I have read and prefer the opinion of Sir Apirana Ngata in his booklet along with the view noted in the translation of Sir Hugh Kawherau, that sovereignty was ceded to any modern-day re-interpretation.
In my reading, Sir Apirana saw the action taken in 1840 as positive for Maori while noting that anyone doubting the outcome should be reminded that their ancestors made the decision to sign. I have no doubt Sir Apirana fully understood what was written and what it meant.
The Tribunal has exceeded any mandate for issue resolution and has engaged in politics to the point its continuance must be in doubt. The open opposition to the government of the day, and its resistance to the mandate given to the Coalition elected in 2023, surely must mean its days are numbered.
A "unique constitutional status”. We can't even agree to be all equal under the law? NZ is indeed in a very sorry state.
A sad little country at the bottom of the world that was once wonderful and unique with a humble population that mostly laughed at life and and got on with the job but increasingly filled with the wealthy of the world who hope to escape nuclear annihilation and a government who cannot govern due to public servants who continually undermine their mandate and a healthy-sized bunch of victims apologists and sympathisers who destroy any chance of movement forward.
Ensuring equitable outcomes for Maori and Pakeha was tried by Arderns govt, but when it comes to lifespan, there is no proof that they have ever been the same, and may be genetically different, so it become obvious why Labours attempts at D.E.I. were such a failure. It is extreme ideology.
Why after all this time they was it necessary in the first place to have a Tribunal for a Treaty, that is written in plain English . Its time to stop these , call them what you like, but they are not the same as those Maori that signed it in 1840 , these Pakeha/Maori will never stop or be satisfied ,what ever the outcome , who has the authority of this country New Zealand, it's the elected government of today not a bunch of renegade Pakeha/Maori that have the politicians jumping threw hoops and laughing all the way to the Bank .
The Treaty of Waitangi can only ever be one of two things:
1. The intent of the Authors of the Treaty else
2. Void
The Treaty's intention in 1840 by the British was about: Equal rights & votes for every INIDIVIDUAL. What it was not, was the intent of the modern fallacy of Te Tiriti: GROUP based 'co-governance' with 50% say for eternity regardless of your population proportion and your diluted ancestral lineage.
There is nothing in the Treaty of Waitangi that states the guarantee of health, medical, dental, educational, political etc equitable outcomes of Maori (especially partial ancestry) for eternity, at the expense of everyone else and without any consideration of any self-responsibility or genetics.
If there was any misinterpretation of the Treaty at the time then the Kohimarama conference of 1860 left no doubt in Maoridom or English:
4. …Chiefs who signed the Treaty of Waitangi ceded for themselves and their people to Her Majesty the Queen of England absolutely and without reservation all the RIGHTS AND POWERS OF SOVEREIGHTY which they collectively or individually passed or might be supposed to exercise or posses.
5. ...to watch over the interests and promote the advancements of her subjects WITHOUT DISTINCTION OF RACE.
'The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane' Marcus Aurelius the stoic philosophic Roman emperor 161 - 180.
'Those who think for themselves and don't give in to peer pressure escape being deemed an idiot' is my takeaway.
As former Prime Minister David Lange explained in a speech presented in 2000, the Treaty of Waitangi was a contract between the Crown and Māori, not a ‘partnership’. He said treating it as a partnership was not only “absurd” but doing so would result in the introduction of profoundly “undemocratic” rights and entitlements. The innocent words “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” were included in the SOE Act only because Lange’s then attorney-general (Geoff Palmer) assured the cabinet the phrase was meaningless. Thanks to some judicial musing, this initial phrase became loosely associated with “partnership”. About 30 years on, this link was subtly extended to the “principles of partnership”. Then that meaningless phrase was gradually manipulated into a linkage with co-governance. He Puapua worked on converting that link into a string of “principles of co-governance”, with 3 waters being one of them. Most other countries are moving away from race based rights so that everyone is treated equally.
I have read and prefer the opinion of Sir Apirana Ngata in his booklet along with the view noted in the translation of Sir Hugh Kawherau, that sovereignty was ceded to any modern-day re-interpretation.
In my reading, Sir Apirana saw the action taken in 1840 as positive for Maori while noting that anyone doubting the outcome should be reminded that their ancestors made the decision to sign. I have no doubt Sir Apirana fully understood what was written and what it meant.
The Tribunal has exceeded any mandate for issue resolution and has engaged in politics to the point its continuance must be in doubt. The open opposition to the government of the day, and its resistance to the mandate given to the Coalition elected in 2023, surely must mean its days are numbered.
A "unique constitutional status”. We can't even agree to be all equal under the law? NZ is indeed in a very sorry state.
A sad little country at the bottom of the world that was once wonderful and unique with a humble population that mostly laughed at life and and got on with the job but increasingly filled with the wealthy of the world who hope to escape nuclear annihilation and a government who cannot govern due to public servants who continually undermine their mandate and a healthy-sized bunch of victims apologists and sympathisers who destroy any chance of movement forward.
Ensuring equitable outcomes for Maori and Pakeha was tried by Arderns govt, but when it comes to lifespan, there is no proof that they have ever been the same, and may be genetically different, so it become obvious why Labours attempts at D.E.I. were such a failure. It is extreme ideology.
Great post and summary.
Why after all this time they was it necessary in the first place to have a Tribunal for a Treaty, that is written in plain English . Its time to stop these , call them what you like, but they are not the same as those Maori that signed it in 1840 , these Pakeha/Maori will never stop or be satisfied ,what ever the outcome , who has the authority of this country New Zealand, it's the elected government of today not a bunch of renegade Pakeha/Maori that have the politicians jumping threw hoops and laughing all the way to the Bank .
The issue is that a discussion on this topic always comes down to racism, and if you support ACT you will be “tarred and feathered”.
The Treaty of Waitangi can only ever be one of two things:
1. The intent of the Authors of the Treaty else
2. Void
The Treaty's intention in 1840 by the British was about: Equal rights & votes for every INIDIVIDUAL. What it was not, was the intent of the modern fallacy of Te Tiriti: GROUP based 'co-governance' with 50% say for eternity regardless of your population proportion and your diluted ancestral lineage.
There is nothing in the Treaty of Waitangi that states the guarantee of health, medical, dental, educational, political etc equitable outcomes of Maori (especially partial ancestry) for eternity, at the expense of everyone else and without any consideration of any self-responsibility or genetics.
If there was any misinterpretation of the Treaty at the time then the Kohimarama conference of 1860 left no doubt in Maoridom or English:
4. …Chiefs who signed the Treaty of Waitangi ceded for themselves and their people to Her Majesty the Queen of England absolutely and without reservation all the RIGHTS AND POWERS OF SOVEREIGHTY which they collectively or individually passed or might be supposed to exercise or posses.
5. ...to watch over the interests and promote the advancements of her subjects WITHOUT DISTINCTION OF RACE.
Ref: https://atojs.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/atojs?a=d&d=AJHR1860-I.2.1.6.19&e=-------10--1------0--&fbclid=IwAR3g0KCx9JV0x43yT9WWpVpqhCaUZlPmR0m1eCM4_Z4M_ELBD1u73ONtD8Y
To advocate or promote anything race based is a call for segregation and opposes any possibility of unity.
'The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane' Marcus Aurelius the stoic philosophic Roman emperor 161 - 180.
'Those who think for themselves and don't give in to peer pressure escape being deemed an idiot' is my takeaway.
The Tribunal has quite simply become a racist, apartheid land and money grabbing elite who are pushing a false narrative.
Their outrageous claims are so falsely based as to be laughable.
As former Prime Minister David Lange explained in a speech presented in 2000, the Treaty of Waitangi was a contract between the Crown and Māori, not a ‘partnership’. He said treating it as a partnership was not only “absurd” but doing so would result in the introduction of profoundly “undemocratic” rights and entitlements. The innocent words “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” were included in the SOE Act only because Lange’s then attorney-general (Geoff Palmer) assured the cabinet the phrase was meaningless. Thanks to some judicial musing, this initial phrase became loosely associated with “partnership”. About 30 years on, this link was subtly extended to the “principles of partnership”. Then that meaningless phrase was gradually manipulated into a linkage with co-governance. He Puapua worked on converting that link into a string of “principles of co-governance”, with 3 waters being one of them. Most other countries are moving away from race based rights so that everyone is treated equally.
Please update typo: Sir Apirana Ngata at the Centenary of the Treaty in '1840'