Myth No. 4.
Those tribes, like Tuhoe and Tainui, whose chiefs did not sign the
Treaty, are not bound by it.
The obvious answer to this is that Tuhoe, Tainui, etc. should return
to the taxpayer their recent substantial Treaty settlements as how can
you take a treaty that the forebears of your
tribe did not sign? However, as is so often the case, the obvious is not
the truth. By living peacefully under the law for several generations
paying taxes, receiving welfare benefits, fighting in the armed
services, etc. – these and other tribes have, by their actions, accepted
the sovereignty of the Crown. Whether or not their forebears signed
the Treaty is irrelevant. End of story.
Myth No. 5.
The Treaty of Waitangi was a “partnership” between the Crown
and Maori.
It never was. Full sovereignty was ceded to Queen Victoria by Article
1 of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. Britain, at the time the greatest
empire in the history of the world, did not go in for “partnership”
agreements with Stone Age chiefs who had been unable to bring peace
and order to their land. Indeed, one of the instructions of Colonial
Secretary, Lord Normanby, to Captain Hobson, was to walk away if
full sovereignty could not be ceded as, without it, Britain would have
no legal basis for bringing order and peace to the islands. No special
concessions or “partnership” were mentioned in the Treaty for the
simple reason that there was no partnership.
This was clearly understood by all parties until the Maori radical
movement got off the ground in the 1980s. Realising that by the
words of the treaty they could not get superior rights over other New
Zealanders, they invented the “partnership” concept for that very
purpose. For reasons of cowardice, treason or self-interest, others –
politicians, judges, bureaucrats – have accepted this lie. It is also being
taught in our schools in an effort to soften up the next generation for a
whole new tranche of tribal demands.
Myth No. 6.
There are principles of the Treaty.
No, the Treaty was a very simple document of only three Articles,
none of which mentions “principles” or “partnership”. Since the Treaty
gave equality for the first time to all the people of New Zealand, the
grievance industry of the late twentieth century knew that they could
not get special race based privileges from the Treaty itself and so, 150
years after the event, they invented for the first time the fictions of
“principles” and “partnership” to give them what the Treaty does not.
Myth No. 7.
There are two conflicting versions of the Treaty –
one in English and the other in Maori.
There is only one treaty – in Maori – (Te Tiriti o Waitangi), that was
signed by around 500 chiefs. It was constructed from the English
draft, known as the Littlewood Document (see Appendix B on page
31). Hobson’s secretary, James Freeman, acting improperly, later
made some English “versions” of the Treaty in what he considered
more suitable language to send to dignitaries overseas. These were
neither drafts of the Treaty nor translations of it but one of these
unofficial English documents was signed by some chiefs at Waikato
Heads because there was not enough space on the genuine document
for all the signatures. By creating the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 the
government has adopted this incorrect document, signed by a mere 49
chiefs in the abovementioned circumstances, as the “official” treaty,
displacing Te Tiriti that was signed by nearly 500 chiefs!!!!
Myth No. 8
The Treaty of Waitangi is a “living document”.
Not correct. The Treaty was merely the pre-condition for establishing
British rule, which Governor Hobson did by proclamation later
in 1840. By the end of 1840 the Treaty had performed its function,
viz. acceptance by the chiefs of British sovereignty in exchange for
full British citizenship for all Maoris. It is only a “living document”
for those who want to expand its meaning so as to give ever more
questionable rights to the tribal elite, thereby denying other citizens
their equal rights.
Myth No. 9.
Colonisation was bad for Maoris.
The Treaty of Waitangi and British colonisation brought the advantages
and restraints of civilised government to New Zealand for the first time.
This was the catalyst that brought New Zealand from a state of war
and anarchy to one of peace that ended the cannibalism, infanticide
and inter-tribal warfare that had been features of Maori society since
time immemorial, thus giving them a right to freedom and personal
security that they had not had before.
Conflict resolution came to be through the courts and no longer by
savage battle with victory going to the more powerful, where might
was right. Limits on the power of chiefs benefited all Maori. Chiefs
themselves lived with greater security, no longer forced by the demands
of utu to risk their lives while taking the lives of others.
British law, recognising Maori ownership of land until such time as
they decided to sell (as many did), gave Maoris titles guaranteed by
law to virtually the whole of New Zealand – something they had never
had before as land ownership under the old Maori law of tikanga was
determined by military might; any tribe could be attacked during the
night by a stronger one with better weapons, ensuring a change of land
ownership.
The Treaty of Waitangi freed all the chiefs’ slaves (about 10,000 of
them). They were then free to take work on things like road building
contracts, thus earning money and being able to spend it how they
liked.
For a society that had not even invented the wheel or writing,
colonisation brought all the advanced inventions, comforts and modern
medicine of the Western world. In 1840 the average life expectancy of
a Maori was less than 30 years. In 2013 it was 73 years for men and
77.1 years for women.
Myth No. 10.
Maori had to wait 27 years after 1840 before being granted the vote
in 1867.
Not so. Maoris had the same representation as all other New Zealanders
from the very beginning – after all, the Treaty had given them the full
rights of British subjects. In 1853 all men over twenty-one who owned
property (with no distinction for race) could vote. At the time about 100
Maoris (mainly leaders) were enrolled to vote and by 1860 some 17%
of the electorate were Maoris. The special Maori seats in Parliament
were introduced in 1867 when all Maori men over twenty-one (with
no property provision) could vote. By contrast, a property qualification
still applied to Europeans so that many remained excluded. In 1893
all women, including Maori, were granted the vote. Now that Maoris
are so fully integrated into society there is no longer any reason to
continue the race-based Maori seats in Parliament.
Myth No. 11.
In 1863, during the Maori War, Governor Grey “invaded” the
Waikato.
This misrepresentation has been bandied about for several years –
usually by so-called “professional historians” with an axe to grind. The
word “invade” implies a hostile entry by a foreign power –e.g. Hitler
invading Poland in 1939 and Argentina invading the Falkland Islands
in 1981. Since Grey was the Governor of New Zealand, holding legal
jurisdiction over the whole country, how could he “invade” part of it?
What he did was to send troops legally into the Waikato to suppress a
rebellion against the sovereign power – something that every state is
entitled to do. That is not an “invasion”.
Myth No. 12.
Confiscation of lands from rebellious tribes during and after the
Maori Wars was a breach of the Treaty.
In the words of Sir Apirana Ngata, the first Maori to graduate from
a university and probably the greatest thinker that Maoridom has yet
produced, “The chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England
the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the
Maori people violated that authority. War arose from this and blood
was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in
payment. This itself is a Maori custom – revenge, plunder to avenge a
wrong. It was their own chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The
confiscations can not therefore be objected to in the light of the treaty.”
Ngata also said in 1940 that the Treaty was “a gentleman’s agreement
which on the whole has not been badly observed”.
Myth No. 13.
There is no harm in ”co-governance agreements” between Crown
and Maori.
Incorrect. Co-governance agreements are a violation of both
democracy and national sovereignty. Co-governance undermines the
power of our democracy to make decisions for the general good since
unelected tribes have effective veto powers and see things only from
their own narrow interests. Co-governance agreements drive a sword
through the nation’s sovereignty and are undermining our hard won
democratic institutions.
Myth No. 14.
The Maori name for New Zealand is Aotearoa.
Pre-1840 the Maoris did not have a name for the whole of New Zealand
as they had no sense of a Maori nation – just tribes.
In 1643 the country was named New Zealand by the States-General
(Parliament) of Holland and this has been its name for 370 years.
“Aotearoa” as a fanciful name for New Zealand began only in 1890
when S. Percy Smith used it as a make-up name for the whole country
in his fictional story of Kupe. The word “Aotearoa” did not appear in
the Treaty of Waitangi – for obvious reasons.
Myth No. 15.
Tuheitia of the Waikato is the Maori king.
Like all other New Zealanders Tuheitia is a subject of Queen Elizabeth
II and no monarch can be the subject of another. It is legally impossible.
He might be a chief – even a high chief – but a king he is not. He is not
even regarded as a king by tribes other than his own.
Myth No. 16.
Maoris (“tangata whenua”) have a greater claim to New Zealand
than other New Zealanders.
There is no such thing as an ethnic Maori and there do not appear to
be even more than a few half-castes – a result of several generations of
Maoris preferring to breed with Europeans rather than with their own
kind. What we now have is a successor race of part-Maoris with more
European blood in them than Maori, thus negating the concept of so-
called “tangata whenua”.
Furthermore in a modern democracy that is committed to equal rights
for all citizens it is both absurd and offensive that any racial group
should have superior rights to other New Zealanders. The mere chance
of whose boats arrived first is irrelevant.
Myth No. 17.
Maoris deserve special grants and privileges because they are at the
bottom of the socio-economic heap.
Yes, a certain percentage of part-Maoris are not doing well – certainly
a higher percentage than for other groups. However, poorer people of
all races should be helped on the basis of need and not race.
Far too much of the taxpayer funded Treaty settlement and other race
based monies have gone into the pockets of the pale-faced tribal elite –
people like the multi-millionaire Irish New Zealander, Stephen (alias
Tipene) O’Regan (one-sixteenth Maori).
Myth No. 18
The modern revival of tribalism is a good thing.
No, it’s not. It was tribalism that caused the Musket Wars (1800-40)
in which around a third of the Maori population were killed (around
43,500 killed as opposed to 2,800 killed ON BOTH SIDES during the
Maori wars of the 1840s and 1860s).
It was to get away from this terrible chain of killings – one utu
(revenge) leading to another – that the chiefs signed the Treaty of
Waitangi so as to become united under a single and indivisible Crown.
For governments to try to re-tribalise one part of the population of our
diverse democracy is an affront to those like Tamati Waka Nene and
the other wise and far-sighted chiefs who signed the Treaty in 1840.
Tribalism didn’t work for New Zealand before 1840 and it won’t
work now. It is a curse that should be kept in the past instead of
the tribal elite and appeasing governments using it to undermine
the sovereignty, unity and democracy of the nation through “co-
governance agreements”, a fictitious “partnership between Crown
and Maori”, separate Maori wards in local government, etc. that are
creating a new type of apartheid of two nations instead of one.
Myth No. 19
Treaty settlements are for the redress of historical grievances.
Not any longer. More than $3 billion have been transferred from the
taxpayer to small, private tribes of part-Maoris and there is no record
of any one of them ever saying “Thank-you”. In assessing how many
millions of dollars to hand over to these re-created tribal groups the
Office of Treaty Settlements uses a “quantum” basis. The size of the
settlement will depend largely on the number of people to-day who
claim membership of a particular tribe, even though they may have
less than 4% of Maori blood in them.
Other determinants of the amount are “the benchmark set by existing
settlements” and the amount of land that the tribe held in 1840 regardless
of how much of it they have sold since. These periodic handovers of
tens and hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are based on factors
other than genuine “historical grievances”. It is effectively a protection
racket – buying off the bullying tribal elite so that they won’t mount
big protests that disrupt society and the economy – and they are sold to
the public as “redress of historical grievances”.
Myth No. 20.
The Waitangi Tribunal acts like a court.
No, it doesn’t. Not true to its original purpose, it has become a biased
Maori advocacy group that accepts unreliable oral evidence ahead of
written documents so as to extract as much money out of the taxpayer
as possible. Telling lies – as it did when it said that Maori did not
cede sovereignty in 1840 – is a normal part of its racially biased and
verbally fabricated behaviour. This Tribunal is the enemy of truth,
honesty and a unified nation.
In South Africa the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, that was
set up to deal with the problems that had occurred under apartheid,
was wound up after five years, having achieved a task much more
challenging than in New Zealand. The Waitangi Tribunal has been
going for nearly 40 years, providing an army of cultural consultants,
etc. with millions of taxpayer dollars. It has already done enough harm
to the country and needs to be abolished.
Myth No. 21
The high imprisonment rate of part-Maoris is the result of
colonisation and the Crown not honouring the Treaty of Waitangi.
No, people are imprisoned for things they have chosen to do. By
1936, Maoris/part-Maoris made up just 11% of the prison population.
This was much closer to the period of colonisation than now. The
fact that 83 years later part-Maoris make up around 51% of the
prison population is due not to colonisation but to bad choices made
by so many of them.
Myth No. 22
In the 1800s Maoris “lost” most of their lands.
Apart from the relatively small percentage of land confiscated as a
punishment for rebellion in the 1860s (See Myth No. 12) Maoris did
not “lose” their lands; they sold them for valuable consideration at a
mutually agreed price. Whether they spent the proceeds wisely or not
was their own choice. There is a world of difference between “losing”
something and selling it. In addition to “Maori land”, people of Maori
descent also own general land.
Myth No. 23.
Most New Zealanders see nothing wrong with Maori privileges; it is
only a few fuddy-duddies who object.
Some polls:
79% No to special Maori seats in parliament
(Submitters to the Constitutional Advisory Panel)
82% No to compulsory Maori language in schools
(yahoo Xtra poll)
96% of non-Maori students of Year 9 and above do NOT learn Maori
despite it being an available option in many schools
(NZ Herald, 23 July, 2014)
85% No to special Maori housing
(Bay of Plenty Times, 20 April, 2013)
81% No to “Maori are special” (Close Up poll, July, 2011)
81% No to Maori names for North Island and South Island (Stuff
poll, 2/4/13)
82% No to “h” in Wanganui
(Referendum conducted by Wanganui District Council, 2006)
79% No to a special Maori voice on the committees of Rotorua
Council (Rotorua Daily Post, 9/5/14)
79% No to Maori wards, Waikato District Council, April, 2012
80% No to Maori wards, Hauraki District Council, May 2013
79% No to Maori wards, Nelson District Council, May, 2012
52% No to Maori wards, Wairoa District Council, March, 2012
68% No to Maori wards, Far North District Council,
March, 2015
82% No to special Maori wards on New Plymouth Council, May, 2015
80.03% No to Maori wards, Kaikoura District Council,
May, 2018
78.2% No to Maori wards, Western Bay of Plenty District Council,
May, 2018
77.04% No to Maori wards, Manawatu District Council,
May, 2018
68.87% No to Maori wards, Palmerston North City Council, May, 2018
56.39% No to Maori wards, Whakatane District Council,
May, 2018
70% want Maori wards in local government abolished
(Consumerlink, Colmar Brunton poll, March, 2012)
68% want the Waitangi Tribunal abolished (Ibid)
Myth No. 24.
Those who oppose special rights and privileges for part-Maoris are
“racists”.
This is a contradiction in terms and is propagated by people who are
either mischievous or just misinformed. Special rights/privileges for
one race are a violation of the democratic principle that we should
all be treated equally. To demand this is not being “racist”. The real
racists are those of the radical tribal elite who are trying to subvert our
democracy with their never-ending race-based demands.
