32:20 Duncan says - "they've got too much" in reference to how white people think about Maori issues. I don't think this is correct. Being unelected onto councils and Maori seats is the issue. No group including whites has this advantage. Previous confiscations and hurts is a no brainer to be corrected appropriately.
How about just giving ordinary New Zealanders a choice in the matter. I appreciate politicians know better but they should also realize we are fed up with being treated like mindless sheep. As far as I am aware, NZ is still a democracy. Let the people speak!!!
Absolutely agree John...as the monies for these endless settlements came from the had labour of the NZ people they have every right to have their say. Let the entire country speak. A referendum will determine the matter once and for all.
Ah, what a shocker-Don Brash runs a poll, and the results just happen to align perfectly with his long-standing preferences. Truly groundbreaking. Next, we’ll hear that the sun rises in the east, or that water is wet. When you curate the audience, frame the questions, and play to a specific narrative, it’s less of a "poll" and more of a performance art piece.
@@I_Extinguish_I and this from a TPM disciple? TPM are masters at playing to a specific narrative and curating an audience, framing questions.. performance art pieces every one of them... HOW WONDERFULLY YOU DESCRIBE TPM.. thank you!
"There is no case and no space in this country for separatists" “The days when people could stand up and scream “treaty” and believe that they would get special rights have gone.” John Tamihere 2005
I have been listening to all Tamihere great statements of what he intended mostly between 2005-2008... read out in Parliament. The guy has done a complete round about flip... how can he ever be considered relevant it is hard to imagine. He is a user of people and much much more.
@valeriehughes1008 he's learnt how to take advantage of the system to benefit him and his family, he took advantage of his position as ceo of the Waipareira Trust to obtain 385,000 in intrest free loans some of which is believed to have funded TPM, The trust has since clawed the money back because of the negative attention around it, He also lives in a million dollar plus home.
Don just ripped his arguements apart, with actual facts and common sense.......Duncan tried to use what he thought would be gotcha questions, and Don still out thought him with common sense.
Dame Tariana Turia ❤ It didn't matter who the government was, that our job was to get alongside of them and do the very best we could for our people whether we like them or not that wasn't what we were here for, We were here to get the best opportunities for our people that we could so we never ever thought about is it labour or is it National even though I know labour ran that line that we were basically supporters of National, the fact of it is we were supportive of who ever was the government at that time other wise we wouldn't of been able to get anything for our people waste of time been here which is what Matua Whatarangi Winiata told us you can't be there and do nothing get nothing.
I am for Mr Seymour and his 3 Principles Bill. I am1/8 Maori, 7/8s Irish,Scottish,and English, but foremost born a New Zealander. I believe in one elected Gvt making rules for all NZs.
Couldn’t agree more that everyone has the right to fully understand Te Tiriti-but let’s be honest, most of the division comes from not understanding it. Te Tiriti was meant to unite, not divide, by creating a relationship of partnership, protection, and participation. The real issue isn’t the Treaty itself-it’s the selective memory some have about what it actually promised.
@@jimmannz Absolutely, unity is the goal. Aotearoa becomes stronger when we honour the commitments that were made and work together to address the inequities that still exist.True strength comes from a partnership where all voices are heard, and progress is shared. Let’s build a future where unity isn’t just a slogan but a reality rooted in mutual respect and fairness.
The march had nothing to do with the bill, it was TPM looking for more support, as since the new government, TPM have had people leave them in droves, through their own stupidity...now the truth is out, they've made themselves look like the losers they truly are 😊.. keep on truckin Don 🇳🇿👍
Every New Zealander must demand a vote in a referendment. This is the most critical point ever reached in N.Z. and must be resolved by each individual person of voting age.
Oh, Hobson’s Pledge-you’ve got to admire their dedication to keeping things as bland as their slogan. “We are all one people,” they say, while conveniently ignoring the messy bits of history that suggest, well, we’ve never been one people. It’s almost endearing how they cling to Hobson’s handshake moment like it’s the Constitution, while sidestepping the complex realities of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the Crown’s long history of breaches. But hey, it’s a good marketing move. Nothing says “united” quite like framing equity as a threat and cherry-picking history to support the narrative. If they’re steering the ship on this poll, it’s less “let’s have a fair debate” and more “let’s double down on the soundbites.”
I agree, we can no longer be bullied, viciously attacked and threatened into silence... all New Zealanders have the right to determine the future of our country.. bring on a referendum!
@@kareemhetaraka-brown1259 Absolute garbage.. Governments have no money.. the money comes from the tax payers of NZ... taxes on their hard work... if Maori demand endless settlements, payouts and benefits.. then the NZ tax payer has every right to have their say. Maori greed and their vicious attacking of all NZ citizens has brought this to a head and the majority of the people are now pushing back.
Maori only serves their own ethnic group. We are ALL made in God's image, therefore all New Zealanders should be united under one banner i.e. New Zealanders - not pakeha and iwi. It creates seperatism. Furthermore, nobody owns the water. It belongs to God.
Luxon won't fold...he's been out maneuvered by Seymour.....it was never about getting it through this time, it was to get actual factual data on what New Zealanders as a whole want......so in the next 'lets form a government' their will be a referendum on it.
@@maorifilm There are many decent Maori like you mate. But it is the radical racist separatist ones who are making a lot of noise, your kind are not given publicity by the mainstream media.
@@maorifilm You should vote.. sitting on the fence is not an answer.. look at what your ancestors wanted.. they never cease to astound men for their wisdom.. they had a clear image we were to be one people. I still have trust in their wisdom.
Luxon needs to be and feel pressured. This problem will "not" go away. Radical Maori 's desire for self determination is plainly not acceptable!! When will the Government just do we, the Majority want. The electors. That is why we all voted for a more right sided government
There use to be 2 departments within the New Zealand Police. One looked after the transport policing and the other the criminal policing. When they were combined it immediately saved millions and unified a divided Police force into one better and more productive single department. There has been 2 different types of New Zealanders for far too long. We need one single group of New Zealanders, with the one law and one vote for all. Otherwise, things are just going to get worse.
Combining police departments saved money, sure. But governance? That’s not just a “merge and hope for the best” situation. New Zealand isn’t a spreadsheet-it’s a nation built on Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Ignoring that doesn’t unify us; it papers over the cracks left by 180 years of unfulfilled promises. If you want results that actually work, you need collaboration. And co-governance is exactly that: a proven partnership that delivers real results. Take the Waikato River. Before co-governance, it was like a toxic cocktail-polluted by decades of industrial waste, agricultural runoff, and neglect. Enter the Waikato River Authority: iwi and the Crown, working together, funded over 300 restoration projects. Dissolved oxygen levels are up, arsenic levels are down, and the river is finally on the mend. That’s co-governance in action-cleaner water, better outcomes, and everyone benefits. Or let’s talk Te Urewera. Under sole Crown management, it was just another national park, but co-governance handed decision-making back to Tūhoe. The result? Revitalized biodiversity, stronger pest control, and a conservation model that respects both tikanga and environmental science. The land isn’t just preserved-it’s thriving. Now, let’s compare housing. Government emergency housing schemes? You’ve got families stuck in motels for months at eye-watering costs, with no long-term solutions in sight. Meanwhile, Te Puea Memorial Marae’s Manaaki Tangata program? With just $125,000, they housed 181 people-including over 100 kids-in just three months. And they didn’t stop there: wraparound support, job connections, rental subsidies-it was a full toolkit for getting whānau back on their feet. That’s not just cost-effective; it’s life-changing. So, no, co-governance doesn’t divide New Zealanders-it delivers. It’s iwi, hapū, marae, and the Crown working together to clean rivers, restore ecosystems, and house families. It’s not just honoring Te Tiriti-it’s building a better future. The stats don’t lie: partnership works, and frankly, it works a lot better than a one-size-fits-all approach that leaves everyone frustrated. Let’s lean into what’s proven to succeed. It’s time to collaborate, not consolidate.
@@I_Extinguish_I The Treaty was suggested as a means of the Maoris coming under the protection of the British settlers because of what the Maoris did to the French, and they had heard that the French were on their way back to New Zealand with "warships" as the Chiefs said. The Chiefs were petrified that the French were going to attack them again, because of what they did to the French Captain and crew for fishing in an area that the Chiefs had put a tapu on, of which the French knew nothing about, and were not of the same religious beliefs of the Maoris anyway. The original Treaty written IN MAORI ( not the version done several years later by the Maori Chief when he was in England trying to buy muskets so he could attack and kill the Chiefs that had agreed to become citizens of a new Nation of New Zealanders under the British system of DEMOCRATIC governance ) was signed specifically for THE PROTECTION of the Maoris BY THE ENGLISH settlers FROM THE FRENCH, and it was actually a basic Treaty done on the basis that A FULL DOCUMENT OF FOUNDATION could be organised WHEN the Maoris all stopped fighting each other. The example of the Police was given simply to illustrate the advantages of having one department that combined the actions of 2 areas as one, and it was meant to be a reflection of the present situation where some people want one New Zealand Parliament under a democratic system of governance, and another group of people want their own "Aotearoa Maori Parliament" which is racist segregation and against all manner of National and International Laws, and Human Rights Accords that are fully detailed in so many United Nations Resolutions and Agreements that the mere suggestion that a separate group of people should be entitled to things that exclude anyone else, is absolutely UNBELIEVABLE. The ORIGINAL TREATY written IN MAORI and agreed to was not used as a basic Agreement and turned into a full Agreement as agreed and planned, and that was simply because of the continued arguments and wars between the Maoris over which tribe actually "owned" New Zealand, and the modern day claims that the Maoris did not cede sovereignty is actually a big fat lie, simply because of 2 very important FACTS. 1. The Chiefs AGREED to their Treaty and that was to become BRITISH CITIZENS. 2. The continuation of the attempted slaughter by musket use by the rebel Maori chiefs, who had managed to get some from New South Wales ( as Australia was called then ) WAS STOPPED BY THE BRITISH as the Maoris that had signed the Treaty WERE BRITISH CITIZENS, and would become New Zealand Citizens AFTER the FULL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE was debated, and decided IN CO-OPERATION WITH the Chiefs, and the GOVERNOR GENERAL appointed to do those negotiations. The talk about a "partnership" is actually not what was ORIGINALLY AGREED TO, and all the factual documentation ESPECIALLY THAT AGREEMENT some people call their "co-governance agreement" CLEARLY STATES THAT there was ONE LAW, and that was simply to stop any of the Maori chiefs from taking ANY ACTIONS that the British democratic system covered. The Chiefs AGREED to the PROTECTION OF BRITISH LAWS AND GOVERNANCE, the actual situation at that time for the British was to negotiate a BRITISH COLONY with ANY NATIVES and not to take anything by force. The argument today is one of utter fabrication, there was NEVER any 'co-governance" agreement, the Treaty that WAS AGREED TO was one of all Maoris OF THE TRIBES THAT SIGNED becoming British subjects ( even the Chief that did not sign and went to London and Petitioned the Queen ASKED HER TO PROTECT HER MAORI SUBJECTS and proceeded to argue his case for being given muskets, which was refused SIMPLY BECAUSE the British Army had that responsibility to fight the French, or any Maoris that attacked any Maori ENGLISH SUBJECTS.) If today's Maori want "co-governance" then they should consider the fact that they actually do already have that full right. It is called nominating suitable people to stand for a position in local or central Government that a democratic election is being held for, and to campaign for that position on a platform of what they can bring to that position, FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF RACE, RELIGION, OR GENDER that COULD ELECT THEM to that position. I note that there are New Zealanders of Maori descent in Parliament now that have been voted to those positions. The "Maoris only" Party is, under ALL NATIONAL and INTERNATIONAL laws, RACIST AND DIVISIVE BY ALL DEFINITIONS and Legal Actions are underway for it, and ALL OTHER SUCH RACIST GROUPS and ORGANISATIONS to be immediately defunded and disbanded. It is A CRIMINAL OFFENCE under all laws to act the way some Maori activists have been, and continue to in New Zealand. I know quite a number of Maori New Zealanders who work in the various New Zealand Government Departments and Organisations that have played a major role in making very good improvements to the management of our natural resources, and in our social, educational, housing and employment industries, and can confirm that the improvements that have resulted in all these areas have come about because of the one person, one vote, one nation, one direction, one law, one future, and one flag that has been our way of life since the Maori Chiefs sought the help of the British settlers and wanted to become British subjects of the Queen of England. Why do you think the French warships went to Akaroa, settled there for a few years, then left ? Just in case you have not realised why, try reading the documentation that records the true situation at the time the Treaty was asked for, and supplied. The present situation is that if some Maori want to pick a fight over this instead of actually realising how fortunate they are and getting on with their futures, then they better realise that they have got quite a lot that they could actually lose, if the Moriori Claim to the United Nations is finalised, and lodged. THAT will expose the genocide that some of the Maoris committed, and exactly WHO ARE THE REAL INDIGENOUS NATIVES OF NEW ZEALAND.
Don says Maori can't have preferable treatment by allocated seats because everyone has the opportunity to be elected through democratic voting. Wat he is blinded to is that Pakeha are guaranteed the majority of the seats, if not all, through the democratic process he advocates for. This process shuts out Maori representation as history has shown pre 1970's after which began our mission to attain the gains Seymour is attempting to roll back on.
Remember watching a interview with Miriama Kamo and John Tamihere, John was mocking Tiriana and the Māori Partie he even requested to be interviewed with the New Zealand flag in the background.
@simon-ds1vp yip after saying The problem with the Māori Party is that it is led by a bunch of people who have done extraordinarily well out of protest activism, so they can tell their children why they should vote against things, why they should march against things, and why they should dislike others. John Tamihere 2005. The problem with the Māori Party is that it The Māori Party is built around new-age educationalists, reconstructionists in terms of history, and the academics and the new elite around the Treaty of Waitangi chequebooks. There is no case and no space in this country for separatists. I am very proud of my Ngāti Porou tānga-very proud of that tribal background. We do not ram it down other people’s throats, but we are very proud of it. Our being proud of it does not mean to say that we can coerce others into our way of thinking. We have to acknowledge that this is a great land of diversity, difference, and opportunity. The days when people could stand up and scream “treaty” and believe that they would get special rights have gone. John Tamihere 2005
@@darrylsowerby7973 Not so! Let a dna test prove your argument. Until 1970's only half were recognised as being Maori.. you were categorised by the greatest amount of dna you carried... eg someone 3/4 European 1/4 Maori were categorised European. Below 1/4 were not considered Maori. In 1970 changes were made for anyone with Maori blood to be able to call themselves Maori.. at that point there were no full blood Maori left and it was a way of continuing the race and culture. Lots of claims of full bloods but not proven scientifically mainly two 1/2 bloods marrying thinking they then made up a whole Maori blood line!!! The largest percentage were 1/2. Sorry Darryl.. this is a fact!!
@@krismacdonald7397 any Maori who used to work for Government who sensibly invests/ed their money in property or business. It is all just jealousy because they think Maori should be poorer not richer than them.
we have never had a say, and after each paying $30,000 in treaty settlements over fifty years, we deserve a say, we have earned it. I want the equal rights, no more moari seats in parliament, no more moari seats in councils, no more Iwi veto rights on Resource Management, No more Moari saying my property, like 1/3 of Queenstown, is of special interest to them, no more race based anything, I want equal rights for all of us without any exceptions and an end of apartied in NZ.
Ngai Tahu were 2000 people in the whole south island when Treaty was signed, yet now Ngai Tahu claim a special interest and special relationship with 1/3 of the land in Queenstown area.
Good interview. Agenda is out and the original Maori treaty sounds better for all though the privileged would be a little worse off. Ai, history and all facts led me to this conclusion
Technically, since maori had no written language when the treaty was drawn up & signed. Would it not make the 'treaty' null & void since it was written in a language created by the opposing party in the contract? A language that was not written by maori, couldn't possibly be fully understood by them. Even the very definition of ownership was not a concept that was understood by maori, they mistook it for guardianship & hence, much land was stolen from them, many ab*ses have been imposed on them. For balance to be regained in NZ, these glaring issues need to be addressed in a way that is positive for our people & our country, not the back pockets of people who benefitted greatly from that illegal contract.
Get real mate and face the truth. The treaty is a very easy to understand and the Radial Maori Activists want to go back on a deal their topuna agreed to. Their strategy is to keep reiterating misinformation to cause the Illusory truth effect, which has and is resulting in corruption at all levels in our country.
DON you no that your so called parliament are a corporation as your whole governmental system is , the government of the day are illegal,a corporation can not govern a country,you and your lot don are over,exposure is coming and you no were it’s coming from don,truth is coming to all the nation what you and your govenments of past and parties have done to this nation and its people, not just Māori don all people,truth that will set the people free. Don the people of nz will no the truth about the treaty,not the lies you an others with the help of the Atlas network have been spreading in this nation.Don the United Nations no the truth about the treaty don’t they don,it’s a legal document,but that’s not all right don ,isn’t there a document page two ,we’re the United Nations state that your government have deceived the people of New Zealand don,that’s all coming out and more,January 2025 ,not long to wait,so while government quickly pushing through fast track bills
You just repeated a lie that they did not understand ownership. Are You aware they were already trading using euro design ships before the treaty, bit hard to trade overseas if you don't understand ownership don't ya think lol You have been indoctrinated, and that is why you believe that nonsense.
It's only a matter of time before outdated mindsets are left in the past. The newer generations have a better understanding of historical accounts and are alot more accepting.
Well I'm a history teacher of 25 years and I can tell you the young generation i teach have little understanding of most things. And outdated mindsets? Hmm like all people are equal? Pretty sure that's in the US constitution which predates our treaty by 80 odd years.
@@grandadneal8114 If anything, the younger generation is diving into history and challenging outdated narratives with fresh perspectives, and isn’t that exactly what education is for? As for 'all people are equal,' sure, the US Constitution said that-except it didn’t mean it. The same document allowed slavery, didn’t give women the vote, and considered Indigenous peoples as less than human. Equality on paper is meaningless without action behind it.
@grandadneal8114 Dont bother with that person, the level of debate is to report and have your comment removed when they can't refute your evidence. No good faith at all.
@@HTDSNZ Good faith,” you say? Interesting standard. For the record, I’ve never reported or removed a comment. What I have done is get myself banned from comment sections by individuals who couldn’t handle having their cherry-picked historical soundbites put into full context. Apparently, offering the entire picture-rather than just the parts that suit their narrative-is a one-way ticket to the block list. Providing well-supported evidence and reasoning isn’t a bad-faith move; it’s the backbone of honest debate. If your argument can’t survive the weight of context, maybe it’s time to rethink the foundation.
@I_Extinguish_I You are dishonest. You accuse me of reporting and having your comments removed when your comments are still on the thread. Mine are not there lol Laughable. These are the speeches made on the 5th at waitangi after the chiefs were presented te tiriti. The first to speak were against signing (many later changed their mind and signed anyway) and the rest were pro signing. We can see from these speeches what the chiefs knew te tiriti to say and mean regarding the ceding of sovereignty in te tiriti. These speeches prove the chiefs knew by signing they would become less than, lower than the queen and her governor even. They also show they knew they would be subject to the queen and her laws. These are not the words of men who thought te tiriti said they got to retain sovereignty or that they would be exempt from the queens rule or laws. This is Maori council/iwi evidence entered into court record by them, so not biased whitey evidence. They authenticated them as a true, full and correct translation of the words spoken by the chiefs that day. 1. Te Kemara, chief of the Ngatikawa: ......"If thou stayers as Governor, then, perhaps, Te Kemara will be judged and condemned. Yes indeed, and more than that - even hung by the neck. No, no, no: I shall never say yes to your staying. Were all to be on equality, then perhaps, Te Kemara would say "Yes", but for the Governor to be up and Te Kamara down - Governor high, up, up, up and Te Kamara down, low, small, a worm, a crawler - No, no, no." 2. Rewa, chief of the Ngaitawake tribe: "What do Natives want of a Governor? We are not whites, nor foreigners. This country is ours, but the land has gone, Nevertheless, we are the Governor - we, the Chiefs of this our father's land. I will not say Yes to the Governor’s remaining" 3. Kawiti, chief of the Ngatihine Tribe: "No, no. Go back. What dost thou want here? We Native men do not wish thee to stay. We do not want to be tied up and trodden down....... I, even I Kawiti, must not paddle this way, nor paddle that way because the Governor says No" 4. Hakiro (speaking on behalf of his chief): "I say, no, no, no. Go back, go back; Do not sit here. What wilst thou sit here for? We are not thy people. We are free. We will not have a Governor. Return. Leave us" 5. Tareha, chief of the Ngatirehia Tribe: "No Govenor for me - for us Native men. We, we only are the chiefs , rulers. We will not be ruled over. What! thou, a foreigner, up and I down! Thou high and I Tareha, the great chief of the Ngapuhi tribes , Low. No, no; never; Never;....... Yes, I say we are the Chiefs. If all were to be alike, all equal in rank with thee - but thou, the Governor up high - up, up, and I down, under beneath! No. no. no!". (1) Colenso, William. The Authentic and Genuine History of the Signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand, February 5 and 6, 1840. First published in 1890. (2) NZ Maori Council vs Attorney General - New Zealand Law Report (3) Māori Council's Lands Case against the Crown in 2014. This is the only referenced evidence shared in this entire comment thread, you have shared none. Tino rangatiritanga also can not mean high chieftainship/soverighnty as article 2 of te tiriti promised it to the tribe members also, you can not promise high chieftainship/soverighnty to the chief while also promising to those the chief would have it over, that is ilogical and a nonsense. Going to report this comment too I suppose? since you don't like hearing the truth and you can't refute the evidence.
Why does Duncan keep refusing to acknowledge that David is a Maori? Terribly sorry but also the description of non Maori's response (our Asian, African and Polynesian of origin citizens should not be lumped into Pakeha) should also have a say as to how their country protects their rights.
What wasn't mentioned in this interview was that about 20% of Labour voters also support the bill. This is a problem for Hipkins, who has let Jackson run amok, steering Labour into a position it never used to have. Either Hipkins pulls him into line, or they will have a major problem in 2 years.
@stanleywang8524 The treaty has allways had two versions.. Its just now, that Māori are fighting for there beliefs.. But also, to add.. I dont have an answer.. I just like to observe the kaos....
I’m not sure what the point is here. Stats are often grossly misleading when bias is involved and it’s quite obvious there is bias here. Can we stop giving this guy air time ? He’s not an mp anymore and he does nothing that is noteworthy or worthwhile to the country.
What gets me is the snide comment at the end, when Don has left. Basically saying if you disagree with Duncans views, you're a racist, and obviously Pakeha.
Brash is very open to changing things when it suits him. His narrative on Parliamentary position and judgement if fluid based on his assessment. Good one Don you spoon.
Wow are you sure you are not describing TPM.. along with Tamihere who has jumped ship so many times it makes your head spin... listening in Parliament to all his great speeches of 2005 onwards.. his middle name must be YoYo... he originally stood for everything opposite to what he says today.
Maori virtually own the New Zealand commercial fishing for all intents and purposes. Talleys are about the only major fish company they don’t have a major shareholding in.
Maori really haven't got a clue how well they are treated. It wasn't until 1928 that Aboriginies were legally defined as animals that were not a protected species under the law. Maori who complain probably need to learn a bit of world history to understand they are not hard done by.
Duncan has some weird perspectives about New Zealanders. Those wanting the principles clearly defined & agreed to know that must happen if NZ is to have a peaceful, cooperative future. Laws must be knowable & certain to work. Race-based entitlements have always destroyed countries.
THE TREATY OF WAITANGI Victoria the Queen of England in her memory of the Princes and Clans of New Zealand because she wanted them to have mercy on their kingdoms and their land, and to keep the Good News and Peace to them. He has argued that it is necessary to send a Chief - to be equal to the Native People of New Zealand - so that the Native Chiefs will welcome the Government of the Queen to all parts of the world and the country - because there are many people of his people who have lived in this world and who are coming. And the Queen wants the Government to be free so that harm does not come to the natural person to the Pakeha who live illegally. The Queen has agreed to send William Hobson, a Captain in the Royal Navy, as Governor for all parts of New Zealand which will now be sent to the Queen, he said to the Chiefs of the wakaminenga of the clans of Nu Tirani and those other Rulers these laws will be mentioned. The first The Princes of the Commonwealth and all the Sovereigns who are heirs to that Commonwealth surrender to the Queen of England for ever - the whole Government of their lands. The second The Queen of England agrees to grant to the Princes and Clans - to all the people of New Zealand the sovereignty of their lands, their homes and all their property. But the Lords of the Wakaminenga and all the other Lords will offer to the Queen the sale of those lands that the owner of the land is satisfied with - according to the price that they and the buyer are willing to pay. by the Queen as a vendor. The third This is also a sign of acceptance of the Government of the Queen - The Queen of England will protect all citizens of New Zealand and grant them all the same conditions as those of England. [signed] W. Hobson Consul & Lieutenant Governor So we, the Chiefs of the Wakaminenga of the New Tirani clans who gather at Waitangi and we, the Chiefs of New Tirani, see the meaning of these words. We take it and accept it all, that's why our names and our symbols are spared. This will be done at Waitangi on the sixth day of February in the year one thousand eight hundred and fourty of our Lord. Source, Te Tiriti o Waitangi Translation, Google translate
8:18 this is an absolutely idiotic argument to make 🤦🏽♀️David Seymour says he whakapapa’s Māori but he is one person who does not represent proper consultation with Māori in NZ, and he (and other Māori in his party) have a professional conflict of interest since it’s his/their own bloody bill 🤦🏽♀️ ACT party represent 8% of the general population, they certainly don’t represent a large number of Māori. Under the current Treaty Principles, government (including David Seymour) must include partnership, participation and protection of Māori when those activities are to do with Māori matters. Since Māori are a signatory of the Treaty of Waitangi, which David’s Bill affects the interpretation of, then proper process in the development of his Bill would be to work with various Iwi and Māori organisations in the development of it. At the VERY least to uphold Māori-Crown relationships and not cause such racial harm. But at best to work together. But he didn’t. And now everyone’s in such a state because of it, no matter what side you’re on. Additionally, saying that Māori are included at the end process of the Bill being presented and voted on at Parliament, knowing they are in the minority and therefore will lose the vote anyway, is a joke. An actual joke. In fact the Waitangi Tribunal reported on the Bill, finding it lacked Māori engagement, breached Treaty Principles and recommended the Bill be abandoned. This wasn’t listened to by this government, nor the letter by 43 King’s Council, because it protects its 3 year coalition agreement more than it protects its 184 year Treaty partner. Other government departments, crown entities, and businesses are doing proper consultations right now - on what? Their job restructures, they’re consulting with all their staff on matters that concern them and their contracts - Don Brash implies that David Seymour and ACT do not have to do this with Māori. It is being diluted down to be “race-based” issues when it is “Treaty-based” issues and no amount of dumbing it down with provocative language changes that. A very small group of New Zealanders mentioned it as race. The idea’s taken hold and spread, probably due to American influence, and it’s absolutely insulting to people’s intelligences. This is not a hard concept to understand. Māori are the Treaty partner. They have protected rights under that Treaty. One small group is attacking that by dumbing it down as “race”. Then suddenly, it’s separatism, apartheid - which is genuinely ridiculous. NZ has no explicit law that has racial segregation. Thank god. What it does have is a progressive democracy that’s been redressing and repairing its historical wrongs to its Treaty Partner since the 1970s. Only as recent as my parents generation. Now, not 50 years later, we have a government unravelling that. We have to hold our Ministers to better standards. If some of our own Chief Executives and leaders can follow consultation and proper process with workers, why can’t our Ministers? Otherwise how are we supposed to have faith that they follow best practices at all? That they are capable leaders?
So sad Tangata Tīriti are all not just Pākeha and Māori. Māori hold sovereignty and under Te Tīriti article three gives British Citizens and all others citizenship under the bi- cultural partnership
@vvwalker7261 the legal document under contra proferentum is Te Tiriti O Waitangi. Again, kawangatanga as per article one is governance. Article two expresses tino rangatiratanga.
@fteeagle9446 We have the speeches by the chiefs on the 5th at waitangi that prove they understood te tiriti to say they would be ceding soverighnty. The first to speak were against signing (many later changed their mind and signed anyway) and the rest were pro signing. We can see from these speeches what the chiefs knew te tiriti to say and mean regarding the ceding of sovereignty in te tiriti. These speeches prove the chiefs knew by signing they would become less than, lower than the queen and her governor even. They also show they knew they would be subject to the queen and her laws. These are not the words of men who thought te tiriti said they got to retain sovereignty or that they would be exempt from the queens rule or laws. This is Maori council/iwi evidence entered into court record by them, so not biased whitey evidence. They authenticated them as a true, full and correct translation of the words spoken by the chiefs that day. 1. Te Kemara, chief of the Ngatikawa: ......"If thou stayers as Governor, then, perhaps, Te Kemara will be judged and condemned. Yes indeed, and more than that - even hung by the neck. No, no, no: I shall never say yes to your staying. Were all to be on equality, then perhaps, Te Kemara would say "Yes", but for the Governor to be up and Te Kamara down - Governor high, up, up, up and Te Kamara down, low, small, a worm, a crawler - No, no, no." 2. Rewa, chief of the Ngaitawake tribe: "What do Natives want of a Governor? We are not whites, nor foreigners. This country is ours, but the land has gone, Nevertheless, we are the Governor - we, the Chiefs of this our father's land. I will not say Yes to the Governor’s remaining" 3. Kawiti, chief of the Ngatihine Tribe: "No, no. Go back. What dost thou want here? We Native men do not wish thee to stay. We do not want to be tied up and trodden down....... I, even I Kawiti, must not paddle this way, nor paddle that way because the Governor says No" 4. Hakiro (speaking on behalf of his chief): "I say, no, no, no. Go back, go back; Do not sit here. What wilst thou sit here for? We are not thy people. We are free. We will not have a Governor. Return. Leave us" 5. Tareha, chief of the Ngatirehia Tribe: "No Govenor for me - for us Native men. We, we only are the chiefs , rulers. We will not be ruled over. What! thou, a foreigner, up and I down! Thou high and I Tareha, the great chief of the Ngapuhi tribes , Low. No, no; never; Never;....... Yes, I say we are the Chiefs. If all were to be alike, all equal in rank with thee - but thou, the Governor up high - up, up, and I down, under beneath! No. no. no!". (1) Colenso, William. The Authentic and Genuine History of the Signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand, February 5 and 6, 1840. First published in 1890. (2) NZ Maori Council vs Attorney General - New Zealand Law Report (3) Māori Council's Lands Case against the Crown in 2014. You also mentioned tino rangatiritanga so I will explain why it can not mean high chieftainship/soverighnty. In article 2 of te tiriri, tino rangatiritanga is also promised to the tribe members and to all the people of NZ, not just the chiefs. You can not logicaly promise high chieftainship/soverighnty to the chief while promising it to the very tribe members they would have it over, that is ilogical and nonsense. Good for NZ that those who changed the meaning of tino rangatiritanga in the 70s had the same intelligence level as all the so called treaty experts, lawyers and historians, they were very imbecilic so didnt relise their lies were so very stupid and provably false.
The majority of Maori do not vote for the radical loons, that's why they need the seats, otherwise they would never get a look in. The majority of non Maori will not vote them in and the majority of Maori will not vote them in. So they have to be given what the majority of Maori will never give them.
So 1000 people were polled from Knobson's wedge to get to a magical number 64% that you could still see the fairy dust settling on when he posted it to his phlegms, righteo.
David does not represent any iwi except for the Iwi that gave him a mandate. He can speak for his hapu I suppose but that does not mean they have given him the authority. Just because there are Māori in parliament does not mean they represent their hapu/Iwi SO ..Don believes the treaty was an an agreement between Queen Victoria and her subjects? It is not a myth that sovereignty was not ceded ,,,courts agree it was not. The myth is that Queen Victoria signed a treaty with her subjects that were settling here Some Iwi did delt directly with the Government and did not go through the Waitangi tribunal ...Don needs to contemplate that
@@glennhowlett2082 It dose not affect my tribe , we dealt directly with the Government bypassing the Waitangi tribunal ....apparently the majority of the people polled said that was the acceptable group to rule on such matters. . Our agreement can not be touched Why would I vote for a bill based on illogical arguments?
@@vvwalker7261 Where did I say Maori did not cede sovereignty? Not all Iwi signed on the 6-th The Non Maori courts agree that Maori did not cede sovereignty , try keeping up to date
There are far more people in the center-right that are opposed to this entire sham than Don Brash seems to think. Remember Sir John Key said Brash sounds like a broken record, Key was right, this dude just doesn't shut up.
@@simon-ds1vp someone who believes that their race makes them better, more intelligent, more moral, etc. than people of other races and who does or says unfair or harmful things as a result
This whole idea of making the Treaty of Waitangi null and void is just about grabbing resources-it's about money. Also, I really wish you would pronounce 'Māori' properly. I'm tired of hearing 'they' and 'them'-it’s dehumanising. Honestly, this is a discussion you shouldn't have bothered recording. It comes across as racist and would’ve been better kept private."
32:20 Duncan says - "they've got too much" in reference to how white people think about Maori issues. I don't think this is correct. Being unelected onto councils and Maori seats is the issue. No group including whites has this advantage. Previous confiscations and hurts is a no brainer to be corrected appropriately.
Maori will have a chance to debate the Treaty principles bill just as every other person in NZ will.
Bingo!
Have you heard of the tyrrany of the majority. You are all still trying to continue thieving from Maori.
That was a really good, respectful discussion. Thanks Duncan.
Duncan Garner, your guest spoke well and clearly. You spoilt it with your stammering and stuttering and failure to keep up with the flow.
How about just giving ordinary New Zealanders a choice in the matter. I appreciate politicians know better but they should also realize we are fed up with being treated like mindless sheep. As far as I am aware, NZ is still a democracy. Let the people speak!!!
Absolutely agree John...as the monies for these endless settlements came from the had labour of the NZ people they have every right to have their say. Let the entire country speak. A referendum will determine the matter once and for all.
Good interview
So the result of Brash's poll matched with Brash's preferences? No one could have predicted this
exactly
Unless Brash did, obviously.
Maybe because the minority are no longer telling the majority what to do.
Ah, what a shocker-Don Brash runs a poll, and the results just happen to align perfectly with his long-standing preferences. Truly groundbreaking. Next, we’ll hear that the sun rises in the east, or that water is wet. When you curate the audience, frame the questions, and play to a specific narrative, it’s less of a "poll" and more of a performance art piece.
@@I_Extinguish_I and this from a TPM disciple? TPM are masters at playing to a specific narrative and curating an audience, framing questions.. performance art pieces every one of them... HOW WONDERFULLY YOU DESCRIBE TPM.. thank you!
"There is no case and no space in this country for separatists"
“The days when people could stand up and scream “treaty” and believe that they would get special rights have gone.”
John Tamihere 2005
He's the most radical of the bunch in my opinion.
Was it Tamahere who pledged to "..put the bro'racracy on notice"? Then he becomes one of the bro'racracy.
I have been listening to all Tamihere great statements of what he intended mostly between 2005-2008... read out in Parliament. The guy has done a complete round about flip... how can he ever be considered relevant it is hard to imagine. He is a user of people and much much more.
@valeriehughes1008 he's learnt how to take advantage of the system to benefit him and his family, he took advantage of his position as ceo of the Waipareira Trust to obtain 385,000 in intrest free loans some of which is believed to have funded TPM, The trust has since clawed the money back because of the negative attention around it, He also lives in a million dollar plus home.
@@valeriehughes1008 Yes, 100% - he was a voice of reason then - all about Maori looking forward instead of regressivly looking back.
How can you have a referendum on a historical treaty agreement where one of the signatories is a minority
Because the minority signatory keeps changing the interpretation to suit their own desires ?
there are lots of minorities in nz indian asian chinese etc etc. thats why you need a referendum
@@grahamsanderson8053they’re not signatories are they
@@shaayd12neither were the courts
@@jamescavanagh1751 for example what changes?
Don just ripped his arguements apart, with actual facts and common sense.......Duncan tried to use what he thought would be gotcha questions, and Don still out thought him with common sense.
The clock is ticking for the old 85 yr old hua, not long to go 🥳
@@jamietownsend7545 Duncan's not 85
That's just rude. It doesn't help. @jamietownsend7545
@@Designsecrets I said hua not Duncan ya knob
Well done Don.
Dame Tariana Turia ❤
It didn't matter who the government was, that our job was to get alongside of them and do the very best we could for our people whether we like them or not that wasn't what we were here for, We were here to get the best opportunities for our people that we could so we never ever thought about is it labour or is it National even though I know labour ran that line that we were basically supporters of National, the fact of it is we were supportive of who ever was the government at that time other wise we wouldn't of been able to get anything for our people waste of time been here which is what Matua Whatarangi Winiata told us you can't be there and do nothing get nothing.
Vote don , David,
🤮
I am for Mr Seymour and his 3 Principles Bill.
I am1/8 Maori, 7/8s Irish,Scottish,and English, but foremost born a New Zealander.
I believe in one elected Gvt making rules for all NZs.
Then we will see beautiful nz landscape never be the same.
Say hello to your new Colonisers.
Im not a New Zealander.. Im Māori and English..
Good on ya, when ya heading off
@@Moanarose88 can you expand on this
We all have the right to fully understand the treaty so we can be united in one form or another. Cause division doesn't help this country at all
New zealand already been divided by feminism & liberalism that are too woke
Couldn’t agree more that everyone has the right to fully understand Te Tiriti-but let’s be honest, most of the division comes from not understanding it. Te Tiriti was meant to unite, not divide, by creating a relationship of partnership, protection, and participation. The real issue isn’t the Treaty itself-it’s the selective memory some have about what it actually promised.
@I_Extinguish_I 100% agree, and I'm hoping what comes from this discussion cause NZ (Aotearoa) will be a very strong country when we unite as 1.
@@jimmannz Absolutely, unity is the goal. Aotearoa becomes stronger when we honour the commitments that were made and work together to address the inequities that still exist.True strength comes from a partnership where all voices are heard, and progress is shared. Let’s build a future where unity isn’t just a slogan but a reality rooted in mutual respect and fairness.
You’ve always had the right to fully understand the treaty, just go out and learn it
The march had nothing to do with the bill, it was TPM looking for more support, as since the new government, TPM have had people leave them in droves, through their own stupidity...now the truth is out, they've made themselves look like the losers they truly are 😊.. keep on truckin Don 🇳🇿👍
😂😂😂😂 it's not about TPM, it's about the bill
Every New Zealander must demand a vote in a referendment. This is the most critical point ever reached in N.Z. and must be resolved by each individual person of voting age.
TPM the greatest misinformation spinners and grifters... using Maori as their pawns.
@@MaxMurray-gu8zj Agree
Nah, I and many Māori I know don't support this hua's bill and we don't vote TPM even though we on the Māori roll, stop making things up 🤦🏽♂ 🥳
Vote ACT
The people behind the poll are ‘Hobsons Pledge’. Haha what a joke 😂
Oh, Hobson’s Pledge-you’ve got to admire their dedication to keeping things as bland as their slogan. “We are all one people,” they say, while conveniently ignoring the messy bits of history that suggest, well, we’ve never been one people. It’s almost endearing how they cling to Hobson’s handshake moment like it’s the Constitution, while sidestepping the complex realities of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the Crown’s long history of breaches.
But hey, it’s a good marketing move. Nothing says “united” quite like framing equity as a threat and cherry-picking history to support the narrative. If they’re steering the ship on this poll, it’s less “let’s have a fair debate” and more “let’s double down on the soundbites.”
No! Every day NZers. Get it right
Everything Don Brash says makes a lot of sense
Except the bits when he opened his mouth and noises came out
I agree, we can no longer be bullied, viciously attacked and threatened into silence... all New Zealanders have the right to determine the future of our country.. bring on a referendum!
@@valeriehughes1008 Another flea bite comment
Any referendum needs to be binding otherwise it’s pointless
Agree... a binding referendum determined by the majority of the nation.
So Maori culture and people just get the boot from the society and country we founded and established with Te Tiriti?
bolloks
I support the bill - one New Zealand
When it comes to the government, One nz is another way of saying white nz.
@@kareemhetaraka-brown1259 Absolute garbage.. Governments have no money.. the money comes from the tax payers of NZ... taxes on their hard work... if Maori demand endless settlements, payouts and benefits.. then the NZ tax payer has every right to have their say. Maori greed and their vicious attacking of all NZ citizens has brought this to a head and the majority of the people are now pushing back.
Courts can only enforce rules made by parliament, once bills are changed, courts are bound by these.
Maori only serves their own ethnic group. We are ALL made in God's image, therefore all New Zealanders should be united under one banner i.e. New Zealanders - not pakeha and iwi. It creates seperatism. Furthermore, nobody owns the water. It belongs to God.
Luxon won't fold...he's been out maneuvered by Seymour.....it was never about getting it through this time, it was to get actual factual data on what New Zealanders as a whole want......so in the next 'lets form a government' their will be a referendum on it.
Wont be a referendum, because civil unrest will be conducted and Aotearoa isnt ready for that type of situation...
Yep. ACT!!!!!
My best friend is very Maori and votes for NZ first... along with her entire large family
Im Māori and I dont vote... I have many non Māori mates, we dont play the race game...
@@maorifilm There are many decent Maori like you mate. But it is the radical racist separatist ones who are making a lot of noise, your kind are not given publicity by the mainstream media.
I know a handful of people in the same boat.
@@maorifilm You should vote.. sitting on the fence is not an answer.. look at what your ancestors wanted.. they never cease to astound men for their wisdom.. they had a clear image we were to be one people. I still have trust in their wisdom.
Luxon needs to be and feel pressured. This problem will "not" go away. Radical Maori 's desire for self determination is plainly not acceptable!!
When will the Government just do we, the Majority want. The electors. That is why we all voted for a more right sided government
There use to be 2 departments within the New Zealand Police.
One looked after the transport policing and the other the criminal policing.
When they were combined it immediately saved millions and unified a divided Police force into one better and more productive single department.
There has been 2 different types of New Zealanders for far too long.
We need one single group of New Zealanders, with the one law and one vote for all.
Otherwise, things are just going to get worse.
Combining police departments saved money, sure. But governance? That’s not just a “merge and hope for the best” situation. New Zealand isn’t a spreadsheet-it’s a nation built on Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Ignoring that doesn’t unify us; it papers over the cracks left by 180 years of unfulfilled promises. If you want results that actually work, you need collaboration. And co-governance is exactly that: a proven partnership that delivers real results.
Take the Waikato River. Before co-governance, it was like a toxic cocktail-polluted by decades of industrial waste, agricultural runoff, and neglect. Enter the Waikato River Authority: iwi and the Crown, working together, funded over 300 restoration projects. Dissolved oxygen levels are up, arsenic levels are down, and the river is finally on the mend. That’s co-governance in action-cleaner water, better outcomes, and everyone benefits.
Or let’s talk Te Urewera. Under sole Crown management, it was just another national park, but co-governance handed decision-making back to Tūhoe. The result? Revitalized biodiversity, stronger pest control, and a conservation model that respects both tikanga and environmental science. The land isn’t just preserved-it’s thriving.
Now, let’s compare housing. Government emergency housing schemes? You’ve got families stuck in motels for months at eye-watering costs, with no long-term solutions in sight. Meanwhile, Te Puea Memorial Marae’s Manaaki Tangata program? With just $125,000, they housed 181 people-including over 100 kids-in just three months. And they didn’t stop there: wraparound support, job connections, rental subsidies-it was a full toolkit for getting whānau back on their feet. That’s not just cost-effective; it’s life-changing.
So, no, co-governance doesn’t divide New Zealanders-it delivers. It’s iwi, hapū, marae, and the Crown working together to clean rivers, restore ecosystems, and house families. It’s not just honoring Te Tiriti-it’s building a better future. The stats don’t lie: partnership works, and frankly, it works a lot better than a one-size-fits-all approach that leaves everyone frustrated. Let’s lean into what’s proven to succeed. It’s time to collaborate, not consolidate.
@@I_Extinguish_I The Treaty was suggested as a means of the Maoris coming under the protection of the British settlers because of what the Maoris did to the French, and they had heard that the French were on their way back to New Zealand with "warships" as the Chiefs said.
The Chiefs were petrified that the French were going to attack them again, because of what they did to the French Captain and crew for fishing in an area that the Chiefs had put a tapu on, of which the French knew nothing about, and were not of the same religious beliefs of the Maoris anyway.
The original Treaty written IN MAORI ( not the version done several years later by the Maori Chief when he was in England trying to buy muskets so he could attack and kill the Chiefs that had agreed to become citizens of a new Nation of New Zealanders under the British system of DEMOCRATIC governance )
was signed specifically for THE PROTECTION of the Maoris BY THE ENGLISH settlers FROM THE FRENCH, and it was actually a basic Treaty done on the basis that A FULL DOCUMENT OF FOUNDATION could be organised WHEN the Maoris all stopped fighting each other.
The example of the Police was given simply to illustrate the advantages of having one department that combined the actions of 2 areas as one, and it was meant to be a reflection of the present situation where some people want one New Zealand Parliament under a democratic system of governance, and another group of people want their own "Aotearoa Maori Parliament" which is racist segregation and against all manner of National and International Laws, and Human Rights Accords that are fully detailed in so many United Nations Resolutions and Agreements that the mere suggestion that a separate group of people should be entitled to things that exclude anyone else, is absolutely UNBELIEVABLE.
The ORIGINAL TREATY written IN MAORI and agreed to was not used as a basic Agreement and turned into a full Agreement as agreed and planned, and that was simply because of the continued arguments and wars between the Maoris over which tribe actually "owned" New Zealand, and the modern day claims that the Maoris did not cede sovereignty is actually a big fat lie, simply because of 2 very important FACTS.
1. The Chiefs AGREED to their Treaty and that was to become BRITISH CITIZENS.
2. The continuation of the attempted slaughter by musket use by the rebel Maori chiefs, who had managed to get some from New South Wales ( as Australia was called then ) WAS STOPPED BY THE BRITISH as the Maoris that had signed the Treaty WERE BRITISH CITIZENS, and would become New Zealand Citizens AFTER the FULL DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE was debated, and decided IN CO-OPERATION WITH the Chiefs, and the GOVERNOR GENERAL appointed to do those negotiations.
The talk about a "partnership" is actually not what was ORIGINALLY AGREED TO, and all the factual documentation ESPECIALLY THAT AGREEMENT some people call their "co-governance agreement" CLEARLY STATES THAT there was ONE LAW, and that was simply to stop any of the Maori chiefs from taking ANY ACTIONS that the British democratic system covered.
The Chiefs AGREED to the PROTECTION
OF BRITISH LAWS AND GOVERNANCE, the actual situation at that time for the British was to negotiate a BRITISH COLONY with ANY NATIVES and not to take anything by force.
The argument today is one of utter fabrication, there was NEVER any 'co-governance" agreement, the Treaty that WAS AGREED TO was one of all Maoris OF THE TRIBES THAT SIGNED becoming British subjects ( even the Chief that did not sign and went to London and Petitioned the Queen ASKED HER TO PROTECT HER MAORI SUBJECTS and proceeded to argue his case for being given muskets, which was refused SIMPLY BECAUSE the British Army had that responsibility to fight the French, or any Maoris that attacked any Maori ENGLISH SUBJECTS.)
If today's Maori want "co-governance" then they should consider the fact that they actually do already have that full right.
It is called nominating suitable people to stand for a position in local or central Government that a democratic election is being held for, and to campaign for that position on a platform of what they can bring to that position, FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL PEOPLE REGARDLESS OF RACE, RELIGION, OR GENDER that COULD ELECT THEM to that position.
I note that there are New Zealanders of Maori descent in Parliament now that have been voted to those positions.
The "Maoris only" Party is, under ALL NATIONAL and INTERNATIONAL laws, RACIST AND DIVISIVE BY ALL DEFINITIONS and Legal Actions are underway for it, and ALL OTHER SUCH RACIST GROUPS and ORGANISATIONS to be immediately defunded and disbanded.
It is A CRIMINAL OFFENCE under all laws to act the way some Maori activists have been, and continue to in New Zealand.
I know quite a number of Maori New Zealanders who work in the various New Zealand Government Departments and Organisations that have played a major role in making very good improvements to the management of our natural resources, and in our social, educational, housing and employment industries, and can confirm that the improvements that have resulted in all these areas have come about because of the one person, one vote, one nation, one direction, one law, one future, and one flag that has been our way of life since the Maori Chiefs sought the help of the British settlers and wanted to become British subjects of the Queen of England.
Why do you think the French warships went to Akaroa, settled there for a few years, then left ?
Just in case you have not realised why, try reading the documentation that records the true situation at the time the Treaty was asked for, and supplied.
The present situation is that if some Maori want to pick a fight over this instead of
actually realising how fortunate they are and getting on with their futures, then they better realise that they have got quite a lot that they could actually lose, if the Moriori Claim to the United Nations is finalised, and lodged.
THAT will expose the genocide that some of the Maoris committed, and exactly WHO ARE THE REAL INDIGENOUS NATIVES OF NEW ZEALAND.
Don says Maori can't have preferable treatment by allocated seats because everyone has the opportunity to be elected through democratic voting. Wat he is blinded to is that Pakeha are guaranteed the majority of the seats, if not all, through the democratic process he advocates for. This process shuts out Maori representation as history has shown pre 1970's after which began our mission to attain the gains Seymour is attempting to roll back on.
Anyone can be elected if you do the work and a area votes you in. Best situation is education which all nz people have available.
what a wast of typing on your behalf
Remember watching a interview with Miriama Kamo and John Tamihere, John was mocking Tiriana and the Māori Partie he even requested to be interviewed with the New Zealand flag in the background.
tamahhere runs the Maori party
@simon-ds1vp yip after saying The problem with the Māori Party is that it is led by a bunch of people who have done extraordinarily well out of protest activism, so they can tell their children why they should vote against things, why they should march against things, and why they should dislike others.
John Tamihere 2005.
The problem with the Māori Party is that it The Māori Party is built around new-age educationalists, reconstructionists in terms of history, and the academics and the new elite around the Treaty of Waitangi chequebooks. There is no case and no space in this country for separatists. I am very proud of my Ngāti Porou tānga-very proud of that tribal background. We do not ram it down other people’s throats, but we are very proud of it. Our being proud of it does not mean to say that we can coerce others into our way of thinking. We have to acknowledge that this is a great land of diversity, difference, and opportunity. The days when people could stand up and scream “treaty” and believe that they would get special rights have gone.
John Tamihere 2005
80% European, there is no maori in New Zealand.
Wrong. There are still Full blooded Maori in New Zealand
@@darrylsowerby7973 Not so! Let a dna test prove your argument. Until 1970's only half were recognised as being Maori.. you were categorised by the greatest amount of dna you carried... eg someone 3/4 European 1/4 Maori were categorised European. Below 1/4 were not considered Maori. In 1970 changes were made for anyone with Maori blood to be able to call themselves Maori.. at that point there were no full blood Maori left and it was a way of continuing the race and culture. Lots of claims of full bloods but not proven scientifically mainly two 1/2 bloods marrying thinking they then made up a whole Maori blood line!!! The largest percentage were 1/2. Sorry Darryl.. this is a fact!!
Says you which you know nothing.
Cuzz you cant change the law if its illegal.....legal precedence says you cannot usurp a legal law with an illegal law
maori elite doing well chris sells tw0 houses and becomes richer over night thank you very much.
who are the Maori elite?
@@krismacdonald7397 David Seymour and Winston Peters.
@@krismacdonald7397 any Maori who used to work for Government who sensibly invests/ed their money in property or business. It is all just jealousy because they think Maori should be poorer not richer than them.
he worked for it
@raywheeler3135 how are they elites 🤔
Was only 958 people polled 😂😂😂
we have never had a say, and after each paying $30,000 in treaty settlements over fifty years, we deserve a say, we have earned it. I want the equal rights, no more moari seats in parliament, no more moari seats in councils, no more Iwi veto rights on Resource Management, No more Moari saying my property, like 1/3 of Queenstown, is of special interest to them, no more race based anything, I want equal rights for all of us without any exceptions and an end of apartied in NZ.
Te Pati Party do not represent part Maori, they got 3% of the vote, Part Moari are 16% of the country.
Four times as many Part moari did not vote for Te Pati Maori as voted for them.
Ngai Tahu were 2000 people in the whole south island when Treaty was signed, yet now Ngai Tahu claim a special interest and special relationship with 1/3 of the land in Queenstown area.
End all this shit, all of it.
Good interview. Agenda is out and the original Maori treaty sounds better for all though the privileged would be a little worse off. Ai, history and all facts led me to this conclusion
Duncan’s understanding is simplistic. He doesn’t know that a lot of Maori are on the same page as Pakeha.
Technically, since maori had no written language when the treaty was drawn up & signed. Would it not make the 'treaty' null & void since it was written in a language created by the opposing party in the contract?
A language that was not written by maori, couldn't possibly be fully understood by them. Even the very definition of ownership was not a concept that was understood by maori, they mistook it for guardianship & hence, much land was stolen from them, many ab*ses have been imposed on them.
For balance to be regained in NZ, these glaring issues need to be addressed in a way that is positive for our people & our country, not the back pockets of people who benefitted greatly from that illegal contract.
I'm pretty sure the definition of ownership was a concept everyone understood, lots of tribes fought for ownership of their lands.
Get real mate and face the truth. The treaty is a very easy to understand and the Radial Maori Activists want to go back on a deal their topuna agreed to. Their strategy is to keep reiterating misinformation to cause the Illusory truth effect, which has and is resulting in corruption at all levels in our country.
This is an excellent point, discussed at length in a book called "The Treaty And Its Times". I recommend reading it.
DON you no that your so called parliament are a corporation as your whole governmental system is , the government of the day are illegal,a corporation can not govern a country,you and your lot don are over,exposure is coming and you no were it’s coming from don,truth is coming to all the nation what you and your govenments of past and parties have done to this nation and its people, not just Māori don all people,truth that will set the people free. Don the people of nz will no the truth about the treaty,not the lies you an others with the help of the Atlas network have been spreading in this nation.Don the United Nations no the truth about the treaty don’t they don,it’s a legal document,but that’s not all right don ,isn’t there a document page two ,we’re the United Nations state that your government have deceived the people of New Zealand don,that’s all coming out and more,January 2025 ,not long to wait,so while government quickly pushing through fast track bills
You just repeated a lie that they did not understand ownership. Are You aware they were already trading using euro design ships before the treaty, bit hard to trade overseas if you don't understand ownership don't ya think lol You have been indoctrinated, and that is why you believe that nonsense.
So hobson pledge done a poll... what a joke
explain your reasoning
Hobsons Wedge ... awful people :/
It's only a matter of time before outdated mindsets are left in the past. The newer generations have a better understanding of historical accounts and are alot more accepting.
Well I'm a history teacher of 25 years and I can tell you the young generation i teach have little understanding of most things. And outdated mindsets? Hmm like all people are equal? Pretty sure that's in the US constitution which predates our treaty by 80 odd years.
@@grandadneal8114 If anything, the younger generation is diving into history and challenging outdated narratives with fresh perspectives, and isn’t that exactly what education is for? As for 'all people are equal,' sure, the US Constitution said that-except it didn’t mean it. The same document allowed slavery, didn’t give women the vote, and considered Indigenous peoples as less than human. Equality on paper is meaningless without action behind it.
@grandadneal8114
Dont bother with that person, the level of debate is to report and have your comment removed when they can't refute your evidence.
No good faith at all.
@@HTDSNZ Good faith,” you say? Interesting standard. For the record, I’ve never reported or removed a comment. What I have done is get myself banned from comment sections by individuals who couldn’t handle having their cherry-picked historical soundbites put into full context. Apparently, offering the entire picture-rather than just the parts that suit their narrative-is a one-way ticket to the block list.
Providing well-supported evidence and reasoning isn’t a bad-faith move; it’s the backbone of honest debate. If your argument can’t survive the weight of context, maybe it’s time to rethink the foundation.
@I_Extinguish_I
You are dishonest.
You accuse me of reporting and having your comments removed when your comments are still on the thread.
Mine are not there lol
Laughable.
These are the speeches made on the 5th at waitangi after the chiefs were presented te tiriti.
The first to speak were against signing (many later changed their mind and signed anyway) and the rest were pro signing.
We can see from these speeches what the chiefs knew te tiriti to say and mean regarding the ceding of sovereignty in te tiriti.
These speeches prove the chiefs knew by signing they would become less than, lower than the queen and her governor even.
They also show they knew they would be subject to the queen and her laws.
These are not the words of men who thought te tiriti said they got to retain sovereignty or that they would be exempt from the queens rule or laws.
This is Maori council/iwi evidence entered into court record by them, so not biased whitey evidence.
They authenticated them as a true, full and correct translation of the words spoken by the chiefs that day.
1.
Te Kemara, chief of the Ngatikawa: ......"If thou stayers as Governor, then, perhaps, Te Kemara will be judged and condemned. Yes indeed, and more than that - even hung by the neck. No, no, no: I shall never say yes to your staying. Were all to be on equality, then perhaps, Te Kemara would say "Yes", but for the Governor to be up and Te Kamara down - Governor high, up, up, up and Te Kamara down, low, small, a worm, a crawler - No, no, no."
2.
Rewa, chief of the Ngaitawake tribe: "What do Natives want of a Governor? We are not whites, nor foreigners. This country is ours, but the land has gone, Nevertheless, we are the Governor - we, the Chiefs of this our father's land. I will not say Yes to the Governor’s remaining"
3.
Kawiti, chief of the Ngatihine Tribe: "No, no. Go back. What dost thou want here? We Native men do not wish thee to stay. We do not want to be tied up and trodden down....... I, even I Kawiti, must not paddle this way, nor paddle that way because the Governor says No"
4.
Hakiro (speaking on behalf of his chief): "I say, no, no, no. Go back, go back; Do not sit here. What wilst thou sit here for? We are not thy people. We are free. We will not have a Governor. Return. Leave us"
5.
Tareha, chief of the Ngatirehia Tribe: "No Govenor for me - for us Native men. We, we only are the chiefs , rulers. We will not be ruled over. What! thou, a foreigner, up and I down! Thou high and I Tareha, the great chief of the Ngapuhi tribes , Low. No, no; never; Never;....... Yes, I say we are the Chiefs. If all were to be alike, all equal in rank with thee - but thou, the Governor up high - up, up, and I down, under beneath! No. no. no!".
(1) Colenso, William. The Authentic and Genuine History of the Signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand, February 5 and 6, 1840. First published in 1890.
(2) NZ Maori Council vs Attorney General - New Zealand Law Report
(3) Māori Council's Lands Case against the Crown in 2014.
This is the only referenced evidence shared in this entire comment thread, you have shared none.
Tino rangatiritanga also can not mean high chieftainship/soverighnty as article 2 of te tiriti promised it to the tribe members also, you can not promise high chieftainship/soverighnty to the chief while also promising to those the chief would have it over, that is ilogical and a nonsense.
Going to report this comment too I suppose?
since you don't like hearing the truth and you can't refute the evidence.
Brash makes a lot of sense. Get rid of maori seats straight away they aren't relevant to the reasons they were set up.
Brash is an old fart and won't be around much longer and everyone will celebrate that day
Why does Duncan keep refusing to acknowledge that David is a Maori? Terribly sorry but also the description of non Maori's response (our Asian, African and Polynesian of origin citizens should not be lumped into Pakeha) should also have a say as to how their country protects their rights.
What wasn't mentioned in this interview was that about 20% of Labour voters also support the bill. This is a problem for Hipkins, who has let Jackson run amok, steering Labour into a position it never used to have. Either Hipkins pulls him into line, or they will have a major problem in 2 years.
Can we have a Pakeha Party? Yeah Right!
No because it would be racist 😅
Make one, ill vote for you... Just for shits and giggles 🤣🤣🤣
Do it instead of talking about it 🤷♀️
I am white, not pakeha ( white pig )
Why not go a step further and have a White All Black team, why can they a maori All Black team.
Good interview 👍
Don Rash
I’m neutral on this to be completely honest but if this referendum goes ahead I can’t see how NZ won’t rip itself apart.
NZ is already ripped apart as people have different interpretations of the Treaty. If politicians cannot resolve the issue, what is the solution?
@@stanleywang8524 Great point. Yeah I don’t have the answer.
"I can't see" is doing all the work in this statement.
@stanleywang8524 The treaty has allways had two versions.. Its just now, that Māori are fighting for there beliefs.. But also, to add.. I dont have an answer.. I just like to observe the kaos....
@@samgraham8430 What do you mean by that Sammy?
The last citizen initiated referendum was in 2013 over Energy company partial sales.
I’m not sure what the point is here. Stats are often grossly misleading when bias is involved and it’s quite obvious there is bias here. Can we stop giving this guy air time ? He’s not an mp anymore and he does nothing that is noteworthy or worthwhile to the country.
Willy saying David and Winston aernt real Maori is like me saying you I shouldn’t be there because I don’t agree with you.
Winston 1/2, Willie 8%, David 1/4.... so just who is Maori... certainly not Willie!!!
The treaty is a joke, it was drawn up in the 1700s and no one knew anything, the settlers believed the maori were indigenous but not true.
no the settlers from all I have read were more aware than todays pakeha , and it was drawn up in 1840 lol
What gets me is the snide comment at the end, when Don has left. Basically saying if you disagree with Duncans views, you're a racist, and obviously Pakeha.
Brash is very open to changing things when it suits him. His narrative on Parliamentary position and judgement if fluid based on his assessment. Good one Don you spoon.
bit like TPM,labour, waitangi tribunal, iwi etc etc the list is massive
Wow are you sure you are not describing TPM.. along with Tamihere who has jumped ship so many times it makes your head spin... listening in Parliament to all his great speeches of 2005 onwards.. his middle name must be YoYo... he originally stood for everything opposite to what he says today.
Maori virtually own the New Zealand commercial fishing for all intents and purposes. Talleys are about the only major fish company they don’t have a major shareholding in.
Maori really haven't got a clue how well they are treated. It wasn't until 1928 that Aboriginies were legally defined as animals that were not a protected species under the law. Maori who complain probably need to learn a bit of world history to understand they are not hard done by.
A referendum would be unfair given Maori are in a minority. That is not democratic.
Duncan has some weird perspectives about New Zealanders. Those wanting the principles clearly defined & agreed to know that must happen if NZ is to have a peaceful, cooperative future. Laws must be knowable & certain to work. Race-based entitlements have always destroyed countries.
He forgets to mention the Crown ,the other treaty partner.
THE TREATY OF WAITANGI
Victoria the Queen of England in her memory of the Princes and Clans of New Zealand because she wanted them to have mercy on their kingdoms and their land, and to keep the Good News and Peace to them. He has argued that it is necessary to send a Chief - to be equal to the Native People of New Zealand - so that the Native Chiefs will welcome the Government of the Queen to all parts of the world and the country - because there are many people of his people who have lived in this world and who are coming.
And the Queen wants the Government to be free so that harm does not come to the natural person to the Pakeha who live illegally.
The Queen has agreed to send William Hobson, a Captain in the Royal Navy, as Governor for all parts of New Zealand which will now be sent to the Queen, he said to the Chiefs of the wakaminenga of the clans of Nu Tirani and those other Rulers these laws will be mentioned.
The first
The Princes of the Commonwealth and all the Sovereigns who are heirs to that Commonwealth surrender to the Queen of England for ever - the whole Government of their lands.
The second
The Queen of England agrees to grant to the Princes and Clans - to all the people of New Zealand the sovereignty of their lands, their homes and all their property. But the Lords of the Wakaminenga and all the other Lords will offer to the Queen the sale of those lands that the owner of the land is satisfied with - according to the price that they and the buyer are willing to pay. by the Queen as a vendor.
The third
This is also a sign of acceptance of the Government of the Queen - The Queen of England will protect all citizens of New Zealand and grant them all the same conditions as those of England.
[signed] W. Hobson Consul & Lieutenant Governor
So we, the Chiefs of the Wakaminenga of the New Tirani clans who gather at Waitangi and we, the Chiefs of New Tirani, see the meaning of these words. We take it and accept it all, that's why our names and our symbols are spared.
This will be done at Waitangi on the sixth day of February in the year one thousand eight hundred and fourty of our Lord.
Source, Te Tiriti o Waitangi
Translation, Google translate
8:18 this is an absolutely idiotic argument to make 🤦🏽♀️David Seymour says he whakapapa’s Māori but he is one person who does not represent proper consultation with Māori in NZ, and he (and other Māori in his party) have a professional conflict of interest since it’s his/their own bloody bill 🤦🏽♀️ ACT party represent 8% of the general population, they certainly don’t represent a large number of Māori.
Under the current Treaty Principles, government (including David Seymour) must include partnership, participation and protection of Māori when those activities are to do with Māori matters. Since Māori are a signatory of the Treaty of Waitangi, which David’s Bill affects the interpretation of, then proper process in the development of his Bill would be to work with various Iwi and Māori organisations in the development of it.
At the VERY least to uphold Māori-Crown relationships and not cause such racial harm. But at best to work together.
But he didn’t.
And now everyone’s in such a state because of it, no matter what side you’re on.
Additionally, saying that Māori are included at the end process of the Bill being presented and voted on at Parliament, knowing they are in the minority and therefore will lose the vote anyway, is a joke. An actual joke.
In fact the Waitangi Tribunal reported on the Bill, finding it lacked Māori engagement, breached Treaty Principles and recommended the Bill be abandoned.
This wasn’t listened to by this government, nor the letter by 43 King’s Council, because it protects its 3 year coalition agreement more than it protects its 184 year Treaty partner.
Other government departments, crown entities, and businesses are doing proper consultations right now - on what? Their job restructures, they’re consulting with all their staff on matters that concern them and their contracts - Don Brash implies that David Seymour and ACT do not have to do this with Māori.
It is being diluted down to be “race-based” issues when it is “Treaty-based” issues and no amount of dumbing it down with provocative language changes that. A very small group of New Zealanders mentioned it as race. The idea’s taken hold and spread, probably due to American influence, and it’s absolutely insulting to people’s intelligences. This is not a hard concept to understand.
Māori are the Treaty partner. They have protected rights under that Treaty. One small group is attacking that by dumbing it down as “race”. Then suddenly, it’s separatism, apartheid - which is genuinely ridiculous. NZ has no explicit law that has racial segregation. Thank god.
What it does have is a progressive democracy that’s been redressing and repairing its historical wrongs to its Treaty Partner since the 1970s. Only as recent as my parents generation. Now, not 50 years later, we have a government unravelling that.
We have to hold our Ministers to better standards. If some of our own Chief Executives and leaders can follow consultation and proper process with workers, why can’t our Ministers? Otherwise how are we supposed to have faith that they follow best practices at all? That they are capable leaders?
13:56 So if you say you can’t speak for Pakeha and you can speak for yourself, why do you think David Seymour and the ACT party can speak for Māori?
Y😂es you could say, there has been more going on behind the scenes, over the last fifty years.
So sad Tangata Tīriti are all not just Pākeha and Māori. Māori hold sovereignty and under Te Tīriti article three gives British Citizens and all others citizenship under the bi- cultural partnership
Article 1 of the treaty - Maori cede sovereignty
@vvwalker7261 the legal document under contra proferentum is Te Tiriti O Waitangi. Again, kawangatanga as per article one is governance. Article two expresses tino rangatiratanga.
@fteeagle9446
We have the speeches by the chiefs on the 5th at waitangi that prove they understood te tiriti to say they would be ceding soverighnty.
The first to speak were against signing (many later changed their mind and signed anyway) and the rest were pro signing.
We can see from these speeches what the chiefs knew te tiriti to say and mean regarding the ceding of sovereignty in te tiriti.
These speeches prove the chiefs knew by signing they would become less than, lower than the queen and her governor even.
They also show they knew they would be subject to the queen and her laws.
These are not the words of men who thought te tiriti said they got to retain sovereignty or that they would be exempt from the queens rule or laws.
This is Maori council/iwi evidence entered into court record by them, so not biased whitey evidence.
They authenticated them as a true, full and correct translation of the words spoken by the chiefs that day.
1.
Te Kemara, chief of the Ngatikawa: ......"If thou stayers as Governor, then, perhaps, Te Kemara will be judged and condemned. Yes indeed, and more than that - even hung by the neck. No, no, no: I shall never say yes to your staying. Were all to be on equality, then perhaps, Te Kemara would say "Yes", but for the Governor to be up and Te Kamara down - Governor high, up, up, up and Te Kamara down, low, small, a worm, a crawler - No, no, no."
2.
Rewa, chief of the Ngaitawake tribe: "What do Natives want of a Governor? We are not whites, nor foreigners. This country is ours, but the land has gone, Nevertheless, we are the Governor - we, the Chiefs of this our father's land. I will not say Yes to the Governor’s remaining"
3.
Kawiti, chief of the Ngatihine Tribe: "No, no. Go back. What dost thou want here? We Native men do not wish thee to stay. We do not want to be tied up and trodden down....... I, even I Kawiti, must not paddle this way, nor paddle that way because the Governor says No"
4.
Hakiro (speaking on behalf of his chief): "I say, no, no, no. Go back, go back; Do not sit here. What wilst thou sit here for? We are not thy people. We are free. We will not have a Governor. Return. Leave us"
5.
Tareha, chief of the Ngatirehia Tribe: "No Govenor for me - for us Native men. We, we only are the chiefs , rulers. We will not be ruled over. What! thou, a foreigner, up and I down! Thou high and I Tareha, the great chief of the Ngapuhi tribes , Low. No, no; never; Never;....... Yes, I say we are the Chiefs. If all were to be alike, all equal in rank with thee - but thou, the Governor up high - up, up, and I down, under beneath! No. no. no!".
(1) Colenso, William. The Authentic and Genuine History of the Signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand, February 5 and 6, 1840. First published in 1890.
(2) NZ Maori Council vs Attorney General - New Zealand Law Report
(3) Māori Council's Lands Case against the Crown in 2014.
You also mentioned tino rangatiritanga so I will explain why it can not mean high chieftainship/soverighnty.
In article 2 of te tiriri, tino rangatiritanga is also promised to the tribe members and to all the people of NZ, not just the chiefs.
You can not logicaly promise high chieftainship/soverighnty to the chief while promising it to the very tribe members they would have it over, that is ilogical and nonsense.
Good for NZ that those who changed the meaning of tino rangatiritanga in the 70s had the same intelligence level as all the so called treaty experts, lawyers and historians, they were very imbecilic so didnt relise their lies were so very stupid and provably false.
The majority of Maori do not vote for the radical loons, that's why they need the seats, otherwise they would never get a look in. The majority of non Maori will not vote them in and the majority of Maori will not vote them in. So they have to be given what the majority of Maori will never give them.
why do they "have" to be given it
@simon-ds1vp
Becouse they can not earn it on their merits. To be clear, they should not be given them either, but they are.
So 1000 people were polled from Knobson's wedge to get to a magical number 64% that you could still see the fairy dust settling on when he posted it to his phlegms, righteo.
Hahaha, this is thier spokesman, whst a joke. 😂
He was the PM of NZ a while back. He's no joke and cares deeply for NZ.
David does not represent any iwi except for the Iwi that gave him a mandate.
He can speak for his hapu I suppose but that does not mean they have given him the authority.
Just because there are Māori in parliament does not mean they represent their hapu/Iwi
SO ..Don believes the treaty was an an agreement between Queen Victoria and her subjects?
It is not a myth that sovereignty was not ceded ,,,courts agree it was not. The myth is that Queen Victoria signed a treaty with her subjects that were settling here
Some Iwi did delt directly with the Government and did not go through the Waitangi tribunal ...Don needs to contemplate that
Article 1 of the treaty says the Maori cede sovereignty. Try reading the document before commenting
You can vote against the bill
@@glennhowlett2082 It dose not affect my tribe , we dealt directly with the Government bypassing the Waitangi tribunal ....apparently the majority of the people polled said that was the acceptable group to rule on such matters. . Our agreement can not be touched Why would I vote for a bill based on illogical arguments?
@@vvwalker7261 Where did I say Maori did not cede sovereignty?
Not all Iwi signed on the 6-th
The Non Maori courts agree that Maori did not cede sovereignty , try keeping up to date
@vvwalker7261 te tiriti o Waitangi says kawangatanga, governance. Tino rangatiratanga is sovereignty, read it!!!
your not justifying your points don.
justify your comment
@ listen with your ears like the rest of us.
@@simon-ds1vp elected maori ministers support the parties not maori big difference.
There are far more people in the center-right that are opposed to this entire sham than Don Brash seems to think. Remember Sir John Key said Brash sounds like a broken record, Key was right, this dude just doesn't shut up.
what poll are you referring to , or are you just being a left of centre spinner
O Don 😂😂 give it up.
I think Duncan is talking about more Maori Wards.
This man is rascist!!!!
Four explanation marks.... It must be true
define racist ,,,
@@simon-ds1vp someone who believes that their race makes them better, more intelligent, more moral, etc. than people of other races and who does or says unfair or harmful things as a result
I don't relate to this weird fella , Tama and Shane are pretty kaupapa Māori
This whole idea of making the Treaty of Waitangi null and void is just about grabbing resources-it's about money. Also, I really wish you would pronounce 'Māori' properly. I'm tired of hearing 'they' and 'them'-it’s dehumanising. Honestly, this is a discussion you shouldn't have bothered recording. It comes across as racist and would’ve been better kept private."
there is no attempt to make the treaty null and void,, go and actually read what the bill says not what you have been told or heard,
It's not just TPM who is against the Treaty Principles Bill.
obviously but do you actually understand the bill have you read it
@@simon-ds1vp of course Ive read it! Made my submission in opposiion to it too!
@@simon-ds1vp Been making submissions all year in oppostition to this CoC Govt.! :/
@@simon-ds1vp Gaslighters! :/
who is then . state fact . don't just make statements
Duncan Garner is so ignorant
You crack me up bro. Having this r@cist 🤡 on.
how is he racist
War talk ??
Bahaaaaa......."a maori party jack up"
Brash is a deluded person who creates division with his misrepresented wording of the Treaty.
Bro just share
Booooooooooooo
DG has no sense of what it means regards equal right for everyone.
Fake news
Poapoa stuff that's right it's just stuff