We are immigrants to NZ. Anti immigrants can Fire at will, I’ve heard it all. Because of all this constant battering of Māori, non Māori, politics by colour, and lack of ability to take the country forward because it’s still fighting about the past, we’re off. Leaving NZ and closing it as a bad chapter in our lives. NZ is falling apart and living in the past seems to have greater priority than moving into the future. NZ is being left standing on the world stage. We was proud to say we had moved to NZ, but not anymore. I hope NZ can sort its sh1t out before it ruins itself.
Bugger off then. Good luck out there though, as the whole world is in freefall, economically, socially, culturally. Lay the blame where it belongs, on crap global leadership, not the people who bear the pain of it.
We DONT legitimately have any principles. The only reason we appear to have these things is that people have talked them into existence...... starting with the Waitangi Tribunal
And, of course, our politicians - who have made a complete disaster of it starting with the likes of Palmer & Rata, added to along the way with the likes of that low-life, Findlayson, who deserves special mention.
@@Fred-zw9kk Oh it goes back further than that, way past the mighty Totara Bolger, we have them all to thank for this mess. They all need to be held to account IMO.
@@paulmeersa7162 they never will be. We just need to accept the Treaty exactly as it was when it was signed by both parties and work on that and that alone from now on. It is NOT a partnership, The Crown has sovereignty.
Winston says that their are no principals in the treaty,he is correct but yet for the past 30 years we have had principals in the treaty and Winston has been part of successive Governments and yet the principals remain not a squeak from Winston until David brought in his treaty Principals bill FFS
If you listen to Costellos recent speech about the Principles she says in the past NZ First has brought forth bills to the table about retiring the Treaty principles made up in the recent decades not create another set that maoris will only keep saying are being breached thats all they know how to do
the document's text, signatures, and date are what matter, not the unwritten principles or understandings that have evolved over time. The signed document is the primary source of its legal authority and obligations.
Absolutely correct . I am not an authority but I am pretty sure that the chiefs who did sign in 1940 wanted peace and the protection of the Crown . If this is incorrect please advance your argument in the comments .
The 'principles' have been interpreted in a way that creates two standards of citizenship based on ancestry..- that's what the treaty principles bill is intended to correct and despite Luxon's cowardice, this issue will only fester..
The Treaty of Waitangi has become a nice little earner for people once they get their snouts in the tax-payer trough. It is called the grievance industry. End of story.
@deantairi8357 yep, if Roy "took something" from you, take him to court. Otherwise, we are all just people, working hard to pay taxes for the benefit of all, based on their needs and not what race they identify as.
@@olsaffa7679 thats part of the reason why the waitangi tribunal was established courts will cost taxpayers more money like you said all of our taxes are footing the bill maori are paying to get back what was confiscated from our maori ancestors
This is why Lawyers are predominantly left leaning. They're non-productive, gatekeepers who exist either as a tax in they public system or in the private sector. You'll find that predominantly in industries where value is interfered with, not created. They don't enable, they gate-keep and insert themselves as "value add" services. Tell me, where is the value added?
@deantairi8357 confiscated by who? Take a walk down Queen Street and you'll quickly realize that the majority of people came here post 1940, forget about 1840. Go have a walk in Gisborne or Kaitaia and you'll notice very few people who'd claim 50% Maori ancestry, forget about 100%. Can you now claim "reparations" from immigrants when Maori should claim reparations from part of their own immigrant whakapapa? And how did the majority of NZers, arriving post 1940's, come to owe part Maori today? Go take individuals who you can prove benefitted to the court, which Maori subjected themselves to when they became full crown citizens. The only thing the Waitangi Tribunal should be dealing with is land expropriated without compensation. Once those are settled, no more grievances. The "Maori economy" makes up 27% of GDP while 17% of the population. If you need reparations, you should ask where all that money is going first.
I would think that it is in both party's interests to have more clarity around the standing of the so-called principles and I believe that is what David Seymour is driving at. Those who speculate that having this debate is somehow going to increase racial tensions are simply aiming to shut down the debate, without considering the mutual benefits of having one.
The problem is no-one can have the truthful view because it isn't open to interpretation cos it did the job for 12 years until Parliament formed period
not signed on the day, not part of the Treaty of Waitangi. Otherwise every contract in our country since can be rewritten at any stage, that is the precedent that would set.
The Crown itself is to blame for that imo...the Crown were who committed the injustices to Maori, but somehow the Crown makes YOU and ME foot the reparations bill... Crown causes the bs, but it's us that pays for it? Where's the fairness in that?
@@marksvideochannel3592 Exactly...that's been a known fact for many years, yet they still take the money from us to pay the reparations...my point is, the law is bent. If you commit a crime, you are expected to pay for that crime. If the Crown commits a crime, we pay for it? Neat little system they've designed for themselves huh??
In the context of post colonial New Zealand, the Goverment, also known as the Crown, is part of the Commonwealth and is represented here by the Govenor General King Charles III is also King of New Zealand and the Commonwealth once known as the "British" Commonwealth and earlier still, the British Empire.. In breaking with a long held tradition, then Commonwealth country Barbados, removed the reigning Monarch QE2, as their head of state. They had their reasons no doubt and if other Country's within The Commonwealth begin to have similar ambitions, then they too may well jack it in and free themselves from their historic links to the Commonwealth. The strength of these were tested when the British joined the European Economic Union but after they Brexited from the EU they've rejoined the Commonwealth and, "she's all hunky dory" again.
Why is the treaty of Waitangi commission entitled to create principles for the treaty which were not created when the treaty was signed? Surely that is not a part of our democratic process? In which case why can’t any Iwi create principles to suit their individual agenda?
similar things seem to happen in other departments too. The police have created "none crime incidents" which they record. The IRD can decide you could be earning more and charge you based on that instead of your earnings because "capacity to earn" they define as what they feel you could earn. The education department just makes up anything they like, parents and truth be damned, so do mental health professionals science be damned. This is what the USA call the "deep state", people that are part of government, aren't elected yet have lots of power they abuse without anyone able to vote them out or hold them accountable. Like the police commissioner not being able to be fired by the police minister we elect for example....so how do the citizen hold the commissioner accountable?
And there lies the question we, critical thinking people, have been asking for sometime. We know this has been a shit show of un addressed largesse, for a self selected few. Shame.
@@warriorsfan1602 more like the treaty is being used to justify lining the pockets of greedy spokespeople and others who want preferential treatment and now they are crying that the gravy train will end. Weak people who are not good enough to succeed on their own.
This is crazy so you’re telling me that unelected people have created something out of nothing and now we having to pay for all this nonsense? How is this okay or able to happen?
Because the rebels were given a Court of their own, the ones that had their land confiscated for slaughtering 100s of Pakeha starting wars everywhere for 30 years after the Treaty they caused all the strife and still do
The Waitangi Tribunal has had many remarkable thoughts about NZ over time, but none of these are binding or have any more legitimacy than others' views. Let parliament give the guidance we need on how to interpret the treaty and stop the ad-hoc wish list approach that maori have adopted.
Other way round, the govt has paid out 4 billion since 1840. Last year alone the country made 400 billion. Pretty cheap rate considering what has been made dont you think?
I think we have now got to a point where the Treaty causes more confusion, disagreement and distrust than bringing us together as a nation. Once upon a time I had faith in the Waitangi Tribunal process addressing historical grievances. Now i think it has become a self-generating grievance industry that has lost credibility and needs to be disbanded.
For some reason our GPs also need to do Māori cultural training. Not for any other ethnicities, because obviously the majority of their other non Māori patients don’t exist.
I argued this with ACC recently when they asked if I was Maori due to cultural needs? There are many cultures in NZ now, so why are they not being respected also? It's all or none!
Yeah they do, especially in urban areas. I’m guessing you are referring to a lack of rural GPs which affects people living in rural areas which includes rural Māori?
Sadly, Winston is doing a Winston, like many duplicitous politicians. If the ‘principles of the Treaty’ are to be removed from legislation as he implies, how much legislation do you think that will really affect? By way of example, the “Fast-Track Approvals Bill” (which need I mention is a coalition initiative and has nothing directly to do with Treaty Settlements), mentions "Treaty" 85 times, “principles” 11 times, “Tikanga” 3 and “Matauranga” once. So, I’ll wager the ‘principles of the Treaty’ will continue to prevail and with them the claims of a 'partnership', co-governance, Maori sovereignty etc. etc. will continue to fester, while the country continues to decline. We absolutely need Seymour’s proposed discussion, and for democracy to prevail, if there's to be any any chance of NZ uniting and prospering. Either that, or it's goodnight, nurse!
It's debatable whether we should be taking much notice of the Treaty anyway. It shouldn't be debatable whether any "principles", which have been created out of nothing, should apply.
Leaving the principles in for existing Waitangi Tribunal settlement is probably the compromise he made to get this agreed by National. Chris Luxon is weak.
So seven principles were contrived under the Dept of Maori Affairs in 1971 . They are not contained in the 1840 Maori version and were not explicit at all until the meddling that occurred 131 years later . If what I have written here is incorrect then it can be refuted but if it is simply deleted where is the desire for the truth to be known ?
@@andrewcampbell2903 The principles come from the fact that the Crown broke the terms of their own treaty for 180 years. Compensation through settlements was seen as one way of going forward the others was through treaty principles.
@@warriorsfan1602 OK , so you are not arguing that the principles are contained within the 1840 document . We need to make a distinction between the treaty itself and something that came along more than a century later .
No he rightly observes they aren't real rules.....however if they are being enforced, and they are being enforced, it needs to be shut down actively. Ignoring it is therefore not an option.
The Māoris signed up to get in line to sample the cake and decided they like the icing but not the rest . However rather than be all out they keep coming back for further helpings of the icing . The Maori culture is quite frankly boring and nothing to do with me so stop ramming it down my throat because I’m regurgitating it faster than ever .
The principles are a diversion,...there is only 1 principle, the principle of honour. Principles do not need to be defined, what needs definition is between the 2 treaty versions , which version prevails, and if so, what are the inherent rights therein. Only then can a nation move forward.
Resoprocity is the practice of exchanging things with others for mutual benefit, especially privileges granted by one country or organization to another.
The artcles are straightforward. Maori Chiefs had/ have the right to Chieftainship over their villages( people),land and taonga,the Crown has kawanatanga sovereignty or paramount chieftainship over the whole islands. To me this clearly means Chiefs have had governership over their separate Iwi ,this means day to day decisions for their tribal lands.Accordingly any land they have left or purchase as a collective including Marae should come under their jurisdiction .These lands should be exempt from rates and pay only for direct services that are accessed.These lands should also be exempt from our current regulations regarding use and building codes and the like.They should be left to do what they desire and consequences are the responsibility of themselves.
@@paulmeersa7162 It's clear to me, clear to Sir Apirana Ngata, clear to Sir Hugh Kawharu, even clear to lackluster Luxon but still there are some to whom it is not clear. Maybe a definitive answer from the other party in this Treaty might just convince them.
Having read the treaty, both english and maori and the ideas for the new bill they look to be saying the same thing...like exactly the same thing. I suspect what I'm missing is what the courts made up along the way building precedent....which I've seen be taken a long way with other laws. Right now for example the IRD decided to pretend I;m earning double what I am because they twisted one phrase "capacity to earn" to mean what they feel like I could be earning instead of what I'm actually managing to earn today. I can appeal this in court but that would cost as much or more than what they are demanding! Our court system grossly oversteps in my opinion, from enforcing law to re-writing it themselves. Seems that's what may have happened with the treaty.
That is messed up what they doing to you. If only you had an investment property to bring your taxable income down, or a failing wee business that cost are more than what it earns, you could possibly reduce your taxable income with the cost and the loss. An accountant may know about that. (cough). One judge made a comment about the treaty being "akin to a partnership" The radicals leapt onto the partnership part and have used that as grounds for the partnership principle since.
Agree with Seymour not partnership Agree with Winston no principles in original Treaty of Waitangi. Where is Luxon? One foot in each camp Double minded is not leadership 0:44
The principles are the articles... not some set of nebulous meanings hiding behind the articles that only the initiated are supposed to decipher. Winston is right, we need to get back to the meaning of the historical treaty, and to get away from a treaty-centric politics.
The main problem is that we don't have a constitution to set this stuff down in text, and a review function. So our bits and pieces of cobbled together government, courts, commissions, tribunals, all end up in a legal and linguistic melee. However, what Parliament screweth up, Parliament must fixeth. Bad drafting in 1975 is a problem. Tolerating 50 years of constitutional uncertainty on minor matters like political power, property, and rights before the law is a frkng travesty.
Blah blah blah, unless the govt grows some, makes clear what the treaty actually means, in 100 years nz will still be divided..... our pakeha govts are too scared to have it out, so the future looks unhappy and divided....
@@arnoldbraunschweiger4828 if someone nicks all your land for less than fair value, by being the only buyer by way of a treaty. Yes, then I think you can play the victim card.
The Court of Appeal The inclusion of the principles in the State-Owned Enterprises Act 1986 led to a Court of Appeal case New Zealand Māori Council v Attorney-General (1987) (a.k.a. the ‘Lands’ case or the ‘SOE’ case). It forced the Court to define the treaty principles. The judgements do not codified their principles, but a common summary and useful for govt departments who struggle with the meaning of a legal document
Again WINSTON talks out of BOTH sides of HIS MOUTH saying there are NO PRINCILES of the TREATY & then say's HE WILL KEEP SOME in law / legisltion. Same old Winston double talk, eg vote for me & NZ 1st " WON'T go with National & he DID.
Sir Apirana explanation and translation of the treaty “ Governor for all parts of New Zealand, to ceded and for ever to the Queen( Victoria). 1860 New Zealand was pretty much lawless Europeans were murdering Māori and vice versa. The Queen ( Victoria) wanted to establish a Government with a view to avert the evil consequences to the Māori people and to Europeans living under no laws.
No if the Parliament does not make the Bill Law then it will go to a referendum which will be even more embarrasing for Maori when Pakeha Ora comes to town baby!!!
It's 2024 can we not just be 1 new zealand and not divided by money and greed from some !! The Maori had nothing before the European/British arrived they did not own the land etc they didn't have roads or airports or farms now they want money for it all and separate heath care etc. They have done very well in the past 100 years.
Totally incorrect to say the Maori had nothing before the European arrive, and "they did not own the land". Ownership itself is a european construct so it almost makes no sense to say they did not own the land. That doesn't mean that the land was not used by Maori or important to them - you could say the land was in many ways more important to Maori than mere ownership. This is why having land stolen and obtained in dubious ways was such a problem, and one people seem to conveniently forget about.
You were there were you, or are you guessing? Today so many pakeha children have massive inheritances from pakeha having access to purchase land or housing etc...A few years ago, the Bank on the phone said, great deposit, salary looks good, come in no problem. I went to the Bank, the guy came out abd said, not even in his office, sorry we can't help you. Must of been my different colour nail polish. I fought every Bank, and finally had the right colour nail polish on 90% deposit. I found errors in my bank statements, next thing I get the small mortgage. Walk in the shoes, don't guess the shoe size.
The Maori had land, their language, dignity, alot more Māori because the British came and killed alot of them!!Don't even say Māori had nothing before the British came, our ancestors were here for 500 years before the British came!
Removing reference to the Treaty from all government legislation is critical. It seriously distorts laws, democracy, and much more. Either that or the meaning of "principles" need defining. Those developed to date by courts are very problematic, undemocratic and open to unending interpretation and exploitation by perpetual Maori distortions and grievances. Therein lies the problem.
Sean: the last thing we need is a division between Act and NZ first squabbling over technicalities, when the critical issue is that a united front is needed to challenge the common contrary concept of partnership. "A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand " and if we dont make a united challenge to the greater division, our national "kingdom"will be divided. If one subset of the collective franchise has a special relationship with the body elected to represent us, where does that leave the rest of us? If tangata tiriti are shut out of the Tribunal, where do non maori have a voice in the debate? Are the rest of us as a majority subset, not the silent majority, but the silenced majority? The critical issue at stake is our fundamental ignorance of our founding history, which leaves us open to political manipulation and reactionary misinformation. The focus of the Tribunal is hearing Maori claims, and as with any bunch of lawyers, the goal is not justice but the best deal for the client, and so it was with the Tribunal Report that concluded that Maori did not cede sovereignty. In an open court system this decision could be appealed, but none of us outside that system have a right of appeal We urgently need an open and objective forum in which these issues can be raised, but all we get at present is a war of ideologies spiced with accusations and slurs To the Coalition, please, paddle the waka in the same direction, hitch your horses in one harness and at least get the stagecoach of NZ to the first base of a select committee hearing. That is the place- or at least theonly place at present-where all of these issues can potentially be objectively addressed by all citizens. Our foundation needs to be the rock of historical fact, not the shifting sands of political ideologies and revolutionary agendas.
Fantasy World as "created by the Labour Party of New Zealand in 1974.... The British are famous for writing off the peasentry these ways from since well before Queen Victoria and so therefore will a Second Reading make any difference to the Maori enquiry about Principles make any difference whatsoever to Winston Peters and Christopher Luxon ?.... Anyone ?.... Anyone ?.... In a closed Parliament ?....
If there are no principals then Willoughby shortland can prove it is a marriage license. Wikitoria Pare Te Kanawa and Wiremu Tamihana Te Rauparaha. That would have assent of all the Chief. Pono.
The treaty was with people from the UK. We were born here. No different than Maori We are all under the same treaty. Us New Zealanders have a King in the UK. Whoopdee doo. So what? Other than that what has the treaty got to do with anything now?
@@jimijamesjowitt WRONG, the treaty opened the door for non maori to come here and be governed by the Crown through the establishment of a government. At the time alot of the non Maori who were here came under the governance of tribal rule, the church and a small presence of the Crown mainly from Australia Your ignorance is why the treaty should be taught in schools champ lol 😂
@@warriorsfan1602 people would have come here any way. the treaty just made it easier. I would also suggest that had another nation colonized wothout a treaty it probably would have been a lot worse for all.
@@ryanking8960 WRONG, The establishment of a Crown initiated government opened the doors to mass immigration from the UK. Mostly poor people escaping poverty. Without that security immigration would have been slower, which would have been better and not resulted in the Crown taking Maori land illegally due to excessive immigration. As for other countries seeking power through colonisation. The Germans were in Samoa, and although not perfect, their footprint is alot smaller and impactful as the Crowns impact in Aotearoa
Save time and money. Call a national referendum. History is an ever growing piece of string. How long do certain parties want to drive the narrative of redress?
Know your Hitori e tangatawhenua. Its all going to come out soon.for the world to see. No bullshitters. You cant erase or hide the awful truth about pakeha government
there is so much scholarly work done on the treaty. These guys are pretending that its all vague and confusing. The amount of times they say 'I dont know' and 'this is new to me' shows how unprepared and ignorant they are.
What would have Happen if the Cheifs NEVER signed the Treaty 🤔 Was it a Treaty of Peace or was there an Agenda there on the British behalf ...Makes you wonder why a Group of Cheifs would Cede SOVEREIGNTY to Vistors 🤔.
4:47 Principals as expressed by courts of treaty of Waitangi Partnership Crown to act in Good faith Reciprocity Mutual benefit Informed decisions Active protection of Maori Principal of redress
@@Fred-zw9kk yeah I only listed them for reference, can’t say I believe in them, especially as they were established at least 140 years after the treaty if not longer.
@@dave24-73 Only concocted to advance the gravy train. But now they're mentioned in legislation, alas, we have to address them. Seymour has proposed the best option so far as there will never be agreement to remove them from legislation.
More immediate things? yes, more important? not really This is far further reaching and therefore important than you may realize. If ACTs bill doesn't happen or some equivalent then NZ will be one step closer to no longer being an independent nation and fall to the globalists losing our sovereignty. We have already taken several steps in that direction fyi
Why NO MENTION that MOST if not ALL so called "MAORI" are AT LEAST part Pakeha /European, SO They are NOT " MAORI" they are Maori / European, NOT like in 1840 when there WERE Maori v's European.
Exactly we have bred together for 200 years its completely insane to expect the impossible seperation of race, we are all unique culturally together we had it right before the Waitangi Tribunal curse
Question. All them principles, are they not existing principles in respect of how the crown is to act towards NZ citizens (once British subjects) already?. A little wording cast aside I'm sure these principles in one way or another are already in place for all citizens? Magna carta comes to mind also for the crown being beholden to such protection for its subjects. I guess what I'm asking is are these principles asking for something we all already have, including Maori? They seem to like making the rights we all have sound like special rights just for them.
No, you need to read it in the context of what's been happening in NZ since 1975. We are well down the path of having two classes of citizenship. That need's correcting and for us all to understand what the Treaty really means, since so few seem to understand it.
@@Fred-zw9kk was this comment meant for me? Iv been providing evidence to hundreds now that Maori did cede sovereignty in 1840. My above questions and comments are simply seeking clarity if these bs principles are actually already in place in some form or another for us all, not just for Maori. As if they are, these principles are worthless, just like the liars that push them.
@@HTDSNZ yep, it was as I wasn't sure where you were coming from? I'm glad you acknowledge Maori ceded sovereignty. There are no "accepted" principles to the Treaty, but if we want to rein-in the BS politicians have created, we absolutely need to define them and Seymour is on the right track. Leave the situation as it stands and NZ will be a third world country in a few decades. We should demand to have the choice which way we want to go.
@@Fred-zw9kk Ye i gathered you had got the wring end of the stick, we are in full agreement mate. I have been battling in online debates for years over this now. I provide the speeches by the chiefs on the 5th at Waitangi after being presented te tiriti (the treaty) that prove they knew they were ceding. Would you like me to share so you have them? Happy to. I only raise the above questions as they keep claiming rights that we all have as special rights just for Maori.
Unfortunately the cat is out of the bag. The precedent has been set, and former governments are to blame. The continuous litigation and grievance industry means that this issue will never be resolved. It will continue to be a political football that's dredged up and used for political convenience. Who here remembers when treaty settlements were supposed to be final? When you create an organization like The Waitangi Tribunal, there can never be resolution. If there was, they'd have no justification to exist. You get that with all leftist institutes. They'll never solve the problem the claim to be fighting (whether it be poverty, climate or any other moral issue of the day), else they'd have no where to go. And they have nowhere to go because they create no value, they have no skill, they're a parasitic non-productive tax on everyone else. They sit their enviously inserting themselves in to the value-creation hierarchy like trolls under the bridge expecting to be paid generously for transactions. They're a mafia first and foremost, masquerading behind a thin veil of empty platitudes, 'liberal niceness' and moral virtue signaling.
I wish I could have a private Tenancy tribunal to use every day so I can jump up and down and say something is wrong every week to enforce all the items and changes I need to FEEl comfy and safe and my home rights are being upheld, all my oral stories and explanations will be guaranteed to be truthful even with zero documents or evidence my word will be taken as truth. I could say the Landlord sexually harassed me and I would be believed and could seek a lot of money for that. Its no different
Maori ceded Kawanatanga - Governorship - which gave the right for the Crown to appoint a Governor (who can oversees government). The Treaty isnt about rights of Maori, it is about the Rights of Governorship ...
Yes David is very clever and shrewd with this Bill, it defines only 3 instead of a plethora of made up ones by maori deceivers they have come to their judgment time, Pakeha ora!
Oh My goodness.... And I really don't mean to say.... But.... Once again the Pakeha pleading the "totally ignorant" card and I really don't know what it all means ????.... And only King Charles lll to turn to for proper "Interpretation" ?.... Of which could take until He dies to get any real meaning from.... And oh.... The plight of the poor goes on....
Ahh actually no if the Parliament doesnt make it law then it will go to the Country referendum hehehe and that is when Pakeha Ora will speak, we dont need to disrupt the community or steal funds for petrol and food
If there should be any principles they should be quotes from the Treaty Chiefs who are being ignored here! The meaning of principles is even being bastardised by maori rebels, principles are ethics not ethnics.
Treaty principles set in stone, do your due diligence fools, 1975 act, 3ps protection, participation, partnership, this ensures maori opportunities to provide input, protect rangatiratanga.
And the SAME Parliament is undoing it ok with the consent of THE PEOPLE ok most are in favour of Davids bill which is simply a repeat of the 3 Treaty articles for dummies
What a horrible show. The principles were created in the 70s due to constant grievances and breaches of the Treaty, disadvantaged statistics for Maori. What are your guys problem. Our Maori people are what makes our country unique and beautiful despite the dark past of intergenerational trauma. We still show manakitanga. Gummon guys. Stop judging from a side you have no understanding from and listen
The Problem is the young have been taught a load of lies through a education system & government / other institutions that has always tried to appease Maori in pursuit of mutual respect and understanding. Some Maori have sort to advance their own embeded agendas. It is time to call it as it is. Maori are not some harmonic race that in the south seas rather ruthless savages have no respect for anyone including other Maori and earlier occupiers of these lands.
Ask Aunty Dame Ann Selmon TO COME ON YOUR SHOW about your cede & The principal's,Reality is you weren't there noone but the Rangatera & monarch (WHICH WAS PAST DOWN ) & spoke about give & take,There was no hand written principal's THAT'S A PAKEA THING WHICH (WE AINT) MADE IT EASIER FOR YOU DIFFRENT CULTURED WHITE PEOPLE IN GOVERNESS TO IGNORE IT & TWIST IT TO FIT YOUR NARRATIVE'S
Magna Carta is the Commonwealth charter and if these rebel Maoris dont sit down more Pakeha will enact the Charter and lawfully strike on taxes and fines which then the Govt will have to negotiate with us, Pakeha ora we are superior and the Lawmakers here whether we like it or not thats what the Treaty was for and the Chiefs chose it under God, Christians have reign here you cannot get past us
Principles my ASS. The treaty was 3 Articles.. YES get over it
We are immigrants to NZ. Anti immigrants can Fire at will, I’ve heard it all. Because of all this constant battering of Māori, non Māori, politics by colour, and lack of ability to take the country forward because it’s still fighting about the past, we’re off. Leaving NZ and closing it as a bad chapter in our lives. NZ is falling apart and living in the past seems to have greater priority than moving into the future. NZ is being left standing on the world stage. We was proud to say we had moved to NZ, but not anymore. I hope NZ can sort its sh1t out before it ruins itself.
Well said, sorry to see you go although I appreciate what you're saying 😊 enjoy your new chapter in life 😁
This is what happens when someone steals someone elses land. Truth be told!
@@dgm2593 What a Clown
Bugger off then. Good luck out there though, as the whole world is in freefall, economically, socially, culturally. Lay the blame where it belongs, on crap global leadership, not the people who bear the pain of it.
@@dgm2593 What land was stolen and when exactly...?
Another great reason to end the Waitangi tribunal grift!!
exactly.
Good luck with that
We DONT legitimately have any principles. The only reason we appear to have these things is that people have talked them into existence...... starting with the Waitangi Tribunal
And, of course, our politicians - who have made a complete disaster of it starting with the likes of Palmer & Rata, added to along the way with the likes of that low-life, Findlayson, who deserves special mention.
@@Fred-zw9kk Oh it goes back further than that, way past the mighty Totara Bolger, we have them all to thank for this mess. They all need to be held to account IMO.
@@paulmeersa7162 they never will be. We just need to accept the Treaty exactly as it was when it was signed by both parties and work on that and that alone from now on. It is NOT a partnership, The Crown has sovereignty.
@@jillspence7227Or, we just throw principles and treaty away, and move forward together.
But it appears too many revel in their victimhood.
The tribunal was set up for claims. And like any group it has unilaterally extended its remit where it can.
Untill this is sorted once and for all this country will never move forward
The maori Grifters will KEEP the gravy train as LONG as they can.
@@Wairoa4ever Ohhh sorry about it disappointed coalition supporter oh sorry act party grifter
@@andrewmann3787 only thing to sort out is your selflessness act supporter
Well it will move forward but it will be a big cluster shambles.
Time waits for no one so in actual fact were always moving forward 😂
Winston says that their are no principals in the treaty,he is correct but yet for the past 30 years we have had principals in the treaty and Winston has been part of successive Governments and yet the principals remain not a squeak from Winston until David brought in his treaty Principals bill FFS
If you listen to Costellos recent speech about the Principles she says in the past NZ First has brought forth bills to the table about retiring the Treaty principles made up in the recent decades not create another set that maoris will only keep saying are being breached thats all they know how to do
the document's text, signatures, and date are what matter, not the unwritten principles or understandings that have evolved over time. The signed document is the primary source of its legal authority and obligations.
Absolutely correct . I am not an authority but I am pretty sure that the chiefs who did sign in 1940 wanted peace and the protection of the Crown . If this is incorrect please advance your argument in the comments .
@@andrewcampbell2903 1940🤷
What was signed in 1940 again?@@andrewcampbell2903
The 'principles' have been interpreted in a way that creates two standards of citizenship based on ancestry..- that's what the treaty principles bill is intended to correct and despite Luxon's cowardice, this issue will only fester..
BINGO!!!!!!!!
The Treaty of Waitangi has become a nice little earner for people once they get their snouts in the tax-payer trough. It is called the grievance industry. End of story.
yep your pretty much grieving about giving back what was taken from maori
@deantairi8357 yep, if Roy "took something" from you, take him to court. Otherwise, we are all just people, working hard to pay taxes for the benefit of all, based on their needs and not what race they identify as.
@@olsaffa7679 thats part of the reason why the waitangi tribunal was established courts will cost taxpayers more money like you said all of our taxes are footing the bill maori are paying to get back what was confiscated from our maori ancestors
This is why Lawyers are predominantly left leaning. They're non-productive, gatekeepers who exist either as a tax in they public system or in the private sector. You'll find that predominantly in industries where value is interfered with, not created. They don't enable, they gate-keep and insert themselves as "value add" services. Tell me, where is the value added?
@deantairi8357 confiscated by who? Take a walk down Queen Street and you'll quickly realize that the majority of people came here post 1940, forget about 1840. Go have a walk in Gisborne or Kaitaia and you'll notice very few people who'd claim 50% Maori ancestry, forget about 100%. Can you now claim "reparations" from immigrants when Maori should claim reparations from part of their own immigrant whakapapa? And how did the majority of NZers, arriving post 1940's, come to owe part Maori today? Go take individuals who you can prove benefitted to the court, which Maori subjected themselves to when they became full crown citizens. The only thing the Waitangi Tribunal should be dealing with is land expropriated without compensation. Once those are settled, no more grievances. The "Maori economy" makes up 27% of GDP while 17% of the population. If you need reparations, you should ask where all that money is going first.
The activists are conning us that the treaty of Waitangi is like the dead sea scrolls with missing writings discovered.
@Coach-j1hThe separatism.
Bullshit e hoa
I would think that it is in both party's interests to have more clarity around the standing of the so-called principles and I believe that is what David Seymour is driving at. Those who speculate that having this debate is somehow going to increase racial tensions are simply aiming to shut down the debate, without considering the mutual benefits of having one.
Seymour is dangerous and lacks the articulated subtlety to calm both sides. He starts wars with his pitting side against side.
There are principles. The issue is that people like David Seymour don’t want to recognize that.
There is no debate to have. The Treaty is clear. Maori ceded sovereign
@@jillspence7227 where does it say they ceded sovereignty
@@jillspence7227 watch out for the flying elephants
Public vote problem solved it's called Democracy...?
1881, Democracy was broken... Your argument is invalid when Early Settlers broke it 🤦🏽🤦🏽🤦🏽
YES BRING IT. Obama is back
Not gonna happen start emptying your tears now😂
Yeah no one wants a vote when ya no you'll never win
Should have live debate on tv
The problem is no-one can have the truthful view because it isn't open to interpretation cos it did the job for 12 years until Parliament formed period
not signed on the day, not part of the Treaty of Waitangi. Otherwise every contract in our country since can be rewritten at any stage, that is the precedent that would set.
always get something to think about from Mr Judd KC, hope he continues to come on the show
How come NZF gets all of the ‘edgy’ anti-establishment support…yet they are allowed to be soft on this issue and not support the referendum?🤔
Because they are right in that there are no principles and adding them now will only further the grift!! Wake TF up man!!!!
Wake up?? NZ first was in govt when He Puapua was tabled…they also let labour in in 2017…you wake up 😂
@@austingtiryou sound old. Winny is a cope out on this issue.
@@mra4955 Winnie said:
"No deal 🙅 mfkrs"
😉
Because there are no principles in the Treaty, so the bill for a referendum is moot. The Crown has sovereignty.
Bull Dust. 😂.
No partnership. Just British law or nothing. Turns out the worst thing done was offering this now it’s just eternal UTU and plunder.
Even if ACTs bill just started discussion on the robbery perpetrated on tax payers.
The Crown itself is to blame for that imo...the Crown were who committed the injustices to Maori, but somehow the Crown makes YOU and ME foot the reparations bill...
Crown causes the bs, but it's us that pays for it?
Where's the fairness in that?
@@Rodtang-x5z especaly as I'm part maori
@@Rodtang-x5z How do you expect the "crown" to pay without it being us?
Their money is from us after all.
@@marksvideochannel3592 Exactly...that's been a known fact for many years, yet they still take the money from us to pay the reparations...my point is, the law is bent. If you commit a crime, you are expected to pay for that crime.
If the Crown commits a crime, we pay for it? Neat little system they've designed for themselves huh??
In the context of post colonial New Zealand, the Goverment, also known as the Crown, is part of the Commonwealth and is represented here by the Govenor General King Charles III is also King of New Zealand and the Commonwealth once known as the "British" Commonwealth and earlier still, the British Empire.. In breaking with a long held tradition, then Commonwealth country Barbados, removed the reigning Monarch QE2, as their head of state. They had their reasons no doubt and if other Country's within The Commonwealth begin to have similar ambitions, then they too may well jack it in and free themselves from their historic links to the Commonwealth. The strength of these were tested when the British joined the European Economic Union but after they Brexited from the EU they've rejoined the Commonwealth and, "she's all hunky dory" again.
Why is the treaty of Waitangi commission entitled to create principles for the treaty which were not created when the treaty was signed? Surely that is not a part of our democratic process? In which case why can’t any Iwi create principles to suit their individual agenda?
similar things seem to happen in other departments too. The police have created "none crime incidents" which they record. The IRD can decide you could be earning more and charge you based on that instead of your earnings because "capacity to earn" they define as what they feel you could earn. The education department just makes up anything they like, parents and truth be damned, so do mental health professionals science be damned.
This is what the USA call the "deep state", people that are part of government, aren't elected yet have lots of power they abuse without anyone able to vote them out or hold them accountable.
Like the police commissioner not being able to be fired by the police minister we elect for example....so how do the citizen hold the commissioner accountable?
And there lies the question we, critical thinking people, have been asking for sometime. We know this has been a shit show of un addressed largesse, for a self selected few. Shame.
Oh tautoko
The Treaty is actually a very simple document whose meaning has been abused for gain.
Dont you mean Te Tiriti? Because as stated in this interview, it was the signed document. Abuse for gain is only in the English version bud.
@@dobbynp You're right, it is a simple document and yet the Crown couldn't keep the terms of the document for 180 years 😂 shame on them 😂
@@warriorsfan1602 more like the treaty is being used to justify lining the pockets of greedy spokespeople and others who want preferential treatment and now they are crying that the gravy train will end. Weak people who are not good enough to succeed on their own.
@@kylebeckett825 no I don't. And please....define the principles.
@@kylebeckett825 And the principles are ? waiting waiting waiting, not wanting feelings or it might be , but the Principals
This is crazy so you’re telling me that unelected people have created something out of nothing and now we having to pay for all this nonsense? How is this okay or able to happen?
Because the rebels were given a Court of their own, the ones that had their land confiscated for slaughtering 100s of Pakeha starting wars everywhere for 30 years after the Treaty they caused all the strife and still do
The Waitangi Tribunal has had many remarkable thoughts about NZ over time, but none of these are binding or have any more legitimacy than others' views. Let parliament give the guidance we need on how to interpret the treaty and stop the ad-hoc wish list approach that maori have adopted.
Other way round, the govt has paid out 4 billion since 1840. Last year alone the country made 400 billion. Pretty cheap rate considering what has been made dont you think?
So they made there own rules up
Always have done. Make up what you like.
The treaty principles are whatever the Maori intelligentsia say they are at any time.
And there is the problem.
I think we have now got to a point where the Treaty causes more confusion, disagreement and distrust than bringing us together as a nation. Once upon a time I had faith in the Waitangi Tribunal process addressing historical grievances. Now i think it has become a self-generating grievance industry that has lost credibility and needs to be disbanded.
Pakeha have grievances from the past too but we the majority dont get heard we have no spokesperson for our Native ethnic people
Bullkaka 😅
Treaty Articles not fake principles made up by activists since 1970s.
For some reason our GPs also need to do Māori cultural training. Not for any other ethnicities, because obviously the majority of their other non Māori patients don’t exist.
I argued this with ACC recently when they asked if I was Maori due to cultural needs? There are many cultures in NZ now, so why are they not being respected also?
It's all or none!
Maori get to see a nurse practitioner not a GP
Yeah they do, especially in urban areas. I’m guessing you are referring to a lack of rural GPs which affects people living in rural areas which includes rural Māori?
Sadly, Winston is doing a Winston, like many duplicitous politicians. If the ‘principles of the Treaty’ are to be removed from legislation as he implies, how much legislation do you think that will really affect? By way of example, the “Fast-Track Approvals Bill” (which need I mention is a coalition initiative and has nothing directly to do with Treaty Settlements), mentions "Treaty" 85 times, “principles” 11 times, “Tikanga” 3 and “Matauranga” once. So, I’ll wager the ‘principles of the Treaty’ will continue to prevail and with them the claims of a 'partnership', co-governance, Maori sovereignty etc. etc. will continue to fester, while the country continues to decline. We absolutely need Seymour’s proposed discussion, and for democracy to prevail, if there's to be any any chance of NZ uniting and prospering. Either that, or it's goodnight, nurse!
Goooooood morning Vietnam!
It's debatable whether we should be taking much notice of the Treaty anyway. It shouldn't be debatable whether any "principles", which have been created out of nothing, should apply.
Leaving the principles in for existing Waitangi Tribunal settlement is probably the compromise he made to get this agreed by National. Chris Luxon is weak.
So seven principles were contrived under the Dept of Maori Affairs in 1971 . They are not contained in the 1840 Maori version and were not explicit at all until the meddling that occurred 131 years later . If what I have written here is incorrect then it can be refuted but if it is simply deleted where is the desire for the truth to be known ?
@@andrewcampbell2903 The principles come from the fact that the Crown broke the terms of their own treaty for 180 years. Compensation through settlements was seen as one way of going forward the others was through treaty principles.
@@warriorsfan1602 OK , so you are not arguing that the principles are contained within the 1840 document . We need to make a distinction between the treaty itself and something that came along more than a century later .
@@warriorsfan1602 Rubbish; the Crown has never broken the Treaty. Ever!
@@warriorsfan1602 And please highlight where and how they were broken, or is it just feelings you have about the govt
So basically, Winston is trying to avoid the issue…
So NZF supports the status quo…🤔
No he rightly observes they aren't real rules.....however if they are being enforced, and they are being enforced, it needs to be shut down actively. Ignoring it is therefore not an option.
Actively shut down…which they are not…so he’s ignoring it…end of…simply saying they don’t exist is an easy way of doing nothing…
They want all principles removed but never got enough votes in the House
The principals 1975 have nothing to do with 1840 '
Yes correct.....it was an attempt at a rewrite to appease one group.....nothing more and I would add.....illegal....
and neither does Davids Bill have anything to do with the Treaty except being a repeat of the articles to reinforce it for the dummies
The Māoris signed up to get in line to sample the cake and decided they like the icing but not the rest . However rather than be all out they keep coming back for further helpings of the icing . The Maori culture is quite frankly boring and nothing to do with me so stop ramming it down my throat because I’m regurgitating it faster than ever .
They are quickly coming to a festering pimple ready to pop, Shane Jones actually said they could be arrested and imprisoned for what they are doing
The principles are a diversion,...there is only 1 principle, the principle of honour. Principles do not need to be defined, what needs definition is between the 2 treaty versions , which version prevails, and if so, what are the inherent rights therein. Only then can a nation move forward.
Resoprocity is the practice of exchanging things with others for mutual benefit, especially privileges granted by one country or organization to another.
Contracts expire.... and the Treaty is long past its expiry date.
Yes, time to return the land that was stolen.
The artcles are straightforward. Maori Chiefs had/ have the right to Chieftainship over their villages( people),land and taonga,the Crown has kawanatanga sovereignty or paramount chieftainship over the whole islands.
To me this clearly means Chiefs have had governership over their separate Iwi ,this means day to day decisions for their tribal lands.Accordingly any land they have left or purchase as a collective including Marae should come under their jurisdiction .These lands should be exempt from rates and pay only for direct services that are accessed.These lands should also be exempt from our current regulations regarding use and building codes and the like.They should be left to do what they desire and consequences are the responsibility of themselves.
Only problem is their land was stolen.
why nz media not talking about destinys church tamaki winning his case all charges dropped for COVID BREACHES
Removing the so called "Principles" from all Treaty enquiries only means that I wonder for how long Winston Peters has held this view for ?....
Would it somehow be possible to ask the British Crown if it considers that the Treaty was a partnership.
Why? It is clear that it is not.
@@paulmeersa7162
It's clear to me, clear to Sir Apirana Ngata, clear to Sir Hugh Kawharu, even clear to lackluster Luxon but still there are some to whom it is not clear. Maybe a definitive answer from the other party in this Treaty might just convince them.
As if they would partnership with a bunch of uneducated savages get real 😅
No way cos Charlie will say well well old chap we could look at floating the idea
@@paulmeersa7162 Really? in 1835 the king acknowledge the Maori as the sovereign people of NZ?
Bring on the MACA Claims. Takutai moana. Enough of the designation of coastal Maoriland given to Pakeha by a Pakeha MAGISTRATES since 1840
Try Washington DC, there's a copy of both draft versions 3 and 4, that's my understanding,
NZ on fast track to backwater banana republic. Zimbabwe here we come !!
Zimbabwe good choice good luck
Having read the treaty, both english and maori and the ideas for the new bill they look to be saying the same thing...like exactly the same thing. I suspect what I'm missing is what the courts made up along the way building precedent....which I've seen be taken a long way with other laws. Right now for example the IRD decided to pretend I;m earning double what I am because they twisted one phrase "capacity to earn" to mean what they feel like I could be earning instead of what I'm actually managing to earn today.
I can appeal this in court but that would cost as much or more than what they are demanding!
Our court system grossly oversteps in my opinion, from enforcing law to re-writing it themselves. Seems that's what may have happened with the treaty.
That is messed up what they doing to you. If only you had an investment property to bring your taxable income down, or a failing wee business that cost are more than what it earns, you could possibly reduce your taxable income with the cost and the loss. An accountant may know about that. (cough). One judge made a comment about the treaty being "akin to a partnership" The radicals leapt onto the partnership part and have used that as grounds for the partnership principle since.
I agree with Winston Peters there are no principles in the Treaty. Time to bin it and start afresh
Yea only problem is the promises made were broken, what does that mean for the confiscated land?
@mooselee902 Billions of dollars have already been paid in reparations to deal with this issue
Agree with Seymour not partnership Agree with Winston no principles in original
Treaty of Waitangi. Where is Luxon? One foot in each camp Double minded is not leadership 0:44
The principles are the articles... not some set of nebulous meanings hiding behind the articles that only the initiated are supposed to decipher. Winston is right, we need to get back to the meaning of the historical treaty, and to get away from a treaty-centric politics.
No, we need to decide what New Zealand is going to look like moving forward into the 21st century. Not forever looking backward at 1840.
@@JohnSmith-ux3tt That would be to get away from a treaty-centric politics. History moved on, and so should we.
The main problem is that we don't have a constitution to set this stuff down in text, and a review function. So our bits and pieces of cobbled together government, courts, commissions, tribunals, all end up in a legal and linguistic melee.
However, what Parliament screweth up, Parliament must fixeth. Bad drafting in 1975 is a problem. Tolerating 50 years of constitutional uncertainty on minor matters like political power, property, and rights before the law is a frkng travesty.
Yes we want the billions back they had their land confiscated cos they slaughtered our Pakeha ancestor families its a travesty alright
Blah blah blah, unless the govt grows some, makes clear what the treaty actually means, in 100 years nz will still be divided..... our pakeha govts are too scared to have it out, so the future looks unhappy and divided....
Rip it up and take back everything that the Maoris were given.
Yes, and they get back all their land.
@@barneyboy2008 And they have to live as they did pre European.....yes I didn't think so.....
@@arnoldbraunschweiger4828 actually, looking the position they hold in society, I'm sure they would.
@@barneyboy2008 Looking at the position they hold in society.....you just keep playing the victim card on their behalf eh....it suits you well.....
@@arnoldbraunschweiger4828 if someone nicks all your land for less than fair value, by being the only buyer by way of a treaty. Yes, then I think you can play the victim card.
Waitangi Tribunal should be removed
Sovereignty of any nation should ultimately belong to all of the citizens of that nation who are currently alive.
Like the First Nation Americans
The Court of Appeal
The inclusion of the principles in the State-Owned Enterprises Act 1986 led to a Court of Appeal case New Zealand Māori Council v Attorney-General (1987) (a.k.a. the ‘Lands’ case or the ‘SOE’ case). It forced the Court to define the treaty principles. The judgements do not codified their principles, but a common summary and useful for govt departments who struggle with the meaning of a legal document
This must be dumped if not it's going to cost the end of nz
Again WINSTON talks out of BOTH sides of HIS MOUTH saying there are NO PRINCILES of the TREATY & then say's HE WILL KEEP SOME in law / legisltion. Same old Winston double talk, eg vote for me & NZ 1st " WON'T go with National & he DID.
Sir Apirana explanation and translation of the treaty “ Governor for all parts of New Zealand, to ceded and for ever to the Queen( Victoria). 1860 New Zealand was pretty much lawless Europeans were murdering Māori and vice versa. The Queen ( Victoria) wanted to establish a Government with a view to avert the evil consequences to the Māori people and to Europeans living under no laws.
Its dead in the water
No if the Parliament does not make the Bill Law then it will go to a referendum which will be even more embarrasing for Maori when Pakeha Ora comes to town baby!!!
Same old shit got to get the ratings up
It's 2024 can we not just be 1 new zealand and not divided by money and greed from some !! The Maori had nothing before the European/British arrived they did not own the land etc they didn't have roads or airports or farms now they want money for it all and separate heath care etc. They have done very well in the past 100 years.
Totally incorrect to say the Maori had nothing before the European arrive, and "they did not own the land". Ownership itself is a european construct so it almost makes no sense to say they did not own the land. That doesn't mean that the land was not used by Maori or important to them - you could say the land was in many ways more important to Maori than mere ownership. This is why having land stolen and obtained in dubious ways was such a problem, and one people seem to conveniently forget about.
You were there were you, or are you guessing? Today so many pakeha children have massive inheritances from pakeha having access to purchase land or housing etc...A few years ago, the Bank on the phone said, great deposit, salary looks good, come in no problem. I went to the Bank, the guy came out abd said, not even in his office, sorry we can't help you. Must of been my different colour nail polish. I fought every Bank, and finally had the right colour nail polish on 90% deposit. I found errors in my bank statements, next thing I get the small mortgage. Walk in the shoes, don't guess the shoe size.
The Maori had land, their language, dignity, alot more Māori because the British came and killed alot of them!!Don't even say Māori had nothing before the British came, our ancestors were here for 500 years before the British came!
@fun---- what bullshit , you must be in the with the tea party radicals.
@CatherineAugust at least the poms stopped the moari wars, didn't they?
Ignore gvt ignore media and news get as far as saying Kia ora that’s about it as doesn’t affect my realities of bills budget and goals
Removing reference to the Treaty from all government legislation is critical. It seriously distorts laws, democracy, and much more. Either that or the meaning of "principles" need defining. Those developed to date by courts are very problematic, undemocratic and open to unending interpretation and exploitation by perpetual Maori distortions and grievances. Therein lies the problem.
The principles are written down in many places, have a read
Well 80 percent of the Country werent at that table, and now we are, Pakeha Ora all day to eternity with God
@@StGammon77 Can Māori wellbeing be eternal with god too? Or just Pākehā?
Sean: the last thing we need is a division between Act and NZ first squabbling over technicalities, when the critical issue is that a united front is needed to challenge the common contrary concept of partnership. "A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand " and if we dont make a united challenge to the greater division, our national "kingdom"will be divided.
If one subset of the collective franchise has a special relationship with the body elected to represent us, where does that leave the rest of us? If tangata tiriti are shut out of the Tribunal, where do non maori have a voice in the debate? Are the rest of us as a majority subset, not the silent majority, but the silenced majority?
The critical issue at stake is our fundamental ignorance of our founding history, which leaves us open to political manipulation and reactionary misinformation. The focus of the Tribunal is hearing Maori claims, and as with any bunch of lawyers, the goal is not justice but the best deal for the client, and so it was with the Tribunal Report that concluded that Maori did not cede sovereignty. In an open court system this decision could be appealed, but none of us outside that system have a right of appeal
We urgently need an open and objective forum in which these issues can be raised, but all we get at present is a war of ideologies spiced with accusations and slurs
To the Coalition, please, paddle the waka in the same direction, hitch your horses in one harness and at least get the stagecoach of NZ to the first base of a select committee hearing. That is the place- or at least theonly place at present-where all of these issues can potentially be objectively addressed by all citizens.
Our foundation needs to be the rock of historical fact, not the shifting sands of political ideologies and revolutionary agendas.
Haha we are equal partners. You 40%, me 60%. Either way the concept of partnership is a misguided convenience.
Fantasy World as "created by the Labour Party of New Zealand in 1974.... The British are famous for writing off the peasentry these ways from since well before Queen Victoria and so therefore will a Second Reading make any difference to the Maori enquiry about Principles make any difference whatsoever to Winston Peters and Christopher Luxon ?.... Anyone ?.... Anyone ?.... In a closed Parliament ?....
If there are no principals then Willoughby shortland can prove it is a marriage license. Wikitoria Pare Te Kanawa and Wiremu Tamihana Te Rauparaha.
That would have assent of all the Chief. Pono.
The treaty was with people from the UK.
We were born here.
No different than Maori
We are all under the same treaty.
Us New Zealanders have a King in the UK.
Whoopdee doo.
So what?
Other than that what has the treaty got to do with anything now?
te tiriti was an agreement between the crown and tangata-whenua and the goons in par-liar ment know this otherwise would have abolished it years ago
@@jimijamesjowitt WRONG, the treaty opened the door for non maori to come here and be governed by the Crown through the establishment of a government. At the time alot of the non Maori who were here came under the governance of tribal rule, the church and a small presence of the Crown mainly from Australia Your ignorance is why the treaty should be taught in schools champ lol 😂
@@warriorsfan1602 people would have come here any way. the treaty just made it easier. I would also suggest that had another nation colonized wothout a treaty it probably would have been a lot worse for all.
@@ryanking8960 WRONG, The establishment of a Crown initiated government opened the doors to mass immigration from the UK. Mostly poor people escaping poverty. Without that security immigration would have been slower, which would have been better and not resulted in the Crown taking Maori land illegally due to excessive immigration. As for other countries seeking power through colonisation. The Germans were in Samoa, and although not perfect, their footprint is alot smaller and impactful as the Crowns impact in Aotearoa
Yes! I was born in NZ. Not England. Well said 👏
And the Waitangi Tribunal had announced that the principles are not set in stone but will change according to circumstances and need.
Save time and money. Call a national referendum. History is an ever growing piece of string. How long do certain parties want to drive the narrative of redress?
There has been fuck all redress, thats the problem
Do not forget Dame Whina Cooper.
Maoris cant be dames pfft its all theatrical fiction has no juri over me
Know your Hitori e tangatawhenua. Its all going to come out soon.for the world to see. No bullshitters. You cant erase or hide the awful truth about pakeha government
Why are all these overstayers complaining 😂😂😂
It's what their best at
Yes I think they should go back to Polynesia and China
there is so much scholarly work done on the treaty. These guys are pretending that its all vague and confusing. The amount of times they say 'I dont know' and 'this is new to me' shows how unprepared and ignorant they are.
What would have Happen if the Cheifs NEVER signed the Treaty 🤔 Was it a Treaty of Peace or was there an Agenda there on the British behalf ...Makes you wonder why a Group of Cheifs would Cede SOVEREIGNTY to Vistors 🤔.
4:47 Principals as expressed by courts of treaty of Waitangi
Partnership
Crown to act in Good faith
Reciprocity
Mutual benefit
Informed decisions
Active protection of Maori
Principal of redress
Yep, 1, 3, 4 & 5 are either BS or non-existent
@@Fred-zw9kk yeah I only listed them for reference, can’t say I believe in them, especially as they were established at least 140 years after the treaty if not longer.
@@dave24-73 Only concocted to advance the gravy train. But now they're mentioned in legislation, alas, we have to address them. Seymour has proposed the best option so far as there will never be agreement to remove them from legislation.
And this is supposed to be the privilege only for Maori, what about the other EIGHTY FIVE PERCENT surely the sacred Treaty is for all NZdrs
Jesus Christ....still on about this rubbish??
We've got far more important things to deal with in this country...
More immediate things? yes, more important? not really
This is far further reaching and therefore important than you may realize. If ACTs bill doesn't happen or some equivalent then NZ will be one step closer to no longer being an independent nation and fall to the globalists losing our sovereignty. We have already taken several steps in that direction fyi
Why NO MENTION that MOST if not ALL so called "MAORI" are AT LEAST part Pakeha /European, SO They are NOT " MAORI" they are Maori / European, NOT like in 1840 when there WERE Maori v's European.
Exactly we have bred together for 200 years its completely insane to expect the impossible seperation of race, we are all unique culturally together we had it right before the Waitangi Tribunal curse
Their descendants are welcome to their birthright
Question. All them principles, are they not existing principles in respect of how the crown is to act towards NZ citizens (once British subjects) already?. A little wording cast aside I'm sure these principles in one way or another are already in place for all citizens? Magna carta comes to mind also for the crown being beholden to such protection for its subjects. I guess what I'm asking is are these principles asking for something we all already have, including Maori? They seem to like making the rights we all have sound like special rights just for them.
No, you need to read it in the context of what's been happening in NZ since 1975. We are well down the path of having two classes of citizenship. That need's correcting and for us all to understand what the Treaty really means, since so few seem to understand it.
@@Fred-zw9kk was this comment meant for me?
Iv been providing evidence to hundreds now that Maori did cede sovereignty in 1840.
My above questions and comments are simply seeking clarity if these bs principles are actually already in place in some form or another for us all, not just for Maori.
As if they are, these principles are worthless, just like the liars that push them.
@@HTDSNZ yep, it was as I wasn't sure where you were coming from? I'm glad you acknowledge Maori ceded sovereignty. There are no "accepted" principles to the Treaty, but if we want to rein-in the BS politicians have created, we absolutely need to define them and Seymour is on the right track. Leave the situation as it stands and NZ will be a third world country in a few decades. We should demand to have the choice which way we want to go.
@@Fred-zw9kk Ye i gathered you had got the wring end of the stick, we are in full agreement mate.
I have been battling in online debates for years over this now.
I provide the speeches by the chiefs on the 5th at Waitangi after being presented te tiriti (the treaty) that prove they knew they were ceding.
Would you like me to share so you have them?
Happy to.
I only raise the above questions as they keep claiming rights that we all have as special rights just for Maori.
@@HTDSNZ No thanks, I know where to reference them and am reasonably au fait with want went down on the 4th, 5th and 6th of Feb. Keep battling. 👍
Unfortunately the cat is out of the bag. The precedent has been set, and former governments are to blame. The continuous litigation and grievance industry means that this issue will never be resolved. It will continue to be a political football that's dredged up and used for political convenience. Who here remembers when treaty settlements were supposed to be final?
When you create an organization like The Waitangi Tribunal, there can never be resolution. If there was, they'd have no justification to exist. You get that with all leftist institutes. They'll never solve the problem the claim to be fighting (whether it be poverty, climate or any other moral issue of the day), else they'd have no where to go. And they have nowhere to go because they create no value, they have no skill, they're a parasitic non-productive tax on everyone else. They sit their enviously inserting themselves in to the value-creation hierarchy like trolls under the bridge expecting to be paid generously for transactions. They're a mafia first and foremost, masquerading behind a thin veil of empty platitudes, 'liberal niceness' and moral virtue signaling.
Well said
I wish I could have a private Tenancy tribunal to use every day so I can jump up and down and say something is wrong every week to enforce all the items and changes I need to FEEl comfy and safe and my home rights are being upheld, all my oral stories and explanations will be guaranteed to be truthful even with zero documents or evidence my word will be taken as truth. I could say the Landlord sexually harassed me and I would be believed and could seek a lot of money for that. Its no different
Maori ceded Kawanatanga - Governorship - which gave the right for the Crown to appoint a Governor (who can oversees government). The Treaty isnt about rights of Maori, it is about the Rights of Governorship ...
Thats true there great point
They didnt cede tino rangatiratanga though
Gary Judd is a rambling old fart of no real consequence other than to provide an echo.
I fell asleep waiting for his point.
Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993.
Because they're not, the Waitangi tribunal will say anything to get the money.
Wow what a clever scam , introducing principles.
Yes David is very clever and shrewd with this Bill, it defines only 3 instead of a plethora of made up ones by maori deceivers they have come to their judgment time, Pakeha ora!
Oh My goodness.... And I really don't mean to say.... But.... Once again the Pakeha pleading the "totally ignorant" card and I really don't know what it all means ????.... And only King Charles lll to turn to for proper "Interpretation" ?.... Of which could take until He dies to get any real meaning from.... And oh.... The plight of the poor goes on....
Cry me a river!
the Pakeha, i do find that word offensive
Dead Duck in the WATER😅
Ahh actually no if the Parliament doesnt make it law then it will go to the Country referendum hehehe and that is when Pakeha Ora will speak, we dont need to disrupt the community or steal funds for petrol and food
This is aotearoa not England
Its Colonia ruled by Britannia Pakeha ora!
This is New Zealand not Aotearoa
If there should be any principles they should be quotes from the Treaty Chiefs who are being ignored here! The meaning of principles is even being bastardised by maori rebels, principles are ethics not ethnics.
Boohoo go to Australia if you don’t like it 😂
That's even worse. They are trying to police the worlds speech right now.....as if policing speech in their own country wasn't bad enough
fark half the Maoris are over there 🤣
@@derektitch indigenous to Australia now?
@@SeanBodleyGuitarist Those are your tricks, go to another peoples home land then try and claim sovereignty
Treaty principles set in stone, do your due diligence fools, 1975 act, 3ps protection, participation, partnership, this ensures maori opportunities to provide input, protect rangatiratanga.
And the SAME Parliament is undoing it ok with the consent of THE PEOPLE ok most are in favour of Davids bill which is simply a repeat of the 3 Treaty articles for dummies
Maori hv spoken stick atlas
What a horrible show. The principles were created in the 70s due to constant grievances and breaches of the Treaty, disadvantaged statistics for Maori. What are your guys problem. Our Maori people are what makes our country unique and beautiful despite the dark past of intergenerational trauma. We still show manakitanga. Gummon guys. Stop judging from a side you have no understanding from and listen
The treaty of Waitangi is the founding document of this country hands off he whakaputanga no moving the goal post
Chur
maoris alreadt tampered with it all the lines are blurred they have no clue, hence Davids Bill of the 3 Treaty articles repeated for dummies
Do maori have made up their own principles so now is the principles of all nz. No Treaty no bs from maori
😅😅😅😅😅
Blah blah blah 😂😂😂
Funny how it’s old as people driving this narrative. Probably can’t operate a simple google search 😂😂😂😂😂
The Problem is the young have been taught a load of lies through a education system & government / other institutions that has always tried to appease Maori in pursuit of mutual respect and understanding. Some Maori have sort to advance their own embeded agendas. It is time to call it as it is. Maori are not some harmonic race that in the south seas rather ruthless savages have no respect for anyone including other Maori and earlier occupiers of these lands.
Ask Aunty Dame Ann Selmon TO COME ON YOUR SHOW about your cede & The principal's,Reality is you weren't there noone but the Rangatera & monarch (WHICH WAS PAST DOWN ) & spoke about give & take,There was no hand written principal's THAT'S A PAKEA THING WHICH (WE AINT) MADE IT EASIER FOR YOU DIFFRENT CULTURED WHITE PEOPLE IN GOVERNESS TO IGNORE IT & TWIST IT TO FIT YOUR NARRATIVE'S
As tpm are doing now clown
and there it is, the reason to vote them out
OBAMA; The Boss is back!!
HE WAKAPUTANGA 1835 is the constitution of New Zealand - the treaty of Waitangi has never been legal
Magna Carta is the Commonwealth charter and if these rebel Maoris dont sit down more Pakeha will enact the Charter and lawfully strike on taxes and fines which then the Govt will have to negotiate with us, Pakeha ora we are superior and the Lawmakers here whether we like it or not thats what the Treaty was for and the Chiefs chose it under God, Christians have reign here you cannot get past us