Post by Kiwi Frontline on May 11, 2016 7:39:06 GMT 12
The New Zealand Herald 11/5/16
NEW PLYMOUTH’S OBJECTION
In the deafening silence from those paid to protect and promote New Plymouth, someone should offer a few words of defence. The district has reluctantly become the latest centre of debate about race-based local body representation.
A poll revealed the same scepticism exists in New Plymouth as just about everywhere else, to the notion that an exclusive Maori ward and seat on the district council would solve the problems that challenge countless government departments and budgets. If it would, those same wary voters would tick that preferential option in a heartbeat.
Instead, the electorate has decided universal and equal suffrage is too valuable to become the plaything of those seeking temporary, feel-good solutions that have not worked anywhere else.
Mayor Andrew Judd has brought an unfair stain on his community and is basking in the praise of a slice of the community focussed on the last century and not the next.
C L
New Plymouth
ACCEPTABLE COMMENT
Mike Hosking is accused of a “racist” editorial outburst on Mayor Andrew Judd’s interview. Hosking’s comments were acceptable to middle New Zealand as all polling results on ‘race-based seats’ within local government have been resoundingly negative.
Section 14 of the Bill of Rights Act states that “everyone has the right to freedom of expression, freedom to seek and receive and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form”.
The only good part of Seven Sharp is Mike Hosking’s pertinent and succinct comments when he signs off.
M J A
Pyes Pa.
NZ Herald 11/5/16 (Short & Sweet section)
On Hosking Mike Hosking is accused of racism for suggesting it is racist to put people into unelected positions on councils based on their race. Sometimes I feel like I'm living in a Monty Python skit.
D A
Mt Albert
Wanganui Chronicle 11/5/16
`MUST READ'
Recently, I asked the Davis Library staff if a copy of a particular book was held by the library. The answer was no, but a copy would be purchased and added to the library stock.
Two weeks ago I was advised that the book was waiting for me to uplift. What a sound investment. This book, entitled One Treaty, One Nation, is written by eight well-qualified New Zealanders who are concerned at the way democracy and equality of citizenship is being undermined in our country.
It is a "must-read" for every-one who has had a gutsful of the special treatment and financial benefits afforded those people who declare themselves to be "Maori". Not only does the book disprove the myths and erroneous beliefs of this minority group, it also exposes the lies that some self-serving activists and separatists are inventing in order to gain further concessions and handouts at the expense of all other citizens.
The fact that the book is not widely available is testimony to its veracity and the unwillingness of some elements within society to widen the ever-increasing chasm between "Maori" and all other New Zealanders. This is despite the efforts of the racially biased Waitangi Tribunal and successive lily-livered governments who continue to drive the wedge deeper.
I recommend this publication to all those who seek the real truth about our history, especially the last 200-odd years, as opposed to the nonsense expounded by those who continue to pursue their fabrications for personal pecuniary advantage. A copy may be obtained via www.trosspublishing.co.nz ($40), or wait in the queue for the one held by the library.
D P
Eastown
The Southland Times 11/5/16
FAILING OUR CHILDREN
In the aftermath of Moko Rangitoheriri’s horrendous death, the major players in his life have, yet again, failed. Crown Law dropped a murder charge in favour for a guilty plea of manslaughter.
The wider iwi have also failed to keep him safe or condemn his abuse. It is my view that, yet again, iwi leadership have remained silent while everyone else looks for the usual reasons of hopeless whanau, dead brain Child Youth and Family management and the long-held cry of colonisation.
A way to engage iwi leadership would be to have a default clause in any Treaty of Waitangi settlement that required an iwi to return $1 million, for any child living in their iwi region, that dies from abuse by one of their iwi. Any tribe that refuses to pay back would not be able to lodge any further claims. New Zealand pays billions [of dollars] to iwi who favour ongoing growth in corporate wealth.
In relation to CYF, we have two issues. The female relative, who pleaded guilty to manslaughter, advised she rang CYF 11 days before Moko’s death. It is alleged that CYF did nothing. It will have lodged the call into its computer system, which then prioritises the urgency of its subsequent investigation response, into one of four categories. The top category is 24 hours; the bottom is 28 days. If they hadn’t visited the child within 10 days, they must have put the call in the third-lowest of the four categories. I would like to see what information the CYF call centre staff were able to extract from the caller and what category it was placed in.
When CYF management are asked to comment, they make a ‘‘no comment because this case will go to the coroner’’. That will take months, if years, by which time a couple more Maori kids will be abused to death.
We really don’t need another coroner’s report that indicates CYF communication, Crown Law and whanau/hapu failure. Nor do we need to have a major costly shake up of CYF that goes beyond the next two general elections. All CYF media releases are ‘‘managed’’ by spin doctors out of their national office. If we were to do a poll of CYF confidence, the results would be ugly. I know it does excellent work but occasionally gets things wrong, with fatal consequences, lest we forget James Whakaruru.
The Sensible Sentencing Trust have it right. Anyone who kills a child, an elderly person or someone with a mental incapacity, should do 25 years, thus making a safeguard for our most vulnerable.
N C
Otatara
Taranaki Daily News 11/5/16
UNFAIRLY BRANDED
In parroting the Judd-as-visionary line, your correspondents Hudson and Russell (TDN, letters, May 9) mistake the underlying reason why his proposal received an overwhelming 'No'. Regardless of where one stands on the Maori ward issue, the whole business was precipitated by Judd's inappropriate use of a casting vote on 23 September 2014.
As it is inconceivable that one immersed in local-body politics is unaware that the status quo is the appropriate option in a tied vote, one can only surmise that Mr Judd determined to push his own barrow because it suited him to do so. This is not the cast of mind one seeks in a public representative, but its clear presence is demonstrated in his unwillingness to abide by his electorate's wishes.
This includes his call for revised legislation, his stating an intention to refer the citizens of New Plymouth to the United Nations and, most ill-mannered of all, his subjecting a royal visitor and the representative of a family traditionally above politics of any sort to a harangue on the importance of indigenous culture and the need for local councils to work with iwi. Visionary? Obsessive is surely a more appropriate term.
Mr Judd's pursuit of demagoguery indicates that he never grasped the notion that the citizens of New Plymouth will hold their elected representatives to account. Also contrary to Hudson and Russell's viewpoint is Howie Tamati's presence on the council. It alone is clear proof that outstanding community figures of any descent can win council seats, and long may recognition based on ability rather than ethnicity continue to prosper.
Mr Judd's petulance and media antics surrounding the announcement of his decision not to put his principles, intentions and values up for public endorsement or public rejection leave a taste in the mouth as their totality has left an electorate unfairly tagged as racist. If this is the extent of a mayor's concern for his community then I, too, would cross the street to avoid acknowledging him.
M B
Oakura
NEW PLYMOUTH’S OBJECTION
In the deafening silence from those paid to protect and promote New Plymouth, someone should offer a few words of defence. The district has reluctantly become the latest centre of debate about race-based local body representation.
A poll revealed the same scepticism exists in New Plymouth as just about everywhere else, to the notion that an exclusive Maori ward and seat on the district council would solve the problems that challenge countless government departments and budgets. If it would, those same wary voters would tick that preferential option in a heartbeat.
Instead, the electorate has decided universal and equal suffrage is too valuable to become the plaything of those seeking temporary, feel-good solutions that have not worked anywhere else.
Mayor Andrew Judd has brought an unfair stain on his community and is basking in the praise of a slice of the community focussed on the last century and not the next.
C L
New Plymouth
ACCEPTABLE COMMENT
Mike Hosking is accused of a “racist” editorial outburst on Mayor Andrew Judd’s interview. Hosking’s comments were acceptable to middle New Zealand as all polling results on ‘race-based seats’ within local government have been resoundingly negative.
Section 14 of the Bill of Rights Act states that “everyone has the right to freedom of expression, freedom to seek and receive and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form”.
The only good part of Seven Sharp is Mike Hosking’s pertinent and succinct comments when he signs off.
M J A
Pyes Pa.
NZ Herald 11/5/16 (Short & Sweet section)
On Hosking Mike Hosking is accused of racism for suggesting it is racist to put people into unelected positions on councils based on their race. Sometimes I feel like I'm living in a Monty Python skit.
D A
Mt Albert
Wanganui Chronicle 11/5/16
`MUST READ'
Recently, I asked the Davis Library staff if a copy of a particular book was held by the library. The answer was no, but a copy would be purchased and added to the library stock.
Two weeks ago I was advised that the book was waiting for me to uplift. What a sound investment. This book, entitled One Treaty, One Nation, is written by eight well-qualified New Zealanders who are concerned at the way democracy and equality of citizenship is being undermined in our country.
It is a "must-read" for every-one who has had a gutsful of the special treatment and financial benefits afforded those people who declare themselves to be "Maori". Not only does the book disprove the myths and erroneous beliefs of this minority group, it also exposes the lies that some self-serving activists and separatists are inventing in order to gain further concessions and handouts at the expense of all other citizens.
The fact that the book is not widely available is testimony to its veracity and the unwillingness of some elements within society to widen the ever-increasing chasm between "Maori" and all other New Zealanders. This is despite the efforts of the racially biased Waitangi Tribunal and successive lily-livered governments who continue to drive the wedge deeper.
I recommend this publication to all those who seek the real truth about our history, especially the last 200-odd years, as opposed to the nonsense expounded by those who continue to pursue their fabrications for personal pecuniary advantage. A copy may be obtained via www.trosspublishing.co.nz ($40), or wait in the queue for the one held by the library.
D P
Eastown
The Southland Times 11/5/16
FAILING OUR CHILDREN
In the aftermath of Moko Rangitoheriri’s horrendous death, the major players in his life have, yet again, failed. Crown Law dropped a murder charge in favour for a guilty plea of manslaughter.
The wider iwi have also failed to keep him safe or condemn his abuse. It is my view that, yet again, iwi leadership have remained silent while everyone else looks for the usual reasons of hopeless whanau, dead brain Child Youth and Family management and the long-held cry of colonisation.
A way to engage iwi leadership would be to have a default clause in any Treaty of Waitangi settlement that required an iwi to return $1 million, for any child living in their iwi region, that dies from abuse by one of their iwi. Any tribe that refuses to pay back would not be able to lodge any further claims. New Zealand pays billions [of dollars] to iwi who favour ongoing growth in corporate wealth.
In relation to CYF, we have two issues. The female relative, who pleaded guilty to manslaughter, advised she rang CYF 11 days before Moko’s death. It is alleged that CYF did nothing. It will have lodged the call into its computer system, which then prioritises the urgency of its subsequent investigation response, into one of four categories. The top category is 24 hours; the bottom is 28 days. If they hadn’t visited the child within 10 days, they must have put the call in the third-lowest of the four categories. I would like to see what information the CYF call centre staff were able to extract from the caller and what category it was placed in.
When CYF management are asked to comment, they make a ‘‘no comment because this case will go to the coroner’’. That will take months, if years, by which time a couple more Maori kids will be abused to death.
We really don’t need another coroner’s report that indicates CYF communication, Crown Law and whanau/hapu failure. Nor do we need to have a major costly shake up of CYF that goes beyond the next two general elections. All CYF media releases are ‘‘managed’’ by spin doctors out of their national office. If we were to do a poll of CYF confidence, the results would be ugly. I know it does excellent work but occasionally gets things wrong, with fatal consequences, lest we forget James Whakaruru.
The Sensible Sentencing Trust have it right. Anyone who kills a child, an elderly person or someone with a mental incapacity, should do 25 years, thus making a safeguard for our most vulnerable.
N C
Otatara
Taranaki Daily News 11/5/16
UNFAIRLY BRANDED
In parroting the Judd-as-visionary line, your correspondents Hudson and Russell (TDN, letters, May 9) mistake the underlying reason why his proposal received an overwhelming 'No'. Regardless of where one stands on the Maori ward issue, the whole business was precipitated by Judd's inappropriate use of a casting vote on 23 September 2014.
As it is inconceivable that one immersed in local-body politics is unaware that the status quo is the appropriate option in a tied vote, one can only surmise that Mr Judd determined to push his own barrow because it suited him to do so. This is not the cast of mind one seeks in a public representative, but its clear presence is demonstrated in his unwillingness to abide by his electorate's wishes.
This includes his call for revised legislation, his stating an intention to refer the citizens of New Plymouth to the United Nations and, most ill-mannered of all, his subjecting a royal visitor and the representative of a family traditionally above politics of any sort to a harangue on the importance of indigenous culture and the need for local councils to work with iwi. Visionary? Obsessive is surely a more appropriate term.
Mr Judd's pursuit of demagoguery indicates that he never grasped the notion that the citizens of New Plymouth will hold their elected representatives to account. Also contrary to Hudson and Russell's viewpoint is Howie Tamati's presence on the council. It alone is clear proof that outstanding community figures of any descent can win council seats, and long may recognition based on ability rather than ethnicity continue to prosper.
Mr Judd's petulance and media antics surrounding the announcement of his decision not to put his principles, intentions and values up for public endorsement or public rejection leave a taste in the mouth as their totality has left an electorate unfairly tagged as racist. If this is the extent of a mayor's concern for his community then I, too, would cross the street to avoid acknowledging him.
M B
Oakura