|
An interesting and informative debate between Kelvin Davis, List Labour MP and the One New Zealand Foundation Inc. after he received a copy of our article. “Maori – as one sees in legislation.” See article below.
29 March 2009.
To: One New Zealand Foundation Inc.
Tena koe
I disagree.
Kelvin Davis. MP.
|
Kelvin Davis Labour List MP |
29 March 2009.
Why do you disagree Kelvin?
Regards,
Ross Baker
31 March 2009
Kia ora Ross
I don’t believe you have the right to define who I am according to your cultural perspective and biases, just as I don’t have the right to define who you are by what I may perceive your whakapapa to be.
Kelvin
1 March 2009.
Kelvin.
We are not questioning your culture or your whakapapa, that is your God given right. What we are questioning is your right to claim against the "distorted" Treaty of Waitangi as "the distinct race of people" that signed the Treaty in 1840. Intermarriage between the races, of their own free will, has destroyed this forever. While the Treaty of Waitangi made us all one people under one flag, one law, intermarriage between the races made us all one people - New Zealanders, something we should all be extremely proud of - I am!!!
We have no problem with your chosen culture or your parents determining your whakapapa, but when it affects me and all other non-Maori New Zealand citizens, then we have a right to question it.
It is a fact, the Government has continued to change the law to define, "who is a Maori today?" as their ancestry became further and further diluted, but this should not give this "mixed race of people" advantages over all other New Zealanders who cannot claim a small trace of "maori" ancestry.
My ancestors came to New Zealand in 1839, so the Treaty belongs to me and to all other New Zealand citizens just as much as it belongs to you and your Maori friends.
"He iwi tahi tatou - We are now one people" - New Zealanders,
For all I know, I may have some "maori" ancestry, (I have no idea what or who my granny did behind the bike sheds) but this does not give me the right to advantages and privileges over my fellow New Zealanders!! Unfortunately it's a fact, the "distinct race of people" that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840, no longer exists.
Regards,
Ross Baker.
1 March 2009.
I'm Maori. You're telling me something different according to your biases.
Kelvin Davis MP
1 March 2009.
No Kelvin, you’re Maori, just not the "maori" that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi!
Regards,
Ross Baker.
1 March 2009.
Ross
Your blood quantum argument is wrong.
If we apply your thread to another context it could be argued that because of intermarriage between races I'm no longer part of the distinct family that bought my maternal great, great, great, great grandfather's farm and as a result have no claim to it? The family name has changed a number of times over the intervening generations, so it can be argued that I'm not part of the 'distinct original family'.
It seems you despise the fact that Maori are tangata whenua, and you can't ever be part of this exclusive club.
It also seems you have deeper issues with Maori but are trying to pick on a small part of the Treaty to justify your anger.
Kelvin
2 March 2009.
Kelvin,
Your family farm is a good example. Before the Tiriti o Waitangi was signed, individual maori or their families owned nothing, it was owned by the tribe while they could defend it. If a stronger tribe came along, the tribe occupying the land either fled, became slaves or dinner as in Taranaki's case when the Waikato invaded them in 1835.
I have no desire to belong to this "exclusive club", I am more than happy with "my club" that we shared with you when your maori ancestors signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840 that gave you, your family and your property protection under the law of the land, except in Mr and Mrs Titford and their young family's case in 1995.
And yes, I and many other New Zealanders have an issue with today’s Maori when we see innocent people like Allan Titford and his young family's freehold titled farm at Maunganui Bluff confiscated by the Crown using "corrupt" documents for an "alleged" Maori land claim without one document to substantiate it, when in fact, this land has been an ongoing dispute since Tiopira Kinaki (Te Roroa) tried to steal it from Parore te Awha in 1874 to sell to the Crown. Te Roroa and Parore legally and morally sold this land to the Crown as two separate sales in 1876. The Kaingaroa Forest is another issue we have, this land was also legally and morally bought by the Crown in 1889, but it has been returned to today’s Maori, including the forest which was owned by the people of New Zealand for the people of New Zealand and had nothing to do with the "original" purchase. See March issue of "Investigate" magazine.
Kelvin it's a fact, Maori today are not the "distinct race of people" that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840, they are a "mixed race of people" through intermarriage of their own free will with other races. It's also a fact, the Government you are part of today has continued to amend the law to define who is a Maori as their "maori" ancestry became further and further diluted, until today they are, "a race of people one sees in legislation", but hopefully proud of all their ancestors as they should be and proud to be a New Zealander.
Regards,
Ross Baker.
2 March 2009.
Ross
So now we're getting to what this is all about - the Titford business.
Some advice - 1. Be up front about what the issue is.
2. Don't denigrate the Treaty or cast aspersions on a person’s whakapapa such as our ancestry is becoming diluted - you'll never win that argument.
3. Don't complain when Maori use the pakeha system - and win. It comes across as if you only back the system when it backs you. You can't have it both ways. Go back to court, if you get what you want, then you were right. If you don't get what you want, you were wrong. The law is black and white I'm told.
Kelvin
3 March 2009.
No Kelvin, it's not about the "Titford business" it's about whether Maori today are the people that signed the Treaty in 1840.
I mentioned the "Titford business" and the Kaingaroa Forest because I have researched these over a number of years and feel it is unjust for today's Maori to be able to claim for land they allege was once owned by one of their ancestors. There is also a second issue with the Kaingaroa Forest, while the land may have once belonged to maori and was purchased by the Crown on a willing seller/willing buyer basis, the forest/trees were planted by the people of New Zealand for the people of New Zealand. Maori have no claim over the trees and the infrastructure that goes with them.
I have never denigrated the Treaty or cast aspersions on a person’s whakapapa. I have just stated the facts as seen in the Acts Parliament has enacted. A person’s whakapapa is determined by his ancestors and parents, something none of us can change whether we like it or not. It is not a case of winning, just pointing out the facts.
The Treaty was denigrated when the Government introduced an English version into the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act and finally when Sir Geoffrey Palmer introduced the "Five Principles" which allowed the Waitangi Tribunal the sole right to interpret the Treaty to suit the claim before it. Governor Hobson never made or authorised an English version of the Treaty.
The apartheid Waitangi Tribunal is not a pakeha system; it is a system for Maori only. What hope have pakeha of winning when they are not allowed to participate, cross-examine or appeal?
As for going back to court, when our present Attorney General was part of the "corrupt" Maori Affairs Select Committee that misled Parliament by withholding all opposing submissions into the Te Roroa Claims Settlement Bill, what hope would Mr Titford have of winning his case?
New Zealand has a legal system, not a justice system and it is definitely not, black and white. Don't believe all you are told - do your own research!!
Regards,
Ross Baker.
Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation Inc.
3 March 2009.
Ross
Maori have been searching for justice since 1840. We think the system is biased against us. You think its biased in our favour.
Your best bet is to stand for parliament and change the system from within. Get yourself on the Maori Affairs Select Committee and fix everything you think is wrong.
As I said earlier, I disagree with you therefore you wouldn't get support from me, but I support your right to try.
Kelvin
Kelvin Davis MP
3 March 2009.
Good one Kev, spoken by a true Poly - the ones that stuffed the system from the beginning!!
It can be fixed from without - not within – as it is corrupt to the core!!
Regards,
Ross.
3 March 2009.
Poly-nesian or Poly-tician?
Kelvin
Kelvin Davis MP
3 March 2009.
Kelvin,
It would have to be a Politician as the Treaty made us all one people - New Zealanders, irrespective of race, colour or creed.
"He iwi tahi tatou"!!
Regards,
Ross
Queen Victoria did not sign the Tiriti o Waitangi with a "mixed race of people - She signed the Tiriti o Waitangi with a distinct race of people called maori, a race through intermarriage of their own free will, no longer exists.
Over the years, many Acts have been passed as the maori race intermarried with other races and their ancestry became further and further diluted from the maori race that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840. As a past Race Relations Conciliator of Maori descent, John Clark stated, "Maori today are a people with maori ancestry, as one sees in legislation".
Some of the Statutory Interpretations of Maori, "As One Sees in Legislation"?
1. The Native Land Act of 1865 defined a Maori as, An aboriginal native and shall include all half-castes and their descendants by natives.
2. The Qualification of Electors Act 1879 defined a Maori as, An aboriginal inhabitant of New Zealand and includes any half-caste living as a member of a native tribe according to their customs and usages and any descendants of such a half caste by a maori woman.
3. The Electoral Act 1893 defined a Maori as, An Aboriginal inhabitant of New Zealand and includes half-castes and their descendants by natives.
4. The Native Land Court Act 1894 defines a Maori as, An Aboriginal native of New Zealand and includes half-castes and their descendants.
5. The Native Land Act 1909 defines a Maori as, A person belonging to the Aboriginal race of New Zealand and includes a half-caste and a person immediately in blood between half-caste and a person of pure descent from that race.
6. The Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974 defines a Maori as, A person of the maori race of New Zealand and includes any descendent of such a person.
This final definition (6) is the definition being used today to allow one group of New Zealand citizens to claim through the apartheid Waitangi Tribunal. All these Acts came about as the maori race intermarried with other races of their own free will.
When the Tiriti o Waitangi was signed, maori were a distinct race of people. Since this time, the maori race has intermarried with other races until today they are not the people Governor Hobson, was authorised to deal with for cession of sovereignty of their country. The fact is, Maori today are a people with maori ancestry as one sees in legislation"; they are not the distinct race of people that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi at Waitangi on the 6 February 1840 ceding sovereignty to Her Majesty the Queen.
Every year, the Royal New Zealand Navy fires a twenty one-gun salute at Waitangi verifying British Sovereignty over New Zealand in 1840. HMS Herald logbook entry 8/2/1840, “A salute of 21 guns was fired to commemorate the cession to Her Majesty of the right of sovereignty of New Zealand”.
The Waitangi Tribunal, which the Government created in 1975, is an apartheid tribunal, where 15% of the population, who can claim a minute trace of maori ancestry, can claim against the others without the right to claim, participate, cross examine or appeal. In 1987, the Government replaced the Tiriti o Waitangi with Five Principles without debate or the people’s knowledge or consent, giving the Waitangi Tribunal unbridled power to rewrite our history. The Government/Crown completely overlooks the fact; Maori today are not, the distinct race of people that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840.
Most Maori today, who claim through the apartheid Waitangi Tribunal or in direct negotiations with the Government/Crown, are closer related to the people they claim to have ripped them of that to their maori ancestors. The Government/Crown are allowing this mixed race of people, through legislation, to claim as if they were, the distinct race of people, that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840. There is no denying, the Treaty made us, all one people under one law, one flag, but intermarriage made us all one people – New Zealanders!!
Queen Victoria did not sign the Tiriti o Waitangi with a mixed race of people - She signed the Tiriti o Waitangi with a distinct race of people called maori, a race through intermarriage of their own free will, no longer exists.
After each chief signed the Tiriti o Waitangi on the 6 February 1840, Governor Hobson shook their hand and repeated,
He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people – New Zealanders
It’s time the people of New Zealand woke up to this monstrous scam being forced on them by the Government/Maori today. It’s an undeniable fact, Maori today are not the distinct race of people that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840; they are a mixed race of people as one sees in legislation.
The End.
Research Department, One New Zealand Foundation Inc.
This is an article of many that appears on our website www.onenzfoundation.co.nz.
|
