We are all used to MSM’s bias and trickery but it still galls me to read headlines such as RNZ’s “Hamilton City Council votes to retain Māori wards”. No. We voted to have a public referendum, knowing that the majority of our citizens are not racist and will get rid of race-based politics at the next election.
The identity extremists are trying to make racial division (which they mockingly call ‘partnership’) normalised by implying the country’s leadership is behind them. Under Ardern, it was. But not now. People are standing up for equality under the law. Yet, across the country, as councils consistently vote for referenda, the local headlines follow the nationwide conspiracy.
As a Hamilton City councillor, I argued that Māori wards have failed, with a meagre 14 per cent voter turnout; not even Māori care about them. It is hard to claim a mandate on that basis. This was no racist attack: it was calling for a discussion of better alternatives.
Councillor Geoff Taylor argued that Māori wards are defeatist and condescending – telling Māori that you can’t make it in real politics. He encouraged Māori to be ambitious, which is hardly a racist thing to do.
Māori ward councillor Maria Huata made an impassioned speech that was enjoyable to listen to if you don’t mind cherry-picked history. She noted that New Zealand’s first election in 1853 restricted voting to individual land owners. Māori, who owned land collectively, were excluded. This was racist, except that miners, farm hands and most of the population were in the same boat. Nor did she mention that the law changed in 1867 to allow all Māori men to vote, but white men who didn’t own land had to wait until 1879. What any of this has to do with 2024 is beyond me.
I lost count of the number of time te Tiriti was mentioned, which is bizarre given councils are not crown entities. The “Local” in “Local Government” is a giveaway. They are regional organisations not subject to the Treaty. The government imposes an obligation only to encourage Māori to participate in the decision-making process, which means they get a chance to vote like the rest of us.
Andrew Bydder is a is a Hamilton City Councillor, a professional problem solver, a designer, and a small business owner. This article was first published HERE
As a Hamilton City councillor, I argued that Māori wards have failed, with a meagre 14 per cent voter turnout; not even Māori care about them. It is hard to claim a mandate on that basis. This was no racist attack: it was calling for a discussion of better alternatives.
Councillor Geoff Taylor argued that Māori wards are defeatist and condescending – telling Māori that you can’t make it in real politics. He encouraged Māori to be ambitious, which is hardly a racist thing to do.
Māori ward councillor Maria Huata made an impassioned speech that was enjoyable to listen to if you don’t mind cherry-picked history. She noted that New Zealand’s first election in 1853 restricted voting to individual land owners. Māori, who owned land collectively, were excluded. This was racist, except that miners, farm hands and most of the population were in the same boat. Nor did she mention that the law changed in 1867 to allow all Māori men to vote, but white men who didn’t own land had to wait until 1879. What any of this has to do with 2024 is beyond me.
I lost count of the number of time te Tiriti was mentioned, which is bizarre given councils are not crown entities. The “Local” in “Local Government” is a giveaway. They are regional organisations not subject to the Treaty. The government imposes an obligation only to encourage Māori to participate in the decision-making process, which means they get a chance to vote like the rest of us.
Andrew Bydder is a is a Hamilton City Councillor, a professional problem solver, a designer, and a small business owner. This article was first published HERE
2 comments:
Andrew. Thank you for publicly stating your position on the electoral blight represented by maori wards. And for taking the MSM to task for yet again deliberately misleading their audience. Your observation on Ms Huata's outdated, jaundiced and disordered contribution to the debate was very apt. Keep up the great work.
Steve Ellis
This absolutely spot on. It would be good to see other local councillors across NZ declare the same position because all we have seen is the msm saying: "An-Other Council votes to retain Māori wards". The referendums will say one way or the other and if the genuine majority say "Yes" then that is democracy in action as will be if they say "No". That is democracy ... and while this bloke may not like it if Maori wards do survive the process, he would live with it because - yep, that is democracy! The one thing that is still sticking in this bloke's throat is the fact that if the decision results in a "No", we will be stuck with the ward and attendant Council member(s) for 3 years longer than ought to be the case! Where there is a "No" vote, the associated ward(s) and its incumbent(s) should be gone by lunchtime and a few $$s would be saved for useful purposes.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.