1Law4All on NewsHub – 4th March 2017:

1Law4All Party makes push to abolish Waitangi Tribunal

04/03/2017
By Kim Vinnell

A political movement labelled by some as driven by extreme right-wing racism is upping the ante ahead of this year’s election.

A flyer drop promoting both an anti-separatist book and the 1Law4All Party has angered one Labour candidate, who says New Zealand is past it.

Thousands of households received the flyer titled “One Treaty, one nation”, and Labour’s Willie Jackson is not happy with its message.

“[It’s a] load of nonsense – racist rhetoric again and so similar to the Pauline Hansen One Nation rubbish that’s coming out of Australia,” he says.

The flyer says Māori have benefited from colonisation, making the claim that it lifted them out of a violent, Stone Age existence. It calls for the Waitangi Tribunal to be abolished, and for voters to avoid anyone who believes in so-called race-based privileges.

Kingsland residents were shocked by the flyer.

“I read it and tore it up and stuck it in the recycling bin. I was a bit distressed about it,” one local says.

“I felt like it was trying to stir within some people that some are getting more than others,” added another.

“It’s so, so racist.”

John McLean, who owns Tross Publishing, is the man behind the flyers, which also promote his book.

“The chiefs ceded the entire country’s sovereignty to Queen Victoria, and the idea of co-governance and partnership is a new idea that’s only been invented about 170 years later,” he says.

Don Brash, who wrote one of the chapters in Mr McLean’s book, is defending the stance.

“It’s bizarre in New Zealand. If you argue for the same standard of citizenship for everybody, you get called a racist,” he says.

Mr McLean says hundreds of thousands of flyers have been put in letterboxes across the North Island.

He says they’ve been dropped by volunteers who support his cause, and the 1Law4All political movement.

The party is also promoted in the flyer. Its vice president in a statement says the movement has been “historically ignored by mainstream media, except when it suited the purpose to refer to the party as some sort of anachronistic, subversive, racist redneck group”.

1Law4All deregistered as a political party in 2015, but says it is upping the ante ahead of this year’s election.

Watch the video here on Newshub.


 

One Law Full Page Advert 3b FOR WEBSITE

Another fabulous article, this time in the National Business Review on the 28th June, with party Spokesperson, Dr Tom Johnson PhD.

P8 News.indd

One Law Full Page Advert 2b FOR WEBSITE

This article appeared in the Napier Courier:

Toms Courier Article

 

This article appeared on a website called NZ News UK

it’s a UK website, presumably for kiwis abroad.

New political party 1 Law 4 All

A new political party, 1 Law 4 All, has been founded. The party wants all New Zealanders to be treated equally at law and in government funding, regardless of race.

1Law 4 All has evolved from a steering committee of concerned citizens who see no end to the government’s granting ever more superior rights, and special funding to part-Maoris, based on their race. The steering committee is made up of previous financial and active members of ACT, Green, Labour, Libertarianz, National and other parties. For the next three months, the 1 Law 4 All party will be concentrating on a membership drive. The leadership team will be announced later, and the Party expects to take List votes from both National and Labour.

The 1 Law 4 All Party is already enjoying considerable support from people who are fed up with the way that the National Party has betrayed the rights of the public – especially over the foreshore and seabed – in order to buy the parliamentary votes of the Maori Party. It intends to outline the damage that Treaty Minister Finlayson is doing to the sovereignty and unity of the nation by his “co-governance” agreements with his favoured tribes, like Tuhoe.

The 1 Law 4 All Party is also gaining good support from people who are fed up with Labour’s support of rampant Treatyism. Especially those “blue collar workers” who do not like the way that they are being made second class citizens in their own country. Something that is even enshrined in the Labour Party’s Constitution. 1 Law 4 All’s position is that the Treaty of Waitangi signed at Waitangi on 6 February 1840 gave no special rights to Maoris that other British subjects don’t also enjoy. Further, that the “principles” and “partnership” so often bandied about are nothing more than figments of political and judicial imagination. No such things are mentioned in the Treaty that was signed at Waitangi.

Among the 1 Law 4 All Party’s policies is the abolition of the Waitangi Tribunal; the abolition of separate Maori electorate parliamentary seats; and the repeal of National’s notorious Marine and Coastal Area Act. This Act took the beaches out of public ownership so that part-Maori tribes can claim them and, by means of “wahi tapu,” exclude others from various coastal areas. The 1 Law 4 All Party also wants an end to the official state promotion and enforcement of divisive bi-culturalism.

For further information see www.1law4all.co.nz

 

Tom Johnson

ttt

Twisting the Treaty

by Bob Sinclair

June, 2013 Auckland issue of elocal.

Will This Book Awaken the Sleeping Giant?

The big question out of dozens that this book raises for me, is this:
Is New Zealand moving towards an apartheid style of Government, where
the Maori race prevails over all others?

I cannot say it isn’t. And that’s what worries me. Sometimes, I wish
E-Local’s editor had not given me this book to review. It has upset my
World. I can’t enjoy that spine-tingling sense of pride when the All
Blacks perform the Haka anymore. A shift has taken place.

“Twisting the Treaty – a Tribal Grab for Wealth and Power”, is the
work of six authors. They are all new to me because, like most New
Zealanders, I haven’t followed issues around treaty settlements that
closely over the past two decades and longer. The authors are an
academic bunch. At times the tone of their work expresses their years
of frustration, trying to wake the majority of New Zealanders up to
what is happening with these treaty settlements. But in just one read,
I cannot argue with their thoroughness. Although the book has already
been labelled racist, I am satisfied these authors are entirely
capable of dispassionate thought and are campaigning for a deeper
truth. It’s about New Zealanders living under one set of laws for all.

The authors would all be well known to a sector of New Zealanders, who
they call “treatyists” – those people who support the concept of
ongoing treaty settlements in order to redress the wrongs done to
Maori following English settlement from the early years of the 19th
century. The book is also a reference point for recorded data. It
includes over 400 pages of comment, opinion and many points of
reference to support their arguments. In other words, years of work.
In summary, these six authors argue that:

* The entire treaty settlement process is based on largely fabricated
history. And when I read their understanding of historical events, I
cannot help being persuaded, and at times even shocked.

* The treaty document itself was a much simpler and basic
understanding – that Maori cede sovereignty to the Queen, and that
Maori in turn, receive her full protection and become subject to her
laws. Maori can sell property, buy property, and trade and live within
British law the same as all other citizens of any race who live here.
Then the authors offer evidence of how the treaty has since been
re-interpreted to distort that original spirit of intent so that it
covers air, water, and the sea. If you vaguely follow national news
you’ll understand what this covers.

* The authors take this further – offering evidence that the wrong
treaty was even signed! A fantastic topic for a TV docu-drama or even
a movie. But I doubt NZ On Air would ever subsidise this one. For this
excerpt alone, read the book. You will never yearn for a Freemans Bay
property again, when you find out who the area was named after.

The authors also argue and offer their evidence that most Maori
chiefs were grateful for this Treaty, because it interrupted the cycle
of mutual conquest, murder, slavery and cannibalism that was the
routine existence of the tribes. They signed it to escape exploitation
from other Maori tribes.

Some of the descriptions, however brief, of how tribes preyed upon
each other, are heartbreakingly cruel. Worse than any “Hostel” horror
movie. Make sure your children don’t read these pieces. Sometimes the
romantic ideal of song, dance and spirituality is the best history to
know. But I am at least satisfied that this is not mentioned as some
gratuitous emotional point. It has contextual relevance to the key
points of the book – what are we paying for and why?

I am reminded of the Napoleon Bonaparte quote that, “history is a
pack of lies agreed upon,” and without spending the next five years of
my life checking the many references that these authors offer, I found
myself, within 100 pages of the book already calling for our
Government to back up the truck and take a closer look at all of this.

Some of the Chiefs I know from school history and readings as a
younger man; Hone Heke, Hongi Hika, Wiremu Kingi, Te Rauparaha and Te
Kooti, come under close scrutiny. If the New Zealand Government of
today seems unusually concessional to Maori claims, this is not a new
characteristic. The book offers evidence that some of these Chiefs –
and I confess my romantic idealised images of them are severely
damaged – worked the 19th century colonial Government to great
advantage before they came to various ends (not entirely undeserved
from this evidence). The events make for fascinating reading. But they
also call into question the wisdom of today’s settlements.

I was forced to read this book in short bursts over ten days because
it aroused such turbulent emotions in me that I needed to take a
second to process what I had just read. By half way through, I
concluded that mainstream media will not go near this book. A Campbell
Live, Third Degree, or Seven Sharp, and the mainstream daily
columnists, could not handle the potential outcry resulting from the
revelations within it. New Zealand is just not ready for this depth of
introspection. There are too many reputations at stake.

But I was pleasantly surprised to read that the debate around a
written constitution for NZ is starting to emerge through public
discussions. This book argues that the constitution ad campaign is a
smoke screen to have the treaty adopted into a constitution. The
authors see it as another step towards an apartheid style of
Government, where Maori take preference.

The historic evidence referred to by these authors left me
gob-smacked. If half of it is true, then as a nation, we need to stop
and take a reality check.

I began to think about what might happen if some of this history
became public through a source outside New Zealand. We have just had a
close call with a member of the Danish Government. Perhaps we are also
overlooking the fact that we now have over 150 nationalities living as
New Zealanders. Korean is supposedly the second language on Auckland’s
North Shore.

Big issues for a nation can be opened up with the simplest question:
“why are we doing this?”

Some media commentators, whom I would perceive as being from both
sides of the political spectrum, have been publishing comments of
alarm about Treaty negotiations and the behaviour patterns of Treaty
Minister, Chris Finlayson, for some time. Experience tells me that
this media attention will grow from its small beginnings. The next
five years will be fascinating.

Excerpts
Here are five excerpts which have been selected to explain the work’s
wide scope. Remember that the whole thing is over 400 pages of
commentary, and each of these points is less than the tip of the iceberg.

A simple and uncomplicated treaty…all that the treaty promised was
that Maori were to live as British subjects. They were to enjoy their
property, as all subjects do and were to enjoy the protection of the
Queen’s law, but that was all…
Ngai Tahu has tribal members on its books who have only one
two-hundred-and-fifty-sixth Ngai Tahu ancestry…there are no longer in
New Zealand, two distinct groups which we can label Maori and settler.
We have been marrying each other for two centuries…

When any modern Maori then claims for an injustice allegedly done to
his ancestors, he is actually claiming for a wrong done by others of
his ancestors…History being re-written?…our brief history is being
scrutinised, sifted and weighed to create accounts that have been
twisted to justify multi-million dollar payouts…for
grievances…Sadly, the Waitangi tribunal, which is sifting through our
history, is not impartial…

Concern is not new, Historian, Dr Giselle Byrne, called the (Waitangi)
Tribunal’s efforts a “noble but flawed experiment….she writes that
tribunal reports are deeply political and overwhelmingly focused on
the present. “It commits the ultimate faux pas of judging the past by
the standards of the present…”

Chris Finlayson. Our current Attorney General and Minister for Treaty
Negotiations comes under particular scrutiny and if the contents of
this book are half true, then New Zealand, we have a problem…A list
Member of Parliament since 2005, Chris Finlayson since 2008, has been
Attorney-General, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and
Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage. Since 2011, he has also been
Associate Minister of Maori Affairs…

Read the book to find out the many points the authors raise, and the
potential conflicts of interest in Chris Finlayson’s appointment,
overlayed by his history as a legal adviser for Ngai Tahu in its claims.

It seems clear that he has a hold over treaty negotiations that call
for an independent audit of some kind. And soon. The authors make a
Shakespearean comparison in their extensive coverage of Chris
Finlayson’s activity. This led me to imagine John Key and Finlayson
more as a Brutus and Cassius – one schemer who has the leader on a
string. The more likely version is, John Key is too busy to notice. I
wonder if his recent public comment that, “Nobody owns the water”,
could be a signal to his Minister that the puppet strings have been noticed?

Judiciary
Equally concerning are the arguments that our judiciary has been
permitted to venture into political decision-making. When I read this
section I couldn’t help thinking that even our most intellectually
powerful people may have been captured by a national delusion that
19th century Maori were simple, peaceful folk, overwhelmed by a more
sophisticated and powerful society of colonists. As Oscar Wilde said,
the truth is rarely pure and never simple. And it looks very much like
New Zealand has opted for simplicity.

However, we have one card in New Zealand that I suspect even the
authors know will eventually be placed on the table – the democratic
process. In the end, however slow, it will have its day. My instinct
tells me that we are within a couple of years – possibly even the next
election – of that card being played. The democratic process does
eventually prevail, despite the behaviour of secrecy and manipulation
that it can sometimes accommodate.

Hidden in this book are many simple concepts that could be conveyed
in a manner that will awaken the attention of a nation. It won’t be
long before that is what happens.

A Herald article in the past year or so, disclosed that the Iwi
dollar is now valued at over $36 billion. This encouraged me to
research the number of registered Maori, to obtain a per-person value.
I think at the time it was 500,000 people, which gives each Maori
person a value of $60,000. I was unable to qualify the balance of the
population in the same way, so I can not really draw a firm
comparison. However, I would imagine that other ethnic communities
including Pakeha would be outraged, as $60,000 per person would be self-made.

So what wishes does this one reader take into the future? I want, as
Governor Hobson stated many times, to be “one people” under one set of
laws common to all of us. I do not want to live in a country where one
particular race has precedence in decision making within our communities.

If there is to be a partnership, it will be with over 150 other
nationalities now living here – not just one of them.

I recently watched separate TV interviews with David Round (one of
the book’s authors) and a fellow South Aucklander, Willie Jackson.

David Round made the same points as this article raises, only more
emphatically,. Willie Jackson described David Round as a nut.

“I’ve debated with him a few times. It’s almost as though he hates
us,” said Willie.

I noticed the “us” in his comment, which implies that Willie Jackson
goes through life with a concept of “them”.

Willie, I need to tell you that there is one more kiwi who has one
foot in the nutters club after reading this book and sadly by your
definition, you would consider him a racist.

Editor’s Note – Editor’s Note – I have never seen a book get people so
roused as this. A new political party has emerged as a result of
people wanting change “1 LAW 4 ALL” – Please see their party website
www.1law4all.co.nz

New party wants one law for all

Posted at 9:58am Friday 07th Jun, 2013 | By Corrie Taylor corrie@thesun.co.nz

A new grassroots political party aimed at ending what it sees as racial separatism in New Zealand launches today with hopes Tauranga will be its biggest supporter.

One Law for All has a sole objective – that all New Zealanders are treated equally in law, regardless of race.

The party’s policies include abolishing the Waitangi Tribunal, abolishing race-based seats and positions in central and local government and stripping all references to the Treaty of Waitangi from legislation.

With the party yet to select a leader, 74-year-old Napier man Tom Johnson is temporarily fronting the party and says racial inequality is the most important issue facing New Zealanders.

“I have felt that for some time. I love my country and I am not prepared to see myself become a second class citizen here, and I don’t want to see my nine grandkids grow up in a country that becomes an apartheid state, in whatever form.

“Our history has been revised, sanitised and all of the sudden the truth is not being taught, and that’s unfortunate, in my opinion.”

Today’s launch is about getting the party’s policies out there and gathering members, says Tom.

“Our organisation is starting itself from the grassroots up…we want to get our policies, what we believe in, well and truly established.”

Further to the above policies are to:

  • Ensure that no individual or group has preferment in legislation or funding on grounds of ethnicity.
  • Ensure that there is no constitutional change without the support of three quarters of those voting in a referendum.
  • End the official state promotion and enforcement of divisive biculturalism.
  • Repeal the current foreshore and seabed legislation.
  • Withdraw New Zealand from the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Tom says the response so far has been overwhelmingly positive – from a variety of ethnicities.

The party’s website received about 4000 hits across two days last weekend.

“My phone has been red hot, and I don’t think I have had a derogatory comment yet, no doubt they will come.”

He specifically recalls a phone call from a Maori woman who phoned twice to tell him she supported the cause.

Tom knows it’s a “sensitive” issue, but is encouraging people to stand up for equality.

“Many people are afraid to put their head above the parapet. And they avoid it. This is unfortunate because we have ended up enduring a lot of things that shouldn’t have happened.

He stresses it is not an attack on Maori.

“We want to be a part of principal that appeals to all New Zealanders, regardless of their ethnicity, hence one law for all.”

“We have to convince a lot of people. We are very hopeful that all the wonderful Maori people I have played rugby with, that I admire and call my friends will also support us.”

Today the party’s steering committee is officially launching its policies, with hopes of building enough support and members to register in three months’ time.

The goal is to eventually win enough seats to hold the balance of power, says Tom.

“The more people we can get the more waves we’re going to make.”

 

Save