This is a companion piece to my just-published Ghettoizing the mind. Both were stimulated by Dr Muriel Newman’s feature article, The Future of the Maori Seats in which she carefully marshalled nearly all the reasons why they should be gone. She also introduced as a guest commentary an address given by Hon Bill English in 2003: Address to the National Press Club Breakfast 24 July 2003.
English said the National Party “stands for one standard of citizenship for all.” “We are all New Zealanders. All as good as each other sharing common rights and obligations.” “Parliament must make it clear that there is no constitutional partnership between the Crown and Maori.” English was then Leader of the National Party Opposition.
More to the point of Muriel Newman’s article, English said, “That’s why National-led Government will abolish the Maori seats.” Of course, it did nothing of the sort when National came back into government in 2008 under John Key. Instead, the Key government abetted the infiltration of all parts of New Zealand society by elements who would substitute authoritarian tribal rule for a free and democratic society, a process which was accelerated by the Ardern/Hipkins governments.
Under pressure from ACT and New Zealand First, the coalition government has walked this back a bit but not to the extent needed to offer meaningful restraint of the authoritarian tendencies which unthinking acquiescence by most of us has unwittingly allowed.
At present, whilst there has been good legislation to roll back some of the more egregious excesses of the last government and isolated examples of ministers insisting on their ministries adopting policies the government was thought to stand for, clear and concerted direction is absent.
Leadership is needed. We need a Prime Minister who will say loudly and clearly what English said in 2003, expressing with strength of character and personality that it is the expectation of all members of the coalition government that all elements of the bureaucracy and other parts of government both central and local will cease undermining our democracy.
Today, when NZ First has advanced a Bill for a referendum and ACT says get rid of the Maori seats now, the opportunity is ripe for that sort of leadership. Getting rid of the seats, especially by or endorsed by referendum to show it is peoples’ will, would not only remove an anti-democratic excrescence, but also be a signal that enough is enough and that henceforth we shall be a “multiracial society [where] people of all races are able to coexist together in peace and cooperation as equal citizens under the law.”
Yet the National Party is silent. Neither for nor against, bereft of the courage to say we agree or we do not agree and this is why.
Or does the leadership think silence is of political advantage? If so, all indications are they are mistaken.
Gary Judd KC is a King's Counsel, former Chairman of ASB and Ports of Auckland and former member APEC Business Advisory Council. Gary blogs at Gary Judd KC Substack where this article was sourced.
More to the point of Muriel Newman’s article, English said, “That’s why National-led Government will abolish the Maori seats.” Of course, it did nothing of the sort when National came back into government in 2008 under John Key. Instead, the Key government abetted the infiltration of all parts of New Zealand society by elements who would substitute authoritarian tribal rule for a free and democratic society, a process which was accelerated by the Ardern/Hipkins governments.
Under pressure from ACT and New Zealand First, the coalition government has walked this back a bit but not to the extent needed to offer meaningful restraint of the authoritarian tendencies which unthinking acquiescence by most of us has unwittingly allowed.
At present, whilst there has been good legislation to roll back some of the more egregious excesses of the last government and isolated examples of ministers insisting on their ministries adopting policies the government was thought to stand for, clear and concerted direction is absent.
Leadership is needed. We need a Prime Minister who will say loudly and clearly what English said in 2003, expressing with strength of character and personality that it is the expectation of all members of the coalition government that all elements of the bureaucracy and other parts of government both central and local will cease undermining our democracy.
Today, when NZ First has advanced a Bill for a referendum and ACT says get rid of the Maori seats now, the opportunity is ripe for that sort of leadership. Getting rid of the seats, especially by or endorsed by referendum to show it is peoples’ will, would not only remove an anti-democratic excrescence, but also be a signal that enough is enough and that henceforth we shall be a “multiracial society [where] people of all races are able to coexist together in peace and cooperation as equal citizens under the law.”
Yet the National Party is silent. Neither for nor against, bereft of the courage to say we agree or we do not agree and this is why.
Or does the leadership think silence is of political advantage? If so, all indications are they are mistaken.
Gary Judd KC is a King's Counsel, former Chairman of ASB and Ports of Auckland and former member APEC Business Advisory Council. Gary blogs at Gary Judd KC Substack where this article was sourced.
21 comments:
I agree, Gary, but they are mistaken and stupid. Need it be said, a stupid leader, and its party, doesn't last long.
National are gutless and pathetic.
Unfortunately their policy is still dominated by Key and is associates, so while that continues National will not change.
It's the underlying reason the Nats have lost support and continue losing support.
Luxon consulting Key on policy is not the answer.
What’s wrong with representative democracy? 8% of the electorate was on board with ACT’s idea of a division-fest. 92% of the electorate said no thanks.
If people don’t like your idea, don’t blame the people! Have a look at where you went wrong with your idea. It’s called taking responsibility.
Leadership is indeed needed. Never a truer word Gary Judd. However, we’re not going to get it. Luxon is a manager not a leader. He’s unified the Nats and kept the coalition govt together - i.e. he’s managing his teams well enough, but he’s no good for NZ. He’s not leading the nation at all. As a leader he’s AWOL.
Before we have a referendum we need to have a debate.
Just calling for a referendum and assuming the entire country will vote for abolition, won’t win it.
In fact, it could guarantee the opposite — a lost referendum and the current situation cemented in even more permanently.
Let’s take the blinkers off and recognise the circumstances for what they are.
Those of us who think like Gary are a minority, not well-led, and not at all organised.
Those who opposed ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill were, if not a majority, a large and significant minority. They were well-led and sufficiently well-organised to draw swelling numbers to a nation-wide hui and demonstrations at Parliament.
Often that’s all it takes.
Sadly, those of us who support Gary’s viewpoint are often not the kind of people who take to the streets waving banners.
But we will need to do so if Maorification is to be rolled back.
I strongly suggest we test the strength of our support publicly first, before pushing for a referendum.
To Anon 10.32: Excuse me - do you mean ACT's Treaty Principles Bill? The result was rigged: every 1000 citizen submissions in favour of the Bill were counted as 1 submission.
Anon@10.32 - wouldn't it be nice, if only just once, Maori took responsibility, rather than always blaming something or someone else and certainly always expecting others to pay?
I agree totally Juliet, well said
We had a referendum already Juliet. 8% in favour of a party that promotes divisive nonsense. End of.
Anon 256pm - 92% of the electorate is against the party that wants such a terrible idea. If that can’t convince you, then nothing well. From here on it’s a you problem, not an NZ problem.
Why the continual appeasement of Maori who demand more and more, and yet National and Luxon know that these Maori and their woke friends are never going to vote for them ?
Just get rid of the Maori seats, and tolerate the outrage which will die down after a few months.
The International media will see this as re-establishing democracy.
If any future Labour government tries to restore them, they will hear the International media screaming about establishing apartheid.
A lot of disappointed ex National voters like myself will see some merit in changing back to them.
Why give themselves a handicap based on an ever declining percentage of Maori DNA ?
Duh ......
Can anyone from the National Party give me any reason at all why the Maori seats should be retained ?
Any ????
Who was it who said, "Stupid is, as stupid does"? Looking at you, Luxon...
To Anon at 4.15: You change the subject by mentioning "Party". Only a formal referendum on government by democracy or ethnocracy would record the national preference. This is the real question meant by equal citizenship. And..... best for NZers to know the answer ASAP.
Anon 526am are you still getting to grips with the concept of representative democracy? It sure sounds like it. How many laws were passed in the last 24 months vs how many laws NZ had a referendum on? But MY dEMocRAcy!
To Anon at 9.29: off message again.
In Parliament, the elected majority legislates on behalf of the people - well or badly.
A binding referendum permits citizens to express their view on a specific and important issue. The result must be respected.
The TP Bill was a disgrace: when a PM says on TV "the Bill will be spiked" , the entire process is instantly invalidated. Even the Chairman of the SC admitted this was farcical.
We will agree to disagree on democracy - and certainly on the " progressive" and "sophisticated" brands touted by certain politicians who seek to impose the will of a minority on the majority.
Anon 359 ah so the distinction is “important”. It ain’t important to me and it ain’t important to 92% of voters. Sorry for your loss.
Anon 7-42. Why are you so nervous about putting the issue to a referendum? If you were so sure that 92% of voters have made their mind up already, I would expect you to fully support a referendum, just to show how right you are!
Imported bloodlines have so- diluted the original native race that ‘MÄori’ today only exists as a cultural concept.
None of these Nimtods—no matter how brown their skin or Polynesian their features—is on None of these Nimtods—no matter how brown their skin or Polynesian their features—is on balance ‘MÄori’ by blood quantum test.
New Zealand needs to stop pandering to brown supremacist part-MÄori ethnocentric pretensions.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.