Bryan Bruce on David Seymour & the treaty

[Lilith7]

I suspect he's hit the nail on the head & greed is at the core of this.


https://www.facebook.com/www.redsky.tv

"Waitangi day ought to be the day we celebrate the signing of the founding document of our nation. Some years it is a moment to pause to remember the things that unite us as a nation. But some years it emphasizes the things that divide us and this, sadly, is one of those years.

I took the time this morning to read David Seymour’s State of the Nation address in which he refers to why he is promoting his Treaty Principles Bill.

Broadly argues the idea of two peoples in partnership tangata whenua (land people) and tangata tiriti (Treaty people) ..

“…is incompatible with the fundamental democratic value that all citizens are equal under the law.” And that ..`” This divisive idea has been fuelled by unelected bureaucrats and judges promoting a ‘partnership’ interpretation of our founding document.”

Well, just taking that last sentence first , he conveniently forgets that it was an elected Parliament that set up the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975 as a response to growing protest over the current and historical treatment of Māori in society.

Māori were NOT being treated as equal under the law that’s why for example there was a huge land march to Parliament calling a halt to sales of remaining Māori land.

Secondly Seymour needs to explain how the idea of partnership is incompatible with democracy when he himself is in political partnership with two other leaders to form the current government.

What then is Seymour’s motive in promoting his bill?

Is it purely philosophical as he would have us believe?

Or should we read his desire to re-evaluate the Treaty in the context of his other policies stated in his address… that “business is a force for good “ and there should be less government in our lives.

So is his desire for us to debate the Treaty because it is a problem for the greedy?

For one thing it gets in the way of selling the rest of our country to overseas interests - a process that has been slowly eroding our national sovereignty since the introduction of neoliberal economics in 1984 an economic theory that spawned the politics of selfishness.

So, nothing wrong with partnership and democracy Mr Seymour which you know that from your own experience.

And debate of this significance ought to to arise from facts not falsehoods such as the partnership idea "being promoted by unelected officials" when it was an elected parliament that recognised the unequal treatment and grievances of Maori in establishing the Waitangi Tribunal."

[zqwerty]

Yes, he is both two faced and speaks with a forked tongue, a capitalist dealing with an indigenous population that is in the way of further modern day development in a time proven way of exploitation and undermining traditional values.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

One of the things that really intrigues me about this whole business is the way Ngapuhi claim him as one of their own.

[Lilith7]

One of the things that really intrigues me about this whole business is the way Ngapuhi claim him as one of their own.

Its surprising but perhaps they've no option...who knows what deviousness politicians can delve into.

[C_T_Russell]

The maori don't appear to be very happy about this treaty principals bill for whatever reason, but not exactly sure why, they should be happy about it because it ensures equal rights for everyone.

The following quote from the latest Hobsons pledge newsletter says it all:


"At this point, it can be credibly argued that there is a deliberate effort to spread false information about what the Government, the ACT Party, and David Seymour are proposing with the Bill.

No one is suggesting a referendum on the EXISTENCE of the Treaty of Waitangi, for example. Recent media stories have often seemed to suggest otherwise.

What the ACT Party is arguing for is of foundational importance to New Zealand’s future. It is important New Zealanders understand it.

In recent years, more and more people have been led to believe that the Treaty of Waitangi created a partnership between two distinct groups of New Zealanders, with those who chance to have one or more Maori ancestors having an inherently superior constitutional status.

According to this view, those with some Maori ancestry have a superior right to be consulted about a whole range of policy issues, including those regarding land use, natural resources, and political representation.

David Seymour totally rejects this interpretation of the Treaty and argues that having a society where some citizens have rights which are inherently superior to those of other citizens is inconsistent with any reasonable definition of democracy. He argues that we have no future as a democracy if rights are dependent on who our ancestors were.

Moreover, he argues that the words of the Treaty actually support what he proposes that the Treaty Principles Bill will provide – that the government has the right to rule, that we all have rights to our own property, and that all citizens have equal rights."

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Why is it you capitalise White, but not 'maori' or 'treaty' unless you are c&p ing?

[Praktica]

Treaty principles....principals are something else entirely...

[Lilith7]

The maori don't appear to be very happy about this treaty principals bill for whatever reason, but not exactly sure why, they should be happy about it because it ensures equal rights for everyone.

The following quote from the latest Hobsons pledge newsletter says it all:


"At this point, it can be credibly argued that there is a deliberate effort to spread false information about what the Government, the ACT Party, and David Seymour are proposing with the Bill.

No one is suggesting a referendum on the EXISTENCE of the Treaty of Waitangi, for example. Recent media stories have often seemed to suggest otherwise.

What the ACT Party is arguing for is of foundational importance to New Zealand’s future. It is important New Zealanders understand it.

In recent years, more and more people have been led to believe that the Treaty of Waitangi created a partnership between two distinct groups of New Zealanders, with those who chance to have one or more Maori ancestors having an inherently superior constitutional status.

According to this view, those with some Maori ancestry have a superior right to be consulted about a whole range of policy issues, including those regarding land use, natural resources, and political representation.

David Seymour totally rejects this interpretation of the Treaty and argues that having a society where some citizens have rights which are inherently superior to those of other citizens is inconsistent with any reasonable definition of democracy. He argues that we have no future as a democracy if rights are dependent on who our ancestors were.

Moreover, he argues that the words of the Treaty actually support what he proposes that the Treaty Principles Bill will provide – that the government has the right to rule, that we all have rights to our own property, and that all citizens have equal rights."

I wouldn't be inclined to place any trust whatsoever in the Hobson's pledge group; they're deliberately divisive & deceitful .

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/4969...ance-group

"A website aimed at immigrants, heavy on te reo and pushing a message of unity is accused of being deceitful and divisive.
The 'We Belong Aotearoa' website and Facebook account was set up earlier this year.
With bright colours and a modern design, its stated purpose is "whiria te tāngata" - weave the people together.

Photographs of smiling people of various ethnicities are featured and the website says it stands for togetherness, unity, inclusiveness, and equality. It asks people to 'join us' by signing up with a name and email address.
It cites a Māori proverb: "Kia Mau Ki Te Tokanga Nui a Noho - there's no place like home."
Between $6000 and $20,964 has been spent on advertisements on Facebook promoting the website.

An unexpected owner
In August, a note in dark type on a dark background was added to the website. The website was created by the lobby group Hobson's Pledge, which is opposed to mandated Māori representation in central and local government. Don Brash, the former Act and National Party leader, was named.

The website and social media presence are run by the Campaign Company, which lists Jordan Williams (co-founder of the Taxpayers' Union) as a director. The Campaign Company is also listed as the "admin contact" of other domain names associated with Hobson's Pledge including isthisracist.nz, bottomline.nz and equalhealth.nz. The hobsonspledge.nz domain name also has the Taxpayers' Union listed as its "admin contact".

Hobson's Pledge and Brash have been outspoken critics of the use of te reo Māori in New Zealand. One of the group's campaigns is called: "NZ New Zealand, Not Aotearoa NZ." It specifically "demands" that the official name of the country is affirmed as New Zealand, not Aotearoa New Zealand.

Why would it put its money behind a campaign called 'We Belong Aotearoa'?


"Brash told RNZ the site exists to oppose co-governance, which is a legal concept of shared management for things like environmental resources.
"You very rarely get any serious discussion about co-governance, which is why half the country thinks it's a good thing. It's an appalling thing. Treating New Zealanders differently based on their race is an appalling situation and we need to push back on that strongly."

When asked why there was no mention of co-governance on the website he said: "No, there's not but that's the implied message, isn't it?"
He did not know when messages about co-governance might be added to the site, or shared with people who had signed up to a mailing list for a "unified NZ" but said that would be decided at future Hobson's Pledge strategy sessions."

[zqwerty]

Devious beyond belief.

Remember his wimpy/weak face when he got manure thrown on his suit at Waitangi.

Brash is scum of the highest order. His disgusting little affaire/s.

[Lilith7]

Devious beyond belief.

Remember his wimpy/weak face when he got manure thrown on his suit at Waitangi.

Brash is scum of the highest order.  His disgusting little affaire/s.

It can't be much fun being targeted but I think a lot depends on how its handled.

Steven Joyce for example handled the thrown sex toy incident extremely well & with humour.


https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7660465...t-waitangi


"You have] new experiences in politics every day. It's the privilege of serving," Joyce said, tongue-in-cheek.

He wasn't sure if he would become the next YouTube sensation, since he hadn't seen the footage.

"It would be unfortunate for being known for this incident."



He later tweeted: "Someone send the gif over to [television host] John Oliver so we can get it over with.."
Oliver is a comedian who has made a bit of a habit of poking fun at New Zealand politics."

[harm_less]

Devious beyond belief.

Remember his wimpy/weak face when he got manure thrown on his suit at Waitangi.

Brash is scum of the highest order.  His disgusting little affaire/s.

It can't be much fun being targeted but I think a lot depends on how its handled.

Steven Joyce for example handled the thrown sex toy incident extremely well & with humour.


https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7660465...t-waitangi


"You have] new experiences in politics every day. It's the privilege of serving," Joyce said, tongue-in-cheek.

He wasn't sure if he would become the next YouTube sensation, since he hadn't seen the footage.

"It would be unfortunate for being known for this incident."



He later tweeted: "Someone send the gif over to [television host] John Oliver so we can get it over with.."
Oliver is a comedian who has made a bit of a habit of poking fun at New Zealand politics."

Yes well handled by Steven Joyce and John Oliver, in the way that 'any publicity is good publicity'.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/video/2...gate-video

[C_T_Russell]

Why is it you capitalise White, but not 'maori' or 'treaty' unless you are c&p ing?

Thats my mistake sorry, I had edited my signature, so that W happened to be at the beginning of the old one.

[Praktica]

So from your signature - you are saying all your functional groups are on the same side?