Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jul 18, 2016 6:37:49 GMT 12
The Northern Advocate 18/7/16
MAORI MEMBERS
There has been a disturbing trend around the country of l ocal councils appointing unelected part-Maori representatives, granting them full voting rights.
This has been done without consulting the electorate and one must question the legality of such actions.
The incumbent board members were elected to a council that had a set structure and set of rules, therefore any changes to that basic format should require prior consent from those whom the council claims to represent.
Arbitrarily changing the rules after an election is a violation of voters’ trust, so any proposal for major change should be a part of an aspiring candidate’s electoral campaign prior to the election.
Only then will the people have a true voice and no longer be deceived by those who may have a hidden agenda that overrides democracy.
There is no problem in consulting with local Maori to hear their viewpoint on certain matters, but council members must carefully differentiate between what is good for the community and token appeasement of taniwha at the bottom of the garden.
Politics and religion do not sit well together in local government.
People who consider that part-Maori need special help are being unwittingly condescending and invalidative of those of Maori descent who are quite capable of being elected to council on their own merit.
Part-Maori are in no way inferior to other citizens, so at least give them a chance to stand on their own two feet without brainwashing an entire mixed-race generation into believing that a smattering of ancestral genes makes them “special”.
Any candidates with racially based policies must make their intentions very clear before voting time.
Electors who still value democracy will then know exactly where they stand.
MITCH MORGAN
Kaipara
Wanganui Chronicle 18/7/16
TIME TO BE AS ONE
In reply to Rob Rattenbury (July 15) you suspect there is a sense of shame felt by Pakeha about events that happened 150 years ago. I for one feel no shame, nor I would think do most Kiwis. What happened in New Zealand hundreds of years ago would have happened no matter who landed here.
You compare the Australian Aborigines or the American Indian, they were hunted and killed, and still struggle in modern society. We can all agree things were different 150 years ago but Maori have had a better run at things compared with nearly all other races. Most Maori get on with their lives like the rest of us and appreciate New Zealand for what we have all made it.
It is the stuck-in-the-past whingers that keep coming back moaning. Maybe when the government finishes paying out the millions of dollars in compensation we can all move on and live as one, but somehow I think for some it is never enough.
P A
Wanganui
NO LAND WARS
Re Rob Rattenbury letter (July 15) —there were no "land wars" between Maori and the British. There were times when the British troops were brought in to bring law and order to the rebelling tribes.
Over 500 tangata Maori chiefs had signed the Treaty of Waitangi to bring law and order to all the people living in New Zealand. It must be remembered that between 30,000 and 50,000 Maori had been slaughtered after Hongi Hika had returned from England in 1820 with over 800 illegal muskets. [This] caused 13 Ngapuhi chiefs to write to the King in 1831 asking him to be their guardian and protector, not only from the French but also from themselves as they were quickly becoming extinct by their own hand.
While most tribes adapted to English law and order, a few took longer to accept what over 500 chiefs had agreed to when they signed the Treaty and continued to cause trouble. Taranaki was a shining example when they tried to reclaim land they had lost in battle to Waikato. Land was confiscated as punishment for those breaking the law.
Sir Apirana Ngata in his book The Treaty of Waitangi: An explanation —some have said that these confiscations were wrong and they contravened the articles of the Treaty of Waitangi, but the chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England the sovereignty and the 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. This in itself is Maori custom; revenge and plunder to avenge a wrong It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty.
I B
Wanganui
MAORI MEMBERS
There has been a disturbing trend around the country of l ocal councils appointing unelected part-Maori representatives, granting them full voting rights.
This has been done without consulting the electorate and one must question the legality of such actions.
The incumbent board members were elected to a council that had a set structure and set of rules, therefore any changes to that basic format should require prior consent from those whom the council claims to represent.
Arbitrarily changing the rules after an election is a violation of voters’ trust, so any proposal for major change should be a part of an aspiring candidate’s electoral campaign prior to the election.
Only then will the people have a true voice and no longer be deceived by those who may have a hidden agenda that overrides democracy.
There is no problem in consulting with local Maori to hear their viewpoint on certain matters, but council members must carefully differentiate between what is good for the community and token appeasement of taniwha at the bottom of the garden.
Politics and religion do not sit well together in local government.
People who consider that part-Maori need special help are being unwittingly condescending and invalidative of those of Maori descent who are quite capable of being elected to council on their own merit.
Part-Maori are in no way inferior to other citizens, so at least give them a chance to stand on their own two feet without brainwashing an entire mixed-race generation into believing that a smattering of ancestral genes makes them “special”.
Any candidates with racially based policies must make their intentions very clear before voting time.
Electors who still value democracy will then know exactly where they stand.
MITCH MORGAN
Kaipara
Wanganui Chronicle 18/7/16
TIME TO BE AS ONE
In reply to Rob Rattenbury (July 15) you suspect there is a sense of shame felt by Pakeha about events that happened 150 years ago. I for one feel no shame, nor I would think do most Kiwis. What happened in New Zealand hundreds of years ago would have happened no matter who landed here.
You compare the Australian Aborigines or the American Indian, they were hunted and killed, and still struggle in modern society. We can all agree things were different 150 years ago but Maori have had a better run at things compared with nearly all other races. Most Maori get on with their lives like the rest of us and appreciate New Zealand for what we have all made it.
It is the stuck-in-the-past whingers that keep coming back moaning. Maybe when the government finishes paying out the millions of dollars in compensation we can all move on and live as one, but somehow I think for some it is never enough.
P A
Wanganui
NO LAND WARS
Re Rob Rattenbury letter (July 15) —there were no "land wars" between Maori and the British. There were times when the British troops were brought in to bring law and order to the rebelling tribes.
Over 500 tangata Maori chiefs had signed the Treaty of Waitangi to bring law and order to all the people living in New Zealand. It must be remembered that between 30,000 and 50,000 Maori had been slaughtered after Hongi Hika had returned from England in 1820 with over 800 illegal muskets. [This] caused 13 Ngapuhi chiefs to write to the King in 1831 asking him to be their guardian and protector, not only from the French but also from themselves as they were quickly becoming extinct by their own hand.
While most tribes adapted to English law and order, a few took longer to accept what over 500 chiefs had agreed to when they signed the Treaty and continued to cause trouble. Taranaki was a shining example when they tried to reclaim land they had lost in battle to Waikato. Land was confiscated as punishment for those breaking the law.
Sir Apirana Ngata in his book The Treaty of Waitangi: An explanation —some have said that these confiscations were wrong and they contravened the articles of the Treaty of Waitangi, but the chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England the sovereignty and the 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. This in itself is Maori custom; revenge and plunder to avenge a wrong It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty.
I B
Wanganui