Commentator Morgan Godfery has confirmed what the Government has been denying for the past year, that the He Puapua plan for two governments in New Zealand, one for Maori and one for everyone else, is under way and that the people of New Zealand will never have a referendum on it.
This confirmation came in an article by him that was published today in The Guardian, titled “In New Zealand, Maori co-governance is already underway – referendum or not”. (1)
The term “co-governance” is a weasel word, ambiguous and misleading and probably intended to be so. A Maori supremacist quite likely sees no “co” when “co-governance” is mentioned.
A coup is usually a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government. In this instance, it is the government that is illegally seizing power from the citizens of New Zealand and reorganising power and control into race-based structures.
Godfery, who graduated in law from Victoria University of Wellington in 2015, is the Maori Research Partnerships Manager at the University of Otago, has worked at Parliament, was a trade unionist, and is a columnist at Metro.
It’s a pity that no one takes Godfery to task. It’s even more of a pity that his ramblings are circulated around the world as in the current Guardian piece. His writings out him as a Maori supremacy activist.
Godfery’s piece looks like an effort to support Maori Development Minister Willie Jackson in his time of need. Jackson has to manage the He Puapua plan, revealed one year ago, and appears to lack the brain power to mount an effective defence of the proposal.
This came to light when ACT Party leader David Seymour challenged Jackson to a debate. All Jackson could do was accuse Seymour of “hypocrisy” and “scaremongering”. Jackson made no attempt to explain how and why duplicated governance entities would benefit everyone or anyone.
Race, sex, sexuality and religion are not relevant to voting rights, says Seymour, and he is gaining traction.
One of Seymour’s ancestors signed the Treaty of Waitangi. Godfery said that Seymour’s position on the treaty was an irony and showed a contradiction “at the heart of New Zealand politics”.
Perhaps the fresh-faced Godfery, who looks like a descendent of a wicked white coloniser, is annoyed that a politician with Maori ancestry doesn’t buy into the racist dogma pushed by Jackson’s fellow Maori Labour MPs, the Green Party, and Maori Party extremists in Parliament.
Godfery did not mention that two other ACT Party MPs who have Maori ancestry have spoken out in Parliament against racial division.
Godfery tried to say that Seymour will be ignored because ACT has just 5 percent support.
It looks like Godfery guessed the figure because a recent Roy Morgan poll showed that Seymour had dropped to 9 percent. Godfery lauded the stand of the Maori Party without saying Roy Morgan polled just 2 percent support for them.
Sensitivity about governance and Maori radicals is widespread.
Early last year, it didn’t take long for petitioners in nine areas to collect sufficient signatures for referenda on Maori wards.
Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta panicked and outlawed petitions and votes on Maori wards.
Has Godfery has ever checked his facts? Or does he just think that because other Maori supremacists are saying something it must be true.
He presents a number of untruths as fact.
For instance, he wrote that the Maori and Green parties pursue the “textual meaning” of the Maori language Te Tiriti, which reaffirms Maori sovereignty”, while the ACT and National parties pursue the textual meaning of the English language text, in which sovereignty is ceded.
Godfery does not say and may not be aware that the text used to argue that the chiefs did not really cede sovereignty was a back-translation of the Maori text done by a Waitangi Tribunal member named Hugh Kawharu in 1986.
This self-serving “translation” had extensive footnotes in which two key words, “kawanatanga”, and “rangatiratanga”, were redefined to create a treaty in which, according to Maori supremacist radicals, chiefs ceded the right only for the British governor to govern the British migrants in New Zealand while chiefs could carry on being chiefs.
Those redefined words say what the Maori supremacists say they mean today, not what eyewitness accounts show that the chiefs understood when the Maori words of Te Tiriti were read to them in 1840.
There should be no mystery about what the treaty actually says. It is all there in the Maori text. As more people learn Maori, more can read the three simple articles without the Maori supremacist treaty-twisting commentary.
Another reason why there should be no mystery about what the treaty actually says is that the treaty was drafted in English and translated into Maori and National Archives has the Busby February 4 draft in English that has just two differences from the Maori text – the addition of the word “maori” in Article three and the date.
I don’t know what Godfery was thinking when he wrote no opponent “can point to a single governance” failure and cited the Ureweras as an example of co-governance success.
Urewera co-governance became a failure when most of the huts and many of the swing bridges in the area were in dire need of repair but the Tuhoe iwi wouldn’t allow the repairs so the walk was closed.
Commentator Heather du Plessis-Allan wrote:
. . . if that was place was run exclusively by DOC, like it was beforehand, and DOC shut it down for summer because it just couldn't be bothered maintaining the assets we’ve all put our taxpayer money into, we would haul the Minister over the coals in front of the media and put pressure on them until they pulled up their socks and did their job. Because they are accountable to us. But not the iwi.(2)Godfery uses a version of the Labour Government argument that “National started co-governance and we’re (Labour) just carrying on”.
The fact that former National Government Treaty Negotiations Minister Christopher Finlayson set up co-governance does not make co-governance sound and should not stop another National government from dumping it.
The He Puapua plan has been under way for three years.
The working group report was kept from former Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters. The Labour Party deceitfully did not campaign on it in 2020. Once Jacinda Ardern’s Labour Government gained an absolute majority, the plan was imposed.
The word is that Ardern has her eye on the election next year and, under the cover of Covid-19 hysteria, has done a deal with the Maori Party with Maori supremacy front and centre of the agenda.
Since a bad poll gives these people the jitters, now is a good time to speak out any way you can.
Unafraid of criticism, Seymour has the political arena largely to himself on co-governance. Criticism from vested interests raised his profile on the issue.
What you can do is visit your local Labour MP. First, check to see what poll number would put him or her on the street. Ask where they stand on two governments, one for Maori and the other for everyone else, and watch them squirm.
1. See https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2022/apr/24/in-new-zealand-maori-co-governance-is-already-underway-referendum-or-not?fbclid=IwAR3IHJvPylhEs8-C7HZlwfcVYJbyoxQ1GOqUS3za1YS8C6JASiGchzuvHew
2. See https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/heather-du-plessis-allan-drive/opinion/heather-du-plessis-allan-this-is-the-problem-with-maori-co-governance/
Mike Butler is a journalist, author and rental property manager, who was the chief sub-editor of the Hawke’s Bay Herald-Tribune from 1986 to 1999.