John Key funny

Arise Sir John

Disclaimer:

Whilst I have reblogged this article from another blog, and I do agree that John Key has been a disaster for this country, it does not mean I or 1Law4All agree with every statement made in the article. For example, I don’t believe we have true poverty in New Zealand. If you calculate the number of people living in poverty as the number living on a percentage of the average wage, then we will always have poverty, even if that same percentage are on an income of $100,000.00 a year. It’s a ridiculous way to decide if people are living in poverty. I also know that by always stating the number of kids, rather than the number of people, is designed to tug at the heart strings, (or guilt strings), because most of us know that if kids are living in poverty, it’s their parents fault. Not the Governments or the taxpayers.

Arise Sir John

For creating a New Zealand where there are over 250,000 kids living in poverty …

For refusing to get the bodies out of the Pike River mine and thereby helping individuals avoid justice …

For Dirty Politics …

For the increasing numbers of homeless sleeping rough …

For selling off shares in the electricity companies and in Air New Zealand and enriching the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us …

For presiding over the development of a housing crisis yet refusing to accept that one existed …

For increasing the Crown’s debt from $10 billion to $93 billion and claiming this was evidence of sound financial management …

For widening inequality in NZ …

For the widening sexist pay gap in NZ …

For legislating to give Sky City further gambling rights so that the convention centre can be built on the back of problem gamblers …

For attacking scientists, reporters and media …

For the repeated lie that every budget would result in a further 170,000 jobs being created …

For ruling out an increase in GST but then implementing one …

For stuffing up negotiations with Warner Bros, Rio Tinto, SkyCity …

For systematically under funding health …

For deliberately running down state housing stock …

For increased surveillance and “jihadi “brides” fear mongering …

For running down the education system with stupid ideological policies …

For the rising rates of “third world” diseases of poverty and overcrowding …

For claiming that tax cuts were fiscally neutral when they caused Crown debt to escalate …

For wanting to make New Zealand a nirvana for the 1% …

For harassing a waitress (and making us an international laughing stock) …

For the stupid failed “War on P” …

For wasting $26m on a failed vanity flag referendum …

For suspending local democracy in Canterbury …

For the creation of the working poor …

For under funding mental health and the highest suicide rates ever …

For claiming that he would apply higher Ministerial standards but then allowing Murray McCully to complete #sheepgate …

For destroying New Zealand’s ability to respond to climate change …

For the fiasco of private prisons …

For taxing paperboys and girls …

For forcing the TPP down our throats …

For turning your back on meaningful refugee increases …

For trying to use tax payer money to pay your Bradley Ambrose payout …

For destroying so many of our waterways in the name of intensified dairying …

For sheltering ministers who have been incompetent and worse …

For lying habitually about everything …

And for all that – achieving nothing of vision or significance …

For pandering to Maori demands, fueling resentment and entitlement and increasing racism in New Zealand…

For allowing mega companies to take our fresh water for nothing…

For championing racist policies which have destroyed New Zealand’s democracy…

Arise Sir John.

By: of The Standard

The last few in green I’ve added. I’m sure you can think of many more. Let’s hear them in the comments!

 

Save

Save

Anthony Willy

The State of Democracy in New Zealand

The State of Democracy in New Zealand

 

Posted on
By

Posted on: NZCPR.COM

Until the passing of the Resource Management Amendment Act 2017 the business of territorial local authorities was conducted by the elected representatives of the citizens living in the particular area. That is no longer the case. Henceforth councils will be required to share their statutory powers with self-selected, unelected entities. This marks the end of democratic local government in New Zealand for the obvious reason that the elected members are no longer sovereign but must take account of the wishes of the self-selected group none of whom will be required to submit to the ballot box. Given that the activities of local authorities play an increasingly important role in our lives this has the potential for far reaching consequences. No longer will the contents of the district plans which control all important aspects of; land and water use, and any activities involving discharges to the atmosphere, be arrived at with the consent and input of the occupants of the district but will become subject to the wishes of unelected group.

However, given that there seems to be increasing disinterest in local body elections one may wonder whether this is necessarily such a bad thing. Why not leave it to the professional staff and an unelected pressure group to determine what activities are, and are not allowed to take place within a district. In other words is democracy such a necessary or good thing? To answer this question it is helpful to start with three aphorisms:

  • “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.” – Lord Acton 1887.
  • “Democracy is a psychopathic expression of inferiority” – William Joyce, an American better known as Lord Haw Haw who broadcast defeatist propaganda from Berlin during to the war. He was hung as a traitor by the British at war’s end.
  • Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…” – Winston Churchill 1947.

Churchill uttered this in the aftermath of the general election in which Clement Attlee’s Labour government swept to power. It was an astonishing affirmation of the place of democracy as a political institution. Having lately been instrumental in salvaging the free world from German hegemony, Churchill was nevertheless comprehensively rejected by the United Kingdom voters. One would have expected some bitterness, or questioning of a political structure which intended to and did demolish much of the existing social norms into which he was born, and which his party represented. Not so – he continued to believe in the common sense and life experiences of the electorate in deciding who should govern the country. What then are some of the other forms about which Churchill spoke? To mention a few:

[Read more…]

Muriel Newman

Democracy Under Attack

DEMOCRACY UNDER ATTACK

By Dr Muriel Newman

NZCPR Weekly:

Democracy has been described as a ‘fragile flower’. Indeed it is, and it’s something we take for granted because our relatively young society has not yet experienced its collapse. But it’s that complacency along with a naive assumption that serious social disorder could never really happen here, that has created opportunities for those who seek to undermine democracy for their own personal gratification and enrichment.

The sad truth is that we have allowed those who want to subvert democracy to have a free reign.

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator retired Judge and former university law lecturer Anthony Willy, outlines what’s been going on:

“Until the passing of the Resource Management Amendment Act 2017 the business of territorial local authorities was conducted by the elected representatives of the citizens living in the particular area. That is no longer the case. Henceforth councils will be required to share their statutory powers with self-selected, unelected entities. This marks the end of democratic local government in New Zealand for the obvious reason that the elected members are no longer sovereign but must take account of the wishes of the self-selected group none of whom will be required to submit to the ballot box.”

Anthony is, of course, referring to the consequences of the back-room political deal making  between the National and Maori parties earlier this year to unilaterally pass their ‘Mana Whakahono a Rohe’ agreements into law in such a way as to deny all public consultation and avoid any scrutiny by the wider public whatsoever.

By National’s own admission, the new powers that they granted are significant.  They will elevate any number of Maori tribal and family groups into positions of partnership with their local authorities for “plan-making, consenting, appointment of committees, monitoring and enforcement, bylaws, regulations and other council statutory responsibilities” – including over fresh water.

Anthony goes on to say, “Given that the activities of local authorities play an increasingly important role in our lives this has the potential for far reaching consequences. No longer will the contents of the district plans which control all important aspects of land and water use, and any activities involving discharges to the atmosphere, be arrived at with the consent and input of the occupants of the district, but they will become subject to the wishes of unelected groups.”

He further explains, “Democracy has fathered a notion of equal importance and that is the ‘Rule of Law’. This is a lawyer’s construct and little discussed or even understood by the general public. It involves the simple imperative that laws enacted by our democratically elected government will be applied equally to all irrespective of creed, colour or social circumstance. The combination of democratic government and the rule of law are the twin pillars on which all of our freedoms rest. Without the support of both pillars the house cannot stand. Absent either of these foundations, the liberties  we hold dear cannot survive and one of the competing forms of government will come back to haunt us.”

In legislating Maori tribal groups into the status of an elite ruling class that is totally unaccountable to the public, the National Party has undermined the Rule of Law in New Zealand and corrupted democracy as we know it.

It’s fair to ask, how on earth it could have got to this stage – has the nation been asleep while iwi leaders have been advancing their sovereignty agenda?

While the iwi agenda has not been secret, it has not been entirely open either. Much of their manoeuvring has been carried out under the guise of helping disadvantaged Maori. As a result, most New Zealanders have been totally unaware that a long-running and well-planned offensive has been underway.

Some, however, have been trying to raise the alarm for years.

For more than two decades, Professor Elizabeth Rata of Auckland University has warned of the threat being posed by the bicultural movement in New Zealand. She has outlined how a powerful cultural elite from within Maoridom – who were committed to subverting democracy – were positioned inside the State system, to destroy it from within.

According to Professor Rata, biculturalism arose in the seventies, driven by left wing activists who were seeking an alternative to traditional class politics.

What they found, of course, was cultural Marxism – a socialist philosophy originated by a former leader of the Italian Communist Party, Antonio Gramsci, who saw ‘culture’ as the way to win the class struggle. While the traditional battle to ‘liberate’ the working class involved taking control of the ‘economic means of production and distribution’, he focused on controlling the ‘cultural means of production’. His work inspired a literal socialist march through culture-forming institutions such as the media, universities, and churches – enlightening those within about the struggle for social justice by ‘oppressed’ groups in society, centred on race, gender, and sexuality.

Professor Rata explained that many ‘biculturalists’ moved into positions of power and influence in the education and health professions, social services, and government circles, as public servants and politicians, bringing with them their political commitment to the identity politics agenda: “Victimhood was subsequently understood as oppression by colonisation, the patriarchy, and ‘Western’ culture generally – an oppression experienced by ethnic groups, indigenous peoples, women, gays, and religious minorities rather than the capitalist exploitation of working class people.”

Over the years, New Zealanders have been deceived by the bicultural activists, who have claimed that the movement was a means to greater social justice for marginalised Maori. Yet, in reality, it has been used as a Trojan Horse to enable a rich and powerful tribal elite to grow stronger at a cost to disadvantaged Maori, who are little better off today than they were back then.

John Moore, writing on the Liberation blog run by Dr Bryce Edwards of Otago University, has called identity politics an “elitist scam” that enables the state largesse flowing to groups claiming to be marginalised, to end up in the hands of the elites who run the groups, instead of those in need: “Modern social-liberalism – in the form of identity politics – has been exposed as an elitist scam. Gender politics and tino rangatiratanga struggles were all presented as a way to alleviate the poverty, oppression and discrimination of those at the bottom of society. Instead these ideologies have acted to elevate… an elite of those from subjugated sectors of society…”

Professor Rata has also pointed out that while the agenda promoted by biculturalists occurs in the name of social justice, the path to social justice cannot be through ethnic division.

This was reinforced by former US President Barack Obama in 2006, when he said, “Ethnic-based tribal politics has to stop. It is rooted in the bankrupt idea that the goal of politics or business is to funnel as much of the pie as possible to one’s family, tribe, or circle with little regard for the public good. It stifles innovation and fractures the fabric of the society. Instead of opening businesses and engaging in commerce, people come to rely on patronage and payback as a means of advancing. Instead of unifying the country to move forward on solving problems, it divides neighbour from neighbour.”

The reality is that tribalism is an archaic social structure that suits the tribal elite, and no one else. Yet this is what National is supporting through massive state subsidies.

Policies enacted under the tribal ‘by Maori for Maori’ bicultural umbrella have led to separate Maori education systems, Maori university quotas, Maori health care, Maori welfare programmes, Maori housing schemes, and Maori justice programmes. There are Maori government departments and tribunals, Maori-only consultation rights, Maori-only co-governance rights, Maori-only tax rates, and Maori-only charitable status – to name but a few of a vast array of separatist privileges that now exist to support tribalism.

The problem is that the pressure for more tribal power and control is never-ending. Now the Maori Party not only wants to restructure the entire Justice System on “the basis of the Treaty of Waitangi and the foundation of partnership”, but it is also pushing “cultural competency” and a “Maori world view” across the whole of the public sector.

The education system is the latest victim, with cultural competency requirements having become compulsory from 1 July. As a result, all primary and secondary school teachers now have to “Demonstrate a commitment to a bicultural Aotearoa New Zealand” and prioritise “Maori learners as tangata whenua”.

As Professor Barend Vlaardingerbroek explained recently in an article for the NZCPR, “Passive acquiescence won’t do any more: teachers must now be personally committed to this political paradigm. This is where the new standards leave the democratic domain and enter the totalitarian realm. Bang go teachers’ rights as citizens to hold their own opinions without interference. New Zealand teachers are being deprived of a fundamental right of all citizens in a democracy – the right to disagree with ideological dicta promulgated by the political elite. This right is not about letting teachers get away with denigrating or abusing Maori kids, which falls foul of the duty of care and professional ethics. This is about hitting teachers who are actual or potential political dissenters with a stark choice: submit or vacate. And that is enforced ideological conformity – the antithesis of democracy and an infringement of teachers’ internationally acknowledged human rights.”

With there now being a critical shortage of teachers in New Zealand, one can’t help but wonder whether compulsory cultural competency requirements, that requires all teachers to not only swear an allegiance to the Maori sovereignty agenda, but to indoctrinate the children as well, is the straw that is breaking the camel’s back.

It’s all emerging as Professor Rata warned. The bicultural movement was captured by radical Maori separatists who will not stop until Maori control all governance processes – they want to return the country to Maori. “The bicultural movement in New Zealand has been a mistake – it is subverting democracy, erecting ethnic boundaries between Maori and non-Maori, and promoting a cultural elite within Maoridom.”

But she has also warned that there are two sides to biculturalism – the small elite group that are promoting it and the much larger group that is allowing it to happen.

And that’s where our fragile flower of democracy stands today.

So, what of the future and the possibility of a new government come 23 September?

The National Party has already said that if it wins sufficient support it would prefer to enter into another coalition agreement with the Maori Party after the election.

This news will have no doubt caused many former National voters to despair.

Anyone in doubt about the merits of National’s liaison with the Maori Party needs only reflect on the mess that National’s concession to the Maori Party over the foreshore and seabed has caused, whereby hundreds of Maori groups, gifted with millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money to fund their opportunistic grab for New Zealand’s coastline, have lodged claims covering every square inch of our coast, many times over, forcing citizens to have to fight to protect our public rights.

Labour, it appears, would be no better as their leader Andrew Little has already said he supports Maori sovereignty. So too does the Green Party, which also wants a new constitution based on the Treaty of Waitangi.

That’s also one of the goals of Gareth Morgan’s Opportunities Party – to increase Maori rights and put the Treaty at the heart of all Government affairs.

At this stage the only dissenting voice is that of Winston Peters with his call for a binding referendum of all voters on the future of the Maori seats – which, of course, are the power base of the bicultural movement and their Maori sovereignty agenda.

As the election jostling continues, one can only hope that more political parties will come to recognise the crucial importance of the Rule of Law and Democracy to New Zealanders – and realise that overwhelmingly, Kiwis want to live in a country where all citizens are treated equally.
 

We Will Take From Them The Beaches

We Will Take From Them The Beaches

We Will Take From Them The Foreshore;

We Will Take From Them The Islands;

We Will Take From Them The Water;

We Will Take From Them The Land;

We Will Take From Them The Rivers;

We Will Take From Them The Mountains;

We Will Push Them Into The Sea.

Is this the National Party government’s death knell? How could anyone other than those in the blues seeking election actually vote for National?

MARINE AND COASTAL AREA APPLICATION

You are hereby notified that Cletus Maanu Paul, on behalf of all Maori, has applied for recognition of customary marine title and protected customary rights (rangatiratanga, kaitiakitanga and all ancillary activities) over the entire area of New Zealand, including all islands to the outer limits of the territorial sea; and, the Marine and Coastal Area surrounding all islands and reefs lying off shore from the coastline to a distance of 12 nautical miles; and, the entire foreshore and territorial waters of New Zealand under the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011. Notices of appearance in support or in opposition to the applications must be filed by Friday 30 June 2017 in the Rotorua High Court.

• Published Sunday, April 30 2017
• First Published Sunday, April 30 2017

And if that snatch for the entire country doesn’t work, then the khaki mafioso will aim to take it from you, piece-by-piece. Of course, it’s likely that this is not only the tip of the iceberg, but a distraction. It is not necessary for such applications to go through the high court.

All the greedy grabbers need to do is cosy up to whanau Whinlayson, behind the closed doors of his office, to get what they want – by the back door – literally. Perhaps he did turn the cuzzies down on some, because even he couldn’t stomach the mendacious temerity of the claim? Or perhaps he was worried that – come September – the voters might be reminded of his treachery?

Here’s some of the other classified adverts . . .

HIWARAU TURANGAPIKITOI AND OHIWA OF WHAKATOHEA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the …

MAHURANGI NGATI AWA, NGAPUHI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the …

NGA HAPU O NGATI WAI IWI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NGA TINI HAPU O MANIAPOTO MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NGAI TAI IWI AND THE URI (DESCENDANTS) OF NGAI TAI IWI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions …

NGAI TAMAHAUA HAPU MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NGATI HEI CHARITABLE TRUST INCORPORATED MARINE AND COASTAL A REA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all …

NGATI HUARERE KI WHANGAPOUA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NGATI KAHU & TE RARAWA TE URIOHINA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine …

NGATI MANU & NGATI RANGI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NGATI MURIWAI HAPU MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NGATI ONEONE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NGATI RAHIRI TANGATA WHENUA KI TE TII WAITANGI KI TE PEIWHAI RANGI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal …

NGATI TOREHINA KI MATAURE O HAU MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

NOTICE TO ALL BENEFICIARIES OF NGATI KAHU KI WHANGAROA AND ASSOCIATED HAPU A Hui-A-Iwi/Hapu has been scheduled for Saturday 27th May at Waitaruke Marae to commence at 11.00am. Purpose: …

O NGA HAPU O TAIAMAI KI TE MARANGAI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

PAKOWHAI HAPU MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION TO HIGH COURT UNDER THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011: CIV 2017-404-546 The Trustees of the Ngati Rehua Ngatiwai ki Aotea Trust, for …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION TO HIGH COURT UNDER THE MARINE A ND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011: CIV 2017-404-545 The Trustees of the Ngati Manuhiri Settlement Trust, for and …

RIRIWHENUA HAPU MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

ROPU O RANGIRIRI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

TE AITANGA O NGA URI O WHAREKAURI MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

TE HAPU O TITOKO NGAI TAMA AND URI (DESCENDANTS) OF TE HAPU O TITOKO NGAI TAMA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with …

TE HIKA O PAPAUMA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

TE IHUTAI KI ORIRA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

TE KUPENGA O NGATI HAKO MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

TE RUNANGA OF NGATI PU INCORPORATED MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

TE URI A TEHAPU MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

TE WHANAU O HONE PAPITA RAUA KO REWA ATARIA PAAMA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, …

WHANAU A APANUI HAPU MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …

WHANAU A KAUWHAKATUAKANA MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 APPLICATION In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011, all interested …


Another Fifteen Today

Anyone care to check to see if there’s any unclaimed coastline left, now?

Published Monday, May 01 2017

Public notice of an Application for an order under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 CIV-2017-485-000250 Application by Te Tawharau o Ngati Pukenga on behalf of …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-404-558 An application by RIHARI DARGAVILLE on behalf of the Ngaitawake, …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-2017-404-565 An application by HONOURABLE DOVER SAMUELS on behalf of the …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-404-542 An application by MARAMA STEAD on behalf of the Te Taou, being …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-404-537 An application by JOSEPH ROBERT KINGI on behalf of the Nga Puhi …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-404-538 An application by RIHARI DARGAVILLE on behalf of the New Zealand …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-TBA An application by RIHARI DARGAVILLE on behalf of the Taitokerau District …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-TBA An application by RIHARI DARGAVILLE on behalf of the Ngaitawake, being …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-404-539 An application by RIHARI DARGAVILLE on behalf of the Ngati Kauwau, …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-TBA An application by RIUHA LOUISA COLLIER on behalf of the Ngati Kawau, …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 103 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 CIV-404-573 An application by MAIA MARIA NOVA on behalf of the Ngai Tahuhu, …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION TO HIGH COURT UNDER THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011: CIV-2017-485-240 The Trustees of the Parengarenga Incorporation, for and on behalf …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION UNDER S100 OF THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 (“MACA”) Notice is given on behalf of Ngati Maraeariki and its hapu Ngati Raupo, Ngati …

PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION UNDER THE MARINE AND COASTAL AREA (TAKUTAI MOANA) ACT 2011 Te Whanau a Haunui (Royal Family) In accordance with the provisions of the Marine and Coastal …

Public Notice of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu’s application on behalf of Ngai Tahu Whanui for an order recognising customary marine title under section 98 of the Marine and Coastal Area …


An Earlier 1Law4All Blog Post on This Matter

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).


80% OF YOUR COUNTRYMEN
ARE COUNTING ON YOU
TO GIVE THEM A VOICE

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.

Sweet Sue or Auntie Acerbic

Sweet Sue or Auntie Acerbic?

Here’s an opportunity for all you regular blog contributors to provide 1Law4All with some insights. The nub is simple.

In this election year, when campaigning against the racist policies of National, Labour, Greens et al, should the tenor by nice or strident? Should 1Law4All go for the jugular, or be measured and modest?

It matters not whether it’s words or pictures – what shall it be?

Consider the images you’ll see if you click the links below – various facebook pages. Clicking on the links will open a new tab in your web browser.

Picture No. 1    Picture No. 2   Picture No. 3   Picture No. 4

Are they over-the-top? About right? Too pussyfoot? Those images and perhaps more like them can be seen on the 1Law4All facebook page.

Most bloggers will recognise the imprimatur of John Ansell.


On another, but related matter, it’s said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so how does this sound for an election jingle?

Make New Zealand ONE Again

Would you wear a cap or tee shirt emblazoned with these slogans?



If so, by the end of Monday 25 March, you should see them available to buy, along with other designs, from 1Law4All’s shop by clicking here.

Save

The Northland By-Election – The Beginning Of The End For A Racist National Party

The Northland By-Election

The Beginning Of The End For A Racist National Party?

eight_col_benedict_one

Prime Minister John Key, second left, and National candidate Mark Osborne in Northland on 26 March 2015. Photo: RNZ / Benedict Collins

The much touted electoral appeal of John Key – or, to be more precise, that contrived perma-smile of John Key – has carried National to three undeserved election victories. But, as was so spectacularly shown in the Northland by-election, the Key train is now falling off the rails.

Despite the nakedly pork barrel politics of offering ten new bridges and Key rushing back from Korea to imprint his own so-called invincible personality on the contest, Winston Peters won this long held, safe National seat by more than 4,000 votes.

At long last, perhaps the voters have seen through the fraud of Key? From here on, it will all be downhill because John Key, like Tony Blair in Britain, is not and never was anything other than a PR/media creation. This man will fly from Dargaville to Invercargill just to oblige the press by wearing a funny hat for a photo opportunity. But when has he ever put in a full day’s work in Wellington on serious matters that affect the country?

When Angela Merkel, the Chancellor of Germany, paid a brief (about 24 hours) visit to New Zealand on her way to a recent conference in Brisbane, she was whisked off to some island in the Hauraki Gulf so that she could have her photo taken holding a kiwi with a smiling John Key looking on, as well as other inane photo opportunities. And she doesn’t even like touching animals! This was at the height of the Ukraine crisis and Merkel was the Western leader who had the most contact with Putin.

Besides having one of the world’s strongest and most influential economies, Germany is at the heart of Europe. Any hosting Prime Minister with a work ethic, or any substance or patriotism, would have utilised the small amount of time that this important and useful person had in New Zealand to extract the maximum from the visit. Briefing Cabinet, officials and even the Opposition instead of swanning off to islands for contrived and staged photo ops would have been a so much more productive and wiser thing to do.

Like Tony Blair, John Key is lacking in character, substance or even patriotism (e.g. his expensive attempt to destroy our nation’s flag). When the PR bubble finally bursts, there is nothing else for such types to fall back on with the result that their descent becomes almost vertical. It happened with Blair in Britain – propped up by the media for so long because he was young and smiling but, when that image snapped, there was nothing else to hold him up and today he is one of the most widely reviled men in England.

So, the Key bubble has been popped and even the unflappable Steven Joyce, whose candidate management skills were thought to be infallible, has now been exposed as a tin god. What other campaign manager would have allowed a candidate to appear in such scruffy clothes as Mark Osborne?

With as little as Tony Blair had to prop him up, from now on Key will be battling as the mask of invincibility has so effectively been wiped off his face by Winston Peters. And, with Key’s unpatriotic and ham fisted attempt to change the nation’s flag, he is in for some pretty rough times.

However delighted one might be to see National’s defeat in Northland, one should not expect too much from Peters’ victory. That old and largely empty warhorse spent about five weeks making speeches every day in every town square and kauri grove and yet never once was it reported that he spoke out in support of the principle of One Law For All despite that issue currently being terribly important in Northland.

This is in line with New Zealand First’s retreat on this important policy that it once had, but seems to have dropped. About a year ago New Zealand First distributed a brochure to Tauranga letter boxes entitled “15 Fundamental Principles.” The principle of One Law For All was neither mentioned nor even implied. This shows how vital it is for 1Law4All to succeed, as we can not rely on any of the other parties to drive this all-important issue.

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.

Who Will You Vote For?

While many issues will influence your decision on Election Day (20th September 2014), we believe the entrenchment of racial bias, privilege and corruption in our government and legal system will be the most damaging to New Zealand and our way of life in the long term.

Never in the world’s history has legal racial separatism & preference led to anything other than exploitation, resentment & violence.

So how can our politicians be so stupid as to continue pushing us down this path? Short-term power? Salaries? Status? Ego? Fawning over the rich & powerful? Future money-making opportunities?

They cannot understand history or common human psychology. Perhaps they simply don’t give a damn about what our children will suffer. Public service? Yeah right.

Your Party Vote is Crucial.

Party votes determine the percentage of parliamentary seats any party can claim. So choose the candidate who works best for your electorate, but please consider carefully your choice of Party Vote.

To guide you, we have prepared a summary of where the parties stand. It’s objective, as 1Law4All’s Board comes from all political persuasions!

LEGALISED RACISM (i.e. APARTHEID)

 

Political Parties

What They Say
on Racial Matters

What They Actually Do/Did Our Voting
Advice
National While in opposition, National spoke out for one standard of citizenship for all New Zealanders (“One law for all”) & on removing the Maori-only parliamentary seats. BUT since being in government, they have promoted separatism and privilege based on racial ancestry for the benefit of the tribal elite. In 2008, Key unnecessarily invited the Maori Party into coalition & radically extended legal racial separatism and privilege in NZ – more than any other government e.g. support for the UN’s Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which promotes separatism; transfer of NZ’s coastline (foreshore & seabed) from public to iwi control; Maori Statutory Board’s extensive & undemocratic control of “Super Auckland”; significant transfers of government assets to iwi on spurious grounds; co-governance of public resources, etc. NO
Labour All people should have equal access to all social, economic, cultural, political and legal spheres, regardless of wealth or social position….. BUT they have promoted separatism and privilege based on selective racial ancestry….. although under Helen Clark, Labour resisted the extremes demanded by radical Maori. But who knows what Cunliffe is willing to do? NO
Greens Numerous race-based policies; no mention of equality. They promote extensive separatism and privilege based on selective racial ancestry. NO
Maori It’s all in the name! They have radically promoted separatism and privilege based on selective racial ancestry for the benefit of the tribal elite; want to take democratic power from the people by entrenching racial privilege in a new Constitution; have achieved extensive “settlements”, “co-governance” and control for the benefit of iwi corporate elite and are extending the ways & means by which other New Zealanders will be forced to keep paying out forever.  NO
NZ First Policy-making to be based on need, not race, creed or colour; the future of the Maori seats is a decision for the people.  Winston has always promoted equality when in opposition – he tends to say what we want to hear; BUT when in power, he has taken the baubles and delivered nothing (other than the “gold card”).Note: In 2006, ex-NZF MP Doug Woolerton did introduce a Private Members Bill seeking to abolish the Waitangi Tribunal. It failed to get sufficient support from other parties to pass. A prospect if in a Coalition. But would he ever make racial equality a bottom line before giving support? On past performance, this is unlikely.
ACT Equality before the law; remove all race-based appointments & ensure that the Waitangi Tribunal process ends. BUT has supported the National Coalition’s radically racist agenda. Also delivered the Super Auckland Council structure, which has resulted in unelected & unaccountable iwi elite control at Councillor level & throughout the bureaucracy (i.e. the imposition of unlimited/undefined iwi processes and taxes on private property owners in the Unitary Plan; co-governance of the Hauraki Gulf). NO
United Says very little. Has gone along with whatever is necessary to keep the coalition perks in place. NO
Conservative Wants the one electoral roll; an end to Treaty claims; removal of differential treatment based on race; a repeal of the foreshore and seabed legislation; the closing down of the Constitutional Review. Actions speak louder than words. They were the only political party (other than 1Law4All) to make a submission against the blatant racial bias of Auckland Council’s Unitary Plan. 

Otherwise yet to be proven.

Maybe, but the proof will be in the performance.
Internet Mana Extensive race-based policies include 100% of New Zealanders speaking Te Reo Māori by 2040; a new way in which political and legal power is structured in Aotearoa; “meaningful constitutional transformation”, etc. The Mana leader, Hone Harawira, is openly racist.
The Internet arm has demonstrated no principles other than self-interest.
NO

What About 1Law4All?

Our registration as a political party has been delayed further by a Maori Party objection to the 1Law4All logo. It’s hard to fathom what grounds they might have, other than it represents a party calling for legal equality – something that is an anathema to the racist Maori Party.

But nevertheless, 1Law4All has had great difficulty in gathering resources – both financial and in terms of personnel. Too few people understand the threat as we do, or perhaps they see advantages in the wealth and power that comes with the tribal elite. Either way, they do not want to rock the boat.

So we are left with insufficient resources to credibly contest this year’s election. However, we are committed to the cause and will keep up our resistance – with your help.

URGENTLY WANTED – appropriately able people for volunteer operational roles:

• Secretary (or Treasurer)
• Database Manager
• Webmaster
• Marketing/Communications Manager
• Media Spokesperson

Participate in a campaign for change!
True democracy & racial equality is worth fighting for.

1 2
%d bloggers like this: