A massive "Education and Training Bill" is currently open for submissions. This radical Bill requires State indoctrination of children and young people in Marxist identity ideology and Maori cultural propaganda, and grants Maori elites undue influence over the education of our children and young people. The new rules seek to impose Maori cultural values on our predominantly non-maori population and transfer power, jobs and funding to Maori academics and iwi elites. In a particularly sinister move, the Bill will allow Chris Hipkins and Kelvin Davis (Minister of Maori-Crown relations) in consultation with Maori to issue a "Statement of Expressions" outlining what education providers (schools, pre-schools, training institutes etc) will be required to do to meet their obligations under Treaty legislation. The creation of these rules by the Minister and the Minister of Crown-Maori relations in consultation with "Maori" (presumably representing the bogus Crown-Maori "Treaty partnership") represents a novel form of "Treaty negotiations", and with the Bill expressly removing Parliamentary powers of oversight, a gross corruption of democratic principles.
Please read further to help us defeat the Bill where it seeks to indoctrinate our children with identity politics and Maori cultural propaganda and to hand undue influence and powers to unelected, unaccountable Maori elites.
The indoctrination plan is outlined in Section 9: Te Tiriti o Waitangi:
Section 9 states that a purpose of our education system is to honour the Treaty of Waitangi and support Maori-Crown relationships. Section 9 will require teachers to teach the lie that the Treaty created a partnership between the Crown and Maori.
Section 5(4)(c) schools must instil in each child the importance of:
(ii) diversity, cultural knowledge, identity, and the different official languages, and
(iii) Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori.
Section 5 will require teachers to promote Marxian identity ideology and elevate the significance of Maori language beyond its modern day relevance and, in particular, relevance to non-Maori children. Ironically, the drafters of the Bill don't appear to realise that New Zealand has only two official languages: te reo Maori and New Zealand Sign Language, so the Bill requires teachers to instil in children the importance of te reo Maori and NZ sign language while ignoring English, the world's most widely spoken language and the gateway to jobs in a modern economy.
This provision in effect creating backroom "Treaty negotiations" between the government (Chris Hipkins) and Maori (Kelvin Davis and iwi elites) as to what education providers will be required to do to meet their Treaty obligations appears to be part of a movement towards constitutional change by stealth, a sinister corruption of democracy likely to result in a massive transfer of broad powers to "Maori" within the education section.
It is unknown as to what a "Statement of expectations" might stipulate, soft indoctrination: the adoption and elevation of maori culture and maori religious practices (karakia etc), is already widespread throughout the education sector on a voluntary basis. It is possible that the Statement might set out compulsory curriculum material to be taught in primary and secondary schools including maori language and tikanga, as well as compulsory Maori staffing quotas, perhaps even the separate tuition of Maori children. This is quite possible, as section 122(1)(d) requires School Boards to ensure that school policies and lessons are aimed towards achieving equitable outcomes for Maori students.
While we cannot know what the Statement will contain, the point to note is that unless the Bill is amended, all education providers will be be required to give effect to measures outlined in the Statement without reference to Parliament or the wishes and needs of the wider public: taxpayers, teachers, parents or the students themselves.
Section 122(1)(d) states that a primary objective of School Boards is to ensure that school plans, policies and lessons reflect:
- local tikanga Maori, matauranga Maori and te Ao Maori; and
- that schools take all reasonable steps to make lessons available in tikanga Maori and Maori language; and
- achieving equitable outcomes for Maori students
As such, the Bill requires teachers to indoctrinate children with sanatised Maori lore, Maori religious beliefs (animism) and the so-called "Maori world view". Presumably the stipulation of local tikanga will require school boards, prinicpals and teachers to consult with local Maori elites in matters of school governance and the preparation of lesson plans.
The Bill does not define who is a "Maori" student, or what "equitable outcomes" means, or any way of measuring "equitable outcomes". Presumably, schools will be required to jump through the numerous hoops stipulated in the Statement of Expectations and allocate funding to meet the additional perceived needs of a child due to that child's ancestry rather than treating the child as an individual with individual needs. And while we would all want all children and young people to achieve to the best of their abilities, it is not at all clear why the entire burden for achieving "equitable outcomes" (however interpreted) should be placed at feet of schools, rather than parents. Nor is it clear why "Maori students" are relegated to belonging to a generic minority "identity", stigmatised and patronised as requiring special attention regardless of their individual skills and unique personality. A better approach might be to encourage Maori (all) parents to instil in their children a love of reading and learning, an appetite for study and encouragement to eschew drugs and alcohol.
Part 3 Subpart 6 of the Bill provides for the continuing segregation of Maori children and young people from mainstream education though the provision of separate schooling (Kura Kaupapa Maori) at all levels catering almost exclusively to Maori.
It is unclear whether independent research has been conducted to see whether Kura Kaupapa Maori serve the best interests of these children and young people.
Transfer of rights and powers to "Maori"
Section 10(1) the definition of "school community" is broadened beyond the parents and families of school students to include "the Maori community associated with the school". This might be interpreted as a requirement by schools to consult beyond the immediate family of pupils and consult with local iwi.
Under these provisions, all "Maori" are regarded as belonging to a generic minority "identity".
Probably the best way that we can have the Bill changed is by contacting New Zealand First MPs (and ACT's David Seymour) about how the Training and Education Bill will confer undue rights on Maori to influence the eduction of our children and young people.
Email or write (Freepost Parliament) to NZ First MPs
urging them to propose amendments to the Bill that would remove all references to the Treaty, as outlined within section 9 of the Training and Education Bill.
David Seymour (ACT)
tell our MPs:
- that our children and young people should be treated as individuals, rather than as a sub-set of a politically constructed identity
- that we do not want future generations indoctrinated with Treaty propaganda or with knowledge of tikanga Maori and the so called te Ao Maori (Maori world view)
- that you do not support the creation of race based powers
- that school staff should be employed solely on the basis of competence
which is why the Education and Training Bill must be amended to remove all race based preference as outlined within section 9 of the Bill
Click here to make a submission. The closing date for submissions is 14th February 2020.
Other provisions in the Education and Training Bill that transfer powers to Maori and create de facto Maori quotas, as outlined in section 9(2):
- section 307(1)(c) power of Maori Advisory Committee to elect 1 member of the NZIST Board
- section 312(1) requires the NZIST to establish a Maori Advisory Committee
- section 312(3)(a) NZIST Council must consult with the Maori Advisory Committee
- education Councils acknowledge the principles of the Treaty in the exercise of their functions and powers
- the NZ Institute of Science and Technology collaborate with Maori and iwi partners to improve outcomes for Maori learners and Maori communities
- New Zealand Institute of Science and Technology: Schedule 13 requires that the Institute's governance, management and operations give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi etc; recognise that Maori are key actors in regional social, environmental, and economic development
De facto Maori quotas in employment rules
- section 258(2)(a) NZIST Council must include at least 1 "Maori"
- section 344(3)(b) Workforce Development Council must include representation by Maori employers
- section 128 a school Board's policies and practices must reflect cultural diversity. Presumably this governs Board's roles in the appointment of Principals, which may favour an applicant's ancestry over competence.
- section 380 the Tertiary Education Commission appoint members only after consultation with the Minister of Maori Development
- section 449(4)(b)(v) require the Minister to consider the collective understanding of partnership principles when considering appointments to the Teaching Council
- section 564(2)(d) general principles: schools and training providers to recognise the aims and aspirations of Maori, the employment requirements of Maori and the greater need of Maori in the education service
Under these provisions, all "Maori" are relegated to belonging to a generic minority "identity", stigmatised and patronised as requiring special attention regardless of their individual skills and unique personality.
Please sign our Ihumatao petition: Government must uphold Treaty settlement, police must evict protesters
In 2015, the Ihumatao iwi Te Kawerau a Maki agreed to a full and final settlement of all their grievances and received financial redress of $6.5 million, plus forestry, forestry rentals and more. Fletchers bought private land in the area and announced plans to build 480 homes, 40 of which were to be given to Te Kawerau a Maki. But a member of that iwi (against the will of the elders) started a land occupation demanding that the Government buy the land to keep it as is.
If the Government caves in to protesters and buys the land, this will open the floodgates to similar protests, trash Treaty settlements, and erode private property rights.
Undue Influence: New Zealand’s Tribal Corruption Charter
Corruption takes different forms in different nations. In New Zealand the Race Based Laws which grant legal privilege to Maori individuals and tribal entities have resulted in a form of corruption, the undue influence of Maori tribal entities upon New Zealand’s governance, economy and society.
Since 1975, this undue influence has resulted in an expanding cycle of “legalised” extortion, a "virtual Tribal Corruption Charter" through which wealthy, litigious tribal trusts can employ their special legal status as a mechanism to gain additional legal rights and powers, financial gain to individuals (mainly tribal trustees and employees) and tribal entities.
The ability of Maori individuals and groups to lodge claims with the Waitangi Tribunal that they have been prejudiced, in conjunction with an increasingly radicalised Maori electorate, also exerts undue influence on governments seeking policy reform, as governments quietly pay sweeteners to tribal groups to avoid protracted litigation and maintain internal support from Maori electorate MPs.
As many of the Race Based Laws are indirect in influence (eg the right to be consulted on an environmental application rather than the power to refuse consent), tribal entities often resort to implied threats of litigation and delay. As voiced by one tribal trust:
“It says the first rule on consent application is to “object”. The second rule on consent application is “object”. If in doubt go back to rule one (objection gives time, time is of no importance to us, only the application) it says. The first rule of objection is to claim lack of consultation, the document states. The second is the Treaty of Waitangi, the RMA is the third, and the fourth “anything anyone can think of”. Results would not be measured in dollars, “but the sum of the good that can be gained for the hapu”.(1)
The result of this undue influence of tribal entities is massive costs, both direct and indirect, imposed upon government ministries and agencies, local government, business and individuals. (2),(3)
Direct costs to business and individuals include costs for "soft" payments to tribal entities, unwanted and unnecessary cultural consultancy and advisory services, regulatory complexity, legal fees and delay. The wider economy must also be damaged as individuals and businesses simply walk away from both scientific endeavour and business opportunities.
Indirect costs for the operation of parallel institutions, separate Maori seats, Maori wards, the Waitangi Tribunal, the Maori Courts and co-governance etc flow to individuals and business through increased taxes, rates and charges. In some instances, undue influence fosters criminal corruption which may or may not be reported to authorities.
The following entries, which document instances of only a tiny fraction of the undue influence exerted by tribal entities over the last forty years, illustrate how tribal rights are damaging not only our economy but the nation's social fabric through the normalisation of New Zealand's peculiar form of constitutional corruption.
Please contact firstname.lastname@example.org if you have verifiable examples of undue influence that you would like to be included on this page.
Northland Regional Council has granted resource consent to Refining New Zealand to dredge the entrance to Whangarei Harbour.
To get a bore you have to get iwi consent, and they want a koha, which is not a gift, it's a bribe" one woman stated.
One Pure, owned by Hong Kong based corporation Hon Lung International, with the capital and expertise to build a massive water bottling facility, felt the need to approach Hawke’s Bay tribal entity Ngati Paarau[i] for “support and partnership [ii]” in their endeavour. Why?
"Through regular engagement and funding provided by Genesis Energy, the parties seek to deliver the broad objectives of developing a long term relationship, assisting Marae development, fostering cultural understanding, supporting the kaitiaki role of the Marae and enhancing the environment and supporting education and training initiatives".
"We were then told that under the new Draft Unitary Plan, not yet enacted, our building being within 50 metres of a designated Maori heritage site, we needed RMA approval (for a new shop window, for God’s sake), this instantly forthcoming at a cost of $4500 plus the approval of 13 iwi".
Waitaha (te Runanga O Waitaha Me Mata Waka Inc) appeal against the granting of RMA consents by Waitaki District and Otago Regional Councils, claiming the Councils had failed in their resource consents process to apply the Treaty of waitangi, Resource Management Act, New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and Local Government Act.
"This decision is also concerning in that it invites Maori and Genesis to have 'a meeting of the minds' over the next 10 years to resolve the future use of the water. This is an invitation for backhanders, given the huge value of electricity and the leverage that Whanganui iwi will have over Genesis.
Members of iwi Ngati Kura clamp four cars at Matauri Bay and clamp four cars belonging to students on the beach for a surfing lesson.
(1) Ngati Puu: Christchurch Press, 12th March 2003; quoted on Dr Nick Smith: Hansard Parliamentary Debates: resource-management-amendment-bill-no-2-—-first-reading; http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/47HansD_20030320_00001026/resource-management-amendment-bill-no-2-%E2%80%94-first-reading
(2) Round, D --- "Here Be Dragons?"  OtaLawRw 3; (2005) 11 Otago Law Review 31
(3) Ministerial Panel on Business Compliance costs, which identified that the RMA was a significant cost to business due to:
• Inconsistency in interpretation
• Lack of capacity in local government
• Time delays
• Difficulties in meeting obligations to Maori
24 May 2018
Hon. Kelvin Davis Minister of Crown-Maori Relations
We believe that the Government’s move to establish a ministerial responsibility for reviewing the relationship between the Crown and Maori is fraught with danger because it entrenches the notion that the Crown and Maori somehow exist as separate groups in partnership with each other. Indeed, your own website affirms that “the Crown and Maori will act reasonably, honourably, and in good faith towards each other as Treaty partners”, reinforcing that notion. But the Crown’s duty to act in this way surely extends to all New Zealanders, of whatever origin; it cannot be the prerogative of only a racially selected few.
The arrival of British rule in New Zealand in the wake of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 did not immediately spread throughout the country as qualified manpower was scarce. Some Maori in the Waikato were dissatisfied that lawlessness still prevailed in the back areas and so the idea of having their own "king" and government was floated. Not all Maori - not even in the Waikato - accepted the idea.Read more
The first Agreement negotiated under the Marine and Coastal Area (Tukutai Moana) Act 2011 not only confirms widely raised fears of the Crown’s failure to represent the public interest but sets a precedent for fresh rounds of Treaty style negotiations.Read more