Post by Kiwi Frontline on Sept 22, 2019 6:23:13 GMT 12
Dear Editor (Sent to the NZ Herald 18/9/19)
Our political leaders regular refer to NZ being a democracy, but this is increasingly becoming a misnomer. Auckland Council allows two unelected, unaccountable tribal appointees voting on critical issues alongside elected Councillors on all Committees, and we have a mix of elected Councillors and tribal appointees governing many of our public spaces and resources, including the Hauraki Gulf. Other councils around the country have followed suit.
Now I see in the Council’s Auckland Plan 2050, that “Political structures will evolve within Auckland as the model of co-governance is refined and te Tiriti settlements call for new arrangements.”
Perhaps I have missed something. Has there been any public consultation and referendum on us changing from a democracy to a race-based form of government? Or is NZ just another failing state, slowly evolving into a Kleptocracy? We already seem to be a Kakistocracy.
FIONA MACKENZIE, Whangaparaoa
Dear Ed, (Sent to the Waikato Times 16/9/19)
I have always been a strong supporter of NZ history being a core subject in NZ schools, it certainly was in my day as part of primary school Social Studies.
Unfortunately I have zero belief that today the subject can be truthfully taught. The past 30 years has seen a constant barrage, by historians, media and educators to belittle all things colonial and promote all things Maori as virtuous.
Much of that barrage has been by way of exaggeration and outright lies.
An example is in the “Opinion. Tom O’ Connor” column of your Saturday edition 14/9.
Tom refers to the girls from Otorohanga and the Commemoration of the NZ Land Wars. The very simple fact is the legislation refers to the NZ Wars, Land is not in its title, which covered a period from 1843 to 1872.
Only a few days ago a plaque was installed in Parliament that confirms the wording.
Most of the battles referred to over that period resulted from Sovereignty disputes and were not land related. Loss of land was sometimes the result of the wars rather than the cause. The combatants understood that risk.
The girls of Otorohanga were the catalyst for the welcomed legislation, but it must be remembered that their views arose from totally dishonest information supplied to them by a senior Maori leader who knew better. Over many years many have retold the story of 100 or more innocent Maori being locked in a church and burnt to death. Even Dame Susan Devoy has retold that tale at a public event. Today most school pupils consider it to be true.
The truth is the church stood until 1931, and there are at least five published pieces that can confirm It was not burnt down.
MURRAY REID, Cambridge
Our political leaders regular refer to NZ being a democracy, but this is increasingly becoming a misnomer. Auckland Council allows two unelected, unaccountable tribal appointees voting on critical issues alongside elected Councillors on all Committees, and we have a mix of elected Councillors and tribal appointees governing many of our public spaces and resources, including the Hauraki Gulf. Other councils around the country have followed suit.
Now I see in the Council’s Auckland Plan 2050, that “Political structures will evolve within Auckland as the model of co-governance is refined and te Tiriti settlements call for new arrangements.”
Perhaps I have missed something. Has there been any public consultation and referendum on us changing from a democracy to a race-based form of government? Or is NZ just another failing state, slowly evolving into a Kleptocracy? We already seem to be a Kakistocracy.
FIONA MACKENZIE, Whangaparaoa
Dear Ed, (Sent to the Waikato Times 16/9/19)
I have always been a strong supporter of NZ history being a core subject in NZ schools, it certainly was in my day as part of primary school Social Studies.
Unfortunately I have zero belief that today the subject can be truthfully taught. The past 30 years has seen a constant barrage, by historians, media and educators to belittle all things colonial and promote all things Maori as virtuous.
Much of that barrage has been by way of exaggeration and outright lies.
An example is in the “Opinion. Tom O’ Connor” column of your Saturday edition 14/9.
Tom refers to the girls from Otorohanga and the Commemoration of the NZ Land Wars. The very simple fact is the legislation refers to the NZ Wars, Land is not in its title, which covered a period from 1843 to 1872.
Only a few days ago a plaque was installed in Parliament that confirms the wording.
Most of the battles referred to over that period resulted from Sovereignty disputes and were not land related. Loss of land was sometimes the result of the wars rather than the cause. The combatants understood that risk.
The girls of Otorohanga were the catalyst for the welcomed legislation, but it must be remembered that their views arose from totally dishonest information supplied to them by a senior Maori leader who knew better. Over many years many have retold the story of 100 or more innocent Maori being locked in a church and burnt to death. Even Dame Susan Devoy has retold that tale at a public event. Today most school pupils consider it to be true.
The truth is the church stood until 1931, and there are at least five published pieces that can confirm It was not burnt down.
MURRAY REID, Cambridge