In a post-Budget interview this week, Seymour was asked by Whakaata Māori’s Māni Dunlop for his response to Labour’s claim that $1 billion in “Māori funding” had been cut. His reply was unapologetic.
“There’s no such thing as Māori funding. There’s funding for New Zealanders,” he said. “I’m getting really tired of people trying to racially profile us, put us in categories based on our ancestry or whakapapa, and then try and tag the budget funding for that. It’s just got to stop.”
Predictably, critics pounced. Media headlines implied Seymour had “attacked Māori,” while some political commentators branded him divisive. But these accusations miss the point entirely.
Seymour, who is himself of Ngāpuhi descent, wasn’t criticising Māori people. He was criticising a political and bureaucratic culture that increasingly treats ethnicity as the primary lens through which to view policy and funding decisions.
Asked whether he opposed funding specifically for Māori, Seymour doubled down. “I’m against any kind of race-based targeting of funding,” he said. “I’m opposed to people who want to put all their emphasis on 0.1 per cent of human DNA that’s different from each other, and ignore the 99.9 per cent that unites us.”
It was a firm response. Perhaps too firm for some snowflakes in the press gallery, who tried to push him further by asking whether his opposition extended to Pasifika funding. His answer? “Well, I think you can work that out, yeah.” The media are fucking idiots.
Public funding should be based on need, not ethnicity.
This debate is not new. For years, New Zealanders have been grappling with the question of how best to address historic inequities without embedding permanent divisions into our political structures. It is possible, and essential, to address disadvantage without institutionalising racial separation.
That is what Seymour is arguing for. He is not denying that disparities exist, or that targeted interventions may sometimes be needed. What he is pushing back against is the reflexive assumption that race should be the default organising principle in government policy.
And he is right to do so.
The left’s backlash to Seymour’s comments is emblematic of a broader problem. Increasingly, public discourse in New Zealand is shaped not by honest debate but by fear of causing offence. Anyone who questions the wisdom of race-based funding is immediately cast as being anti-Māori, regardless of the substance of their argument.
This is a dangerous trajectory. It not only chills democratic discussion, it also erodes the very idea of equality before the law. New Zealand cannot move forward as a united country if we are constantly being told we are separate.
The path to unity is not through more race-based policy. It is through a renewed focus on common values, shared citizenship, and fairness for all. That means recognising need where it exists, among Māori, Pasifika, Pākehā, or anyone else, and responding to it with integrity rather than ideology.
David Seymour didn’t say anything hateful. He said something important and something worth listening to. It is time we stopped letting outrage drown out reason and defund the media
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
Seymour, who is himself of Ngāpuhi descent, wasn’t criticising Māori people. He was criticising a political and bureaucratic culture that increasingly treats ethnicity as the primary lens through which to view policy and funding decisions.
Asked whether he opposed funding specifically for Māori, Seymour doubled down. “I’m against any kind of race-based targeting of funding,” he said. “I’m opposed to people who want to put all their emphasis on 0.1 per cent of human DNA that’s different from each other, and ignore the 99.9 per cent that unites us.”
It was a firm response. Perhaps too firm for some snowflakes in the press gallery, who tried to push him further by asking whether his opposition extended to Pasifika funding. His answer? “Well, I think you can work that out, yeah.” The media are fucking idiots.
Public funding should be based on need, not ethnicity.
This debate is not new. For years, New Zealanders have been grappling with the question of how best to address historic inequities without embedding permanent divisions into our political structures. It is possible, and essential, to address disadvantage without institutionalising racial separation.
That is what Seymour is arguing for. He is not denying that disparities exist, or that targeted interventions may sometimes be needed. What he is pushing back against is the reflexive assumption that race should be the default organising principle in government policy.
And he is right to do so.
The left’s backlash to Seymour’s comments is emblematic of a broader problem. Increasingly, public discourse in New Zealand is shaped not by honest debate but by fear of causing offence. Anyone who questions the wisdom of race-based funding is immediately cast as being anti-Māori, regardless of the substance of their argument.
This is a dangerous trajectory. It not only chills democratic discussion, it also erodes the very idea of equality before the law. New Zealand cannot move forward as a united country if we are constantly being told we are separate.
The path to unity is not through more race-based policy. It is through a renewed focus on common values, shared citizenship, and fairness for all. That means recognising need where it exists, among Māori, Pasifika, Pākehā, or anyone else, and responding to it with integrity rather than ideology.
David Seymour didn’t say anything hateful. He said something important and something worth listening to. It is time we stopped letting outrage drown out reason and defund the media
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
9 comments:
Racial privilege is the very essence of He Puapua and the plan for tribal rule by 2040 espoused by radical Maori and their fellow travellers. A referendum on this issue is urgent - but refused by Luxon. This issue must be addressed if NZ is to remain a cohesive nation, a harmonious society and a thriving economy = it is now at high risk on these 3 counts.
I am so grateful David Seymour has the courage to speak the truth!! and he is fighting the fight against racism with vigour, I hope more people see him for who he really is
“There’s no such thing as Māori funding. There’s funding for New Zealanders.”
Apartheid funding is rife in New Zealand, due to government apartheid Acts, statutes and legislation passed based on a Freeman composite English version of the treaty that does NOT agree with the original Maori treaty text.
The TOW was not a constitutional document and had nothing to do with forming a government in NZ, in fact it has done more to destroy NZ than any other document on record. But no more so than when Mr Palmer as Attorney General dreamt up and passed into legislation “The Five Principles for Crown Action” on the TOW, destroying the true meaning and interpretation of the treaty. Interesting, after he left politics, he helped Maori with their “alleged” claims against the Crown.
BTW, there was apartheid funding in the budget, at the behest of New Zealand FIRST, an additional $1.5 million pa of base line funding to Māori and Pasifika Wardens, and the Māori Women’s Welfare League bringing total government funding to $2.7 million per annum to Māori and Pasifika Wardens.
The budget also retained baselined funding of $100 million a year, focused on the Pacific (Pasifika) but masquerading as “climate finance”. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Peters making a case for MORE funding. Thanks New Zealand FIRST.
"The path to unity is not through more race-based policy. It is through a renewed focus on common values, shared citizenship, and fairness for all. That means recognising need where it exists, among Māori, Pasifika, Pākehā, or anyone else, and responding to it with integrity rather than ideology."
You are absolutely RIGHT there !!!
A truly progressive move would be to end ALL official recognition of race or ethnicity in ALL legislation.
With race/ethnicity no longer having official status, there could be:-
NO more race-based seats or race-specific party in Parliament.
NO more race-based wards in local government.
NO more census questions about ethnicity.
NO more co-governance, and NO more basis for claims of unending victimhood.
NO Waitangi Tribunal !
History tells us that no nation or society can survive while racist activists promote division and entitlement on the basis of race, (i.e. APARTHEID) and the only way to bring this to an end is by ceasing ALL official recognition of and status for race/ethnicity
Comply with the Treaty " we are one "
All parties agreed with that 1840 - you can't rewrite history to suit your arguments of today.
TPM is like Papa Doc Duvalier's political party in Haiti which turned that country into an elite dictatorship . TPM's two leaders make a fine Papa Doc and Mme Doc leading a top-down elitist structure. If they can get the gangs to merge and form a Tonton Macoute with machetes they have the ''army'' to seize power through terror.
Can't wait for your ideas to manifest !
Yes , our TPM male co=leader does remind one of Papa Doc, right down to his headgear
Thank you for your insightful analysis
Post a Comment