New Zealand Maori begin march on capital to protest indigenous treaty bill

Decades of interpretation by the courts and a separate Maori tribunal have tended to expand Maori rights and privileges.

Hmm, that does sound a little out of step these days.

Aren’t we supposed to treat all people the same, basically?

(I’d say the people who descended from people in 1840 who signed this treaty are all equally indigenous. How many generations have to pass to qualify?)

It may be better to use the term “pakeha” than “whites” to avoid confusion there. There are a lot of “white” Māori.

HawkToday  07:23 pm JST

That's weird. Quite a few whites in the accompanying photograph.

Yep, all you need to do in NZ now is say you have 5% Maori blood in you and you get all the extra benefits that white people don't. Cheap loans, government hardship handouts & the list goes on.

There are people walking around NZ that are whiter then Frosty the snowman but they "identify" as Maori

Haaa NemuiToday  07:49 pm JST

It may be better to use the term “pakeha” than “whites” to avoid confusion there. There are a lot of “white” Māori.

No, that word is not and English word so I am Not Pakeha , I am a White Man. But you are on the right path with now there are lots of White Maoris in NZ.

Yep, all you need to do in NZ now is say you have 5% Maori blood in you and you get all the extra benefits that white people don't. Cheap loans, government hardship handouts & the list goes on.

There are people walking around NZ that are whiter then Frosty the snowman but they "identify" as Maori

So you're saying everyone is entitled to the same benefits if they simply say they are Maori? Sounds fair to me.

HawkToday  07:23 pm JST.

That's weird. Quite a few whites in the accompanying photograph.

And adding to above have a look at the woman's name holding the sign, Not a single bit Maori. Just a freeloader taking advantage of the handouts

No, that word is not and English word so I am Not Pakeha , I am a White Man.

while I understand the sentiment, it’s a bit like saying you aren’t “gaijin” because that’s a Japanese word not an English word.

But you are on the right path with now there are lots of White Maoris in NZ.

Yep, the comment about the whites in the photograph I felt needed a response.

It's a fair point but are you willing to say with certainty that every person in the picture has Maori ancestry? Perhaps they simply support the cause.

I'm not saying they are one way or the other. I'm just saying (or trying to at least... maybe not very well) there are actually plenty of "white" Maori, and it's not really appropriate to be suggesting that because those in the photo are "white" that they might not be Maori.

I'm not saying they are one way or the other.

Right. Because you can't. And neither can I, which is why I concede the point.

there are actually plenty of "white" Maori, and it's not really appropriate to be suggesting that because those in the photo are "white" that they might not be Maori.

Also pretty inappropriate (and untrue) to suggest that no non-Maori New Zealander sympathises with their concerns.

Also pretty inappropriate (and untrue) to suggest that no non-Maori New Zealander sympathises with their concerns.

and I'm not saying that either.

Yes! correct!

So Maori and non-Maori alike are able to take advantage of benefits offered to Maori. Sorry, I'm still not seeing the unfairness there.

and I'm not saying that either.

Cool. Well, we can't ask the people in the photo, so yeah, maybe they are all Maori, maybe not. And that's not even a photo of the current hikoi so it's moot anyway. I apologise for the offense.

HawkToday  09:49 pm JST

Yes! correct!

So Maori and non-Maori alike are able to take advantage of benefits offered to Maori. Sorry, I'm still not seeing the unfairness there.

WHITE people in NZ do not get the same free handouts that these bludgers do. And if you want to talk about numbers. Take a look at the Maori unemployed on the "dole" as you called it vs WHITE people. And then consider the actual percentages of Maori vs WHITE people on the population. That will tell you how they are just lazy freeloaders. Then take a look at the amount of Maori in prisons in NZ vs WHITE people and again keep that population in mind.

AlongfortherideToday  10:19 pm JST

HawkToday  09:49 pm JST

Yes! correct!

So Maori and non-Maori alike are able to take advantage of benefits offered to Maori. Sorry, I'm still not seeing the unfairness there.

The white people you are saying are also taking advantage of free handouts are the same white people who PRETEND to Maori as they know if they ever want to be lazy and never work just pretend to be one. Different health care system, different interest rates on loans, different education system (if you can actually get one out of bed in time to even go to school.

WHITE people in NZ do not get the same free handouts that these bludgers do. 

You said they do! They just need to say they are Maori.

Take a look at the Maori unemployed on the "dole" as you called it vs WHITE people. And then consider the actual percentages of Maori vs WHITE people on the population. That will tell you how they are just lazy freeloaders. Then take a look at the amount of Maori in prisons in NZ vs WHITE people and again keep that population in mind.

Well, you don't know, do you? Could be that's white people claiming to be Maori.

Look, I know Maori are over represented in crime, unemployment and so on. They also fare less well than others in things like life expectancy, alcoholism, suicide rates, health, etc. First of all, how are they privileged again? Secondly, I think your whole premise is flawed to begin with. In order to claim such priveleges, you're usually required to prove your Maori heritage with documentation, generally provided through your iwi. I don't think simply identifying as Maori is enough. Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

Any person born in New Zealand is an indigenous person and should have the same rights as any other person of New Zealand.

I do, all you have done in all your comments is play with words of other people. You have not yet mentioned a single fact that shows us you have any knowledge at all on the topic.

According to you, Maori have special entitlements that non-Maori can also get. Huh? We've established that Maori have worse outcomes in almost all social indicators such as health, education, crime, employment, housing etc but they are somehow privileged, and you've as yet failed to prove, as I asked, that you don't need to provide evidence of your whakapapa to access those entitlements. Furthermore, you've perpetuated the long-debunked Moriori myth. Come on, how are the education, health, and lending systems (those you mentioned) better for Maori than for non-Maori?

Would it be fair to say that a minority party that feeds on racism is stirring up racism to boost its membership numbers?

Generally treaties are best interpreted by the courts. The legal system is more likely to uphold peoples' rights. Politicians are more likely to suppress, restrict and abolish peoples' rights.

Most places with a mix of people use bilingual roadsigns/forms etc, but only oppressive regimes force people to speak a specific language. Surely NZ hasn't slid that far right.

Both Australia and NZ recognise past abuse (it was worse in Australia). Both have attempted to make amends, but with limited success. The people in positions of power and authority on both sides might not be the best option for sorting things out. It may be helpful for ordinary people on both sides to talk to each other and find out where the problems lie.

I used to run sessions that would gather people who worked in education, local government and social care, to sit and chat about the problems they were having, and find ways to resolve them. Because they were not speaking for a union or an employer, they felt able to speak freely and got on with each other, often finding workable solutions to seemingly intractable problems. After the meetings they stayed in touch. When those in charge sit down together, they take entrenched politicised positions, refuse to make concessions and it usually turns into a war of attrition.

Kathy Hughes sign has me scratching my head. She is apparently a leader in the pro-Maori political party Te Pati Maori yet the sign looks like something you would expect to see a far right anti-Maori rights demonstrator to carry.

Kathy Hughes sign has me scratching my head. She is apparently a leader in the pro-Maori political party Te Pati Maori yet the sign looks like something you would expect to see a far right anti-Maori rights demonstrator to carry.

A play on a line Maori rights activist Tama Iti was forced to write out hundreds of times at school as punishment for speaking te reo Maori laid over a tino rangatiratanga, the national Maori, flag?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/pou-tiaki/129683587/i-will-not-speak-mori-tame-itis-provocative-new-artwork-creates-a-splash

fzgai

Hmm, that does sound a little out of step these days.

Aren’t we supposed to treat all people the same, basically?

Yes. But this pertains to the treaty and the people that it covers as part of a legal agreement.

To get an understanding of what New Zealand is going through would take pages and pages. It is very complex. A Treaty was written by the Governor of the time in 1840 - Governor Hobson and a copy was also made in Maori - so that the many chiefs who could not speak English could have it read out to them. The crux of the Treaty was that the Chiefs gave up sovereignty to the Queen of England and that all New Zealanders would be treated equally. This was signed by the Chiefs and became the founding document. In 1860 another meeting was held by the then Governor and 180 chiefs to ask how they felt about the Treaty. To a man, they all agreed that life could not have been better and they were happy with the Treaty. In 1975 a Tribunal was formed - called the Waitangi Tribunal - to look into alleged grievances and they re-wrote the interpretation of the Treaty - using 1975 language and not the 1840 language, inventing new words and adding words like "partnership", "principles", all of which found in favour of Maori. They ignored the 1860 meeting as "irrelevant". As a result, there has been a continuous payment to Maori groups that has totalled more than $6Billion in total so far and continues today. Maori have been given control over things that were never intended in the Treaty and they command special places in New Zealand. Places for entry into specialist areas like Medical school are reserved for Maori applicants who do not have to attain the same pass marks for entry as do other applicants. Try watching this to give you an idea... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_MohRB1bmo

A Treaty was written by the Governor of the time in 1840 - Governor Hobson and a copy was also made in Maori - so that the many chiefs who could not speak English could have it read out to them.

Translated into Maori by white guys.

 In 1860 another meeting was held by the then Governor and 180 chiefs to ask how they felt about the Treaty. To a man, they all agreed that life could not have been better and they were happy with the Treaty. 

Kohimarama? Yeah, citation needed. No mention of the chiefs who refused to attend, nor those, especially in the Taranaki, who were actively fighting the British in an attempt to keep their land from being taken at the time? And of the over 200 hundred attendees, a little over 100 signed the resolutions.