courage or social conscience to mention or challenge these undemocratic anomalies. 

I have on three occasions written a personal letter to each MP, had 10% acknowledgement from secretaries but no comment from the member and no actions taken. Is this how Members regard their constituents? And so the imbalance will continue. 
B J 
Omokoroa 


MAJORITY RULES 2  (also in Hawkes Bay Today 15/11/16)
In his Gettysburg address, Lincoln spoke of government of the people by the people and for the people, and the Western world has come to accept those eloquent words as a striking description, if not definition, of democracy. New Zealanders would believe almost to a man that we have democracy here. But our ‘‘democracy’’ extends only to a one man one vote every three years, selecting from a soporific collection of oddballs, layabouts, manics and professional politicians. 

And even our version of one man one vote leaves something to be desired. It seems we have government of the people, but not by the people nor for the people. A well-known example of that is the 2009 referendum on parental corporal punishment. 87+ % of us voters submitted "No" to the referendum's question "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand". But that 87+ % were ignored, because our elected representatives and, perhaps more crucially, their lobbyists know best. 

Now, fearful that the Australian people will not share the pathetically correct position of their elected "representatives", the Australian politicians have vetoed the promised referendum on the issue of homosexual marriage. How democratic is that ? Down here in Australasia, we need a Donald Trump of our own to drain the swamps. 
L L 
Benneydale 

The Northern Advocate 21/11/16 
WAKE UP, GOVT 
What exciting times we are living in. Britain has given the EU the one-fingered salute, America has tossed out the Democrats despite the protestations of the media — Noam Chomsky, supposedly one of the world’s four most intelligent men, says the Republicans are the most dangerous organisation in the world’s history! One church leader says that the earthquakes here are the results of decadence in society. That doesn’t answer why they happened before humans came here, does it? 

The Netherlands, France, Austria, Finland and Hungary could follow Britain out of the EU. Apart from having their lifestyles disrupted, it seems a certain group of religious (?) followers are infiltrating them and creating havoc among them. This particular group number some 1.3 billion people worldwide and at least 10 per cent of these want the Western way of life wiped out. These countries will not allow Nazis to form there now, so why these people? They simply want to take their democracies back! 

These people are even migrating here. I would say to them that they must be able to answer four questions: 1. Do you believe in the freedom of religion? 2. Do you believe in the freedom from religion? 3. Do you believe in the freedom of the individual? 4. Do you believe in equal rights for women? A situation exists here where the Government kowtows to a race who were here before white people, but ignores the people before them. Don't treat your voters with contempt! 
KEVAN G MARKS 
Kaipara 

Nelson Mail 19/11/16 
RISE OF SEPARATISM 
A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still. That phrase could well have been written exclusively for your correspondent Gary Clover (November 12). He refuses to accept that the reparations he speaks of are simply going into the hands of a few greedy Europeans with enough Maori blood to make their case look kosher. 

This elite little group could not give a toss about grass roots Maori youth or the disproportionate number of Maori in our prisons. Take a good hard look at the key players I refer to and see who is really benefiting from the proceeds of this generation of taxpayers, both Maori and other. 

People need to remove their rose coloured spectacles they acquired on special at the PC shop, and take a good look at the reality of the increasing separatism in this country, scrape away the veneer to see just who is supping at the trough. 

If I was nine-tenths European and one tenth Maori, and realised how little it took to qualify for some taxpayer cash then of course I would quickly forget my nine-tenth European ancestry. Cynical? Isn't that what this whole treaty industry/ gravy train is all about? Sadly I am not alone in this conclusion. 
D D 
Wakefield. 

Northern Advocate 19/11/16 
PALMER'S VERSION 
I hear a lot about the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and have been wondering what they are and where they have come from. Also there has been talk about a partnership with the Crown. There is no mention of a partnership either. 

On checking, I find that these principles and partnerships were added some 130 years later by Sir Geoffrey Palmer, among others, who have decided to rewrite the history of the Maori, store the old books of history out of sight and mind, and that this is the reason for the current fiasco. Is this the same Geoffrey Palmer who wants New Zealand to become a republic? It seem he wants his cake and to eat it as well. You can't have it both ways. 

I'm beginning to wonder if they are handing out knighthoods with packets of tea! It will take a prime minister with a bit if intestinal fortitude to get rid of the Maori Party in Parliament, sack the Waitangi Tribunal, get rid of one of the two Maori TV channels, all of which are an albatross around our necks (with apologies to Samuel Taylor Coleridge), and declare that we are now one people as Governor William Hobson stated at the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi! On that day New Zealand will become a democracy. 

Maori were not the first people in New Zealand. That privilege belongs to the Patupal a reh e, Waitaha and Turehu people, who were decimated by certain Maori tribes on their arrival. 
KEVAN C MARKS 
Kaipara 


TE REO A MIXTURE 
Maori Development Minister Te Ururoa Flavell announced, "We must normalise te reo Maori" so that New Zealanders can " ... start their te reo Maori journey". 

Perhaps the minister is un-aware that not only have non-Maori started their journey but are major contributors to what is now called the Maori language. 

When the early colonists arrived the Maori vocabulary consisted of approximately 40,000 words. It is now probably more than 450,00 words, with the additional 110,000 being variations of the English language, dropping consonants for which Maori had no equivalent and adding vowels at the end. 

For example let us consider the very English name John Hadfield. No letter J in the Maori alphabet, so substitute H. Since all Maori words end in a vowel let's add an 'e'. Result —John equals Hone. Now for Hadfield. 'Ha' is OK but no 'd', so replace with 'ra'; no T so use 'w' the letters lie' become i, and as there is no 'I' or 'd replace with 'ra' so it ends in a vowel. So now what do we have? Surprise, surprise — Hone Harawira, whose given name at birth was John Hadfield. 

The same applies to many "Maori" names and variations on words borrowed from the English language. A few years ago two (no doubt well-paid) Maori scholars proudly announced they had invented 10,000 new Maori words in the preceding year, those words all being "converted" from the English language. So far from preserving the original Maori tongue, we are being fed a conglomeration of two languages rolled into one. Perhaps part-Maori children attending total immersion schools would better understand the origins of te reo if they learnt the English language first. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 

Bay of Plenty Times 19/11/16 
END FOR NATIONAL 
Donald Trump successfully dealt to the "rotten to the core" Washington establishment, doing the American public a big favour. Yes, he's possibly loosely wrapped and maybe not ideal but was clearly better than the opposition and some of his policies actually make sense. 

With the Trump landslide, Brexit and other looming political changes about to sweep through Europe and even Australia, the National Party have every reason to fear the October 2017 elections. 

Mr Key's policies including RMA, freshwater, race-based (elected and unelected) representation on councils/com-mittees, TPP, the flag referendum, housing stuff-ups, immigration and tribal uprisings commemoration day all effectively done without public consultation — will be the death knell for Key and his robotic bootlickers. 

Grovelling to the Maori Party is just another nail in the coffin. 

Voters will have the opportunity to dismiss this National Govemment, bypassing the inane Labour/Greens coalition, by giving their 2017 party vote to NZ First which at least supports what most Kiwis believe in, and this should translate into 20.25 seats, enough to hold the balance of power. 

A word of warning to the National Party backsliders: "Ask not for whom the bell tolls —it tolls for thee." And good riddance too. (Abridged.) 
R P 
Matapihi 

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 18/11/16 
DEFINITION OF DEMOCRACY IGNORED 
It is not looking good for democracy in Tauranga. I wrote, on behalf of the people of Tauranga City, to all the councillors about the law which they have just sworn an oath to uphold. I quote: “The purpose of local government is to enable democratic local decision making and action by local communities”. The definition of democracy is: “Rule by the people”. Two out of 11 replied! Nothing from, Mayor Greg Brownless, Max Mason, Gail McIntosh, Kelvin Clout, Leanne Brown, Larry Baldock, Catherine Stewart, Bill Grainger and Terry Molloy. Rick Curach and Steve Morris sent very short replies! 

My concern is that right now, staff at TCC are telling these councillors they - the elected councillors - are to make all the decisions and ignore us. This is totally against the purpose of The Local Government Act and against the law. Sadly, 10 of the 11 councillors have all operated in the former council and, I believe, will quickly resume their old ways under the influence of non-elected staff. 

We, you and I, can apply to have a Government Appointed Commissioner to run our council if the old system of dictatorship continues. Councillors, you have to obey the law. You have been warned! 
K E 
Tauranga. 


STOP THE ‘CRAZIES’ IN THEIR TRACKS 
Donald Trump successfully dealt to the ‘rotten to the core' Washington establishment and in doing so, did the American public a big favour. Yes, he is possibly loosely wrapped and maybe not ideal but is clearly better than the opposition and some of his policies actually make sense. 

Having regard to the Trump landslide, Brexit and other looming political changes about to sweep through Europe and even Australia, the National Party has every reason to fear the October 2017 General Election and reliable sources report they are privately paranoid about losing seats. 

Mr Key's policies including RMA Act, Freshwater, race-based – elected and unelected – representation on councils and committees, Trans-Pacific Partnership, the flag referendum, housing stuff-ups, immigration and tribal uprising's commemoration day – all effectively done without public consultation will be the death knell for him and his robotic bootlickers! Grovelling to the irrelevant Maori Party is just another nail in the coffin. 

Voters have the opportunity to dismiss this National Government and not to support the Labour-Greens Coalition by giving their 2017 Party Vote to NZ First, which at least supports what most Kiwis believe in and this should translate into 20-25 seats, enough to hold the balance of power and stop the ‘crazies' in their tracks. A word of warning to National Party backsliders ‘ask not for whom the bell tolls – it tolls for thee' and good riddance too. 
R P 
Matapihi. 

Nelson Mail 18/11/16 
VISIONLESS 
Democracy is a fragile flower, and political pragmatism is its nemesis. Nick Smith’s pragmatic RMA deal with the Maori Party eminently disqualifies him as democracy’s cultivator, and justifying it by the Treaty of Waitangi, is a culpable misrepresentation of both history and of the framers’ intent. 

His government has already white anted democracy’s walls by introducing into governmental bodies members with full voting rights on decisions affecting the people who never democratically chose them. 

You don’t know what you’ve lost until it’s gone, and the democratic inheritance bequeathed to us by our forefathers is being sold out by a generation of visionless and cynical anti-democratic dealmakers. 
A F J 
Wakefield 

NICK SMITH REPLIES: My Resource Management Act (RMA) Bill makes more than 40 important changes that will benefit New Zealand. 
It makes managing natural hazards a priority. It enables national regulations to get stock fenced out of our lakes and rivers. 
It requires councils to free up more land for housing. 
It exempts minor activities from requiring a resource consent 
It provides more generous compensation for land taken under the Public Works Act 
It requires councils to use national planning standards that will hugely reduce the RMA's complexity. 
The bill's provisions that allow for councils to enter into iwi participation arrangements are simply about enabling Maori to have a say in resource management They are not compulsory and require council agreement. Final decision-making remains with elected councils. 
The bill makes plain that such arrangements need to minimise the cost and avoid unnecessary delays. 
Some councils already have such agreements, and they are working well. 
We should not idealise our forefathers' democracy. 
Our majority rule Parliament was used in the nineteenth century to unfairly confiscate Maori land. 
Our MMP democracy today is more inclusive and does require compromise. 

Hawke's Bay Today 17/11/16 
RMA CHANGES A BETRAYAL 
Parliament has started debating the National Government’s redraft of the Resource Management Act — the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill. 

The majority of newly elected councillors on Hawke’s Bay Regional Council are committed to prohibiting oil and gas drilling in our water catchments, but section 360D of the draft bill will enable central government to override our democratically elected regional council. 

The National Party does not have a majority and is dependent on the Maori Party to get the bill passed in Parliament. Prior to the last general election, the Maori Party signed a commitment to support exclusion zones to protect drinking water from fracking for oil and gas, and electors should hold them to that. 

I would urge everyone to write to the Minister, Nick Smith, to oppose this element of the proposed legislation. This is clearly a betrayal of local democracy. 
A L 
Parkvale 

Northland Age 17/11/16 
AND AGAIN 
So once again we have had a call for Maori to be given ethnic. preference with councillor Penny Hulse suggesting a slogan should include reference to "Maori identity as Auckland's point of reference in the world". 

Such misguided reasoning would serve no purpose, as the slogan would be in English with no historical or cultural reference to Maori. 

However, it helped dispense half a million dollars. Incidentally, the cost of the exercise should come as no surprise when one considers that the "finger print logo" for Te Papa cost over $300,000. 

`Tamaki Makau Rau,' or lyrically 'The Land Contested by a Thousand Lovers' spent long periods uninhabited, as tribes were reluctant to occupy this prize locale for fear of the attacks by other tribes it would invite. 
B J 
Omokoroa 

Nelson Mail 16/11/16 
PATERNALISM 
It’s pointless expecting fact or reason to prevail against the fantastically skewed version of history promoted by Gary Clover and his ilk. 

Regardless it should be pointed out that the cavalier dismissal of the very principals of our democracy in order to promote Clover's condescending push for iwi privilege will ensure that racism remains alive and well for some time yet. The last few decades in Fiji go some way to proving the point. 

Clover should realise that inspirational Kiwis like Sir Jerry Mateparae or Mavis Mullins to name but two along with most average Kiwis don't need his benevolent great white father paternalism. 
K M 
Upper Moutere, 

NZ Herald 15/11/16 (Short & Sweet section) 
ON AUCKLAND'S SLOGAN 
So Ateed has chosen the literal English rendition of Tamaki Makaurau — "the place desired by many" — as its new slogan for Auckland. In other words, Ateed has spent half a million dollars on a basic translation. I would have done the same for a mid-to-low range bottle of pinot and a back rub. 
B A 
Western Springs Rd. 

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 11/11/16 
ENCOURAGING RACISM 
Re: ‘Maori do need race-based policies' (The Weekend Sun, November 4). M Leabourn argues in favour of continued race-based policies for Maori. Does he want to encourage more racism and separatism? Then to be fair there should also be separate policies for Pacific people, Asians and Indians etc. 

He states that “our current policies do not work for Maori”. I amend that to “some Maori”. I agree Maori culture is unique, so is the culture of all races who make up the NZ population. M Leabourn should dig a little deeper to find out about the numerous “special policies” that already exist for Maori in our legislation. Maori already currently have a say in decision making with the Maori Party in coalition with the Government. 
R B 
Papamoa

Waikato Times 12/11/16 
LAND WARS DAY 
Re: New Zealand war days set (Waikato Times, November 1). 

It’s interesting in a country espousing peace that a commemoration of the New Zealand land wars in the 19th century would be considered to be a worthy undertaking. Surely, we have more than enough exposure to warfare and resulting destruction. Most people in New Zealand who have studied 19th century New Zealand history would be aware of the land wars. We commemorate the First and Second World Wars but to no avail. Warfare and racism continues worldwide. 

There may even be lobbying to pursue a commemoration day as a statutory holiday. I’m sure the extra cost to employers will not be popular if that comes to pass. I often wonder if people who come up with these plans are actually aware of the real world and what it takes to manage a business, particularly now that the minimum wage has risen to $15.25. 

Perhaps an alternative commemoration would be for all of the pre Maori peoples who came to these shores in peace over a period of 2000 years or more, as is being discovered. New Zealand has an ancient history but little is mentioned. As Rahui Papa said, "We must face up to the happenings of the past to prepare all of Aotearoa-New Zealand for a brighter more unified fixture." It's certainly questionable whether a Land Wars Day will improve the unity within the country. 
P B 
Hamilton, 
Ontario Canada 

Rotorua Daily Post 12/11/16 
RMA BACKING 'BIZARRE' 
In an attempt to shake the feeling of consternation as the reality of a Trump presidency sunk in, I browsed through local political headlines to reassure my-self that things are not so bad in Aotearoa. With most media busy reporting from Washington instead of Wellington, the news of RMA reforms unsurprisingly did not hit headlines. 

But despite the absence of headlines, the negative impact of the reforms will still be felt by all. On Wednesday, the Maori Party reversed their previous position and are instead backing their National Party colleagues by supporting the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill, which other-wise would not have become law. 

The bill strips legislative ability from local councils to make decisions in its own best interest, instead the bill concentrates power to a few central government elite. One amendment removes the option for local councils to receive a financial contribution from housing developers. It would he fairer for the council to retain this, instead of the option backed by the Maori Party, which could see the council be forced to increase rates for all residents to meet the additional infrastructure demand imposed by new developments. 

Considering the Maori Party had a policy of changing taxation distribution to achieve equality, it is in my view bizarre that they would back a plan which sees wealthy developers make more profit while private residents pay more tax in the form of rates. But I guess in a world where the president of the USA is Donald Trump, anything is possible. 
R G 
Rotorua 

Bay of Plenty Times 12/11/16 
RMA OUTRAGE 
Nick Smith, backed by the Maori Party, has announced changes to the RMA with the requirement for local councils to enter into agreements with iwi on how they can be involved in the resource management process. 

David Parker (Labour) labels the changes as horrendous, and it is opposed by developers, environmental groups, the Law Society and others. Sir Geoffrey Palmer calls it a constitution al outrage. 

The John Key-led National Government entrenches racism within our society by giving one race priority over other cultures. This they have done under cover of the brouhaha during the USA elections. 
M J A
Pyes Pa 

Taranaki Daily News 11/11/16 
ONE NATION 
I understand what Errol Spence is saying in his letter re Maori/ Moriori history and the fact that Maori, especially Waikato Maori were a violent people who claimed large parts of the country by ‘right of conquest’, however, I believe he misses one vital point, the Treaty of Waitangi. 

Unlike the Waikato Maori, the British government agreed to protect Maori and their lands, but some unscrupulous Pakeha decided to enforce their own interests and greed on the native community using the same barbarity Mr Spence criticises Maori for. 

It is not an excuse for either party, but they were different times and a different morality existed. 

In a more enlightened time, reparations were right to be made, but it begs the question of how long are we going to be held to blame for the sins of some of those early settlers. 

Is David Hooper of Ngapuhi right when he says that the Treaty has no place in modern New Zealand, and that history is being distorted and rewritten to fit the Treaty; judges and historians being afraid to speak out for fear of their careers. 

Maori culture, language and history must be preserved and promoted, it helps define this country, but it seems to have been hijacked by some self serving activists, their personal greed and their own political agenda. 

When do we start moving forward as one nation, Kiwis? 

Pakeha helped to provide much of the rich tapestry which now puts New Zealand where it currently sits in the world. 
P B 
Bell Block 

The Northern Advocate 11/11/16 
TRUE DOCUMENT 
Re M Armstrong letter October 29. The so-called English text of the Treaty used for an overflow of signatures at Waikato Heads is a bogus document concocted by Hobson's secretary, Free-man. 

Mike Butler, my fellow-author in One Treaty, One Nation is fully aware of this and would never quote it as authoritative. 

We are well aware that the document in Maori, signed at Waitangi on February 6, 1840, is the only valid treaty and we rely on it. 

It is an absurdity for Armstrong to claim that, by it, Maoris kept their independence and "control over everything that is important to them". By Article second, all the people of New Zealand (tangata katoa o Nu Tirani) were simply assured of their property rights (tino rangatiratanga — a missionary-coined expression in the absence of a Maori one). This article is actually redundant as existing Britishers had such rights already and Maoris obtained them when by Article third they became fully-entitled British subjects. 

It is a disgrace that new migrants are being indoctrinated with a set of gross falsehoods and the so-called "Network Waitangi" is a prime offender in this betrayal of our nation's integrity. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson

Nelson Mail 10/11/16 
DEMOCRATIC CONTEMPT 
While Gary Clover (November 8) will maintain his deluded views about the Treaty of Waitangi until the cows come home, may I say once and for all to the rest of your readers that there never was such a thing as a ‘‘treaty partnership’’ whatever anybody may imagine. 

The great thing about the Treaty is that it gave equal rights to all the people of New Zealand (tangata katoa o Nu Tirani). 

It is a flagrant abuse of that great principle that no sooner has it been elected that the Nelson City Council without reference to electors before or since has appointed three individuals with full voting rights. 

The council treats democracy with contempt. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

Waikato Times 8/11/16 
STRANGE TIMES 
A certain amount of newspaper weirdness is highly desirable to boost sales and enliven the day. The Times excelled with two recent articles. 

The first was the report on the Matariki protest at a marae in Taranaki. Taranaki is one of the wettest areas in New Zealand and stars are normally obscured by cloud or rain all through winter. I don’t think a few wispy smoke plumes 5km away will make much difference to the marae’s celebrations. The idea of Matariki as a planting time is highly dubious. 

Good luck to anyone trying to plant kumara in Taranaki in June! Most authentic accounts talk of winter as a time of death. Traditional Maori foods were not planted in mid winter as they were of sub tropical origin. 

The second beauty was the report of October 28 being chosen as the date to commemorate the Waikato Wars. The signing of the Declaration of Independence in Northland was a minor, local, Ngapuhi affair concerned with keeping Baron de Thierry from becoming ‘‘king of the Bay of Islands’’ – nothing to do with Waikato or any war. It was superseded by the Treaty of Waitangi. It took place in 1835– 27 years prior to the Waikato Wars. 

A more weird date would be hard to find! 
M L 
Hamilton 

The article relating to Matariki is here > http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/80926549/kahotea-marae-opposed-to-nova-gasfired-power-plant 

Northland Age 8/11/16 
THE REAL AGENDA 
One would have to be very naive to accept the real purpose of the proposed commemoration of the Land Wars. A likely result may be more spurious claims of tribal land confiscations, resulting in more Waitangi Tribunal-sponsored settlements. 

Te Ururoa Flavell should consider that those who died during the entire military engagements, 190 deaths the most in a single battle, fell well short of the thousands slaughtered by Hongi Hika or Te Rauparaha in a single raid on other tribes. The over 40,000 who died in the internecine battles of the Musket Wars apparently deserve no mention. 

Our school children deserve to be taught the true, verifiable facts of our history and not the ethnically-biased versions presented by teachers who betray their professional and ethical trust by introducing personal politics into their classrooms. 

Where does honest revision and reflection on our history begin? Are the murderous actions of Mr Flavell's Ngapuhi forebears not deserving of commemorating? 
B J 
Omokoroa 

Northern Advocate 8/11/16 (Also in Northland Age 8/11/16) 
TE TIRITI 
I followed with interested the exchange of views re the Treaty of Waitangi in Letters recently. 

The true treaty is Te Tiriti o Waitangi, written in te reo. No other document is the treaty. This document contained the words that were written and that were spoken to the people of New Zealand in February of 1840 and the preceding months. It is this document that contains the marks or signatures of those who became a party to it. 

Yes, we all know that Maunsell used an English version at Waikato, penned by James Freeman, to receive some signatures that wouldn't fit on the official te reo document. But we also know the vast majority of signatories to the actual treaty, Te Tiriti o Waitangi, did not speak or understand English in 1840. So any English 'version' written by Freeman is irrelevant, as it was not the document that was read to the people. 

It is nothing short of criminal that the government have elevated the Freeman document and sat it alongside the official and signed document. 
M L 
Te Puke 

Taranaki Daily News 8/11/16 
PARIHAKA AND PEACE 
The peaceful greeting of the Armed Constabulary was inevitable due to the decision to present in overwhelming numbers. Had half a dozen constables turned up to arrest Te Whiti and Tohu the outcome may not have been peaceful. 

When Te Whiti was starting to talk of peaceful coexistence with Pakeha his fellow Atiawa were still holding the rapidly diminishing remnants of the Moriori in abject slavery on the Chatham islands. 

Shortly before the first English settlers arrived to a virtually empty New Plymouth, Te Atiawa from the Wellington area invaded the Chathams. They had been displaced in north Taranaki by the repeated raids by Waikato. The massacre and cannibal feasting at Pukerangiora is well documented. The Waikato leader Te Whero Whero (later the first Maori king) claimed this land as his "by right of conquest". 

Invading Atiawa at the Chathams were peacefully met by the 1500-odd Moriori. For at least 400 years they had been isolated and for various known reasons they had rejected violence. The Maori had no such rules. 

They immediately murdered about 300 and, after making the rest slaves, divided up the Moriori land claiming it "by right of conquest". The complete degradation of the Moriori followed for more than thirty years, long after slavery was abolished in New Zealand and released Atiawa started to return to claim north Taranaki back. 

Many want Parihaka as a symbol of peace but the truth is that the only truly peaceful people of those times were the Moriori. 

The difference was that at Parihaka it is easy to condemn today because Pakeha were involved whereas at the Chathams it was Polynesians massacring Polynesians. 

My point is that many mistakes were made at that time by all sides. Can we not accept this, shut the door to the past and seek to live in genuine peace today. 
E S 
Inglewood 

Dominion Post 7/11/16 
REBELLIOUS ACTIONS 
Your November 3 editorial is more than a little fanciful. Perhaps a few facts might help. 

When Waikato Maori belonging to the king movement were fighting against the government in 1860-1863, against the wishes of their first leader, Te Wherowhero, Governor Grey sent a warning that "those who wage war against Her Majesty, or remain in arms, threatening the lives of Her peaceable subjects, must take the consequences of their acts, and they must understand that they will forfeit the right to the possession of their lands guaranteed to them by the Treaty of Waitangi." 

Rebellious actions continued, and after they were defeated land was indeed confiscated. 

This was neither "indefensible" nor "abandonment of the Treaty of Waitangi", but commonly accepted under international law, indeed in keeping with the Treaty and Maori lore. 

A parliamentary investigation soon resulted in the return of close to one-half the land, and more was to follow. [abridged] 
JOHN ROBINSON 
Island Bay 

The Northern Advocate 7/11/16 
LAND WARS TRUTH 
On October 28, 2017, we will celebrate another event, which will become an annual event in New Zealand’s history, thanks to the efforts of two pupils from Otorohanga College. 

Is our history being twisted still further from the truth? It will be called, I believe, National Commemoration Day, and will mark the land wars. It will mark the Maori people who lost their lives fighting, plus British soldiers as well as the Maori sympathisers. Let’s call them Maori, because they were not known as Maori in those days, but by the names of their various tribes, of which there were some 100, though many were divided off in to family groups. 

The Government, bless them, will stump up $4 million for these celebrations over the next four years. 

Almost 3000 people lost their lives, 2154 Maori and 745 British soldiers. “Me Maumahara Tatou — We Must Remember”. Sounds almost like Anzac Day, doesn’t it? 

Perhaps we should remember the 43,000 Maori who were slaughtered by, would you believe, Maori, as well, and many more were taken as slaves, not to mention the people who were in residence before they came and had their lands taken from them, the Patupaiarehe, Waitaha, and Turehu, and whose populations were decimated and who have not received a brass razoo for their losses (yet)! If we are to mark the land wars, at least we should keep everything in perspective. 
KEVAN G MARKS 
Kaipara 

Bay of Plenty Times 7/11/16 
RACE-BASED RIGHTS A NONSENSE 
Peter Dey's letter (Letters, November 4) wrongly claims that Robin Bishop's opposition to race-based politics lacks rational sense, but his claims then throw rationality out the window. 

Presumably relying on Article 2 of the Treaty he construes this as giving special “race-based” property rights to Maori. If he read the Treaty he would find that what Article 2 actually guarantees is the property rights of “tangata katoa o Nu Tirani” which means “all the people of New Zealand” and “all” means “all”. Again a statement of equality. 

Taonga in 1840 as Peter Dey states was defined as “valued possessions”, chattels, certainly not things of spiritual or mystical nature, or pertaining to the commons. 

For Peter Dey to suggest that opposing race-based politics is opposing Maori culture and is a desire for a mono-cultural society makes no sense, in my view. We already have a multicultural society. What those who demand equality oppose is the attempt to elevate Maori culture and cultural practices above all other cultures and Maori be given special rights and privileges. They also question if the amount taxpayers spend on Maori culture, such as the $600m pa on promoting Te Reo, could be better spent on say, housing the homeless. 
R P 
Welcome Bay 


TREATY FOR ALL 
The Treaty of Waitangi is not a race-based document as Peter Dey (Letters, November 4) asserts as it is directed at “all the people of New Zealand”, it says so in Te Tiriti “ki nga tangata katoa o Nu Tirani”. 

The true treaty is Te Tiriti o Waitangi written in Te Reo, no other document is the treaty, this document contained the words that were written and that were spoken to the people of New Zealand in February of 1840 and the proceeding months. It is this document that contains the marks or signatures of those who became a party to it. 

Yes we all know that Maunsell used an English version at Waikato, penned by James Freeman, to receive some signatures that wouldn’t fit on the official Te Reo document. 

But we also know the vast majority of signatories to the actual treaty “Te Tiriti o Waitangi” did not speak or understand English in 1840. So any English “version” written by Freeman is irrelevant as it was not the document that was read to the people. 

Dey appears to uphold the “Freeman” document? 
M L 
Te Puke

Bay of Plenty Times 5/11/16 
RACIAL FALLACY 
Regarding Peter Dey's letter (Opinion, October 28), there are no racial property rights in Te Tiriti o Waitangi, only the ceding of sovereignty to Ko Wikitoria to Kuini o Ingarene and the confirmation and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand, the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property. 

Mr Dey claims favour for Maori "because they were the original owners of the country". In my view, there is ample evidence opposing that view. Examine the multitudinous, archaeological documentation and DNA evidence that substantiates other cultures being here as far back as 3000 years ago, evidence which has been gained from below the tephra layers from Lake Taupo eruptions. (Abridged.) 
M J A 
Pyes Pa 


ONE NATION 
How much longer will Peter Dey continue to write his version of the Treaty of Waitangi? 

Under the Treaty we became one nation, New Zealanders with no special privileges for Maori other than that they could sell land through the Crown, which they did with enthusiasm. No mention of forests, rivers, water or even fresh air. 

Maori were not the original settlers — tribal leaders in the past have agreed there were people here when the first canoes arrived. 

Dey forgets that the fact there are part-Maori alive today is due to the entreaties of Maori leaders —first to King William, and then Queen Victoria, asking them to send troops to the other side of the world to save Maori from tribal wars and cannibalism. Queen Victoria did so on her terms, namely signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. 

This is not a race-based document but makes us equal living in a multi-cultural New Zealand. (Abridged.) 
M B 
Tauranga 

Dominion Post 4/11/16 
RIGHT TO REMEMBER 
Your editorial Lest we forget the NZ Wars (November 3) rightly commends having a day to remember the wars in our own country. 

Such a commemoration would ensure New Zealanders get an accurate picture of what actually happened: that more Maori fought on the side of the Crown than against it; that there were atrocities on both sides with the worst being those of Te Kooti; that most of the country, including the whole of the South Island, was largely unaffected; and that, despite widespread land alienation, there were ultimately a large number of positive outcomes for Maori. 

As part of the October 28 commemorations we should also remember the conflict that killed more New Zealanders than all later wars here and overseas. In hundreds of Musket War battles from 1807 to 1845, possibly 30,000 Maori were killed or wounded. Thousands of innocent men, women and children were slaughtered and sometimes eaten, and hundreds of others were enslaved. And, large areas of land were confiscated by victorious iwi. 

Our history does not just begin in 1840, and students, especially, need to learn about all our devastating wars. Furthermore, teachers have a responsibility to ensure they get a balanced coverage. 
R C 
Raumati Beach 


CONSULT OTHERS 
Your editorial supporting commemorating the NZ Wars is concerning. Minister Te Ururoa Flavell said iwi have decided October 28 as the commemoration date, being the day in 1835 the Declaration of Independence of New Zealand was signed. 

This date seems to have little significance to the wars and more to gaining constitutional leverage. 

The Government should be asked why the demanded "Land Wars" commemoration is only, it seems, being discussed with and by iwi. 

Of the approximately 3000 who died in these wars, some 1000 were British soldiers and militia. 

It seems their descendants are not being consulted. My forebears arrived in 1841 and some lost their lives in the Waikato and Taranaki wars. No one has approached me or my family. 

Flavell said he had secured $4 million to support the commemorations. I have the unease this money will be used only by iwi for history revision and so to weave a new korowai of victimhood to improve their ideological interests and financial position. 

If the wider public, and particularly the descendants of early settlers, are not involved and their views included, then these so-called commemorations will. like Waitangi Day, become another day of ugliness and division. 
R P 
Tauranga 

Bay of Plenty Times 4/11/16 
TAKE EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES 
The Government has announced funding for an increase in prison beds in existing prisons and in a new facility. 

I was interested in an interview with a Maori spokesman on TVNZ 1 News that most of the Maori prisoners could not read or write. He was aiming this comment as though it was the Government’s fault. But the Government provides schooling where the majority of young children are taught to read and write. 

If the parents don’t bother to take advantage of this paid-for service then don’t blame the Government. Figures released recently showed that less than 60 per cent of Maori and Pasifica students attend school regularly. Is it any wonder then that 50 per cent of the prison population is Maori or Pasifika and they can't read or write? 

I entertained a New Zealandtrained teacher in August and on a couple of occasions we visited Bayfair. She could not get over the family groups with school-age children wandering around. Why were the children not in school? In London, where she teaches, parents get fined $80 if their children play the wag. 

New immigrants to this country generally appreciate having good schools to send their children to so that when they grow up they will be able to support themselves. (Abridged) 
P T 
Pyes Pa 

The New Zealand Herald 3/11/16 (Short & Sweet section) 
ON CONSTITUTION 
Your correspondent Neville Cameron comments that a constitution gives people a fall-back. We must ensure that any future constitution is for the common good of all of us and is not hijacked into race-based politics by a constitution based on the Treaty of Waitangi. 
R B 
Tauranga. 

Rotorua Review 3/11/16 
ILLEGAL? 
It was with interest I read the article on the front cover of the Rotorua Review (October 19) where Mayor Steve Chadwick said that the controversial Te Arawa Partnership was settled, absolutely put to bed and would not be revisited. 

What I would like to know is is this Maori advisory group being paid and if so, is the money coming out of our rates? 

Bearing in mind this group have not been democratically elected by the rate payers of Rotorua. 

Surely such an arrangement is illegal, as this is not democracy. 
B M 

Northland Age 3/11/16 
AGENDA EXPOSED 
With the Treaty claims process coming. an end, the right to control public resources is becoming a central focus for tribal corporations as they enter the post settlement era. their priority is the control of fresh water. 

New information shows they are making significant progress. 

Our research has now uncovered the fact that an extensive three-year fresh water policy development process is well under way. It is a reform programme the government clearly doesn't want you to know about. 

Their Cabinet Paper explains it in this way: "The public has been informed of our intention to continue work to develop freshwater allocation policy proposals, through publication of our consultation document 'Next steps for fresh water' on 20 February 2016. No further media announcements are intended." 

In other words, the Government has decided that an innocuous comment in a complex consultation paper is sufficient to inform the public that a major programme of crucial fresh water reform is underway. 

This is in sharp contrast to the way iwi leaders have been treated. 

The Cabinet Paper explains: "We seek Cabinet's agreement to a work programme on water allocation. We have discussed this draft terms of reference with the Iwi Leaders' Group, who expressed their support for the approach. This will be a complex piece of work and is likely to have significant impact on the New Zealand economy. It is important to take an approach that ensures the policy options we are presented with are supported by a strong evidence base, and are well tested with those who can tell us how they are likely to play out, practically, on the ground. It will take time to do this, and initially we will need officials to explore a wide range of options before narrowing down to those that are most feasible. 

"Advice on options will include how they are consistent with the government's fundamental position that no one owns fresh water, and that fresh water needs to be managed at a local level, catchment by catchment." 

A network of advisory groups consisting of an Allocation Team, a Joint Advisory Group, and a Technical Advisory Group, have now been established to advance this work programme. Iwi leaders have been invited to have a presence in all groups, and indeed have had a significant hand in determining the process, the advisory groups, and the membership of those groups. This far from independent process has no doubt been designed by iwi to produce their desired outcome. 

In terms of the proposed time frame for the project, by the end of this year a full range of reform options will have been identified with advice provided to ministers on which ones should be explored further. 

Next year, the policy options agreed by Cabinet will be modelled, tested and refined, with final recommendations made to the incoming government at the end of 2017. 

The third phase of the project, in 2018, will include limited public consultation on the policy options being proposed. The final implementation of the reforms will be "through either amendment to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management, regulations or legislative change." 

In other words, the government is already planning to push through major reform of fresh water management in New Zealand by the back door using a National Policy Statement or regulation, both of which would avoid further public scrutiny and the democratic Parliamentary process. 

This is clearly a strategy designed to introduce substantial race-based privileges to a national resource, with limited public involvement, and without attracting attention. What's more, the timetable delays public consultation until after the 2017 election, thereby avoiding the risk of it becoming an election issue. 

Although the Cabinet Paper raises concerns about conflicts of interest, it makes no mention of the glaring pecuniary conflict of interest of iwi leaders, who stand to make billions of dollars from water rights if the final policy outcome goes their way. 

National is clearly hoping that in the next term of government, together with the Maori Party, they will be able to introduce the tribal control of fresh water - long demanded by the iwi elite - through the back door. 

Anthony Willy, a former judge and lecturer in law at Canterbury University, puts it this way: 

"Creating imaginary rights and rectifying wrongs taken out of their historical context may give the academics and their ilk among the policy-makers a warm feeling of rectitude, but they do nothing to promote and preserve the greater good." 

In 2007, then National Party conservation spokesman Nick Smith stated that water was a public resource and "We think it is a mistake to try and divide the management of water along ethnic lines". 

How his tune has changed. But what's most disturbing is the conniving and arrogant dismissal of the public's right to be kept informed of changes to the way this crucial public resource is about to be managed. 
DR MURIEL NEWMAN 
NZ Centre for Political Research 

Southland Times 2/11/16 
ONE RULE FOR ALL 
In response to Nichola Voice labelling me a racist (28/10/16). Principled opposition to unearned racial privilege is not racist and like myself most Kiwis are in favour of racial equality and one rule for all. 

I agree we should preserve the unique Maori culture, but it should not be rammed down our throats at every opportunity, these days one cannot open a wardrobe door without a powhiri. Furthermore it should not command endless funding, for instance Maori language initiatives alone costs the New Zealand taxpayer close to $600 million annually. 

Of their own free will, 19th-century Maori adopted the colonist language and culture because they could see the benefits, any forcing was at the request of their wise elders. 

Maori being indigenous is not a fact, what is a true fact is that by their own admission they came from somewhere else, and only a few hundred years before Europeans. 

In 1840 the chiefs signed the governance of their "home" to the Queen of England, therefore Maori culture is not privileged to take centre stage. 

Today, New Zealand is home to many cultures and mixed bloodlines which makes New Zealanders who they are, to elevate one culture above others for whatever reason is separatism which Nichola obviously supports. 
GEOFFREY T PARKER 
Whangarei 

The New Zealand Herald 2/11/16 
LAND WARS COMMEMORATION 
Iwi have decided October 28 will be the date on which the New Zealand Land Wars will be commemorated nationally, starting next year. One thing that has me bemused and should be asked of the Government is why the demanded “Land Wars” commemoration is only, it seems, being discussed with and by iwi. Of the approximately 3000 who died in these wars, some 1000 were British soldiers and militia. It seems their descendants are not being consulted. 

My forebears arrived in 1841 and some lost their lives in the Waikato and Taranaki wars. No one has approached me or my family. 

Maori Development Minister Te Ururoa Flavell said he had secured $4 million over four years to support the commemorations, to be known as “Raa Maumahara National Day of Commemoration”. I have the unease this money will used only by iwi for history revision and so to weave a new korowai of victimhood to improve their ideological interests or financial position. 

If the wider public, and particularly the descendants of early settlers, are not involved and their views included, then these so-called commemorations will, like Waitangi Day, become another day of ugliness and division. 
R P 
Tauranga. 

Waikato Times 2/11/16 
RACE RELATIONS 
In 1950 the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (Unesco) released the following statement: "The biological fact of race and the myth of 'race' should be distinguished. For all practical social purposes 'race' is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social myth. The myth 'race' has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years it has taken a heavy toll in human lives and caused untold suffering. It still prevents the normal development of millions of human beings and deprives civilisation of the effective cooperation of productive minds. The biological differences between ethnic groups should be disregarded from the standpoint of social acceptance and social action. The unity of mankind from both the biological and social viewpoints is the main thing. To recognise this and to act accordingly is the first requirement of modern man." 

Now organisations (such as the United Nations and the NZ Government) promote separate racial identity as an ideal. Mankind's future hinges upon ascending from tribalism to unity, but instead we are following a retrograde path leading only to divisiveness and inequality. 

The current crusade of politically correct leftists is to destroy democracy, with our successive governments weakly tagging along because of a paranoid dread of being labelled "racist". Notice the terror that afflicts our leaders at the mere mention of binding referenda. They are well aware that racially-slanted policies would have been quashed had the government dared to seek majority opinion. 

Activists clamour for racial division, compensation for events in which no one alive today took part, and distort a document of unity into one of apartheid. Until we unearth a leader with the guts to say, "Enough!" we are destined to witness the disintegration of a nation that once led the world in inter-racial harmony. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 

Northern Advocate 2/11/16 
MINCING WORDS 
M Armstrong is correct to write that the Maori text Te Tiriti has primary importance. 

Bear in mind that the treaty was drafted in English and translated into Maori and the final draft went missing. 

The word “kawanatanga” in the first article was used to translate “sovereignty”, and the word “rangatiratanga” in the second article translates “ownership” or “possession”. 

However, the Waitangi Tribunal has redefined “rangatiratanga” to mean “chiefly authority” and makes the contradictory assertion that the treaty ceded sovereignty in Article 1 but confirmed Maori sovereignty in Article 2. 

Even the Maori text Article 2 quoted above confirms that the chiefs, tribes, and families owned what they owned, and could sell what they owned, if they wished, at agreed prices.(abridged) 
MIKE BUTLER 
Hastings 


RACIAL DIVIDE 
Letter writer Robin Lieffering (October 8) highlights the disastrous ethnically-divided direction in which our country is heading with his poignant statement: “When our family sit around the table together with our grandchildren — three of part-Dutch ancestry, one of part-Niuean ancestry and two of part-Maori ancestry — how can we justify the special rights and services that just two have over the other four?” 

An earlier correspondent sadly wrote, “My Maori sons claim they are Maori. What gives them the right to disclaim of their heritage — and who am I then?” 

Is this then our future — families divided by genetics, with a minority of children receiving privileges denied to other children because their great-great grandma or grandpa slept with someone of a particular race? 

Is this the kind of world you want for your children? 

I have one simple request for parents of part-Maori offspring; “Don’t tell your children lies.” 

Tell them all of the facts regarding their mixed heritage and let them become a whole person. 

Let them become one with other NZers who are all of mixed descent — any denial of this is self-delusion. 

Then we have the question of “Who or what is a racist?” 

A racist is a person who holds that a sector of our population be granted special privileges (unavailable to all other citizens) because of their race. Are you one of them? 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 

Gisborne Herald 1/11/16 
YOU LOVE TAIRAWHITI, I LOVE POVERTY BAY 
Re: Our history is not endangered, October 29 letter. 

Thank you for your opinions Linda — we are all entitled to them. You said you are disappointed that I use the same arguments used every time this topic comes up. That simply tells me a lot of people agree with what I wrote. You also stated you do not support a hyphenated name and that my classification was irrelevant. Sorry, but your letter contained that same hyphenated version. 

Please, do not tell me that Poverty Bay is an unattractive name that is never used in general conversation. Sorry, but I will guarantee that knowledge of Poverty Bay as a name for our area far exceeds Turanganui-a-Kiwa. 

I am certain you love the area you refer to as Tairawhiti (which actually extends down into Hawke’s Bay). I love the area that I, and countless others, refer to as Poverty Bay. 

To Tim and Geoff, I know the place where Cook landed was called Turanganui-a-Kiwa by Maori. However, when Cook departed, he referred to it as “Poverty Bay” because it did not provide him with the fresh water and food he required. 

According to Cook’s journal his reception was confrontational, possibly because he had no understanding of a Maori challenge. I am sure anyone at that time would have felt very threatened. Cook also went to a place he named The Friendly Islands. I guess he received a better welcome there. 

Tim, you mentioned the number of Cook statues in our city. Could you please let me know where all of these are because I only know of the one on Kaiti Hill, mistakenly represented by an Australian sculptor, and the one at the Waikanae Cut. 

Once again, please remember Poverty Bay is a historical name given to us by Captain James Cook. It is not a description of the affluent area we reside in today. Poverty Bay it is, and Poverty Bay it should stay. 

Our Mayor wants discussion of this matter with local iwi. He had best add the rest of our population into this debate. 
M M

Dominion Post 1/11/16 
CIVIL WAR WAS REAL 
Since a civil war is simply 'war between citizens of the same country", the 19th century fighting in New Zealand was indeed civil war. 

That fighting was rebellion by various Maori groups, opposed by many other New Zealanders, both Maori and settler alike. 

The campaigns of individual tribes were not "against local acts of Crown aggression", as claimed by Danny Keenan (October 29). Kingi's action at Waitara was part of a tribal feud. Of course Maori did not constitute a "single polity"; they were a tribal society. 

When Hone Heke raided communities, he was opposed by his senior Ngapuhi chief; Tamati Waka Nene, and by Waikato chief Te Wherowhero. Later, Tamati Waka Nene offered armed assistance to the government when the king movement in Waikato began its rebellion against the clearly expressed commands of the first king, Potatau (Te Wherowhero). 

When Arawa fought and defeated a war party from the eastern Bay of Plenty they were defending their own lands, and that action prevented reinforcements to the kingite rebels, who were defeated at around that time. 

This was no "difficult position", as claimed by Keenan. They joined with other New Zealanders to bring peace to their country. 
JOHN ROBINSON 
Island Bay 

Northland Age 1/11/16 
CONSTITUTIONAL BIAS 
In his advocacy for a written constitution, Sir Geoffrey Palmer mentions the huge volume of submissions and the many public hearings caused by the government's Constitutional Review Panel in 2013. 

Perhaps he can justify why the selected panel, on a topic of concern to all New Zealanders, was so racially biased in favour of Maori, much of the proceedings being conducted in te reo. The chairman and eight members, or two-thirds, of the panel were Maori or Maori sympathisers. This from 15 per cent of the country's population. The government, although questioned by many on this anomaly, failed to justify or even reply to the matter. One Maori member of the panel said that he not only wanted the Treaty included in a constitution, but he wanted the Treaty to be the basis of a constitution. 

While in government Sir Geoffrey succeeded in subverting the meaning and purposes of the Treaty, but would now seem intent on further revising what is a simple and clear agreement by the chiefs to accept completely the sovereignty of the Queen in exchange for full citizens' rights and ownership of their lands and properties. 
B J 
Omokoroa 

Southland Times 1/11/16 
DEMAND FOR EQUALITY 
A call for equality of all New Zealanders in law, and in government - both national and local - demands that there be no separation based on ancestry. This demand for equality is the very opposite of racism. This has always been the New Zealand way. 

Nichola Voice (Southland Times, October 28) is incorrect with the claim that "England colonised, forcing their language and culture on Maori." From the very first contact, communications took place in both languages, as British learned to speak Maori and Maori began to speak English. 

For many years, many Maori spokesmen insisted that all teaching in schools should be in English - it was not "forced" by colonisers. Then New Zealanders of various ancestries (European, Maori and mixed) came to recognise the value of Maori culture and the need for its protection, and that policy was changed. 

Thus we find Sir Apirana Ngata proclaiming in 1936 that in schools he would make "English first, second, third, fourth and all the rest of the subjects fifth". Three years later when speaking to an important conference of young Maori leaders at Auckland, he said that he had formerly opposed the teaching of Maori in Native schools because he had believed there was not sufficient time for pupils to learn both Maori and English. He now believed "nothing was worse than for one to be with Maori features but without his own language". 

The story of our country should not be reduced to a crude race-based caricature. 
JOHN ROBINSON 
Wellington 

Bay of Plenty Times 31/10/16 
EXERCISE BIASED 
I agree fully with Brian Johnson’s letter (October 29). The whole constitutional exercise was heavily biased in the favour of Maori. 

Selected democratically based on Statistics NZ figures, the panel should have been: two Maori (14.9 per cent), one Asian (10 per cent), one Pacific Islander (10 per cent) and eight representing all other ethnic groups (65.1 per cent). 

If you dare query the panel selection, and are lucky enough to get a reply from the authorities, it will commence (Under the terms of the Treaty). 

If the version of the Treaty used by the Waitangi Tribunal were to be used as a basis of a new constitution, it would be a disaster. (Abridged) 
R B 
Papamoa 

Taranaki Daily News 31/10/16 
BOGUS TACTICS 
Dennis Ngawhare (TDN, October 24) bemoans 800 words to get his pro-Maori propaganda out, unfortunately this privilege is not available to those that wish to counter. 

That Taranaki was almost deserted is verified online "Further Papers Relative to the Native Insurrection, Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1861 Session, " by Charles Heaphy. "Taranaki that before the regular settlement of the country by the British, it had for several years been almost deserted by the Natives.... "The Waikato conquered it in 1830 " A miserable remnant of about 30 or 40 Natives of the Ngatiawa lived at Ngamotu point in 1839. 

Furthermore Hobson's emissaries were unable to find a chief of sufficient rank to sign the Treaty in Taranaki. 

Ngawhare resorts to a moral equivalence argument by comparing outside conflicts with tribal Maori wars. This bogus tactic is often used by marxists to suggest that two unrelated wrongs make a "right," or at least cancel one another out. Pukerangiora was just one example of Maori savagery, the Taranaki tribes slaughter in the Chatham Islands was even worse, as was the massacre and cannibalism at Auckland and Waikato by Ngapuhi. 

That Taranaki tribal peace has stood unbroken since 1834 is credit to the British law system not tribal goodwill. 

If Ngawhare's flippant quote "At the end of the day history is only a viewpoint" is accepted then history becomes rumour, gossip and hearsay and ceases to be a worthwhile subject of study. NZ taxpayers will be chuffed to know that they have handed elite Maori millions in settlements based on someone's viewpoint. 
GEOFFREY PARKER 
Whangarei 

Southland Times 31/10/16 
COLONISATION SAVED CULTURE 
I have read with interest both the letter from Geoffrey T. Parker and the reply from Nichola Voice. Ms Voice comments that "England colonised, forcing their language and culture on Maori". 

Is she not aware that colonisation brought an end to cannibalism, slavery and savage inter-tribal warfare. Pre-colonisation life for Maori was short, harsh and brutal with Chief Taipari of Tauranga noting -"Maori are well on the way to exterminating themselves". The arrival of the missionaries and subsequent colonisation saved them from that fate. 

Colonisation brought them better food, medical care, hygiene, clothing, housing, and transport. In a nutshell - colonisation was the best thing that ever happened to Maori. 
R B 
Tauranga 

CULTURE PERSONAL CHOICE 
Permit an erstwhile Waipahi farm boy to respond to Nichola Voice's excessive reprimand of Geoffrey Parker for his remarks on culture and her unfounded accusation that he is racist. 

Our culture is about how we live and is largely a matter of personal choice as is our view of other people's. 

Any suggestion today that Maori culture is supposedly "indigenous" and therefore superior is absurd. Equally absurd is Voice's statement that the English forced their language and culture on Maoris. On several occasions wise parents petitioned for children in Maori schools to be taught only in English, even for their teachers to know no Maori. Those parents knew how valuable a sound knowledge of English would be for their children in the world. It is even more true today. 

It is a different matter of fact today that there are groups of people with a modest quota of Maori blood claiming unfounded privileges and material rewards on that basis. That, in a word, is racism. The current bid for a powerful tribal voice in the control of water is an example. Parker does us a favour in alerting us to it. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

Northern Advocate 31/10/16 (Also in Southland Times 25/10/16,  Waikato Times 25/10/16, Northland Age 20/10/16) 
SHARED CULTURE 
Nobody is attempting to deny the right of a part-Maori New Zealanders to affiliate to a Maori kin group and embrace what they regard as Maori culture, provided they do it in their own time and on their own dime. 

That means a shared common New Zealand culture occupies the public square. Any subcultural affiliations are a private matter for those concerned, funded and engaged in by those who value them, with no financial or other claim of any kind on those who don't. 

For those who pretend to be indigenous because they are part-Maori and prefer to elevate that above their other ancestors, that's entirely their business. 

However it is a different matter when these opportunists start trying to put their hand in fellow New Zealanders' pockets and colonise the public square in order to force the language and culture of their adoption on others. It then becomes the business of other New Zealanders, who are being compelled to pay or adopt something they don't want or value. 
GEOFFREY T PARKER 
Whangarei 

Bay of Plenty Times 29/10/16 
MAORI BIAS 
In his advocacy for a written constitution Sir Geoffrey Palmer mentions the huge volume of submissions and the many public hearings caused by the Government's Constitutional Review Panel in 2013. 

Perhaps he can justify why the selected panel, on a topic of concern to all New Zealanders, was so racially biased in favour of Maori, much of the proceedings being conducted in te reo The Government, although questioned by many on this anomaly, failed to justify or even reply to the matter. 

One Maori member of the panel said that he not only wanted the Treaty included in a constitution but he wanted the Treaty to be the basis of a constitution. (Abridged) 
B J 
Omokoroa

New Zealand Herald 29/10/16 (A quick word, section) 
New Zealand has one of the most successful constitutions in the world. its flexibility and simplicity makes it the envy of many other nations. It ain’t broke and Geoffrey Palmer wants to ‘fix’ it?
GEOFFREY T PARKER
Kamo 

The Northern Advocate 28/10/16 
THE ‘RACE MYTH’ 
In 1950 the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released the following statement: 

“The biological fact of race and the myth of ‘race’ should be distinguished. For all practical social purposes ‘race’ is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social myth. 

“The myth ‘race’ has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years it has taken a heavy toll in human lives and caused untold suffering. It still prevents the normal development of millions of human beings and deprives civilisation of the effective cooperation of productive minds. The biological differences between ethnic groups should be disregarded from the standpoint of social acceptance and social action,” the statement said. “The unity of mankind from both the biological and social viewpoints is the main thing. To recognise this and to act accordingly is the first requirement of modern man.” 

Now organisations (such as the United Nations and the NZ Government) promote separate racial identity as an ideal. 

Mankind’s future hinges upon ascending from tribalism to unity, but instead we are following a retrograde path leading only to divisiveness and inequality. 

The current crusade of politically correct leftists is to destroy democracy, with our successive governments weakly tagging along because of a paranoid dread of being labelled ‘racist’. 

Notice the terror that afflicts our leaders at the mere mention of binding referenda. They are well aware that racially-slanted policies would have been quashed had the government dared to seek majority opinion. 

Activists clamour for racial division, compensation f or events in which no one alive today took part, and distort a document of unity into one of apartheid. 

Until we unearth a leader with the guts to say, “Enough!” we are destined to witness the disintegration of a nation that once led the world in interracial harmony. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 

Marlborough Express 27/10/16 
ANOTHER VIEW 
Rino Tirikatene – more accurately Tregerthen – suggests ( Express, October 19) that local bodies ‘‘have nothing to fear from iwi partnerships’’. 

I suggest that, on the contrary, we have a great deal to fear. This is because such "partnerships" strike at the very heart of democracy - one person, one vote, all of equal value, with the precious capacity to get rid of non-performing office-holders periodically. 

Our colonists, unfairly berated today, came to New Zealand from lands beriddled with inherited privilege based on the accident of birth. They were determined that instead they would build a society where this was of no account, where all men and women were as good as they showed themselves to be and fairness was the guiding principle. 

To our credit, for the few decades after World War II we achieved this, to the extent that is possible in an imperfect world, and were on the whole a happy country. 

Now people like Tregerthen/ Tirikatene, a descendant of Cornish great-grandparents with a Cornish name like myself, but a small quota of Maori ancestry, aim to erode our hard-won democratic rights won in a slow process over centuries. We allow people like him to have their way at our peril. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

Gisborne Herald 27/10/16 
RENAME POVERTY BAY? DON’T CHANGE HISTORY 
All of the history books show that in 1769 Captain James Cook landed in New Zealand at Poverty Bay. Do we have to change history to now read in 1769 Captain Cook landed in New Zealand at Turanganui-a-Kiwa? 

We have been called Poverty Bay since 1769 by all other than Maori. Everybody knows that poverty is not an adjective to describe our region. It is only a historical word used to describe the area at the time of Cook’s landing. It has stuck ever since and so it should. 

We are rich in so much more, thankfully, than countless other places in New Zealand. Unfortunately, we have a mayor who has only a one-sided vision. Meng, why did you not mention your desire pre-election? I am absolutely positive the result would have been very different. 

It appears you are hell-bent on changing as much as you can to reflect only on our indigenous population although I am 100 percent certain there is no more than a very, very few if any, who do not have European blood in their veins. 

“Tairawhiti” is springing up everywhere (without any consultation). Will it eventually get to the state where every European name is wiped from our city? No Grey, Peel, Carnarvon, Nelson etc? 

Meng, you must not substitute historical names to suit your personal desires. How many Maori names are there in New Zealand that have an unappealing translation? I would guess at hundreds. Are they to be changed? History is history and no one has the right to alter it. 

This decision must not be made by the mayor and councillors. End of subject. 
M M 

Northland Age 27/10/16  
RACE AND MYTH 
In 1950 the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released the following statement: "The biological fact of race and the myth of 'race' should be distinguished. For all practical social purposes, 'race' is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social myth. 

The myth 'race' has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years it has taken a heavy toll in human lives and caused untold suffering. It still prevents the normal development of millions of human beings and deprives civilisation of the effective co-operation of productive minds. 

The biological differences between ethnic groups should be disregarded from the standpoint of social acceptance and social action. The unity of mankind from both the biological and social viewpoints is the main thing. To recognise this and to act accordingly is the first requirement of modern man." 

Now organisations (such as the United Nations and the New Zealand government) promote separate racial identity as an ideal. Mankind's future hinges upon ascending from tribalism to unity, but instead we are following a retrograde path leading only to divisiveness and inequality. 

The current crusade of politically correct leftists is to destroy democracy, with our successive governments weakly tagging along because of a paranoid dread of being labelled 'racist'. Notice the terror that afflicts our leaders at the mere mention of binding referenda. They are well aware that racially-slanted policies would have been quashed had the government dared to seek majority opinion. 

Activists clamour for racial division, compensation for events in which no one alive today took part, and distort a document of unity into one of apartheid. Until we unearth a leader with the guts to say, "Enough!" we are destined to witness the disintegration of a nation that once led the world in inter-racial harmony. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 


THAT'S A NO 
Recently I listened to a radio programme where Maori lawyer Moana Jackson was discussing a plan for a written constitution based on the Treaty of Waitangi, thus entrenching the treaty as superior law. 

He and Maori activist Margaret Mutu are obviously planning to sell the idea to us by presenting it as a way forward for our country. 

We went through this nonsense a few short years ago with the Constitutional Advisory Panel, and the people of this country made it abundantly clear that there are to be no race-based politics. 

Any constitution created for our country must be for the common good of all of us, and not one that leads us to racial separatism and superiority. 

Thankfully we live in a democracy, in which the definition is that we must all be treated exactly the same regarding race, gender and religion. Therefore all race-based politics must be firmly denied and immediately thrown into File 13 —aka in Army parlance — the rubbish-bin! 
R B 
Tauranga 

Rotorua Review 26/10/16 
IN RESPONSE 
In response to the letter from Elizabeth Mackenzie regarding ‘Race Based Appointments’, her allegations clearly indicate her lack of understanding of the democratic principles we live by today. 

She also needs to understand that the Local Government Act states quite clearly that Councils must ‘Consult’ with Iwi, and nowhere is there any wording to the effect that unelected Maori appointments can be imposed on Councils. 
MIKE MCVICKER, 
Rotorua 

Bay of Plenty Times 26/10/16 
RACIAL POLITICS 
Recently I listened to a radio programme where Maori lawyer Moana Jackson was discussing a plan for a written constitution based on the Treaty of Waitangi, thus entrenching the Treaty as superior law. 

We went through this nonsense a few short years ago with the Constitutional Advisory Panel and the people of this country made it abundantly clear that there were to be no race-based politics. 

Any constitution created for our country must be for the common good of all of us, and not one that leads us to racial separatism and superiority. 

Thankfully, we live in a democracy, of which the definition is that we must all be treated exactly the same regarding race, gender and religion. 

Therefore all race-based politics must be firmly denied and immediately thrown into File 13 — aka in army parlance as the rubbish-bin! 

Watch this space. (Abridged) 
R B 
Tauranga 

Rotorua Daily Post 26/10/16 
‘LAND GRAB’ 
What evidence is there to support your correspondent’s allegation that “most of the land grab was done by the churches”? ( Letters October 21). 

The Crown confiscated very large areas in Taranaki, Waikato, Bay of Plenty and the East Coast. The churches on the other hand had neither means nor desire to confiscate land. 

Some churchmen bought land, and some were given land, but those transactions, while significant, did not remotely compare in scale to the Crown confiscations, and in any case cannot be fairly categorised as a “land grab”. 

If any land can be shown to have been “grabbed” by my church, it will either be returned to its rightful owners, or I will be looking for a new place to worship on Sundays. 
G F 
Rotorua 

The Northern Advocate 26/10/16 
ARTICLE INCLUSIVE 
The wording “nga tangata Maori katoa o Nu Tirani” in Article 3 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi that was signed by some 500 chiefs translates to “all the people of New Zealand”, meaning all the people were granted British protection, not just Maoris as M Armstrong (19/10/16) infers. Furthermore, Maoris became fully entitled British subjects — what a boon — especially for their slaves. 

Article 1 clearly states ceding sovereignty to the Queen which is corroborated by the chief’s speeches prior to signing the 1840 Treaty and again affirmed in the chief’s speeches at Kohimarama 1860. 

It is a creative imagination that reads sovereignty and/or governance into Article 2 of the Treaty, it was simply about legal ownership of property and for Maori landholders to sell only to the Queen’s agents for protection from unscrupulous dealers. With Article 1 ceding sovereignty, it is absurd to hint at Maori sovereignty/governance in Article 2. 

In shrewdly switching between interpretations and wordings of Te Tiriti, and various English texts, treatyists arrive at a contentious vehicle that transfers wealth, assets and special rights to Maori which is racially dividing our society. 

Contrary to Armstrong’s spin, the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 was about unity. The Government of the day with the support of NZ First placed the F&S in Crown ownership for the benefit of all New Zealanders, rather than a grab by opportunist tribes. 

The Act did not confiscate the F&S but affirmed public ownership in accordance with British common law which had been the case until 2003. If tribes thought they had a right to areas they could still take their case to the High court under the F&S Act 2004, very few did. 
GEOFF PARKER 
Kamo 

Hawkes Bay Today 26/10/16 
UNLIKELY PARTNERS 
One Pure, a Hong Kong-based corporation with the capital and expertise to conduct a massive water-bottling facility, felt the need to approach Ngati Paarau for "support and partnership" in their endeavour. According to Denis O'Reilly, this "support and partnership" is "good for our region and our nation, all of us, regardless of our ethnicity or derivation". 

So can Mr O'Reilly answer the following questions on our behalf: What is the nature of the "support and partnership" which was "respectfully" requested of Ngati Paarau by One Pure? Are these "support and partnership" services of a scientific nature relating to preservation of our aquifer? If so, did One Pure approach any other organisation for this expertise? 

If Ngati Paarau's knowledge regarding preservation of the aquifer (flowing tens of metres underground) is in the nature of traditional Maori knowledge, should this knowledge be preserved and accessible to those beyond Ngati Paarau, or can this traditional knowledge only be exercised by members of Ngati Paarau? 

Mr O'Reilly states that One Pure's plant will have "minimal effect on the aquifer, if any". Did Ngati Paarau conduct independent tests on the bore to verify this statement, or did they simply accept assertions from One Pure? 

Will Ngati Paarau, or any members of Ngati Paarau, receive any benefits or payment from One Pure by way of compensation for their "support and partnership"? 

A response to these questions will certainly shed light on the nature of "partnership" between such unlikely parties as Hon Lung International and Ngati Paarau. 
SARAH TAYLOR 
Napier Hill 

Northern Advocate 25/10/16 
NO SOVEREIGNTY 
M. Armstrong should read the English text of Article 2, which says: 

“Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand and to the respective families and individuals thereof the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession; but the Chiefs of the United Tribes and the individual Chiefs yield to Her Majesty the exclusive right of Preemption over such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to alienate at such prices as may be agreed upon between the respective Proprietors and persons appointed by Her Majesty to treat with them in that behalf.” 

As you can see, Article 2 confirmed that the chiefs, tribes, and families owned what they owned, and could sell what they owned, if they wished, at agreed prices. 

There is nothing about Article 2 affirming “the status quo of te tino rangatiratanga, Maori sovereignty” as M. Armstrong claims. 
MIKE BUTLER 
Hastings 

Hawkes Bay Today 22/10/16 
TREATY INTERPRETATION 
Mr Lindsay Paku's recent letter, written in reply to one from Mr Alan Rhodes, was an inaccurate distortion of fact and the truth There was no Pan Maori nation in 1835 when British resident James Busby initiated the Declaration of Independence signed by 34 only northern chiefs. 

The move was an attempt to control the lawlessness of settlers and pre-empt the establishment of a French colony as " Baron" de Thierry had purchased 40,000 acres of land at Hokianga. 

In 1835, King William, not Queen Victoria, was the monarch. 

The Treaty in 1840 nullified any previous agreement and was signed by 512 chiefs. It was further ratified at the 1860 Kohimarama Conference. The minutes of this meeting verify this as does Sir Apirana Ngata's 1922 book The Treaty of Waitangi: An Explanation. 

As Associate Professor Elizabeth Rata said "(New Zealand) history is demoted from an academic discipline with its justifying procedures and methods to self-interested narratives that mix truth, with half-truths, and opinion foregoing the scrutiny of criticism to which real historical inquiry must he subjected." 

Alan Rhodes was pointing out the Treaty gave all New Zealanders equal rights as British citizens under the law. It was forward thinking for its time, as slavery still existed in the United States for a further 20 odd years. 

Mr Paku seems obsessed with grievances, real or imagined that are divisive in a country that should be looking to the future, not the past, in the interests of all citizens regardless of their ethnicity. Fifty-two grievances taken to Britain in 1852 morphed into 2034 in 2013. 

A fanciful contemporary interpretation of the Treaty and a drive for separatism are a recipe for disaster for New Zealand if these moves are successful. I support Alan Rhodes interpretation of the Treaty as an accurate one. 
TOM JOHNSON 
Napier

Gisborne Herald 22/10/16 
SORT OTHER PROBLEMS FIRST 
Meng, you and I have been friends for a long time, and you know that I have a Maori family and a Pakeha family, so I believe I have a balanced view. I was a little disappointed to see that your first concern as our newly elected Mayor was to solicit more views on changing the name of Poverty Bay — which, by the way, I don’t particularly like. 

Meng, I think there are far more important things for you and your councillors to concentrate on than worrying about changing a name that has been here since 1769. You can always re-visit this when you have sorted out all the other problems we have. 
L N

Rotorua Daily Post 21/10/16 
MAORI ENTERPRISE 
In reply to Wairangi Jones, (Letters, October 15). I suggested Maori were better off now than prior to 1800. I was speaking of 1760, not 1860. In that time Maori did not have any of the things mentioned by Wairangi except flax and fishing. Neither of these did they have as commercial entities. The Europeans brought vegetables, beef, pork and mutton, eggs, apples and cheese, and wheat which enabled enter-prising Math to have orchids, market gardens, and a thriving flour mill, built with European technology and of course some-one to sell all this to. 

Tourism of course depends on a European market. Unfortunately, the Europeans also brought measles, gorse, blackberry, rabbits and the churches. Most of the land grab was done by the churches. Prior to European settlement the means of acquiring land was to wage a battle against the occupying hapu and kill them all off, thereby gaining ownership. Ordinary emigrants who 

came here, having been dispossessed in Europe and had absolutely nothing, only wanted a plot to build a home and a life on. The thought I was trying to get across was count your blessings, not your losses and work to improve your life. Say thank you for what you have achieved, not cry for more to be handed out. Maori who are entrepre-neurial and energetic are doing very well, the same as they were in 1860. There are always those who do nothing and cry to be carried. 
M B 
Rotorua 

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 21/10/16 
‘NO WAY’ TO ALL CO-GOVERNANCE 
The candidate meetings for the local body elections were interesting, but also upsetting and made me angry. When listening to our regional council representatives, I pushed for more information on the co-governance regarding the ‘fresh water futures' issue. We were told co-governance was well entrenched, especially the Kaituna catchment area and Rangitaiki River. 

Were any of you consulted on this? Has there been a referendum? No? I submitted a submission to say ‘no' to co-governance. 

We were told government pressure is for co-governance - and this really makes for ‘a them and us scenario'. As soon as you say co-governance it means more than one group, which is apartheid! 

The water issue should be all the people, without it we die! 

No one group should be in control, which means ownership. 

Maori have now been quoted as "wanting their fair share of the water profits" (The Daily Post, August 22, 2016). It always comes back to money, costing the rest of us! 

Kiwis need to make a fuss - you are quite quickly losing your democracy in every sector. On this election journey I've realised how gutless councillors are in every sector. 

The government needs to be told to get lost, stop putting pressure on councils for things like libraries, museums, water etc. Kiwis just cannot afford their rates to climb and councillors need to say ‘No' to government demands! 
C H 
Katikati 


WHEN IT ALL TURNS TO CUSTARD… 
Now the dust has settled on the Tauranga City Council elections, let's analyse the outcome. First we have candidates re-elected, despite being discarded previously for their cavalier attitude to spiralling debt. Then we have candidates elected who support race-based representation, elected or unelected, and special race-based privileges. And last but not least, candidates who strongly supported the Civic Heart Centre with very expensive add-ons which many Tauranga residents don't want. 

Oh and don't forget those candidates who are so weak-kneed, their pulses should be checked to see if they can breathe unaided by themselves. 

On the mayoral side of things, the mayor elected is a nice guy but he'll want to be all things to all people and probably won't have the fortitude to say ‘no' to anyone floating special interest schemes. 

This disparate group of people are what Tauranga voters have elected. Only 38 per cent voted and that apathy is appalling. So when it all turns to custard, as it inevitably will, no one wants to listen to the whinging from those that voted this lot into power or those who didn't bother to vote who are just as much to blame. 

What voters got rid of were the thinkers and those who recognised the problems and were at least prepared to look at change and how to address the issues. Best of luck. 
S P 
Arataki.

Northern Advocate 20/10/16 
DEMOCRACY 
Fair-minded and informed readers will recognise that Rosemary McLeod's lengthy re-buff (October 10) of Brash and Craig is nasty and inaccurate. 

The Treaty of Waitangi was a straightforward document written by an "upright and plain-dealing" naval officer. In essence it said the chiefs agreed to cede sovereignty to 

the Queen and all Maoris be-came fully-entitled British subjects. What a boon for Maori slaves! The "historians [who] have found it to be infinitely more complicated" are deluded charlatans. 

Hongi Hika brought the biggest batch of weapons to New Zealand, not "us". Then he commenced slaughter and cannibalism on a massive scale on less fortunate Maoris. 

McLeod's "settler land-grabbing" was actually eager selling by many chiefs who freely sold the South Island and much of the North before 1840 and did it all again afterwards. So, yes, the European or British way is best — it is called democracy. Brash defends it for us. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

Dominion Post 19/10/16 
UNBALANCED ACCOUNT 
Vincent O'Malley (The war that history forgot, October 15) is not an objective historian. Remember that there was a rebellion of Waikato tribes, not a war, and Governor Grey was fully entitled to take strong measures to quell it. 

To minimise casualties, General Cameron planned a surprise attack to take Rangiaowhia, food-basket of the rebel fort at Paterangi. 

At chief Hoani's whare, some left peacefully when called on to surrender, but Hoani shot Sergeant McHale and a skirmish began in which Colonel Nixon was killed and the whare burned. When all was lost, Hoani emerged and was killed in the hail of bullets. Whose fault was that? 

And no churches were burned either. 

Remember the Ngati Maniapoto challenge to the troops at Orakau that they would never surrender? It would have been wiser if they had, instead of rousing the troops to a point where they showed little mercy to those who fled. 

Recall too the Ngati Maniapoto raiders who shot missionary Whiteley at Whitecliffs, having butchered a family of five and two unarmed men walking on the beach. 

O'Malley does us no service in arousing passions with inaccurate and unbalanced accounts of events which should be left quietly to subside into history. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

Bay of Plenty Times 19/10/16 
LUCKY COLONY 
Your correspondent Huikakahu Kawe (Letters, October 14) comments that indigenous people of colonised lands are now the commoners and the descendants of the colonisers hold much of the wealth. 

We all have equal opportunities in education which is surely the key to a successful life, and Maori have as much opportunity as the rest of us. 

Life for pre-colonisation Maori was short, harsh and brutal. The arrival of the missionaries brought an end to centuries of inter-tribal warfare, cannibalism and slavery. 
It brought Maori better housing, food, hygiene, medical care, transport, clothing. (Abridged.) 
R B 
Tauranga 

Dominion Post 18/10/16 
FAVOURING MAORI 
A correspondent (October 15) advocates favouring Maori on racial grounds because land was "stolen" by the colonisers (presumably benefiting all New Zealanders mostly, thus including Maori). 

However, fair settlement aside, the Treaty also cemented enormous Maori land ownership -which beforehand was as tenuous as Maori killing each other to claim it. 

Even the colonisers don't privilege Celtic genes in recognition of invasion by Romans, Saxons, Vikings and Normans. Those were terrible times and if we don't apply contemporary common sense, then the United States owns the Moon. 

Don Brash is effectively asking what the future will hold if, for example, a board position is reserved for someone merely because they carry a Maori gene - which concept is ludicrous given "Maori" continually succeed on merit, as do immigrants coming here with nothing. 

Some argue that disproportionate Maori prison statistics justify racially targeted hand-ups, but this is also nonsense. Sir Ngatata Love and anyone else, whether Maori or not, face prison when they do wrong. And, if a lower socio-economic group is less able to afford good legal assistance, that is a systemic problem requiring a needs-based solution (not a racially biased or exclusive solution that fails to assist other races when facing such need). [abridged] 
D F 
Paraparaumu Beach 


WAIKATO WARS 
Re The war that history forgot (October 15), in writing of the origins of the Waikato wars Vincent O'Malley has claimed that "Tainui-Waikato were reacting to the move to set up a Pakeha system of government that would largely exclude Maori" . This is simply untrue. 

In April 1857 Governor Gore Brown attended a meeting at Rangiriri, where he met Te Wherowhero, who became the movement's king, Potatau, the following year. There the principal chiefs of the Waikato asked for runanga, a European magistrate, and laws. To these demands the governor assented; he promised to send a magistrate to reside in the Waikato, who should visit the native settlements, and, with the assessors, administer justice periodically. He also promised to have a code of laws framed, applicable to the circumstances of the natives. All the men then took off their hats, and cried "Hurrah!" 

Te Wherowhero was pleased and wished to co-operate with the governor, to share in this form of inclusive local government. He declared that he would be guided by the governor's advice. He was a dying man, and should bequeath his people to the governor's care. That promise was kept. However, some kingites disobeyed the king and drove those government agents out of the Waikato. 
JOHN ROBINSON 
Island Bay 

The Northern Advocate 18/10/16 
LEAVE HIM ALONE 
Don Brash, among others, has started up a group called Hobson’s Pledge Trust. Put simply, Hobson said after the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi: “Now We Are One People”. 

Predictably, the media ghouls have been at him like a pack of bloodhounds. Andrew Little referred to him as racist. What is racist about that? John Key says that New Zealanders are not “interested in broken record politics”. Dream on John! Look, if you guys want to be clowns, why don’t you join a circus? 

Why did DoC remove about a dozen oak trees, with trunks about 2 metres thick, from the Bay of Islands? Their excuse was that they were not part of our history. But that is exactly what they were. They may have been 800 years old, here before Maori. Why are there 105 embargoes in the country? I have seen photos of stone buildings in the Waipoua Forest, and they look just like those on the Orkney Islands, north of Scotland, to me. Why am I refused permission to explore in some 4000 archaeological sites in New Zealand, which have been logged? 

Why aren’t the Patupaiarehe (Ngati Hotu), and the Waitaha people paid out for the atrocities that were committed against these peaceful people? They were here centuries before Maori. Come on, you media ghouls, these questions demand answers — and carry on the good work Don Brash and Co. (Abridged) 
KEVAN C MARKS 
Kaipara 

Hawkes Bay Today 18/10/16 
LAND SALES 
Lindsay Gordon Paku Q.S.M, Hastings, wrote that "in 1835 Queen Victoria recognised the Declaration of Independence". Unfortunately, Queen Victoria's reign started in 1837. 

Unlike Mr Paku's version of Article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi, which he wrongly claims includes the foreshore, the English text as appended to statutes says: "Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand and to the respective families and individuals thereof the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession; but the Chiefs of the United Tribes and the individual Chiefs yield to Her Majesty the exclusive right of Preemption over such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to alienate at such prices as maybe agreed upon between the respective Proprietors and persons appointed by Her Majesty to treat with them in that behalf." 

As you can see, Article 2 confirmed that the chiefs, tribes, and families owned what they owned and could sell what they owned, if they wished, at agreed prices. 

Mr Paku's lament that "we no longer possess our rivers, our lakes, our forestry, or our foreshore" fails to acknowledge that the chiefly proprietors sold it all along with the land. Check out the land sale deeds, held at the Victoria University NZ Electronic Text Centre which specifically include streams, rivers, lakes, and everything under the ground. 
MIKE BUTLER 
Hastings 

The Daily Post Rotorua 18/10/16
BOARDS’ ADVISORY ROLE 
Lots of people work shifts, flexibly, weekends, and as our society changes so should our shops if they want to compete with online shopping, which is 24 hours." 

Yes, as John Pakes said ( Letters, October 14), there will be two community boards advising council, but it is in an advisory capacity only. 

Therein lies the difference between them and the unelected Te Arawa members who sit on, and can vote on, the two most important council committees. ( Abridged) 
P H 
Rotorua 

The Northern Advocate 17/10/16 
NZ HISTORY 
Congratulations to columnist Rosemary McLeod ( Advocate October 10) — the perfect PC product of three decades of social engineering. 

During that time history has been rewritten, seminal documents distorted and NZ’s earliest inhabitants erased from our nation’s history. 

Democracy has been aired as a dirty word, and those who favour equal rights for all citizens presented as racists. 

The Treaty of Waitangi has been “updated” from being a document of unity into one of divisiveness. 

Ms McLeod would have it that Hobson's "We are now one people" really meant we are now two peoples with separate laws. However, her viewpoints are understandable in the light of what she has been taught and accepted unquestioningly as truth, but unfortunately the cancer of political correctness has pervaded our mass media and educational system. 

Today's part-Maoris have no more prerogative to assert what ancient Maori understood the Treaty to mean than anybody else who can access ancient records such as the Maori/ English dictionary Grammar and Vocabulary of the Language of New Zealand, jointly compiled by Ngapuhi chieftain Hongi Hika and Professor Samuel Lee at Cambridge University in 1820, and William William's Dictionary of the New Zealand Language compiled in 1844. These contain Maori/English definitions as understood by both parties who signed the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 and present a very different Treaty translation from today's politically correct distortion. 

The Treaty meant what it said — two races united as one under a common law. Hence the end of tribal wars, cannibalism and slavery, and equal rights for all (yes, the Treaty states all NZers, not just Maoris.) 

Other opinions aired by Ms McLeod also echo disinformation propounded by those with a corrupt PC agenda. Perhaps she should probe deeper into so-called man-made climate change and study the Maunder Minimum period of sunspot activity, and look again with untarnished eyes at the principles espoused by Don Brash. 

Unfortunately education today stifles analytical thinking. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 

The New Zealand Herald 17/10/16 
BICULTURAL RACISM 
It is interesting that, in an article addressing the racialism to be found in New Zealand, Phil Taylor includes the words “bicultural” and “biculturalism”. 

Mr Taylor may not know that the prefix “bi” means “two” but the academics and the optician he quotes probably do. 

The bicultural purview is that New Zealand is or should be, a society of two cultures only, Maori and pakeha. That is to say, the cultures of the Asian and Middle-Eastern people among us have no place. 

In my experience the “bloody foreigners” (to quote one of Mr Taylor’s sources) among us, my Chinese wife included, will never abandon their culture for Maori or western culture. 

One day perhaps, or perhaps not, New Zealand’s academics and journalists will recognise and acknowledge the fact that New Zealand is a multicultural society. 

I must go, there are fleets of pigs flying past my window. 
M E 
Auckland central. 

Dominion Post 15/10/16 ( To the Point section) 
James Hibbs is correct in asking where the billions of dollars given to Maori have gone. State assistance should always be given on the basis of need, not race. 
N H 
Thorndon 

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 14/10/16 
SAGE OR CYNIC? 
Bill Ralston may consider himself a witty and erudite observer of and commentator on the human condition, but when he compares those with contrary points of view to rabid racists as he did in his recent Listener article by likening Don Brash and Hobson's Choice adherents to the Ku Klux Klan, he confirms his smugly arrogant public persona. 
B J 
Omokoroa. 


NOBODY IS INDIGENOUS 
Earlier this year I suggested you watch ‘Skeletons in the Cupboard' the first of three documentaries produced by Plumtree Productions. This DVD confirmed in my mind the hypocrisy that NZ law and Acts have been based on since 1975. 

The second documentary is available and named ‘Under the Carpet'. This DVD establishes that three or four cultures inhabited NZ prior to the arrival of Polynesian Maori and European. Nobody is indigenous, everybody immigrated to this land. See: https://vimeo.com/ondemand/nzskeletonsredheads 

The dark underbelly of greed and power in this country is exposed in this excellent documentary. 
MJ A 
Pyes Pa. 


NO RACISM IN EQUAL RIGHTS 
Amazingly, the Hobson Pledge Trust has prised most of the race-bleating appeasers, treatyists, revisionists, grievers out of the woodwork, accompanied by the usual ranting, about racists, the bog standard response when they cannot win an argument based on facts, history logic or even common sense. Hobson's ‘one people' statement simply reinforced what the legitimate Maori version of Treaty said: sovereignty ceded, property rights guaranteed; and granting rights and privileges of British subjects with no mention of partnerships, principles or special race-based treatment. 

Current Maori vested interests are not a special race yet the Labour Party's Andrew Little, Grant Robertson and Kelvin Davis have jumped into the fray, reinforcing Labours 2014 election thrust for special-preferential race-based treatment. 

A strange ‘blond moment' as left wingers always champion equality not privilege. Labour's Maori policies are ruinous, but if you think that's bad go check out the Greens' absurd aberrations - no referendums simply ‘their way or the highway'. 

Not a chance that Te Ururoa Flavell and Te Awanui Black, who are ensconced under race-based preference systems, want that to change – they are more than happy with a system of reverse racism protecting their little patches. The National Party bucket list stated ‘race-based' parliamentary seats would be abolished, but recently resiled from that promise. See Taranaki Settlement Bill 2016. 

Sadly, those who are given whatever they demand rapidly develop a sense of entitlement quickly losing all sense of proportion and objectivity. 

If proposing equal rights for all Kiwis is racist, then I'll be a monkey's uncle! 
R P 
Matapihi.

Northern Advocate 14/10/16 
MAORI VOTING 
Comments by Kelvin Davis that the low number of Maori people elected to Northland councils is a problem that can be solved by more Maori people voting, is a sad commentary on how he views voters. 

Mr Davis assumes that if more Maori people had voted more Maori candidates would have won, but that assumption is based on the belief that Maori vote for Maori. It is quite possible that a lot of Maori people voted for non-Maori candidates because they thought they would represent them better. 

Council representatives should be there to represent all Northlanders, not just those who are of the same race or sex or age as them. Representation is not about identity. It is just as wrong to assume that a man cannot be represented by a woman or that a woman automatically represents all women, as it is to assume that only a Maori person can represent Maori people in a council. 

A good council representative knows their community and should be able to represent it, whatever their gender or race. 

Identity politics is a way of thinking with ancient roots in mankind's tribal history. It is an ugly mindset that lies behind such obscenities as collective punishment, clan feuding and apartheid. The idea that a particular race is special and needs special representation is offensive and outdated. Civilised modern societies have moved on from it. Kelvin Davis should too. 
R G 
Whangarei 

Taranaki Daily News 14/10/16 
MISTAKEN ON STATS 
Your editorial about Don Brash's "Hobson pledge" is very topical. However the writer was mistaken when he says "Find any statistic about..... education and Maori languish at the bottom". 

In fact, before the 1970s Maori education was given special treatment with extra staffing, extra capitation money, and effuse of materials and equipment direct from the Education Department. 

Great efforts to give Maori communities superior education to enable them to be equal in all respects. 
J M 
New Plymouth 

Wanganui Chronicle 14/10/16 
PLACE NAMES 
If your readers travel north along the bank of your river, they will see signs "Atene", "Koriniti", "Ranana" and "Hiruharama". This is outrageous. Since two of them are Greek and one Hebrew, they are not even in the right alphabet —while the other one should be "London". 

It is all much more serious than leaving a dubious "H" out of the name of your fair city and gross default on the part of the NZ Geographic Board for failing to rule that the correct names must be adopted. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

■ Editor's note: To be fair, the Maori names Atene, Koriniti and Hiruharama are adapted phonetically from the English language versions — Athens, Corinth and Jerusalem — rather than the original language versions (which sound more like Athina, Korinthos and Yerushalayim). Perhaps we should start by correcting the English versions to avoid offending speakers of the Greek and Hebrew reo. 

Nelson Mail 13/10/16 
BRASH DEFENCE 
Fair-minded and informed readers will recognise that Rosemary McLeod’s lengthy rebuff of Don Brash and Colin Craig (Nelson Mail, October is nasty and inaccurate. 

The Treaty of Waitangi was a straightforward document written by an ‘‘upright and plain-dealing’’ naval officer. 

In essence it said that the chiefs agreed to cede sovereignty to the Queen and all Maori became fully entitled British subjects. What a boon for Maori slaves. 

The ‘‘historians [who] have found it to be infinitely more complicated’’ are deluded. 

Hongi Hika brought the biggest batch of weapons to New Zealand, not ‘‘us’’. Then he commenced slaughter and cannibalism on a massive scale on less fortunate Maori. 

McLeod’s ‘‘settler landgrabbing’’ was actually eager selling by many chiefs who freely sold the South Island and much of the North Island before 1840 and did it all again afterwards. 

So, yes, the European or British way is best – it is called democracy. Brash defends it for us. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson

Otago Daily Times 13/10/16 
MINISTER REPLIES TO CRITICISM OF HIS ROLE IN BILL 
EXACTLY when the programme to undermine democracy in New Zealand was first spawned is unclear. However, in recent years, the Attorney-general and Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Christopher Finlayson, has (wittingly or unwittingly) been an important instrument in its spectacular progress. 

Mr Finlayson's hand in the Taranaki Tribes Settlement Bill is obvious. It's right there in the clause which hands political power over to the tribes by giving them six decision-making roles on the local authority, purely on the basis of their race — and without public voting. 

If Mr Finlayson thinks that it is democratically acceptable to arbitrarily impose racially-selected appointments, then he believes in racial discrimination (which is both undemocratic and illegal) and furthermore, he either misunderstands democracy or disagrees with it. 

Any of these cases disqualifies him from any kind of political position in a (supposed) democracy. He should resign immediately and seek some other line of work. McDonald's springs to mind. 
C R 
Northeast Valley 

* [Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Christopher Finlayson replies: "I want to set out the correct position about iwi involvement in Taranaki local government. 

Treaty settlement legislation provides for iwi representation on two standing committees of the Taranaki Regional Council, not on the council itself which retains ultimate decision-making power. The iwi of Taranaki and the Taranaki Regional Council have worked together to develop a robust framework for iwi representation on the policy and planning committee and the regulatory and consents committee. Iwi will be able to contribute to decisions about their region through these arrangements. 
This benefits both regional council decision-making and the people of Taranaki. Input of key stakeholders into council decision-making is not a new concept. The policy and planning committee, for example, already has an external appointment from Federated Farmers.") 

Dominion Post 13/10/16 
MAORI MILLIONS 
For the past few weeks Don Brash has had people having a go at him over his suggestion that Maori should not be given more than other New Zealanders. 

Watching Parliament and the media it is seen that Maori want all of us to contribute more to their poor and those who have no housing. 

I must ask, why, over the past 100 years, we, New Zealanders, have given millions and millions to Maori yet where has it gone? 

Why have they not seen that their people have gained, and not be permitted to remain in the poorest bracket, why is it that those who control their affairs seem to have blown it on all manner of crazy things and mainly for the benefit of the leaders. 

If the leaders say this has not been the case, then let them advise us where all the millions have gone. 
J H 
Upper Hutt 

The Northern Advocate 13/10/16 
TWO PATHS AHEAD 
With the emergence of “Hobson’s Pledge”, a lobby group fronted by Dr Don Brash, New Zealand now has the opportunity to go down one of two paths. 

We can continue spiralling down the Government-assisted path to tribalism whereby our tried-and-true system of democracy will be laid to rest, our freshwater will become under tribal control and Resource Management Act issues will need tribal consultation. 

Or New Zealanders can remount the path that was innovatively laid out in the Treaty of Waitangi 1840 in which all citizens, regardless of race, were equal under one law. 

I urge readers to Google “Hobson’s Pledge” as New Zealand will never have a better opportunity to reverse the cancerous racial separatism that is pervading our society today. 
GEOFF PARKER 
Kamo 

Bay of Plenty Times 12/10/16 
CHIEFS KNEW 
Your correspondent, Glenys Daley (Letters, October 4) in my view does not need the words of Don Brash, The Treaty of Waitangi or Hobson, who drafted it, to understand what it was about. 

She just needs to read the words of the Maori chiefs who signed it to know that they fully understood the concept of the Queen’s sovereignty over them. 

The Maori of the time became British subjects, hence Hobson’s statement: “He iwi tahi tatou.” This was a massive gift to them. 

This understanding was repeated by the chiefs at the 1860 Kohimarama conference 20 years later as evidenced by their statements then. 

In my opinion all this was, of course, before the revisionist history that Daley believes in and so beloved of separatists. 
G F 
Tauranga 

The Press 12/10/16 
NO SYSTEMIC RACISM IN NZ 
Systemic racism is not alive and well in New Zealand (Oct 10). 

If it were, we would have arranged marriages, honour killings and a caste or class system. These would force the breeding generation to take advantage of the perceived benefits of belonging to one race or another. 

Individually we may admire or despise one culture or another but as a society we allow the widest possible definition of the label ‘‘Maori’’. 

We are content to see an ever increasing number of New Zealanders identify with that label and share in the benefits of that definition. 

Some may think it is unfair that people with 1/32 of Maori blood may claim educational and financial advantages from the rest. 

But our society accepts it in the knowledge that eventually, say five generations down the track, 100 per cent of New Zealanders will be on the gravy train. 
C N 
Linwood 

NZ Herald 12/10/16 
CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM 
The last time former prime minister Geoffrey Palmer created havoc was when he introduced the Treaty of Waitangi Act. We can only imagine what he has in mind with this Constitution Act based on the Treaty of Waitangi, which he is not promoting publicly. Why not? Now is the time to stop an undemocratic slide into New Zealand-style apartheid and join Hobson’s Pledge. 

All New Zealanders must be equal, regardless of ancestry or ethnicity. There can be no co-governance on a “partnership” basis. We must cease racebased privilege and claimed “principles”, cease separate Maori representation on any governance bodies whether at central government or local government level, prevent Maori-only water interest. 

In short, New Zealand is a democracy for all New Zealanders equally and we do not need a constitution with the massive separatism and cost resulting from the Treaty of Waitangi Act. 
J H, 
Tauranga. 

Northland Age 11/10/16 
DIVIDE AND RULE 
Why are our major political parties so intent upon establishing apartheid in our country, and allowing our children to be brainwashed with a history that has been distorted and rewritten by those with vested interests? Why has democracy, the cornerstone of most civilised countries, been cast aside by our politicians in the name of `cultural sensitivity' to appease a race that exists in name only? It seems that democracy is no longer an acceptable philosophy, and has been replaced by a reversion to tribalism. It is plain to see that the Maori Party has our Prime Minister over a barrel. 

Unfortunately it is not only the National Party kowtowing to invidious political correctness, but also the Labour Party and the Greens, leaving voters with the sorry option of replacing one bad apple with another. Or is this all a deliberate device, a giant red herring, designed to divert the populace's attention away from the disastrous financial state we are in because of reckless government borrowing? Our national debt is horrific, yet our opposition parties are strangely silent on this issue. Is that because they haven't got a clue on how to resolve it? 

The easiest political solution is to create a diversion - the old ploy of divide and rule. After all, who is going to worry about such a mundane thing as our country's financial state when their country is being split on the basis of minuscule racial heritage? We must once again become one people, and demand that politicians face up to our economic woes. The alternative is a future of a nation in bankruptcy - and being controlled by those to whom we are indebted. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 

The Press 11/10/16 
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR TAX 
I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments of Selene Manning’s letter (Oct 8), that we should celebrate Ngai Tahu’s successes. 

I also agree with her suggestion that, with respect to income tax, we should be looking at all registered charities. 

Why, in New Zealand, do we allow charities to undertake commercial activities that are unrelated to their charitable purposes, yet we grant them exemption from income tax? 

This was addressed in England, the source of much of our charity law and influence on our tax legislation, in the 1920s and you will not find such activity there. 

If we were to do so, then Ngai Tahu, Sanitarium, Mission Estate, NAIT, Musgroves, Wilson Bulk Transport, Gloriavale, Pioneer Generation, the Wright Family Foundation and Tainui Group Holdings, to name but a few, would not have the benefit of a commercial advantage over their for-profit competitors by being able to accumulate cash at a faster rate due to not having to pay income tax. 

The creation of a level playing field is essential, given we have a broad-base, low-rate, tax system. 
DR MICHAEL GOUSMETT 
Adjunct Fellow, University of Canterbury 

The New Zealand Herald 
RALSTON’S PERSONA 
Bill Ralston may consider himself a witty and erudite observer of and commentator on the human condition, but when he compares those with contrary points of view to rabid racists as he did in his recent Listener article by likening Don Brash and Hobson’s Choice adherents to the Ku Klux Klan, he confirms his smugly arrogant public persona. 
B J 
Omokoroa. 

The Press 10/10/16 
ANCESTRAL CLAIMS ABSURD 
I’m told that Maori represent 15 per cent of our population. However, apparently anyone with just 1⁄32 of Maori ancestry can register themselves as Maori. If this is true and you really stop to think about it, it’s absurd. 

Anyone with 1⁄32 of Maori ancestry would have just one Maori ancestor from five generations ago. Counting from five generations back we each have a total of 62 ancestors, 61 of whom are apparently irrelevant as far as New Zealand is concerned. 

You have to wonder what the appeal is of claiming to be Maori – or perhaps one should ask what is the benefit. And if we took away that benefit and had a more sensible definition, just what percentage of Maori would there be in our population? 

Before I get accused of Maoribashing, I should add that I would find it equally absurd if these claims were adopted by people of any background. 
L T 
Prebbleton 

Southland Times 10/10/16 
A THORNY ISSUE 
I see the thorny issue of 'are Maori indigenous' has raised it's head in your columns (5/10/16). According to David Round (law lecturer at University of Canterbury), "nowhere is there any definition of who or what exactly an indigenous person is in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples". 

So what makes some assume Maori are indigenous? They have only been here a mere 800 years. How do Maori claim to be indigenous when Japanese (Ainu being the exception) and Britons, who have occupied a country for thousands of years are not indigenous? 

I guess the criterion for the UN and those seeking special race-based privileges is 'having ancestors who arrived here first', therefore Sir Ed Hillary owned the top of Everest, the Americans own the moon, and the descendants of our early pioneers have more rights than recent fellow immigrants. 

Today virtually all Maori are of mixed European and Maori descent. This is the 'whitening' of New Zealand, as the base colour early 18th Century was brown. If this were not so serious, it would be laughable that these indigenous pretenders can hang a bone fish hook around their neck and claim fellow New Zealanders owe them. 
GEOFFREY T PARKER 
Whangarei 

Nelson Mail 8/10/16 
HONEST BRASH 
Gary Clover is at it again with his mis-statements about the Treaty of Waitangi and attack on an honest man, Don Brash. 

So, the Treaty, a document in the Ngapuhi dialect of Maori and nothing else. Article first: the chiefs agreed to yield sovereignty (kawanatanga) to the Queen, completely and for ever. 

Article second: the property rights (tino rangatiratanga) of the chiefs, families and all the people of New Zealand (tangata katoa o Nu Mani) were guaranteed. (This is actually redundant as existing British subjects had such rights already and article third bestowed them on all Maori. A provision for sale of land was relaxed.) 

Article third: all Maoris (tangata Maori katoa) received the full rights of British subjects. (This including the slaves of other Maoris - surely a godsend for those many slaves.) 

"Article fourth": Non-existent, Mr Clover. The "shared sovereignty" of Mr Clover and the so-called "Maori king" is nonsense which treats the Treaty of Waitangi with contempt. 
H M 
Richmond, 

Northern Advocate 8/10/16 
LAW UNEQUAL 
Don Brash has announced this week a "Hobson's Pledge Trust" with the main thrust of one people, one nation. One law. This has brought the shut-him down, he is a racist and a bigot. This is ignorance, the worst kind of attitude to what should be open discussion. 

On the Sunday TV3 The Nation programme, presenter Lisa Owen, usually a very good interviewer, smirked as she introduced the subject, and Don Brash and Louisa Wall. 

There can be no doubt those of Maori descent are being treated differently in a host of ways and through the enactment of laws. Consider the Resource Management Act; the Conservation Act, the urge for local government to create separate Maori wards; the central government giving itself rights to appoint councillors to Environment Canterbury and giving Ngai Tahu the right to appoint three councillors to that same authority. 

Democracy. Louisa Wall did not dispute there are differences but defended the morality of those differences. Today we learn that when the Overseas Investment Office granted [Russian billionaire Alexander] Abromov the right to buy his 215ha farm north of Whangarei in 2009, it was on the condition that he gave public access across that land to the beach. In March 2015 with the approval of the 0I0, that requirement was amended to give the access rights to Ngati Wai only. What happened to the Seabed and Fbreshore which gave free and public access to our beaches? 

When our family sit around the table together with our grand-children — three of part-Dutch ancestry, one of part-Niuean ancestry and two of part-Maori ancestry — how can we justify the special rights and services just two have, over the other four? Is this the best way forward for this multi-cultural country to be a nation of integrity, equality, emancipation, unity. The media has a responsibility to support open discussion and to report without bias. 
R L 
Whangarei 

Bay of Plenty Times 8/10/16 
WHO'S TO BLAME? 
I agree with .Jan Hill’s criticism of Tommy. Kapai’s column on the Hobson’s Pledge (Letters, October 6). 

Kapai, in my opinion, plays the old tune of wealthy whites — most of whom have worked hard for their money. Some Maori tribes are among the richest people in New Zealand. Why do these wealthy Maori not share their riches with those who are alleged to be living in poverty? Why is it that 60 per cent of children in CYF care are Maori out of a population of 18 per cent? Why are our prisons bursting at the seams with Maori offenders? 

Under the Treaty of Waitangi, we became one people (New Zealanders) under British law, Maori included. Why is it that, over 170 years later, there are people still trying to dig up what I believe to be old, unproven allegations? 

Due to colonisation, we live in a wonderfull country. Look at the state of other nations and let's be thankful. It is up to Maori themselves to achieve (Abridged) 
M B 
Tauranga 

Dominion Post 8/10/16 (To the Point section) 
Rosemary McLeod (October 6) criticises Colin Craig for suggesting there is 'no need for Maori seats in Parliament'. Craig is not alone in this view as it was part of the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Electoral System. 
R H 
Carterton 

Sunlive / Weekend Sun 7/10/16 
SHARE THE ‘NATION’S CAKE’ EVENLY 
Tariana Turia, has excelled herself in the rabid rhetoric and looney logic she employs in her latest ‘NZ Herald' article. It appears the multitude of problems besetting Maori are the result of governmental, departmental and institutional racism. 

The fact that twice as many Maori children, under five years old, are referred to CYF she implies is the fault of the department and not an indication of poor parenting. 

The fact that health centre research shows Maori suffer poorer health in the areas of obstetrics, heart, renal and mental health she claims are the result of institutional racism with no consideration of self-indulgent lifestyles that may result in these conditions. Which department is responsible for Maori committing crimes? 

Her referral to practices in Great Britain have little relevance to New Zealand conditions. We do not have the large number and diversity of immigrants, a reason for the success of Brexit. 

What other country would require trainee nurses to study the protocols and absorb the customs of a single ethnic group exclusively as was a requirement in NZ, where many trainees nurses also had to spend a night sleeping on a marae? Were not hospital visiting regulations relaxed to suit Maori cultural. 

Ms Turia, you would be better employed in encouraging the controllers of the $40 billion Treaty Settlement ‘nest-egg' to spend some of it in solving Maori problems. 

None of the self-styled tangata whenua is more than 50 per cent Maori. We are all a mixture of ethnicities and so should regard ourselves as New Zealanders, share the ‘nation's cake' evenly and dispense with egregious claims. 
B J 
Omokoroa. 


UNPROVEN FACTS 
On ‘The Nation' on TV3 on October 2 Larissa Wall made a comment that Maori are indigenous to NZ. This cannot be proven with facts. DNA testing, carbon dating, and archaeological evidence prove three or four cultures were here prior to Polynesian Maori arrival 700 years ago. 

What happened to the Patupaiairehei (ancient surveyors)? Who drove Ngati Hotu, the redheaded, blue-eyed people to the brink of extinction? These peoples' DNA goes back 1800 years out of Persia. 

Who annihilated the Turehu peoples and then there is the innocent Waitaha and the peaceable Moriori? They all pre-dated Maori arrival in NZ. Maui arrived from Egypt in 231BC. 

Why does a so-called ‘free' country have 110 archaeological sites embargoed? Much evidence of NZ's blood thirsty history pre-European arrival is being systematically destroyed by persons who have an agenda to bury the truth and gain Maori sovereignty. 
MJ A 
Pyes Pa. 

Waikato Times 7/10/16 
BRASH PLEDGE 
Don Brash has begun a working group to combat rising separatism and I note that several high-profile Maori are involved in this group. 

Maori leaders have condemned this group as racist with waffling about Maori statistics, housing shortages, high rates of Maori in prison. 

Housing shortages are not racespecific and, as for prison, if you do the crime, then you do the time! 

There are many separate agencies set up especially for Maori - health, housing, schools, television/radio stations, sports teams, seats in local and central government, statutory boards, language funding, advisory committees and even a special Maori tax rate. 

Why are we not all under the same umbrella as simply New Zealanders? And what of Ngai Tahu and Waikato Tainui who, due to their charitable status, pay no income tax at all on their multimillion-dollar enterprises, such as Go Bus, Shotover Jet The Base shopping centre, and many others? 

Another example of separatism -Maori are demanding that the government sign over freshwater to them-and do it now! Can you see where Don Brash and his team are coming from - because I can! 
R B 
Tauranga 

Dominion Post 7/10/16 (To the Point section) 
Tracy Watkins is wide of the mark There really is a deep groundswell of resentment at Maori privilege in New Zealand. It's just not prevalent in her Left-wing circles. Ask a farmer or a sharemilker. Tracy. they'll explain it to you. 
N H 
Thorndon 

Nelson Mail 6/10/16 
DIFFERENT TREATY 
Your editorial about Brash has completely missed the point. It took two thousand years to arrive at our Westminster style of democracy which whilst not perfect is still the best there is. 

Now for a couple of votes in Parliament the Government wants to return us in part to a feudal system of governance by hereditary privilege based on race. 

Handing a few Maori elite power without mandate or accountability will do nothing to help those languishing in the bottom social indicators. 

The continual judgment of our history using today’s values is of no help either, especially when you look at only part of the picture, for example the treatment of labourers, child workers and unemployed in Great Britian in the 1800s was appalling by today’s standards as was the treament meted out by Ngati Tama and Ngati Mutunga to Chatham Island Maori up until 1862. 

Encouraging separatism and privilege in governance is simply creating future problems and resentments. Finally your comments on enforcing the deal and protecting the rights of the individual are illogical, you obviously read a different Treaty from the one I read. 
K M 
Upper Moutere, 


WEAK ARGUMENT 
Don Brash might not be the most likeable bloke, but even his detractors (Nelson Mail editorial October 3) must agree that the only fair democracy is one founded upon one electoral vote by every citizen, period. 

This kind of government Kiwis have died for, the kind famously described by Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg, his prayer being that such a "government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth". 

And yet that is exactly what your editorialist maintains the Treaty of Waitangi requires, as seemingly do many of our local bodies. New Zealand needs to stop standing in two canoes, and decide whether we are to be a democracy or not. 

Calling pro-democracy arguments racist is specious rubbish, and making Brash the whipping boy in an attempt to subvert what Governor Hobson saw the Treaty achieving, shows only the possession of a weak argument. 
A.F. J 
Wakefield 

Northland Age 6/10/16 
EQUAL RIGHTS HOBSON'S CHOICE 
Amazingly, the Hobson Pledge group has prised most of the race-bleating appeasers, treatyists, and revisionist grievers out of the woodwork, accompanied by the usual ranting, raving, frothing at the mouth and wringing of the hands, screaming about racists. 

This of course is their bog standard response when they cannot win an argument based on fact, history logic or even common sense. Hobson's `one people' statement simply reinforced what the legitimate Maori version of the Treaty said in three simple Articles: 

* Sovereignty ceded. 

* Property rights of all new Zealanders guaranteed and 

* Granting all rights and privileges of British subjects. 

A benign document everyone could live with. Any way, it is just an historic relic now. 

One thing is certain, no mention of partnerships, principles or special race-based treatment. Current `Maori' vested interests are not a special case, because there is really no Maori race (if that view is wrong, provide the whakapapa and details showing bloodlines of 50 per cent or more), with most of the bleating often coming from those with infinitesimal 'Maori' bloodlines. 

Labour party nitwits Messrs Little, Robertson and Davis have joined in the fray, so it is interesting to recall what Labour's 2014 election position was (no referendums, simply their way or the highway).Viz, Labour will: 

* Legislate to recognise Maori as first/ indigenous peoples of New Zealand. Continue to explore the means of protecting the status of the Treaty (bogus English version) and enshrining it within our constitutional framework. 

* Ensure as a principle the equity of funding for Maori providers across the entire public sector on all service contracts. 

* Compel local government to review the provisions for unelected race-based Maori representation. 

* Retain race-based 'Maori' parliamentary seats until 'Maori' decide otherwise. 

Maori are not indigenous, yet Labour is proposing special/preferential race-based treatment and if you think Labour `Maori' policies are ruinous, go check out the Greens' absurd aberrations. 

So does anyone think those jesters who are installed by a race-based preference system would want that to change? Not a chance, as they are more than happy with a system of reverse racism protecting their little patches. 

The National Party bucket list stated 'race-based' parliamentary seats would be abolished, but they have now resiled from that position See Taranaki Settlement Bill 2016. 

Sadly, those who are given whatever they demand rapidly develop a sense of entitlement, quickly losing all sense of proportion and objectivity. If proposing equal rights for all Kiwis is racist, then I'll be a monkey's uncle! 
R P 
Matapihi 


BURYING THE TRUTH 
Re Nation, TV 3 Sunday October 2 Larissa Wall makes comment that Maori are indigenous to New Zealand. This cannot be proven with facts. 

DNA testing, carbon dating and archaeological evidence prove three or four cultures were here prior to Polynesian Maori arrival 700 years ago. What happened to the Patupaiairehei (ancient surveyors)? Who drove Ngati Hotu, the red-headed, blue-eyed people to the brink of extinction? These people's DNA goes back 1800 years out of Persia. Who annihilated the Turehu peoples? And then there is the innocent Waitaha and the peaceable Moriories. 

They all pre-dated Maori arrival in New Zealand. Maui arrived from Egypt in 231 BC. 

Why does a so-called 'free' country have 110 archaeological sites embargoed? Much evidence of New Zealand's blood-thirsty history pre European arrival is being systematically destroyed by persons who have an agenda to bury the truth and gain Maori sovereignty. 
M J A 
Pyes Pa 

The Press 6/10/16 
IT’S GOOD FOR SOME 
Nice to see Ngai Tahu have made such a large profit (Oct 4). 

Being one of the biggest organisations in New Zealand, that has had so much given to them, it is a pity they cannot be like other good corporate citizens and pay their share of taxes. 
I E 
Darfield 

NZ Herald 6/10/16 
LAND WARS HOLIDAY 

A public holiday for New Zealand’s Land Wars makes sense, perhaps exchanging it for the Queen’s Birthday Holiday. It would be great if alongside it there were education programmes around the Land Wars, including the inter-Maori tribal land invasion wars, which are also an important part of our history. The New Zealand Land Wars started long before the Europeans arrived, let’s not forget. 
I M, 
Stratford. 


INSTITUTIONAL RACISM 
Dame Tariana Turia is off the mark in her claims concerning institutional racism against Maori. 

Pepi-pod funding had nothing to do with racism. It was based on a decision to not encourage a harmful and dangerous parenting choice, “co-sleeping”. Maori desperately need leaders like Ngata and Duff who are not afraid to encourage their people to embrace the reality of our modern multicultural society, not those who continually make excuses for poor choices and behaviour. 
M M 

Bay of Plenty Times 6/10/16 
HOBSON’S PLEDGE 
I have never read what, in my opinion, was such a load of crock as Tommy Kapai’s column in relation to Don Brash’s Hobson’s Pledge (Opinion, October 3).
 
The subject of Hobson’s Pledge is one New Zealand for all. 

Instead, Kapai referred to hangi, music awards, old white money, a colour-blind society, chestnuts and stolen land, which we all hear endlessly. 

Not once did he refer to equal opportunities for all, regardless of race and colour, which is what Hobson’s Pledge is about. 

Kindly deal with only the real issues raised in Hobson’s Pledge when referencing it, which will then hopefully stop this massive divide which has developed in New Zealand, end the “blame game” and end the massive amounts being paid to some but not others, based entirely on ancestry and ethnicity. (Abridged) 
J H 
Tauranga 

Hawke's Bay Today 6/10/16 
UNITING TREATY 
With the greatest respect, the muddlements of the Maori King and the New Plymouth mayor Andrew Judd are shared in the fullest measure by Lindsay Gordon Paku, QSM. 

My original letter stated that there was nothing in the Treaty of Waitangi that spoke about separate sovereignties, partnerships . . . nothing. It spoke of oneness before one law, the foundation stone of a unitary democratic state, whatever its imperfections in practice. One citizenship, with all the protections and rights of British citizenship, from whence we have derived modern law and honours such as the QSMs, Queen’s Service Medals, one of which Mr Paku has accepted. 

Of the great Maori scholars from 1890s Te Aute College . . . one of whom rose to be acting prime minister in WWI . . . whose childhood understandings they would have learned from living tribal signatories to the Treaty, none saw the Treaty as other than a uniting document for all New Zealanders, or people of Aotearoa if you like . . . a unitary word not created until 1900. Quite clearly the one law and the equality of all before it was what Sir Apirama Ngata regarded as the cornerstone of this one nation. So do I. 

There is so much in Mr Paku’s letter that is so wrong it levitates into fantasy. There was never any intention ‘to sign a treaty with Maori without Royal consent . . . ’ much less to beat the French with any French treaty. The French would have arrived with the Tricolour, marines, and guillotine, Mr Paku. There would be no ‘Treaty Settlements’ taking place today ‘ . . . a British Governor arrived with a treaty that was meant for Australia . . . ’ No, no and no. A naval captain, Hobson, arrived with a mandate to offer a treaty to Maori that many tribes wanted. 

‘Britain would protect the Maori . . . and that they would become one people with us, not the other way around.’ Surely oneness is oneness; what other way around is there? 

Misunderstandings entangle with error so much that answering all points would be impossible here. 

The Treaty of Waitangi and its theme of oneness is all we have, and nothing in it supports separate development under different laws. Read it! If we don’t like this basic fact, then all we are left with is the simple Right of Conquest as was practised elsewhere. 

I do not think Mr Paku would find this at all to his liking. 
A R 
Napier 

The Northern Advocate 
POLITICAL GRAFT 
A recent article in a newspaper berated Winston Peters for the use of the word “apartheid”, pertaining to the Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill. I don’t recall the article writer having anything to say when Tariana Turia, and another Waitangi Tribunal member, mentioned a holocaust in parliament. Perhaps I missed it. 

Julius Caesar ruled the ancient Romans with his "divide and rule" policy, and our present Government is using the same tactics to good effect. 

That there was a holocaust there is little doubt. It was committed by the Waikato Maori who slaughtered one third of the Taranaki Maori, took one third as prisoners, and the re-maining third fled to Wellington, where they embarked on a ship to the Chathams, and slaughtered the Moriori, rendering their population from about 1200 down to 105, and leaving Taranaki virtually empty. 

Why does the Government want to pay out to the Taranaki Maori when there were none left? Because it is PC, Political Corruption — it is what keeps them in power. What about paying out the Patupaiarehe and Waitaha, who were here long before Maori, their populations decimated by the later arrivals, and who are being paid out handsomely — in some cases time and time again? 
KEVAN G MARKS 
Kaipara 

The Press 5/10/16 
NGAI TAHU IS NOT PAYING ITS FAIR SHARE 

Nowhere in the article about Ngai Tahu’s $169 million profit did it state this is income tax-exempt profit. 

Nowhere in the article (Oct 4), in the interests of balanced journalism, did it state Ngai Tahu pays no income tax, other than on income earned through its Maori Authority status, which is negligible, and on Australian income. 

While the Government is concerned about international companies paying their fair share, it continues to turn a blind eye to this failure of internal tax policy which allows a charitable trust to be a shareholder of a commercial operation, with those trusts claiming that, because they are exempt from income tax, therefore so is the income from the commercial operations. 

The issue is that where a commercial operation is unrelated to a charity’s charitable purposes, as described in its deed of trust, the company should pay tax on funds that are not distributed for charitable purposes. 

Donations can be claimed as a deductible item which reduces the company’s income tax bill, as provided for in the Income Tax Act 2007. In Ngai Tahu’s case, each company would donate to the Ngai Tahu Charitable Trust which would then distribute funds for the benefit of iwi. 

The time is ripe for this absurdity to be rectified and for such companies to pay their fair share. 

This is not Maori-bashing; this is about equity, as righting a wrong from the past has now created another wrong. 
DR MICHAEL GOUSMETT 
University of Canterbury 


IWI ARE CORPORATE IDENTITIES 
Just another Brash bash? 

Let’s have a reasoned discussion about ‘‘Hobson’s Pledge’’ issues, including the erosion of democracy. 

Appointing Maori representatives to local councils and community boards confers political and electoral privilege. 

Ngai Tahu has an exploitive interest in water and actively campaigned for Environment Canterbury to remain a government commission with three commissioners appointed by them. It has acquired two. 

This is against the wishes of a vast majority of Cantabrians and the Christchurch City Council demanding a return to full democracy. 

Traditional Maori tribes no longer exist – iwi are corporate entities. Moreover, one can be Maori with a fraction of Maori blood. Special claims on this basis are unwarranted. 

Historical injustices are dealt with by Treaty settlement processes and the courts. 

Over-representation in social problem statistics must be rectified whatever the ethnicity. 

NZ is a multicultural not bicultural society, a social democracy with equal rights irrespective of gender, religion or ethnicity. 

We are equal ‘‘subjects’’ or citizens, not unequal partners. 

We have evolved a long way from the practices of both Victorian and traditional Maori tribal societies. 
J W 
South New Brighton 

Bay of Plenty Times 5/10/16 
ONE SET OF RULES FOR ALL NZERS
Don Brash has started a lobby group to combat what he believes is rising separatism in New Zealand. 

Some people have condemned this group as racist, with waffling about Maori statistics, housing shortages, high rates of Maori in prison. 

Housing shortages are not race-specific and as for prison, if you do the crime, then you do the time. There are many separate agencies set up particularly for Maori — health, housing, schools, television/radio stations, sports teams, seats in local and central government, statutory boards, language funding, advisory committees and even a special Maori tax rate. 

Why are we not all under the same umbrella as simply New Zealanders? Can you see where Don Brash and his team are coming from? I can. (Abridged) 
R B 
Tauranga 

The New Zealand Herald 5/10/16 (Short & Sweet section) 
ON BARBARISM 
One never hears of the early Maori, their barbarism. Alan Duff’s theme, that that was the normal back then, should be in every article written on NZ history. 
S B, 
Glendowie. 

Southland Times 5/10/16 
INDIGENOUS OR NOT? 
On Nation, TV3, on Sunday, October 2, Larissa Wall made comment that Maori are indigenous to New Zealand. This cannot be proven with facts. DNA testing, carbon dating, and archaeological evidence prove three or four cultures were here before Polynesian Maori arrived 700 years ago. 

What happened to the patupaiairehei (ancient surveyors)? Who drove Ngati Hotu, the redheaded, blue-eyed people to the brink of extinction? These people's DNA goes back 1800 years out of Persia. Who annihilated the Turehu peoples, and then there is the innocent Waitaha and the peaceable Moriori? They all pre-dated Maori arrival in New Zealand. Maui arrived from Egypt in 231BC. 

Why does a so-called free country have 110 archaeological sites embargoed? Much evidence of New Zealand's bloodthirsty history before European arrival is being systematically destroyed by persons who have an agenda to bury the truth and gain Maori sovereignty. 
M J A 
Tauranga 

Dominion Post 5/10/16 
HARDLY DEMOCRATIC 
I refer to Campaign against 'Maori favouritism' (September 29) and Tracy Watkins' commentary Is there any life left in this souffle. Steven Joyce states that most New Zealanders recognise they have "... a prime minister who is actually very even-handed on this sort of stuff'. 

Oh really? How can he say that, when the Government is proposing Treaty settlements that would quietly force councils to accept unelected Maori representatives with full voting rights? That is completely undemocratic, and doesn't come within miles of being "even-handed". 

Watkins is wrong too if she thinks there's no life left in this debate. As long as the Government continues trying to pull stunts like this, the debate will continue. 
D B 
Upper Hutt 

The Daily Post Rotorua 4/10/16 
VIVA EQUALITY FOR ALL 
It was like a breath of fresh air to read in the Rotorua Daily Post that a lobby group is being formed to promote equality amongst all New Zealand citizens. Mind you what did shock me was that the word “controversy” was used. Surely equality is the cornerstone of our democratic society. To promote this can hardly be called controversial. 

Nobody is superior because he or she happens to belong to any group, ethnic or otherwise. And, of course, nobody should be allowed to bypass our election system and get into a position of making decisions without citizens having to vote for them. 

Lately we have come across some people who try to describe democracy as a dirty word, how awful, shame on them. I congratulate Don Brash for fighting the separatism that popped up its ugly head in our society. He has my full support. 
H B 
Rotorua 


ENOUGH ALREADY 
I don't think there are many people in New Zealand who do not acknowledge that Maori are the "people of the land". As such, they are given special rights and privileges. 

But, like spoilt children, the more they are given the more they demand. If you give something to someone and he says "Thank you, that is nice" you are happy to give. If on the other hand he says "Yeh! That's not enough. Give me more" you naturally get a bit brassed off. 

There are lots of things that are for Maori only. Maori All Blacks, Maori golf, Maori Music Awards, lots of grants for education. I cannot think of one thing that Pakeha can get that Maori are not also entitled to. 

I was accosted in the corridor of the hospital by a Maori youth who said, "What are you doing here? This is our hospital, we own this land." Think what that did for my sympathy for the "poor underprivileged". 

Maori gifted the land, but Pakeha provided the building, the staff and the equipment. Come on Maori! Admit that you are better off now than you ever were in 1800. Enjoy civilisation and let's all go forward into a united future. 
M B 
Rotorua 

The New Zealand Herald 4/10/16 
NOT SO VILE 
Lizzie Marvelly’s column is misinformed and one-sided. This self-appointed arbiter of our social attitudes has, week after week, demonstrated attitudes one would expect of a part-Maori young feminist with little other than her own ingrained prejudice and selective morality to guide her. 

She tries to discredit Don Brash’s “vile newspaper ads”, which I haven’t seen, but I am familiar with his, to me, very fair and equitable attitude towards all New Zealanders being “one nation, one people”; and her equally irrationally biased praise for the most useless apparatchik in the firmament, Dame Susan Devoy, Race Relations Commissioner, who it seems is dedicated more to furthering the Maori elite agenda of equal power sharing with the Crown than equality and fair treatment for all. 
C. M, 
Kaitaia. 

NZ Herald 4/10/16 (Short & Sweet section) 
ON RACISM 
From various newspaper articles, radio programmes and social media, Don Brash and “Hobson’s Pledge” have certainly rattled some cages — and about time too. 
GEOFF PARKER, 
Kamo. 

Dominion Post 4/10/16 
TREATY 'TRUTH' 
The Dominion Post reaction to Don Brash and "Hobson's Pledge" (Editorial, October 1) is a blatant distortion of the truth. 

The second article of the Treaty of Waitangi does not mention the word "Maori" and is not a "guarantee of a serious amount of political power". 

Your editorial writer should actually read the Treaty in which Article Two guarantees the property rights of "tangata katoa o Nu Tirani' which means "all the people of New Zealand" and "all" means "all" 

Since British subjects possessed property rights anyway and Article Three gave such rights to all Maori (including the many slaves of other Maori), Brash is entirely correct in stating that Article Two is redundant. 

Again, your editorial chants the modern nonsense about `Treaty partners" - a delusion of the late Robin Cooke (whom I knew personally) and an absurdity anywhere but in Alice's Wonderland which is New Zealand today. 
BRUCE MOON 
Nelson 

Waikato Times 4/1/16 
LIES, LIES, LIES 
Being in a situation where they can manipulate the media those in power bombard us with messages that ‘‘all is well’’ when the underlying facts reveal a radically different story. 

Recently we are told that New Zealand has a rock star economy – and that is in a nation with an insurmountable national debt (interest only on that debt is around $100 million each week) and the fact we owe more than $100 billion is swept under the carpet in the euphoria of announcing a budget surplus. 

This is a debt that can never be repaid under our current monetary system and a terrible legacy for future generations. 

We are being progressively led into poverty by incompetent political leaders whose only solution is to invent another tax. The most insidious tax ever invented is GST. Here we see someone who is already taxed on any income received from providing a service being doubly taxed for performing that service. 

Another blatant lie is the benefit of unlimited free trade, but free trade agreements with slave-labour countries are the root cause of unemployment and poverty in our own nation. Local manufacturers cannot compete with cheap products that are flooding our markets and are either forced to shut up shop or move overseas. This may be helping developing nations, but it is destroying our own. 

Then there is our nation’s true history, with our real indigenous people concealed under a mountain of political correctness and guilt-ridden appeasement. 
MITCH MORGAN 
Kaipara 

Taranaki Daily News 4/10/16 
HIKOI SUPPORT 
The newspaper (Taranaki Daily News, September 22) had some details of a hikoi going to Owae Marae at Waitara. I would support their intention of having the unlawfully taken Waitara lands returned to their original owners, which is not Te Atiawa.The town side of the river - names of the original owners - are on the 1861 map drawn up by the second highest ranking Ngatiawa chief in Waitara, a copy of which is in the hands of the New Plymouth District Council. 

Their hypocrisy is well demonstrated when they say we cannot change the law - but they have in Parliament, an Act to allow the lands to be sold and the monies put into a fund which will be bled for "expenses" by council nominees. It does not help the victims at all. 

I understand the Hikoi started from Te Kohia (on the International Day of Peace) but why from there - a place of war? Why didn't it start from Kuikui where 200 Ngatiawa men, women and children had their homes burnt out by ancestors of Te Atiawa on 17 March, 1860. There would be a good starting place for Te Atiawa to say "sorry" on the Day of Peace. 

But their leaders are still misleading, by referring to the lands as being "confiscated" when they were not ever legally confiscated, but taken by unlawful armed occupation actively supported by Te Atiawa. 
R W 
Waitara 

The New Zealand Herald 3/10/16 
RACE-BASED SEATS 
Audrey Young’s column on Hobson’s Pledge (October 1) defends the provision in the Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Bill which gives iwi decision-making roles on Taranaki Regional Council committees, asserting it is no different to the option already available to local authorities to appoint external members to committees. 

However, the bill does present significant differences. Unlike the current appointments which are optional, the proposed legislation mandates three permanent iwi seats on the two standing committees. Furthermore, the councillors cannot select the candidates for these appointments, as they can now. Nor can the wider community or their council representatives choose to terminate the arrangement, now or in the future. 

This legislation constitutes an offence against democracy, made worse by being imposed on the citizens of Taranaki against the will of the wider community, as illustrated in a recent referendum held in New Plymouth whereby the proposal for race-based seats at the council decision-making table was overwhelmingly rejected. 
S S 
Meadowbank. 

The New Zealand Herald 3/10/16 (Short & Sweet section 
ON MASSEY 
Your correspondent Heather du PlessisAllan makes so much sense with her call to not rename Massey University. Many pillars of society over the years have been flawed, but we cannot and should not rewrite history to suit those who are so easily offended. Should Te Rauparaha Arena in Porirua be renamed because he was heavily involved in much of the murder, mayhem, and biffo between pre-colonisation Maori tribes? 
R B 
Tauranga. 

Bay of Plenty Times 3/10/16 
‘RACISM’ LABEL ON GOAL DISAPPOINTING 
The predictable response from Maori leaders to Don Brash’s wonderful goal for New Zealand to be “one people” left me feeling very disappointed that all the money that has been poured into Maori education and welfare has been wasted, in that they see this as “racism”. 

Dr Brash’s antecedents were Scots, early settlers with strong moral principles and vision, and along with other early settlers gave New Zealand the first school, first cathedral, first university, first teachers’ college and the list goes on. 

They came in ships 160 years ago and in that time so much was achieved which included better things for Maori in the form of health, education, opportunities and they intermarried, the ultimate form of acceptance. Such are the ethics this man grew up with. 

Everyone who has lived here has come from somewhere else. Check out the contribution the Dutch settlers have made, wonderful. The Chinese, exceptional. 

We all came in different boats at different times and are now in the same boat and an intelligent man is trying to steer us away from the rocks to a united future, so Maori leaders, “sit down you’re rocking the boat.” (Abridged) 
B L 
Otumoetai 


‘ONE PEOPLE’ 
“He iwi tahi tatou” . . . “We are now one people”. In February 1840 when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed, all parties agreed that we are all one people in New Zealand. 

However, in the Bay of Plenty Times (News, September 30) Don Brash and the lobby group known as Hobson’s Pledge were accused of being “racist” by Bay of Plenty Regional councillor Awanui Black, who represents Mauao Maori on the council. 

It doesn’t take much to research the meaning of “racism”. Racism: a noun describing the state of being racist ie. Subscribing to the belief that the human population can be classified according to “race”. 

The Thesaurus explanation states that a racist is a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others. 

I cannot see how anyone can label Don Brash or the lobby group as “racist” as they are trying their utmost to have everyone in New Zealand treated in the same way. 

There is no suggestion of one race being superior to another. 

We are all New Zealanders and therefore should all be working towards sharing this country fairly and equally. There is no need for Maori representation to be seen as separate, as all members of a council or the Government should be there on merit and not on race. 

If there is to be a Maori “voice” then those persons involved should be elected in exactly the same way as anyone else. If the Waitangi Treaty is so important, why aren’t we all working towards being “one people” as was agreed by all involved so long ago. 
I A 
Tauranga 

Sunday Star Time 2/10/16 
PETERS RESPONDS 
Did your editor have a holiday last week ("Winston's salary should be docked," September 25) and appoint a lunatic to write the editorial on Treaty settlement bills? 

The point is that NZ First had earlier agreed Parliament would sit under extended hours on a Friday to pass the bills. Then, on closer examination, we found the Taranaki Claims Settlement Bill contained a clause which handed local iwi six positions on the local authority. We do not support this form of electoral apartheid. 

We had another concern also with the serious miscarriage of justice proposed in the Ngatikahu Ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Bill and therefore requested that there be a party vote to record our opposition to the two bills. A voice vote would not have been a record of any party's opposition. 

This is not grandstanding, or perverting the course of democracy, as the editorial states -this is actually democracy at work. National's Gerry Brownlee should have accepted the request. 

By this stage, National had already granted leave to many of their MPs, which reflects how little importance they attach to these bills. Brownlee, in a fit of pique, cancelled the Friday sittings - and then sought to blame NZ First. 
WINSTON PETERS, 
leader, NZ First