April - June 19

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 28/6/19 
Tauranga City Council's Policy Committee is proposing changes to the street naming policy (Sunlive, June 22).

This looks like little more than another effort to re-write and edit the history of Tauranga.

Committee chairman, councillor Steve Morris claims “we have nothing to fear”.

In my opinion we have lot to fear. What is being proposed, among other things, is that naming decisions are purely a function of council, and if the council decides, requires no community consultation.

When a te reo name is gifted by mana whenua there will be no consultation or formal decision-making.

It displays this council's usual arrogance, lack of transparency, failure to consult with and act on the community's wishes, mostly at the expense of ratepayers.

It is an affront to democracy.

Most interesting to see another of Peter Dey's interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi (Letters 14 June) being expressed. On the one hand he claims that the Treaty is a "partnership" document which, by implication, means that it promotes an equitable sharing of resources, and on the other hand states that the Treaty very clearly grants Maori racial preferences. Confusing, isn't it?

Makes one wonder whether, despite having a Race Relations Conciliator, we are a racist country after all.

What Peter Dey claims, [The Weekend Sun, June 14], is not everybody’s view of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. As usual he quotes Freeman’s flowery rendition of the treaty in English. What the real Treaty and Hobson’s final draft both said is that ‘all the peoples of New Zealand were guaranteed the possession (tino rangatiratanga) of their lands, dwellings and ordinary property (taonga)’. Nowhere are the words “forests, fisheries” or "partnerships" present. The Third Article gives Maori the same rights - no more, no less - than the people of England.

New Zealand is laden with 'fake' history and it is detrimental to our true history that any one culture is trying to suppress the true and brutal history we are descended from.

Which part of Peter Fellingham's letter did Peter Dey not understand? Which part of Hobson's Pledge does he cite as recording Pakeha culture as superior when all Don Brash has ever called for is equality for all ethnicities in New Zealand of which there are over 200.

It has always been the argument of we so-called racists that that we are one people as Dame Whena Cooper has said (he iwi ko tahi tatau) and it has always been argued in support of this that the Crown should never have been divested of ownership in perpetuity for all people. It has never been an anti-Maori issue.

Now, thanks to successive Governments and National's Chris Finlayson, together with Peter Sharples' misrepresentations to the United Nations, NZ became the only country in the world to abrogate those natural rights (rivers, lakes, mountains, beaches/harbours, national parks) to a minority of its population to govern/receive economic benefit/control access/dictate terms to the remainder of us so that now every part-Maori is officially an UN-authenticated indigene with rights that precede and supervene on those of all other New Zealanders. Is that not superior enough Mr Dey?

Now our local council has taken it upon itself to rename the district with regard to Maori culture - European history and contributions to NZ growth being a non-event. This is now a national problem and it is time to acknowledge that New Zealand is not Aotearoa but a big, beautiful country that belongs to everyone.

Rotorua Daily Post 29/6/19 
It’s always been okay to be Maori (Dr Rawiri Taonui, June 23), just like its okay to be any race.

The key Is education, then the world, yes the world, is your oyster for career opportunities.

I wish people would realise this and just get on with It instead of publishing this sort of tit-for-tat stuff which gets you nowhere. Actually, it sticks up walls between the races.

We all realise the wrongs that have been done and are trying to put it right but two wrongs don’t make a right — all it does is keep the cycle of racism, going.

A word of friendly advice: Look at the glass half full — positivity is the key to anything.

A 'can-do attitude" goes a long s way, especially in this PC society we all live in.

Harmony of the races is the key to living a long and happy life in this land of ours, what's that saying? United we stand, divided we fall. and this country is definitely worth being united for, isn't it?

Dom Post 29/6/19 (To the point section) 
Whanau is the word now being presented in the media. What’s wrong with the former word whamily?

Northland Age 27/6/19 
The uproar regarding the attempted uplifting of an infant from its mother recently, and the associated naval-gazing, knee-jerking, defies belief. The paramount and only consideration and concern here is the welfare and safebeing of the child - the wider family and parents are of secondary importance, as they are usually the cause of the problem, not the solution.

To enable a child to be uplifted, a court order is required, and I doubt that the Ministry for Children ever acts precipitously because of the flak involved.

The first step would be to see if the child can be placed with other family members, and if this cannot be safely negotiated that’s an indictment of whanau. Indiscriminate breeding, physical abuse, alcohol, drug-taking, violent temperaments, history of violence etc. are all major contributors in the upsurge of child-related violence.

If the ministry properly uplifts at-risk children there is outrage, while if a child is not taken and then suffers physical harm or death, all hell breaks loose – it is a no-win situation for the ministry.

Families need to step up and be counted, addressing issues before they reach the bottom of the cliff stage, because lack of family support and care are often telling features in the tragedies. From the use of the inappropriate name Oranga Tamariki it seems fair to conclude that these children in at-risk situations are more often than not part-Maori. Unbelievably, three separate individual current investigations are under way, and the cost involved will be horrendous.

Children’s Commissioner Becroft looks ineffectual, Chief Ombudsman Boshier rolls out the usual platitudes, and Minister for Children Tracy Martin is just her normal disagreeable self.

None of them seem to be prepared to face the reality of the situation and place the blame where it lies.
ROB PATERSON Mount Maunganui

Dr Nichola Shackleton (NZ Herald, June 17) appears to blame colonialism, around 200 years after the event, for today’s obesity of Polynesian children and part-Maori in particular.

It may surprise Ms Shackleton, if she is interested in facts, to learn that only 2.31 per cent of New Zealand’s total land mass remained confiscated, for tribal rebellions, after 1928, very minimal in the scheme of things, and hardly the cause of today’s obesity problems.

Maori, unlike some other peoples that were colonised by the British, were never repressed or oppressed. In fact Article 3 of the Treaty granted the people of New Zealand, which included Maori, the same rights and privileges of British subjects.

Since 1867 the Maori Representation Act has provided separatist political power for Maori, and currently we have seven designated Maori seats in Parliament, and my research shows that MPs of Maori descent total 29 out of 120 (24 per cent, which far exceeds their population percentage).

Of course the so-called ‘wicked white coloniser’ introduced wheat, along with alcohol, tobacco and sugar, but they also brought self-reliance, work ethic and willpower, which strangely appears not to have rubbed off on many of the locals.

The colonisers rightfully outlawed cannibalism. I wonder if Ms Shackleton has done research as to whether the ban on this source of protein has any bearing on part-Maori obesity?

Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter is more important than the Treaty of Waitangi, as it is our true founding document, our first constitution and our Independence Day. This extremely important document has been ignored for over 173 years. The day we should all celebrate as our Independence Day is May 3.

The Treaty of Waitangi is not our founding document. Over 500 tangata Maori chiefs decided to give up their territories and governments to Queen Victoria of their own free will, in return for the same rights as the people of England.

It was their chiefs’ decision when they were strong. The people of England living in New Zealand at the time had nothing to do with the Tiriti o Waitangi. It was an agreement solely between Queen Victoria and tangata Maori chiefs.

Sir Apirana Ngata, Minister of Native Affairs, stated in his book The Treaty of Waitangi in 1922: ‘The chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority, war arose and blood was spilled.’

The law came into operation and land was taken in payment. It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the treaty.

It is also interesting to note that the tribes that caused most of the trouble, such as Waikato, Ngai Tahu, Taranaki and Tuhoe, were the tribes that in most cases did not sign the Treaty of Waitangi but have used it to gain most in compensation and assets.

Dom Post 24/6/19 
I didn't think I could read anything in the Dominion Post as offensive as the stories around white supremacists, but the June 21 so-called cartoon, titled "Stolen Across Time" really hits the mark.

The inference that Pakeha have been taking Maori children from their mothers since colonial time, in something akin to the "stolen generation in Australia", is a shocking attempt to rewrite New Zealand history that has no basis whatsoever.

It is a gross insult to the heritage of every New Zealander of European descent in the country and absolutely repugnant.

If the cartoon is meant as a dig at Oranga Tamariki, just remember New Zealand has the highest rate of child abuse in the OECD so the question we really need to be asking is how many Nia Glassies do we need?
GRAHAM DICK, Masterton

The Press 24/6/19 
I puzzled over Sharon Murdoch’s ‘Whenua’ Cartoon (June 21) for some time, where James Cook appears to be kidnapping a Maori child from a distraught mother.

Surely this was history reinvented? The caption ‘Stolen across Time’ did not help either. It seemed to imply a second wave of colonists were continuously stealing the children of the first?

Still puzzled, I checked my understanding of whenua, but that shed no light either.

Then it dawned on me … it was simply a misprint.

The image should have been on the following page, along with Rosemary McLeod’s satirical piece ‘‘It’s tough to be a bloke’’.

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 21/6/19 
Peter Dey (The Weekend Sun, June 14) is wrong on so many counts it’s hard to know where to start.

Mr Dey should provide evidence that Parliament has formally decided that the Treaty of Waitangi is a “legally binding partnership agreement” between Maori and the Crown because I most certainly cannot recall such a vote. Justice Cooke did suggest that the Treaty did create a relationship in the nature of a partnership, but he did not suggest that that was a partnership of equals, as Peter Dey implies. 
Political leaders as different as David Lange and Winston Peters have dismissed as absurd the notion that Queen Victoria, head of the greatest empire the world had seen to that date, would have entered into a partnership of equals with 500 chiefs on the far side of the world, almost none of whom she had ever met and most of whom were illiterate.

Article II of the Treaty guaranteed Maori ownership of their property, which they were entitled to sell to an agent of the Queen if they so wished. Of course, most of that property was sold decades ago. There is not, in the Maori language version of the Treaty, any mention of forests or fisheries.

Mr Dey argues that the equality which Hobson’s Pledge argues for is “based on the belief that Pakeha culture is superior”. Well, it certainly was vastly superior to Maori culture in 1840, with Maori culture having no written language, no knowledge of the wheel, and no knowledge of any metals.

But our argument today is not based on which culture was or is superior but on the simple notion that there can be no racial harmony in New Zealand unless all citizens have equal political rights, and it was exactly that equality of political rights that Article III of the Treaty guaranteed to us all.
DON BRASH, Auckland

Peter Dey (The Weekend Sun, June 21) clearly isn't keen on Article 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi which grants equality of citizenship to all New Zealanders and he is even less keen on Don Brash mentioning it.

It’s a funny old world where someone can be called divisive for advocating for democracy, equally of citizenship and supporting free speech.

Dey claims Article 2 gives special rights to Maori. A reading of the Treaty would show him that the protection of property rights under Article 2 applies to all of the people of New Zealand - Tangata kotoa o Nu Tirani.

We need to be a country where we celebrate our differences, where our diversity enriches us, where ethnicity matters but does not bestow privilege, where all citizens are united equally under the law.

If we continue down the path of separatism and don't unite as New Zealanders we will fail as country.

New Zealand Herald 21/6/19
As a proud New Zealander with a little Maori ancestry, my heart bursts with pride when I see a great haka or hear a beautiful waiata. However, I am ashamed to see (Herald, June 19) some of our people preventing at-risk Maori babies being taken into state care.

Where were these people when the young mother was born into a house of poverty and neglect? Where were they when she needed a bedtime story? Where were they when she went to school without lunch? Where were they at parent-teacher interviews? Where were they on those cold Saturday mornings at netball? And where were they when she got pregnant to a boy from the same background? 

Our ancestors would cry in shame at how some of our tamariki are treated. Being brought up in state care is far from perfect but it sure beats the alternative.
D ADAMS, Mt Albert.

Northland Age 18/6/19 
I was born in New Zealand. and as such am a New Zealander.

Originally the country was known as New Zealand. Then it became Aotearoa New Zealand. Now it is often just Aotearoa.

The weather report on night television concluded, "That is the weather forecast for Aotearoa." Our tourism industry is labelled Tourism Aotearoa. Not New Zealand.

Government departments now have Maori names. Why? To appease 15 per cent of the population?

Signage is in te reo in government departments and other state institutions, and takes precedence over English.

So a language spoken by 3 per cent of the population in New Zealand is being preferred to a language that is spoken by 20 per cent of the world's population, to whom official signage in Maori is as incomprehensible as it is to most New Zealanders.

I am still a New Zealander, but henceforth, by the insidious infiltration of te reo, with the tacit acceptance of government and the media, I may find myself being internationally known as an Aotearoan.

Is over $500m a year to promote te reo not enough to satisfy an avaricious bunch of ethnic elitists? Wake up New Zealand! The writing's on the wall, and it's in te reo.
Northland Age 13/6/19 
Justice Minister Andrew Little displays gross illogicality in his latest press release.

If, as he claims, there are mass failures in the country’s legal system, it is a clear indictment of not only law enforcement agencies and the judiciary but mostly of the government and politicians for permitting these injustices to continue. He further states that Maori have “a justifiable level of anger” at 51 per cent of prison inmates coming from 15 per cent of the population.

Logic would suggest that the lawabiding population has a better right to be aggrieved for having to pay for the 51 per cent Maori internees.

Mr Little, innocent people do not get imprisoned. If they do it is high time you and your parliamentary mates did something about it, because the public can’t. What makes you think that turning the problems over to Maori agencies will be more successful than their failure to do so in the past?

The public should be deeply concerned about what New Zealand’s justice system and race relations can expect from such a tendentious minister.

Whinging, PC brigade are at it 24/7. Mental disease, child poverty, homelessness, family physical abuse, behavioural problems, failure to allow chastising kids all make the headlines.

On the mental disease front, people are rarely born with any problem but seemingly become infected by the environment they live in. Some obvious reasons for it are family upbringing, parental neglect, abuse, drugs, diet, and lack of medical treatment for diseases. Much of the blame also lies with violent videos, porn, gaming, drug addictions, lack of education and literacy, resulting in frustration and aggressiveness.

One can accept with modern-day pressures some people (non-violent) will inevitably suffer from anxiety and depression, and we can feel sympathy for these people and treat them for these mental illnesses.

The other so-called victims’ problems are often not genuine, mostly selfinflicted and categorised by violence, indiscriminate breeding and overcrowding, usually untreatable, as they refuse to be helped or play blame games. Particular sections of society are more prone than most Kiwis who don’t have the same propensities. Smart phones, social media, gaming and bullying all play their part.

Problems not really congenital at all, and nothing much showed up pre-1975.

No amount of money thrown at the maelstrom or at the ‘wailing wall’ will remedy the epidemics. Unreal senses of entitlement point to social problems, resulting in violent crime, car chases and the like. The whole country lacks a sense of responsibility for poor behaviour, and the no blame, no punitive action theory does not work.

A lack of penalties or pain for offending encouraged by namby-pamby wet bus tickets dished out are a joke, based on convenient excuses like feigned mental issues and blaming the victim.

Let our horde of creative writers come up with pie-in-the-sky excuses for this modern-day phenomenon, then let’s critique the fictions floated. Every day there is more nonsense added to the list of perceived ills, grievances, and even teachers with strikes, ideology attitudes and teachers’ code of ethics only add to the mess.

We don’t have the money to throw at this leftist/socialist, ideologistic garbage, and the long-suffering, much maligned irrelevant silent majority (80 per cent of Kiwis) don’t need to tolerate this. It is simply a case of not being apathetic, rising up and telling politicians they have had enough.

The first opportunity to do this will arise at the October 2019 local government elections, so pick candidates who will protect and nurture our communities, and then at the 2020 general election send a clear message to all politicians the game is over. If Kiwis don’t do so, New Zealand will end up a violent Third World country — the choice is with Kiwis who can identify those responsible for the problems supporting and fostering anti-social behaviour, so let’s make these sods fully accountable.
ROB PATERSON Mount Maunganui

Dominion Post 13/6/19 
Air New Zealand has joined the warm, fuzzy, inclusivity and diversity club by deciding to allow staff to expose "non-offensive tattoos" while at work (Airline allows `non-offensive' tattoos, June 11).

According to chief executive Christopher Luxon, this move will "reflect the makeup of New Zealand". They will even have a Tattoo Review Panel.

Good grief! What about passengers and their views? Do they not have a say? How about a Customer Satisfaction Panel?

I find all tattoos offensive, whatever the fashionable reason for their ubiquity or confected cultural significance. When travelling, can I refuse to be attended to by someone sporting subcutaneous ink patterns?

What is reflective of the makeup of New Zealand in this skin-scribbling craze?

Mr Luxon should ensure the company keeps flying customers safely from place to place, employs the best aircraft engineers and leaves the social engineering to those who know even less about it. [abridged]

Waikato Times 13/6/19 
Polarising rhetoric risks drowning out the overwhelmingly positive aspects of the history of Maori and Pakeha co-existence. Thus I support teaching NZ history in our schools provided that is revealed in the context of the world as it was, and is balanced and honest.

The first Europeans to visit NZ include Abel Tasman (1642), James Cook (1769). They were followed by a succession of French explorers, but what were they all really looking for looking for in the South Pacific and what did they encounter?

Both Tasman and Cook were greeted in their first encounter in NZ by violent Stone Age natives who had no written language and only primitive tools and weapons with which to defend themselves.

So what did the British have to offer Maori? A giant leap from the Stone Age into an Iron Age and with it, the opportunity to create a Maori written language, warm blankets, weatherproof clothing and shelter. In addition metal gardening tools, hammers and nails, axes and saws, and the skill to utilise them.

Then there was the dreaded fire-stick (musket, shot and gun powder) from which they had no defence, but once in their possession gave them great power over their traditional tribal enemies. For example, when Ngapuhi, armed with muskets, became a super power, invaded their traditional tribal enemy in Taranaki who were armed only with traditional close-contact weapons, and slaughtered them.

However, the most important gift that the British had to offer was exposure to a system of Judo/Christian values which had developed over 1800 years.

What did the Maori have to trade in return? Fresh water, food, including an abundance and variety of fish, birds, and wild pig, rich volcanic soil in which to grow, potato, taro, kumara, melons and corn. Highly sort-after precious hard-stone material like green gemstone and the trinkets and weapons fashioned from it, massive trees from which ships, housing and fortification could be built, and flax from which baskets and rope could be fabricated.

Plus, in the distant a future in which vast uninhabited areas of land and forest created the potential for NZ to become the food bowl of Mother England. It was in this context that the history of New Zealand began.
BRIAN MAIN, Hamilton

Dominion Post 10/6/19 
Kelvin Davis announced a $32 million boost in kohanga reo funding despite no more money being available for teachers in general.

Another recent gift was $5m for new vans.

In March 2014 Hekia Parata gave these figures on the Native Affairs: funding $92m, kohanga reo 460, pupils 9000. Davis' latest figures were pupils 8500 and staff 1000.

Having seen no outcry from Maori, I can only presume Parata's quoted funding of $92m still exists, boosted by an extra $32m.

Rough maths give a figure of $14,500 to keep a child in kohanga reo while it is generally accepted that it costs around $8000 a year to put a child through the public education system.

I would be pleased to be proved wrong in my calculations but there in there appears to be a vast inequality in the allocation of funding.

NZ Listener 8/6/19? 
I agree that we "need an honest and open reckoning with our past" ("Owning our past" May 25), which means acknowledging the good and the bad. If we are to do this, then we need to take a broader view than, "It began with a single musket shot ... in 1842 ... and ended in 1873."

War-fare had been going on in this country for much longer, with far more casualties than the estimated 2250 Maori detailed in Vincent O'Malley's The New Zealand Wars. In the Musket Wars alone, which occurred mainly between 1818 and 1840, battles between Maori resulted in about 20,000 deaths and considerable redrawing of tribal boundaries in the North and South islands as well as the Chatham Islands.

Michael King's History of New Zealand refers to "an incident" at Onawe in Akaroa Harbour, in 1832. My recollection from visiting there several years ago was the chilling effect of reading that hundreds were enslaved, raped, tortured, massacred and eaten.

I spent much of a day looking for information on Te Rauparaha's attack on Onawe and found reference to the almost complete annihilation of Ngai Tahu at Onawe, Kaiapoi, Kaikoura and elsewhere.

Dark episodes, indeed, and it is essential that we acknowledge them honestly, preserve sites and record history at those sites.

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 7/6/19 
I take issue with your report on page 10 of May 31 regarding the Murray-Benge mayoralty candidacy.

The author makes reference to Don Brash being the founder of ‘divisive’ lobby group Hobson’s Choice.

Please explain to me how one can be ‘divisive’ when they’re endeavouring to achieve exactly the opposite, to bring harmony to all New Zealanders by treating everyone equally regardless of ethnicity or race.

So surely the apt description would be ‘inclusive’ and not ‘divisive’.

Too often media have unfairly lambasted Brash as racist. To the contrary, he’s a true patriot who’s undertaken the noble but thankless task of ensuring all Kiwis are treated fairly and equally, and like the majority of New Zealanders, believes all support mechanisms should be based on need and not race or ethnic grouping.
TONY FELLINGHAM, The Lakes, Tauranga

Northland Age 6/6/19 
In ceding full sovereignty to the Queen of England in Article 1 of the Treaty of Waitangi it is clear-cut that the Queen is not a chief amongst chiefs, as Anahera Herbert-Graves writes (May 4). The Queen is sovereign, and Herbert-Graves’ chiefs are the Queen’s subjects.

The ToW was not our constitutional founding document, as Herbert-Graves claims. It was a simple ceding of sovereignty agreement.

If a constitution is a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organisation is governed, thus constituting what the entity is, the November 16, 1840 Royal Charter is the first statement on how the governance of New Zealand was to be organised. This has to be our constitutional founding document.

Noted pro-Maori historians concur that the 1835 Declaration of Independence (He Whakaputanga) was a non-event, which was abandoned in the face of continued fighting between confederation members. The chiefs never met yearly, in congress, as Clause 3 of the document required. In short, the 1835 DOI never got off the ground.

I wonder what she is referring to when she hints at ‘exploitation.’ Very little if any exploitation occurred in New Zealand. The chiefs, of their own free will, ceded sovereignty to the Queen of England for protection from other foreigners, for law and order, legal land ownership and British governance. They then sold most of the land, much of it under Article 2, where they could only sell to the Queen, this to protect the vulnerable Maori land sellers from unscrupulous land buyers.

Part-Maori grievers like Herbert-Graves should be thankful the Brits 'banged' into New Zealand at a time when a strong humanitarian movement, centred on the churches, influenced British colonial policy. The Colonial Secretary, Lord Normanby, genuinely tried to treat 19th century New Zealand inhabitants better than happened in earlier colonisations.

Otago Daily Times 4/6/19 
THE debate about Ngai Tahu representatives on the policy committee of the ORC appears to have avoided one issue.

Who will they actually be representing — themselves as kaitiaki, their particular marae, their rununga, or Ngai Tahu Holdings?

In any case, it must be asked if the same rules governing conflict of interest applies to the Ngai Tahu representatives as it does to other ORC members.

Especially in the vexed case of Central Otago water rights. And especially when revered kaumatua Sir Tipene O’Regan, at a Wanaka forum recently, supported damming more rivers. In whose interests would this be, exactly?

Northland Age 4/6/19 
Once again the NZ Listener, through the article by Sally Blundell and the reportage of Vincent O’Malley, presents a very selective account of our history without presenting opposing views.

O’Malley’s version of the action at Rangioawhia relied entirely on the oral history of Tainui, and varies considerably from the official account that includes the version given by the chief’s grandson.

The church that he claimed was filled with women and children by the colonial forces and set alight was still standing for years afterwards.

The total fatalities of the action came to nine. O’Malley’s claim that the Waikato engagements have more significance than the Western Front or Gallipoli is a gross exaggeration.

He also reported the ‘invasion of the Crown.’ A country cannot invade itself. The Tainui Kingites were seen by Sir Apirana Ngata and the 128 chiefs at the 1860 Kohimarama Conference as a rebellion against the legal authority of the Crown, and their loss of land was legally justified.

O’Malley and other historians, like Orange and Belich, are very selective in their reportage to avoid including facts that might show Maori in a less than favourable light, like the slaughtering rampages of Hongi Hika, Te Rauparaha and Te Kooti, or the 30,000-plus fatalities of the Musket Wars. The tribal customs of infanticide, ritual killings, cannibalism and slavery get no mention in their recordings.

Our history, or the public, will not be well served while the Listener and most of the print media refuse objective reportage of contrary opinions and politicians promote racial privilege.

Local body elections coming up and already the shenanigans have started in Rotorua.

Council member and resident snowflake Tania Tapsell was ‘referenced’ as a Pied Piper by Reynold Macpherson, who is campaigning for mayor. Stevie Chadwick, the present mayor, and her cohorts see Macpherson as a real threat after she only scraped in against him last time around, and after a secret meeting of council they decided to take this to the police as hate speech.

After the horrific events in Christchurch it is becoming plain to see that hate speech is being used as a tool against anyone who has a different opinion than the Nanny State we are slowing being taken over by.

The only claims to fame Stevie and her minions have to campaign on in the coming elections are bringing race-based council to Rotorua after being told by locals they didn’t want it, and a green corridor running through the CBD that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and was never used, now being torn up.

How corrupt are the race baiters going to get? Trying to hobble opponents with accusations of hate speech because they have no merits to stand on.

Get out and question the people who are running for your council, ask them what their motives are. We don’t want people pushing their separatist ideology or pinko socialist ideas down our throats.

Spend our money wisely keeping the roads clean and in repair, make sure the rubbish is picked up. This is not China, North Korea or Russia. Well, not yet anyway.

Anahera Herbert-Graves regurgitates the ‘ploughmen of Parihaka’ (May 28).

The thrust of that matter was that for 14 years these Parihaka people illegally squatted on legally confiscated land (result of earlier tribal rebellion). As she admits, they wreaked havoc on neighbouring settler farms by ploughing fields. Other recorded incidences involved stealing horses, the pulling down of a newly built stockyard, placing a toll on passing travellers and harassing storekeepers.

This den of ‘pacifists’ also harboured fugitives from the law, kept company with rebel Hau Haus, and were found to have a stockpile of 250 firearms and ammunition.

Later she touches on Bastion Point. Records show that most of Auckland was sold by the tribes except for 5.3ha at Bastion Point, which was taken under the Public Works Act for military use in 1886; £1500 was paid in compensation.

In today’s money, £1500 equals approximately $282,000. The median price per hectare of New Zealand farmland in April 2015 was $28,668. This means government compensation in 1886 was approximately double the per hectare value of Bastion Point land. Ngati Whatua was more than adequately compensated for Bastion Point in 1886.

In her article she quotes that “. . . the protest and eviction led to the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal. . .” The facts are that the Waitangi Tribunal was established in 1975 and the Bastion Point eviction was approximately three years later, in 1978. Further, Whina Cooper’s land march arrived at Parliament three days after the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 was passed.
Need I say more?

Otago Daily Times 3/6/19 
THE epithet of ‘‘one person, one vote’’ seems to have been set aside by the ODT editorial writer (28.5.19) on the need for rational debate over nonelected Maori representation on the Otago Regional Council.

If the concept of one person, one vote is so oldfashioned, surely society first needs to debate whether there is a better basis to achieve representative democracy, such as appointment without consultation.

In order to achieve better representation, should not the ORC now ensure equal representation by appointment of women, youth, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, race, and creed. If not, why not?

I can immediately think of two outstanding people from Maoridom within Otago who may well put forward their names as candidates — and win — at the forthcoming ORC elections. What then?

Northern Advocate 3/6/19 
Whatever future privileges and gilding of the Gold Card for superannultants Winston Peters may arrange will not, in the minds of many, compensate for the gross betrayal of his bottom line agenda at the last elections, namely the removal of racial privilege.

The promises he made then were the main reason many voted his party into power. That, and his subsequent signing of the UN Global Compact on Migration, a commitment that threatens our nation's sovereignty, will see the demise of him and New Zealand First at the next elections.

Gisborne Herald 1/6/19 
Attacking the messenger is an age-old response to a message one does not want to hear or understand.

I stand by everything I have said about the waste of money on the Cook Sestercentennial; the exclusion of the wider public, and the division it is causing.

But it is evident some writers to the paper do not bother to properly read what others say — they would rather spit out personal attacks.

For the record, I have always supported telling the history of the local tangata whenua.

The full facts of the Endeavour’s arrival here should and must be told. There should be no glossing or glorifying, but recognition — and acceptance that the events of the past cannot be judged by today’s standards.

It would seem some people want to hold bitterness and grudge to their heart, 250 years after the landing, in similar vein to longstanding vendettas such as the Montagues and Capulets in Romeo and Juliet, or the Hatfields and McCoys of America.

Tribalism, religious or racist separatism, or supremacism, has no place in the modern world.

I have as much right as anyone to be aggrieved at history — my forebears lost land and position to the Normans. In modern times dozens — yes, dozens — of Handfords died fighting in world wars . . . fighting for the freedoms of speech, thought and belief, freedom from racism and supremacism. I was the last of my line.

In New Zealand I have been attacked because of being white, even though I am not personally responsible for the wrongs of the past.

I repeat — I fully support Maori in their efforts to have their story told and have their rightful place in New Zealand.

But it can be achieved without denigrating others and without trampling on other people’s history, culture or goodwill.

Downright lies and inflammatory remarks about our shared history do not help.

Since the decision to build new council offices, the placement of the pou in Kelvin Park and so on, full public consultation and participation, along with a deeper empathy, have been sadly lacking.

The projects of the sestercentennial continue this grossly undemocratic behaviour. 

Gisborne Herald 29/5/19 
For some, there is a huge difference between the public statements made by Israel Folau and Tina Ngata — especially when judgements are being made on whether they push the boundaries of hate speech or not.

It obviously depends a lot on an individual’s political leanings and religious beliefs, because it is a revelation watching the hysterical left being very selective in the adjectives they use to describe the respective utterances.

On the one hand we have Ms Ngata knowingly telling lies about the historical James Cook’s tragic first encounter with the tangata whenua of this land. As a consequence, she must have gone well beyond what normal people are prepared to accept as a person’s right to free speech.

Yet it would appear that while her comments do border on incitement to violence, the left-wing media of this country have not lifted a finger to point this out. And Ms Ngata knows that as long as they continue to adopt a blind eye to her outrageous garbage, she can virtually say what she likes.

Unfortunately, not so Mr Folau whose crime was to say what he firmly believes to be true based on his religious convictions. Yet the media regard his testimony as having the potential to cause damage in the lives of those who are struggling with their own sexual identity.

For his trouble, Mr Folau has been cast as a character of criminal proportions, insensitive to the faiths of others which actually advocate punishments worse than death for misdemeanours less offensive than those on his list.

But that’s OK because his religion happens to be Christianity, which has long been the public whipping boy for the media — unlike others who we feel an obligation to defend, even in the knowledge that the teachings we are condoning are far more barbaric than those Mr Folau adheres to.

There is a rotten stench of hypocrisy when this topic is being discussed, which is made worse by the fact there appears to be no mood for change — at least not amongst those who administer the law governing these aspects of social conformity.
Otago Daily Times 31/5/19 
MICHAEL Laws is talking about the Otago Regional Council’s lack of democracy.

It is nothing to do with Ngai Tahu’s history or the Treaty of Waitangi. It is all about democracy — equality for all, not preferential treatment for a minority group.

Our country is supposed to be one law for all. Most things in life are a privilege, not a Godgiven right.

Kiwis seem to be getting dumb and dumber. It’s not about racism. Why has everyone become so precious?
C. HUMPHREYS, Katikati

SUZANNE MenziesCulling (letters, 18.5.19) berates democracy because the Maori Representation Bill 1867 ‘‘limited Maori voters to four seats in Parliament’’.

The Act granted Maori men universal suffrage 12 years before Pakeha men, who faced property qualifications until 1879.

One hundred and fiftytwo years later, this act of discrimination favouring Maori is turned on its head as yet another cause for grievance.

The claim that ‘‘rangatiratanga’’ in Article Two of Te Tiriti o Waitangi somehow survives in isolation from the rest of the Treaty (ceding sovereignty with the protection of possessions unless sold to the Crown, in return granting the same rights and duties as British citizens) is an oftrepeated and fanciful misinterpretation of the Treaty.

It is like claiming the benefits of an insurance policy without paying the premium.

The Press 31/5/19 
Will Ta Mark Solomon’s leadership, generosity of vision and his foresight as chair of Te Taumata, a body which represents nine South Island iwi, extend to ensuring that the business activities of iwi pay their fair share of income tax as a contribution towards the greater public good, or will they be hidden under the mantle of charity, thereby paying no income tax?

Bay of Plenty Times 31/5/19 
In a recent article about Captain Cook, Lizzie Marvelly (Opinion, May 18) referred to current discussion which suggested Cook’s arrival in New Zealand in 1769 should not be celebrated because his influence was not good for resident Maori.

Cook was a navigator and arrived after observing the transit of Venus in Tahiti, which was the purpose of his voyage.

He ordered that his men were considerate to native people and treat them with respect.

Cook had to find a port to reprovision and take on water and he was not always well received.

It should be remembered that Maori were not a unified people, were hunter-gatherers and defended their hunting areas tenaciously.

Pa were normally located in good defensive positions and because there were no mammals in New Zealand, human captives were often eaten after conflict between tribes.

Cook introduced pigs and maize and gave them to Maori in Queen Charlotte Sound so that he could reprovision his ships there in the future.

He also charted the New Zealand coast and drew detailed and accurate maps and wrote about the Maori people. His contribution to New Zealand was significant. Bethlehem A reader suggests Captain Cook’s achievements when he first came to new Zealand are being overlooked.
DAVID SYKES, Bethlehem

Northland Age 30/5/19 
Maori Television reports that the NZ Maori Council is intending to campaign for better care for part-Maori children “in our homes and communities.” And that is a little encouraging. It is a little less encouraging to note that the NZMC executive director twice mentions “the system” as needing to be addressed.

Nonetheless, he at least, quite surprisingly, acknowledges the outrageous statistics for part-Maori children in state care and in Youth Court appearances, and for part-Maori adults in prisons. Perhaps someone is beginning to take some notice of us who have had our voices suppressed when we’ve tried to point out the foolishness of part-Maori parents and/or groups promoting “language strategies and programmes based on traditional and modern Maori learning and teaching methodologies.”

The time is well past for part-Maori to stop pretending that Maori language and/ or culture is going to serve them well in the world. Teaching that to children is another form of child abuse.

Part-Maori parents will serve their children best by enrolling them in state schools, where they will mix with all sorts of children, including part-Maori, and where they will be educated by trained teachers, including part-Maori, and where they will learn the English language and literature, the mathematics, the chemistry, the physics and the philosophy that have produced physicians, statesmen, engineers, nurses, law-makers, missionaries et al, part-Maori amongst them.

And part-Maori parents will serve their children well by ensuring that they apply themselves at school, studying and learning, completing their homework and other assignments punctually. And part-Maori parents will serve their children well by ensuring that they have respect for others, particularly adults and persons of authority such as police, and that they have respect for property.

We are all British citizens, with the freedoms and the untold benefits that accrue from that. Maori might well enjoy practising their customs and speaking/ teaching their language in their homes, as do other ethnicities. Outside our homes, let’s enjoy the government system, the education system, the bureaucracy, the judicial system that has proven to be the equal of any in the history of the world.

Dominion Post 29/5/19 
Qualified journalists reporting regularly in newspapers and online on local government (including district health board) activity are essential (Cash boost for local democracy, May 28).

Their almost complete absence from those spheres over recent decades has been detrimental to both local agencies and the citizenry.

The business of local government isn’t worth reporting only when a few councillors or board members behave badly, or even when there is a longrunning matter of public anxiety over essential service.

In my 15-year experience, almost every formal council or board meeting, and the numerous committees that feed those public events, were full of fascinating and important discussions, debates and decisions that often had an enduring impact on the unwitting citizens who didn’t know, or didn’t realise, they were happening.

Like the meetings of local school boards of trustees, local government deliberations are the stuff of our democracy. They clothe the real value and importance of little groups of locally elected people making critical decisions about our rates, our taxes, while trying to maintain good oversight of the usually capable, sometimes unhelpful, professional officials whose behaviour must be monitored and directed.

On the widest scale, our democracy relies on the fourth estate for integrity and accountability. At the smallest local level, where over time billions of dollars and a huge range of essential services are governed, monitoring, evaluation and transparent reporting are the only reliable basis for public trust in local agencies.

May the Local Democracy Reporters expand into big watchful, highly trained reporters with generous editors and interested readers. [abridged]
JUDITH AITKEN, Paekakariki

NZ Herald 29/5/19 
It’s very heartening to read (Herald, May 20-24) about the progress being made by many iwi in bettering their position — and I applaud the Herald for publishing it. It would be helpful to see statistics on crime and imprisonment, employment, health and drug issues in the South Island (where Ngai Tahu have built a strong financial base and been able to put much of it into education, jobs etc) compared to the far North (where Ngapuhi have not agreed among themselves to settle and therefore are struggling to improve their standard of living).
REX BEER, Manly.

Gisborne Herald 28/5/19 
The Cook obelisk on Kaiti Beach Road is a national monument, and as such, any plan to modify that reserve should have been put to the public — first — before anything was done.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, this is yet another case of a complete lack of public consultation. The Department of Conservation (DoC) and District Council are at fault, along with other parties who arrogantly push their own barrows without regard for public feeling.

Not only is the Cook site a listed national historic monument, it was partly funded by the people of New Zealand through subscription. DoC was entrusted with the reserve’s oversight, but has trampled on this trust by allowing the site’s integrity to be trashed by these intrusions.

A monstrous concrete plinth (for a statue I assume?) has destroyed the large grass area behind the obelisk. It looks like it was deliberately planned to overshadow the Cook obelisk. The stalled and misnamed “thousand-year” bridge will complete the takeover.

Last Saturday’s Gisborne Herald briefly outlined the “redevelopment”, but to date not one fully-laid-out plan or architectural drawing has been produced to show the public how it will look when completed. Are we ever going to get one?

The site’s original purpose has been totally and unnecessarily compromised — the Maori stories could have been told without the slighting of Cook and existing monuments.

That the wider public has at no point been consulted, nor given the courtesy of design drawings to show fully what is intended with statues and the like is a disgrace. 
We are being ridden over roughshod and I for one strongly object.

Northern Advocate 28/5/19 
Hek Busby said that he was sick of Ngapuhi and Its endless disagreements. I think they are cursed. Good Job a Maori said it In fact It took a maori to say It. Hekenukumal „The Mainest Man.

But now. no one drops that sentiment into the public debate. Why? Because It Is contrary to the culture of Post Colonial hand wringing angst of ill at ease liberal Pakeha. Which goes hand in hand with the mangled historical outlook of the coterie of self righteous Maori pseudo-peddling their rubbish korero of hapu never ceded sovereignty, and Captain Cook was a mass murderer along with being the sadistic willing tool of White Devil Supremacist Imperialism

So we end up with the endless cycle of guilt and grievance, and the unwholesome spectacle of reruns of one-eyed myopic versions of quasi-history adapted to suit these peoples' self absorbed egotistic agendas.

Move on. Neke neke! What happened. happened. just like the Musket Wars happened.and the Land Wars happened. And Hobson bought Auckland for two bob an acre.

So what do we need to do now?

Yesterday Is Just a memory.

Tomorrow is never what It's meant to. Will a hundred million dollars save the day? Or will it require individuals taking a bit of personal responsibility to make the change happen? Cop Out or Cop On?

Hek said he was determined to make something of his life. So he did. That's Copping On
GM TINKER Whangarei

Northland Age 28/5/19 
Clearly Tim Howard (letters, NZ Herald May 23) has never read Te Tiriti that 540 chiefs signed. Article 1 clearly cedes sovereignty to the Queen of England. This is the only legitimate Treaty translated from the final draft English version (Littlewood Draft).

The chiefs ceded full sovereignty (kawanatanga), and they knew it. Read the chiefs' speeches in Colenso's record, further supported by chiefs' speeches at Kohimarama 20 years later. It is utterly absurd therefore to say that in Article 2 they somehow retained it

He further discredits himself in referencing a racially stacked, biased Waitangi Tribunal report, who the then Attorney-General, Christopher Finlayson rebutted in the media:"There is no question that the Crown has sovereignty in New Zealand. This report doesn't change that fact."

Auckland University Professor Paul Moon also stated at the time: “I was shocked by some of the statements contained in the report. This is not a concern about some trivial detail, but over the fundament al history of our country, which the Tribunal has got manifestly wrong."

Perhaps Mr Howard could explain, if the chiefs still thought they had full chieftainship, then why did they release their slaves, cease cannibalism, female infanticide and tribal warfare?

It is important that we know our history, and not a distorted version of the facts, as shown in the Waitangi Tribunal's ruling on the claim that Ngapuhi did not cede sovereignty to the Queen.

Article 1 of the Treaty, on sovereignty, was accepted unreservedly by the chiefs, and Hone Heke, who was the first to sign, exhorted others to do the same. Hongi Hika, previously the legendary rangatira of Ngapuhi, was succeeded by Tamati Waka Nene. His tombstone in the Russell churchyard still bears the epitaph: First to welcome Queen's Sovereignty.

At the Kohimarama Conference in 1860 Ngapuhi were represented by Tamati Waka, Wiremu Kaitara, Huirua Mangonui, Wiremu Hau, Tango Hikuwai, Wi Tete, Hori Kingi. The conference unanimously endorsed the sovereignty of the Queen, and also denounced the 1858 Kingite movement in the Waikato.

History is a verifiable recording of facts and not convenient opinions or wishful thinking. The Waitangi 'flibunal is once more shown to be unreliable and its rulings biased.

The careless ignorance of those who lead us in central and local government today is breathtaking. It is almost impossible to find a 'leader' who does lead, and who doesn't simply cave in to whatever politically correct proposal raises its ugly head.

I'm prompted to make this comment by what I read recently in my free local twice weekly racist rag. In this instance, another part-Maori group (Maniapoto something), not content with their demand to Maorify the name of northern King Country's only non-Maorified village (Benneydale), is stepping up its demands and flexing it’s muscles in the direction of the Otorohanga District Council, demanding the addition of a macron to the name Otorohanga, via their comrades-in-aims, the National Geographic Board.

That anyone would take any notice of such a ridiculous proposition is beyond me, but the Mayor of Otorohanga is genuflecting to this demand in "an effort to embrace New Zealand's indigenous culture."

On the one hand, Maori are not indigenous to New Zealand. It is well known and acknowledged even by the most careless historians that Maori came to New Zealand from somewhere else. That's generally thought to be the Republic of China.

On the other hand, Maori had no written language until the British missionaries created it, using the English alphabet, phonetics and punctuation.

There are no macrons in English language, and there were no macrons in the written Maori language. But hey, if it helps to keep one in power, run with it, eh?

Hawkes Bay Today 27/5/19 
A few weeks ago this paper published my letter regarding Ngati Kahungunu's Asset Management company. My comment was that the company, which had recently purchased rival Hawke's Bay Seafoods, enjoys an unfair competitive advantage as a result of its charitable status as the tax rules exempt charities from income tax.

Following my letter. Hawke's Bay Today published a factually incorrect "clarification". For the record, Ngati Kahungunu Asset Management Company is listed on the Charities Commission website as Registered Charity No 37607, its directory clearly states it is exempt from paying income tax, and indeed its financial statements show it paid no tax on its $32 million profit for the year ended June 30, 2018.

Ngati Kahungunu doesn't rely on public support for donations (like other charities, such as Unica) to which members of the public willingly donate. Group "charity" Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated sits on $70.5m in assets, earned revenues of $6.5m and paid governance fees of $830k on top of its generous $94k average wage to staff. Kahungunu also appears to be setting aside $200,000 annually towards its advocacy" reserve, no doubt to push its claims of ownership over our fresh water, flora and fauna and marine and coastal area

At the same time, the nine independently wealthy "baby Kahungunus" exert significant political power through co-governance of our Regional Planning Committee. Perhaps it is time to question why the public should continue to allow these powerful trusts operating commercial businesses to not pay income tax payable by the rest of us?

Otago Daily Times 25/5/19 
AS a ratepayer to the Otago Regional Council, I am disgusted that all but three members have voted to have two Maori representatives on a committee.

Selective moves without a full referendum of the ratepayers shows the contempt this council has for those it represents.

I applaud the three members who opposed this, Crs Graham Bell, Michael Laws and Sam Neill.

To approve any one person who is unelected shows there is a problem within the organisation. It is obvious that this was a move by a very inexperienced group who have premeditated views.

I hope the members who voted for them pay the wages for the unelected, as no­one does something for nothing.

The rate rises have been frequent — I wonder what will happen next. [Abridged]
D. MITCHELL, Alexandra

I’M with Cr Michael Laws regarding his opposition to unelected iwi representatives being appointed to an Otago Regional Council committee.

It is undemocratic and unnecessary.

The Resource Management Act specifically provides for iwi involvement, resulting in virtually every resource consent application made to the ORC and virtually every regional plan being developed having iwi input by way of consultation and submissions. [Abridged]

Weekend Herald 25/5/19 
Lizzie MarveIly's revisionist- lite take on Cook (Weekend Herald. May 18) is revealing in a number of ways. none of which she is likely to have intended

As a secondary-school history teacher of rnore than 16 years. I can assure Marvelly that. in every school that I'm aware of. some aspect of New Zealand history is taught (often at multiple levels) and many schools teach an entire unit on the Treaty outlining Maori perspectives and often emphasising injustices. Maori resistance. and modern attempts to deal with legitimate grievances. I have personally taught a full -year. 19th-century New Zealand history course at Level 3 for many years.

I grant that the attitude towards learning this history is sometimes negative, which perhaps speaks to some more fundamental issues about race relations, but many (if not most) history teachers are committed to teaching the subject in an engaging nuanced manner. We must also accept that many students find New Zealand local history uninteresting and prefer global/foreign/ancient history topics. Marvelly’s statement that the education system should compel students to learn their own history is telling.

Her concerns about Cook's whitewashing are even more misplaced when you consider that just this year a significant TV documentary. Uncharted, aired on Prime. Marvelly could also check out Damn Anne Saimond's Trial of he Cannlbal Dog (2004). Revisionism is now mainstream and most teachers are teaching exactly what she laments as absent from classrooms.

Two articles last week were poles apart. The first is the story of Robert Gillies. last surviving member of 28 Maori Battalion, who participated in the 76th commemorations of the battle of Monte Casino in which he risked his life and saw many mates die in defence of the freedoms we enjoy today. To Robert and all those he represents, I again express my profound gratitude for their sacrifice.

The second article Is by Lizzle Marvelly ( Weekend Herald. May18) in which she describes Cook's first lancing as a 'murderous invasion's.

We live in one of the most open and free countries. We champion the rights of the individual, freedom of expression, rule of law, right to education and healthcare for all and the right to enter into relationships of our choosing regardless of ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation

The rights and freedoms we enjoy in New Zealand society derive from Cooks landing. the colonial era — for all its faults — and the sacrifices of people like Robert Gillies

Bay of Plenty Times 24/5/19 
Lizzie Marvelly's article on James Cook's arrival to NZ 'Heroic or murderous invasion?' deserves a response (Opinion May18).

I have taught history courses for over 40 years at Tauranga Girls' College and Waikato University and would contend we should commemorate Cook's voyage to NZ in a positive light.

I have the feeling Lizzie would like to have it as otherwise Maybe Lizzie (and others interested) could Google an article Was James Cook a white supremacist? by Dame Anne Salmond. Dr Salmond examines the evidence and finds Cook to have been a person worthy of us celebrating.

Part of the dilemma of studying history is when people apply today's standards to events of the past without much understanding of their context. It would be a shame if that happened during our 250th commemorations. (Abridged)

Otago Daily Times 23/5/19 
LOU Scott (letters, 20.5.19) is appalled by Michael Laws’ understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi.

Lou Scott may wring his/her hands and be appalled (as is allowed in a democracy). I am equally appalled by Lou Scott’s support of racebased representation while we of a different hue must do the ‘‘hard yards’’ and sell our credibility to the elector in order to enjoy the same status a racebased system delivers.

The practice of ‘‘privilege’’ as promulgated by the Otago Regional Council is the thin edge of the wedge that (if not challenged) will destroy the concept of democracy. [Abridged]

Northland Age 23/5/19 
Tumbled out of bed, collected the Weekend Herald (May 18) thinking I would have a quiet read while enjoying my Weetbix and coffee. Skimming through Herald I came across ‘Paddy’ O’Malley’s latest take on NZ Wars (more correctly described as Tribal Rebellions) and nearly choked on my Weetbix.

Composing myself, I went to the bookcase and grabbed James Cowan's `New Zealand Wars,' and thankfully this reputable historian's epic authoritative text on the topic based on eye witness accounts quickly reassured me I hadn't missed something, concluding Paddy 0's blurb was primarily a flowery piece of prose. Eye witness accounts always trump modern day mythistory, or put another way, a Royal Flush trounces the Knave/ Deuce hand every time.

Breathing a sigh of relief, I moved on to the Review Section, being confronted there by Dizzy Lizzie Marvelly's take on Captain Cook titled 'Heroic Endeavour or murderous invasion.' Fortunately I didn't need to check any authentic reputable source to realise this was just another throwaway piece of nonsense.

Incidentally, Admiral Zheng-He (1421) and Tasman (1642) both preceded Cook (1769) in finding New Zealand, and by all accounts probably others pre-Maori did too.

Mandatory media warning is needed to make it clear that this mythistory stuff bears little relation to either the truth or facts, or reality being primarily floated to cause consternation.

We should consider nominating Paddy 0's NZ Wars novel for the Acorn or Pappe Fiction Prize and the Marvelly Cook fantasy piece for Sargeson Short Story Fiction Prize.
ROB PATERSON, Mount Maunganui

Surely many of us have felt grave concern at how people of Maori and Pasifika ethnicity (even if it's only a small fraction in the person concerned) can be accepted for some university courses with lower NCEA Level 3 marks than all other new students must have.

I don't think we would feel very confident about consulting a professional who is of that ethnicity, even though he/she had the appropriate qualification.

The point would still be, just how well did he/she pass the final exams for it?

Leaving out the matter of ethnicity, there is surely a much higher chance that a student who enters on those easier terms will flunk out or voluntarily drop out at some stage of a long and tough course. Also that, even if he/she passes the finals to qualify, it will very likely be just a scrape-through pass and not a brilliant one.

From the viewpoint of a professional person's patient or client, this could have very serious consequences - I don't need to spell out what they might be.

I wonder whether there are any official statistics that would tell us the facts about how many of the flunk-outs and drop-outs were those who began the course on that privileged basis, and perhaps also statistics of how well, if they got through the final exams, what their marks were. But my guess is that, even if such statistics exist, our authorities would be very reluctant to release them to us.

Even if we leave out the facts about those students who finally qualify, there is likely to be a large waste of taxpayers' money on the flunk-outs and drop-outs, so this would embarrass the powers that be if it became public knowledge.

It's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. Most iwi, throughout the land. have been successfully producing squeaky wheels for a long time. The bountiful sum of $80 million, approved by Jacinda Ardern for northern Maori, is an example, as are the exclusive funds for health, education, social welfare, and the large sums that were granted to iwi to make claims for control of the coastline. No funds were made available to the general public to challenge the legality of the claims.

They are doing well with the multi-millions spent on promoting to reo, as it now, with three per cent national speakers, takes precedence in official signage over English, with 20 per cent internationally, and still they keep on squeaking.

It is difficult to accept logically that a citizen with one-sixteenth Maori blood should have special exclusive advantages over a citizen of one-sixteenth Scottish ancestry. Fifteen-sixteenths of the part-Maori's forebears were possibly colonists.

We should all identify primarily as New Zealanders and share equally the bounty of this great land, and stop squeaking for a larger share. These claims are not against Maori but against divisive, avaricious national practices.

Hawkes Bay Today 22/5/19 
No doubt, like many of your readers, I waited (with expected disappointment) for the appropriate councillors and iwi to condemn the actions on the summit of Te Mata Peak.

Of course, as expected, we were met with deafening silence.

While I defend the rights of the Mongrel Mob members to access public space, it must be done in such a way as to allow everyone else to also use that space — without fear and intimidation.

And before the apologists jump down my throat and accuse me of all sorts of heinous racist utterings, like it or not, patched gang members are intimidating. Quite frankly, they scare the hell out of me.

I did my Compulsory Military Service alongside a member of the Hell’s Angels gang in the 70s — he was a nasty individual and his moral code non-existent.

In an enlightening book (The Devils are Here) written by retired Detective Sergeant Cam Stokes, who specialised in dealing with gangs, the author stated that gangs cause widespread harm in communities, are involved with a wide range of crimes, and drug dealing and violence are their core business.

It is true that many poor, disadvantaged people turn to crime as they believe it is their only course of action and while disagreeing with crime as a resource, having grown up in a tough low socioeconomic neighbourhood in Auckland, I fully understand that.

Along with local iwi, most of the HDC councillors were outspoken about showing Te Mata Peak respect after the Craggy Range track was constructed — we haven’t heard a bleat from them (apart from Damon Harvey) on this issue.

With democracy thrown out the window and social disorder ignored, this council is taking us down a slippery slope.

I strongly disagree with the Hastings councillor who wants to ban gang patches from the CBD.

I am more than happy to be forewarned that I am in the proximity of dodgy people who should not be trusted so that I can keep an eye on them, or move away.

The way I see it is gang patches and insignia do a good job of advertising these things.

What is a gang patch anyway? It is simply a sign of allegiance to a group of likeminded individuals.

If the councillor succeeds in their misguided mission, then will this also include the gang patches or insignia of the National and Labour parties, etc, who can also be termed “gangs”?

We know what one of these gangs stands for, and they regularly meet our expectations.

The others tell you what they are going to do and seldom meet up to our expectations. How ironic.

Perhaps it would just be better to crack down on councillors with silly ideas!

Otago Daily Times 21/5/19 
THE decision to allow iwi unelected representation on ORC committees and have voting rights is totally the wrong message to the community, and flies in the face of true democracy.

For once, I actually agree with Michael Laws on this, and feel if iwi think they are needing representation, they should have candidates standing in the local body elections so that there is true, elected representation.

Is there any Pakeha representation on any local iwi committees and administrative boards? I doubt it.
BOB FARRELL, Arrowtown

Bay of Plenty Times 21/5/19 
Democracy is vital.

The mayoral race in Tauranga city is starting to hot up, and get publicity, and that is good. I believe that anyone leading policy and public input for a multimilliondollar organisation needs three important qualities.

They need proven business acumen, preferably at some stage risking their own capital, and displaying success in this area.

This is important.

The second thing they must do is listen to majority public opinion rather than be driven too much by staff input or minority groups — one law for all.

They must allow accessible public workshops and all meetings open to the public scrutiny, except of course for confidential issues.

I understand Tauranga, to their credit, do this. Councils must be racially neutral with the same input from everyone.

Excellence in other fields, like sports, or even corporate systems, might give a high profile, but do not qualify them to head a multimilliondollar business, that can impact on so many, and affect their lives so much.

Please think on this, results speak for themselves.
NORM MAYO, Katikati

Northland Age 21/5/19 
A recent New Zealand Cabinet Report Card defies rational belief: 26 wannabes averaging around 6.5/10 as reward for failure after failure — KiwiBuild, transportation, Provincial Growth Fund, with review committees coming out their ears.

The three bottom-ranked players, viz Messrs Twyford, Clark and Jones, are correct, but several others should join them. Three out of the top six-ranked have no reason to (be) in such rarified air, and as for Ms Ardern, apart from the Christchurch carry on, she has shown appalling leadership qualities.

She fails to control Cabinet (two already gone, and several others should join them). She has the ultimate responsibility for the failures and behavioural issues.

In some cases assessment should have been a minus and/or ‘F’ for fail, and another six show such racial bias that Kiwis have every reason to be fearful of outcomes and the future of their country.

The philosophy of envy, failure, ignorance and arrogance and the ‘equal’ sharing of misery is alive and well, and will continue to thrive, and with these nitwits in control — be afraid, very afraid!

As the national anthem says, God Defend New Zealand, because it’s hard to see anyone on the political front doing the job.

The private sector would see this lot gone by lunchtime.
ROB PATERSON Mount Maunganui

Otago Daily Times 18/5/19 
OTAGO Regional Council councillors are elected representatives and have to go through a rigorous process to become so. To appoint iwi seats with voting rights on the Policy Committee is to undermine our democratic method.

The Policy Committee has the right to authorise temporary appointees if it wishes to have some advice on a particular subject but it should not use the back door to conveniently ‘‘sneak’’ in iwi appointees and give them voting rights on ORC policy. This is highly undemocratic and insulting to all New Zealanders, whether of European, Asian, Pasifika or any other descent. Our representatives should be voted in on the basis of citizenship, not ethnicity.

Ngai Tahu Maori are New Zealanders and should be treated as such. In fact, our last census showed that there are more Asian New Zealanders than Maori and Pasifika combined.

If the ORC has a Memorandum of Understanding with Ngai Tahu, it should not extend to offering the iwi paid positions or voting rights on any of its committees.

Remember the experiences of the Canterbury Regional Council which had its Ngai Tahu Representation Bill withdrawn on the basis that New Zealanders’ voting rights should be based on citizenship, not ethnicity. The Bill was withdrawn when it became obvious that it did not have the votes to get through Parliament (with National, NZ First and Act all opposed to it). [Abridged]

Hawkes Bay Today 17/5/19 
I am writing in response to an article in HB Today May 14. page 21. headline reading 'Maori pay $723m in tobacco taxes". Dr Mar ewa Glover calls for revenue to be returned to iwi for new homes and to change behaviours.

I am very sorry but feel this is inciting drastic racism.

How on earth can anyone request that revenue/taxes gathered from one particular ethnic group should be returned to their iwi I have never read so much codswallop in all my life.

Everyone has a choice whether they smoke or drink a gamble and it is up to the individual.

Almost as pathetic as saying I have no children at school so any tax I pay should not be proportioned to education".

I would imagine Dr Glover was paid for the commission that spouts this utter nonsense. I for one would like my portion of funding returned.

Rotorua Daily Post 17/5/19 
In response to the article in the Rotorua Daily Post about Maori paying tobacco taxes and it being returned to iwi (News, May 15).

I would like to say: Stop smoking then you won't have to pay the tax.

If the tax goes anywhere, it should go to the health sector, which is where the smokers end up.

It is not just Maori who smoke, so where does the money go from the non-Maori population who pay the taxes? (Abridged)

Northland Age 16/5/19 
Who does Anahera Herbert-Graves (May 14) think the Crown stole our foreshore and seabed from? If Maori is her answer, then that is bollocks.

In 1840, under English Common Law, the F&S was managed/regulated by the Crown or democratically elected officers for the good of the general public.

The wise chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi to cede sovereignty to the Queen of England, and, in return, became British subjects in accordance with the law of the time, including common law. Therefore it follows that the F&S was vested (not stolen) in the Crown. Yes, the chiefs themselves vested the F&S in the Crown on signing the treaty.

This is further evidenced in Rev John Warren’s (who was there on the day of signing) quote: “There was a great deal of talk by the natives, principally of securing their proprietary right in the land and their personal liberty. Everything else they were only to happy to yield to the Queen, as they said repeatedly, because they knew they could only be saved from the rule of other nations (mainly the French) by sitting under the shadow of the Queen of England . . . ”

Article 2 in the Maori language Treaty states that all the people of New Zealand (not just Maori, but Maori included) are guaranteed legal ownership of their land (occupied or in usage at the time), houses and ordinary property (taonga). As a consequence, any customary rights to ‘other’ resources (F&S) were extinguished by the treaty.

Lastly, since 1840, as New Zealanders, Maori have always had access to, and the enjoyment and benefits of the F&S, but recently New Zealanders have not always had access to the F&S due to activist Maori actions, something for New Zealanders to think about in the current racist Maori claims to our foreshore and seabed.

Vincent O’Malley (Waikato Times, May 11) may well be an acclaimed historian, but he is very biased against all things colonial.

His well researched history of the Land Wars devotes an entire chapter of 25 pages to Rangiaowhia and surroundings. Within that chapter there is no mention of the myth of innocent women and children being rounded up, locked in the Catholic church and burnt to death. This is a myth very easy to disprove.

On page 303 of his book is a painting of the new redoubt at Rangiaowhia, flanked by both the Catholic and Anglican churches. The truth is the church was dismantled in 1931.

O’Malley, in other writings and in interviews, frequently alludes to the church myth with no supporting evidence. An RNZ interview October 7, 2016 is worth looking at.

In his article he refers to the girls from Otorohanga ¯ College who were shocked to learn of massacres. Of course they were, as they had been told the same lie by a high-ranked Maori historian. I wonder if their petition would have gone ahead had that lie not been told?

O’Malley smugly goes on to deride the group known as Hobson’s Pledge as being treaty revisionist. Pardon? As far as I can work out, all they want is for all New Zealanders to be treated equally, as the Treaty was envisaged by Capt Hobson in 1840. They very much question the revision of the Treaty and the terms ‘principles’ and ‘partnership,’ which don’t appear in any of the documents of the day.

It is easy to deride Don Brash, but it is worth remembering that a founder and spokesperson for the group is Ms Casey Costello, a Maori of Ngapuhi descent.

He also jumps on the bandwagon by asking. “Would it hurt if Von Tempsky St, Hamilton, became Rewi Maniapoto St?”

It most definitely offends me, and is an insult to those city fathers who named the street in the first place. Did he pick on Von Tempsky because he had a German name, or because he was a good and loyal soldier following orders? If the latter then we would have to look closely at his superior officers too. Nixon, Cameron, Grey and Victoria are all streets in Hamilton.

Maybe Hamilton’s Mayor King should write to our Sovereign requesting consent to rename the main street as Tuheitia Way?

Rewi Maniapoto was indeed an effective leader during the Land Wars, but it is hard to forget that some 30 years earlier he took part in the siege of the pa at Pukerangiora, in Taranaki. That would probably rank as the worst interMaori battle of the Musket Wars. Many hundreds died, mainly women and children. Many were tortured and eaten, and many mothers threw their children off the 100m cliffs to avoid that fate.

I doubt whether Von Tempsky would have participated in such events.

Frankly, I am very disturbed, as a proud Hamilton-born New Zealander, to observe the waves of change that are being promoted by people who should know better. Today the divisions between Maori and other New Zealanders is greater than at any time in my life. and the divide is widening, thanks to people like Vincent O’Malley.
MURRAY REID, Cambridge

Taranaki Daily News 16/5/19 
Donald Murray makes valid points in his letter relating to Glenn McConnell's article on the word pakeha. 

The Maori language is made up predominantly of words that come from two words and they can have different meanings depending on the pronunciation. 

A local example is the meaning of Rahotu. Pronounced Ra-hotu is entirely different from Raho-tu as to reo speakers will appreciate. 

The word pakeha, whether an abbreviation of an original word and meaning or not, pronounced as pake-ha is not relevant. However, pronounced as pa-keha (which is how I've heard it pronounced in Maori action chants and songs) is entirely a different matter. 

The Maori dictionary tells us that pa can refer to any Maori village or defence settlement. 

The word keha (as a noun) is a flea or blood sucking insect, and may also be interpreted as sore or ulcer. Pa-keha in this context then could be seen as an insinuation of white non Maori being a parasite or an infection that has invaded the living place of Maori. 

From what I get from the Maori dictionary if you want to call a white man the same in to reo it would be tangata ma or tane koma (tane - man and koma - whitish. pale or, pallid). 

A poll taken in 2012 had 66 per cent believing that pakeha was an insult and 44 per cent Maori believed the same. It's too contentious to continue to allow it. 

Northland Age 14/5/19 
First there was the suppression of free speech at public venues by Auckland and Nelson mayors and Massey University because of the purported threat to public safety. Now it is public access to a scenic location, Te Mata Peak, by the activities of group fallaciously claiming ethnic privilege.

The police and the government have taken no action to ensure that the safety and rights of the public are maintained. When will the rule of law be honoured?

Wake up New Zealand.

Waikato Times 14/5/19 
After years of Maori activists agitating, the Maori Council is finally targeting Hobson's Pledge.

This group comprising part-Maori is solely chaired by 79-year-old Sir Taihakurei Durie with eight executives.

Their interest in Hobson's Pledge is puzzling. Do they fear influences challenging their rampant race-based privilege?

The inane suggestion that Brash and his team wear designer suits, drive late-model European cars and should be held to account is ludicrous. Brash lives modestly driving an older Hyundai car. For enlightenment, let's get serious and reveal the financial details of individual Maori Council executives' assets, either personal, held in trust or otherwise and what cars they drive.

Brash has worked in the business world, Reserve Bank Governor, National Party leader, etc. Let's learn what Maori Council members did for a crust in their working lives.

Brash's renowned 2004 Orewa speech was accurate, very brave and prophetic and most Kiwis supported his views then and now. It's the Maori Council that is irrelevant.

Current statements made on their behalf reek of belligerent, inflammatory hate speech. Have they integrity to state they're not supporting equality before the law, equal treatment for all Kiwis or that we're not one people. That would shatter their credibility.

Taranaki Daily News 14/5/19 
The journalist Glenn McConnell asked the question, "How many times does this need to be said? Pakeha is not a slur."

In to reo Maori he is perfectly correct, but when the word is used in English it is the context and intent of the speaker that controls the true meaning of the word.

The word is neither an English language word, nor really is it a common usage loan-word.

It is very easy to open up a Maori dictionary and list all its potential and correct meanings.

However, one has looked in the wrong dictionary, potentially taken the incorrect context, and side-stepped the point that the word can be used in a very negative, derogatory and condescending way in English.

I am sure that the speaker in Christchurch did not have any such negative intentions when he used the word, but on to a linguistic hornet's nest he stepped.

In the same way that many words with negative racial connotations have gratefully slipped from common usage it would be wise that this particular word slips back into to reo Maori where it is properly and correctly used. Too many people appear to object to the word, and too frequently people use it offensively, so to repeat the question, "How many times does this need to be said?"

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 10/5/18 
WBOP District Council has asked us Rate Payers to ‘have our say.’
Sounds good, but they never take a blind bit of notice!

We [Rate Payers Assn] have continually said ‘Freeze our rates’, WBOP rates are still the highest in the Country, WHY?

Particularly retired people must sell and move because they just cannot afford the high rates.

Now we are being faced with a rate rise again of 3.4% up to 4.67%, because a Council cannot live within their means.

CPI is 1.9% that is the highest a rate increase should be! Plus, extra on water charges now and they want to have a big Corporate collect the Rubbish, so there will be a price rise there! that will make the rate increase higher!

Once again, we have our say, like we did a NO to a new Katikati Library, but we got one anyway.

We voted a resounding NO to Maori Wards, to get around that one they invented a Maori Committee of 19 who are paid by the Rate payers once again, without our permission!

Now behind the scenes our Mayor is on a Mission to give Pane Pane Point back to Maori,

which in my opinion he legally cannot do as it is still being used for what it was purchased for in 1920.

WBOP District Council goes to the Polls later this year so please ratepayers just remember all these misdemeanours of an extravagant council that cannot live within their means.

When is too much for Ratepayers to bear, many will keep selling and move to live elsewhere where maybe they respect the ratepayer!

Council Stop biting the hand that feeds you!

A recent commentary in a national newspaper ranked cabinet ministers from 1 to 10 on their performance. Not surprisingly, Phil Twyford, David Clark and Shane Jones each received a rating of 4.

However, I was aghast to read Winston Peters received an 8 out of 10. Is this the same politician who coerced the voting public to support him with these three of many pre-election promises:

1. There should be "one law for all New Zealanders".

2. That the Maori seats in Parliament "must be abolished as recommended by the Royal Commission".

3. Reduce parliament to 100 MPs.

Since this politician, who after the election engineered the Labour Party to become the new Government, made these important policy statements, not one of these have been fulfilled.

It beggars belief that despite Peters making promises he hasn't kept, he has still managed to retain his seat in Parliament over the last 30-plus years. Shame on you Peters. We won't be fooled a second time into voting for NZ First in 2020.

Dominion Post 11/5/19 
Contributors Rawiri Taonui and Glenn McConnell both totally miss the point (May 9). Some people find the term "pakeha" to be offensive and derogatory. Therefore your newspaper should stop using it to describe non-Maori New Zealanders. It's as simple as that.

There is a wide range of words which cause offence to groups of people that we have collectively had the sense to stop using. Add "Pakeha" to that list, instead of running defences of your earlier race-baiting "stale, pale and mostly male" opinion piece along-side a column trying to normalise the wont (a column which ends inappropriately with a jokey jab about eating somebody's ancestor).

Otherwise it is just another attempt to drive wedges along racial lines - something your self-appointed cultural commentators all too readily accuse others of doing.
G HARRISON, Mangamahu

Hawkes Bay Today 11/5/19 
Jean Te Huia (letters 10/5/19) divides our society into them and us, I thought we were all New Zealanders?

Democracy is based on the simple principle that all citizens must be treated the same under the law. Every individual has the same rights and indeed has the same responsibilities under the law.

Within society, people may share common views and interests with others, be those cultural, religious, ethnic, social or perhaps sporting. All such groupings are basically tribal in nature.

But forming such groupings, call them what you may, does not give the members collectively, any special rights under the law.

Democracy is based on giving equal rights to individuals. Giving special rights or privileges to groups, however configured, cannot be good. If you start treating one group of people either better or worse than others, it will end in tears.

Northland Age 9/5/19 
So, after nearly three years of sniping and griping by Maori activists, the Maori Council has finally decided to have a go at Hobson’s Pledge.

The Maori Council, comprising partMaori, is solely chaired by (Sir Taihakurei) Durie (79 years old), along with eight executive members representing around 48 committee members.

The sudden interest in Hobson’s Pledge at this time is puzzling. Perhaps it is just the ‘manana’ mentality coming to the fore belatedly, or do they fear something is challenging rampant race-based privilege? The inane suggestion that Brash and all his team wear designer suits and drive around in late-model European cars and should be held to account is ludicrous. In fact it seems Brash drives a 2015 Hyundai car, and is of modest means, as one would expect of a 78-year-old retiree of his stature.

Now let’s get serious and have the financial details of what individual Maori Council executives’ assets are, either personal, held in trust or otherwise, and what cars they run around in, as this may enlighten the punters. Brash has a history of working for a real living in the business world, subsequently Reserve Bank Governor, leader of the National Party and so forth, so let’s hear what these Maori Council people do or did for a crust in their working lives.

Brash’s renowned 2004 Orewa speech was accurate, very brave and prophetic, and most Kiwis supported his views then, as they do today, in my view. It is the Maori Council that is irrelevant, and current statements made on its behalf reek of belligerent, inflammatory hate speech.

Let’s hear them if they have the guts to say out loud they do not support equality before the law or equal treatment for all Kiwis, or that we as Kiwis are not one people. Well we all know that won’t happen until hell freezes over — game, set and match on credibility methinks.
ROB PATERSON Mount Maunganui

Otago Daily Times 9/5/19 
A recent commentary in a national newspaper ranked cabinet ministers from one to 10 on their performance.

Not surprisingly, Phil Twyford. David Clark and Shane Jones each received a rating of four.

However, I was aghast to read Winston Peters received an eight out of 10, is this the same politician who coerced the voting public to support him with these three of many pre-election promises:

There should be "one law for all New Zealanders";

Maori seats in Parliament "must be abolished as recommended by the Royal Commission";

Reduce Parliament to 100 MPs

Since this politician, who after the election engineered the Labour Party to become the new Government. made these important policy statements, not one of them has been fulfilled.

It beggars belief that, despite Mr Peters making promises he hasn't kept, he has still managed to retain his seat in Parliament over the last 30-plus years.

Shame on you, Mr Peters. We won't be fooled a second time into voting for NZ First in 2020.

The Press 9/5/19 
I find the rush of academics to label me as a ‘white fairy’ incredibly racist just because my ancestors arrived here a little later than some other people who describe themselves as ‘Maori’or ‘normal’.

And I find no sense in being labelled the generic brand European or even worse, Caucasian.

I’m a New Zealander. Always have been. Always will be.

If some people living here wish to make up other names for themselves then go ahead, but don’t foist some label on me.
IAN SIMMONDS, Christchurch Central

I believe the word Pakeha is offensive, not because of its etymology but because of its historical and current usage.

It is an exclusionary term that defines what someone is not rather than what they are. It is basically equivalent to the Japanese word ‘Gaijan’, the Mexican ‘gringo’, and the Samoan ‘palagi’. This is obvious when you compare it to its counterpart, Maori, which literally means ‘normal’.

Of course meanings change over time. Pakeha is not normally used to refer to recent Asian or African immigrants but it is used to refer to recent European immigrants. It is quite obvious that in its current usage, Pakeha is mostly used as a euphemism for ‘‘white person ’’.
Nelson Mail 8/5/19 
Nelson City Council has advertised a fulltime position for iwi partnership with council.

The growth in race-based representation in local and central government - through appointment rather than election - is concerning.

The drive by iwi leaden to institutionalise 50-50 governance is a threat to our democracy.

These demands for power are fraudulent. They claim that the Treaty of Waitangi established a 50-50 partnership between Maori and the Crown, so iwi should have half the say in official decision-making in New Zealand.

This ignores the fact that the Treaty was not a partnership, but an agreement that endorsed the Queen as our sovereign, protected property rights, and established the rule of law.

Truth is no obstacle to the supporters of the sovereignty movement.

Treaty partnership rights do not exist in law. They are a political construct by the iwi elite to pressure politicians to accept that the Treaty confers special sovereign rights that justify tribal groups being elevated to a position of power above everyone else.

This is a dangerous and undemocratic precedent, and for the council to be buying into it underscores its contempt for democracy.

Dominion Post 8/5/19 
A commentary in a national newspaper ranked Cabinet ministers from 1 to 10 on their performance. Not surprisingly, Phil Twyford, David Clark and Shane Jones each received a rating of 4.

However, I was aghast to read Winston Peters received an 8 out of 10. Is this the same politician who coerced the voting public to support him with these three of many pre-election promises:

1. There should be "one law for all New Zealanders".

2. That the MAori seats in Parliament "must be abolished as recommended by the royal commission".

3. Reduce Parliament to 100 MPs.

Since this politician, who after the election engineered the Labour Party to become the new Government, made these important policy statements, not one of them has been fulfilled.

It beggars belief that, despite Peters making promises he hasn't kept, he has still managed to retain his seat in Parliament over the last 30-plus years.

We won't be fooled a second time into voting for NZ First in 2020.

The May 3 editorial asks, "Were Maori sidelined in the mental health inquiry?" As the former inquiry panel, we firmly reject this claim.

There is only one inquiry report, He Ara Oranga, delivered in November, when the inquiry panel was legally disestablished. To help future researchers, summaries of submissions were published after the inquiry concluded.

The Maori summary document, Oranga Tangata, Oranga Whanau, published in February, was not "sanitised", but was delayed after peer review led by Professor Mason Durie found the first commissioned draft was not a faithful representation of submitters' voices. The needs of Maori were central to the inquiry terms of reference and panel composition. We had extensive engagement with Maori.

The entire inquiry report carries a strong theme of radical change to New Zealand's mental health and addiction system and underlying inequities in society. To suggest Maori missed out because only three recommendations specifically refer to Maori overlooks the fact all 40 recommendations are about substantial change for Maori and all New Zealanders.

We expect meeting the needs of 'Maori will be central to the Government's response, as it was to the inquiry and our report.

The Press 7/5/19 
A recent editorial asks an important question: ‘‘Were Maori sidelined in the mental health inquiry?’’ As the former inquiry panel, we firmly reject this claim.

There is only one inquiry report, He Ara Oranga, delivered in November, when the inquiry panel was legally disestablished. To help future researchers, summaries of submissions were published after the inquiry concluded. The Maori summary document, Oranga Tangata, Oranga Whanau, published in February, was not ‘sanitised’, but was delayed after peer review led by Professor Mason Durie found the first commissioned draft was not a faithful representation of submitters’ voices.

The needs of Maori were central to the inquiry terms of reference and panel composition. We had extensive engagement with Maori. The entire inquiry report carries a strong theme of radical change to New Zealand’s mental health and addiction system and underlying inequities in society. To suggest Maori missed out because only three recommendations specifically refer to Maori overlooks the fact all 40 recommendations are about substantial change for Maori and all New Zealanders.

Like the rest of the country, we await the Government’s response. We expect meeting the needs of Maori will be central, as it was to the inquiry and our report. 

Northland Age 7/5/19 
It is nonsense for the Maori Council to claim that Hobson’s Pledge is making racist claims when the very words used by them, as their dictum for equality in the population, ‘We are one people’, are the very words used by Jacinda Ardern to give solace and support to the Muslims in the Christchurch mosque massacre: “We are one.”

Marlborough Express 6/5/19 (Also in Hawkes Bay Today 6/5/19) 
A recent commentary in a national newspaper ranked cabinet ministers from 1 to 10 on their performance.

Not surprisingly, Phil Twyford, David Clark and Shane Jones each received a rating of 4.

However, I was aghast to read Winston Peters received an 8 out of 10.

Is this the same politician who coerced the voting public to support him with these three of many pre-election promises:

1. There should be "one law for all New Zealanders".

2. That the Maori seats in Parliament "must be abolished as recommended by the Royal Commission".

3. Reduce parliament to 100 MPs.

Since this politician, who after the election engineered the Labour Party to become the new Government, made these important policy statements, not one of them have been fulfilled.

It beggars belief that despite Peters making promises he hasn't kept, he has still managed to retain his seat in Parliament over the last 30-plus years. We won't be fooled a second time into voting for NZ First in 2020.

Taranaki Daily News 6/5/19 
I’m writing about the front page news on Friday, May 3.

Some people must have nothing to do. I mean there are other matters in New Zealand to worry about. I have had a Maori mate I grew up with in Wanganui (notice spelling). We have been friends for over 60 years. I have never noticed he was Maori. I was white; he is a mate, Kiwi like me. He lives in Sydney; we keep in touch; I love the guy. People should get over this 'we' thing. We are all Kiwis, every one of us.

The article the letter above refers to here > https://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/112392183/kai-kitchen-accused-of-racial-profiling-in-ad-for-child-model

Wanganui Chronicle 6/5/19 
If Aotearoa/New Zealand has gained anything from the Christchurch massacre (March 15) it is that inter-racial and inter-religious barriers have been severely shaken up and eroded, hopefully for good. Also: our skin colour might be different, but the colour of our blood is the same.

It is with deep sadness, then. that I read your correspondent Denise Lockett (Whanganui Chronicle April 19) referring to the End of Life Choice Bill (the bill) as 'a Pakeha thing, reflecting Pakeha values, ethics and morality'.

Denise finds support in an opinion piece in the NZ HeraId (April 2) in which Dame Tariana Turia states that 'It [the state] should not pass a law that undercuts our families and whanau and makes death an option for those with limited resources and insufficient support'.

May I remind both ladies that the latest scientific poll conducted by the reputable NZ Horizon company (June. 2017) finds support for the bill among Pakeha is 79 per cent and for Maori 71 per cent Not so much a Pakeha thing after all....

Opinions about this bill have very little to do with whether one identifies as being Maori a Pakeha but everything with your world view and which schools you attended.

My deep desire is that this bill will become reality so all of us in Aotearoa/New Zealand can have a choice at the end of our lives when we get terminally or irremediably ill and we suffer severely. Is that too much of an ask??

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 3/5/19 
Having regard to the current hoo-ha over the 2015 1Law4All pamphlet titled One Treaty One Nation. 

I have now obtained a current copy which is the same as original printed. Perusing the contents carefully I can see nothing remotely racist in the pamphlet which simply espouses equality. 

Those railing against this pamphlet are frankly not facing reality. Any hate speech or racism comes from the so-called detractors. 

Following on from his costly Justice Forum debacle last year, (which excluded victims’ representation) Justice Minister Andrew Little’s dismissive summation of the publication, without any meaningful insight or investigation, indicates a race-based, biased mentality. He’s not impartial and should be relieved of his portfolios forthwith. 

Tellingly Ms Ardern, Davis and Co couldn’t even recall what was stated in the Tiriti o Waitangi Articles and I suspect Mr Little is in the same class. Readers can judge for themselves. 

It’s understood over 200,000 pamphlets were delivered over three years with only two complaints. Hardly “offensive” and certainly not worthy of a news story. 

Ironically 2018 Census criticism about minority ethnicity details overlooks many people canvassed wanted to be categorised only as New Zealanders - food for thought for separatists trying to drive a wedge between Kiwis. 
Otago Daily Times 2/5/18 
Susan Short makes a very good point in her letter (ODT, 29.4.19).

Maori seats are separate, racebased positions on councils. They are voted for exclusively by a Maori constituency.

The candidates do not have to compete with other candidates from the general community and primarily care about gaining advantages for their Maori supporters.

Rural wards are geographic in nature, representing all people within their boundaries. Their candidates are subject to the normal electoral process, competition and expense, and can be elected by the adults registered on the electoral roll in that ward.

Noone is included or excluded because of their identifying ethnicity. [Abridged]

New Zealand Herald 2/5/19 
Minister of Justice Andrew Little (Herald, April 29) defends our right to challenge the socially and culturally dominant. That’s great, although we need to be able to discuss freely and challenge all systems and ideas that are promoted, no matter who by or how un-PC they are. That’s how we maintain a healthy, fair and prosperous society.

While New Zealand does not yet officially suppress free speech, an unofficial system is well entrenched in all levels of government, education and mass media. Unquestioning endorsement of selective ideology is required from state employees. Peaceful speaking events have been cancelled for “security” reasons. Many facts relating to the way we are governed or our taxes are spent are simply not reported on.

It seems the public are to be kept in the dark so they won’t question the appropriateness of systems that promote representatives of a non-dominant culture into positions of authority. This approach does nothing to ensure long-term goodwill or to prevent corruption from festering.
FIONA MACKENZIE, Whangaparaoa.

Northland Age 30/4/19 
According to John Tamihere (NZ Herald March 28) Maori were shot without due process after endeavouring to defend their land, and this was the Nadir of the east coast conflicts (1856-1868).

I would have thought the lowest point would have been when those 79 ‘pillars of society’ shot, bayoneted, tomahawked or clubbed 70 sleeping innocent people at Matawhero prior to their capture.

Mr Tamihere neglected to say that the shooting of the 79 was at the orders of Rapata Wahawaha, who as a youngster was a slave of the Rongowhakaata tribe. It looks he was enacting his revenge while fighting on the side of the government militia.

Militia leaders did not sanction the executions, and Colonel Whitmore would have been hard-pressed to prevent them, because nearly all soldiers were Maori. Whitmore did try to prevent the killing of the women and children.

Mr Tamihere’s history cherry-picking is not the sort of thing one would expect from an aspiring Auckland mayor.

Otago Daily Times 29/4/19 
BY arguing that the establishment of Maori wards is essentially no different from establishing rural wards or community boards, Dave Cull (letters, 23.4.19) exhibits a worrying naivety.

Overseas evidence shows there is significant risk in creating unique political rights for groups that are defined by something fixed and arbitrary like descent or ancestry.

Racebased political rights, like special electoral wards, create a dynamic that forces the population to see themselves as something apart from one another.

This incentivises leaders of these groups to exaggerate existing differences between their group and the rest of society.

Such a scenario risks creating divisions that get worse over time.

It is extremely important that the poll provision giving citizens the right to choose whether to endorse Maori wards should stay. [Abridged]

Nelson Mail 27/4/19 
Who was the politician who said with hand on heart to New Zealand voters before the general election in 2017 that:

1. There should be ‘‘one law for all New Zealanders’’.

2. That the Maori seats in Parliament ‘‘must be abolished as recommended by the Royal Commission’’.

3. That the signing of the United Nations Indigenous Peoples Declaration was ’’a vehicle for providing ethnic groups with exclusive rights and the final step to full separatism in New Zealand, and the road to another Zimbabwe’’.

Since this politician – who after the election engineered the Labour Party to become the new Government – made these important policy statements, an almost complete reversal in his thinking has taken place. There is no plan to abolish Maori seats, as he says the ‘‘timing is not right’’. He now supports the implementation of the Indigenous Peoples Declaration, which means once in place there can no longer possibly be ‘‘one law for all New Zealanders’’.

It beggars belief that despite Winston Peters making promises he can’t keep, he still has managed to retain his seat in Parliament over the last 30-plus years. Will the ‘‘time’s up’’ bell ring for him at next year’s election?

Northland Age 25/4/19 
Having regard to the current hoo-ha over the 2015 1Law4All pamphlet, 'One Treaty One Nation,' I have now obtained a current copy thereof, which is the same as original one. Perusing the contents carefully I can see nothing remotely racist in the pamphlet, which simply espouses equality.

Those railing against this pamphlet are frankly not facing reality — any hate speech or racism comes from the so-called detractors' comments.

Following on from his costly Justice Forum debacle last year (which excluded victims' representation), Justice Minister Andrew Little's dismissive summation of 'One Treaty One Nation', without any evidence of meaningful insight or investigation, indicates a race-based/ biased mentality. He's not impartial, and should be relieved of his portfolios forthwith.

Tellingly, Ms Ardern, Davis and Co couldn't even recall what was stated in to 'Tiriti o Waitangi articles, and I suspect Mr Little is in the same class. Readers can judge for themselves by just going to the Kiwi Frontline home site or Facebook and reading the pamphlet.

It's understood that over 200,000 pamphlets have been delivered over four years since 2015, with only two complaints. Hardly "offensive" to most people, and certainly not worthy of a news story.

Ironically, it is worth noting the 2018 census criticism about minority ethnicity details overlooks that many people canvassed wanted to be categorised only as New Zealanders. Food for thought for separatists trying to drive a wedge between Kiwis.

Dominion Post 25/4/19 
Wellington city councillors are considering changing the name of an apartment building to honour Sister Mary Joseph.

However, they want to change her English name to the Maori version, Merl Hohepa.

Can you imagine the outrage if they were to change a Maori name to its European version?
NELL HARRAP, Thorndon 
Dominion Post 24/4/19 
Neville Baker says the land at Shelly Bay belongs to iwi and they have every right to develop it as they want. Big words, Neville Baker, but you're horribly wrong.

And on the other hand, are you expecting the ratepayers of Wellington to fund the millions and millions of dollars for trading, sewerage and bask infrastructure just for a money-making iwi development?

And as for doing whatever iwi like with the land, are Maori above the Wellington City Council bylaws, some of which stem directly from government law?

Otago Daily Times 23/4/19 
MAYOR Cull’s message to residents in the April edition of FYI Dunedin could not have been more appropriate in the wake of the tragedy in Christchurch.

Our community is made up of people of many ethnicities and beliefs, all of whom have come here from many different countries and all have contributed to our city.

What a pity that Mr Cull stopped short of endorsing the provision in Article 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi, that all citizens should have the same legal entitlements regardless of their ethnicity and regardless of when they or their ancestors came here.

That principle was challenged last year by five local authorities who sought to impose divisive, ethnic exclusive voting wards on their communities via public referendum. The communities decisively defeated the move.

In response, Mr Cull, as chairman of Local Government New Zealand, sought to persuade the Government to remove the public’s right to such a referendum.

If Mr Cull is sincere in his current message to Dunedin residents, he should now review his position on divisive, ethnicexclusive voting wards for local body elections, and seek to persuade his LGNZ colleagues to drop the idea.
JOHN BELL, Forbury

[Dunedin Mayor and LGNZ president Dave Cull replies:  ‘‘Local Government New Zealand has no view on whether councils should have Maori wards and constituencies. These are matters for each council and its community to decide through their representation review process.

‘‘In many cases, local iwi and communities do not support the Maori ward approach, and this is reflected in council decision making not to create such wards.

‘‘LGNZ’s concern is that the current process for establishing Maori wards and constituencies is unfair and inconsistent, as it does not apply to other forms of ward or constituency.

‘‘By comparison, there is no ability for citizens to trigger a referendum to override a council’s decision to establish a rural ward or community board. In applying referendum provisions only to the creation of Maori wards, the current system discriminates against Maori.

‘‘The legal regime should support local decisionmaking by elected councils. This is best achieved by aligning the rules concerning the creation of Maori wards with the existing rules concerning the creation of any other type of ward or constituency. Either the poll provisions should apply to all wards, or they should apply to none.’’]

Otago Daily Times 22/4/19 
IT is speculated by David George (letters, 12.4.19), following others, that either Cook or Banks sired a child in the Marlborough Sounds in 1769.

Cook was notably chaste, so it would not have been him, but Banks was quite a stud, so there can be little doubt who was the probable performer.

Cook and his wife had a large family, few of whom outlived childhood, and his last surviving son was robbed and killed while crossing the common near his home to join his ship. Mrs Cook, who lived to a great age, must have died a lonely old woman.

Sir Joseph Banks was a noted (amateur) botanist. He would have been very affronted by David George’s description of him as a ‘‘trading captain’’.

Hawkes Bay Today 20/4/19 
Ngati Kahungunu are to be congratulated on their purchase of Hawke's Bay Seafoods. With good management, the business will continue creating jobs in the local economy.

Now that Kahungunu own the newly named Takitimu Seafoods, the business will cease to pay income tax. Kahungunu Asset Holding Company is a registered charity, therefore exempt (under section CW42 of the Income Tax Act) from paying tax on its business income.

This represents a massive competitive advantage to Kahungunu and other corporate charities, other companies must pay 28 per cent tax on retained earnings or pay dividends (which are taxed in the hands of the shareholder). Kahungunu doesn't have to pay tax on Its earnings and can simply distribute its profits through charitable grants to members.

So every time Kahungunu swallows up a competitor we have less in the coffers to pay teachers. nurses: and police - perhaps not so much to celebrate?

Dominion Post 20/4/19 (‘To the point’ section) 
The non-Maori 85 per cent of the population. commonly referred to In the media as The Silent Majority. should more aptly be called The Pathetic Apathetics. Their only contribution to the running of the country Is to put some marks on the electoral voting papers every three years

Northland Age 18/4/19 
Everybody — visitors, residents and Kiwi citizens — can reasonably expect to be safe and free from harm and danger in New Zealand. However, political wallowing, wailing and bleating doublespeak does nothing for Kiwis' psyche, only alienating many people with inane suggestions being floated.

Certainly we must try to ensure Christchurch-type catastrophe never happens again by taking appropriate practical steps, but we must move on from agonising over Christchurch ad nauseum.

As a first step, gun control/ ban was essential, but why didn't we just follow the Australian legislation with amendments, although whereas they had a firearm registry, we in New Zealand have not since 1987? Blame our politicians for this, and for allowing free access to military-style semi-automatic weapons etc.

It is all very well getting compliance from legitimate gun owners, but what about the tens of thousands of illegal guns floating about in Etherland, and what will politicians do to track down those weapons? What will the government do with all the guns purchased for between $100 million and $300 million? It has been rumoured that they may look to sell some guns overseas, where they could end up in conflict zones in Africa and the Middle East. Can the government categorically state this will not happen, and that all the guns surrendered will be destroyed?

Where is the urgent critical workable gun register legislation?

A Supreme Court judge has been appointed to head the Royal Commission (costing $8.4 million), which will go on forever, yet no firm conclusions are anticipated. Wouldn't it have been better to get the terrorist trial out of the way, where much of the evidence etc, may be forthcoming anyway?

Appallingly, what continues to happen is the usual culprits' exploitation of the Christchurch massacre by seizing every opportunity to heap vitriolic, scurrilous attacks amounting to hate speech on their fellow Kiwis in an attempt to shut down robust criticism of their own offensive activities.

Justice Minister Little is looking at new hate speech legislation, presumably to shield the government, local government and the race-based activist ratbags from robust criticism by trashing the right to freedom of speech.

New Zealand sports team names that were never an issue until this evil lone wolf terrorist surfaced in Christchurch have now also come under the blowtorch.

Frankly, how can anyone have any confidence in any government legislation or policy initiatives when it can't even get the Provincial Growth Fund fiasco, Kiwibuild debacle or Cullen's crazy CGT issues sorted?

These socialist sods who are imbued with the global world socialist (Marxist) philosophy, which always over-promises and under-delivers, being based on the philosophy of failure, ignorance and arrogance, with the equal sharing of miseries by everyone, couldn't organise a booze-up in a brewery, while their rivals, who pay lip service to capitalism, the philosophy of greed resulting in the inequitable, disproportionate sharing of wealth, are no better. Both factions share many of the same despicable traits, including the lack of public consultation, transparency, openness, honesty or accountability.

Trust any of them at your peril.
ROB PATERSON Mount Maunganui

New Zealand Herald 18/4/19 
The non-Maori 85 per cent of the population, commonly referred to in the media as the Silent Majority, should more aptly be called the Pathetic Apathetics. Their only contribution to the running of the country is to put some marks on the electoral voting papers every three years.

Bay of Plenty Times 17/4/19 
Tauranga In response to Mr Dey, (Letters, April 4), in my view, the purpose of local government is (among other things) to promote the social economic environmental and cultural wellbeing of communities in the present and for the future.

TCC is not in itself obliged to gift back purchased land to the vendor and then pay a rental. The Elms continues to promote the cultural history of all New Zealanders and is one of the oldest heritage sites in New Zealand. The people of New Zealand have paid hugely in terms of legislated goodwill. The various statutes have rigorous provisions for Treaty implementation for which the nation is paying. This is not one of them. The council assisted in the purchase of the land for the future development of the Elms and also to prevent commercial ownership of adjoining land.

Gifting the Lot in question immediately creates an opportunity for iwi to have both a commercial and governance interest. The peninsula was originally purchased by the Mission Society after it was abandoned by Maori after inter-tribal warfare. The Anglican Church has already gifted 14 acres of Te Papa (which it had purchased legally) to the winner. How much more goodwill do you want?

The transfer of Lot 11 to anyone other than the Elms would be another transaction not in the interests of the ratepayers and the majority of the Bay of Plenty people. 

Herald on Sunday 14/4/19 
The potential Crusaders’ name change marks a victory for the Marxist Left, the pseudo-liberals, the Muslim jihadists and the historically illiterate revisionists.

The ignorance of history, which is a major cause of this regression, should come as no surprise to the population, as both leading political parties have suppressed the nation’s history since the 1970s and exacerbated the situation by permitting dramatic revisions to our national statutes, even the Treaty, without any historical knowledge of them or consideration of future ramifications.

This ignorance of our nation’s history is so prevalent that we have a prime minister, presently lauded internationally and with suggestions of a Nobel prize nomination, who did not know the wording of the Treaty of Waitangi.

History records that the Muslim jihadists began invading Europe in the eighth century and their violent mission of converting all to Islam continues to this day.

Bay of Plenty Times 13/4/19 
Once again the Green Party is taking over where Chris Finlayson left off, along with MP Tamati Coffey.

The Indigenous Freshwater Fish Amendment Bill (News, April 6) includes in definitions “Treaty settlement legislation”.

Amongst other references to Maori it also gives priority in Section 48A (5) wherein any inconsistency in provisions in freshwater fish regulations or provisions relating to Maori fishing rights then Treaty legislation will prevail.

The Bill seems, in my view, to be less of a fish protection proposal than an effort to entrench Maori/ Treaty control issues in the Conservation Act which has operated successfully for all New Zealanders through the auspices of the Fish and Game Council and the Conservation Department.

There is also the reference in the proposed amendment that “these regulations or notices do not affect Maori fishing rights” and they can continue to harvest their whitebait etc. while controlling access under the guise of kaitiaki. I am wondering if, before taking this Bill into committee stages, any consideration was given to the report by Geoffrey Palmer which included concerns about the negative effect on Fish and Game. This is particularly relevant in the amendment (6) to Clause 7J.

“However, if there is any conflict between a provision in a freshwater fisheries management plan and a provision in a sports fish and game management plan, the provision in the freshwater fisheries management plan prevails.” (Abridged)
R E STEPHENS Papamoa Beach

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 12/4/19 
While the Treaty of Waitangi gave tangata Maori, “The same rights as the people of England if they gave up their kawanatanga/governments to the Queen”, it did not make New Zealand into a British Colony under one flag, one government and one law.

After the Treaty was signed, New Zealand remained under Governor Sir George Gipps and the dependency and laws of New South Wales.

On the 3rd May 1841, Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter/Letters Patent dated the 16 November 1840 separated New Zealand from New South Wales dependency and New Zealand became an independent British Colony.

Not only did New Zealand became a British Colony on this day, but we were given our first Governor and Constitution that set up our political, legal and justice systems under one flag, one government and one law, irrespective of race, colour or creed.

This document was, “Our true Founding Document and first Constitution”.

As Maori celebrate the Treaty of Waitangi on the 6th February, all New Zealander’s must celebrate New Zealand’s Independence Day on the 3rd May every year.

It is the day we became, One Nation under One flag, One government and One law! It’s time to shout it from the roof tops!

Don’t let another year go by without celebrating. It’s only one month away.
R BAKER, Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation lnc

Gisborne Herald 11/4/19 
Re: Moving to the right side of history now, April 10 letter.

I like the way you immediately attempt to take the moral high ground by labelling anybody with a different view to yours as racist, right wing etc. Total nonsense. All this does is show you and your ilk in your true light.

How can you live a happy life with all this bile deep inside you? Your second to last sentence is an admission that the wrongs of the past are no longer present.

I have no idea what the last line says, no doubt that will also be held against me.

When I was a kid in Timaru, we used to go to the “bughouse” pictures on a Saturday and would cheer for the white hat cowboys, who normally represented truth, justice and the American way, and boo at the black hat cowboys, who were at the opposite end of the moral spectrum.

I read Wally Te Ua’s recent letter with interest and particularly note the way various words carry positive or negative values with them. This tends to create, at least an illusion, of a white hat/black hat scenario, with guess who wearing the black hats?

“Picking up scraps from under the white man’s table”, I thought a little over the top for 2019.

I am bemused by the final quotation, “Mene mene tekel upharsin”. Uncle Google tells me “the writing on the wall, interpreted by Daniel to mean that God had weighed Belshazzar and his kingdom, had found them wanting, and would destroy them”. It’s a long time since I frequented Chalmers Presbyterian Church in Timaru and therefore my scripture is a mite rusty. If I have got it wrong, I apologise.

I sincerely hope that my expressed opinion does not cast me into that special corner of hell, reserved for right wing, scaremongering racists.

Bay of Plenty Times 12/4/19 
I note in your “Hot Topics” quiz that you state that English is one of the three official languages of New Zealand.

You know this is incorrect because, for many years, a prolific letter writer on this very subject to your paper, the late Robin Bishop, had tried right up until her passing to get English accepted into law as an official language.

She even presented her petition which I also signed to her local MP, Simon Bridges, for him to table in Parliament, but not surprisingly that disappeared into the ether, never to be seen again.

Can I respectfully ask that before putting incorrect answers to your quizzes that you indeed research your subjects more thoroughly?

Otago Daily Times 12/4/19 
SIMON Chapple’s article (ODT, 4.4.19) makes timely reading.

The Begg brothers, doctors Neil and Charles, were noted historians last century. They passed on a lot about the history of contact. In a footnote to one of their books, they mentioned that the captain of the Endeavour (Tupai’s ship) had sired a child, in the Marlborough Sounds in 1769. She was sighted during the 1777 voyage — as an 8year old.

The writers noted that the captain could have either been Joseph Banks, or Captain James Cook — they being the trading captain and the sailing captain respectively.

It might be interesting to note that one gentleman would have passed on some immunity to the disease. These illnesses were passed on inadvertently during the period of contact.

If James Cook had been the father, it is possible that his only descendents might be found among the population of New Zealand today.
Simon Chapple's article > Early Maori population hard to judge

Northland Age 11/4/19 
Perhaps the delay in the release of the last census figures is because they are trying to find more citizens with a trace of Maori blood.

The Hastings District Council has voted to support and promote racism within its district.

The Christchurch massacre was caused by racism, but, abhorrent as it was, the District of Hastings has voted to support those actions by practising its own form of racism. It has voted to appoint two Ma¯ ori to their four standing committees, ignoring democracy by circumventing the council’s requirement that only elected councillors be allowed to vote on these committees. This is against basic democracy within a democratic New Zealand.

Race-based government is called an apartheid copy of South Africa. One that this country has opposed both politically and publicly. Heaven forbid that our own FNDC attempts the same sort of nonsense.

I refuse to purchase fish, fruit, veges or wine from the Hastings area. Do not support racism.

Dominion Post 11/4/19 
The calm, well-researched, reasoned article on multiculturalism by Jim Traue is in striking contrast to the emotive outbursts and pleas relating to racism and freedom of religion since the Christchurch murders.

It is also highly relevant to Wellington City Council's pursuit of Maori biculturalism, evidenced by the reference to Tangaroa in a scientific, planning document.

The inept handling of the matter, from the inclusion of the word in the first place, was shown by supporting councillors comments (April 5).

The mayor associated use of Tangaroa with Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny, insulting, particularly, Maori culture, but also the associated Christian beliefs about celebrations of key events in the life of Christ.

Fitzsimons' comments on use of metaphor to capture interest were daft, Day's old saw accusing Pakeha of cultural misunderstanding, missed the point, and both Sparrow and Calvi-Freeman ducked for cover.

Common sense did not exist. While there is an excellent case for the protection of Maori culture, the definition of culture should not be in the framework of biculturalism from the past, but multiculturalism in the 21st century. Voters are likely to recognise this.

The article that Mike Williams refers to > For multiculturalism to work, society needs to promote the values of our cultural heritage 

Hawkes Bay Today 10/4/19 
Your World Watch correspondent Gwynne Dyer (Monday, March 25) is incorrect when he states that The Treaty of Waitangi was written in both languages (Maori and English).

In fact The Treaty of Waitangi was only ever written in the Maori language. Governor Hobson was adamant the Treaty document in Maori signed at Waitangi on February 6 was the de facto treaty document.

He subsequently gave specific instructions that all treaty negotiations would be undertaken in the Maori language using a copy of that Maori language treaty document.

And that is in fact what happened (including at the Manukau and Port Waikato Treaty signings).

All of the so-called English versions of the Treaty are derived from documents purported to be the draft documents crafted by Busby, Freeman, Hobson and others to generate the final English draft of the Treaty handed to Henry Williams on February 4 to translate into the Maori language . . . or they are translations of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the Maori language written by various authors subsequent to the signing of the Treaty. There is no English version of The Treaty of Waitangi.

Waikato Times 10/4/19 
The Crusaders' name change marks a victory for the Marxist Left, the pseudo-liberals, the Muslim Jihadists and the historically-illiterate revisionists.

The ignorance of history, that is a major cause of this regression, should come as no surprise to the population, as both political parties have suppressed the nation's history since the 1970s and exacerbated the situation by permitting dramatic revisions to our national statutes, even the Treaty, without any historical knowledge of them or consideration of future ramifications.

This ignorance of our nation's history is so prevalent that we have a prime minister, presently lauded internationally and with suggestions of a Nobel prize nomination, who did not know the wording of the Treaty of Waitangi.

History records that the Muslim Jihadists began invading Europe in the eighth century and their mission of converting all to Islam continues to this day.

Dominion Post 10/4/19 
Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments expressed by Lana Hart (It's time to get practical about ending racism, April 8), I don't think we are in a very strong position to preach anti-racism whilst we have government-imposed, and encouraged, racism within our systems.

We have race-based seats in Parliament, we have places at medical school allocated by race, we have employment opportunities within the public service decided according to race. We even have a racially selected rugby team representing our country. Let's tackle racism by all means, but let's get our own house in order first.
REG FOWLES, Walkanae

Bay of Plenty Times 9/4/19
In your article (April 4) “Debate on street names called for” you can add to the list some street names referencing the Battle of Gate Pa , Puhirake Cres, Pyes Pa (The Lakes).

The Ngai Te Rangi chief Rawiri Puhirake instigated the Tauranga battles by challenging the British to come and fight him. He even built a road so that Greer’s soldiers would not be too tired when they got there.

On receiving no reply he moved his pa closer on the lower Wairoa River. When the British still didn’t take up the challenge he moved to Pukehinahina (Gate Pa) where he got his wish.

Puhirake and his men repulsed the first attack but knowing their position was so compromised they would not survive the attack which would come in the morning they evacuated the pa under the cover of darkness.

Puhirake died at the next battle at Te Ranga which was a major defeat for Maori. Puhirake was widely admired for bravery and is buried in the Mission Cemetery. I wonder if Tommy Wilson and his followers want Puhirake Cres expunged or it only the street names of British soldiers?

Northland Age 9/4/19
While the Treaty of Waitangi gave tangata Maori 'The same rights as the people of England if they gave up their kawanatanga/governments to the Queen,' it did not make New Zealand into a British colony under one flag, one government and one law.

After the Treaty was signed, New Zealand remained under Governor Sir George Gipps and the dependency and laws of New South Wales.

On May 3, 1841, Queen Victoria's Royal Charter/Letters Patent dated November 16, 1840, separated New Zealand from New South Wales dependency and New Zealand became an independent British colony.

Not only did New Zealand became a British colony on this day, but we were given our first Governor and constitution that set up our political, legal and justice systems under one flag, one government and one law, irrespective of race, colour or creed.

This document was our true founding document and first constitution.

As Maori celebrate the Treaty of Waitangi on February 6, all New Zealanders must celebrate New Zealand's Independence Day on May 3 every year. It is the day we became one nation under one flag, one government and one law. It's time to shout it from the roof tops. Don't let another year go by without celebrating. It's only one month away.
ROSS BAKER Researcher One New Zealand Foundation

The Crusaders' name change marks a victory for the Marxist Left, the pseudo-liberals, The Muslim Jihadists and the historically-illiterate revisionists.

The ignorance of history, that is a major cause of this regression, should come as no surprise to the population, as both political parties have suppressed the nation's history since the 1970s, and exacerbated the situation by permitting dramatic revisions to our national statutes, even the Treaty, without any historical knowledge of them or consideration of future ramifications.

This ignorance of our nation's history is so prevalent that we have a Prime Minister, presently lauded internationally and with suggestions of a Nobel prize nomination, who did not know the wording of the Treaty of Waitangi.

History records that the Muslim Jihadists began invading Europe in the 8th Century, and their violent mission of converting all to Islam continues to this day.

Nelson Mail 8/4/19 
Very interested to read that the NZ First party opposed the introduction of an act of Parliament that would have given South Island iwi Nga¯ i Tahu exclusive rights to have two appointments made to Environment Canterbury.

NZ First spokesman Shane Jones claimed such appointments would have been an ‘‘affront to democracy’’.

We know that throughout our country a number of local bodies are considering similar exclusive right appointments and their national organisation, Local Government NZ, seems to be condoning such undemocratic moves.

My question is simply this. Will NZ First as the critical Government coalition partner now be taking steps to ensure local government legislation is amended so that no action can be taken at local government level that is an ‘‘affront to democracy’’? We will watch that space with interest.

Sunday Star Times 7/4/19 
I read Hinemoa Elder’s article regarding the Christchurch terror attacks several times to make sure I understood her intent (‘‘We must not ignore cultural differences’’, Focus).

I agreed with some of it. But I found the underlying message to be very offensive and unnecessarily divisive at this time ‘‘. . . well-meaning Pakeha must get out of the way . . .’’

I live in Christchurch and in the time immediately after the terror attacks, I have noticed small but discernible acts of love and kindness.

The majority of our community, regardless of race or religion, have supported each other and the families of the victims.

Why, then, did Elder admonish just Pakeha for getting in the way?

Why not mention Asians, Pacific Islanders, Irish immigrants, South African immigrants, Hindu immigrants, gang members, Christian church groups? All of these groups have offered help and open kindness.

My only answer is that her comments were racially motivated and deliberately divisive.

We, the people who actually live in Christchurch, have had more than our share of grief. I know from talking to friends and colleagues of all races and religious beliefs that we want to build a more inclusive community where we all have a valuable contribution to make.

By the way, I’m a born and bred Aucklander. I love my home town but I deeply respect Christchurch!
GREG McNEILL, Christchurch

Hawkes Bay Today 4/4/19 
Councillor Jacoby Poulain says a public poll would not have supported the Hastings District Council proposal to appoint four Maori representatives to their four standing committees “because only 20 per cent of the population is Maori”. That may well have been the case, but at least a poll is democratic. And democracy is how councillor Poulain got elected.

Yes, Winston Churchill once said democracy was the worst form of government “except for all the others”. What does that say about “the others?” They are infinitely worse.
MARK TAYLOR Havelock North

NZ Herald 3/4/19 
I am sorry Tariana Turia feels the way she does about assisted dying. In the Horizon Research Poll, May 2017, Maori were 71 per cent in favour of assistance to die being available in terminal illness as per the End of Life Choice Bill.

If a Maori person accesses assistance to die they will be able to respect their cultural values better than in many usual end of life situations. Before the assistance takes place they will be able to discuss with whanau and come to a consensus view of whether they should ask for assistance to die. They are encouraged to talk with family.

Obviously, the person concerned has to make the final request. If the patient wants it, the health practitioners concerned will talk to family. The person will be competent and awake when it happens, with family around them in support. Family will have immediate and continuing access to the patient afterwards. The disabled or old are not eligible unless they meet the criteria of terminal illness, major irremediable unbearable suffering, and be in an advanced stage of incapacity.

It is intended that the body who provide the second doctor will have cultural representation.

Bay of Plenty Times 3/4/19 
This may surprise you Tauranga City councillors say you are continually being consulted about proposals.

The local body law states that all citizens must be consulted on plans and proposals that affect them.

All of us know this is not happening and consequently, the TCC is not obeying the law.

I believe, many things are being actioned which would never be agreed to, if there was proper consultation operational.

Like the free gifting of a residential property. in Mission St. to a tribal (rust. Effective consultation of our community and action as directed must be done. as the law demands.
KEN EVANS Tauranga

Northland Age 2/4/19 
I was wondering, when our Prime Minister proclaims "We are one people," is she meaning the way immigrants and refugees, such as Muslims, assimilate into New Zealand society, accepting our traditions and values?

Or is she referring to the relationship of part-Maori and non-Maori?

If she's meaning that New Zealand's part-Maori and non-Maori are one people, why did Donald Brash get "de-platformed" at Massey University for saying and, in fact, preaching that?
LEO LEITCH, Benneydale

To any reasonable people with a bit of natural pride in themselves, their way of life and their origins, asserting that their way is the best way is exactly what one would expect. Where those people are a large majority in their own country, of course that becomes the dominant culture, and by and large, all residents are expected to observe its norms.

At the same time, where there are minorities of any sort — of culture, religion, colour, political persuasion— all reasonable people will tolerate and accept them, as long as they do not attempt to impose their ways on anybody or attempt to upset the equilibrium of society.

A fine example in New Zealand since Hobson assured Bishop Pompallier at Waitangi is our religious tolerance — the persecution of Jews and the brutal conflicts of Catholic/Protestant or Christian/Muslim have been absent from ow shores. Of course, on rare occasiors when a religious group has chosen to defy social norms and the law of the land, vigorous steps have been necessary to deal with it.

The nasty cults of Parihaka and Rua Kenana, who stated his seditious position in the middle of a major war, are among the few examples. And in those cases, the authorities' response was fair and moderate.

So now, in the aftermath of the appalling tragedy in Christchurch, it surely comes as a considerable shock to find ourselves berated by prominent figures, of whom Person of the Year Anne Salmond would be one, telling us that we are "white supremacists" who belittle others with of ridicule, suppression and contempt. And many others are using distorted accounts of our recent colonial past to use this situation to advance their political position and bid for more power.

Confronted with such challenges, it is time, I suggest, for all New Zealanders of good faith to assert their belief in themselves and their values of fairness, truth and democracy on which our fine country was founded.

As an 88-year-old pensioner of the group frequently vilified by some ethnic and pseudo-liberal groups as male, pale and stale, the only 'white privilege' that I have experienced in a working life engaged in naval service, teaching, an abundance of other jabs and raising five children, has been to be dully employed the whole time and so able to provide the taxes needed to support those less fortunate.

Waikato Times 2/4/19 
Democracy and free speech is alive in Hamilton with one councillor happy to fly in the face of good science, medicine, sound history and sheer common sense. Cr Henry showed poor taste at the weekend when she defiantly wore an "Anti Vaxx" shirt at a time when NZ may be facing a measles epidemic. I suspect few parents in Christchurch would applaud her. 

She also opposes fluoridated water supply despite the opinions of almost all doctors and dentists.

I was born and grew up in Hamilton pre fluoride and by the time I was twenty had acquired the usual mouth full of fillings. Since 1967 my wife and I have always lived with fluoridated water and neither of us have had new fillings since about 1975. Our two daughters, in their forties, and four grandchildren are today filling free. Good enough proof for me.

Cr Henry also knows little of history if she equates Gov, Sir George Grey in the same light as Hitler. Five minutes of research would show her that Grey was the best friend Maori ever had. During his first term he was lauded by them and nowhere more so than at Rangiaowhia. He was brought back to serve a second term precisely because of his rapport with Maori.
MURRAY REID, Cambridge

Dominion Post 2/4/19 
It is shocking that Hastings District Council feels able to abandon democracy and appoint totally unelected Maori to council committees.

With 25 per cent of Hastings’ population being Maori, there is surely no reason why Maori cannot be elected to the HDC. Already four of the 14 elected members have Maori heritage.

It is an insult to the ratepayers of Hastings that the council has made this decision to appoint those who have not stood before the ratepayers to seek their endorsement. This is a very slippery slope for democracy.

The issue will not go away, and will no doubt be remembered when the local body elections take place later in the year.

At the very time the prime minister is stressing the fact that all New Zealanders should have equal rights, and that we should be one people, Hastings District Council votes to give voting rights to some citizens on purely racial grounds.

Time for a change, I think, because this has been a disgraceful example of what not to do in local government.

Hawkes Bay Today 1/4/19 
It is shocking that the Hastings District Council feels able to abandon democracy and appoint totally unelected Maori to council committees.

With 25 per cent of Hastings population Maori, there is surely no reason why Maori cannot be elected to the HDC. Four of the 14 elected members have Maori heritage.

It is an insult to the ratepayers of Hastings that the council has made this decision to appoint those who have not stood before the ratepayers to seek their endorsement. This is a very slippery slope for democracy.

The issue will not go away, and will no doubt be remembered when the local body elections take place later in the year.

At the very time the Prime Minister is stressing that all New Zealanders should have equal rights, and we should be one people, the Hastings District Council votes to give voting rights to some citizens on purely racial grounds.

Time for a change I think because this has been a disgraceful example of what not to do in local government

As an 88-year-old pensioner of the group frequently vilified by some ethnic and pseudo-liberal groups as: 'Male. Pale and Stale'. the only "White Privilege" that I experienced in a working life engaged in naval service, teaching an abundance of other jobs and raising five children, has been to be fully employed the whole time and so able to provide the taxes needed to support those less fortunate.