Our fundamental human rights are protected under the Human Rights Act 1993 and the Bill of Rights Act 1990. It's not the treaty's job to do that. The treaty is a contract between nations based on the same concept the UK was founded on ( in their case a treaty between Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England). I think we'd all agree that Scottish people desiring a certain level of autonomy as a separate identity and culture to the English isn't a controversial or negative thing, and that forcing "equality and unity" with England by making the Scots abolish their parliament wouldn't be a cute idea. Same principles apply here.
This video highlights exactly why debate and clarification is needed. Without debate and clarity, this will go on frustrating generation after generation of New Zealanders.
Dude that likes to text and send vids to 13 year old girls, can’t even pronounce ‘Māori’ correctly. I wonder if he thinks we can’t see through his paid shill work from the Atlas group that he worked for in Canada, trying to strip the rights of indigenous people to pump the oil and gas from the land, royalty free. It’s impressive to see him sit up straight, when he doesn’t have a backbone.
Here is the clarification: The majority of Rangatira signed te Tiriti. They did not cede sovereignty to the crown nor give them permission to confiscate land, apply unequal rates, or breakup ownership of Maori land into individually owned blocks. Te Tiriti was authenticated by William Hobson. End of discussion.
The Treaty has its own clarification written in black and white. The problem is the government don't like that clarification so they decided to come up with their own vague clarifications.
As an Australian, I can assure you that a treaty between the Crown and the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander people is an idea they can only dream of. They are the most disadvantaged group in society by community standards and not having a treaty in place has had a devastating effect. The Maori are leading the way by international standards when it comes to first nations people having self-determination and land rights protection. That is something to be proud of. Te tiriti o waitangi must be protected at all costs. Kia Kaha ✊
The Mabo case which established allodial land rights for Torres Strait Islanders was judged using the same Law of equal rights to all as Mr Seymour is talking about. Mabo is a decision that has been used to establish land rights of peoples at the time of European contact in NZ as well. I'm wavering on support now and prefer NZ First position Remove all references to TOW out of parliament made law Id love to see a case taken by South Islanders against Ngai Tahu - who never signed the ToW btw
Fun fact: millions of people voted in the election, the majority for parties other than ACT or TPM, who do support the principles Seymour sets out in this bill - meaning, one law for all. The ACT vote tally is neither here nor there.
@Laura Fun fact Laura, Put the bill to a referendum and then see how many people vote *For* it. Me no expert, but I suspect that it will garner 7 figures
I think Jack had him on the ropes a bit with the questions about the courts being a neutral third party, and a Maori roll and general roll referendum being needed for it to be fair. Nice to see a good debate over this bill instead of emotionally charged rhetoric!
David Seymour just can't understand how New Zealand could be world-leading, or following his own argument, the world's first successful country with a founding document honoured by all the original parties.
The treaty has not just come up over the last 50 years. It was supressed and ignored by governments after it was signed for over 130 years. David wants to return to the european hegemony because it suits his backers. Maori will not be put back in their box David. Their rights under the treaty cannot be legislated away. These rights are perpetual whether you like it or not.
This comment is not about the Treaty Principles bill as such. The perspective Seymour is grounded in is a Libertarian doctrine. People might want to look up what libertarian ideology is all about and start asking how will it be good for me, more importantly our country? I suspect some people who are all on board with ACT might actually find that they are worse off under libertarian policies. The opportunity is there to take a look behind the talking points and consider the big picture and future implications. If you have done your homework and still like a Libertarian orientated future then so be it. There is a reason that 'big business' and the very wealthy back ACT.
06:30 no one is being pulled OUT of other classes to learn Māori. It's an additional, separate class altogether. Do you know how much spare time you have at school? Where teachers just do whatever stuff to fill in the time? If i had time to learn basic french, spanish and NZSL in intermediate on top of everything else, I think Māori is fine.
Also learning multiple languages at school as a requirement is super normal for the majority of the planet! It makes sense for us to learn all our national languages
He knows about Canada because he worked for the Atlas Group there. And they want Native rights stripped to make it easier to for Oil & Gas, mining ect to come in
Try paying for all the free stuff NZs demand if you're not willing to raise the cash to pay for it. The same people who demand the most in free social services are the ones who often do the most to stop NZ raising the funds to pay for it all.
People hating on Jack are just bots, he slammed ya David Seymour and anyone with a brain knows why this is being done it aint about any race or cultures #Blackrock
@mobbarley7517 The majority of the people who support this bill have no clue about the treaty. This bill & Seymour himself, are doing nothing more than exploiting the vast ignorance around this subject and the equal amount of prejudice around this subject.
The treaty give Maori culture rights as Maori are native to NZ. So in protecting Maori culture rights the crown should work with Maori to protect those rights in partnership, Its not for the crown to not dictate the Maori culture. Everyone is equal under law as stated in the treaty. There is the Human Rights, Bill of Rights and other laws people in NZ are all equal under. So what's the issue with the treaty? NOTTING, There are laws for development in NZ already to benefit all NZ people.
Moriori are native to this country. Maori came from elsewhere and ever since have created the impression that they are the indigenous and have 'allowed' everyone else, therefore they have 'veto' so that everything must get a tick from them!
I find it very difficult to trust that a career politician actually cares about people's rights as much as David is professing. Just a thought based on historical norms in this country.
He cares about people's rights as long as it makes him money. I don't think it's a coincidence this proposed bill undermines environmental legislation in this country
Well said Mr Seymore. Jack needs to learn to really 'listen' and stop interrupting in order to get his own interpretations of what the Treaty Articles meant and force David Seymore on the ropes.
I know one crazy grandfather who attacked a neighboring country 3 years ago. A country that is of the same blood as this jerk . His main motivation is that his nation is the greatest, his language is the greatest and you have never been before us. This grandfather does not want to talk to anyone and negotiate with anyone because he is the greatest. He is also sure that the world can be made to love him if the world is afraid of him. Does it remind you of anything in New Zealand today?
I'm going to park in Disabled Parks now, since David said we all have EQUAL RIGHTS. Its my right to park where ever I want, thats what David Seymour said. Disabled people are human beings like Me, so they have the same rights that I do.
@@JohanThiart Ask David Seymour. He said, and keeps saying "Everyone in NZ should have EQUAL RIGHTS AS HUMAN BEINGS. Are you saying you don't want that?
@@JohanThiart So you agree with David Seymours bill? Or not? Because if you agree with the bill, you would agree EVERYONE in NZ has Equal (The same) rights?
@ is there anyone living in New Zealand that believe differently ….. Sadly, the answer is apparently yes! Is that a definition of bigotry? I would argue yes, it is racist !
National are in a lose/lose here. they losing votes on both ends. i feel bad for Luxon, he just wanted to focus on the economy but act started a shit show with no real change. this bill has been a winning move for David , mining company's will keep giving money to him in hopes it can get though next election and he has divided nz with him at as the banner-man for the white side. National will lose votes to labor and ACT for this. you will see labor win next election. ACT will have more power when making a deal with National. 2029 election this bill will return and National will be forced to pic a side.
The treaty is a recognition of Maori, and Maori culture rights, as they're the indigenous people of NZ. It ensured they had the right to govern themselves an equal right to participate in the governing of the nation. I do think that giving people different rights can be divisive - and some of the co-governance stuff was, but mainly because the Maori side weren't democratically elected. Just have a Maori Prime Minister who is elected alongside the actual Prime Minister. All Maori partnership models with representatives should require those representative be elected. Problem solved. Maori have an equal say in the decision making in the land they are indigenous to - and thats what is important.
You don't have to take Maoriland away to prove your point mr 8%. Been there done that. entitled Maori? No such thing con sidering our hitori. Shortsighted selective memory. Let the Maca claims loose. Find out our hitori whanau
I’m going start parking in disabled carparks now since David seems to think he speaks for everybody and is allowed to just do what he wants, then so can I. Thanks David!
Good interview, Jack. Showed how one-sided the bill is. It's all about what he thinks the treaty should look like in todays world & unilaterally altering the meaning of Treaty for his purposes.
No you don't there are many ways of being parted from your property Sale Gift to another Transmission by death - you will it to some one Loss though debt - you go bankrupt Death of the body is the human condition 3:36 😊
What sort of interview is this? Interviewer asks a question, then immediately interrupts him as he's responding. Then asks a new question, interrupts again. Does this a few more times and then deliberately misinterprets what they mean to say. What is going on here?
At 14:30 - proposing two seperate referendums divided along race lines…….right there…….that is exactly what’s wrong with the Jack Tames of the world. We are one people, one race, the human race, we are equal, we have much more in common than we have to divide us. Stop the division, end the nonsense. One person one vote, we all speak with one voice. This is democracy. Peace out ✌️
Fun fact More money was given to landlords by way of tax deductions, in one year (this year), than all of the collective monies returned to Maori, since 1840 ($2.9B) The crown stole over 90% of the land and natural resources and have given back less than .02% of the revenue they have secured. David Seymour is an Atlas paid shill. Trying to create a faux division for corporate interests, so that corporations can come in and exploit the natural resources as he tried to do in Canada.
You live in a country where each citizen gets two votes regardless of what roll they are on. There is no one person, one vote. There is one person, two votes.
nearly right but unfortunately, you'll have to convince the Indian's, Chinese, Japanese, and all other ethnic origins that they are Not who they believe they are! However it might be better to catch em at birthing time, just when they're at the peep hole, let em know straightaway...they might wana duck back in , after hearing that stupid comment!!
The treaty is not an agreement between races, there wasn't a big giant referendum that all British and Maori citizens over the age of 18 took part in at the ballot box. The Crown is not a race of people. The Crown is a governing body that represents the British. Te Triti was signed between Rangatira (Maori leaders) and representatives of the Crown. It was an agreement between two groups of governing, sovereign bodies about who should govern what and how. David Seymour admits this without even realizing it @5:11.
Well done Jack Tame, really nailed down the facts exposing Seymours arrogant lies. Why is Seymour never introduced by is full title which also includes ‘Shareholding Minister for TVNZ ‘? (Makes sense why he wanted that position in his coalition deal now doesn’t it!?! Should be a conflict of interest. None the less, Jack clearly did his research showing his principles as flawed 👏
So basically, Seymour wants to pass this bill so every organization that wants to so call "improve the community on certain lands" the bill says they DON'T HAVE TO ASK AND JUST DO IT UNDER EVERYONES NOSES. 👀👀👀👀👀👀👀👀 No thank you Seymour! F(CK THE BILL.
@@lizlambert The bill is about more than it seems, you'll need some general knowledge about the behaviour of politicians and corporates before it becomes apparent.
We already HAVE equal rights in NZ, David is trying to get rid of what little rights that Māori have left as well as selling of NZ assets into foreign ownership without worrying about the Treaty of Waitangi!
Co-governance is in the treaty. Brits replaced rangatiratanga (run by Māori chiefs) with sovereignty (run by UK royals). My tipuna signed He Whakaputanga (Declaration of Independence) 28.10.1835 and Te Tiriti 17.2.1840. Pōmare believed he had not given up any sovereignty and stated that he was not able to in any case, as it belonged to all of his iwi. Focus on getting in the waka and working together - Kiingi Tuheitia. Kotahitanga ngā iwi Māori katoa.
You make a good point . The division of Māori at the signing of the treaty reflects perfectly on the division of Māori in 2024 . There will never be resolution until Māori themselves stop their division .
@@AnnSmith-u9c Kotahitanga is togetherness not division. The hikoi was an example of the wide range of nationalities we have that believe in the unity that Te Tiriti provides to all New Zealanders. What's good for Māori is good for everyone.
so what priviledges did you get david !!!! like you said we got! what did we get david answer it yor māori what did we get??????we got exactly what you did in canada you helped take those indigenous rights too david you did that for your works peers in INAC
Can anyone point me to further reading on the comment that Māori have rangatiratanga over 90% of the South Island ? I don’t get what that means in practical terms
what new rights would you get if his bill went through? none. Because we already have equal rights... What do Maori lose? what was promised to them in the treaty
I think the issue is not that Maori have different rights to everyone else, it’s the fact that Pakeha have the same rights as everyone that is not Maori.
Tame clearly doesn't understand that this is a constitutional matter, not a contract matter. A minister cannot be in conflict with the Crown or constitution if seeking to make amendments to the constitutional framework under the Constitution Act. A minister is also a Member of Parliament, so there are three identities - Member of the House, Cabinet Minister and Minister of the Crown. If a Minister cannot introduce changes which impact on the constitutional relationship, then we wouldn't have a Constitution Act, nor any legislation dealing with the Treaty, because it was not localised into NZ law until 1975, and then only partially. If the parliament cannot pass enactments to bind the Crown, then the purpose of settled government is defeated, as is the adoption of the Statute of Westminster, and the Constitution Act of 1947. Since the courts are subordinate to the constitution act, you can't throw constitutional matters over to the courts to decide. Since that would involve courts deciding on the will and intent of Parliament which hasn't made itself clear and can't be bothered doing so.
I want to share more nuance to this debate, by analysing David Seymour’s opening statement from 2:32 to 5min. Read on if you’re interested. - He quotes the Waitangi Tribunal said this bill tramples over all Māori. I can’t find a single source online that says this. He references their report, I can’t see that statement in their public report. So this is either a direct lie by him to coax people into his perception of the Waitangi Tribunal, or he’ll need to actually provide evidence of that. Waitangi tribunal’s report specifies where this Bill goes wrong, I’d recommend reading it for yourself and not hearing a politician twist it to their advantage. - He uses previous policies as examples of how NZ is held back by ancestry alone. But doesn’t reference that these policies were attempts to redress historical grievances and meet our current Treaty Principles of Partnership and Protection. Painting this as solely a debate of ancestry is concerning and narrow-minded to the context of our country. - He mentions it’s a problem to have to consult with Māori and to have to take differences in perspective into account - ironic considering he is advocating for equal rights. This is an example of why politicians call this Bill overly simplified. His version of equal rights doesn’t seem to take into account differences people have by culture, but rather, that we become one NZ. It’s also overly simplified because the concept of equality vs equity is well known to most now. Equality is that everyone has shared value, a basic concept everyone knows. Equity is ensuring that everyone, no matter your start in life, will have the same equal outcomes. What looks like privilege to some e.g. Treaty settlements, scholarship for Māori, health funding and prioritisation for Māori, are part of trying to create equitable outcomes and redressing historical grievances as recent as the 1970s. Our parents or grandparents generations. It’s an effort to help Māori who are on the lowest statistics for health, education, incarceration etc be given the same outcomes as non-Māori. To add; the settlements allowed some Iwi like Ngāi Tahu to reinvest this money into their next generations and try and give them equitable outcomes e.g Māori scholarships, housing etc. Iwi organisations like this meet the Charity Tax bracket because of this. Some people will view this as a cultural privilege because they feel left out, but they are already born into and exist in a system that generally gave their grandparents, parents etc more support. Why has this Bill become divisive? Several things are happening here that’s causing an unnecessary racial divide, stoked by the manner of which this Bill has come about. There are processes in place to protect Māori rights and Crown-Māori relations e.g the Principles in the judicial system, the Waitangi tribunal. Their interpretations aren’t legislated, which keeps it adaptable and evolving to NZ across the decades. It’s in the Spirit of the Treaty. Along comes this government who repeals Te Aka Whai Ora, an organisation established o address disparities in Māori health outcomes, which pushes against equity. It attempted to rewound the use of te reo Māori in public service, which anyone who has been alive for more than a decade and been in Public Service, knows has been a huge help in gaining Māori trust back into government. This naturally feels like the government is going backwards on Māori, raising concerns. Then David Seymour drafts his own Bill with his own definitions that reinterpret the Treaty of Waitangi and how it will be legislated. Without consultation of Māori who are a signatory of that same Treaty. Without proper expert evidence or policy either. Ignoring decades of hundreds of lawyers, courts, Waitangi Tribunal etc advice, in fact, demeaning them as less than his own intelligence. You know. As a politician. And what does parliament do? It allows the Bill to be introduced to parliament as part of their coalition deal. That is such a huge slap to Crown-Māori relations in the last 50 years, to generations of people who protested, suffered, endured, learned how to come back to the table and work together and figure out a way moving forward together. That is why the Haka in parliament, as a challenge to this government’s irreverence. That is why the Hikoi saw tens of thousands of people. That’s why Māori, and other indigenous people are aggrieved (and for people who aren’t aware, indigenous people are cultures that existed pre-colonisation by the British Empire, as defined by the United Nations, which includes Māori, AND the Moriori who are indigenous to Chatham Island and Pitt Island - I recommend reading Moriori descendent Maui Solomon’s piece on Moriori: Still Setting the Record Straight as well.) What we have is a politician who knows how to speak and present himself in a way to lull you into feeling this is all quite reasonable. Please, don’t fall for this. A politician is a politician. I am also a critic of the left; before anyone assumes my own politics based on this. My intention is just to spread more awareness and context that’s coming behind this Bill. I do personally believe we should all have a debate, but not a referendum yet; and I agree the Bill shouldn’t be passed. NZ is a young country still figuring out its identity and values. My hope is that we can figure out a way forward that has equitable outcomes for us all, that we come to a place where culture IS protected and can’t be threatened by the government of the day. Otherwise, this country is on the fast track of looking A LOT like America.
If anyone is also interested on the key demographic David Seymour talks to; a recent article by Craig Ashworth, a Local Democracy Reporter from Taranaki, was at a small event where David Seymour was speaking a few days ago. The article ‘ACT’s David Seymour won’t ’bow down’ to his hāpu leader’ has a sensational title, but the rest of the article is good. People at this event said about Māori “they are like seagulls, if you feed them, more come and they start crapping on you” “there’s a self serving reinterpretation of the Treaty to benefit the Māori elite” “before Pakeha bought colonisation and war, Māori were killing each other anyway” and more on what percentage of Māori ancestry should count, and Māori organisations with charity tax status should be investigated. This audience was predominantly over 60 and applauded the loudest during Seymour’s speech, on the government cutting 6000 public servant roles - you know, some of the same people without jobs to support their families, who helped NZ through Covid, who helped support our healthcare system and others. Efficiencies need to happen? Of course. Applauding for 6000 people losing their jobs and affecting 6000 kiwi families? Yeah. Yeah no. Now. It’s important to note from this article that David Seymour did not say any of this. He just decided to speak to these people in a small gathering. But, when David Seymour’s iwi Ngāti Rēhia came out to support the Hikoi and that they oppose the Bill, iwi leaders met with Seymour in person that they have serious concerns that this Bill will hurt our people. As an aside, it already has. But Seymour went on to disregard them, with polite contempt, saying ‘if being Māori means I have to bow down and follow leadership, then that’s not a very attractive proposition’. Again, twisting what Ngāti Rēhia actually said and came to him with. Like a politician does. So, a reminder to everyone. When you hear David Seymour politely and ‘reasonably’ discussing equal rights or what his evidence is to the majority of NZ’ers, remember that he is a politician who knows the game.
I’m going start parking in disabled carparks now since David seems to think he speaks for everybody and is allowed to just do what he wants, then so can I. Thanks David! 21:30
@ no no, because of David… he seems to be allowed to believe and do whatever he wants no matter the consequence to others so maybe you should try learning to read properly before embarrassing yourself
@@Bigtbone205 I’ll say it again, learn to read and comprehend my comment correctly before embarrassing yourself, I’m only following David’s lead so I can do whatever I want no matter the consequence or who it affects. David’s setting the example to be followed here, if he doesn’t care for following treaty obligations - why should I be expected to follow any law set by the crown???
Not gonna lie. The treaty principles sounds pretty fair, what’s wrong with it? Giving everyone equal rights unites us as one. Giving people different rights divides us, doesn’t it?
Because we already have that through the bill of rights. This bill is about stripping maori of their sovereignty, so that multinationals can come in without having to consult iwi.
Yes it *sounds* very reasonable by design, but it isn't reasonable when you take into account: 1) the treaty principles bill misrepresents what the treaty is actually about. The Treaty isn't the human rights bill (which we already have). The treaty is a legal document on land stewardship and has more in common with something you might sign when leasing land off someone, then with a declaration on human rights. The "privileges" Maori get from the treaty are simply reparations the government has to pay out for breaching their signed agreement. 2)The treaty principles bill risks undermining several key bits of legislation we already have. In particular I don't think its a coincidence this bill could weaken several key bits of legislation that protects our environment. The Act party is famously ignorant regarding anything land management related afterall....
If right-wing voters are puzzled about why Maori don't agree with David Seymour here is why: The Crown is not a race of people. The Crown is a governing body that represents the British. Te Triti was signed between Rangatira (Maori leaders) and representatives of the Crown. It was an agreement between two groups of governing, sovereign bodies about who should govern what and how. David Seymour admits this without even realizing it @5:11 when he talks about Runanga (Maori councils). Maori as a race do not have more rights than Pakeha, we don't get extra votes (we get the same two ticks as Pakeha on the Maori roll - party and MP). What people are seeing is that because Maori are over represented in poor health and crime outcomes, previous governments have taken interest and action towards addressing those causes (this is due to the damage that was caused by the Crown through land acquisition, Maori lost the ability to generate wealth off the land and help their own). Maori are now starting to generate wealth and provide services. David Seymour wants to see more cuts to public services, something that would impact everyone. He wants to give more development, and oil and mineral exploration permits to cooperation's, that means giving those same corporations access to Iwi land that was confiscated by the crown.
Geezus, this is the narrative of personal attacks that finally persuaded the majority of America to vote trump back in. People aren’t stupid like you, they can sniff out the BS and overtime with repeated unsubstantiated falsehoods, it will all come out. This narrative will turn more people towards supporting the bill rather than oppose it. So please, keep spewing your nonsense, this is a long game that will be won be reason, logic and tiredness of the grifters.
The bill does the opposite, it basically legitimizes the land theft and doesnt acknowledge that maori never ceded sovereignty. The treaty isnt between everyday people, its between representatives of people. The everyday people already have equal rights.
21:00 Jack puts the mirror up to David, the English text of Article 2 and now David wants to run with his interpretation of Maori text. Again David, what are you? Maori or Crown? The key issue is that David has run a unilateral process to write this bill. The Treaty of Waitangi established a partnership between Māori and the Crown based on mutual respect and good faith. Defining Treaty principles unilaterally breaches this partnership and contravenes the Crown's obligation to act in consultation and collaboration with Māori. The lack of meaningful engagement with Māori violates the principle of rangatiratanga. Furthermore, consultation is not a courtesy but a requirement under the Treaty and this process appears dismissive of Māori voices, undermining the legitimacy of the proposed legislation.
Chiefs signed NOT IWI which a modern administrative concept. Hapu are family groups that Chiefs have ancestral links to The Chiefs got + a 10% payout in land for the big deals They have been dealing with those 10ths without any reference to non family Hapu since
@tajtandoori9076 doubt anyone who thinks ACT is good needs a bong. They're all high on their own egos and white supremacy under the guise of "equality"
what new rights would you get if his bill went through? none. Because we already have equal rights... What do Maori lose? what was promised to them in the treaty
At first glance, David is logical promoting equality under the law for all. This however, threats all people as interchangeable blank slates, void of genetic/ancestral differences. Those differences are real and we all exhibit a degree of in group preference to that which we are. Another nuance is Maori signed a treaty, not recent Chinese or Indian immigrants, so why exactly should that not be respected in law today? To be race/colourblind sounds great, David sounds reasonable, but the world is a little more complex and nuanced. What if, for example, NZ rejected the Crown entirely and formed a written constitutional framework of unalienable rights which has more gravitas than the existing BoR?
The reality is the current treaty principles (not the treaty) offer privilege to some and division based on race. Reality is the majority of people wont be "co-governing" and will get no benefit of it , every day maori and non maori wont be effected. Only the 1% of each will. We all just want equal chance to a good life - work , family ,fishing , our own plot if land to chill with those we love. I dont give a shit who sit on the seat of power , as long as their only goal is making that possible for everyone.
Principle 2 of Davids bill Give Māori rights to historical treaty claims so this gives Māori rights to any claims regarding matters before 1840. Im not sure but haven't most of those claims been settled? And the settlements were done at the time Māori believed they still had or would have the full rights under the treaty. So will this mean all settlements made will have to be resettled to acknowledge the fact all other rights the Māori have under the treaty is no more? Then it will be only right to add if new historical settlements can not be reached between Maori and the crown in 1 year then all land sold or leased or gifted to the crown after 1840 be return to Maori . And the crown forfeiture any governance in NZ.
Why does he have to rewrite the treaty, why doesnt he just propose a law saying that all New Zealanders have equal rights, separate from the treaty? We got by just fine for the last 180 years, why is it that people think they dont have equal rights now?
Jack's just put his foot in it - All Maori are going to support the Bill - the Treaty Settlements as they now can be challenged. If the Bill passes into law those settlements are safe - for now
Way to go Jack, i am sure maori want to live on a reserve where alcohol is banned, no kfc no mcdonalds, maybe you should go to one of these reserves and see how people live.
By the next census 'Asian' will equal if not surpass Maori in percentage of population. So where do they fit within the treaty? Let a lone others. If we are to hold onto meanings and signatures of 184yrs ago where does a rapidly changing nz sit? My view is it needs definitive definitions accordance to a modern New Zealand.
Well done Jack! In "Te Tiriti o Waitangi" we never ceded our Rangatiratanga - it's confirmed. "He Whakaputanga o nga Rangatiratanga o Niu Tireni" it's declared. Your argument is false David Seymour, it doesn't increase the mana of "Te Tiriti o Waitangi", it increases the lie of "The Treaty Principles Bill".
@@DeborahTaylor-u5o you say its wrong what happened and we should move on but as soon as we ask for Te Reo to be also be apart of school like english is, thats when the "sorry" go's away real fast. white people love to say sorry but not make things right.
Our fundamental human rights are protected under the Human Rights Act 1993 and the Bill of Rights Act 1990. It's not the treaty's job to do that. The treaty is a contract between nations based on the same concept the UK was founded on ( in their case a treaty between Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England). I think we'd all agree that Scottish people desiring a certain level of autonomy as a separate identity and culture to the English isn't a controversial or negative thing, and that forcing "equality and unity" with England by making the Scots abolish their parliament wouldn't be a cute idea. Same principles apply here.
I agree!
This video highlights exactly why debate and clarification is needed. Without debate and clarity, this will go on frustrating generation after generation of New Zealanders.
Dude that likes to text and send vids to 13 year old girls, can’t even pronounce ‘Māori’ correctly.
I wonder if he thinks we can’t see through his paid shill work from the Atlas group that he worked for in Canada, trying to strip the rights of indigenous people to pump the oil and gas from the land, royalty free.
It’s impressive to see him sit up straight, when he doesn’t have a backbone.
The only reason Principles exist in the first place is because the government does not want to honor the treaty they signed.
Here is the clarification: The majority of Rangatira signed te Tiriti. They did not cede sovereignty to the crown nor give them permission to confiscate land, apply unequal rates, or breakup ownership of Maori land into individually owned blocks. Te Tiriti was authenticated by William Hobson. End of discussion.
@
‘Authenticated’
Bahahahaahhahahhahahahahaahhhahahhaahahhahahah
The Treaty has its own clarification written in black and white. The problem is the government don't like that clarification so they decided to come up with their own vague clarifications.
As an Australian, I can assure you that a treaty between the Crown and the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander people is an idea they can only dream of. They are the most disadvantaged group in society by community standards and not having a treaty in place has had a devastating effect. The Maori are leading the way by international standards when it comes to first nations people having self-determination and land rights protection. That is something to be proud of. Te tiriti o waitangi must be protected at all costs. Kia Kaha ✊
Kia ora! 👍🏼🙌🏼
Wow Thank you for highlighting this.
The Mabo case which established allodial land rights for Torres Strait Islanders was judged using the same Law of equal rights to all as Mr Seymour is talking about.
Mabo is a decision that has been used to establish land rights of peoples at the time of European contact in NZ as well.
I'm wavering on support now and prefer NZ First position
Remove all references to TOW out of parliament made law
Id love to see a case taken by South Islanders against Ngai Tahu - who never signed the ToW btw
The Maori and aboriginal story are not the same.
Moari are the worst!
Fun fact: The petition against this bill got more votes (288,023) than the ACT party did in the last election (246,473).
Fun fact: millions of people voted in the election, the majority for parties other than ACT or TPM, who do support the principles Seymour sets out in this bill - meaning, one law for all. The ACT vote tally is neither here nor there.
Fun fact: two options will have a lot larger polarity than sixteen.
Good stuff Laura
@Laura
Fun fact Laura, Put the bill to a referendum and then see how many people vote *For* it.
Me no expert, but I suspect that it will garner 7 figures
It's not just Act voters that support it 46% of New Zealanders do with 29% undecided.
I think Jack had him on the ropes a bit with the questions about the courts being a neutral third party, and a Maori roll and general roll referendum being needed for it to be fair. Nice to see a good debate over this bill instead of emotionally charged rhetoric!
Courts arnt neutral
David Seymour just can't understand how New Zealand could be world-leading, or following his own argument, the world's first successful country with a founding document honoured by all the original parties.
Why not let the man talk his reasoning instead of cutting him off constantly 🤫
The treaty has not just come up over the last 50 years. It was supressed and ignored by governments after it was signed for over 130 years. David wants to return to the european hegemony because it suits his backers. Maori will not be put back in their box David. Their rights under the treaty cannot be legislated away. These rights are perpetual whether you like it or not.
Simply clarifying the articles of te teriti
Toitu Te Tiriti ❤️ 🤍 🖤
This comment is not about the Treaty Principles bill as such. The perspective Seymour is grounded in is a Libertarian doctrine. People might want to look up what libertarian ideology is all about and start asking how will it be good for me, more importantly our country? I suspect some people who are all on board with ACT might actually find that they are worse off under libertarian policies. The opportunity is there to take a look behind the talking points and consider the big picture and future implications.
If you have done your homework and still like a Libertarian orientated future then so be it.
There is a reason that 'big business' and the very wealthy back ACT.
Nice try. His political philosophy is far more classical liberal - see Adam Smith and John Locke.
06:30 no one is being pulled OUT of other classes to learn Māori.
It's an additional, separate class altogether. Do you know how much spare time you have at school? Where teachers just do whatever stuff to fill in the time?
If i had time to learn basic french, spanish and NZSL in intermediate on top of everything else, I think Māori is fine.
Also learning multiple languages at school as a requirement is super normal for the majority of the planet! It makes sense for us to learn all our national languages
Parliament is NOT the Crown
Poor old Jack having to live by his script / opps notes.
Its a partnership between the crown an maori...THE CROWN AN MAORI
David is calm, logical and rational.
Full of brainwashed slaves 😅
The opposite of the guy attempting (and failing) to push a victimhood mentality narrative.
Except that he conveniently avoids ever stating that no treaty ever signed in the history of mankind was based on race.
He's a weasel.
And texts and send vids to 13 year old girls through snapchat
The way Jack interviews some people on some issues, you’re going to need a moderator 😂
So this is all about money, property, and power. Got it 👍..
For the govt
Great work, Jack, someone finally asking him the questions I've been wanting to hear him address for ages
… been living under a rock bro?😂
@johnleonard3959 Something like that
Yeah don't give in to his word salad.
He knows about Canada because he worked for the Atlas Group there. And they want Native rights stripped to make it easier to for Oil & Gas, mining ect to come in
Which native rights specifically?
To the land @@logicalanswer3529
Try paying for all the free stuff NZs demand if you're not willing to raise the cash to pay for it. The same people who demand the most in free social services are the ones who often do the most to stop NZ raising the funds to pay for it all.
The rights off land & sea native rights given by the people who took control from them.
Do your on homework lazy.
@@Hatunrumioc Except NZ doesnt own it do they, if a multinational rolls in the people get piss all.
People hating on Jack are just bots, he slammed ya David Seymour and anyone with a brain knows why this is being done it aint about any race or cultures #Blackrock
50% of the country back the bill dismissing them as "bots" or "without a brain" shows how weak your argument is
@@mobbarley7517 50% of the country probably eat crayons
@mobbarley7517
The majority of the people who support this bill have no clue about the treaty.
This bill & Seymour himself, are doing nothing more than exploiting the vast ignorance around this subject and the equal amount of prejudice around this subject.
@mobbarley7517 if you are confident, then push for a referendum right.?
Awesome challenge by Jack Tame!! Kia ORA Jack Tame
The treaty give Maori culture rights as Maori are native to NZ. So in protecting Maori culture rights the crown should work with Maori to protect those rights in partnership, Its not for the crown to not dictate the Maori culture. Everyone is equal under law as stated in the treaty. There is the Human Rights, Bill of Rights and other laws people in NZ are all equal under. So what's the issue with the treaty? NOTTING, There are laws for development in NZ already to benefit all NZ people.
Maori aren't native to NZ they immigrated here just like the Europeans did.
Moriori are native to this country. Maori came from elsewhere and ever since have created the impression that they are the indigenous and have 'allowed' everyone else, therefore they have 'veto' so that everything must get a tick from them!
@@mobbarley7517 Difference is, when they came here it was settled, they didnt have to displace anyone.
@@mobbarley7517 By 1200 years...
@@mooselee902 correct but that doesn't mean they are native
I find it very difficult to trust that a career politician actually cares about people's rights as much as David is professing. Just a thought based on historical norms in this country.
He cares about people's rights as long as it makes him money. I don't think it's a coincidence this proposed bill undermines environmental legislation in this country
Well said Mr Seymore. Jack needs to learn to really 'listen' and stop interrupting in order to get his own interpretations of what the Treaty Articles meant and force David Seymore on the ropes.
I know one crazy grandfather who attacked a neighboring country 3 years ago. A country that is of the same blood as this jerk . His main motivation is that his nation is the greatest, his language is the greatest and you have never been before us. This grandfather does not want to talk to anyone and negotiate with anyone because he is the greatest. He is also sure that the world can be made to love him if the world is afraid of him. Does it remind you of anything in New Zealand today?
Still operating under the notion that 'might is right' and harnessing as many as possible as a show of power to drive this home.
I'm going to park in Disabled Parks now, since David said we all have EQUAL RIGHTS. Its my right to park where ever I want, thats what David Seymour said. Disabled people are human beings like Me, so they have the same rights that I do.
Your comment speaks for itself .. 😮 was it your intention to insult a group of NZ’ers ?
@@JohanThiart Ask David Seymour. He said, and keeps saying "Everyone in NZ should have EQUAL RIGHTS AS HUMAN BEINGS. Are you saying you don't want that?
@@JohanThiart So you agree with David Seymours bill? Or not? Because if you agree with the bill, you would agree EVERYONE in NZ has Equal (The same) rights?
@ is there anyone living in New Zealand that believe differently …..
Sadly, the answer is apparently yes!
Is that a definition of bigotry? I would argue yes, it is racist !
@@JohanThiart If you think Disabled people are insulted by my comment, now you know how Maori feel about the bill.
Brilliant interview Jack. Carved this muppet a new one👍👍
I’ll be voting ACT next election
Same. I believe National and Labour will lose a lot of votes to Act and New Zealand First next time.
Hahaha Te Pati Māori is gonna eat heaps at next election 🤪
Take the kiwi out of ur name and right English. If you aint here for our people then don't be using our Māori names for ur name.
Change your name to English flyer. Your not a kiwi flyer. You don't deserve to use our kupu when it suits.
National are in a lose/lose here. they losing votes on both ends. i feel bad for Luxon, he just wanted to focus on the economy but act started a shit show with no real change.
this bill has been a winning move for David , mining company's will keep giving money to him in hopes it can get though next election and he has divided nz with him at as the banner-man for the white side.
National will lose votes to labor and ACT for this. you will see labor win next election. ACT will have more power when making a deal with National. 2029 election this bill will return and National will be forced to pic a side.
Its about money and power!! even me know that
“It’s a very cute argument” this is the proof that tells you this guy does not honour te tiriti o waitangi! 21:34
No it isn't.
Maoris who have been robbed MILLIONS from the likes of tamahere and Maori party, who haven't received any govt money should be FURIOUS!!!
David just makes sense. The radical academics, judges, and elites Māori are in discomfort with this bill as it shakes off their grifting existence.
The treaty is a recognition of Maori, and Maori culture rights, as they're the indigenous people of NZ. It ensured they had the right to govern themselves an equal right to participate in the governing of the nation. I do think that giving people different rights can be divisive - and some of the co-governance stuff was, but mainly because the Maori side weren't democratically elected. Just have a Maori Prime Minister who is elected alongside the actual Prime Minister. All Maori partnership models with representatives should require those representative be elected. Problem solved. Maori have an equal say in the decision making in the land they are indigenous to - and thats what is important.
You don't have to take Maoriland away to prove your point mr 8%. Been there done that. entitled Maori? No such thing con sidering our hitori. Shortsighted selective memory. Let the Maca claims loose. Find out our hitori whanau
I’m going start parking in disabled carparks now since David seems to think he speaks for everybody and is allowed to just do what he wants, then so can I. Thanks David!
Good interview, Jack. Showed how one-sided the bill is. It's all about what he thinks the treaty should look like in todays world & unilaterally altering the meaning of Treaty for his purposes.
Why cant Maori have perpetual rights under the treaty. I have perpetual rights to my property.
Perpetual emotional rights 👍🏼
No you don't there are many ways of being parted from your property
Sale
Gift to another
Transmission by death - you will it to some one
Loss though debt - you go bankrupt
Death of the body is the human condition 3:36 😊
Stop paying your rates and see if that's true
@@barneyboy2008 I don't recommend not paying rates.
@@lizlambertor:
Stolen
Strong armed
Confiscated due to it being fallow
Perpetually leased
What sort of interview is this? Interviewer asks a question, then immediately interrupts him as he's responding. Then asks a new question, interrupts again. Does this a few more times and then deliberately misinterprets what they mean to say. What is going on here?
Thank you I thought I was the only one with eyes and ears in this comment section 😂
This is what Jack does unless he’s interviewing anyone on the left. Watch his interview with Debbie. 🤦♀️
At 14:30 - proposing two seperate referendums divided along race lines…….right there…….that is exactly what’s wrong with the Jack Tames of the world. We are one people, one race, the human race, we are equal, we have much more in common than we have to divide us. Stop the division, end the nonsense. One person one vote, we all speak with one voice. This is democracy. Peace out ✌️
Fun fact
More money was given to landlords by way of tax deductions, in one year (this year), than all of the collective monies returned to Maori, since 1840 ($2.9B)
The crown stole over 90% of the land and natural resources and have given back less than .02% of the revenue they have secured.
David Seymour is an Atlas paid shill.
Trying to create a faux division for corporate interests, so that corporations can come in and exploit the natural resources as he tried to do in Canada.
You live in a country where each citizen gets two votes regardless of what roll they are on. There is no one person, one vote. There is one person, two votes.
Except Maori will be marginalised in such a system, because they only comprise 17% of the population. Is that what you call justice?
Stupid libertarian.
nearly right but unfortunately, you'll have to convince the Indian's, Chinese, Japanese, and all other ethnic origins that they are Not who they believe they are! However it might be better to catch em at birthing time, just when they're at the peep hole, let em know straightaway...they might wana duck back in , after hearing that stupid comment!!
The treaty is not an agreement between races, there wasn't a big giant referendum that all British and Maori citizens over the age of 18 took part in at the ballot box. The Crown is not a race of people. The Crown is a governing body that represents the British. Te Triti was signed between Rangatira (Maori leaders) and representatives of the Crown. It was an agreement between two groups of governing, sovereign bodies about who should govern what and how. David Seymour admits this without even realizing it @5:11.
We gonna end up like aus where aboriginal can't drink alcohol
Yep 🎉 nor smoke nicotinamide but taking all sorts of nice psyotropic drugs will be pushed
Well done Jack Tame, really nailed down the facts exposing Seymours arrogant lies. Why is Seymour never introduced by is full title which also includes ‘Shareholding Minister for TVNZ ‘? (Makes sense why he wanted that position in his coalition deal now doesn’t it!?! Should be a conflict of interest. None the less, Jack clearly did his research showing his principles as flawed 👏
What part was a lie?
Is David Seymour going to say next that New Zealand's friendship treaty with Samoa is an agreement between races?
So basically, Seymour wants to pass this bill so every organization that wants to so call "improve the community on certain lands" the bill says they DON'T HAVE TO ASK AND JUST DO IT UNDER EVERYONES NOSES. 👀👀👀👀👀👀👀👀 No thank you Seymour! F(CK THE BILL.
What rubbish are you talking
@@lizlambert The bill is about more than it seems, you'll need some general knowledge about the behaviour of politicians and corporates before it becomes apparent.
Good grief, JT asks a question but never lets his guest comprehensively reply.
He did. Seymour is just full of shit. Quite easy to gather...
@@ShoEnTeL1 What specifically did Seymour lie about?
@@logicalanswer3529quite a lot didnt you listen?
If he does, he'd get owned on his own show.
@@stephenlennon7369 That is exactly the type of answer I always receive from people who are against the treaty principles bill. What specifically?
David's one step ahead, Jake. Amazing people have a problem with a bill that promotes equal rights.
Who's Jake?
@@reasonablearticalo Jake Heke
@@tajtandoori9076 Crazy that he was interviewed for this.
How "equal" are equal rights?
We already HAVE equal rights in NZ, David is trying to get rid of what little rights that Māori have left as well as selling of NZ assets into foreign ownership without worrying about the Treaty of Waitangi!
Co-governance is in the treaty. Brits replaced rangatiratanga (run by Māori chiefs) with sovereignty (run by UK royals). My tipuna signed He Whakaputanga (Declaration of Independence) 28.10.1835 and Te Tiriti 17.2.1840. Pōmare believed he had not given up any sovereignty and stated that he was not able to in any case, as it belonged to all of his iwi. Focus on getting in the waka and working together - Kiingi Tuheitia. Kotahitanga ngā iwi Māori katoa.
You make a good point . The division of Māori at the signing of the treaty reflects perfectly on the division of Māori in 2024 . There will never be resolution until Māori themselves stop their division .
@@AnnSmith-u9c Kotahitanga is togetherness not division. The hikoi was an example of the wide range of nationalities we have that believe in the unity that Te Tiriti provides to all New Zealanders. What's good for Māori is good for everyone.
David with the common sense 🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼
Australians have common sense too. But indigenous there, ain't got nothing and still have the highest rates of imprisonment🤦♂️💯
David with the racism.
For a bill that will never stand why does he try argue his point so much.
so what priviledges did you get david !!!! like you said we got! what did we get david answer it yor māori what did we get??????we got exactly what you did in canada you helped take those indigenous rights too david you did that for your works peers in INAC
Wake me up once this nightmare is over, at that point let me know what the rules are.
Can anyone point me to further reading on the comment that Māori have rangatiratanga over 90% of the South Island ? I don’t get what that means in practical terms
At the end of the day, all kiwis should be treated equal.
Fun fact - we all are‼️‼️
what new rights would you get if his bill went through? none. Because we already have equal rights... What do Maori lose? what was promised to them in the treaty
I think the issue is not that Maori have different rights to everyone else, it’s the fact that Pakeha have the same rights as everyone that is not Maori.
Tame clearly doesn't understand that this is a constitutional matter, not a contract matter. A minister cannot be in conflict with the Crown or constitution if seeking to make amendments to the constitutional framework under the Constitution Act. A minister is also a Member of Parliament, so there are three identities - Member of the House, Cabinet Minister and Minister of the Crown. If a Minister cannot introduce changes which impact on the constitutional relationship, then we wouldn't have a Constitution Act, nor any legislation dealing with the Treaty, because it was not localised into NZ law until 1975, and then only partially. If the parliament cannot pass enactments to bind the Crown, then the purpose of settled government is defeated, as is the adoption of the Statute of Westminster, and the Constitution Act of 1947. Since the courts are subordinate to the constitution act, you can't throw constitutional matters over to the courts to decide. Since that would involve courts deciding on the will and intent of Parliament which hasn't made itself clear and can't be bothered doing so.
Throw the treaty in the museum! We’re toddlers no longer, throw the pacifier away 👊
I want to share more nuance to this debate, by analysing David Seymour’s opening statement from 2:32 to 5min. Read on if you’re interested.
- He quotes the Waitangi Tribunal said this bill tramples over all Māori. I can’t find a single source online that says this. He references their report, I can’t see that statement in their public report. So this is either a direct lie by him to coax people into his perception of the Waitangi Tribunal, or he’ll need to actually provide evidence of that. Waitangi tribunal’s report specifies where this Bill goes wrong, I’d recommend reading it for yourself and not hearing a politician twist it to their advantage.
- He uses previous policies as examples of how NZ is held back by ancestry alone. But doesn’t reference that these policies were attempts to redress historical grievances and meet our current Treaty Principles of Partnership and Protection. Painting this as solely a debate of ancestry is concerning and narrow-minded to the context of our country.
- He mentions it’s a problem to have to consult with Māori and to have to take differences in perspective into account - ironic considering he is advocating for equal rights. This is an example of why politicians call this Bill overly simplified. His version of equal rights doesn’t seem to take into account differences people have by culture, but rather, that we become one NZ. It’s also overly simplified because the concept of equality vs equity is well known to most now. Equality is that everyone has shared value, a basic concept everyone knows. Equity is ensuring that everyone, no matter your start in life, will have the same equal outcomes. What looks like privilege to some e.g. Treaty settlements, scholarship for Māori, health funding and prioritisation for Māori, are part of trying to create equitable outcomes and redressing historical grievances as recent as the 1970s. Our parents or grandparents generations. It’s an effort to help Māori who are on the lowest statistics for health, education, incarceration etc be given the same outcomes as non-Māori.
To add; the settlements allowed some Iwi like Ngāi Tahu to reinvest this money into their next generations and try and give them equitable outcomes e.g Māori scholarships, housing etc. Iwi organisations like this meet the Charity Tax bracket because of this. Some people will view this as a cultural privilege because they feel left out, but they are already born into and exist in a system that generally gave their grandparents, parents etc more support.
Why has this Bill become divisive? Several things are happening here that’s causing an unnecessary racial divide, stoked by the manner of which this Bill has come about.
There are processes in place to protect Māori rights and Crown-Māori relations e.g the Principles in the judicial system, the Waitangi tribunal. Their interpretations aren’t legislated, which keeps it adaptable and evolving to NZ across the decades. It’s in the Spirit of the Treaty.
Along comes this government who repeals Te Aka Whai Ora, an organisation established o address disparities in Māori health outcomes, which pushes against equity. It attempted to rewound the use of te reo Māori in public service, which anyone who has been alive for more than a decade and been in Public Service, knows has been a huge help in gaining Māori trust back into government. This naturally feels like the government is going backwards on Māori, raising concerns.
Then David Seymour drafts his own Bill with his own definitions that reinterpret the Treaty of Waitangi and how it will be legislated. Without consultation of Māori who are a signatory of that same Treaty. Without proper expert evidence or policy either. Ignoring decades of hundreds of lawyers, courts, Waitangi Tribunal etc advice, in fact, demeaning them as less than his own intelligence. You know. As a politician. And what does parliament do? It allows the Bill to be introduced to parliament as part of their coalition deal.
That is such a huge slap to Crown-Māori relations in the last 50 years, to generations of people who protested, suffered, endured, learned how to come back to the table and work together and figure out a way moving forward together.
That is why the Haka in parliament, as a challenge to this government’s irreverence. That is why the Hikoi saw tens of thousands of people. That’s why Māori, and other indigenous people are aggrieved (and for people who aren’t aware, indigenous people are cultures that existed pre-colonisation by the British Empire, as defined by the United Nations, which includes Māori, AND the Moriori who are indigenous to Chatham Island and Pitt Island - I recommend reading Moriori descendent Maui Solomon’s piece on Moriori: Still Setting the Record Straight as well.)
What we have is a politician who knows how to speak and present himself in a way to lull you into feeling this is all quite reasonable. Please, don’t fall for this. A politician is a politician.
I am also a critic of the left; before anyone assumes my own politics based on this. My intention is just to spread more awareness and context that’s coming behind this Bill.
I do personally believe we should all have a debate, but not a referendum yet; and I agree the Bill shouldn’t be passed. NZ is a young country still figuring out its identity and values. My hope is that we can figure out a way forward that has equitable outcomes for us all, that we come to a place where culture IS protected and can’t be threatened by the government of the day.
Otherwise, this country is on the fast track of looking A LOT like America.
I agree. Imaginary enemies is a tired narcissistic trick. Politicians do it in other countries, too when cornered.
If anyone is also interested on the key demographic David Seymour talks to; a recent article by Craig Ashworth, a Local Democracy Reporter from Taranaki, was at a small event where David Seymour was speaking a few days ago.
The article ‘ACT’s David Seymour won’t ’bow down’ to his hāpu leader’ has a sensational title, but the rest of the article is good.
People at this event said about Māori “they are like seagulls, if you feed them, more come and they start crapping on you” “there’s a self serving reinterpretation of the Treaty to benefit the Māori elite” “before Pakeha bought colonisation and war, Māori were killing each other anyway” and more on what percentage of Māori ancestry should count, and Māori organisations with charity tax status should be investigated.
This audience was predominantly over 60 and applauded the loudest during Seymour’s speech, on the government cutting 6000 public servant roles - you know, some of the same people without jobs to support their families, who helped NZ through Covid, who helped support our healthcare system and others.
Efficiencies need to happen? Of course.
Applauding for 6000 people losing their jobs and affecting 6000 kiwi families?
Yeah. Yeah no.
Now. It’s important to note from this article that David Seymour did not say any of this. He just decided to speak to these people in a small gathering. But, when David Seymour’s iwi Ngāti Rēhia came out to support the Hikoi and that they oppose the Bill, iwi leaders met with Seymour in person that they have serious concerns that this Bill will hurt our people.
As an aside, it already has.
But Seymour went on to disregard them, with polite contempt, saying ‘if being Māori means I have to bow down and follow leadership, then that’s not a very attractive proposition’.
Again, twisting what Ngāti Rēhia actually said and came to him with. Like a politician does.
So, a reminder to everyone. When you hear David Seymour politely and ‘reasonably’ discussing equal rights or what his evidence is to the majority of NZ’ers, remember that he is a politician who knows the game.
shush david and put the stuff down
David constantly nodding away like a woodpecker
I’m going start parking in disabled carparks now since David seems to think he speaks for everybody and is allowed to just do what he wants, then so can I. Thanks David! 21:30
You should do that. Then when you go to court after not paying the fine you can explain how it is your right because...ancestors
@ no no, because of David… he seems to be allowed to believe and do whatever he wants no matter the consequence to others so maybe you should try learning to read properly before embarrassing yourself
@@housesofmyhome don't forget your disabled sticker!
@@Bigtbone205 I’ll say it again, learn to read and comprehend my comment correctly before embarrassing yourself, I’m only following David’s lead so I can do whatever I want no matter the consequence or who it affects. David’s setting the example to be followed here, if he doesn’t care for following treaty obligations - why should I be expected to follow any law set by the crown???
Jack let David finish his answer - constantly interrupting when he tries to reply. You never do this when it’s involving certain ethnicities.
Not gonna lie. The treaty principles sounds pretty fair, what’s wrong with it? Giving everyone equal rights unites us as one. Giving people different rights divides us, doesn’t it?
A $700 fine for parking in a disabled space says otherwise.
Because we already have that through the bill of rights. This bill is about stripping maori of their sovereignty, so that multinationals can come in without having to consult iwi.
@@Arms26Get a permit.
Seems very racist to say maori are disabled . As that your argument?
Yes it *sounds* very reasonable by design, but it isn't reasonable when you take into account:
1) the treaty principles bill misrepresents what the treaty is actually about. The Treaty isn't the human rights bill (which we already have). The treaty is a legal document on land stewardship and has more in common with something you might sign when leasing land off someone, then with a declaration on human rights. The "privileges" Maori get from the treaty are simply reparations the government has to pay out for breaching their signed agreement.
2)The treaty principles bill risks undermining several key bits of legislation we already have. In particular I don't think its a coincidence this bill could weaken several key bits of legislation that protects our environment. The Act party is famously ignorant regarding anything land management related afterall....
didn't want to no this what about Timmy Timmy what's he been doing 2.5 years for what
If right-wing voters are puzzled about why Maori don't agree with David Seymour here is why: The Crown is not a race of people. The Crown is a governing body that represents the British. Te Triti was signed between Rangatira (Maori leaders) and representatives of the Crown. It was an agreement between two groups of governing, sovereign bodies about who should govern what and how. David Seymour admits this without even realizing it @5:11 when he talks about Runanga (Maori councils).
Maori as a race do not have more rights than Pakeha, we don't get extra votes (we get the same two ticks as Pakeha on the Maori roll - party and MP). What people are seeing is that because Maori are over represented in poor health and crime outcomes, previous governments have taken interest and action towards addressing those causes (this is due to the damage that was caused by the Crown through land acquisition, Maori lost the ability to generate wealth off the land and help their own). Maori are now starting to generate wealth and provide services.
David Seymour wants to see more cuts to public services, something that would impact everyone. He wants to give more development, and oil and mineral exploration permits to cooperation's, that means giving those same corporations access to Iwi land that was confiscated by the crown.
For 8% and a seat gifted to him, this guy gets a lot of attention. More than the guy who is meant to be actually running the country
"Rights of herding reindeer" are you kidding Tame
Well done, Jack Tame, great interview!!
So you can just use the land and not have to get iwi permission ahahaha 😂
Thats all this is..... He dosnt want to ask for permission to play up....
Great interview Jack
Still waiting on Seymour to let us know what happened to Tim Jago. Why isn't Seymour being honest?
ask him about the pedophile
Tim Jago
Good grief. Is that how little you have to discuss?
He is not full of cliches. He does not parrot the same words each time he talks about the same principles. He just sounds authentic.
So you support pedophiles, Got it @@dossnone4554
Geezus, this is the narrative of personal attacks that finally persuaded the majority of America to vote trump back in. People aren’t stupid like you, they can sniff out the BS and overtime with repeated unsubstantiated falsehoods, it will all come out. This narrative will turn more people towards supporting the bill rather than oppose it. So please, keep spewing your nonsense, this is a long game that will be won be reason, logic and tiredness of the grifters.
❤❤❤ Act Party
Can somone clairfy for me what actual rights moari have different from anyone else and why this bill effects them so much
The bill does the opposite, it basically legitimizes the land theft and doesnt acknowledge that maori never ceded sovereignty. The treaty isnt between everyday people, its between representatives of people. The everyday people already have equal rights.
I Love David Seymour and Act.
Does David Seymour think his Ex-Act party president should have name suppression lifted since we all have equal rights?
21:00 Jack puts the mirror up to David, the English text of Article 2 and now David wants to run with his interpretation of Maori text. Again David, what are you? Maori or Crown? The key issue is that David has run a unilateral process to write this bill. The Treaty of Waitangi established a partnership between Māori and the Crown based on mutual respect and good faith. Defining Treaty principles unilaterally breaches this partnership and contravenes the Crown's obligation to act in consultation and collaboration with Māori. The lack of meaningful engagement with Māori violates the principle of rangatiratanga. Furthermore, consultation is not a courtesy but a requirement under the Treaty and this process appears dismissive of Māori voices, undermining the legitimacy of the proposed legislation.
So Māori have culture rights and the crown have governance in NZ as in the treaty agreement states.
Chiefs signed NOT IWI which a modern administrative concept.
Hapu are family groups that Chiefs have ancestral links to
The Chiefs got + a 10% payout in land for the big deals They have been dealing with those 10ths without any reference to non family Hapu since
Did Jack not listen to his last agreement 😂 he's asking some of the same questions he asked last time..
If an contract violates universal human rights are we still obliged to honour it?
If by contract you mean the Treaty, no it does not violate anyone.
David is the greatest politician in New Zealand...
Act will lead parliament one day under his leadership
That is why t.p.m are spitting the dummy - They can see that when that happens, they are done.
You really think most of the country will vote ACT? Time to put down the bong.
@tajtandoori9076 doubt anyone who thinks ACT is good needs a bong. They're all high on their own egos and white supremacy under the guise of "equality"
Hmmm yet Maori party got what? 3% from 16% Nz... think u on crack pipe
NEVER. He'll be gone next election, as will NZ First. And GOOD.
Jack done his best to interupt, editors done their best to make david look bad. DAVID STILL HAS A COMPELLING ARGUMENT THAT YOU CANNOT DISAGREE WITH!!
NO, HE DOESN'T!
what new rights would you get if his bill went through? none. Because we already have equal rights... What do Maori lose? what was promised to them in the treaty
At first glance, David is logical promoting equality under the law for all. This however, threats all people as interchangeable blank slates, void of genetic/ancestral differences. Those differences are real and we all exhibit a degree of in group preference to that which we are. Another nuance is Maori signed a treaty, not recent Chinese or Indian immigrants, so why exactly should that not be respected in law today?
To be race/colourblind sounds great, David sounds reasonable, but the world is a little more complex and nuanced. What if, for example, NZ rejected the Crown entirely and formed a written constitutional framework of unalienable rights which has more gravitas than the existing BoR?
Or south African immigrants
"Gotcha" questioning makes one an activist and not a journalist.
Tough questions too tough for you?
Lol if his own bill backs him into a corner, thats his own fault.
The reality is the current treaty principles (not the treaty) offer privilege to some and division based on race. Reality is the majority of people wont be "co-governing" and will get no benefit of it , every day maori and non maori wont be effected. Only the 1% of each will. We all just want equal chance to a good life - work , family ,fishing , our own plot if land to chill with those we love. I dont give a shit who sit on the seat of power , as long as their only goal is making that possible for everyone.
Jack, why when you are talking about the English text: you don't mention Article One: Maori absolutely cede sovereignty to the Crown
Māori* where is the evidence supporting that claim
Thank god for Jack Tame
Absolutely
Seymour needs to go back to school. To learn to read and understand the Treaty.
Principle 2 of Davids bill Give Māori rights to historical treaty claims so this gives Māori rights to any claims regarding matters before 1840. Im not sure but haven't most of those claims been settled? And the settlements were done at the time Māori believed they still had or would have the full rights under the treaty. So will this mean all settlements made will have to be resettled to acknowledge the fact all other rights the Māori have under the treaty is no more? Then it will be only right to add if new historical settlements can not be reached between Maori and the crown in 1 year then all land sold or leased or gifted to the crown after 1840 be return to Maori . And the crown forfeiture any governance in NZ.
Crowns legacy is birth right, The empire of the crown is by ancestry
Why does he have to rewrite the treaty, why doesnt he just propose a law saying that all New Zealanders have equal rights, separate from the treaty?
We got by just fine for the last 180 years, why is it that people think they dont have equal rights now?
Jack's just put his foot in it - All Maori are going to support the Bill - the Treaty Settlements as they now can be challenged. If the Bill passes into law those settlements are safe - for now
Rewrite the treaty to suite yourself
Just leave the treaty alone man we can all be equal without changing the treaty
Way to go Jack, i am sure maori want to live on a reserve where alcohol is banned, no kfc no mcdonalds, maybe you should go to one of these reserves and see how people live.
What reserve you talking about take alcohol american fast food outlets back where they came from your ancestors brought the drugs here not maori
Stop talking your racist dog shit.
It's not the KFC or maccas or what ever. It counts like you.
i dont even know what your on about? you sound crazy, this isnt usa.
By the next census 'Asian' will equal if not surpass Maori in percentage of population. So where do they fit within the treaty? Let a lone others. If we are to hold onto meanings and signatures of 184yrs ago where does a rapidly changing nz sit? My view is it needs definitive definitions accordance to a modern New Zealand.
29:41 then start fixing it by giving Maori their rights back, giving their land back, giving back the promise made by your leader the crown!
Land has been given back and many settlements. There are 9 outstanding as of today and these are under work.
David just about choked on his togue saying everyone is equal before the law ,
Well done Jack! In "Te Tiriti o Waitangi" we never ceded our Rangatiratanga - it's confirmed.
"He Whakaputanga o nga Rangatiratanga o Niu Tireni" it's declared.
Your argument is false David Seymour, it doesn't increase the mana of "Te Tiriti o Waitangi", it increases the lie of "The Treaty Principles Bill".
Jacinda Adern used brute force. Not this time.
We would have more people speaking Maori if you government didn't ban it
Provide the link to the legislation that bans Te Reo?
Let's live in the present aye. It was wrong what happened in the past. But how long do the offspring of their relatives say sorry for?!
@@DeborahTaylor-u5o you say its wrong what happened and we should move on but as soon as we ask for Te Reo to be also be apart of school like english is, thats when the "sorry" go's away real fast.
white people love to say sorry but not make things right.
😂😂😂😂😂