Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jun 30, 2019 6:08:02 GMT 12
Weekend Sun / Sunlive 28/6/19
STREET NAMES
Tauranga City Council's Policy Committee is proposing changes to the street naming policy (Sunlive, June 22).
This looks like little more than another effort to re-write and edit the history of Tauranga.
Committee chairman, councillor Steve Morris claims “we have nothing to fear”.
In my opinion we have lot to fear. What is being proposed, among other things, is that naming decisions are purely a function of council, and if the council decides, requires no community consultation.
When a te reo name is gifted by mana whenua there will be no consultation or formal decision-making.
It displays this council's usual arrogance, lack of transparency, failure to consult with and act on the community's wishes, mostly at the expense of ratepayers.
It is an affront to democracy.
RICHARD PRINCE, Welcome Bay
SHARING RESOURCES
Most interesting to see another of Peter Dey's interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi (Letters 14 June) being expressed. On the one hand he claims that the Treaty is a "partnership" document which, by implication, means that it promotes an equitable sharing of resources, and on the other hand states that the Treaty very clearly grants Maori racial preferences. Confusing, isn't it?
Makes one wonder whether, despite having a Race Relations Conciliator, we are a racist country after all.
ROMAN TOMSON, Hairini
THE REAL TREATY
What Peter Dey claims, [The Weekend Sun, June 14], is not everybody’s view of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. As usual he quotes Freeman’s flowery rendition of the treaty in English. What the real Treaty and Hobson’s final draft both said is that ‘all the peoples of New Zealand were guaranteed the possession (tino rangatiratanga) of their lands, dwellings and ordinary property (taonga)’. Nowhere are the words “forests, fisheries” or "partnerships" present. The Third Article gives Maori the same rights - no more, no less - than the people of England.
New Zealand is laden with 'fake' history and it is detrimental to our true history that any one culture is trying to suppress the true and brutal history we are descended from.
MAUREEN ANDERSON, Pyes Pa
NOT ANTI-MAORI
Which part of Peter Fellingham's letter did Peter Dey not understand? Which part of Hobson's Pledge does he cite as recording Pakeha culture as superior when all Don Brash has ever called for is equality for all ethnicities in New Zealand of which there are over 200.
It has always been the argument of we so-called racists that that we are one people as Dame Whena Cooper has said (he iwi ko tahi tatau) and it has always been argued in support of this that the Crown should never have been divested of ownership in perpetuity for all people. It has never been an anti-Maori issue.
Now, thanks to successive Governments and National's Chris Finlayson, together with Peter Sharples' misrepresentations to the United Nations, NZ became the only country in the world to abrogate those natural rights (rivers, lakes, mountains, beaches/harbours, national parks) to a minority of its population to govern/receive economic benefit/control access/dictate terms to the remainder of us so that now every part-Maori is officially an UN-authenticated indigene with rights that precede and supervene on those of all other New Zealanders. Is that not superior enough Mr Dey?
Now our local council has taken it upon itself to rename the district with regard to Maori culture - European history and contributions to NZ growth being a non-event. This is now a national problem and it is time to acknowledge that New Zealand is not Aotearoa but a big, beautiful country that belongs to everyone.
R.E STEPHENS
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers
STREET NAMES
Tauranga City Council's Policy Committee is proposing changes to the street naming policy (Sunlive, June 22).
This looks like little more than another effort to re-write and edit the history of Tauranga.
Committee chairman, councillor Steve Morris claims “we have nothing to fear”.
In my opinion we have lot to fear. What is being proposed, among other things, is that naming decisions are purely a function of council, and if the council decides, requires no community consultation.
When a te reo name is gifted by mana whenua there will be no consultation or formal decision-making.
It displays this council's usual arrogance, lack of transparency, failure to consult with and act on the community's wishes, mostly at the expense of ratepayers.
It is an affront to democracy.
RICHARD PRINCE, Welcome Bay
SHARING RESOURCES
Most interesting to see another of Peter Dey's interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi (Letters 14 June) being expressed. On the one hand he claims that the Treaty is a "partnership" document which, by implication, means that it promotes an equitable sharing of resources, and on the other hand states that the Treaty very clearly grants Maori racial preferences. Confusing, isn't it?
Makes one wonder whether, despite having a Race Relations Conciliator, we are a racist country after all.
ROMAN TOMSON, Hairini
THE REAL TREATY
What Peter Dey claims, [The Weekend Sun, June 14], is not everybody’s view of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. As usual he quotes Freeman’s flowery rendition of the treaty in English. What the real Treaty and Hobson’s final draft both said is that ‘all the peoples of New Zealand were guaranteed the possession (tino rangatiratanga) of their lands, dwellings and ordinary property (taonga)’. Nowhere are the words “forests, fisheries” or "partnerships" present. The Third Article gives Maori the same rights - no more, no less - than the people of England.
New Zealand is laden with 'fake' history and it is detrimental to our true history that any one culture is trying to suppress the true and brutal history we are descended from.
MAUREEN ANDERSON, Pyes Pa
NOT ANTI-MAORI
Which part of Peter Fellingham's letter did Peter Dey not understand? Which part of Hobson's Pledge does he cite as recording Pakeha culture as superior when all Don Brash has ever called for is equality for all ethnicities in New Zealand of which there are over 200.
It has always been the argument of we so-called racists that that we are one people as Dame Whena Cooper has said (he iwi ko tahi tatau) and it has always been argued in support of this that the Crown should never have been divested of ownership in perpetuity for all people. It has never been an anti-Maori issue.
Now, thanks to successive Governments and National's Chris Finlayson, together with Peter Sharples' misrepresentations to the United Nations, NZ became the only country in the world to abrogate those natural rights (rivers, lakes, mountains, beaches/harbours, national parks) to a minority of its population to govern/receive economic benefit/control access/dictate terms to the remainder of us so that now every part-Maori is officially an UN-authenticated indigene with rights that precede and supervene on those of all other New Zealanders. Is that not superior enough Mr Dey?
Now our local council has taken it upon itself to rename the district with regard to Maori culture - European history and contributions to NZ growth being a non-event. This is now a national problem and it is time to acknowledge that New Zealand is not Aotearoa but a big, beautiful country that belongs to everyone.
R.E STEPHENS
sites.google.com/site/kiwifrontline/letters-submitted-to-newspapers