Despite mountains of books and easily available evidence about why the British decided to dispatch William Hobson to New Zealand in 1839, providing him with instructions about how to proceed once he got there, and in particular to gain agreement from Maori to cede sovereignty to Queen Victoria, which he did, Smail is peddling fiction to school children about what actually happened. Quoting from a 2014 Waitangi Report along the way, Smail argues that the Treaty did not cede sovereignty to the Queen over all New Zealanders, including Maori. Instead, she says, the Queen only sought the authority from Maori to control the handful of British settlers in New Zealand at that time. They, according to Smail, all 2,000 of them spread thinly across the whole country, were the main problem confronting New Zealand. She says not a word about the Musket Wars that raged around New Zealand from 1807-1840 where Maori killed somewhere about 50,000 of their own, enslaved many, and cannibalised others. This booklet is designed to hide the harsh realities from school children.
Hoodwinking children is not what we send our kids to school for. They are quite capable of dealing with the facts. Maori society in pre-colonial days was violent. As iwi managed to purchase muskets, they roamed the country, slaughtering their fellow Maori and settling old scores. As reputable historians have shown, Hobson was dispatched to treat with Maori in order to secure the Queen’s sovereign authority over the whole or any parts of the country willing to agree. He succeeded in gaining consent from most chiefs. In return, the Queen promised to protect the rights of iwi to control their land, villages and treasures. The chiefs agreed that the Crown would have the sole right to purchase Maori land at an agreed price. And, in the Treaty’s third article, the Queen promised to protect Maori and “give them the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of New Zealand”. The country quietened down, and the Musket Wars ended. The Queen’s representatives gradually introduced law, order and education to the country.
It’s all straight forward. But Roimata Smail’s text promotes the notion that sovereignty was not passed to the Queen, and that therefore, by inference, a parallel system of government still exists: 17% of the population governed by Maori, and the rest of us by an elected Parliament. Using black print, Smail tells us that “Maori will keep total authority over their land, resources and way of life”. What she means is that those calling themselves Maori, no matter whether they be fifteen sixteenths Pakeha, don’t have to obey any laws that are passed by former or present governments. Presumably, in her world, Maori will be free to do whatever they like. If they offend against the other 83% of New Zealanders, then tough titty. Intelligent students who think about it might be terrified by the implications of what Smail is telling them. She wants something akin to South Africa’s former system of apartheid for us. Seventeen percent on top pulling all the strings, and 83% putting up with whatever the minority wants to do. Madness!
Smail has appeared before the Waitangi Tribunal and regards this non-judicial body as the fount of all wisdom. The Tribunal she seems to have such faith in, was set up by an Act of Parliament in 1975. In that Act appears the original Treaty of Waitangi, both the text in English, and the text in Maori. Both versions contain the first article of the Treaty in which the chiefs in 1840 ceded sovereignty to the Queen “absolutely and without reservation”, or “for ever” to the Queen. Surely, it’s quite improper that the Tribunal, forty years later, should set about re-imagining the Treaty which it is instructed to “observe” and “confirm”. Even more strange that Smail’s misinformation should be sent to all schools in the country for students to study.
If, like me, you feel that her actions are quite improper, then what about writing to your local MP alerting him/her to Roimata Smail’s attempts to spread falsehoods to schools, leading, if unchecked, to unnecessary division and anger within society. Those who want to read the booklet can buy it ($25). They don’t need to have it foisted upon them by overly zealous social studies teachers.
In the first edition of this article I said that Ms Smail was employed by the Waitangi Tribunal. I apologise for that misunderstanding.
12 comments:
Why anyone would want to buy that booklet after what has been chronicled about its contents would be hard to credit. Anyway, reading those lies and misrepresentation wouldn't do my blood pressure any good. Anyone with grandchildren should sit them down and give them an unbiased version of our history. There are well-researched, thoughtful, scholarly texts readily available, although don't rely on your local library; they have probably caved in to activist pressure and culled the good books. Go to a second-hand book shop.
It should be the govt stopping all this nonsense, but they are not. In fact, only the people reading these posts are even aware of it. Nz will get a form of tribal rule, otherwise we would be getting a referendum.
Te Tiriti is the lie, the scam, the fraud. There is no such document. The other lie, scam and fraud is that there is an "English language treaty". There was only one treaty (The Treaty) authorized by Hobson, read out and signed on the 6th February 1840, and that was the Maori language treaty. The only other document read out that day was the "English language draft" that composed (The Treaty). This document is known today as Busby's final draft and/or the Littlewood treaty.
The so called "English language treaty" document used by our government to create apartheid in New Zealand is one of many "Royal style composite inaccurate versions" done for overseas consumption by James Freeman. This "imposter" makes no mention of "all the people of New Zealand" and includes "Estates, forests and fisheries".
The truth is to be found in the 1840 Maori language treaty (The Treaty), Busby's final draft and the 1869 official back translation of the Maori language treaty.
On the other hand, there was an article in The Post yesterday about the Hutt City Council removing a copy of Sir Apirana Ngata’s Explanation of the Treaty from copies of Hutt News because it was considered ‘misinformation’ and someone had complained.
The article referred to the Explanation as a paid “advertorial insert from right-leaning think tank, the New Zealand Centre for Political Research.” The Free Speech Union are now suing the Council.
However, the Council chief legal officer has asked the FSU to pause litigation and whether it was an “appropriate use of your time and resources, as well as the time and resources of Hutt City Council and the court”.
Reference: https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360515725/free-speech-union-suing-hutt-city-council
So, "someone" complained and the corporate HCC accuses Sir Apirana Ngata's explanation of the Maori language treaty's meaning and intent a lie?
Where's the outrage?
Compare that to calling out the fraudulent "te tiriti" explanation that Maori didn't cede sovereignty, therefore own everything?
Allen H - you should be asking your children and grandchildren if they want their future grandchildren to be second class citizens of Aotearoa, or equal citizens of New Zealand.
Unless Luxon acts, the second class scenario is most likely.
If our so-called leaders don't stand up to it, then all it makes you think, is that they all in on it and back it.
Barrie, don't believe "The Post". Their article makes it look like the HCC are nothing short of saints. They have had more than ample opportunity to address their blatant breach of the law - they haven't. They now deserve what's coming their way. Hopefully, there won't be too much fallout for their long suffering ratepayers, but to add insult to injury, as recorded on this site today, these clowns have now publicly opposed the Treaty Principles Bill. One would think they would address the job they are elected/employed to do but, no - these woke, Marxists-leftists are quite incapable of sticking to the law and the knitting. It's no wonder their finances are also strapped.
Would be useful to dissect all waitangi tribunal reports and examine specific historic evidence presented.
Anonymous at 11.44; I am constantly pushing what I see as the 'correct' message, and I see some hope with my children, so can only hope they will get their children to see the light before it is too late. However, as you can see from the myriad comments here and elsewhere, the lies, misinformation and propaganda in the media far outweigh our current efforts. We must keep fighting back.
I would like to ask if the Dept of Education had given the green light for this book to be placed in schools to be used in history lessons. Surely only they can dictate what is taught in our schools.
The Educ Dept is riddled with woke incumbents weighed down with greenstone, the Minister needs to make a NY resolution to get very direct and clear. I happen to know that Maggie Thatcher always watched Spitting Images and Yes Minister as they was a great indicator of what the Civil Service and those around her were getting up to.
Post a Comment