Post by Kiwi Frontline on May 10, 2016 10:03:50 GMT 12
Wairarapa Times-Age 10/5/16
WRONG DECISION
The decision by Masterton District Council to allow ‘iwi representatives to join council committee meetings with speaking and voting rights’ is wrong in so many respects. It is undemocratic, divisive and patronising. It promotes separatism and tribalism, neither of which benefits those Maori at the ‘bottom of the heap’ nor those who do not support Maori special privileges. The only people who benefit are activists and tribal leaders.
Councillor Chris Peterson’s statements are just latter-day PC tripe with no basis in fact or history. Hooker’s comments about the about ‘ tangata whenua’ are equally fatuous. Gary Caffell’s remarks about the imminence of a new council are relevant. Even if the proposal had any validity, why the rush? Why not let the voters have their say?
D F
Masterton
DIVIDED NATION
I have been reading of the appointment to the Masterton District Council of unelected iwi representatives.
I do not understand why council services require separate racial consideration. Do footpaths, parking and dog control need a Maori viewpoint? Are libraries, parks, street lighting and rubbish collections any different for Maori?
As Maori are part of the general population and every council serves that general population then why the need for a Maori ward?
We are becoming such a divided country and race-based legislation should have no part in local or central government.
Surely this is an insult to Maori who are more than capable of standing on their own two feet.
No council should have unelected representatives with voting rights as this is a blatant violation of democracy.
R B
Tauranga
MAORI TERM A MYTH
I read that the Masterton District Council will be having two iwi representatives joining council meetings as well as speaking and voting rights.
Councillor Doug Bracewell said there was no voice for Asians. Councillor Johnathan Hooker stated that Asians are not tangata whenua. Even mayor Lyn Patterson stated on radio that Maori are tangata whenua. Those people on council who support the myth that Maori are tangata whenua do not know anything about our history. They are deceiving the public.
The true meaning of the words is “the ancient ones or the people before us” until Maori changed it to mean themselves.
Even the late professor Ranginui Walker, past head of Maori studies, had stated “the traditions are quite clear on one point whenever crew disembarked there were already tangata whenua (prior inhabitants), the canoe ancestors of the 14th century merged with these tangata whenua tribes”, in the treaty Maori are called tangata Maori.
Lyn Patterson said the council plan is to promote partnership with Maori as required by the treaty, what a load of rubbish. It doesn’t say anything about partnership in the treaty, she doesn’t know what she is talking about.
It seems that around the country the people who are promoting separatism/ apartheid are our white leaders who are in power, not the Maori people. I hope the people of Masterton will vote for a clean out of some of their councillors and mayor. Don’t let them deceive you. The treaty gave Maori the same rights as everyone else.
I B
Wanganui
Taranaki Daily News 10/5/16
HAS JUDD NOW RECOVERED?
The other night like many thousands of people throughout the country, I watched the Seven Sharp programme in utter disbelief I saw New Plymouth District Councils mayor Andrew Judd state that he is a recovering racist, I just could not believe what I was hearing. Question - Has he now recovered?
In any multicultural society there is absolutely no room for racism whatsoever. When the elections of Oct 2013 took place, of which I too was a candidate, Andrew Judd got elected to be the mayor of New Plymouth District Council of which I congratulated him on at the time. (In my opinion he got elected based on the district being sick and tired of lack lustre performances from the past). This position comes with a high degree of leadership, accountability and responsibility to all members of the district.
My question is why did he take the role on in the first place? I think he has let down the community of which he has been elected to serve. After all this is a democracy and we don't always get what we want and the people of New Plymouth district have spoken regarding the Maori seat on council.
I also for the record do not condone in anyway the actions that effected his family. Sadly, this has done nothing for the image of New Plymouth district and its people. It's about time the New Plymouth district was in the news for far better things, here's hoping!
C M
Former mayoral candidate
The Southland Times 10/5/16
EQUALITY COUNTS
Andrew Judd, mayor of New Plymouth claims on TV1 (May 5, 2016) to be a ‘‘recovering racist’’.
The public outburst is the result of a backlash to his initiated referenda to have Maori seats on council, in which he was roundly defeated.
Whilst he is entitled to his private opinion he was elected to promote democracy, not separatism.
There is nothing in the Local Government Act that denies Maori from standing and being elected to council.
How does Judd explain Winston Peters’ ongoing electoral success?
Judd might consider reading both sides of the story.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the now authenticated Littlewood draft, which undeniably is the English draft of February 4, 1840, would be a good place to start.
Nelson Mandela spent his life promoting ‘‘equality’’ for his people not ‘‘speciality and separatism’’ as tribal interests have been promoting since 1975 when New Zealand’s Treaty history was rewritten.
MJ A
Tauranga
Bay of Plenty Times 10/5/16
INAPPROPRIATE
Re Peter Dey’s letter (April 23). Using Te-Moana-a-Kiwa, the original Maori name for the Bay of Plenty, for a teaching institution concerned with technological scientific and mechanical matters is inappropriate.
Maori did not have any concept of a written language until the arrival of Europeans.
Living in the present should not mean that the 3 per cent speakers of the 14 per cent Maori population should have disproportionate usage of language over English.
If culture can be expressed in the way we lead our daily lives then we are not a bi-cultural or multi-cultural society, but a mono-cultural one with minor ethnic variations. (Abridged)
B J
Omokoroa
The Dominion Post 10/5/16
IWI AND WATER
The free bottling and sale of New Zealand water by commercial organisations has prompted much public condemnation, resulting in a statement from the prime minister that no-one owns the water. Should we take this as an assurance, or a warning?
In 2004, Helen Clark's Labour government made an unambiguous statement that the foreshore and seabed belonged to everyone, confirming this by passing the Foreshore and Seabed Act. Seven years later, the National government repealed this act, and replaced it with the Marine and Coastal Area Act, which denied public ownership, and instead declared that no-one owned the foreshore and seabed. However, the same act created a different form of permanent property rights called Customary Marine Title. This was, and still is, available to iwi —and only iwi—who can prove historical and continuing usage of parts of the foreshore and seabed.
Now, proposed amendments to the Resource Management Act include provisions which, if passed, would give to iwi wide ranging powers over the management of New Zealand's water. Although the word "ownership" is not mentioned, the effect of the proposed provisions would be the same. Is this what the prime minister meant by no-one owning the water?
B C
Wadestown
Northland Age 10/5/16
WE DON'T
Nick Smith asked on Radio New Zealand, "How do we ensure that iwi are involved in the decision-making process around freshwater?" The only legitimate answer is, "We don't".
There is nothing in the Treaty of Waitangi or anywhere else which gives Maori tribes any right to be involved. To give tribes any involvement in the decision-making process which is not granted to others is strident racism.
GEOFF PARKER
Kamo
WRONG DECISION
The decision by Masterton District Council to allow ‘iwi representatives to join council committee meetings with speaking and voting rights’ is wrong in so many respects. It is undemocratic, divisive and patronising. It promotes separatism and tribalism, neither of which benefits those Maori at the ‘bottom of the heap’ nor those who do not support Maori special privileges. The only people who benefit are activists and tribal leaders.
Councillor Chris Peterson’s statements are just latter-day PC tripe with no basis in fact or history. Hooker’s comments about the about ‘ tangata whenua’ are equally fatuous. Gary Caffell’s remarks about the imminence of a new council are relevant. Even if the proposal had any validity, why the rush? Why not let the voters have their say?
D F
Masterton
DIVIDED NATION
I have been reading of the appointment to the Masterton District Council of unelected iwi representatives.
I do not understand why council services require separate racial consideration. Do footpaths, parking and dog control need a Maori viewpoint? Are libraries, parks, street lighting and rubbish collections any different for Maori?
As Maori are part of the general population and every council serves that general population then why the need for a Maori ward?
We are becoming such a divided country and race-based legislation should have no part in local or central government.
Surely this is an insult to Maori who are more than capable of standing on their own two feet.
No council should have unelected representatives with voting rights as this is a blatant violation of democracy.
R B
Tauranga
MAORI TERM A MYTH
I read that the Masterton District Council will be having two iwi representatives joining council meetings as well as speaking and voting rights.
Councillor Doug Bracewell said there was no voice for Asians. Councillor Johnathan Hooker stated that Asians are not tangata whenua. Even mayor Lyn Patterson stated on radio that Maori are tangata whenua. Those people on council who support the myth that Maori are tangata whenua do not know anything about our history. They are deceiving the public.
The true meaning of the words is “the ancient ones or the people before us” until Maori changed it to mean themselves.
Even the late professor Ranginui Walker, past head of Maori studies, had stated “the traditions are quite clear on one point whenever crew disembarked there were already tangata whenua (prior inhabitants), the canoe ancestors of the 14th century merged with these tangata whenua tribes”, in the treaty Maori are called tangata Maori.
Lyn Patterson said the council plan is to promote partnership with Maori as required by the treaty, what a load of rubbish. It doesn’t say anything about partnership in the treaty, she doesn’t know what she is talking about.
It seems that around the country the people who are promoting separatism/ apartheid are our white leaders who are in power, not the Maori people. I hope the people of Masterton will vote for a clean out of some of their councillors and mayor. Don’t let them deceive you. The treaty gave Maori the same rights as everyone else.
I B
Wanganui
Taranaki Daily News 10/5/16
HAS JUDD NOW RECOVERED?
The other night like many thousands of people throughout the country, I watched the Seven Sharp programme in utter disbelief I saw New Plymouth District Councils mayor Andrew Judd state that he is a recovering racist, I just could not believe what I was hearing. Question - Has he now recovered?
In any multicultural society there is absolutely no room for racism whatsoever. When the elections of Oct 2013 took place, of which I too was a candidate, Andrew Judd got elected to be the mayor of New Plymouth District Council of which I congratulated him on at the time. (In my opinion he got elected based on the district being sick and tired of lack lustre performances from the past). This position comes with a high degree of leadership, accountability and responsibility to all members of the district.
My question is why did he take the role on in the first place? I think he has let down the community of which he has been elected to serve. After all this is a democracy and we don't always get what we want and the people of New Plymouth district have spoken regarding the Maori seat on council.
I also for the record do not condone in anyway the actions that effected his family. Sadly, this has done nothing for the image of New Plymouth district and its people. It's about time the New Plymouth district was in the news for far better things, here's hoping!
C M
Former mayoral candidate
The Southland Times 10/5/16
EQUALITY COUNTS
Andrew Judd, mayor of New Plymouth claims on TV1 (May 5, 2016) to be a ‘‘recovering racist’’.
The public outburst is the result of a backlash to his initiated referenda to have Maori seats on council, in which he was roundly defeated.
Whilst he is entitled to his private opinion he was elected to promote democracy, not separatism.
There is nothing in the Local Government Act that denies Maori from standing and being elected to council.
How does Judd explain Winston Peters’ ongoing electoral success?
Judd might consider reading both sides of the story.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the now authenticated Littlewood draft, which undeniably is the English draft of February 4, 1840, would be a good place to start.
Nelson Mandela spent his life promoting ‘‘equality’’ for his people not ‘‘speciality and separatism’’ as tribal interests have been promoting since 1975 when New Zealand’s Treaty history was rewritten.
MJ A
Tauranga
Bay of Plenty Times 10/5/16
INAPPROPRIATE
Re Peter Dey’s letter (April 23). Using Te-Moana-a-Kiwa, the original Maori name for the Bay of Plenty, for a teaching institution concerned with technological scientific and mechanical matters is inappropriate.
Maori did not have any concept of a written language until the arrival of Europeans.
Living in the present should not mean that the 3 per cent speakers of the 14 per cent Maori population should have disproportionate usage of language over English.
If culture can be expressed in the way we lead our daily lives then we are not a bi-cultural or multi-cultural society, but a mono-cultural one with minor ethnic variations. (Abridged)
B J
Omokoroa
The Dominion Post 10/5/16
IWI AND WATER
The free bottling and sale of New Zealand water by commercial organisations has prompted much public condemnation, resulting in a statement from the prime minister that no-one owns the water. Should we take this as an assurance, or a warning?
In 2004, Helen Clark's Labour government made an unambiguous statement that the foreshore and seabed belonged to everyone, confirming this by passing the Foreshore and Seabed Act. Seven years later, the National government repealed this act, and replaced it with the Marine and Coastal Area Act, which denied public ownership, and instead declared that no-one owned the foreshore and seabed. However, the same act created a different form of permanent property rights called Customary Marine Title. This was, and still is, available to iwi —and only iwi—who can prove historical and continuing usage of parts of the foreshore and seabed.
Now, proposed amendments to the Resource Management Act include provisions which, if passed, would give to iwi wide ranging powers over the management of New Zealand's water. Although the word "ownership" is not mentioned, the effect of the proposed provisions would be the same. Is this what the prime minister meant by no-one owning the water?
B C
Wadestown
Northland Age 10/5/16
WE DON'T
Nick Smith asked on Radio New Zealand, "How do we ensure that iwi are involved in the decision-making process around freshwater?" The only legitimate answer is, "We don't".
There is nothing in the Treaty of Waitangi or anywhere else which gives Maori tribes any right to be involved. To give tribes any involvement in the decision-making process which is not granted to others is strident racism.
GEOFF PARKER
Kamo