Don Brash: Pae Ora Submission
This Bill must be one of the worst pieces of legislation ever to come before the New Zealand Parliament in that it unashamedly and explicitly introduces racism into the New Zealand health sector.Read more
Brash: Treaty does not oblige University to pretend it is in partnership with local Maori tribe
To: Cheryl de la Rey
Subject: Your press statement announcing the University's Office of Treaty Partnership
Dear Dr de la Rey,
As a graduate of the University of Canterbury, I was dismayed - indeed, horrified would not be too strong a word - to read your press statement announcing the University's new Office of Treaty Partnership.Read more
He Puapua - Labour's plan for co-governance by 2040
A Government plan to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) intends to establish two governments in New Zealand by 2040, one for Maori and one for everyone else. These two governments would be subject to a monitoring group created by tribes and chaired by a Maori sovereignty radical, according to the plan that was submitted to Maori Development Minister Nanaia Mahuta on November 1, 2019.
All of this was done quietly. The Labour Party did not campaign on this in the 2020 election. We think the plan to divide New Zealand governance along racial lines and under tribal authority and to set up tribal borders is an outrage. We have set up a petition against this which you may skip to if you are ready to sign.
On March 5, 2019, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her Labour Government commissioned a working group to recommend how to implement the UNDRIP in New Zealand. Nearly a year later, in October, 2020, just 34 pages of the report were posted on the Ministry of Maori Development website. A full version of the report obtained under the Official Information Act this month revealed 123 pages and the muddled thinking used to justify the plan. Click here to read the "He Puapua" document.
The plan details a radical, two-government plan for New Zealand that is totally different to anything in UNDRIP’s 46 non-binding articles. The two governments are intended to be running in just 19 years. The two-government proposal, presumably both central and local, is intended to consist of two overlapping spheres of equal authority, according to the diagram on page 11 of the plan. There would be a sphere of solely Crown governance that includes Parliament, the Beehive, and the civil service, as currently exists, to govern the 4.5 million non-Maori citizens of New Zealand.
How big would be the sphere of solely Maori governance, equal responsibility, and of equal authority? Would that include a second Parliament, a second Beehive, and a second civil service, to govern the half million citizens with some Maori ancestry? The two spheres would overlap creating a “co-governance sphere” in which the Crown and Maori share governance in “matters of mutual concern”.
A group named the Independent Monitoring Mechanism, which was established by the Iwi Chairs Forum in 2015 and led by the Maori sovereignty activist Margaret Mutu, as detailed on page three of the plan, has been pushing for an “implementation” of UNDRIP since 2015. Progress towards two governments would be monitored by a group named the Aotearoa Independent Monitoring Group, presumably the same group that is currently chaired by Mutu.
There is nothing about two governments in UNDRIP’s 46 articles. The two-governments diagram appears in the 34-page version posted on the Maori Development website in October 2020.
There is no mention of the tribal monitoring group in the 34-page version. It looks like UNDRIP is being used as a cover to implement the goals of the Maori sovereignty movement.
When the United Nations adopted UNDRIP in 2007, the Clark Labour Government at that time thought the Declaration too radical for New Zealand to support. But in 2010, the Key-led Government sent Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples to sign New Zealand up to the Declaration.
“Protecting Papatuanuku”, the Maori earth mother, is the first stated objective, shining an environmental light on the project. Five themes follow: Self-determination (Treaty); Maori participation in Crown government; lands, territories and resources; culture; and equity and fairness. Slipping in and out of untranslated Maori words and phrases, the action plan is a masterpiece of deceit. This is most apparent in weasel-word references to the Treaty and Treaty principles, which are cited as the ultimate justification for what is proposed. But the Treaty referred to in the plan, and the Treaty principles, are both versions concocted by the Waitangi Tribunal which bear little relation to the Treaty signed in 1840.
The other key justification is reference to Maori negative social indicators. To separate into a group poor, sick, and incarcerated citizens with some Maori ancestry is a clear case of "lies, damned lies, and statistics", and illustrates the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. So, without either a constitutional lawyer or a cost-benefit analysis in sight, like the Ardern Government has commissioned a small group of Maori sovereignty radicals who appear to be taking this as an opportunity to seize power.
Elements of the plan appear to be already under way. These include:
• Setting up Maori wards in local government, which started taking place in 20 local bodies when referenda on such proposals were outlawed on February 1, 2021.
• Giving claimant groups money to buy private land. A version of this happened at Ihumatao, when protesters forced Fletcher Building to sell 33 hectares to the Government for $30 million.
• An anti-coloniser history curriculum for all schools that starts next year.
• A separate Maori health authority, announced this week, which will not only have responsibility for Maori health but will also have the right to influence the decisions made for the rest of the health sector.
• Exempting some Maori land from the requirement to pay rates.
The full plan prescribes intensive engagement with iwi, hapu, as well as Maori organisations and individuals only, and this may have been happening since November 1, 2019.
The spectacle of tribes setting up roadblocks to protect their “borders” during the Covid-19 lockdown last year, and the Government’s reluctance to enforce the law on the illegal roadblocks, suggests that the tribal border proposal was understood back then.
There is no stated intention to engage with anyone else other than via propaganda to convince us to embrace the Maori language and culture, give territory and resources to tribes, and prepare for New Zealand to be divided into clearly visible tribal districts.
The plan is comprehensive and would end democracy in New Zealand as we know it. It includes:
• Two complete governments that overlap, as described above.
• A written constitution based on a grossly distorted interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi. Those with some Maori ancestry would have greater legal rights than everyone else.
• A Maori health system, where patients with a Maori ancestor will be treated differently from other patients.
• A Maori court system, where offenders with a Maori ancestor will be treated differently from other offenders.
• Maori jails, where inmates with a Maori ancestor will be treated differently from other inmates.
• Granting Maori rights and title to water. Some Maori organization would be paid every time you turn on the tap.
• Public education to eradicate unconscious bias, the sort of bias that no one is aware of until someone with a strong bias against you points it out. This means 85 percent of New Zealanders would be scared to think or speak freely.
To get a clear picture of the covert nature of this activity, compare this proposal for UNDRIP implementation with how the right to petition on Maori wards proposals was removed from law. To outlaw such petitions, the Minister fronted, there was a media release with talking points, efforts were made to get the media onside, and a law change was pushed through Parliament under urgency.
With the UNDRIP action plan, there was no media release, no efforts were made to get anyone onside, there was no law change, and there was no debate in Parliament.
The name He Puapua displays the intent of this proposal. “He Puapua”, which means “a break”, and usually refers to a break in waves, has been given the radical meaning of “breaking the usual political and societal norms”, according to the report.
Has the Maori sovereignty takeover started? Has your Prime Minister started implementing this without telling you? This is your country. A costly system that dilutes your rights and puts you under control of iwi groups could be under way and you are paying for it.
Do you agree or disagree with the radical plan for two governments under tribal control?
Click here to sign our petition to reject co-governance.
Brash: The country is going mad
There are two pieces of legislation wending their way through Parliament at the moment designed to further entrench the crazy notion that the Treaty of Waitangi created an obligation on governments nearly 200 years later to treat anybody with a Maori ancestor in some kind of preferential way.
One is the Public Service Bill, introduced to Parliament last month and now being considered by the Governance and Administration select committee. It represents the Government’s grand plan to revamp the whole public service by repealing the State Sector Act.Read more
Brash: Hobson's not "an anti-Treaty rights" group
Yesterday, in commenting on the decision by New Zealand First to vote against his Bill to entrench the Maori electorates, Te Tai Tonga MP Tino Tirikatene accused that party of pandering to anti-treaty rights group Hobson’s Pledge”. I’m disappointed that Waatea News did not take the trouble to get a comment from Hobson’s Pledge on Mr Tirikatene’s totally unwarranted description of us as an “anti-treaty rights group”. For that, I believe you owe us an apology.Read more
Use your vote to end National's race based policies
Over the last year, the Hobson’s Pledge Trust has been promoting the message that New Zealanders are one people, with equal rights to live in this land – not two people, Maori and “the rest”, as successive governments have asked us to believe. Over the last month or so, with the upcoming election in mind, we have been urging people to “use your vote to end National’s race-based policies”. Not surprisingly, people have asked: how?
First let me explain why voting National won’t end the race-based policies which have been increasingly built into central and local government practice in recent years.Read more