Auckland’s unfortunate political experiment in having an Independent Maori Statutory Board is being held up as a model for the rest of New Zealand’s fragmented local bodies considering amalgamation into unitary authorities.

Under the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, the amalgamated city of Auckland wound up with a tripartite local authority structure comprised of an overarching elected governing council, 21 underlying local boards elected by their communities, and the racial gerrymander of the appointed Independent Maori Statutory Board.

The Board owes its existence to an expedient deal between prime minister John Key and former Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples when it became obvious separate Maori seats on the restructured Auckland Council were a non-starter.

Mr Key was then assiduously practising appeasement towards the Maori Party in order keep it within the tent of his shaky coalition government.

He has since learned the hard but predictable way through various kicks in the teeth in critical Parliamentary votes that wallowing in Maori politics can be a thankless task.

The principal qualification for belonging to the Key-Sharples affront to elective democracy the Independent Maori Statutory Board represents is that board members must be part-Maori, with claims to being either mana whenua (Auckland tribal) or mataawaka (non-Auckland tribal).

Read more here.

15 thoughts on “Local Government Commission promotes racial discrimination

  1. I think there is more to it than Key and the Maori Party. Len Brown is a strong supporter of this concept as much of his voting strength comes from South Auckland, and trendy lefties across the city. So he does not mind wasting a few million of rate payers money to keep this support behind him.
    Not that this will probably help him next election time!
    The concept is totally wrong, and another example of the slide into racism in our country. No one segment can have special privileges, special voting powers, in these forums, especially when the individuals have not even been elected o the post by their peers.

  2. I’m totally against any Maori Boards in any shape or form in local Government. It is a totally unnecessary cost and what on earth does it achieve? Absolutely nothing from where I’m sitting, apart from a huge drain on finances.

    When you think of the state of our country when the Treaty was signed – tribes warring all over the country, with cannibalism rife and no cohesive unified society anywhere – what on earth does anyone with Maori ancestry have that involves extra specialist knowledge, that the rest of us don’t have. We are so blended today that it is more than likely that quite a number of the elected Councillors would actually have Maori ancestry and that should be sufficient. They can stand for Council and get elected the same as everyone and anything they can contribute can go into the mix.

    So, a big NO from me to special Maori Boards or specialist people with Maori ancestry in any shape or form.

    1. I totally agree with Helen,we do not need Maori agencies of any kind, we are supposed to be “one people” as mooted in the the Treaty written in Maori in which it said they were British citizens no more no less

  3. Am I surprised by this? No I am not.
    If kiwis are too stupid to realise what’s going on and get up and do something about it, then they deserve what they will get; and that is second class citizenship in their country of birth.
    I have lived here for 55 years now (came from the UK in 1959 at 16 years old), and I have watched this process evolve with no little alarm. I am a NZ citizen, and regard this land as my home; I have worked all my life here, and I think that entitles me to an opinion.
    Modern kiwis have been slowly indoctrinated into being browbeaten by the Maori activists.
    If it doesn’t get stopped in its tracks very soon, we will have a dictatorial minority government based on racial privilege.
    I can see only one outcome of that, and it is not a pleasant one. No one likes to contemplate the prospect of civil war at any level, but if we let 15% of the population reduce 85% to virtual serfdom, and that is what will happen if this process is not halted. I cannot see any other outcome.

  4. The only party which has come out strongly against this racial business, which is rapidly heading towards full-blown apartheid, is the Conservative Party which has as a baseline policy “equality for all” and the removal of all mention of race from all legislation. I cannot see “Onelaw4all” having any influence after the next election, so if you are serious on this matter, vote (and persuade your friends to vote) Conservative especially with party votes. With the Nats having very few parties to go into a coalition with, there is every chance that the Conservatives will do so – but only if the Nats agree to adopt some of their baseline policies, of which this is the most important by far!

    1. The Conservatives policies on racial equality are, I doubt, at the top of their list of priorities. ‘nice to have’ rather than ‘must have’ as they are to 1law4all. There is inevitable compromise in any coalition government and my guess is that the racial equality policies will be the first to be sacrificed in any bargaining situation by The Conservatives.

      By being a single issue party and focussed on this ONE issue, we can not and will not compromise on it. We can be middle of the road on everything else, but this is our ONLY priority.

    2. Mike I doubt that the Conservative party would make any real lasting change to the difficulties facing New Zealand. If anything they are just another insidious component of what passes for democracy in New Zealand. No coalition of parties that form a government will ever work or be able to deliver anything approaching a real democracy.

      Let me explain, on the surface the principles behind MMP appear to promote democracy. It is encouraged by most political parties to promote their minority views while apparently giving individuals more choice.

      But, what lies beneath its façade is darker and more damaging to any democracy than every other political ideology.

      Offer recent years it has become more and more difficult to form a single government that has a clear vision and direction. In NZ for example no individual party has been able to form a valid government without combining its votes with those of other smaller parties. On the surface this appears to be, or is being sold, as being good for democracy.
      However this is not the case and its use has reduced the will of the people to drive government in the direction the majority desire.

      How does this happen? All of us have different opinions, but I believe all of us would like to see NZ become a better country for all of its peoples. By accepting MMP as an alternative and allowing minority opinions to form government policy we have sacrificed our true influence on government for an unworkable and ultimately destructive form of government.

      When people vote for a particular ideology as presented by one party or another they do not vote to have it ultimately watered down by the influence of other minority parties. If no one parties policies or ideology fits with the will of the people, the majority, then no government should be able to be formed.

      In offering MMP as an alternative, government has taken away our democratic right to influence policy and ultimately the direction of our country. How has this become the reality?

      Consider this, in a true democracy we the people would elect a government based on its vision and the policies it introduces to move that vision forward. If no one party can legitimately obtain the vote of the majority then in a real democracy any government formed in any other way is void – it has no mandate to govern!

      Some would say let’s combine our vote with other parties to form a majority government – this is nonsense – how can a valid democratic government be formed by joining with a party that a minority has voted for!

      This however is not the worst outcome of MMP. In allowing MMP to continue the principle of democracy is being undermined. How? If no one party can form a government because it can’t attract the majority vote, then and only then would they listen to the people and change their policies, so as to attract the majority of votes. Only in this way can the will of the people be enacted by government.

      MMP allows minority parties to govern in place of a majority party whose actions are governed by the will of the people. In place of a majority government we are allowing, through MMP, a small number of individuals, who only the minority agrees with, to promote their own agendas in the face of the majority of public opinion.

      1. Very well said Shaun. We have minority parties or groups with the extraordinary power to make policies and hold the main party to ransom in order to drive their own personal agendas.

      2. MMP was first brought in at the end of the second World War and the reason was so that no one Party in Germany would ever be able to rule again. It certainly works!! I’m amazed that those who voted to keep MMP can’t see how destructive it is. Because it is the only system so many young people have possibly experienced, they just can’t imagine another probably better system. MMP is certainly not democracy when one small Party can wield enormous influence over the main Party.

  5. If the Maori elite are not stopped and governments are not told to stop the cow towing to them, this country will go down the road to civil war

    1. Yes, I too think civil war to take the country back. Whose side do you think all those part-maoris in the army and the police would be on? Would the country be turned to ashes?

    1. I’ve been trying for a long time, Joan, with absolutely no success at all. We need to elect a Party who will promote BINDING referenda and/or Amy Brooke’s 100 Days concept and then we might have some success.

    2. I think that the only way we can do that is for NZ to have a proper Constitution (not one written by racists or our Government) that guarantees equality for all. The Libertarianz party has already done this, although the transition to their economical structure would be very difficult. Leaving that side of it out, though, would still leave a core set of social values with which 1LAW4ALL would probably find itself in accord.
      This document can be viewed on the Libz website; it was written by people well qualified to do so and is well worth a look.
      The problem then, of course, would be to get the sheeple of NZ to accept the concept of personal freedom and autonomy; that is a concept that frightens the heck out of most of us, which in turn proves what a great job successive governments have done in keeping us in a state of perpetual infancy and dependence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: