There must be something waring about being so negative, or destructive, or activist. They won't see it that way. They will argue they are putting things right or addressing grievances.
But that’s the problem with grievance, isn't it? It's become a gravy train.
How many tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars do you reckon have been spent in the past 50 years at or around the Waitangi Tribunal arguing about perceived wrongs?
The Tauranga group want an urgent hearing over the Government's attack on their language and their culture. Nothing more specific than that, just a broad-based attack.
No matter what you call it, does the Waitangi Tribunal take into account the fact that the policies are the result of a democratic process? Plus, the main outworking of the new Government so far around this issue appears to be the desire to have Government department names in English first. The fact they have been English first for decades, if not forever, doesn't seem to have been an issue worthy of the tribunal up until now.
The ACT Party are looking at a referendum on the Treaty, but that is a long way off. So, is the whiff of an idea as yet enacted, and indeed may never be enacted, an attack also?
Is it not time to ask a few questions around the tribunal, given it is now 50 years old and the vast majority of the settlement business is sorted, and we have moved into the broader area of activism?
How much activism do we want? How much are we prepared to pay for it, and what is the value of this activism? In other words, what's actually changed?
Based on the fact it's seemingly never-ending and they have no legally binding ability to change anything anyway, as we approach the 50-year mark are we asking about the value of the exercise in its totality? It seems as angsty as it ever was. Has having a tribunal made New Zealand a better place?
The good bits were those who used the original historic mechanism to argue their case, settle their claim, get their apology, and move on.
Those tribes are the stories we want to hear more of. But what we seem left with are the agitators, the stirrers, and the troublemakers, and the Waitangi Tribunal seems funded and ready to indulge their whims.
To what end? For what good?
For how long?
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
The Tauranga group want an urgent hearing over the Government's attack on their language and their culture. Nothing more specific than that, just a broad-based attack.
No matter what you call it, does the Waitangi Tribunal take into account the fact that the policies are the result of a democratic process? Plus, the main outworking of the new Government so far around this issue appears to be the desire to have Government department names in English first. The fact they have been English first for decades, if not forever, doesn't seem to have been an issue worthy of the tribunal up until now.
The ACT Party are looking at a referendum on the Treaty, but that is a long way off. So, is the whiff of an idea as yet enacted, and indeed may never be enacted, an attack also?
Is it not time to ask a few questions around the tribunal, given it is now 50 years old and the vast majority of the settlement business is sorted, and we have moved into the broader area of activism?
How much activism do we want? How much are we prepared to pay for it, and what is the value of this activism? In other words, what's actually changed?
Based on the fact it's seemingly never-ending and they have no legally binding ability to change anything anyway, as we approach the 50-year mark are we asking about the value of the exercise in its totality? It seems as angsty as it ever was. Has having a tribunal made New Zealand a better place?
The good bits were those who used the original historic mechanism to argue their case, settle their claim, get their apology, and move on.
Those tribes are the stories we want to hear more of. But what we seem left with are the agitators, the stirrers, and the troublemakers, and the Waitangi Tribunal seems funded and ready to indulge their whims.
To what end? For what good?
For how long?
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
7 comments:
Whats next for the APARTHEID Waitangi Tribunal?
It ceases to exist is what?
Maybe they can see that the gravy train is about to hit the buffers and want to grab as much as they can before it does.
It will take such political courage, but it must go. Politely, respectfully, but firmly gone - over!
Being negative, destructive, and sctivist is wearing. But it accrues all important mana. Many have soft race based jobs with a huge element of pro maori justification and with time to fritter, and they do not squander spare time on home maintenance, or they have a state unit, and/or are on a dole. When all the Council maori wards get into gear the country will learn the meaning of te ao, taihoa, maori time, and the finer points of orchestrated, advanced time wasting obstruction.
Every single cent spent on claims, whether via the tribunal or directly to govt.
is money from the taxpayer.
The taxpayer funds claims, (lawyers, specialists, oral historians, et al)
Claiments need only lodge a claim and the money flows.
Only a Maori could engineer an industry with guaranteed income with no effort.
It might help offset some costs to the taxpayer if Maori charities paid their fair share of tax.
I could go on and on but I'm over it.
What's next for the Waitangi Tribunal?
Closure, with any luck.
It always seems to be forgotten that forward thinking Māori encouraged the use of English at the expense of Te Reo, so when is someone going to say enough is enough. They should be told to get the chip off your shoulder and stop blaming colonisation for all your ills and continuing tribal ways. Just as repealing the anti smoking laws isn’t about trying to kill off Māori for goodness sake, it’s about giving individuals the freedom to make their own decisions. Every adult citizen, in what was our great country, should be responsible for his/her actions. Stop the blame game and inciting treasonous actions.
Post a Comment