Post by Kiwi Frontline on May 13, 2016 8:09:18 GMT 12
Northern Advocate 13/5/16
HOSKING CORRECT
Mike Hosking voiced a viewpoint that most Kiwis would agree with: Maori are eligible to be elected to a seat on any council on merit.
Miriama Kamo accuses him of being racist and “out of touch with Middle New Zealand” yet it is she who appears to be living in an imaginary society.
A binding referendum held in New Plymouth rejected a proposed Maori ward with a resounding 83 per cent saying “No”.
Those 83 per cent are your middle New Zealanders and represent the views of the majority of middle New Zealanders.
Remember when we used to have a democracy?
Political correctness once again has revealed its true purpose — the stifling of freedom of speech.
Nothing Mike Hosking said was derogatory of Maori and could only be construed as such by those who are themselves racially motivated.
Councils are voted in to represent their constituents, therefore any proposed change to council structure must be put to the people first.
Let all councils hold a referendum on the issue of Maori wards and the views of “middle New Zealanders” will soon become apparent.
M M
Kaipara
Wairarapa Times -Age 13/5/16
OPINION OFFENDS
Your editorial (May 9) on iwi representation yet again makes the mistake of categorising people collectively as Pakeha' or 'Maori' as if this were the 19th century rather than 2016. Your implication that people of Maori descent cannot achieve in Western society without special assistance is both patronising and offensive. I do not think for one minute that you believe people of Maori descent are somehow less able, but that is certainly one of the implications of what you write. It also gives people an excuse to blame others (Pakeha'?) for their problems.
You list positions that apparently require people of Maori descent to fill them and write that patched gang members will become role models. Leaving aside the point that we actually need people of competence to fill these positions regardless of their background, perhaps you should make that point to the Governor-General or the high number of MPs of Maori descent. Once you embark on 'affirmative action', you devalue the achievement of those who make it through their own ability and efforts.
In this particular case, giving special privileges to iwi representatives effectively gives two votes to those who identify through the tribal system (which, of course, is very far from being all those of Maori descent). I'm sure a suggestion that those Maori should then be disbarred from direct voting for council would not go down well. The proposal that gives the representation to iwi leaders promotes their power, status and financial reward and thus reinforces tribalism, but probably brings little benefit to other Maori. Sadly it is tribalism which is often seen as a significant hindrance to the success of so-called indigenous people. By giving your support, how-ever lukewarm, to these pro-posals, you are acting as a fellow traveller with activists and radicals.
The lessons of the past are quite clear — appeasement of these people does not work. They only come back with more and more outrageous demands. For decades now, there has been an unrelenting Maori agenda and propaganda in schools, universities, colleges of education (sic) and the public service including the health sector, (which is perhaps where the mayor picked up her drippy ideas), but things don't appear to have changed for the better.
High time for a different approach, perhaps.
D F
Masterton
MORE DISCLOSURE
As one who lives in a multicultural family, I don't wish to get involved in a fight about race. But I firmly believe that elected representatives serve our community well. Many boards, community groups, etc, co-opt different groups when expertise is lacking. This can enhance the democratic process. If the council uses such expertise when needed no problem.
I do take issue at the cost. Question how much at $200 a meeting x two is it costing us. Many of us volunteer our time to assist our community for no recompense, and this is as it should be. I watch in horror at the amount paid to different co-ordinators, community leaders, etc, when pensioners and low income earners are struggling on less than these two will be paid for two meetings. All over our country we see inequality, where huge amounts of money are handed out to those who are supposed to make decisions to assist those in need. If you hand over say $5 to a service provider you expect to receive $5 worth of goods in return. When public money is spent, we surely can expect to receive value for money.
Perhaps as Gary Caffell says, a little more consultation, and full disclosure of costs, and perceived benefits could be in order. After all, as ratepayers and taxpayers it is our money being spent.
R D
Masterton
Taranaki Daily News 13/5/16
FALSE PLATITUDES
I believe as a community is it unfair for our district to be labelled racist as we have in national media over the week.
Mayor Judd is making a stand that he believes in his heart 100 per cent is the right one, and this reminds me of the saying ‘‘a man who doesn’t stand for something will fall for anything’’.
But let’s not lose focus of what an amazing community we are, shown by the amount of citizen awards we received this year as noted by the deputy Mayor.
On top of this let’s not forget the great work this council has done this term, including blueprint and district plan work, the work of resetting the PIF and adjusting the PIF release to an achievable level without hiking rates.
Continued growth within the district and more strategic focus has also been a focus this term.
Going forward we need a mayor who is stable and consistent who is level headed someone who understands the system and can operate and function within it but still be effective. Past.
Let’s not get caught up in what the national media think or say but when voting comes around this year lets hope a mayoral candidate comes forward who has the knowledge and ability and leadership values this community deserves to lead it into the next crucial three years. Cr Shaun Biesiek
Bell Block The outpouring of sympathy for Andrew Judd from the PC brigade will surely result in the Pope canonising him.
Judd served several terms as a councillor, watched over massive rates increases, the disembowelling of our Perpetual Investment Fund, doubling in size of council staff, the continued misinformation about the costs of Len Lye, just to name a few things.
If we look at the Maori ward issue why, during two or three terms, ‘‘seeing the pain in their eyes’’, was he not honest enough to raise the issue.
Had he not faced concerns from local iwi and hapu members who would have espoused this cause.
His epiphany, oddly, occurred only after he got the job, or was he a typical ‘politician’ with his own agenda which he did not have the honesty to tell the electorate?
What he wanted was positive discrimination for Maori which surely is a form of racism, just as the Labour Party in the UK’s policy of women only candidates was a form of sexism. It is tokenism of the worst kind.
For Howie Tamati to describe the referendum, as he did on the news last week as, ‘‘the tyranny of the majority’’, is shameful; someone should remind him what democracy means; those who really believe in it will fight for change.
There is a black President in the USA, whether you like his policies or not, he fought for that right.
Put up a ‘good’ candidate who will work for the whole community as well as ensuring indigenous interests are championed.
P B
Bell Block
HOSKING CORRECT
Mike Hosking voiced a viewpoint that most Kiwis would agree with: Maori are eligible to be elected to a seat on any council on merit.
Miriama Kamo accuses him of being racist and “out of touch with Middle New Zealand” yet it is she who appears to be living in an imaginary society.
A binding referendum held in New Plymouth rejected a proposed Maori ward with a resounding 83 per cent saying “No”.
Those 83 per cent are your middle New Zealanders and represent the views of the majority of middle New Zealanders.
Remember when we used to have a democracy?
Political correctness once again has revealed its true purpose — the stifling of freedom of speech.
Nothing Mike Hosking said was derogatory of Maori and could only be construed as such by those who are themselves racially motivated.
Councils are voted in to represent their constituents, therefore any proposed change to council structure must be put to the people first.
Let all councils hold a referendum on the issue of Maori wards and the views of “middle New Zealanders” will soon become apparent.
M M
Kaipara
Wairarapa Times -Age 13/5/16
OPINION OFFENDS
Your editorial (May 9) on iwi representation yet again makes the mistake of categorising people collectively as Pakeha' or 'Maori' as if this were the 19th century rather than 2016. Your implication that people of Maori descent cannot achieve in Western society without special assistance is both patronising and offensive. I do not think for one minute that you believe people of Maori descent are somehow less able, but that is certainly one of the implications of what you write. It also gives people an excuse to blame others (Pakeha'?) for their problems.
You list positions that apparently require people of Maori descent to fill them and write that patched gang members will become role models. Leaving aside the point that we actually need people of competence to fill these positions regardless of their background, perhaps you should make that point to the Governor-General or the high number of MPs of Maori descent. Once you embark on 'affirmative action', you devalue the achievement of those who make it through their own ability and efforts.
In this particular case, giving special privileges to iwi representatives effectively gives two votes to those who identify through the tribal system (which, of course, is very far from being all those of Maori descent). I'm sure a suggestion that those Maori should then be disbarred from direct voting for council would not go down well. The proposal that gives the representation to iwi leaders promotes their power, status and financial reward and thus reinforces tribalism, but probably brings little benefit to other Maori. Sadly it is tribalism which is often seen as a significant hindrance to the success of so-called indigenous people. By giving your support, how-ever lukewarm, to these pro-posals, you are acting as a fellow traveller with activists and radicals.
The lessons of the past are quite clear — appeasement of these people does not work. They only come back with more and more outrageous demands. For decades now, there has been an unrelenting Maori agenda and propaganda in schools, universities, colleges of education (sic) and the public service including the health sector, (which is perhaps where the mayor picked up her drippy ideas), but things don't appear to have changed for the better.
High time for a different approach, perhaps.
D F
Masterton
MORE DISCLOSURE
As one who lives in a multicultural family, I don't wish to get involved in a fight about race. But I firmly believe that elected representatives serve our community well. Many boards, community groups, etc, co-opt different groups when expertise is lacking. This can enhance the democratic process. If the council uses such expertise when needed no problem.
I do take issue at the cost. Question how much at $200 a meeting x two is it costing us. Many of us volunteer our time to assist our community for no recompense, and this is as it should be. I watch in horror at the amount paid to different co-ordinators, community leaders, etc, when pensioners and low income earners are struggling on less than these two will be paid for two meetings. All over our country we see inequality, where huge amounts of money are handed out to those who are supposed to make decisions to assist those in need. If you hand over say $5 to a service provider you expect to receive $5 worth of goods in return. When public money is spent, we surely can expect to receive value for money.
Perhaps as Gary Caffell says, a little more consultation, and full disclosure of costs, and perceived benefits could be in order. After all, as ratepayers and taxpayers it is our money being spent.
R D
Masterton
Taranaki Daily News 13/5/16
FALSE PLATITUDES
I believe as a community is it unfair for our district to be labelled racist as we have in national media over the week.
Mayor Judd is making a stand that he believes in his heart 100 per cent is the right one, and this reminds me of the saying ‘‘a man who doesn’t stand for something will fall for anything’’.
But let’s not lose focus of what an amazing community we are, shown by the amount of citizen awards we received this year as noted by the deputy Mayor.
On top of this let’s not forget the great work this council has done this term, including blueprint and district plan work, the work of resetting the PIF and adjusting the PIF release to an achievable level without hiking rates.
Continued growth within the district and more strategic focus has also been a focus this term.
Going forward we need a mayor who is stable and consistent who is level headed someone who understands the system and can operate and function within it but still be effective. Past.
Let’s not get caught up in what the national media think or say but when voting comes around this year lets hope a mayoral candidate comes forward who has the knowledge and ability and leadership values this community deserves to lead it into the next crucial three years. Cr Shaun Biesiek
Bell Block The outpouring of sympathy for Andrew Judd from the PC brigade will surely result in the Pope canonising him.
Judd served several terms as a councillor, watched over massive rates increases, the disembowelling of our Perpetual Investment Fund, doubling in size of council staff, the continued misinformation about the costs of Len Lye, just to name a few things.
If we look at the Maori ward issue why, during two or three terms, ‘‘seeing the pain in their eyes’’, was he not honest enough to raise the issue.
Had he not faced concerns from local iwi and hapu members who would have espoused this cause.
His epiphany, oddly, occurred only after he got the job, or was he a typical ‘politician’ with his own agenda which he did not have the honesty to tell the electorate?
What he wanted was positive discrimination for Maori which surely is a form of racism, just as the Labour Party in the UK’s policy of women only candidates was a form of sexism. It is tokenism of the worst kind.
For Howie Tamati to describe the referendum, as he did on the news last week as, ‘‘the tyranny of the majority’’, is shameful; someone should remind him what democracy means; those who really believe in it will fight for change.
There is a black President in the USA, whether you like his policies or not, he fought for that right.
Put up a ‘good’ candidate who will work for the whole community as well as ensuring indigenous interests are championed.
P B
Bell Block