Racist Lolly Scramble

Racist Lolly Scramble

Vote Treaty Negotiations contains a multi-year appropriation of $1,400 million for the five-year period 2017 to 2021.

Yes – you read that right. 1.4 billion dollars of taxpayers money and taxpayer-owned assets being given to part-Maori in unabashedly racist-vote-buying by National.

It’s presumed that’s in addition to the “$93 million for maori development” mentioned, here.

Remember that any non-part-Maori who wants to object to their customary swimming beach being fraudulently grabbed must pay a Court filing fee of $110 to lodge that objection.

So – lucky you – you get to pay twice. Once to cover the beach stealers costs and another to pay your own.

Vote National for more and more of the same.  Labour or the watermelon party (Greens on the outside, reds on the inside) would be just as bad, if not worse.

Electoral Commission Submission

Electoral Commission Submission

1Law4All applied for (taxpayer) funding to assist with broadcasting its policies, as all political parties may do, subject to certain conditions.

On Friday 7 April, a 1Law4All Party representative made an oral submission in support of its written submission, to the Electoral Commission, in Wellington.

From figures available on the Electoral Commissions’ web site, you can get an idea of what 1Law4All and democracy is up against. In 2014 and 2015,  the National Party received donations in excess of five million, three-hundred and seventy-eight thousand dollars. With that sort of money in the coffers, why does it deserve any public money to broadcast its subversively racist agenda message to New Zealand?

Much the same could be said of the Labour Party which received over one million, two-hundred and eighteen thousand dollars in donations. Why does it need any public money to broadcast its equally racist agenda message to New Zealand?

Reproduced below is the 1Law4All’s written Submission to the Electoral Commission (three members).


Members of the Electoral Commission

This is an appeal to your conscience. An appeal to each of you as loyal New Zealanders to do your duty and allow the views of 80% of your fellow citizens to be heard.

As these polls and local body referenda incontrovertibly demonstrate, 80% of New Zealanders don’t want a bar of racial favouritism. And yet they are studiously ignored by their representatives.

Decade after decade, four out of five New Zealanders have been treated with contempt by every branch of central and local government, every academic institution, every judicial institution, every media organisation, and every political party. 1Law4All is the only party that can change that.

As a result, the relentless surrender of New Zealand sovereignty gathers pace every year.

This year, the National Party plans to appease the Maori Party by caving into the demands of the Iwi Leaders’ Group to control New Zealand’s drinking water and to slow down every resource consent by agreeing to give every tribe in every district the power to veto every decision.

This will be the end of New Zealand as we know it. It will mean that at least 50% of the power in every council will be wielded by the wealthy leaders of just 15% of the population.

And all in the name of a non-existent ‘Treaty partnership’ complete with non-existent ‘principles.’

Please help us to save New Zealand before it becomes New Zimbabwe. We are a small party. (Few Kiwis are prepared to put their heads above the parapet on an issue which guarantees they will be demonised as racist — simply for wanting racial equality!)

But as you can see from the chart provided, 1Law4All has a huge potential support base.

And most importantly, we have a policy that if publicised widely would prove enormously popular with the 80%, and give them hope where none currently exists.

The policy is a binding referendum. Below is the wording. We would use your money to make sure every New Zealander knew about it. 1Law4All would pressure other parties to accept it.

1Law4All believes many of those 80% would vote for 1Law4All as a result.

Your empowering legislation allows you to be flexible in your ranking of the various funding criteria.

The criteria stress “the need to provide a fair opportunity for each party that qualifies for the broadcast allocation to convey its policies by the broadcasting of election programmes on television”.

1Law4All needs that fair opportunity.

More importantly, four out of five New Zealanders deserve that opportunity to (if 1Law4All may paraphrase a certain president) “MAKE NEW ZEALAND ONE AGAIN.”

So don’t do it for 1Law4All. Do it for your friends, family and neighbours. And do it for yourself. If and when 1Law4All’s TV adverts appear and momentum starts building for the One Law For All Referendum, you will be able to look yourself in the mirror and say, “I helped save my country.”

1Law4All appreciates the opportunity to make the case for New Zealand.

Is A Trump-Style Revolution Coming to NZ?

House of Cards

Some time back, a 1Law4All blog post showed that one or two in the media had awoken from their torpor and were seeing things more clearly.

Although now several months old, the piece below from across the Tasman shows that enlightenment is slowly spreading through a hitherto moribund media. It matters not what you think of Donald Trump. He is just one manifestation of widespread voter unease. The same unease that led to Brexit and other political shifts which scare the (we-know-best) two-sides-of-the-same-coin, political elite.

As an example, will NZ voters see for what they are, the charade of tax cuts being dangled in front of them as an election bribe? While National have been in power, government debt has ballooned to 58 billion dollars from 18 billion. The “brighter future” jingle is in reality  blatant propaganda. Like the light at the end of the tunnel, that “brighter future” is a gold-plated debt trap for all New Zealanders

In the months and weeks before the election, will anyone ask the National Party hopefuls how there can be a surplus that might give tax cuts, while the government’s debt has increased to such an enormous figure? A government debt that you and me – ordinary New Zealand tax-payers – will have to repay.

Come election day, what really matters is whether or not New Zealand voters have – or will – let the scales fall from their eyes.

Rise of the outsiders — Trump-style revolution is coming here

Mark Latham
January 30, 2017

MALCOLM Turnbull’s floundering leadership aside, Australian politics faces a single irresistible issue. Will a Trump/Brexit-style revolution, a rebellion of the outsiders, torpedo the stability of the two-party system in Australia? I think it will. I think the age of political disruption is upon us.

One’s Nation’s resurgence and the extraordinary result in November’s Orange by-election point to the possibilities of electoral realignment. Unless they promptly transform themselves, the Labor, Liberal and National parties face further structural decline in their support base. In too many areas, the old oligopoly — the arrogant, self-entitled manipulators of machine politics — have formed a policy consensus that runs counter to outsider interests and beliefs.

I call it COLAGIN: the Coalition-Labor-Green-Insider agreement to support a national platform of high immigration, high personal taxation, big government, heavy business regulation, social engineering programs and divisive identity politics, while also lining their pockets with a parliamentary entitlements system brazenly open to abuse.

Through their petty squabbling in the media, Coalition, Labor and Green MPs try to pretend they are debating big policy differences. But in reality, they are all locked into a system of cross-party compromise, practising a timid, suffocating brand of political correctness. When the NSW National Party is willing to do the work of the Greens in trying to ban greyhound racing, traditional notions of ideology have gone out the window.

The Left/Right spectrum has been replaced by a new Insiders/Outsiders divide. With good reason, the public has grown to despise party politics. Large parts of the electorate are looking for someone to turn the system upside down, to create a new social movement that puts the quaint but powerful notion of public interest back into our democracy.

It’s a battle between entrenched power and the will of the people.

It’s a struggle between unpopular insiders like Turnbull and Bill Shorten and the near-certain emergence of electoral insurgents. In its policy substance, what might this movement look like? What ideas does it need to champion to bust the Canberra Club wipe open? Here’s my best effort at a 10-point Outsiders’ Manifesto for Australia’s future:

1 Big cuts to the Federal Government’s annual 200,000-plus immigration and refugee program, ending the major-party consensus for a Big Australia. Slower population growth would take the pressure off local employment, urban congestion, housing prices and environmental sustainability — a massive win-win-win-win in public policy.

2 An end to social engineering programs, with the abolition of Safe Schools, Respectful Relationships, university safe spaces, Section 18C and man-bashing government agencies such as Our Watch and the Australian National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS).

3 Democratising the ABC, making it a clearinghouse for citizen-based broadcasting. Any Australian should be able to post their blogged, podcast or webcast material on its platforms. The most popular contributors would then be promoted to appear on the ABC’s radio and television programs — breaking the longstanding Leftist monopoly.

4 Reforming the Human Rights Commission so that it serves the public, not political correctness. The Commission’s charter should be recast to promote community building, Australian values and the virtues of Western civilisation. It has an important role to play in pushing back against the spread of radical Islam — the greatest human rights threat to our society.

5 Ending the era of big government. To reboot economic growth and international competitiveness, Australia’s top marginal tax rate should be cut from 49 per cent to 35, with other income brackets also receiving tax relief. To increase the disposable earnings of hardworking Australians, the Federal Government needs to make us a low-tax regime.

6 Big cuts to wasteful Federal spending, especially in transport, higher education, energy subsidies, corporate welfare, Canberra’s defence and foreign policy establishment, arts funding, public broadcasting and mental health rorts. Entire departments and agencies need to be abolished, bringing the size of government back to pre-2000 levels. The profligacy of the past 17 years has given Australia the worst of both worlds: bloated bureaucracies and stagnant economic growth.

7 Slashing regulation on business, especially when it holds back the development of new industries. For instance, Australia should be a global energy superpower with a dynamic mix of coal, renewable, CSG and nuclear energy. But the dead hand of government has knocked out the latter two. With the recent weakening of the economy, we can no longer afford to turn away new sources of jobs and investment.

8 Urgent school education reform, fundamentally changing the face of Australian teaching. On the international league table of academic achievement, we have fallen behind Kazakhstan — a national embarrassment. The top performer, Singapore, has based its success on a highly selective process for teacher recruitment. We need to do the same, increasing salaries for high-quality teachers and weeding out under-performers.

9 A new war on poverty, creating economic opportunity for all Australians. Non-viable indigenous settlements and public housing estates need to be closed down, with residents moving to areas where they can access jobs and services. The intergenerational poverty cycle also needs to be broken through improved teaching and learning programs in disadvantaged schools.

10 Genuine reform of parliamentary entitlements to make rorting impossible. The Turnbull Government’s recent proposals are no more than window-dressing. Entitlement amounts should be bundled together and capped, with travel funding released only after MPs have demonstrated the primacy of parliamentary work in their itineraries. An Anti-Corruption Commission is also needed to guard against the corrosive influence of machine politics and paid lobbyists.

Outsider politics aims not only to shake up the old-party system at the ballot box. It also has serious policy intent, ending the COLAGIN consensus in favour of outer-suburban and regional interests.

The electorate is willing. The time is right.

We have every reason to expect the tumultuous march of the outsiders to continue in 2017.

Mayor no Grand Old Duke

 Mayor no Grand Old Duke

(So saith Chester Borrows, MP for Wanganui. Reproduced from the Wanganui Chronicle)

June 24, 2016
Sometimes I regret not being available for the opportunities that present. There have been many occasions when I have felt I could have tried harder to be in a place at a time when history was made. Last Friday’s hikoi to Parihaka from New Plymouth is a case in point.

Funnily enough, the reason I couldn’t be there is intimately connected to the Parihaka story as I was sitting in a Select Committee Treaty of Waitangi Settlement hearing in Palmerston North listening to the Rangitane Claim.

There will be many who will continue to think this hikoi was all about Maori Wards and the New Plymouth District Council but they are wrong. The march was about the racist response to the mayor who promoted the idea. That response being the name calling, spitting, threats and other abuse was the whole reason why there was a need to march.

Of course it wasn’t! And of course Chester doesn’t get it. No matter how much such nastiness directed at Judd goes against the fair go kiwi way, when pushed too far, it was some citizens’ response to the Mayor’s unilateral instigation of unwanted, undemocratic racism on the Council.

The other ratepayers democratically expressed their contempt for Judd’s racism via the ballot box. Yes – that’s right – Democracy! Something Judd and Flavell have publicly complained about. If only the Councillors who supported Judd had the decency to go the same way as he’s chosen: into history’s hall of racist infamy.

It is exactly the sentiment that needs to be railed and rallied against. Every time I post online or write about the celebration of an event involving Maori I am lambasted by the haters and wreckers who want to write a different view of history.

Yet this is not about different views, it is about the right to hold a view and not to be spat on, sworn at and threatened. Funnily enough the worst vitriol is saved for the Pakeha showing an understanding of tikanga Maori and a desire to see long held wrongs set to rights.

Long held wrongs are not necessarily rightly held wrongs grounded in fact or reality. It’s laughable to suggest that the Waitangi Tribunal has any interest in the truth or uncovering it. It is just a racist, bleeding heart squanderer of taxpayers’ money and resources. All based on warmed-over, re-hashed, hand-me-down oral history fantasy stories, well smitten with “Chinese whispers” syndrome and slanted with a view to getting the money.

Opening a meeting using Maori words of greeting or correctly pronouncing Maori place names is enough to incur the wrath of those who would rather we remain ignorant. It was the same when I publicly agreed with the installation of an “h” in Wanganui. It was the same when I attended meetings to discuss West Coast leasehold land arrangements in 1996. Bastion Point, the same. Every Waitangi Day, the same.

Thankfully the voices are getting croaky and softer with old age. Theirs is an olde worlde view. Younger people get it.

No they don’t. They’ve been brain washed and propagandised, since early childhood.

I recall my first visit to Parihaka, which was at the launch of a new police initiative to address youth crime in the mid-90s. It was the first official police visit since the pa was sacked by Bryce and the Armed Constabulary in the 1880s yet the police never saw the significance of it all. There was no acknowledgement of the wrong done. There was no presentation and certainly no apology. I was absolutely and completely embarrassed having, at that time, only recently learned of the history of Parihaka.

A very well spin-doctored version, no doubt!

How come we were never taught that story at school? Why was this history not part of the School Certificate or University Entrance syllabus? Is it now part of any educational core subject?

Having now visited many sites where Taranaki Maori were held captive around New Zealand; the caves and the urupa, and having returned to Parihaka a number of times, I have a view on such things as a shared history.

I have understandings of colonialism and obviously about the pertinence of the Treaty of Waitangi which I have gleaned from the books written by the leaders of the colonial forces, the recent settlers, current and former historians like Cowan and James Bellish, and Michael King and from listening to tangata whenua.

Try Judge Maning’s book, as well as T L Buick’s. You might just read some unsanitised tales of what really went on, written by people who actually lived in those times, free of political correctness. And you show your ignorance of the Treaty so well. For, if you read the Treaty of Waitangi, Chester, they’re called tangata maori! Tangata whenua is a title they’ve arrogated for themselves, many years later!

I wish many others would take a more global view of what went on in New Zealand, this God’s Own Country, as we struggle our way towards a civilised society. But people want what they read to reinforce what they believe not what challenges those sentinels of their inner selves. This was hit home when I publicly commented on a push to set aside a specific day to commemorate the Land Wars.

Andrew Judd’s march to Parihaka with the 400 plus others last week was not reflective of the Grand Old Duke who marched troops up just to march them down again. It was poignant, timely and relevant. So much so that it is an indictment that it needed to be done. Many will scoff, which only goes to underline that poignancy.

I wish I’d been there to lend my weight to his wheel because if you stand for nothing, you’ll fall for anything.

Too late Chester: you’ve already fallen for all the lies, spin and politically corrected versions of history. Versions which you want to believe, because it suits your political tenure. Try following Judd’s example. It would do Wanganui the world of good.

Government must fix Maori obesity: researchers

Another article published in the Granny Herald which perpetuates the myth that all ills that befall Maori are the fault of the wicked white colonialists.



When are people going to stop being taken in by these accusations? You cannot judge the past by today’s standards. Things, life, was a whole lot different back then (1840 and the colonising years after 1840). Especially for Maori.

My comments, in italics, continue below in the article:

Government must fix Maori obesity: researchers

By Martin Johnston

Photo / Thinkstock

Photo / Thinkstock

The legacy of colonisation has predisposed Maori to having much higher rates of obesity than the total New Zealand population (how exactly? They never tell us how these things have had the effect they claim. They just make claims and idiots believe them) and the Government must do much more to address this inequity, a group of Otago University researchers say.

Citing the 2008/09 Adult Nutrition Survey, they say nearly half of Maori were obese.

The same survey found that 28 per cent of the total population were obese – and nearly 60 per cent of Pasifika.

“Since European settlement and the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, Maori have been disadvantaged as a consequence of colonisation and repeated breaches of the Treaty …,” (again – how and where is the proof?) the researchers, Drs Reremoana Theodore, Rachael McLean and Lisa Te Morenga, say today in an commentary piece in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health.

“Loss of land resulted in high levels of poverty and loss of access to traditional food sources for many Maori. The Maori experience, which has been mirrored by many other indigenous groups, has resulted in: wide-scale migration into urban centres; increased consumption of cheap processed foods high in fat and sugar; reduced physical activity levels; and rising rates of obesity and cardiovascular diseases.”

(loss of traditional food sources occurred because they eat them to extinction, not because of loss of land, and the land was not ‘lost’, it was sold by the chiefs who were happy for a quick buck. They land was not making them any money before they sold it! Traditional food sources for Maori – NZ has no native land mammals, so their diet consisted of seafood, birds and plants, mostly fern and kumera before the colonialists introduced other vegetables. No one stopped them going fishing, or gathering shell fish. They could still grow their own vegetables. They had hunted and eaten most edible sized birds to extinction before the Treaty was signed – so what traditional food sources did they lose access to exactly? If life in their traditional villages was so wonderful, why did they migrate to the urban centres? Cheap processed foods with high fat and sugar are relatively new in New Zealand. They certainly weren’t around in the 1800s or early 1900s, so how can you blame colonisation for Maori eating them? No one is making them eat them. No one is forcing them. It’s not just cheap processed foods either – what about their famous ‘boil-ups’ which are full of grease? No one is forcing them to be less active. They are victims of their own poor decision making, not of colonisation!)

They add that Maori tended to be channelled into working-class jobs until the 1970s and were later affected disproportionately, compared with Europeans, by structural economic changes that were accompanied by higher levels of unemployment.

(“Channelled”? Given the level of educational achievement of most Maori at that time, working-class jobs was probably all they could get. Saying that they were “channelled” is an emotive attempt at blaming the colonialists, once again, for the under achievement of Maori. Well educated Maori made much more of themselves and included some great and well known policitians such as Apiarata Ngata, long before the 1970s.)

They urge a focus on the “historically driven social determinants of obesity” to avoid blaming Maori – and their choices – for their own ill health. (of course – can’t have them taking any responsibility for themselves and their choices can we? noooo, blame the nasty colonialists and the Crown and make them pay to fix the problem, like they always do.)

The researchers lament the demise of Health Eating-Health Action and its associated anti-obesity programmes. They also support the current Government’s Whanau Ora and Healthy Families NZ schemes as a “starting point for addressing obesity”, but say much more must be done and that the Government has a treaty responsibility to work in partnership with Maori to and to ensure Maori health equity. (The Treaty is NOT a partnership agreement and if there is an article in the Treaty which makes the Government responsible for the health of Maori, then it must be still lost somewhere because having read the Treaty many times I’ve still not found it!)

“A key issue, however, with Healthy Families NZ is that it focuses on educating people … to make better choices. Evidence increasingly suggests that interventions that rely on individual agency may actually increase socioeconomic inequalities in obesity.”

The policies they propose are in line with those of public health researchers who call for sugar and fat taxes and regulations to control the marketing of unhealthy food and drink to children – ideas repeatedly rejected by the Government. (rejected for good reason – why make everyone pay for the bad choices of a few?)

The Health Ministry, in response to the article, told Radio New Zealand that the creation of the Healthy Families NZ scheme in 10 locations was intended to encourage families to choose healthy foods, be physically active, maintain a healthy weight, not to smoke and to drink only moderate amounts of alcohol. The scheme was part of the Government’s approach to promoting good health.

Another Wearying and Woeful Waitangi Day

Another Wearying & Woeful Waitangi Day



There seems to be no end to the brain- or brown-washing of NZ. It just keeps coming, like a seismic wave of thoroughly well informed self-interest, ignorance and sophistry. Read the PM’s speech excerpt below.

Ground control to PM Key: the Treaty of Waitangi contains:

NO mention of any “principles”

NO mention of a “partnership”

NO mention of “forests”

NO mention of “fisheries”


Wake up and smell the parchment, Key, Finlayson, et al. The Treaty of Waitangi is no more a living document than any other Treaty. Just read the damned two-paragraph preamble, so expeditiously overlooked most everywhere, including Te Papa, our national storehouse of treaty fabrications.

Her Majesty Victoria, Queen of England in Her gracious consideration for the chiefs and people of New Zealand, and her desire to preserve to them their land and to maintain peace and order amongst them, has been pleased to appoint an officer to treat with them for the cession of the Sovereignty of their country and of the islands adjacent to the Queen. Seeing that many of Her Majesty’s subjects have already settled in the country and are constantly arriving; And that it is desirable for their protection as well as the protection of the natives to establish a government amongst them.

Her Majesty has accordingly been pleased to appoint me William Hobson a captain in the Royal Navy to be Governor of such parts of New Zealand as may now or hereafter be ceded to her Majesty and proposes to the chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand and the other chiefs to agree to the following articles.

Reality Check Essential

Once signed, a contract or treaty binds the signatories. End of story. Litigation on interpretation is possible. Renunciation is possible. But changing the words is not. Nor is arguing that a word scribed in a contract or treaty hundreds of years ago should be interpreted in today’s meaning. Lexical drift is a well known phenomena. It would be fatuous to pretend today that Fred Flinstone’s fifty-plus-year-old cartoon strip jingle “gay old time” meant a consorting group of homosexuals.

Critical Thinking Needed

The Treaty of Waitangi has – in and of itself – no validity in law, whether NZ law or international law. It can be part of New Zealand law ONLY by virtue of some Act of Parliament that says that any part of the Treaty applies.

The Prime Minister has pushed his agenda in his Waitangi speech at the upper marae on the Treaty grounds.

Mr Key said while the Treaty is a formal agreement, it must be interpreted over time and adapted accordingly.

He acknowledged the challenges Maori faced in the century after the Treaty was signed, as the Crown ignored many of its agreements.

“The spirit of generosity with which Maori entered into this partnership was forgotten or ignored by many over the following decades,” he said. “But the Treaty partnership we commemorate today acknowledges the bonds that have underpinned the creation of a special country.”

“The Treaty settlement process may not be to everyone’s satisfactions, but I’m a firm believer in the current process, which is addressing the wrongs done in the past to help Maori build their futures.”

“I am confident the next 25 years will deliver more promises, passion and achievements as we work together to tackle the challenges that will be thrown at us.”

What a load of codswallop!

Wake up New Zealand and smell the dozers:



ELECTION: NEITHER NATIONAL NOR LABOUR DESERVE A VOTE says Wellington historian and political analyst, John McLean

First published in Investigate Magazine.

Democracy becomes twisted, in fact meaningless, when the two main parties conspire together against the citizens. This is exactly what National and Labour have done by them both buying into the twin fictions that the Treaty of Waitangi had “principles”(it didn’t) and that it created a “partnership” between the Crown and Maori (it didn’t).

The Treaty was a simple document of only three Articles and does not mention “principles” or “partnership”. These were dreamt up 150 years later by the sinister combination of radical Maori, appeasing governments and senior judges indulging their own political prejudices instead of obeying their oath to apply the law.

Under the Treaty (the real treaty signed at Waitangi and not the reinvented one of the 1990s) the Maoris, through their chiefs, ceded New Zealand to Queen Victoria and in return gained the same rights as British subjects – no more and no less.

Under the real treaty there can be no superior racial rights or special funding (Whanau Ora) or race based ownership/control of public resources (e.g. the foreshore and seabed) for Maoris, part-Maoris or anyone else.The tidal wave of ever growing privileges for part-Maori (code for the very pale-faced tribal elite) could not have proceeded on the basis of the Treaty itself – only by inventing “principles” and “partnership”. Remove these two fictions and New Zealand would return to a democracy of equals. But that won’t happen so long as National and Labour see their primary role as appeasing the tribal elite rather than governing in the interests of all New Zealanders.

National’s notorious Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, which stole the beaches off the public so that they can be handed out to Christopher Finlayson’s ex-client, Ngai Tahu, and his other tribal mates in return for Maori Party support in Parliament, has been described in the top selling book, Twisting the Treaty, as “the greatest swindle in New Zealand history”(page 8).

Once a tribe is granted part of the coast it can declare whole areas of its new domain (usually the best fishing grounds and surf breaks) “wahi tapu”, forbidding the public to step on to these formerly publicly owned beaches with a $5,000 fine on anyone who does so.

The passing of this Act by National – stealing off the many (the whole public of New Zealand) in order to enrich the few (the tribal elite) – was a violation of the principle on which the National Party was founded in the 1930s, viz. to represent the rights of all New Zealanders in contrast to the then class based Labour Party, which then represented only the working class. And a party that is in betrayal of its founding principle is undeserving of a vote by its traditional supporters.

The U-turn that John Key made in getting into bed with the racist Maori Party, itself in permanent violation of Article 1 of the U.N.’s International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, is a betrayal of National’s founding principle and the words “twenty pieces of silver” spring readily to mind.

Writing in the Dominion on 14th December, 2004, Gerry Brownlee, the then deputy leader of National, stated, “National will ensure the beaches and lakes remain in Crown ownership for all New Zealanders, require all Treaty claims to be settled by 2010, treat people on the basis of need rather than race, end the rorts associated with ïwi consultation, and wind up separate Maori electorates in line with the recommendations from the 1987 Royal Commission on MMP.”

If you’ve managed to stop laughing please note that in 2011 Brownlee voted to take the beaches out of Crown ownership (the Marine and Coastal Area Act), National treats people on the basis of race rather than need (e.g. Whanau Ora), the rorts associated with iwi consultation have sky-rocketed under National, the abolition of the Maori seats in Parliament has given way to Key’s perceived need to appease the Maori Party, while Treaty claims have continued way beyond 2010 with Finlayson cheating the taxpayer by ever more imaginative means, including throwing in an extra $10 million to Ngati Toa “for the loss of their maritime empire over Cook Strait” (code for Te Rauparaha’s right to take his war canoes across the strait to kill, cook and eat the tribes of Marlborough. In other words a taxpayer funded reward for cannibalism and one that even the usually biased Waitangi Tribunal refused to recommend. It was a deal reached by Finlayson in secret with Ngati Toa’s tribal leaders without any input from the public who have to fund it.

So, why vote for a party that makes promises to the public and then breaks them, betraying in the process both the ordinary people of New Zealand as well as National’s founding principle?

Labour also promotes separatist policies that reward people on the basis of race rather than need, e.g. the Clark government’s throwing millions of taxpayer dollars at part-Maoris by its racist “Closing the Gaps” policy. Yes, it is good to close gaps but not to people of only one race while ignoring the poor of other races.

Furthermore, it was Labour that introduced the fictitious “principles” of the Treaty, under which we have lost so many of our rights to the tribal elite.

Labour pioneered the undemocratic cancer of special race based positions on local councils when it rammed through the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Maori Constituency Empowering) Act 2001, creating three Maori wards on the council against the wishes of the local community. And by its Public Health and Disability Act 2000, with clauses giving preference to part-Maoris, Labour introduced racism to the health sector.

So, with this level of collusion between National and Labour, why would anyone with decent, democratic and non-racist instincts vote for either of these two parties which are undermining not only our democracy but also our sovereignty (the ever increasing “co-governance agreements” with the tribal elite), our economy (the debilitating effects of endless and expensive Treaty settlements), and our children’s future? In this land that was built by the sweat and labour of the pioneers anyone who is not part-Maori is increasingly becoming a second class citizen.

If you want all this racism and loss of rights to continue, then give your vote to National or Labour (or the Greens or United Future which also support race based privileges).

If you wish to see an end to this never ending avalanche of public resources and rights being handed over to the tribal elite and the continuing Maorification of New Zealand at the expense of all other cultures, then there are other parties to vote for – parties like NZ First, ACT, the Conservatives and 1 Law 4 All, that do not buy into the lies of “principles” and “partnership”.

For the sake of ours and future generations it is time for the notoriously apathetic voters of New Zealand to start thinking more seriously and more broadly about this, the most serious issue affecting our future. It’s time to think beyond the slogans and false promises of the mainstream parties. The slogans are dreamt up by highly paid advertising gurus while – as we saw with Gerry Brownlee’s deceit – the promises are not kept.

Apathy and a “she’ll be right” attitude are no longer options. In the words of G. K. Chesterton, ”A tired democracy becomes a dictatorship”.

An election is the only chance to change things but, if the voters let the TV talking heads and other media manipulators tell them how to vote by means of carefully contrived polls, selective presentation of news and an obsession with such trivialities as John Key’s smile, then there is little reason to go to all the trouble and expense of having an election.

Democracy – and the concomitant protection of our hard won freedoms and sovereignty that it should entail – can only work if people approach an election, the parties and the issues with an open and honest mind untrammelled by past party loyalties. People who are more loyal to a political party than to the long term good of their country are not much more than traitors.

This election is probably the last chance to stem the flow of racist legislation, of the Maorification of New Zealand, of undermining the sovereignty of our country by Finlayson’s “co-governance agreements” with chosen tribes like the backward and not very patriotic Tuhoe crowd.

If we allow ourselves to be so easily swayed by an irresponsible and shallow thinking media, then we should not complain when some thuggish Maori warden orders us off the beach or our Maori neighbour’s child gets preference in university placement and fees or unelected iwi councillors increase the rates.

Only by an open minded and genuine exercise of democracy can we fix this country up. This is the one election when neither National nor Labour deserve the votes of people who believe in democracy, the preservation of our ancient freedoms, racial equality, national unity and one sovereignty uncontaminated by “co-governance agreements” with the unelected tribal elite. Up to you.

The Gantt Guy’s letter to John Key:

Reblogged from CrusaderRabbit

‘With an election looming in only a few short weeks, the only question I am compelled to ask of you is, how much longer?

How much longer must people (partly) of Maori heritage labour under the crushing burden of low expectation? How much longer do we treat them as somehow less fully-formed, less human than other citizens, paternalistically excusing their statistically lower education and health outcomes, and higher rates of crime and imprisonment on the basis of their cultural heritage; the very definition of the term “racism”?

How much longer must New Zealanders of all cultural backgrounds apologise and pay for injustices real and (increasingly often) imagined which occurred most recently – when they occurred at all – more than a century ago?

How much longer must we continue under an apartheid electoral system where people (partly) from one racial background have access to preferential electorate seats from which others are excluded?

How much longer must we put up with those disabled parking spaces of the electoral system?

How much longer must New Zealand be held hostage to a corrupt oligarchical structure of tribal supremacy epitomised by your friends the Corporate IWI?

How much longer do we tolerate that tribal hierarchy deliberately keeping their own people in poverty and misery in order to pluck the heartstrings of Liberal White Guilt in order to ensure the treasury remains open to them?

How much longer until we cease to allow Maori-only electorate representation, Maori-only health funding, Maori-only legal representation, Maori-only educational scholarships?

How much longer must we tolerate the (former) paid and trained pet of the Corporate IWI, holding ministerial responsibility for treaty settlements, a conflict of interest so massive it would at minimum raise the eyebrows of the Law Society were it to occur in the private sector?

How much longer does our society suffer under the burden of treating citizens (partly) from one cultural heritage in preference to those from all others?

How much longer before the people of New Zealand break the stranglehold the Corporate IWI and their puppets in your government have on Maori people?

How much longer before Maori people are considered fully-formed adult members of society, and afforded the same freedoms and liberties as every other citizen?

How much longer until you realise the massive leap backwards the relations between races have taken as a direct result of your government’s pandering to the interests of radical and seditious racist elements in our society?

The Gantt Guy’


Comments are now closed

…and suddenly, it’s all worth while.

It’s not often that you cheer and laugh out loud whilst reading a letter sent to someone else. But that is exactly what I did last week when I received the letter below.

It’s a copy of a letter sent to Greg Hamilton, the General Manager of the National Party, by one of our members, Mr John Bell. Mr Bell was sent a Membership Renewal reminder by the National Party, and the letter below was his response to them:

John Bell Letter Scan2

This party has been established by a small group of enthusiastic people who are deeply concerned about the way this country is going. We have all worked many many hours over many months on all the intricacies of getting the proper form of organisation established with which to make a stand at this coming election. When you receive something like this in the mail – suddenly you feel as though it’s all worth while.

Thank you Mr Bell, for your support and for this morale boost.

Comments are now closed

Submissions Reveal The Constitutional Advisory Panel’s Duplicity & Spin

Posted on March 30, 2014 by Mike Butler on NZCPR
Mike Butler
An analysis of submissions to the Constitutional Advisory Panel obtained under the Official Information Act reveals an overwhelming and deep opposition to treaty politics. A fact that was obscured in the panel’s report to government. The Constitutional Advisory Panel always said its purpose was to take the nation’s pulse on constitutional matters. If the panel had reflected the wishes expressed in the 5259 written submissions, the recommendations would have been very different to the ‘massaged’ report published before Christmas 2013. I.e.

  • Maori seats in parliament should be abolished, according to 79% of respondents. 8% wanted to retain current system, 5% thought it should be decided by Maori, and 3% wanted Maori seats entrenched.
  • 70% said there should be no separate part-Maori representation in local government. 9% wanted Maori wards.
  • The Treaty of Waitangi should have no future role within New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements, according to 63%, while 16% thought it had a role.
  • Moreover, 72% did not want the treaty to be made a formal part of the constitution. 23% thought it should.
  • Part-Maori electoral participation could be improved in the same way electoral participation is encouraged for all, according to 83%.
  • A total of 66% said that New Zealand should not have a written constitution. 28% wanted a single written document.

(Abridged. Percentages have been rounded to whole numbers)
Click here to read Mike’s full article


Comments are now closed

1 2 3
%d bloggers like this: