Sandra in her TPB oral submission presents significant supporting evidence. She is one of the most factually correct, and informative submitters to date.
The subsequent behaviour of Green MP Tamatha Paul, and Te Pāti Māori MP Rawiri Waititi, is racist and disgraceful.
10 comments:
A contradiction: Maori insist that only they can speak for themselves.
However, when their wishes and policies impact negatively on other people (notably in terms of equality or payment of redress for grievances ), why is there no right of reply for non-Maori? NZ is still a democracy - an autocratic ethno-state may be coming but this is not yet formally established.
Tamantha Paul asks what rights does Goudie have to speak for 'her' people.....
That is supremist talk, nothing more, nothing less.
Tamantha, tell us who are 'your' people exactly who do you speak for because I have doubts that you actually speak for maori as a homogenous group......plainy speaking you do not and never will.
I wonder what the point is of having members of the Select Committee that are vehemently opposed to the proposed legislation. And by the way, why did Kiri Allen get granted one of the scarce slots for making an oral submission?
Meager as Chair should have booted Waititi out when he talked back... Goudie should be appointed to Waitangi Tribunal in a key role to reshape and wind it down.
The whole thing is a rort!
Tamantha Paul was one of the worst WCC Councillors when it came to making Wellington the divisive, cot case it is. Now she wants to export her venom to the rest of the country.
I second both points
I am curious how Waititi acheives such brownness. Is he one of the very rare maori who have whittled their colonist content down to 1/1024 or so? Does he choose light clothing to accentuate? Is there a potion? Does he lie in the sun? Has he got a sunbed? It is so marked very many maori must have difficulty identifying with him, although the gross language would connect with most. Presumably maori justify their right to comment on pakeha on the basis thay all part of.
Ms Goudie spoke passionately and her central message is important for New Zealand, as is her description of some of the undesirable consequences that have arisen by the existing fake beliefs about ill-defined principles. However, she gets a few things wrong:
"...all New Zealanders as a party to the Treaty of Waitangi".
It's unclear what she meant by this, but the parties to Te Tiriti were the Crown (through its representatives) and the chiefs on behalf of their people. All New Zealanders were not 'a party to' Te Tiriti. The provisions were to apply to all in New Zealand / Nu Tireni, so it would be accurate to say that all New Zealanders are interested parties who should have a right to be involved in the interpretation and implementation of Te Tiriti.
"Queen Victoria's Royal Charter of 1840 declared New Zealand an independent colony of Australia and established a democratic parliament. That preceded the Treaty of Waitangi"
This statement is very incorrect! The Royal Charter of 1840 didn't declare New Zealand to be 'an independent colony of Australia' but an independent colony of Britain (NZ had until then been treated as part of New South Wales). The 1840 Royal Charter did not establish a democratic parliament at all. It made Hobson the governor of New Zealand as a distinct British colony and Hobson appointed all members of a General Legislative Council. Democracy in any form did not start until 1853 after the British Parliament had passed the New Zealand Constitution Act, and the first elected parliament (elected only by men who held individual titles to land) opened in 1854. Also, the 1840 Royal Charter was dated 16 November so did not precede Te Tiriti at all.
"Maori businesses only pay 17.5% tax".
Yes, Maori Authorities pay 17.5% tax but they have to meet criteria for becoming a Maori Authority, such things as managing communally-owned land and existing for charitable purposes (race-based charity of course). Normal businesses owned by Maori pay the same as any other business. I'm not necessarily defending the 17.5% arrangement. The huge wealth being accumulated by certain Maori authorities and the amount they are paying their trustees etc suggest the terms deserve tightening. However, it's wrong to imply that all businesses owned by Maori pay only 17.5%.
These points might seem pedantic and most of the errors might reflect poor use of language. However, I'm concerned that Ms Goudie's oral submission is being lauded as a great contribution by those supporting a realistic and historically-accurate clarification of what Te Tiriti means. Unfortunately, its errors and ambiguities can only provide the likes of Waititi with ready evidence to support his claim that the Bill's supporters are spreading misinformation. It's a shame that a bit more simple research through Ms Google and some proof reading were not done.
Panel Member: "What gives you the right to speak about Maori, about my people"
Oral Submitter: "Um, democracy and our Bill of Rights gives me, just as you, the right to freedom of speech about any matter I choose to speak about, even though I might avoid the rudeness and racism typically shown by Mr Waititi and his lot.
By the way, Sir Bob Jones, a rangatira of our people, has generously gifted an English name to Mr Waititi. It's 'Egbert Buffoon'. That name now carries profound sacred significance and, in the spirit of racial equality, our people now expect your people to use it in all future references to him. We can now commemorate this with a hongi, Mr Buffoon."
Post a Comment