If the media and certain politicians focused as much on improving housing, infrastructure, education and health as much as they do on the treaty, NZ would be a well oiled, first world nation.
We were in the top 5 thriving Nations once, until the Treaty interference and fraud, everyone knows it. Maori property is their tangata whenua, everywhere else they are not, every property owner is the person of that area of land simple. Principles weren't attached to the Treaty but been indoctrinated into silly racist minds and not consented by the people so here we are learning the English writ thanks colonization!
The Media reports on the government it doesn't make policy. you need to ask the government why it isn't concentrating on the issues that so rightly concern you. The Coalition controls house business, This is the business they choose to bring up
Kapai Chris thats the one focus on the basics 🎉🎉instead worrying dreamers, us Moari's ain't hell bent but if anyone going muck with Moari's sovereignty there'll be a fight seemore should of left it well alone shouldn't of happen now that it has I feel for the kids brown/white/black don't matter may God protect them as we endure through tis episode of history ameni
Jack you're talking about reinterpreting of the principles as if the principles were the treaty,but they're not! The principles were first created 40+ years ago by the Courts. Pleas don't confuse the Treaty and the principles in your interviews, you just continue the confusion
True story, the treaty is all we should be focusing on not some interperated principals . All NZers should be voting on any changes to the treaty and not just iwi, Geoff palmer and some courts and the tribunal. If we dont get a vote on changing our founding document then it's not being followed by most NZers!
The problem is that some Maori have used their perceived indigenous rights to bully other NZers such as the recent blocking boat ramps during the fishing contest up north. I'm Maori but why would we want Iwis to have these special rights over others when they do such petty things. There has to be a middle ground that honours the treaty but stops these radical outlaws.
That's exactly right mate. Equal rights for all. Anything we can have done to make new zealand a more fair, safe and prosperous is a good thing for all. Not everyone will be happy with changes, but as long as we are taking steps in the right direction.
Because it was THEIR land. At the time of the signing, they outnumbered Europeans 40 to 1. Signing the treaty with the Crown ALLOWED your ancestors to come here and live. And how were they paid back for that generosity? Theft, murder, supression of their culture to name but three. For a 130 years people were happy to take advantage of that and now that the ledger is being evened up, its all 'what about MY rights'.
Good. What's radical is actually ignoring history and pretending that the radical things Maori had to endure never happened. Stopping a bunch of people going recreational fishing is not radical.
@@AholeAtheist Those people going recreational fishing are Maori as well. Iwi radical protectionism effects everyone and as happened historically Maori will fight with each other and not just against non Maori. I know this well being a Maori fisherman and Iwi are some of the worst when it comes to pillaging the local fishery. Some Iwi pretend to care for the oceans stopping recreational fishing but often it's an excuse just for control. Extremism is going to make things worse and not heal historic wrongs.
It is not about the principles or equal rights, it is a resource grab, follow the money peeps. If the rights of Maori to exercise tinorangatiratanga, and therefore protection, over their lands, estates, forests, fisheries and other treasures (Article two of Te Tiriti) is extingished, then that is an important barrier removed to the wholesale exploitation of Aotearoa's natural resources by corporate interests. We all lose if this Bill is passed .
100%. Seymour is a neoliberal. He doesn't care about protecting our resources for the future or the equality of kiwis, he cares about creating a system where corporations and private interests rule supreme.
They aren't proposing to change the Articles of the ToW so nothing is being extinguished. Also, iwi are currently exploiting fishery (natural) resources as a commercial entity, so should we follow that money?
@@TheSpartacusBrown of course we should- all corruption, nobody is above the law, don't forget- the treaty is the law too, you can say your not changing the treaty, while you change the way it's interpreted, but don't act like there's a difference. It's just another way to skin the same cat.
It has Never been fairly equal? Govt want everything. Dont bullshit see less (seymore), what your basically saying is Maori should sit down and shut up and let govt take over. Maori have always been treated differently. I work in local govt where 1% in the office is maori, the rest imigrants and european, where is the "Equality" hah? stop talking smack ❤🤍🖤
@BFFS4LIFE1718BFFS your talking about equal outcome that's dangerous and completely different and never works ever in history race is not a factor in what you said at all there is a lot of reasons for what u said unless you won't to ignore all the hard work you put in to get your job
Māori have never been treated equally, that’s why we have the treaty established in the first place, it has never ever been there to hold Māori as superior to anything or anyone. Our ancestors had settled in New Zealand before the British came and threw their weight around, imposing their superiority and governance that was never necessary lead alone asked for, and consequently my people have suffered massive trauma that has been passed down through the generations. We have never been treated fairly by the crown and the government and this isn’t about buddying up with all kiwis or kiwis in general…. Our fight is for our people to uphold and maintain our own customs, traditions and way of life, throughout the land this land where our ancestors lay at rest, the land they made home, this is our home, before the British, the crown and anyone else established themselves here, yet we are laughed at and mocked as being the unruly ones, since way back. You have no idea how deep this is for Māori and not only us but all indigenous tribes around the globe!
1867 our reo was taken from us and as a result of that, a lot of whānau don’t know how to speak their native language… The 1907 tohunga suppression act, stripping us of the ability to heal our people with organic and natural medicinals and healing strategies and now we’re drugged up in mental institutions… We don’t want anything other than to live and breath Māori! That is who we are! That is what we are! And the crown entity and government have tried, tried and are still trying to TAKE that from us, to “assimilate” us into a way of life that contradicts our own, who we are and what we stand for. No matter who you are or where you come from, no human being alive can thrive and live to their highest potential by living in another’s truth, other than their own! That is what this kaupapa is all about and has always been about, from te taha Māori anyway!!! The fight over the last 184 years! No one is moaning about equality! This is about our mana motuhake!
Seymour makes absolutely zero sense. The treaty principle was established over the last 40 years to create a balance between Māori ( the indigenous minority) and the crown. What Seymour is trying to do is to nullify the treaty of Waitangi using his interpretation of the treaty principle bill. As it stands today through the treaty principles bill Maori have a voice on decision making concerning New Zealand and the land. If they take away Māori voices it opens the floodgates to exploitation of New Zealand as a whole. For example the seabed and foreshore would be open to international fishing and mining corporations to pillage and plunder our resources. Not to mention the environmental impacts on our waters and land. Bottom line is I don’t trust Seymour and his ACT party judging from their policies.
Kia ora Sheryl, While you’re correct the Principles and Treaty and Te Tiriti documents are 2 very different things and have been compiled by scholars (historians especially), courts, Waitangi tribunal, Iwi leaders and Politicians. The Treaty Principles are what is known as the Treaty and Te Tiriti representative in New Zealand law. The problem for David, is that the Principles were built around fair interpretation of both documents and acknowledged Maori as did the treaty and te tiriti. David’s interpretation of the Principles doesn’t align with any of the Treaty or Te Tiriti texts and has been told so by many experts both left and right.
Maori aren't trying to just veto everything. We want to be apart of the process because for too long, the crown just trample and disregard us, and don't care about a group of people who have lived here for centuries. If generations of a Maori community have a Marae next to a river or stream, and use it to gather food, or swim in, or whatever they use it for, and then a developer, farmer, industrial factory, or some organization upstream wants to discharge untreated water into these waterways, we want to be able to be at the discussion table and say "hey guys, that isn't a good idea because you will be effecting this community. Lets discuss other options".
Your scenario would be awful, but Maori do not need special rights to prevent it. We need to task our goverent with preventing it, which we do. Or is this about the Koha that Maori expect for being at the table?
@@TheSpartacusBrown Māori are outnumbered in their homeland. We know majority of NZers don't care about us and just vote in a new government to trample on us. It has happened now and has before. The treaty is the main thing we use to protect our history and ancient connections to this land and in doing so, we help preserve other parts of NZs natural environment. Because we know most of NZ don't care about it if it isn't bringing in money to their pockets.
@@ajk4842 saying "the majority of NZers don't care about us" is a roundabout way of saying Pakeha don't care about us. Which is a generalization based on race, ie racist. It's also untrue. All NZers have common core values that we need to recognize and uphold, that's what makes our community strong. Creating separate status or culture by race should not be one of them.
LOL. Jack Genocide Supporter Tame is not that. And David hasn't been misinterpreted just because some people see through his disingenuous lies and dog whistles. Perhaps you need to go back to school.
Surely if there's a variation to a contract/legislative agreement both parties have to agree to any variations/changes. Otherwise how can it be the same contract?
Yes and to do it in ‘good faith’. Not try to wipe the slate clean without any consultation of the other party. As much as David Seemore$$ would like people to believe what an ideal outcome would look like for him, this is not Neverland.
"Allows people who have property rights, a status that is equal to everyone else". Excuse me Mr Seymour, the crown confiscated and dispossessed Maori from their property after the treaty was signed. Killing men woman and children in the process. But I guess Seymour is trying to say suck it up, tough luck, work your butt off and buy it back huh?
@@PeterHemmingson I don't disagree with most of your copied and pasted collection of sentences. No collective "Maori". And your point is what? Shall we use the collective words Europeans gave us such as "Natives", "Savages", "Cannibals'"? Whatever you want to call it, there were groups of people that long occupied an area prior to Europeans "Discovering" it. I already understand occupation of area's were often temporary, and "te rau o te patu" was how connections to land were made and severed. I understand the so called "waste lands" or areas that are on the outskirts of established tribal territories that blurred borders. However, this was the system that was used, and Maori understood it. When the British came, they brought a their system, Maori didn't understand and enforced it. Yes I believe we have a better LAND OWNERSHIP system for everyone in NZ, but to enforce a new system you bring upon people who didn't understand it, especially if you don't educate them in it, is wrong and just taking advantage. Many Maori who "sold" land didn't have the authority to sell area's as they weren't the sole "owners". Did the British establish who the actual owners are? Or did they only mention the Maori they wanted and they knew they could obtain land from? Maori did not understand the European system of legal land ownership. They would have sold European's air if they'd ask for it. But as Europeans say, these Maori signed a piece of paper that we wrote, we made up, we witnessed. Doesn't matter if Maori weren't educated in this system we have imposed on them. How do we know these deeds of land purchases were correctly and legitimately issued? We only have one side, the European side. We do know the British tricked Maori with TOW not saying the same thing as Maori understood in their version. What makes you think every deed of purchase says the same thing as what Maori understood at the time of the supposed purchase? Do you think Maori who were educated in the European system would sell their lands if they truly understood what it meant to own/buy/sell land in a European context? Maori were a community of people who have an established settlement and way of living, and occupied an area for however long they have, then at the time and following the signing of TOW (supposedly giving protection to ALL NEW ZEALANDERS), gave the right for the British to trick them out of their lands, kill and destroy them and push them out just because, "Sorry, you don't own anything according to our British system we have imposed on you, so be gone." And I do blame the missionaries. They brought the religion as a peaceful offering, knowing they had a tyranny of colonial forces following behind them.
The land acquired by europeans were purchased by the new zealand company. Local iwi had agreed to the purchases and the new zealand company paid them. When you talk about "killing woman and children" you make it sound like the british were some viking raiders from the north. Any killing that took place at the time was in retaileatiom from threats or trying to keep law and order in the land.
“No iwi has engaged on what those principles are.” Mate, they’ve held two Hui in a month where they’ve engaged with those principles and told you what they think, then they have shown up in force to Waitangi and said very clearly we engaged with the proposed principles and we don’t like them. You just aren’t listening. You call for a discussion then avoid the discussion. A discussion is not a one sided talk fest by you. By your logic, David, you haven’t said anything about the treaty principles because you’ve only spoken to the media and in speeches at Waitangi about it. This is why they drown you out with a waiata that says “listen” , “whakarongo” over and over.
I was surprised at how poorly Seymour's talking points came across under simple questioning (compared to when he makes them in his speeches and videos). IMO he didn't satisfactorily answer the question put to him several times about how one party to a treaty can reinterpret its meaning without the other party's consent. He went back to his points about how the current interpretation of the treaty unfairly benefits Māori, then effectively questioned the relevancy of the treaty today. Clearly, it does matter to a lot of people, particularly when the proposed reinterpretation of the principles purposefully excludes one of the parties.
50 years of maori dreaming up additions and principles has been a huge mistake by not having democratic consent, now those fabricated additions need to be defined and agreed upon BY THE PEOPLE , maori do not Govern us you need to get that straight!
Seymour is brilliant! He gently calls Jack out (TVNZ) for pushing a political position from the far-left by suggesting it may not be Jack's own personal view. I respect the way Seymour is able to calmly control his thoughts in such an articulate and logical fashion. Luxon is truely as weak as water by comparison in my view.
I don't see Luxon as weak. He's weak to you because he doesn't follow your views. He said he won't support Acts bill past first selection, and he's sticking to it. How's that weak? Luxon just has a little spider trying to run the ship. Seymour isn't even Deputy prime minister yet.
@@ajk4842 I was considering Luxon's ability to be convincing. He comes across to me as weak because he may not be resolute in the position he has been primed to follow by the WEF-infiltrated NZ Civil service. His interests toward the people of this country are not genuine to me as I observe him. He is batting for the same globalists whose slow agenda is destroying Europe, the USA, and most other western countries which have been far too readily (and easily) subverted to follow socialism rather than capitalism. Six years to go, but the changes will be rapid even this year. Look at the digital cage of street cameras (added to by the day) that has been quietly assembled around us. Nobody looks up, nobody notices.
@acegikmoii Absolutely! It is refreshing to see the articulate, calm response from David to a clearly biased, unprofessional journalist clearly showing his political leanings. Tame should perhaps refresh himself on the principles of journalism. A masterclass by David on calling him out on his 'personal' views. Tame was totally outclassed.
And anyone that thinks that the Royal Family in UK have even read or cares about the Te Tiriti is greatly mistaken. Time for all people living in New Zealand to look to each other, wave goodbye to this royal family that does not care about us, and move into the future as a Republic with a new written Constitution.
@@mitchelldenysschen3224 The UK would see this as a mark of disrespect, I'm not sure that would be in our best interest. We're a small, defenceless, and relatively poor country on the global stage, we need as much support as we can get. Especially with the emergence of BRICS.
The Maori version of the Treaty (as translated on the Waitangi Tribunal website): PREAMBLE - Victoria, the Queen of England, in her concern to protect the chiefs and the subtribes of New Zealand and in her desire to preserve their chieftainship and their lands to them and to maintain peace and good order considers it just to appoint an administrator one who will negotiate with the people of New Zealand to the end that their chiefs will agree to the Queen's Government being established over all parts of this land and (adjoining) islands and also because there are many of her subjects already living on this land and others yet to come. So the Queen desires to establish a government so that no evil will come to Māori and European living in a state of lawlessness. So the Queen has appointed 'me, William Hobson a Captain' in the Royal Navy to be Governor for all parts of New Zealand (both those) shortly to be received by the Queen and (those) to be received hereafter and presents to the chiefs of the Confederation chiefs of the subtribes of New Zealand and other chiefs these laws set out here. THE FIRST - The Chiefs of the Confederation and all the Chiefs who have not joined that Confederation give absolutely to the Queen of England for ever the complete government over their land. THE SECOND - The Queen of England agrees to protect the chiefs, the subtribes and all the people of New Zealand in the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages and all their treasures. But on the other hand the Chiefs of the Confederation and all the Chiefs will sell land to the Queen at a price agreed to by the person owning it and by the person buying it (the latter being) appointed by the Queen as her purchase agent. THE THIRD - For this agreed arrangement therefore concerning the Government of the Queen, the Queen of England will protect all the ordinary people of New Zealand and will give them the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of England.
FYI The above Maori version of the ToW was translated by Sir Hugh Kawharu and appears on the Waitangi Tribunal website. Both the English and Maori versions clearly cede government of the whole country forever to the British Crown. What is left of 'sovereignty' (Kingitanga - not mentioned in the Treaty) after you carve out the activities of Government is perhaps a debatable point. @@Andrew1991taxed
@@PeterHemmingson According to the Cambridge and Oxford definitions...MĀORI ARE CONSIDERED AS INDIGENOUS 😅 C'mon Peteyboy, I know it's a hard pill for superiority-complexes to swallow but welp...the really important question I have for you though is: "Are you paying the right amount in taxes"? I'd hate to see the books unbalanced...that could have a huge impact on my govt handouts 😇😂
@@Andrew1991taxed lol that's stupid. Try that trick with an agreement with another country like China or Russia. Two linguistically different versions of a contract need to mean the same thing.
It is time for the people to decide - A referendum on this should occur - All people in NZ will benefit from a better definition, one that is decided by the people.
Thought I'd watch to try and inform myself, I seem more confused. Sounds like David wants to re interpret the bill of principles to suit what he thinks it should be, without consulting or discussions with the people that one of the founding documents of this country was drawn up to protect in the first place. You dont sign a purchase or rental agreement and then start changing things as you go to suit when you feel like it without the outher party agreeing, so whats the difference with the treaty
I think Maori know NZ or the crown will never pay dollar for dollar in compensation for the wrongs that have been committed to Maori. It would be nice but we know there would probably be no more NZ due to bankruptcy. However, we say fine, kei te pai, since you can't return all the land, can't pay us the full amount of what it is worth, we shall require a seat at the decision making table to be able to discuss policies that effect us. For example, if you want your powerlines to run through this area, stay away from placing the pylons or trenches where my ancestors are buried, you can put them anywhere else. If you want to discharge your waste water into the streams we have used for generations, you need to have a treatment system that gets the water to a acceptable quality before discharging. I think, it is these types of things that we are ultimately asking for as a minimum. I guess a form of co-governance. We are not here to block every development or policy under the sun. Some are good. Heck, our ancestors were developers when they first arrived. It's the developments and policies that affect us and are run by the people who don't even care about us that we have a problem with.
If all of the land of NZ was returned to the Maori, most of the highly skilled labour we have here would simply move overseas and the infrastructure would rapidly collapse. "can't pay us the full amount of what it is worth" The primary reason those assets are worth what they are is because of the contribution of ALL NZe'rs. That wealth wasn't created out of thin air. That land is worth nothing without the 200 or so years of sweat and tears ALL NZ'ers have invested into this country since the treaty was signed to make it the prosperous country it is today. Why do Maori people have a right to all of that wealth which they didn't solely create? In regards to the power lines, waste water, etc. This applies to ALL NZ'ers, ALL of us want adequate water treatment and as minimal amount of pollution as possible, ALL of us want to protect the environment, ALL of us want the graves of our ancestors shown respect, I don't see how these issues are exclusive to Maori and therefore require co-governance?
@@MDL.720 We already know it isn't feasible to return all land to Maori. Won't stop us from trying to claim some back. We already know NZ won't pay the full amount. Because of the reasons you pointed out. We understand that land has been worked on by NZ'ers, farmers, companies, NZ has benefited from the development, it doesn't change the fact that our family had been killed for this to happen. In some area's we don't own a blade of grass of a site that our ancestors were killed on by British Forces. So we ask the current landowners to include us in the decisions they make involving the significant area's we have been disposed of. I understand you believe these issues applies to all NZ'ers, but sadly there are too many instances were Maori are left out, ignored, disregarded when it comes to protecting our significant sites that have history dating centuries. But lets protect a 60 year Old Victorian dwelling? We know majority of Europeans don't care about us, we are out numbered in our own homeland. If a development came across the table that negatively affected us, no one would advocate for Maori, more than Maori.
@@MDL.720 We know returning all of the land will be a detriment to NZ and probably be the end of this country. I don't think most educated Maori want that. What we do want is to protect our most sacred places and resources that our ancestors had for centuries before being dispossessed of it by the British. If we can get it back, then cool. If not, then fine. Please let us be part of the decisions that concern these places we once had before being killed for it. We understand the work all NZers role in creating wealth in this country. We don't deny that. But the land was confesicated in the first place. If I stole something from you, gave it to someone else to develop and improve, it doesn't change the fact that it was stolen. We know we won't get back land or dollars of what it's worth. We don't want to dispossess ordinary NZers of their hard work. So for our compensation of being wronged, we ask for at least a seat at the decision making table to try protect what we've lost, and what very little we do have. Unfortunately, no, not all NZers want adequate waste water treatment, minimal pollution, protection of the environment, and protecting our grave sites. The amount of resource consent requests Iwi receive, asking to discharge untreated water into nearby streams and rivers is too much for some iwi to manage. There are still many developments that stumble on our ancestors villages and end up digging their bones. Some mining and construction companies even hide these discoveries to avoid the headache of dealing with Maori. Why do we ask for co-governance? Because we know most Europeans dont care about us, our history and our generational connection to NZ. we are out numbered in our own homeland. When the government makes decisions that impact Maori, even after signing the treaty, no one else will advocate for Maori, more than Māori, the original inhabitants of this land.
@@rockyjones2563 Motherland. I think Hawaiki to most Māori, is a place, physically or spiritually, where their ancestors came from before they arrived to their turangawaewae, or place they now call home in NZ. In turn, there are many hawaki. That's why you see many similar names through out the Pacific. Hawaii, Savaii, Havaiki and more.
Can anyone else see a conflict of interest regarding the ‘crown’ and Maori ? The so called partnership is between the crown,ie the nz government and Maori. But Maori can be part of the government and also remain as Maori. If the treaty is between the crown and Maori it implies that the crown or government was never intended to include Maori as a parliamentary representative. How can you be both part of the crown and Maori ? Maori signed the treaty acknowledging that the crown would govern nz. There was a complete distinction between the crown and Maori. Nowhere does the treaty state that Maori shall govern. Therefore why are some Maori governing. I have no qualms with Maori in parliament so long as they represent all New Zealanders, but I’m still confused about the distinction and role of crown and Maori.
Great points my thoughts as well in fact the Treaty Chiefs warned their people at the 1860 Kohimarama Conference NOT to start political party's. And yeh they are not and never were a completely seperate people there were 500 tribes and they all ended up under the Govt they chose not having any of their own. They sold 90% of NZ and integrated marrying us and producing mixed race can't be separated now they need to be re-educated and all references to the Treaty and principles should be removed from education and legislation.
@@StGammon77mostly māori land was stolen, or villages pillaged and starved, and then māori were coerced into selling the land for much less than it was worth because they were in desperate situations.
@@frankkomene4616 That’s not how colonisation works. The English, Dutch, French, Portuguese and Spanish would never sign such an agreement. That wouldn’t work. It would be disastrous.
@@julioduck19 just so obvious as David pointed out that Jake is stamping his own views on the interview , like majority of media in nz doing, it’s like he’s attacking with questions to try catch him out. Weak journalism
I think it's good. Māori don't have the opportunity to ask these questions to Seymour. Seymour wont talk to us, unless we have money or land. I welcome the debate tho. I didn't agree with Māori drowning out Seymour and Winston at Waitangi. I wanted to hear what they had to say.
@@budsnz it is when you ask silly ones. And he puts this whole ideology clear on display and into the question are we in nz heading down America path of Left wing Ring wing main media because our journalists can’t keep there own ideology out of there journalism?
Racism everyday trolls are using Moari's history to discredit moari happening right now present moment using it to decide Moari's future in a country Moari own?how was that worked out?by stealing the owners lands truth has to be expressed out no repentance they going to hell if someone a atheist they going to hell once truth is revealed the curses will be lifted in Jesus precious name amen
3:06 You've gotta love when politicians justify constitutional changes based on anecdotes about "people who say in my work place a feel-" Ah yes Billy Bob from Nelson is trying to find an excuse for why he didn't get promoted, better get rid of the treaty principles which are already a compromise for Maori...
After moving to the Waikato from Wellington from what I have seen is that Maori do not care about Maori they love to talk about how Maori are one people and it's complete bullshit. There has and always will be a class war; the Maori elite have no interests in looking after Maori they're only interested in looking after themselves. So the end result is quite simple David Seymour can see that quite clearly which is putting everyone on the exact same ground with the exact same respect and rights to the land and people who we share this beautiful country with. I am Maori myself but face constant ostracization from those who also claim to be Maori and from years of having my own Mana dishonoured I believe that the values of Maori that were signed under the treaty to be protected are as dead as those who signed said treaty. It's time to move on and there is no time like the future.
Is this really a Maori? I'm reading the way you write and.... the singular video attached to your account is not corresponding. There are many accounts online at the moment that are actually being run by despicable racists with bad intentions and I am concerned. In response to the people you expected to look after you or yours, usually rotten energy is met with such!
@@TiffanyTwisted-w3q Ngati Porou and Ngati Pukenga. Yes, I am. And yes, I know there's plenty of false flag actors pretending to be Maori, I regularly call them out when they try fake te reo. If you looked at my account, you'd see how old it is, so I would've had to think about making a false flag account in the first starting years of youtube, and then carried on using it for well over a decade as a main to carry on the farce. Not that logical, eh? The main things in the comment above is the "maori elite" comment, which I've never heard another Maori say in over 30 years of life, them advocating for David suckmore and them pretending we don't still have the same values. Again, in 30+ years I've never met another Maori who didn't value family, stability and being able to live how they want.
@@TiffanyTwisted-w3q I am Kāi Tahu and for you to think how you do shows how oblivious you are, you clearly let emotions run your thoughts. Here is a thought lesson; when someone is on the street talking about how birds are government spies, we apply logic to the situation and come to the conclusion that no that statement is not based in factual reasoning. Guess what you just commented, your opinion is completely void because the conspiracy you believe simply does not exist. At the end of the day, I am not your enemy since I'm no elite again it's a class war and I don't own anything no house, no land and no future. I am working-class as in working all the time just to have a roof over my head and food to eat. And throwing labels like Pakeha around shows how little you bring to the table of conversation, if you have an opinion you need to articulate it instead of just wanting to insult someone because your feelings got hurt by ideas that you don't understand. That is how children behave, grow up.
The way he slithers around straightforwardly answering questions to go back to his canned 'color blind' talking points is impressive. What's even more impressive is some people seem to un-irronaclly buy his rhetoric.
What exactly needs to be clear? Honoring the Treaty!!!! yes I agree. Seymour Butts just contradicted himself and tried to dodge Jacks questions so he had to repeat the question.
How does he make sense? If this was a world wherein the treaty was upheld from the start we would probably have an entwined government of Māori and Crown at the moment. Not one where Māori are still second class citizens in Aotearoa New Zealand. If the treaty was upheld from the start there would be no situation where they would need "extra rights" (there are no such extra rights, it is just people complaining about having to uphold the treaty) to fix past wrongs by now.
This is the worst racial slinging I have seen in NZ for many years, and now being talked about across the globe; people are now forced to choose sides, many people swayed by paid online social media influencers. I was happy the way it was... didn't affect or bother me as a non Maori New Zealander.
Yeah you’re spot on. All I hear is people whinging. People who follow politics, especially via MSM are all doom and gloom. From what I’ve seen David Seymour’s just another woke politician
Didn't we promised maori their rights for the atrocities they suffered through colonisation of over 100 years, being out numbered and over powered and not allowing them to speak maori at our schools. It seems, now we have changed our minds? And are now going to copy the Australians and go for a majority vote, knowing Maori will probably be out numbered and over powered, so we can put restrictions on their language? So I'm not sure about equal rights, well not yet anyway. @@JamesClark-cg1qk
Why do you need a bill to feel equal? We all have equal value but what has that got to do with governance? We can't all govern this nation and its resources. We can't all be the Indigenous of a place. So get over it and accept that Māori were here first and many of us live and enjoy their unceded property
Be careful New Zealanders ....be aware that stirring up can come from outside the country If one party frames the proposals then duscussion is defined by yes and no to those proposals ....if the proposals are mapped out by several participants ,then it becomes more like a negotiation with options being generated . The truckers involvement in the last covid protest made it more militant and aggressive until the creative ones took over . Please stay aware of divisive dangers .
Jack just got schooled by Seymour, everything Seymour said is true he is way too educated for Jack this is what New Zealand thinks this is why they voted for this government it’s about time the media understand that and every time they insult the government they insulting us. Have some pride in your country😢
Meanwhile...Michael Hill is still getting robbed and the homicide rate in 2024 alone is shocking. But "Treaty Treaty Treaty" seems to be priority over the safety and wellbeing of "all New Zealanders" 🫣
Seymour has been formulating arguments since he decided to go forward with this paradoxical argument based on equal rights, Tane might not have researched the subject adequately, but thinking an argument is correct because you don't hear a compelling argument in reply does not solidify your argument, it only means you didn't get an acceptable reply in opposition to your opinion. 🤷♂️ ...don't get it twisted!
The government can't change the treaty its the treaty that gives them the right to govern the country. Btw. Where the hell are they gonna dig up 200 maori chiefs to sign off on the new treaty.
Exactly, they spoke their intent its all recorded in the Kohimarama Conference papers in fact there's a book now called Kohimarama Conference by Tross Publishing plus other astonishing books of compiled documentation that throws a truth light on deceiving Maori Treaty tougher and racists
It's the 1000 pages of principles that's the problem, it's like adding to the Bible, but because maori brownists have created a monster it now needs to be defined as the Country now has a grievance with the Crown and we matter!!
Who the hell is a chief in 2024 to talk for the Maoris? They can talk and vote by themselves if there is a voting. Anyways I don't think a democracy should distinguish by ethnicity the population, if the majority agrees and there is no differentiation in the law between population by ethnicity (every citizen is equal) no one can have the balls of say "i being mistreated" by be equal to others in rights and duties. My opinion as Spaniard, by the way, is not my country to know your specificities.
When we are talking about the same rights and duties, all I hear is that western philosophies and systems should remain dominant and be universal. Special status is recognition that as the founders of Aotearoa we decide how to shift our country forward ideologically, together. Through working in collaboration with Māori as tangata whenua we can enrich our society and shift towards equity. Redefining the treaty principles as he has stated seems like code for a 'business as usual' approach which ultimately delievers poorer outcomes for disadvantaged communities, our climate, our economy and human rights. The societal benefits of programmes that increase equity for Māori continue to benefit us all. Just one example is the revitalisation of te reo Māori and the mana and cultural knowledge that it stores, connecting people to their whakapapa and broadening our views on ourselves, philosophy and our relationship with others and the world. There are two world views that were connected through Te tiriti and we are only now, shifting towards integrating both of them in our culture. Kia kaha and lets keep moving forward towards that kaupapa 💜
Maori learnt everything from Pakeha its our Nation of British rule of Westminster everyone loves the Country we built and the peaceful society never mind the rambling racist Maori
I am Tangata whenua on my land thankyou it just means the person's on that land. You aren't tangsta whenua of anyone else's property at all youre definition is erroneous because you just don't know the meaning. This is why NZ voted your type out!
@@StGammon77tourists come to see Maori and the culture we have. They come to see the nature Māori fight to protect. They don't come to see your 3rd class version of a western society. They have better cities to see.
You cannot "unite" two cultures. The definition of culture is "the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society". By that definition two cultures can mix together but never "intertwine" as there will always be clashes. You can only live happily and peacefully side by side. Water and oil don't mix and neither do cultures. That is why part-Maori have such a difficult time with their identity - essentially at some point they come to an identity crisis - am I Maori or pakeha (scottish/english/irish etc)? Which one do I follow? Usually it is the one they had the most contact with or impact from growing up, the parent they identified most with or where they feel most welcome and comfortable. Essentially where they fit. The trouble comes when someone doesn't feel like they fit in either I guess. Can a pakeha appreciate Maori culture? YES! Does that mean they want to participate? Not necessarily. As a pakeha I really enjoy watching kapa haka, poi and waiata performances. I appreciate Te Reo Maori and think if someone wants to learn it they should. I love a hangi. Does that mean I want to DO kapa haka, SING waiata, SPEAK te reo Maori and COOK a hangi. NO. I totally love the concepts of whanau, looking after and respecting elders and caring for extended family, aroha, mana and sustainably conserving the natural world around us. These are aspects of Maori culture that I agree with and like. But there are other aspects I don't agree with or like. So to say that cultures can intertwine is a nice idea but not reality. For government, there can only be one system. For NZ that system is a Western democracy. Under that there may be other things like culture, religion, groups of various kinds and political views. But the "system" must remain. There are many other governmental systems in the world - dictatorship, communism etc. But none are as free as democracy.
We need change here. Not only our Maori people are discriminated but the poor, even some rich. It started with only maori, but the powers at be have mastered manipulation and control over all others.
hu? do u not understand u cant write a coherent comment like u wer talking to the cuzzys at the fish n chip shop....you come across like a child ...no wonder you lot have been duped for so long by iwi elite ...fools @@Hup-x1y
@@franciltarau-eagle9150 Who's asking anyone to take away perpetual leases? Perpetual leases is something Maori Landowners agree too, and is passed in the Maori Land Court.🙄🙄
@@jamesbroughton7635 get savvy with the info before spouting off, many iwi are at battles with this very thing. You need to watch the latest doco by Mata. You know nothing!!!!!!!
The only thing that mattered was the land. Māori had it, settlers wanted it, the Treaty meant settlers could put in place a government that would only be voted for by those with land, land owned freehold in the European way. Māori weren’t allowed to vote, because they had the most land. It took years for maori to get a vote, and even then it wasn’t an equal vote, because they had numbers.. It had to be a special vote, a Māori vote, on a separate roll. Māori have been dispossessed of their land, a right to have a say in the running of the country. Now you want to change the rules again, because they have become a force.. Shame on you Act. You cannot deny Māori the right to Māori land and the laws enacted to give them food, health and education as promised under the land deal made. We aren’t equal, and cannot ever be, until the 170 years of power and wealth stripping has stopped.
Agreed in full. This is just like when Italian and Nazi fascists stripped rights from their citizens because they thought they should no longer be citizens. Maori being a national group with rights recognised by the Crown as well as their own confederacy of Nations are just an easy scapegoat like fascists always use.
@@JamesClark-cg1qk and now because of the 2017sir Edmond Hillary global impact visa scam more small pockets of land has inhabitants behind everyone's back .. like it never happened but still is happening cause no one's noticed it pushed through so fast at the begining of the 2017 realm .. . If your a good dancer why come to nz bring your family become a kiwi .. migrants population makes Maori population look obsolete .. looking at current history not digging up old .. Maori 16.5% other 13.7 % what is other in the census homeless 😉
@@Ruru-pj3ve Go to the people who got billions in settlements or got billions in separate social institutions doubling up on taxpayer money that could be spend in these mundane things like hospitals where we now have affirmative action by race. A heart attack is surely different depending what color skin one has 🙄🙄
Seymour talks very sensibly. Remember he is a Maori, Ngapuhi, so much to gain in Iwi sense. Even for his family and children, special entry standards in University (say for hard to get in course etc), special housing, special job preference for himself and his family/relatives/children. A lot of land and money payback to go to his group (probably more for himself as he powerful and a great speaker). He FORGOES all these for equal rights for all New Zealanders as we matured into a new nation now; he sees as proper human rights and proper rights of society for all. Mull over with depth, is it not a great way for the nation forward? Or should we keep protesting, bashing our head on a wall until it bleeds, flabberghast you in Te Reo and add the haka for emphasis to get the other point across. We have to sit and judge for ourselves as each individual in NZ what is truly right.
David is ethnically Māori and has Whakapapa but is not part of any Marae or has citizenship in any Iwi. He is European through and through. I will never say he is not ethnically Māori but lets not say he will be a part of Māori organisations or wants to be. He just trots out the "I am Māori" to bash on them.
seymour is not ngapuhi, what sort of fairy world are you living in? he just got a historic wero and shat his pants. stiop talking about this guy as if he is something
I would like to show my respect to David - raising this issue requires massive courage. I also like his way of grasping the fundamental problem - the equality of human being. What attracts talents to New Zealand, an isolated island in Pacific, is not only the fabulous view, kind people (Tahiti also has them), but more importantly, a modern and advanced governance. Without the equality of people, the country partially becomes a tool to produce wealth to a small group of people based on their bloodline. Who is going to join just to be a ``slave”? In such cases, New Zealand will degrade to a third class country. Leadership is to find a direction for the future. I can see leadership in David.
Don't compare Tahiti to New Zealand. Tahiti, or French Polynesia (which is probably what you are referring to) are not even self governing. They have been under French rule since the 1840s and are considered French citizens. This is a way of stripping people of their identity and their autonomy and is essentially what the coalition government are trying to do to the Tangata Whenua of Aotearoa New Zealand. You think Maori are given more job opportunities because of their heritage? How about when people are given jobs because they speak Mandarin? What do you think about that? Do you think that's biased as well?
David Seymour's argument has many flaws but the one obvious one is the assumption that after suffering decades of oppression and being deprived of their own resources, which others used to amass generational wealth, a people can be told, "we are all now equal" and that will be enough. 😂 This is so naive it's laughable! Equity is the only way to right those wrongs, and equality is not the same as equity.
So you think Maori have suffered and they are actually entitled to special privileges that's laughable your a little bitch Maori have suffered 180 years and not even alot of Thier suffering is Thier own fault they where fucking slaves by Thier own people brutally fuck your a little girl Maori even fought with the British to take land off other iwi also you little bitch you think Maori have suffered way more than Europeans the first Europeans to live with Maori known as the pakeha Maori where all slaves well alot where alot of them where enslaved by Maori alot rose to high ranks they are known as the pakeha Maori because they became fluent in Maori and wound up with tamokos Jacky marmon is a well known pakeha Maori also the treaty was signed by English and Maori you think Maori have suffered what about the Irish they have suffered from imperialism to be honest this whole narrative is weak and cowardly and low IQ no common sense if you look at things from a scientific and humanitarian point of view
Also you little girl Maori aren't native it's like trying to say the Vikings are native to Greenland because they discovered it and settled the land first how pathetic get real
@@PeterHemmingson yes there are some of us that have climbed out of the crab barrel. But who put us in there in the first place? British did when they took our lands, killed our people, and continue to disregard the effects of what they did to us. I agree we need education to get us out of the hole. It is up to us. But we will hold something against you for wronging us in the first place. Trauma does get carried down through generations but a single person can change their cycle. Just as benefits of wealthy families are able to carry wealth through generations unless someone decides to through it away. It doesn't change the fact that British had placed Māori in a disadvantaged position, and then just expect us to catch up to them instantly.
@@PeterHemmingson James Cowan is another British paid historian writing what his own interpretations of oral accounts. Of course British would down play the number of Māori they killed. The west still down plays their killings of people today. Māori were different in which they over stated the number of people they killed through oral history. It doesn't matter tho, the British still have a long history of killing natives where ever they went.
Sure, just start a party, win a portion of the election and form a government. Seymour isn't one person, he is the leader elected to represent people of NZ. You, are one person.
@@chrisallum9044 Ok so just because 246,409 people decided to vote for that, that means that 5,006,500ish (give or take) also voted for it? That doesn't make sense.
@@chrisallum9044 as for the rest of the coalition, its hardly a win when it was the lowest turn out of voters in the past 3 elections alone, which means less people voted, and they still could NOT form a majority govt. That doesn't scream that a country as a whole decided this. Only the select few of course. 🤗
@WW-ne5lb Absolutely. It takes them three parties to become a government, and before they can even get off the ground they had to form a coalition agreement. That will have by default forced compromise in each parties camp. That does not mean in ANY way shape or form that NZ were all for three different parties to run this country. Luxon got in to power by the skin of his teeth which should be more than enough to show people that he did NOT have overwhelming numbers to get over the line on his own. It was hardly a landslide win by any measure.
Worrying that our Associate Minister of Justice thinks the highest court in the land is the "NZ parliament" (8:25) and that NZ is a republic (11:20). Beyond that Seymour's argumentation is muddled. Seymour cherry-picks his way along a spurious line of argument, invoking the highest principle as the deciding factor on one hand and then the most practical as the deciding factor on another. He clearly does not understand much about Universal Human Rights as these are intended to append to persons as individuals and not to human beings (5:23 ) as a species. They are distinctly related to personal and collective identity and therefore the rights of indigenous persons to maintain their identity are equal to that of non-indigenous persons to maintain their identity and vice versa. This is made very clear in the many articles of the Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent covenants and conventions. His meandering argument in which he attempts to equate the impracticality of compensating the "many people in this country who have come here landless, penniless..." (13:00) (who had or have no contractual basis for compensation) with the Crown's duties to continue to uphold the constitutionally binding agreement they made in 1840 with the signatories to the treaty is just plain silly.
so cant merge human rights with tribal rights....as we have seen in nz iwi elites have had all the benefits, and i dont understand the issue with crown payments being peenys on the dollar by todays market valuations as when land was confiscated nz did not have the infrastructure upgrades it does today....wuld ngati whatua be worth over a billion dollars if auckland cbd wasnt a financial hub ?
@@222-i6o- tribal , indigenous, and treaty rights are not only not in conflict with Universal Human Rights, they are the rights that in a decent society must be upheld as they in general are the rights individuals and collectives who are most disadvantaged. Seymour is insisting on a very simple formulation of equality before the law, a kind of justice as process. However useful to neoliberal political thinkers hell bent on making all aspects of the economy, society and environment open for exploitation, process justice is likely to eliminate the important nuamces of distributive justice in the form of justicecas fairness, and in the process "scuse pun" deprive many indigenous people of their rights and the capacity to flourish.
indigenous ppls are not alwys disadvantaged, and there rights need to be upheld as equal citezens of a cuntry....playing favorites is a road to oppression its plain and simple u cant have one ppls above another ....free market economics has made us a 1st world capitalist nation the state cant build an economy only private enterprise. maoricorporate iwi have billions its time thy spent tht money on ther ppls @@blinka1
Yep, David is probably the best and brightest politician NZ has had in a great many years. Some lesser intelligent folk find intelligence a threat to their flawed opinions, and thus they make petty comments instead of putting forward anything intelligent. Some of these folk will even resort to violence sometimes because they have no answers.
The two distinct parties that made an agreement, no longer exist. It’s New Zealand now. There are different cultures within a nation, but law and rights are equal to all. What people decide to do with that, is there choice. I think NZ has done well over the years, and in the spirit of cooperation and the good of the nation, we will continue to evolve and flourish. Some might be a little more, all about their group only.
I like that Jack tries to pose questions to make politicians uncomfortable, but the whole "it was a contract between two distinct parties" approach is just weak. I can have a contract with my employer that says that my rate is 5 nzd per hour and I have to work 24/7 - it doesn't mean that this contract will be legitimate - because we have laws that are above contracts. Current government can renegotiate the principles because the government is not the crown, but the descendants of both parties who signed the treaty. The new principles effectively make the treaty irrelevant and erase singling out the native population from the other groups in any shape and form. If ACT have their way, the Maori will effectively become just another ethnic group that lives in NZ - no different from, say, Thai or Irish. The only question that everyone should ask themselves when they consider their position on this, is whether they support the fact that native population should have any kind of special status or not.
Treaties are by definition contracts between states. The treaty was not illegal at time of signing so your "contract was invalid because the terms are not legal now" is basically saying I will tear up the treaty. Once the treaty goes Māori will fight for their stolen land in any way they see fit. Not just getting back a fraction of what they are owed as now in the settlements process. Māori if the treaty was followed would probably not need to have more resources allocated for them because our legal systems and governance styles would be intertwined by now. The genocide they suffered by the Crown would not have happened so they would likely have a population that is more equal to 50% of the country. If they have special rights (they don't) or get more resources or opportunities it is only because of the abuse suffered for 184 years that was put off for so long. Your lines of argument make no sense.
It was between Chiefs and Governors and noone can take their place they're dead! All we have is their pre and post Treaty Conferences at Kohimarama for all to read. The mess we have now is due to Maori breaching the Treaty and dishonouring the Chiefs by mis quoting or not quotingvthem at all! Everyone needs to read the Kohimarama Conference records
@@teawaruaedwards274 Hey brother thanks for the back up. If you read the history without any bias it is hard not to come to my position. So if anyone brings that "Māori arguments that ignore reality" I tell them to read any non Hobsons pledge members argument who studies this stuff. They usually take this line of Te Tiriti is not a cessation of sovereignty and that this country would be a better place if the agreement was upheld.
Maori ceded sovereignty, the crown was given absolute authority. You ignore the writings of your own past leaders, and have woven a new history into New Zealand 🇳🇿 that is not true. Treaty breaches? What about the 1000 complaints laid against maoris ripping of settlers in the NSW court, that the Waitangi tribunal don't want a bar of. Biased, equals not fit for purpose.
If someone is kind enough to explain me, why ACT: - focus on this as if it was the most important thing to do? - why passing that bill, what really going to change if accepted? - why so much opposition? Why so many people are against? What are their views? Should we be concerned by this proposal? 🤷 Neither in favor or against, just lost in this political/societal debates
1. Act got voted into govt, the treaty principles bill was something they campaigned on. It is important for a govt to focus on the things they campaigned on, because that is the policy that people who voted want. 2. it will change the interpretation of the treaty by the courts and as a constitutional document 3. opposition is part of a democracy, however the opposition did not win the election, so we should not be concerned that there are people who disagree.
This is the most important thing in my opinion. If you work for a number of years in New Zealand, you will feel that the resources, rights, promotions, are not fairly distributed, even taxpayers money. People with Māori bloodline, even only 1/4 of Māori, has much higher privilege than immigrates from other countries. The evaluation is not merit based and is not fair. NZ is an immigration country, a remote island in the middle of no where. If it cannot retain talent by treating them fairly, talent just can leave, to Australia, to US to elsewhere. If the trend started by the last government is not reverted, New Zealand could become a Māori country, close its door to the outside of the world, a doomed dead end. For example, if travelers to NZ need to learn Māori language to live here, who would stay?
1. They likely campaigned on this as a way of appealing to people with anti-left sentiment especially based on 3 waters and co-governance before the election. 2. The main thing I see that this Bill looks like it wants to change is that third principle, that "All NZers are equal". It's hard on the surface to disagree with equality as a principle, but in answer to your third question, in effect, it seems Seymour wants to use that to remove the protections that have been written into law to try to restore the rights of Māori in things like consent with Iwi (for an excellent summary of why Iwi consultation and co-governance should be protected, read @ajk4842 's comments), and they are against having any kind of organisation designed to protect Māori well-being. National and ACT are already doing things like dismantling the Māori health authority, for example, despite being well aware of the inequalities faced by Māori (he is quite happy to go on about the statistics that make Māori look bad but ignore what kind of societal injustices led to those statistics in the first place). People are also against the underlying racism in assuming that "all New Zealanders" would actually do anything to include the views of groups other than the dominant one. Personally I'm extremely concerned about the proposal. I don't think it will go ahead (at least I hope it doesn't), but I think he'll do a lot of damage with the racism it's going to stir up (a few comments in this thread back that up). (Edited for typo)
You're reinventing the wheel? We covered this with the Lange Labour Government, and the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal which resulted in the many individual iwi claims nearly half a century ago now. The Sea Lord deal, and the many asset reclamation for confiscated Taonga have been recompensed somewhat with the Tipene O'Regan Chairmanship of the Tribunal. First and foremost, the overarching principle addition which is important to note is the removal of the Crown and the British Privy Council from Waitangi settlement proceedings, that has been well and truly established. The ACT Legislative proposal further emphasis this fact with their first proposed Principle. It is in actuality a preemptive step towards a New Zealand Republic via Principle One of the Act Proposal. I agree with it, being a former Councillor for the Queensland Branch of the Australian Republican Movement, I would strongly advocate for this principle wholeheartedly. The rest of the proposed principle bill proposal seems to resonate citizenry egalitarianism which would undermine the Tangata Whenua Article II entitlements for the Tangata Whenua from each respective Iwi, Hapu, Kainga claimants to whenua taonga (Assets). The notion of equality of citizenry rights superceding the Tinorangatira or Governance by the Tangata Whenua is assimilationist and denudes the special tinorangatira status of the Tangata Whenua. This contentious and somewhat Egalitarianism before the law, whilst empowering for all New Zealanders denude the special status for the First Nations people of New Zealand. Right from the outset, you have opened a can of worms, a Pandora's Box whereby all First Nations Peoples worldover will pounce onto White Assimilationist New Zealand like the Denizons from Hell will outrage all First Nations People since the Post Colonialism enlightenment (the Awakening of the First Nations Peoples worldover) White People call this WOKE Culture. They despise with venom WOKE which seems to be synonymous with the LGBTQ community rather than the First Nations people, and the Black Lives Matter people in which WOKE culture moniker was intended. With the LGBTQ community capturing the WOKE Moniker the First Nations people have been tarred by the same brush with the Silent Majority derision and outrage. Needless to say, the Waitangi Treaty amendment may be considered an Egalitarianism proposal to directly challenge the Tangata Whenua, under the guise of Citizenry equal rights for all New Zealanders. This is a morally reprehensible mistake and will adversely affect the 5th Principle the Redress principle under the Lange Administration back in 1984. The ACT proposal passes the Republicanism by stealth priciple test, but, fails to address the second article of the Treaty of Waitangy with specific reference to TinoRangatira principles for the special claimant rights for the Tangata Whenua. This will lead to civil unrest and racial tensions throughout New Zealand Society. The Pacific Islanders themselves will enjoin the Maori in this First Nations effrontery by the ACT Party. It is White Supremacy denudation of the Tangata Whenua through Government Legislation. If the entirety of the three proposed Principles passes then there will be outrage by the Maori Community. If the First Principle passes, then that would be considered very acceptable by the Tangata Whenua. The Second Proposed Principle which affect the denudation of the Tangata Whenua tinorangitira status to New Zealand citizenry equal rights this removes the Tangata Whenua from their Status as Tangata Whenua by merely being considered an equal to all New Zealand Citizens even with regards to rights to freehold claims in hitherto Customary land claims by the Tangata Whenua on a case by case litigation. The Third Principle of Equality of citizenry democratic rights denudes the Tangata Whenua Customary Taonga rights which will open a pandora's box of Hell for White New Zealand Society moving into the next New Zealand election when the ACT Principles, if it is legislated into Parliament, will easily be repealed by a returning New Zealand Labour Government. nonymous with the LGBTQ community rather than the First Nations people, and the Black Lives Matter people in which WOKE culture moniker was intended. With the LGBTQ community capturing the WOKE Moniker the First Nations people have been tarred by the same brush with the Silent Majority derision and outrage. Needless to say, the Waitangi Treaty amendment may be considered an Egalitarianism proposal to directly challenge the Tangata Whenua, under the guise of Citizenry equal rights for all New Zealanders. This is a morally reprehensible mistake and will adversely affect the 5th Principle the Redress principle under the Lange Administration back in 1984. The ACT proposal passes the Republicanism by stealth priciple test, but, fails to address the second article of the Treaty of Waitangy with specific reference to TinoRangatira principles for the special claimant rights for the Tangata Whenua. This will lead to civil unrest and racial tensions throughout New Zealand Society. The Pacific Islanders themselves will enjoin the Maori in this First Nations effrontery by the ACT Party. It is White Supremacy denudation of the Tangata Whenua through Government Legislation. If the entirety of the three proposed Principles passes then there will be outrage by the Maori Community. If the First Principle passes, then that would be considered very acceptable by the Tangata Whenua. The Second Proposed Principle which affect the denudation of the Tangata Whenua tinorangitira status to New Zealand citizenry equal rights this removes the Tangata Whenua from their Status as Tangata Whenua by merely being considered an equal to all New Zealand Citizens even with regards to rights to freehold claims in hitherto Customary land claims by the Tangata Whenua on a case by case litigation. The Third Principle of Equality of citizenry democratic rights denudes the Tangata Whenua Customary Taonga rights which will open a pandora's box of Hell for White New Zealand Society moving into the next New Zealand election when the ACT Principles, if it is legislated into Parliament, will easily be repealed by a returning New Zealand Labour Government.
Historical records show instances where certain Maori chiefs or leaders entered into agreements with European settlers to sell land without consulting or obtaining the consent of all members of their tribes or communities. These transactions, often facilitated by language barriers, cultural misunderstandings, or coercion, resulted in significant loss of land for many Maori communities. The benefits to Maori chiefs who engaged in selling land without proper consultation with their tribal people varied depending on the circumstances. In some cases, chiefs may have received immediate material gains such as weapons, tools, blankets, or other goods from European settlers in exchange for land. Additionally, they may have perceived the agreements as a way to establish alliances or secure protection from potential conflicts with other Maori tribes or European settlers.
Yeah, sure. The historical records compiled by the european colonizers. The european colonizers were the most perfect human beings ever. Never killed, never looted, never forced, and certainly never abused the naivety of the more naive natives.😂
@@mordfustang3794 my brother don't act like Maori were perfect either. The tribe i whakapapa too, Ngati Whatua, was defeated and disbursed by Ngapuhi (Hone Hika) in the 1800s. Maori were not stupid either. They took the opportunities they had at the time, traded and fought as they saw fit. The nature of humanity does not change just because the resources they have access to were less.
@@BlackStallion_19 yes some chiefs knew they were selling land, they had no authority over, to disposess land underneath their enimies feet. British wouldn't care to establish the true owner of land before buying it from the so called owner. They just wanted the land by any means. Let someone sell your house they have no authority over and the government (that's meant to protect your rights) allows it, see how pissed you get.
We sold our boat witha written signed agreement for $65 thousand but it was worth 3 times that!! Will the new owners please compensate us ?? Ridiculous - move on grifters
Dude doesn't even here the contradictions in his argument- just glazes over with, I don't accept that! He doesn't understand the treaty is an internationally ratified document by the highest court on earth. Made in perpetuity, should've seen Mahinarangi Forbes face when he gave her the- "I don't accept that"🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Good you on Jack.. although a brief interview, it is pertinent and gives a better understanding on Acts aims to give clarity to where all of us are in NZ today concerning our founding Treaty (not constitution). It was after all a Treaty to bring sovereign rule to a country that required peaceful settlement with its indigenous inhabitants. The treaty was not intended to provide seperate rights to one group of people… and for it to be interpreted as such is ridiculous … let’s bring focus back on its intentions and what it now means for all kiwi’s to have equal rights under NZ law..
If that was the purpose of the treaty to peacefully take over why did they then break the treaty, subject them to the genocide suffered in all other colonies after they broke treaties there too? Seems like it is just the English playbook, make treaties then break them, genocide the indigenous people during the take over.
Wrong - 1835 He Whakaputanga already recognised the extant sovereignty of Māoridom. 1840 Te Tiriti in te reo Māori reaffirms this sovereignty and invites the Queens representatives to govern the settlers only. The corporate theft of the 19th century Māori economy sent the nation down the institutionally undemocratic racist Nation Māori have been protesting against to have Aotearoa New Zealand honour the equality promised in the constitution of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. All David is doing is creating a smoke screen by employing the cute concepts of “mana” as his way of attempting to suggest all Kiwi’s were signatories to Te Tiriti … they were not … Only Māori were signatories with the Crown on behalf of the Nation - redefining that history is effectively erasing Māori history, culture and language by an unjust outcome of David’s pathologically ignorant definition of the history of Te Tiriti. David is the ultimate simp who is the perfect example of Paulo Freire’s statement in his Pedagogy of Oppression where he illuminates the following:- “The colonised seek to become like their coloniser” and David is that colonised Māori seeking to profit from his service to his coloniser who are his corporate sponsors seeking to remove Te Tiriti from their access to as yet unexploited natural resources protected by Geoffrey Palmers current Principles defined in the 1980’s and now fully integrated in 86 pieces of Treaty Settlement Acts since 1996 valued at a pithy 1% of the total stolen 19th century economy lost to sovereign Māoridom through illegal invasion, genocide, hegemonic policies and institutional racism.
Were we watching the same video. 😂 This gives context and validation as to why Māori have stood against this bill. Equality sounds good but when you’ve had 184+ years of discrimination and systemic racism, it just hasn’t happened and this is with the current Treaty principles. You see the so called ‘Gravy train’ people talk amounts to pittance in comparison to the land and resources lost. Equal to Māori could look like everyone learning and understanding the Māori culture and language alongside English.
@@YoCalmYaFarm Just like Tibet where the Han Chinese immigrants learn Tibetan at school. 95% of people in Tibet know the Tibetan language. There are about 10% of Han in Tibet so that means they learn it at school there.
This gives context and validation as to why Māori have stood against this bill. Equality sounds good but when you’ve had 184+ years of discrimination and systemic racism, it just hasn’t happened and this is with the current Treaty principles. You see the so called ‘Gravy train’ people talk about amounts to pittance in comparison to the land and resources lost. Equal to Māori could look like everyone learning and understanding the Māori culture and language alongside English.
Pakeha, you seem to forget a few basics. You also have Pakeha ancestry, also your great great great grandfather may be one of those that took the land you speak of, many kiwis came after those times, you also forget that Pakeha brought to the then Māori who were still in the Stone Age, the wheel, iron tools, justice, currency, education, stopped cannibalism and slavery. Also if you look back at your European history you also might find that your great great grandfather was also leaving the oppression of England. Do some research and look on the bright side of life, you have the same self determination as everyone else, your choice to live in the past or make a go of the future
And your maori ancestors were cannibals, slavers and wiped out entire tribes including their children and raped and enslaved the woman and raped them, but i do not think you have anything or blame you for that. Because there is no such thing as inherited guilt.
In 1835 Maori were declared a sovereign nation under He Whakaputanga which was recognized by another sovereign nation the United Kingdom. Maori as the sovereigns of Aotearoa entered into a partnership with the British Crown via the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840 bringing about a new beginning for both Maori, the Crown and Non-Maori (British Subjects) currently living in Aotearoa at that time. This is the distinction between Maori and Non-Maori living in NZ. Non-Maori citizens living in New Zealand are not Treaty Partners, they are beneficiaries of the Te Tiriti because their Sovereign formed a relationship with Maori. This is facts but it does not mean that Maori are not inclusive, this does not mean that Maori want apartheid between Maori, the Crown and Non-Maori residents and citizens living in Aotearoa/New Zealand both past and present. So to look at Maori in the same light as you would a Non-Maori citizen is incorrect. The correct way of looking at things and the structure of New Zealand is and should be the following... There are two authorities and two powers in Aotearoa / New Zealand... 1. Maori Under Maori you have all Maori descendants who are beneficiaries of He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Non-Maori descendants who reside here in Aotearoa under Maori Sovereignty who have come into Aotearoa through Maori. This does not apply to Non-Maori residents who have come into Aotearoa by way of the Crown. The reason why this is not visibly seen is because Maori are yet to establish a Whare o Nga Rangatiratanga o Aotearoa (Maori Parliament) and suffered colonization and assimilation by the Crown representatives for the last 184 years and continuing. 2. The Crown Under the crown you have British subjects and Non-British subjects which includes all Non-Maori and Non-British citizens that resides in New Zealand who have come into New Zealand by way of the Crown. The Governing stewards of the Crown have spent the last 184 years strengthening their hold of the country by way of deceit, fearmongering and establishing a narrative that Maori are ugly, despicable, criminals, violent, thieves, supporters of apartheid, lack the capability of governing and managing affairs and that Maori just wants to take from everyone for their own self benefit.
No, the Independence was from warring tribes done together with the missionaries they adopted the CMS flag of St George's flag. Those Northerners mostly became Christians and that is the separation under God!
11:42. this is about what we have here in New Zealand. Treaties overseas are for those people to figure out, nothing to do with New Zealand. The politicians should leave this to the Courts as we have done for the past 40 years or so. We already have universally applying Laws here in NZ along with being part of the Maori or Crown side of the Treaty and Tirity. I am quite happy with this thanks. No need to change anything.
I think as Maori, we are Tangata Whenua, people first to populate this land. I think we see it as our House, the Europeans busted into our house and set up shop in our house and started causing problems. We were like "fine, if you wish to be here, these are the rules and agreement, sign the treaty, and we live in partnership in this land". Europeans ended up killing us reducing our population, confiscating land, Europeans have then invited more of their other European family, and friends from all other parts of the world, now we are outnumbered in our own house. Now they have power to out vote us on policy that affect us in our own house? How would you feel if someone came into your house and out powered you in your own house when you were trying to live along side each other?
Read some true history and educate yourself .Thats how Maori operated prior to 1840. Commiting genocide of other tribes. The stronger tribes taking what they wanted, whenever they wanted. The treaty with Crown sort protection for Maori from the marauding tribes. Maori killed more Maori than any colonial army ever did thats fact. Seems to be know appreciation for the advancement of this country built by colonial and Maori side by side since 1840. Maori had already wiped out all Moa and were struggling to find enough food to be sustainable. Colonials introduced domestic and wild animals for food forveveryone. this was a good colonial thing. There were more positive than negative outcomes.
@@racingescorts6976 no one is arguing maori killed more maori than colonial forces did. Most of us are grateful for Europeans taking us out of cannibalism and tribal warfare, into the modern area. We understand that. We may have taken out the moa, but Europeans have taken out other species and some are almost gone today. It's only later we realise the mistakes of humans. What we don't like, is even after signing the treaty that was meant for "protection" of supposedly all NZers, British still favoured the European settlers stealing land from Māori. They did it sneakily by enticing one willing or drunken single Maori, to sell land of 100s of people. Māori living and occupying that land had their homes ripped from under their feet. After peaceful protests, they were seen as rebels and then Brittish forces came and pushed them off. Brittish knew the strength of the Maori communal living needed to be separated and individualised into a single title to obtain land for settlers.
David Seymours answer to proper compensation.... Dollar for dollar value would put NZ into debt..... . EXACTLY NZ has has debt on its hands to all the Maori that were shafted, betrayed and taken advantage of due to a lack of knowledge and not to mention had their trust violated by corrupt colonialist. Time to extend your heart and apologise properly. Compensation isn't just going through all the nuances of the law in order to give as little as possible back. Apologies are extention of love and support in order to encourage trust and bring healing over the trust that was violated. But no colonialist are too self interested, prideful and arrogant
One of the things I like about David Seymour is that he makes perfect sense when her answers questions. By contrast, look at what Natalie Coates said in her interview - just a load of emotional meaningless dribble at best. She was not able to leave viewers any the wiser about anything. How can Maori expect to move forward in some positive way when they are not able to articulate any coherent sense?
Its interesting that the written Maori language in 1840 was in its infancy. History says Hongi Hika instigated the written Maori language on a visit to England. He died in 1828, only 12 years before the treaty was signed. I would suggest that the Maori was not very advanced at the time of signing and the amount of interpretation that has gone on since is merely opportunistic
the irony of all these angry people posting on here is every working New Zealander, and often those on benefits have a lifestyle today that the richest man on earth 100 years ago could only dream about!!! Back then he had no internet!, he could not travel the world by jet!, refrigeration did not exist! he had a car with no radio,power steering, rubbish tires, no airconditioning and no electric windows not to mention it was slow and uncomfortable, there were poor food standards, medicine and healthcare was very basic by today!! He could only communicate by landline or writing a letter, he had to write a cheque to pay for something!! He did not have access to the roads and bridges we take for granted, there were no supermarkets back then, He lived at a time when the whole world was at war. polyester and nylon velcro and lycra all unknown to him!! Yet all these people act they are hard done by!!! the world is so hard!!! Wake up!! you are living in a nation where you are free to vote!! two thirds of the world's population cannot do that today! You have choices in your life because we live in a free country!! and you are living better in almost every respect than the richest man on earth 100 yrs ago !!
What % blood are those who identify as Maori? Aren't most of us a mix of many races/nationalities now? Do we have that data? It seems so strange how so many are willing to discard 75% of their heritage for 25%, e.g. Kelvin Davis.
@@illogicalslayer9856 The U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., ruled that these descendants have citizenship rights in the Cherokee Nation “ In accordance with Article 9 of the 1866 Treaty, the Cherokee Freedmen have a present right to citizenship in the Cherokee Nation that is coextensive with the rights of native Cherokees.” The Cherokee Nation did not appeal the decision.
@@johnflave In favor to whom? Don't you think that the majority of people who settled worked extremely hard and their mortality rate was high. It was no easy feat to establish an infrastructure, settlements and social institutions. Every person today in NZ benefits from their efforts. Mind you, with those pot holes, waiting lists to get care etc. one wonders whether we go back to the "good ol days".
@@haydsbeks6550 Rural students who score lower on tests than non Rural get into medical school with lower passing scores in premed. Because you need more rural doctors. Same with minority groups. They all still pass the same standards, it is a good thing that it happens for rural and minority groups to serve those communities better.
@@haydsbeks6550 I couldn't find data from NZ but Aus has a 80% rural medical student retention rate in the rural areas they come from. We can say that since they are similar to us we will have similar numbers or at least above 50% which is enough to make the program viable. For minorities in many nations there are up ticks in health outcomes if the minority group is seen by a doctor of their own group. Now to improve health outcomes by any doctor would need all doctors to become culturally competent for all groups of people within Aotearoa New Zealand which I will support alongside these programs.
I love that David Seymour is apparently a Te Reo Māori expert now and has the “correct” interpretation of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. He obviously has no cultural understanding of the meaning of the words or comprehension skills in reading, writing or speaking Te Reo Māori to understand its text in relation to the Treaty of Waitangi. His views on the both documents are heavily influenced through colonialism, western views and bias perspectives. His narrative is divisive, racist and disgusting. He’s pushing an agenda of assimilation which Māori have been fighting for a very long time. Btw, this is written in English so the people that support him can understand better. As apparently that is the only language y’all know, ka aroha ki a koutou ngā kuaretanga 😉 We can’t be equal if the playing field hasn’t been equal for over 100 years with the amount of historic and systemic racism that has happened. Māori lands were taken, Māori traditional medicinal practices banned, Māori were sent to native schools where they were beaten streamed into labouring jobs and taught to bow to white women. There are still kaumātua alive that lived through this. You can’t talk about equality if the starting line is unequal to begin with. For someone that wanted to discuss Māori issues. He clearly doesn’t want to do that with Māori or he would have gone to the Hui ā motu and Rātana.
He doesn’t understand te tiriti at all. Or he does, and hates what it says because he know it gives Maori tino rangatiratanga and the government a governor an that’s it. What people forget is that we’ve been forced into a white mans system, a white mans world. And many of us haven’t thrived in it. If the shoe was on the other foot, white oriole would’ve probably feared better than we have in their system. We need to take back our power, our sovereignty and reaffirm and reassert it by creating our own parliament. That’s what they’re trying to do I heard whispers of it. It will be a govt for all people, it’ll just be our people leading the way with tangata tiriti on board the waka. We can leave thr w.h.o, the UN, and all these other bullshit organisations and become a self sustainable sovereign nation. How does that sound? 😊
I don’t agree with either of you. You can keep looking back or forward. The chinese were discriminated against. I know a dutch women up north who was married to a to an iwi member up North Her Maori work mates would not talk to her. Until they found out who she was married to. I have a friend who looks chinese and was told she was not a proper maori. I think you guys need to. Get off you high horse and realise you are not the only people with historical grievances. My mother a Japanese prisoner of war has had to let it go. Her son has worked for a Japanese company for over 30 years. I would agree even in the 80s things were wrong. Maori jokes were racist. And put Maori down not perfect but a lot of progress made since then. What will you take back. You want 100s of iwi chiefs?
@@chrisnipper9163you best get back on your hoiho ehoa, the discrimination of Maori is still happening today. Read comments from this forum, its all white privilege, racist, discrimination. Get over yourselves!
@@chrisnipper9163 it’s not about historical grievances bro. It’s about what te tiriti says. And it says Maori have sovereignty over themselves. The UN and the WHO etc want to get rid of this because it flys in the face of what they’re trying to get us to do. Even look at the document he whakaputanga. It creates a sovereign nation for New Zealanders that exists alongside the authority of the king. It makes each one of us a sovereign being under God. Not that we needed that to get that, but it just reaffirms it in a Declaration of Independence. My main gripe is that this govt is illegal under te tiriti and they have sold out to global powers. I want a govt that will take care of our affairs at home first and turn us into a self sustainable sovereign nation. Both Te Tiriti and He Whakaputanga give us that opportunity.
The Waitangi Tribunal failed NZ. There nothing in the treaty about redress and their reading of reciprocal is also not in the treaty. The exchange was about property, protection of property, rights and duties under the crown. The Maori version in Article One clearly states the crown will govern over “their lands”, as in Maori lands. Article One being the main point of the treaty. To them think Maori have complete authority of their land is makes no sense. It’s obvious that the point was that Maori have the right to their property and resources on their land, like everyone does, not government over the whole country which is clearly defined in Article One . Treaty breaches? But no discussion about the Maori breaches of the treaty. No discussion of the Maori land theft and genocide of other Maori. What was the backdrop of the treaty? The musket wars that killed 20,000 and wounded 30,000. That’s why protection from the crown was central to the treaty signing.
equal mana for all? does that mean were all going to be wealthy ? because i earnt my mana and if you want some you can earn it too, but if its mana for all i better be wealthy
Shame he lives in a country where Maori were the original inhabitants, and Maori made the mistake of letting the whiteys in. Would be good to see the Maori just kick everybody the fuc# out! And Im a whitey
@@TrakaBatwell as David pointed out the Tribunal has been doing that for 40 years without an ounce of explanation or consultation of NZdrs who you seem to think have nothing to do with it but oh we do, we are ALL protected by the Treaty, our purchased lands, our Tikanga Christianity, customs, traditions, beliefs, ways etc but Maori don't have the mandate to shove their bs up our noses and on our public spaces or private lands! Should stayed on your territory but you didnt you assimilated to our lifestyles cos it was supreme it cannot be changed we are mixed now, all Pakeha culturally
Have you actually taken the time to read it yourself, honestly I can tell you haven't. The Te Reo version is tiny, its poorly written and extremely vague, makes vague refences to land ownership but does not actually define who owns what as an simple example. Hell there is still arguments around Maori ceding sovereignty to the British Crown even though its clearly written in both versions.
read it your self- In Article 1, the Treaty in Māori gave Queen Victoria governance over the land. In English, it gave Queen Victoria sovereignty over the land In Article 2, the Treaty in Māori guaranteed rangatira ‘te tino rangatiratanga’- full rights of chieftainship over their lands, villages and taonga (treasured things). It also gave the Crown the right to deal with Māori in purchasing land. In the English version of the Treaty, rangatira are given ‘exclusive and undisturbed possession’ of lands, forests, fisheries and other property. The Crown was also given an exclusive right to deal with Māori in purchasing land.@@Battleneter
@@jasonpoihegatama1347 The argument is Maori did not understand what they singed, BUT then these same people argue its a legal binding live document, its ridiculous lol
Some Maori do make that argument it is they did not know they were going to be treated bad by the crown and become second class in there own land. However the treaty agreement is clear legal binding document @@Battleneter
@@jasonpoihegatama1347Maori have EXACTLY the same rights as me. I should add NZ has become a modern democracy, the British Crown is all but gone, entirely symbolic, its the main reason why the treaty is largely pointless here in 2024. Most Kiwis that identify as "Maori" here in 2024 also have European ancestry, makes the entire debate even more stupid. But we know its about land and $$, that's why this stupidly drags on.
I'd like to hear Seymour's "many examples" of countries that have failed miserably because they have indigenous rights? I wish Jack Tame called his bluff on that one. I like how Seymour states that as a Nga Puhi bla bla, and then claims to be a poor, part Scottish immigrant. Pick a lane and stay in it, rookie
NZ is a current example of how this coup detat takeover of 50% of Govt is NOT WORKING!! Doesn't work in South Africa either the Country is a mess and look at Palestinians turned into barbarians teaching kids to hate and kill.
Bottom line is no rights or acknowledgment to tangata whenua -indigenous people of Aotearoa. Wow I wished they acknowledged this ‘mana’ to all people at the time of the signing of the Te Tiriti because it was all one sided. Yeah, the indigenous peoples around the world, tangata whenua are still fighting for the injustices from colonisation.
When the Treaty was signed the lowest person in the land and highest person became equal under the law. That protection meant no more tikanga massacres, cannibalism or slavery. Everyone was equal and worthy. What greater mana could be afforded than that? It is easy to forget how revolutionary and beneficial the Treaty was to Maori.
Not "no rights or acknowledgment to tangata whenua" but rather EQUAL RIGHTS for all. Im indigenous to NZ...but you, being a racist, exclude me because of my race.
@@kiwiyogi2846 Europeans were still practising cannibalism and slavery at the same time. That you don't know that and single out indigenous people is just racism. Te Tiriti would have been revolutionary had the Crown adhered to it as a bi national state with proper representation for all, foreigners through the Crown and through Hapū Māori, with joint decisions made between the Crown and Hapū. What happened is that Māori were regulated to second class citizenship and that you don't acknowledge that is racist.
@illogicalslayer9856 Your racism is showing through loud and clear. The British ended slavery out of the goodness of their heart and for no other reason. You won't acknowledge that because you are racist. "A bi national state" is pure fantasy. There are no mergers only takeovers. The British took over NZ and the Maori got themselves a great deal. Now Maori are over-represented in parliament and two of the leaders of the coalition government are Maori. That is the result of the fairness of the British system where everyone is equal. Lots of Maori don't want any part of your corrupt tribal grift.
All NZ should understand te Tiriti benefits all Tangata Tiriti (NZ citizens) and the motivation behind ACT and co's efforts to dismantle it. Te tiriti protects NZ water from foreign/private ownership or control. This is behind the we are the world BS from Seymour. It is an ugly con job by Act on behalf of their private international funders. #ToitūTeTiriti #AtlasNetwork
Your forgetting the Foreshore and Seabed Act changes under John Key that allow iwi overriding rights over other New Zealanders for use of our Beaches and access to them
@@glennanthony3165 The Queens chain exists too.The thing many non Māori don't understand or value is the difference between ownership and kaitiakitanga, guardianship. This benefits all tangata tiriti.
man im just happy comments are allowed :D its so good to see everyones opinions on the matter. Much appreciated for not locking the comment section
True full n final
QnA usually has their comments on just not 1News for some reason
thy have alwyas been open on nzqna
@@RJH755 yes 1 news is leftist fake news
A little bit of Glasnost from the ministry of truth .
If the media and certain politicians focused as much on improving housing, infrastructure, education and health as much as they do on the treaty, NZ would be a well oiled, first world nation.
We were in the top 5 thriving Nations once, until the Treaty interference and fraud, everyone knows it. Maori property is their tangata whenua, everywhere else they are not, every property owner is the person of that area of land simple. Principles weren't attached to the Treaty but been indoctrinated into silly racist minds and not consented by the people so here we are learning the English writ thanks colonization!
The Media reports on the government it doesn't make policy. you need to ask the government why it isn't concentrating on the issues that so rightly concern you. The Coalition controls house business, This is the business they choose to bring up
@@StGammon77 what bs is thriving nations?
get back to your cauldron and broom
Kapai Chris thats the one focus on the basics 🎉🎉instead worrying dreamers, us Moari's ain't hell bent but if anyone going muck with Moari's sovereignty there'll be a fight
seemore should of left it well alone shouldn't of happen now that it has I feel for the kids brown/white/black don't matter may God protect them as we endure through tis episode of history ameni
Jack you're talking about reinterpreting of the principles as if the principles were the treaty,but they're not! The principles were first created 40+ years ago by the Courts. Pleas don't confuse the Treaty and the principles in your interviews, you just continue the confusion
Good point.
Jack is not that smart.
The "treaty" is irrelevant. We honour te Tiriti, not the treaty.
@@AholeAtheist that's because your a dickhead . Bludge on bro
True story, the treaty is all we should be focusing on not some interperated principals . All NZers should be voting on any changes to the treaty and not just iwi, Geoff palmer and some courts and the tribunal. If we dont get a vote on changing our founding document then it's not being followed by most NZers!
The problem is that some Maori have used their perceived indigenous rights to bully other NZers such as the recent blocking boat ramps during the fishing contest up north. I'm Maori but why would we want Iwis to have these special rights over others when they do such petty things. There has to be a middle ground that honours the treaty but stops these radical outlaws.
That's exactly right mate. Equal rights for all. Anything we can have done to make new zealand a more fair, safe and prosperous is a good thing for all. Not everyone will be happy with changes, but as long as we are taking steps in the right direction.
Because it was THEIR land. At the time of the signing, they outnumbered Europeans 40 to 1. Signing the treaty with the Crown ALLOWED your ancestors to come here and live. And how were they paid back for that generosity? Theft, murder, supression of their culture to name but three. For a 130 years people were happy to take advantage of that and now that the ledger is being evened up, its all 'what about MY rights'.
Good. What's radical is actually ignoring history and pretending that the radical things Maori had to endure never happened. Stopping a bunch of people going recreational fishing is not radical.
Nothing ‘perceived’ about it and they are indigenous to this country whether you like it or not.
@@AholeAtheist Those people going recreational fishing are Maori as well. Iwi radical protectionism effects everyone and as happened historically Maori will fight with each other and not just against non Maori. I know this well being a Maori fisherman and Iwi are some of the worst when it comes to pillaging the local fishery. Some Iwi pretend to care for the oceans stopping recreational fishing but often it's an excuse just for control. Extremism is going to make things worse and not heal historic wrongs.
If only Our people would open their ears to broadcasts like this 🙏🙏🙏👏
It is not about the principles or equal rights, it is a resource grab, follow the money peeps. If the rights of Maori to exercise tinorangatiratanga, and therefore protection, over their lands, estates, forests, fisheries and other treasures (Article two of Te Tiriti) is extingished, then that is an important barrier removed to the wholesale exploitation of Aotearoa's natural resources by corporate interests. We all lose if this Bill is passed .
100%. Seymour is a neoliberal. He doesn't care about protecting our resources for the future or the equality of kiwis, he cares about creating a system where corporations and private interests rule supreme.
100%!!! You're on to them!!!
💯
They aren't proposing to change the Articles of the ToW so nothing is being extinguished. Also, iwi are currently exploiting fishery (natural) resources as a commercial entity, so should we follow that money?
@@TheSpartacusBrown of course we should- all corruption, nobody is above the law, don't forget- the treaty is the law too, you can say your not changing the treaty, while you change the way it's interpreted, but don't act like there's a difference. It's just another way to skin the same cat.
I cant believe we live in a time where saying everyone is equal is seen as a bad thing
It has Never been fairly equal? Govt want everything. Dont bullshit see less (seymore), what your basically saying is Maori should sit down and shut up and let govt take over. Maori have always been treated differently. I work in local govt where 1% in the office is maori, the rest imigrants and european, where is the "Equality" hah? stop talking smack ❤🤍🖤
@BFFS4LIFE1718BFFS your talking about equal outcome that's dangerous and completely different and never works ever in history race is not a factor in what you said at all there is a lot of reasons for what u said unless you won't to ignore all the hard work you put in to get your job
Māori have never been treated equally, that’s why we have the treaty established in the first place, it has never ever been there to hold Māori as superior to anything or anyone. Our ancestors had settled in New Zealand before the British came and threw their weight around, imposing their superiority and governance that was never necessary lead alone asked for, and consequently my people have suffered massive trauma that has been passed down through the generations. We have never been treated fairly by the crown and the government and this isn’t about buddying up with all kiwis or kiwis in general…. Our fight is for our people to uphold and maintain our own customs, traditions and way of life, throughout the land this land where our ancestors lay at rest, the land they made home, this is our home, before the British, the crown and anyone else established themselves here, yet we are laughed at and mocked as being the unruly ones, since way back. You have no idea how deep this is for Māori and not only us but all indigenous tribes around the globe!
1867 our reo was taken from us and as a result of that, a lot of whānau don’t know how to speak their native language… The 1907 tohunga suppression act, stripping us of the ability to heal our people with organic and natural medicinals and healing strategies and now we’re drugged up in mental institutions… We don’t want anything other than to live and breath Māori! That is who we are! That is what we are! And the crown entity and government have tried, tried and are still trying to TAKE that from us, to “assimilate” us into a way of life that contradicts our own, who we are and what we stand for. No matter who you are or where you come from, no human being alive can thrive and live to their highest potential by living in another’s truth, other than their own! That is what this kaupapa is all about and has always been about, from te taha Māori anyway!!! The fight over the last 184 years! No one is moaning about equality! This is about our mana motuhake!
@@Shivaaa308 they lost, be happy whites weren't cannibals
Seymour makes absolutely zero sense. The treaty principle was established over the last 40 years to create a balance between Māori ( the indigenous minority) and the crown. What Seymour is trying to do is to nullify the treaty of Waitangi using his interpretation of the treaty principle bill. As it stands today through the treaty principles bill Maori have a voice on decision making concerning New Zealand and the land. If they take away Māori voices it opens the floodgates to exploitation of New Zealand as a whole. For example the seabed and foreshore would be open to international fishing and mining corporations to pillage and plunder our resources. Not to mention the environmental impacts on our waters and land.
Bottom line is I don’t trust Seymour and his ACT party judging from their policies.
Can Seymour pass a bill so new zealanders can effectively block ads from temu?
😃😃2nd thatLL
hahaa gold.
No that would be useful, and cause too much mental relief. He's here to do the opposite
Kia ora Sheryl,
While you’re correct the Principles and Treaty and Te Tiriti documents are 2 very different things and have been compiled by scholars (historians especially), courts, Waitangi tribunal, Iwi leaders and Politicians. The Treaty Principles are what is known as the Treaty and Te Tiriti representative in New Zealand law.
The problem for David, is that the Principles were built around fair interpretation of both documents and acknowledged Maori as did the treaty and te tiriti. David’s interpretation of the Principles doesn’t align with any of the Treaty or Te Tiriti texts and has been told so by many experts both left and right.
hear hear!
Of course the wider public are allowed to have their say.
Not just the elite.
yeah nah...Maori Elite all day every day mate
You could argue the white elite have had too much say.
About time the pakeha elite took a backseat.
Maori aren't trying to just veto everything. We want to be apart of the process because for too long, the crown just trample and disregard us, and don't care about a group of people who have lived here for centuries. If generations of a Maori community have a Marae next to a river or stream, and use it to gather food, or swim in, or whatever they use it for, and then a developer, farmer, industrial factory, or some organization upstream wants to discharge untreated water into these waterways, we want to be able to be at the discussion table and say "hey guys, that isn't a good idea because you will be effecting this community. Lets discuss other options".
Government shouldnt favour groups sorry, newsflash! ... you're not special
@@StGammon77 They shouldn't, but they have. The Government has favored Europeans for centuries.
Your scenario would be awful, but Maori do not need special rights to prevent it. We need to task our goverent with preventing it, which we do.
Or is this about the Koha that Maori expect for being at the table?
@@TheSpartacusBrown Māori are outnumbered in their homeland. We know majority of NZers don't care about us and just vote in a new government to trample on us. It has happened now and has before. The treaty is the main thing we use to protect our history and ancient connections to this land and in doing so, we help preserve other parts of NZs natural environment. Because we know most of NZ don't care about it if it isn't bringing in money to their pockets.
@@ajk4842 saying "the majority of NZers don't care about us" is a roundabout way of saying Pakeha don't care about us. Which is a generalization based on race, ie racist.
It's also untrue.
All NZers have common core values that we need to recognize and uphold, that's what makes our community strong.
Creating separate status or culture by race should not be one of them.
So nice to see David debated by a formidable intellectual, instead of misrepresented by hacks
LOL. Jack Genocide Supporter Tame is not that. And David hasn't been misinterpreted just because some people see through his disingenuous lies and dog whistles. Perhaps you need to go back to school.
@@AholeAtheist Give some evidence there are no lies buddy.
Surely if there's a variation to a contract/legislative agreement both parties have to agree to any variations/changes.
Otherwise how can it be the same contract?
There is no variation. The ToW made everyone equal.
Well neither of the parties are alive today.
Yes and to do it in ‘good faith’. Not try to wipe the slate clean without any consultation of the other party. As much as David Seemore$$ would like people to believe what an ideal outcome would look like for him, this is not Neverland.
@@JamesClark-cg1qkyou are right, but obviously there is a little bit more involved!
@@trihard3d both parties are alive today because it is a treaty between "the crown" and a collective of Iwi. Both parties are alive and well today. 👍
"Allows people who have property rights, a status that is equal to everyone else". Excuse me Mr Seymour, the crown confiscated and dispossessed Maori from their property after the treaty was signed. Killing men woman and children in the process. But I guess Seymour is trying to say suck it up, tough luck, work your butt off and buy it back huh?
@@PeterHemmingson I don't disagree with most of your copied and pasted collection of sentences.
No collective "Maori". And your point is what? Shall we use the collective words Europeans gave us such as "Natives", "Savages", "Cannibals'"? Whatever you want to call it, there were groups of people that long occupied an area prior to Europeans "Discovering" it.
I already understand occupation of area's were often temporary, and "te rau o te patu" was how connections to land were made and severed. I understand the so called "waste lands" or areas that are on the outskirts of established tribal territories that blurred borders. However, this was the system that was used, and Maori understood it. When the British came, they brought a their system, Maori didn't understand and enforced it.
Yes I believe we have a better LAND OWNERSHIP system for everyone in NZ, but to enforce a new system you bring upon people who didn't understand it, especially if you don't educate them in it, is wrong and just taking advantage.
Many Maori who "sold" land didn't have the authority to sell area's as they weren't the sole "owners". Did the British establish who the actual owners are? Or did they only mention the Maori they wanted and they knew they could obtain land from?
Maori did not understand the European system of legal land ownership. They would have sold European's air if they'd ask for it. But as Europeans say, these Maori signed a piece of paper that we wrote, we made up, we witnessed. Doesn't matter if Maori weren't educated in this system we have imposed on them.
How do we know these deeds of land purchases were correctly and legitimately issued? We only have one side, the European side. We do know the British tricked Maori with TOW not saying the same thing as Maori understood in their version. What makes you think every deed of purchase says the same thing as what Maori understood at the time of the supposed purchase? Do you think Maori who were educated in the European system would sell their lands if they truly understood what it meant to own/buy/sell land in a European context?
Maori were a community of people who have an established settlement and way of living, and occupied an area for however long they have, then at the time and following the signing of TOW (supposedly giving protection to ALL NEW ZEALANDERS), gave the right for the British to trick them out of their lands, kill and destroy them and push them out just because, "Sorry, you don't own anything according to our British system we have imposed on you, so be gone."
And I do blame the missionaries. They brought the religion as a peaceful offering, knowing they had a tyranny of colonial forces following behind them.
They started a war ffs stupid people
Because they broke the Treaty til 1860 dummy!
@@ajk4842 Well said!
The land acquired by europeans were purchased by the new zealand company. Local iwi had agreed to the purchases and the new zealand company paid them. When you talk about "killing woman and children" you make it sound like the british were some viking raiders from the north. Any killing that took place at the time was in retaileatiom from threats or trying to keep law and order in the land.
“No iwi has engaged on what those principles are.” Mate, they’ve held two Hui in a month where they’ve engaged with those principles and told you what they think, then they have shown up in force to Waitangi and said very clearly we engaged with the proposed principles and we don’t like them. You just aren’t listening. You call for a discussion then avoid the discussion. A discussion is not a one sided talk fest by you. By your logic, David, you haven’t said anything about the treaty principles because you’ve only spoken to the media and in speeches at Waitangi about it.
This is why they drown you out with a waiata that says “listen” , “whakarongo” over and over.
preach brother
Tena koe e hoa. Tautoko
I was surprised at how poorly Seymour's talking points came across under simple questioning (compared to when he makes them in his speeches and videos). IMO he didn't satisfactorily answer the question put to him several times about how one party to a treaty can reinterpret its meaning without the other party's consent. He went back to his points about how the current interpretation of the treaty unfairly benefits Māori, then effectively questioned the relevancy of the treaty today. Clearly, it does matter to a lot of people, particularly when the proposed reinterpretation of the principles purposefully excludes one of the parties.
Maori do not run the Country ok!! Treaty Chiefs warned their people NOT to start political parties read the Kohimarama Conference records
50 years of maori dreaming up additions and principles has been a huge mistake by not having democratic consent, now those fabricated additions need to be defined and agreed upon BY THE PEOPLE , maori do not Govern us you need to get that straight!
Seymour is brilliant! He gently calls Jack out (TVNZ) for pushing a political position from the far-left by suggesting it may not be Jack's own personal view. I respect the way Seymour is able to calmly control his thoughts in such an articulate and logical fashion. Luxon is truely as weak as water by comparison in my view.
😂😂😂 Seamen ain't good at all! 😂
I don't see Luxon as weak. He's weak to you because he doesn't follow your views. He said he won't support Acts bill past first selection, and he's sticking to it. How's that weak? Luxon just has a little spider trying to run the ship. Seymour isn't even Deputy prime minister yet.
@@ajk4842 I was considering Luxon's ability to be convincing. He comes across to me as weak because he may not be resolute in the position he has been primed to follow by the WEF-infiltrated NZ Civil service. His interests toward the people of this country are not genuine to me as I observe him. He is batting for the same globalists whose slow agenda is destroying Europe, the USA, and most other western countries which have been far too readily (and easily) subverted to follow socialism rather than capitalism. Six years to go, but the changes will be rapid even this year. Look at the digital cage of street cameras (added to by the day) that has been quietly assembled around us. Nobody looks up, nobody notices.
@acegikmoii Absolutely! It is refreshing to see the articulate, calm response from David to a clearly biased, unprofessional journalist clearly showing his political leanings. Tame should perhaps refresh himself on the principles of journalism. A masterclass by David on calling him out on his 'personal' views. Tame was totally outclassed.
Te tiriti was an agreement between the Queen of England and Maori
Not
Kiwi and Maori
Exactly
Kiwi is a bird
You're right, the crown, the English royal family, not your everyday Joe seymour trying to have a go
And anyone that thinks that the Royal Family in UK have even read or cares about the Te Tiriti is greatly mistaken. Time for all people living in New Zealand to look to each other, wave goodbye to this royal family that does not care about us, and move into the future as a Republic with a new written Constitution.
@@mitchelldenysschen3224 The UK would see this as a mark of disrespect, I'm not sure that would be in our best interest. We're a small, defenceless, and relatively poor country on the global stage, we need as much support as we can get. Especially with the emergence of BRICS.
I like the number 3 refined principle : all New Zealander should have equal rights … no one is above other ethics , like UsA and AU
Do you think the American Indians have the same rights or the Aborigines.
Or African Americans aswell who have been striped of their original identity culture and language gone
@@margaretpowell5447 NZ got a much better deal with the crown
Absolutely they don’t
So 👍 true
The Maori version of the Treaty (as translated on the Waitangi Tribunal website):
PREAMBLE - Victoria, the Queen of England, in her concern to protect the chiefs and the subtribes of New Zealand and in her desire to preserve their chieftainship and their lands to them and to maintain peace and good order considers it just to appoint an administrator one who will negotiate with the people of New Zealand to the end that their chiefs will agree to the Queen's Government being established over all parts of this land and (adjoining) islands and also because there are many of her subjects already living on this land and others yet to come. So the Queen desires to establish a government so that no evil will come to Māori and European living in a state of lawlessness. So the Queen has appointed 'me, William Hobson a Captain' in the Royal Navy to be Governor for all parts of New Zealand (both those) shortly to be received by the Queen and (those) to be received hereafter and presents to the chiefs of the Confederation chiefs of the subtribes of New Zealand and other chiefs these laws set out here.
THE FIRST - The Chiefs of the Confederation and all the Chiefs who have not joined that Confederation give absolutely to the Queen of England for ever the complete government over their land.
THE SECOND - The Queen of England agrees to protect the chiefs, the subtribes and all the people of New Zealand in the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages and all their treasures. But on the other hand the Chiefs of the Confederation and all the Chiefs will sell land to the Queen at a price agreed to by the person owning it and by the person buying it (the latter being) appointed by the Queen as her purchase agent.
THE THIRD - For this agreed arrangement therefore concerning the Government of the Queen, the Queen of England will protect all the ordinary people of New Zealand and will give them the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of England.
Doesn’t matter, both versions are written by an Englishman. I’m law the primary signatory interpretation stands ie the english
@@Andrew1991taxed the indigineous takes precedence in world law
FYI The above Maori version of the ToW was translated by Sir Hugh Kawharu and appears on the Waitangi Tribunal website. Both the English and Maori versions clearly cede government of the whole country forever to the British Crown. What is left of 'sovereignty' (Kingitanga - not mentioned in the Treaty) after you carve out the activities of Government is perhaps a debatable point. @@Andrew1991taxed
@@PeterHemmingson According to the Cambridge and Oxford definitions...MĀORI ARE CONSIDERED AS INDIGENOUS 😅
C'mon Peteyboy, I know it's a hard pill for superiority-complexes to swallow but welp...the really important question I have for you though is: "Are you paying the right amount in taxes"?
I'd hate to see the books unbalanced...that could have a huge impact on my govt handouts 😇😂
@@Andrew1991taxed lol that's stupid. Try that trick with an agreement with another country like China or Russia. Two linguistically different versions of a contract need to mean the same thing.
If it hinders how the country is going forward , it should be refined
this country has gone nothing but backwards my whole life, i think these supremacists should take a seat for a maori prime minister
not at all. It isn't up to white people to redefine a treaty signed by the crown and the maori people
It is time for the people to decide - A referendum on this should occur - All people in NZ will benefit from a better definition, one that is decided by the people.
Thought I'd watch to try and inform myself, I seem more confused. Sounds like David wants to re interpret the bill of principles to suit what he thinks it should be, without consulting or discussions with the people that one of the founding documents of this country was drawn up to protect in the first place.
You dont sign a purchase or rental agreement and then start changing things as you go to suit when you feel like it without the outher party agreeing, so whats the difference with the treaty
Exactly my take on it too. I heard a lot of 'I' want or 'I' think from David Seymour.
Exactly, try telling your bank it's just not practical to pay the rest of your mortgage 😂
This sounds like exactly the opposite of what he has been saying
Agreed- This is the proverbial forked tongue colonisers are famous for. Can't understand why we don't all follow the money- it always tells the truth.
The principles written are a problem that's why they have to be corrected
I think Maori know NZ or the crown will never pay dollar for dollar in compensation for the wrongs that have been committed to Maori. It would be nice but we know there would probably be no more NZ due to bankruptcy. However, we say fine, kei te pai, since you can't return all the land, can't pay us the full amount of what it is worth, we shall require a seat at the decision making table to be able to discuss policies that effect us. For example, if you want your powerlines to run through this area, stay away from placing the pylons or trenches where my ancestors are buried, you can put them anywhere else. If you want to discharge your waste water into the streams we have used for generations, you need to have a treatment system that gets the water to a acceptable quality before discharging. I think, it is these types of things that we are ultimately asking for as a minimum. I guess a form of co-governance. We are not here to block every development or policy under the sun. Some are good. Heck, our ancestors were developers when they first arrived. It's the developments and policies that affect us and are run by the people who don't even care about us that we have a problem with.
If all of the land of NZ was returned to the Maori, most of the highly skilled labour we have here would simply move overseas and the infrastructure would rapidly collapse.
"can't pay us the full amount of what it is worth" The primary reason those assets are worth what they are is because of the contribution of ALL NZe'rs. That wealth wasn't created out of thin air. That land is worth nothing without the 200 or so years of sweat and tears ALL NZ'ers have invested into this country since the treaty was signed to make it the prosperous country it is today. Why do Maori people have a right to all of that wealth which they didn't solely create?
In regards to the power lines, waste water, etc. This applies to ALL NZ'ers, ALL of us want adequate water treatment and as minimal amount of pollution as possible, ALL of us want to protect the environment, ALL of us want the graves of our ancestors shown respect, I don't see how these issues are exclusive to Maori and therefore require co-governance?
@@MDL.720 We already know it isn't feasible to return all land to Maori. Won't stop us from trying to claim some back.
We already know NZ won't pay the full amount. Because of the reasons you pointed out. We understand that land has been worked on by NZ'ers, farmers, companies, NZ has benefited from the development, it doesn't change the fact that our family had been killed for this to happen. In some area's we don't own a blade of grass of a site that our ancestors were killed on by British Forces. So we ask the current landowners to include us in the decisions they make involving the significant area's we have been disposed of.
I understand you believe these issues applies to all NZ'ers, but sadly there are too many instances were Maori are left out, ignored, disregarded when it comes to protecting our significant sites that have history dating centuries. But lets protect a 60 year Old Victorian dwelling? We know majority of Europeans don't care about us, we are out numbered in our own homeland. If a development came across the table that negatively affected us, no one would advocate for Maori, more than Maori.
@@MDL.720 We know returning all of the land will be a detriment to NZ and probably be the end of this country. I don't think most educated Maori want that. What we do want is to protect our most sacred places and resources that our ancestors had for centuries before being dispossessed of it by the British. If we can get it back, then cool. If not, then fine. Please let us be part of the decisions that concern these places we once had before being killed for it.
We understand the work all NZers role in creating wealth in this country. We don't deny that. But the land was confesicated in the first place. If I stole something from you, gave it to someone else to develop and improve, it doesn't change the fact that it was stolen. We know we won't get back land or dollars of what it's worth. We don't want to dispossess ordinary NZers of their hard work. So for our compensation of being wronged, we ask for at least a seat at the decision making table to try protect what we've lost, and what very little we do have.
Unfortunately, no, not all NZers want adequate waste water treatment, minimal pollution, protection of the environment, and protecting our grave sites. The amount of resource consent requests Iwi receive, asking to discharge untreated water into nearby streams and rivers is too much for some iwi to manage. There are still many developments that stumble on our ancestors villages and end up digging their bones. Some mining and construction companies even hide these discoveries to avoid the headache of dealing with Maori.
Why do we ask for co-governance? Because we know most Europeans dont care about us, our history and our generational connection to NZ. we are out numbered in our own homeland. When the government makes decisions that impact Maori, even after signing the treaty, no one else will advocate for Maori, more than Māori, the original inhabitants of this land.
@@ajk4842 I thought hawaiki was the homeland of Maori?
@@rockyjones2563 Motherland. I think Hawaiki to most Māori, is a place, physically or spiritually, where their ancestors came from before they arrived to their turangawaewae, or place they now call home in NZ. In turn, there are many hawaki. That's why you see many similar names through out the Pacific. Hawaii, Savaii, Havaiki and more.
Can anyone else see a conflict of interest regarding the ‘crown’ and Maori ?
The so called partnership is between the crown,ie the nz government and Maori.
But Maori can be part of the government and also remain as Maori.
If the treaty is between the crown and Maori it implies that the crown or government was never intended to include Maori as a parliamentary representative.
How can you be both part of the crown and Maori ?
Maori signed the treaty acknowledging that the crown would govern nz.
There was a complete distinction between the crown and Maori.
Nowhere does the treaty state that Maori shall govern.
Therefore why are some Maori governing.
I have no qualms with Maori in parliament so long as they represent all New Zealanders, but I’m still confused about the distinction and role of crown and Maori.
That's why you adopt the Maori nickname "ordinary we are Tangatawhenua
Great points my thoughts as well in fact the Treaty Chiefs warned their people at the 1860 Kohimarama Conference NOT to start political party's. And yeh they are not and never were a completely seperate people there were 500 tribes and they all ended up under the Govt they chose not having any of their own. They sold 90% of NZ and integrated marrying us and producing mixed race can't be separated now they need to be re-educated and all references to the Treaty and principles should be removed from education and legislation.
@@StGammon77mostly māori land was stolen, or villages pillaged and starved, and then māori were coerced into selling the land for much less than it was worth because they were in desperate situations.
Crown were meant to govern there own and Maori govern Maori not controlled by the Crown
@@frankkomene4616 That’s not how colonisation works.
The English, Dutch, French, Portuguese and Spanish would never sign such an agreement.
That wouldn’t work.
It would be disastrous.
Can Jake answer a simple question that David asks him, is this how journalists act now?
Bro this isn't a debate it's called an interview for a reason...
@@julioduck19 just so obvious as David pointed out that Jake is stamping his own views on the interview , like majority of media in nz doing, it’s like he’s attacking with questions to try catch him out.
Weak journalism
I think it's good. Māori don't have the opportunity to ask these questions to Seymour. Seymour wont talk to us, unless we have money or land. I welcome the debate tho.
I didn't agree with Māori drowning out Seymour and Winston at Waitangi. I wanted to hear what they had to say.
It’s not”Jack’s” job to answer questions.
@@budsnz it is when you ask silly ones. And he puts this whole ideology clear on display and into the question are we in nz heading down America path of Left wing Ring wing main media because our journalists can’t keep there own ideology out of there journalism?
All people.
We should never decide by race. That happened in the past.
Where? and what was the outcome?
Exactly this is an open door for racism
Racism everyday trolls are using Moari's history to discredit moari happening right now present moment using it to decide Moari's future in a country Moari own?how was that worked out?by stealing the owners lands truth has to be expressed out no repentance they going to hell if someone a atheist they going to hell once truth is revealed the curses will be lifted in Jesus precious name amen
3:06 You've gotta love when politicians justify constitutional changes based on anecdotes about "people who say in my work place a feel-"
Ah yes Billy Bob from Nelson is trying to find an excuse for why he didn't get promoted, better get rid of the treaty principles which are already a compromise for Maori...
So 'diversity hiring' and 'affirmative action' are just made up terms?
After moving to the Waikato from Wellington from what I have seen is that Maori do not care about Maori they love to talk about how Maori are one people and it's complete bullshit. There has and always will be a class war; the Maori elite have no interests in looking after Maori they're only interested in looking after themselves.
So the end result is quite simple David Seymour can see that quite clearly which is putting everyone on the exact same ground with the exact same respect and rights to the land and people who we share this beautiful country with.
I am Maori myself but face constant ostracization from those who also claim to be Maori and from years of having my own Mana dishonoured I believe that the values of Maori that were signed under the treaty to be protected are as dead as those who signed said treaty.
It's time to move on and there is no time like the future.
It's funny how it's only pakeha saying that
Is this really a Maori? I'm reading the way you write and.... the singular video attached to your account is not corresponding. There are many accounts online at the moment that are actually being run by despicable racists with bad intentions and I am concerned. In response to the people you expected to look after you or yours, usually rotten energy is met with such!
@@tanepukenga1421yes there's pakeha pretending to be first nations on all platforms 👀
@@TiffanyTwisted-w3q Ngati Porou and Ngati Pukenga. Yes, I am.
And yes, I know there's plenty of false flag actors pretending to be Maori, I regularly call them out when they try fake te reo. If you looked at my account, you'd see how old it is, so I would've had to think about making a false flag account in the first starting years of youtube, and then carried on using it for well over a decade as a main to carry on the farce. Not that logical, eh?
The main things in the comment above is the "maori elite" comment, which I've never heard another Maori say in over 30 years of life, them advocating for David suckmore and them pretending we don't still have the same values. Again, in 30+ years I've never met another Maori who didn't value family, stability and being able to live how they want.
@@TiffanyTwisted-w3q I am Kāi Tahu and for you to think how you do shows how oblivious you are, you clearly let emotions run your thoughts.
Here is a thought lesson; when someone is on the street talking about how birds are government spies, we apply logic to the situation and come to the conclusion that no that statement is not based in factual reasoning.
Guess what you just commented, your opinion is completely void because the conspiracy you believe simply does not exist.
At the end of the day, I am not your enemy since I'm no elite again it's a class war and I don't own anything no house, no land and no future. I am working-class as in working all the time just to have a roof over my head and food to eat.
And throwing labels like Pakeha around shows how little you bring to the table of conversation, if you have an opinion you need to articulate it instead of just wanting to insult someone because your feelings got hurt by ideas that you don't understand.
That is how children behave, grow up.
Māori don’t want equal rights, they want ‘ special ‘ rights.
Never been equal you live moari if not you know FA
i’m māori, i feel like i have the same rights as you do, only difference is that i’m probably prettier then you
now your learning bra...
funny how it's always pakeha telling everyone what maori want
@@izaiahlomax6239 OMG I very much doubt that
David Seymour ..a true statesman and Brilliant leader ..David has an amazing grasp of humanity and fairness.
Finally gets to have his say, and actually he's right.
The way he slithers around straightforwardly answering questions to go back to his canned 'color blind' talking points is impressive. What's even more impressive is some people seem to un-irronaclly buy his rhetoric.
He makes sense, it's the way I feel. It needs to be clear in everyone's head. Let's bring it on, let's bring to the table.
What exactly needs to be clear? Honoring the Treaty!!!! yes I agree.
Seymour Butts just contradicted himself and tried to dodge Jacks questions so he had to repeat the question.
@@tearkshunta5407 I will say this once the whole treaty and now shut your stupid mouth
Wat does it truly mean for all NZers without diminishing or changing the treaty of waitangi and maori customary rights , , ,
@@Hup-x1y stop abusing the English language you racist. This is a serious disgusting insult Wat is spelt What.
How does he make sense? If this was a world wherein the treaty was upheld from the start we would probably have an entwined government of Māori and Crown at the moment. Not one where Māori are still second class citizens in Aotearoa New Zealand. If the treaty was upheld from the start there would be no situation where they would need "extra rights" (there are no such extra rights, it is just people complaining about having to uphold the treaty) to fix past wrongs by now.
‼️SEYMOUR IS RIGHT!! EQUALITY FOR ALL KIWIS NOT JUST FOR SOME!!👍‼️
No, sadly, he is not.
One nation, one flag, one people.
He is right - far right!
This is the worst racial slinging I have seen in NZ for many years, and now being talked about across the globe; people are now forced to choose sides, many people swayed by paid online social media influencers. I was happy the way it was... didn't affect or bother me as a non Maori New Zealander.
so equality for all is some how racist ....u r confused
Yeah you’re spot on. All I hear is people whinging. People who follow politics, especially via MSM are all doom and gloom. From what I’ve seen David Seymour’s just another woke politician
The principle of equal rights for all is paramount.
Didn't we promised maori their rights for the atrocities they suffered through colonisation of over 100 years, being out numbered and over powered and not allowing them to speak maori at our schools. It seems, now we have changed our minds? And are now going to copy the Australians and go for a majority vote, knowing Maori will probably be out numbered and over powered, so we can put restrictions on their language?
So I'm not sure about equal rights, well not yet anyway. @@JamesClark-cg1qk
Why do you need a bill to feel equal? We all have equal value but what has that got to do with governance? We can't all govern this nation and its resources. We can't all be the Indigenous of a place. So get over it and accept that Māori were here first and many of us live and enjoy their unceded property
Is it not time we, New Zealand, grew up and created, turned the treaty, and this discussion into a constitution?
We already have Commonwealth Magna Carta
Be careful New Zealanders ....be aware that stirring up can come from outside the country
If one party frames the proposals then duscussion is defined by yes and no to those proposals ....if the proposals are mapped out by several participants ,then it becomes more like a negotiation with options being generated .
The truckers involvement in the last covid protest made it more militant and aggressive until the creative ones took over . Please stay aware of divisive dangers .
Just wait until it passes first reading and goes to the select committee then everyone can make submissions and lobby their MPs
I agree with david on this
Equal mana for all. Please make it so Mr Seymour! You have my support!
Jack just got schooled by Seymour, everything Seymour said is true he is way too educated for Jack this is what New Zealand thinks this is why they voted for this government it’s about time the media understand that and every time they insult the government they insulting us. Have some pride in your country😢
Meanwhile...Michael Hill is still getting robbed and the homicide rate in 2024 alone is shocking.
But "Treaty Treaty Treaty" seems to be priority over the safety and wellbeing of "all New Zealanders" 🫣
Seymour has been formulating arguments since he decided to go forward with this paradoxical argument based on equal rights, Tane might not have researched the subject adequately, but thinking an argument is correct because you don't hear a compelling argument in reply does not solidify your argument, it only means you didn't get an acceptable reply in opposition to your opinion.
🤷♂️ ...don't get it twisted!
Nah. Seymour came across sleazier and more patronising than ever. He is a thinly veiled racist. Im talking about chiffon thin here
You think because Seymour throws in a few words of Te Reo in there he knows what he is talking about?
The government can't change the treaty its the treaty that gives them the right to govern the country.
Btw. Where the hell are they gonna dig up 200 maori chiefs to sign off on the new treaty.
well theres yr answer; cant so dont
Exactly, they spoke their intent its all recorded in the Kohimarama Conference papers in fact there's a book now called Kohimarama Conference by Tross Publishing plus other astonishing books of compiled documentation that throws a truth light on deceiving Maori Treaty tougher and racists
He’s not proposing to change the treaty. He’s proposing to change the treaty principles that were done under the Lange govt
It's the 1000 pages of principles that's the problem, it's like adding to the Bible, but because maori brownists have created a monster it now needs to be defined as the Country now has a grievance with the Crown and we matter!!
Who the hell is a chief in 2024 to talk for the Maoris? They can talk and vote by themselves if there is a voting. Anyways I don't think a democracy should distinguish by ethnicity the population, if the majority agrees and there is no differentiation in the law between population by ethnicity (every citizen is equal) no one can have the balls of say "i being mistreated" by be equal to others in rights and duties.
My opinion as Spaniard, by the way, is not my country to know your specificities.
unfortunately 4 jack seymore has quite a profound intellect
Seymour is a right wing NPC, repeating talking points developed in right wing think tanks from elsewhere.
@@Ruru-pj3ve Proof please or else its an accusation or distribution of misinformation
When we are talking about the same rights and duties, all I hear is that western philosophies and systems should remain dominant and be universal. Special status is recognition that as the founders of Aotearoa we decide how to shift our country forward ideologically, together. Through working in collaboration with Māori as tangata whenua we can enrich our society and shift towards equity. Redefining the treaty principles as he has stated seems like code for a 'business as usual' approach which ultimately delievers poorer outcomes for disadvantaged communities, our climate, our economy and human rights. The societal benefits of programmes that increase equity for Māori continue to benefit us all. Just one example is the revitalisation of te reo Māori and the mana and cultural knowledge that it stores, connecting people to their whakapapa and broadening our views on ourselves, philosophy and our relationship with others and the world. There are two world views that were connected through Te tiriti and we are only now, shifting towards integrating both of them in our culture. Kia kaha and lets keep moving forward towards that kaupapa 💜
Maori learnt everything from Pakeha its our Nation of British rule of Westminster everyone loves the Country we built and the peaceful society never mind the rambling racist Maori
I am Tangata whenua on my land thankyou it just means the person's on that land. You aren't tangsta whenua of anyone else's property at all youre definition is erroneous because you just don't know the meaning. This is why NZ voted your type out!
@@StGammon77tourists come to see Maori and the culture we have. They come to see the nature Māori fight to protect. They don't come to see your 3rd class version of a western society. They have better cities to see.
@@ajk4842what do you do to protect “the nature?” Maori are responsible for the extinction of a number of native species
You cannot "unite" two cultures. The definition of culture is "the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society". By that definition two cultures can mix together but never "intertwine" as there will always be clashes. You can only live happily and peacefully side by side. Water and oil don't mix and neither do cultures. That is why part-Maori have such a difficult time with their identity - essentially at some point they come to an identity crisis - am I Maori or pakeha (scottish/english/irish etc)? Which one do I follow? Usually it is the one they had the most contact with or impact from growing up, the parent they identified most with or where they feel most welcome and comfortable. Essentially where they fit. The trouble comes when someone doesn't feel like they fit in either I guess.
Can a pakeha appreciate Maori culture? YES! Does that mean they want to participate? Not necessarily. As a pakeha I really enjoy watching kapa haka, poi and waiata performances. I appreciate Te Reo Maori and think if someone wants to learn it they should. I love a hangi. Does that mean I want to DO kapa haka, SING waiata, SPEAK te reo Maori and COOK a hangi. NO. I totally love the concepts of whanau, looking after and respecting elders and caring for extended family, aroha, mana and sustainably conserving the natural world around us. These are aspects of Maori culture that I agree with and like. But there are other aspects I don't agree with or like. So to say that cultures can intertwine is a nice idea but not reality.
For government, there can only be one system. For NZ that system is a Western democracy. Under that there may be other things like culture, religion, groups of various kinds and political views. But the "system" must remain. There are many other governmental systems in the world - dictatorship, communism etc. But none are as free as democracy.
We need change here. Not only our Maori people are discriminated but the poor, even some rich. It started with only maori, but the powers at be have mastered manipulation and control over all others.
Davey boy playing the foul card that he's placed on all government corporations an asking for a free click
The bro David has had enough lol
hu? do u not understand u cant write a coherent comment like u wer talking to the cuzzys at the fish n chip shop....you come across like a child ...no wonder you lot have been duped for so long by iwi elite ...fools @@Hup-x1y
Change needs to start with the people themselves.
@@Daywalker685 how many times have the people tried over the years but nothing getting done.
Good on you David for pushing of one New Zealand not division.
LOL. He is the one pushing division. Intelligent pakeha have solidarity with Maori. That is unity. Seymour is just playing to the low IQ racists.
Question I ask is from whose book of equality are you reading from?
If that's the case, why is he not fighting for māori with regards to the perpetual leases and every other issue that is not equitable for māori 🤔🤔
@@franciltarau-eagle9150
Who's asking anyone to take away perpetual leases?
Perpetual leases is something Maori Landowners agree too, and is passed in the Maori Land Court.🙄🙄
@@jamesbroughton7635 get savvy with the info before spouting off, many iwi are at battles with this very thing. You need to watch the latest doco by Mata. You know nothing!!!!!!!
The only thing that mattered was the land.
Māori had it, settlers wanted it, the Treaty meant settlers could put in place a government that would only be voted for by those with land, land owned freehold in the European way.
Māori weren’t allowed to vote, because they had the most land.
It took years for maori to get a vote, and even then it wasn’t an equal vote, because they had numbers..
It had to be a special vote, a Māori vote, on a separate roll.
Māori have been dispossessed of their land, a right to have a say in the running of the country.
Now you want to change the rules again, because they have become a force..
Shame on you Act.
You cannot deny Māori the right to Māori land and the laws enacted to give them food, health and education as promised under the land deal made.
We aren’t equal, and cannot ever be, until the 170 years of power and wealth stripping has stopped.
Agreed in full. This is just like when Italian and Nazi fascists stripped rights from their citizens because they thought they should no longer be citizens. Maori being a national group with rights recognised by the Crown as well as their own confederacy of Nations are just an easy scapegoat like fascists always use.
To the bone " deep "
Kiaora te korero!
Maori didn't own NZ. They inhabited small pockets of it, dependimg on the tribe. And Maori males had the vote ahead of non landowning European males.
@@JamesClark-cg1qk and now because of the 2017sir Edmond Hillary global impact visa scam more small pockets of land has inhabitants behind everyone's back .. like it never happened but still is happening cause no one's noticed it pushed through so fast at the begining of the 2017 realm .. . If your a good dancer why come to nz bring your family become a kiwi .. migrants population makes Maori population look obsolete .. looking at current history not digging up old .. Maori 16.5% other 13.7 % what is other in the census homeless 😉
In last 5 years NZ has 4 billion more budget for Māori! All are taxpayers’ paid money!
Are you whinging? I swear it’s all I hear these days. First world problems I guess
Can you a provide link to the resources on where you got that information from?
4 billion lol what a load of rubbish. Stupid gronk
Provide the evidence
@@Ruru-pj3ve Go to the people who got billions in settlements or got billions in separate social institutions doubling up on taxpayer money that could be spend in these mundane things like hospitals where we now have affirmative action by race. A heart attack is surely different depending what color skin one has 🙄🙄
Probably the most misrepresented and misunderstood politician in NZ.
LOL. No.
Thanks David for explanation, it’s clear. The society needs to move forward, and equal human rights for all New Zealanders!
Seymour talks very sensibly. Remember he is a Maori, Ngapuhi, so much to gain in Iwi sense. Even for his family and children, special entry standards in University (say for hard to get in course etc), special housing, special job preference for himself and his family/relatives/children. A lot of land and money payback to go to his group (probably more for himself as he powerful and a great speaker).
He FORGOES all these for equal rights for all New Zealanders as we matured into a new nation now; he sees as proper human rights and proper rights of society for all. Mull over with depth, is it not a great way for the nation forward? Or should we keep protesting, bashing our head on a wall until it bleeds, flabberghast you in Te Reo and add the haka for emphasis to get the other point across. We have to sit and judge for ourselves as each individual in NZ what is truly right.
David is ethnically Māori and has Whakapapa but is not part of any Marae or has citizenship in any Iwi. He is European through and through. I will never say he is not ethnically Māori but lets not say he will be a part of Māori organisations or wants to be. He just trots out the "I am Māori" to bash on them.
He went to that hard Māori school.. Auckland Grammar
seymour is not ngapuhi, what sort of fairy world are you living in? he just got a historic wero and shat his pants. stiop talking about this guy as if he is something
@@kingdavid3066😂
@@illogicalslayer9856mmm ok so you’re just a filthy racist.
Seymour is brilliant. Smart high IQ and aiming to improve those lives that matter.
I would like to show my respect to David - raising this issue requires massive courage. I also like his way of grasping the fundamental problem - the equality of human being. What attracts talents to New Zealand, an isolated island in Pacific, is not only the fabulous view, kind people (Tahiti also has them), but more importantly, a modern and advanced governance. Without the equality of people, the country partially becomes a tool to produce wealth to a small group of people based on their bloodline. Who is going to join just to be a ``slave”? In such cases, New Zealand will degrade to a third class country. Leadership is to find a direction for the future. I can see leadership in David.
Don't compare Tahiti to New Zealand. Tahiti, or French Polynesia (which is probably what you are referring to) are not even self governing. They have been under French rule since the 1840s and are considered French citizens. This is a way of stripping people of their identity and their autonomy and is essentially what the coalition government are trying to do to the Tangata Whenua of Aotearoa New Zealand. You think Maori are given more job opportunities because of their heritage? How about when people are given jobs because they speak Mandarin? What do you think about that? Do you think that's biased as well?
David Seymour's argument has many flaws but the one obvious one is the assumption that after suffering decades of oppression and being deprived of their own resources, which others used to amass generational wealth, a people can be told, "we are all now equal" and that will be enough. 😂 This is so naive it's laughable! Equity is the only way to right those wrongs, and equality is not the same as equity.
So you think Maori have suffered and they are actually entitled to special privileges that's laughable your a little bitch Maori have suffered 180 years and not even alot of Thier suffering is Thier own fault they where fucking slaves by Thier own people brutally fuck your a little girl Maori even fought with the British to take land off other iwi also you little bitch you think Maori have suffered way more than Europeans the first Europeans to live with Maori known as the pakeha Maori where all slaves well alot where alot of them where enslaved by Maori alot rose to high ranks they are known as the pakeha Maori because they became fluent in Maori and wound up with tamokos Jacky marmon is a well known pakeha Maori also the treaty was signed by English and Maori you think Maori have suffered what about the Irish they have suffered from imperialism to be honest this whole narrative is weak and cowardly and low IQ no common sense if you look at things from a scientific and humanitarian point of view
Also you little girl Maori aren't native it's like trying to say the Vikings are native to Greenland because they discovered it and settled the land first how pathetic get real
You need to talk to those who got the billions in settlements.
@@PeterHemmingson yes there are some of us that have climbed out of the crab barrel. But who put us in there in the first place? British did when they took our lands, killed our people, and continue to disregard the effects of what they did to us.
I agree we need education to get us out of the hole. It is up to us. But we will hold something against you for wronging us in the first place. Trauma does get carried down through generations but a single person can change their cycle. Just as benefits of wealthy families are able to carry wealth through generations unless someone decides to through it away.
It doesn't change the fact that British had placed Māori in a disadvantaged position, and then just expect us to catch up to them instantly.
@@PeterHemmingson James Cowan is another British paid historian writing what his own interpretations of oral accounts. Of course British would down play the number of Māori they killed. The west still down plays their killings of people today. Māori were different in which they over stated the number of people they killed through oral history. It doesn't matter tho, the British still have a long history of killing natives where ever they went.
"Wrong the rights of the past" a notable Freudian slip by David Seymour as his conclusion of this interview...
Perfect.
Ok so using what Seymour is saying i want to see the coalition agreement and I want to make changes to it by kicking act out. Does that mean I can?
No, but You can be the village idiot 😂
Sure, just start a party, win a portion of the election and form a government. Seymour isn't one person, he is the leader elected to represent people of NZ. You, are one person.
@@chrisallum9044 Ok so just because 246,409 people decided to vote for that, that means that 5,006,500ish (give or take) also voted for it? That doesn't make sense.
@@chrisallum9044 as for the rest of the coalition, its hardly a win when it was the lowest turn out of voters in the past 3 elections alone, which means less people voted, and they still could NOT form a majority govt. That doesn't scream that a country as a whole decided this. Only the select few of course. 🤗
@WW-ne5lb Absolutely. It takes them three parties to become a government, and before they can even get off the ground they had to form a coalition agreement.
That will have by default forced compromise in each parties camp.
That does not mean in ANY way shape or form that NZ were all for three different parties to run this country. Luxon got in to power by the skin of his teeth which should be more than enough to show people that he did NOT have overwhelming numbers to get over the line on his own. It was hardly a landslide win by any measure.
They should have had a vote, from the population, in 1840, regarding the treaty, not in 2024
Treaty was a vote
The host is wrong in saying 194 years. It’s just 184 years.
Treaty was the vote
They did and it ended in war cause the Brits didn't care. Maori brought their greviences to the crown and the crown just turned a blind eye
80,000 Maori v 2,000 Europeans. How do you think that would have gone then?
Worrying that our Associate Minister of Justice thinks the highest court in the land is the "NZ parliament" (8:25) and that NZ is a republic (11:20). Beyond that Seymour's argumentation is muddled. Seymour cherry-picks his way along a spurious line of argument, invoking the highest principle as the deciding factor on one hand and then the most practical as the deciding factor on another. He clearly does not understand much about Universal Human Rights as these are intended to append to persons as individuals and not to human beings (5:23 ) as a species. They are distinctly related to personal and collective identity and therefore the rights of indigenous persons to maintain their identity are equal to that of non-indigenous persons to maintain their identity and vice versa. This is made very clear in the many articles of the Declaration of Human Rights and subsequent covenants and conventions. His meandering argument in which he attempts to equate the impracticality of compensating the "many people in this country who have come here landless, penniless..." (13:00) (who had or have no contractual basis for compensation) with the Crown's duties to continue to uphold the constitutionally binding agreement they made in 1840 with the signatories to the treaty is just plain silly.
so cant merge human rights with tribal rights....as we have seen in nz iwi elites have had all the benefits, and i dont understand the issue with crown payments being peenys on the dollar by todays market valuations as when land was confiscated nz did not have the infrastructure upgrades it does today....wuld ngati whatua be worth over a billion dollars if auckland cbd wasnt a financial hub ?
@@222-i6o- tribal , indigenous, and treaty rights are not only not in conflict with Universal Human Rights, they are the rights that in a decent society must be upheld as they in general are the rights individuals and collectives who are most disadvantaged.
Seymour is insisting on a very simple formulation of equality before the law, a kind of justice as process. However useful to neoliberal political thinkers hell bent on making all aspects of the economy, society and environment open for exploitation, process justice is likely to eliminate the important nuamces of distributive justice in the form of justicecas fairness, and in the process "scuse pun" deprive many indigenous people of their rights and the capacity to flourish.
indigenous ppls are not alwys disadvantaged, and there rights need to be upheld as equal citezens of a cuntry....playing favorites is a road to oppression its plain and simple u cant have one ppls above another ....free market economics has made us a 1st world capitalist nation the state cant build an economy only private enterprise. maoricorporate iwi have billions its time thy spent tht money on ther ppls @@blinka1
I'm so impressed with David and his intelligent calm responses
You’re easy to impress
He’s delivering an aggressive notion calmly - if he wasn’t calm he would be put in a mental health unit. His delivery is deliberate
So intelligent he called Aotearoa a republic and thinks we should get involved with German politics.
Yep, David is probably the best and brightest politician NZ has had in a great many years. Some lesser intelligent folk find intelligence a threat to their flawed opinions, and thus they make petty comments instead of putting forward anything intelligent. Some of these folk will even resort to violence sometimes because they have no answers.
The two distinct parties that made an agreement, no longer exist. It’s New Zealand now. There are different cultures within a nation, but law and rights are equal to all. What people decide to do with that, is there choice.
I think NZ has done well over the years, and in the spirit of cooperation and the good of the nation, we will continue to evolve and flourish.
Some might be a little more, all about their group only.
Go David. Best politician we have in NZ
So hard working people who gained land are now striped because theya ain't maori wtfrk
I like that Jack tries to pose questions to make politicians uncomfortable, but the whole "it was a contract between two distinct parties" approach is just weak. I can have a contract with my employer that says that my rate is 5 nzd per hour and I have to work 24/7 - it doesn't mean that this contract will be legitimate - because we have laws that are above contracts. Current government can renegotiate the principles because the government is not the crown, but the descendants of both parties who signed the treaty.
The new principles effectively make the treaty irrelevant and erase singling out the native population from the other groups in any shape and form. If ACT have their way, the Maori will effectively become just another ethnic group that lives in NZ - no different from, say, Thai or Irish. The only question that everyone should ask themselves when they consider their position on this, is whether they support the fact that native population should have any kind of special status or not.
Treaties are by definition contracts between states. The treaty was not illegal at time of signing so your "contract was invalid because the terms are not legal now" is basically saying I will tear up the treaty. Once the treaty goes Māori will fight for their stolen land in any way they see fit. Not just getting back a fraction of what they are owed as now in the settlements process.
Māori if the treaty was followed would probably not need to have more resources allocated for them because our legal systems and governance styles would be intertwined by now. The genocide they suffered by the Crown would not have happened so they would likely have a population that is more equal to 50% of the country. If they have special rights (they don't) or get more resources or opportunities it is only because of the abuse suffered for 184 years that was put off for so long.
Your lines of argument make no sense.
It was between Chiefs and Governors and noone can take their place they're dead! All we have is their pre and post Treaty Conferences at Kohimarama for all to read. The mess we have now is due to Maori breaching the Treaty and dishonouring the Chiefs by mis quoting or not quotingvthem at all! Everyone needs to read the Kohimarama Conference records
@@StGammon77 Europeans breached it worse than Māori ever did or could you numbskull.
Ngamihi bro.@@illogicalslayer9856
@@teawaruaedwards274 Hey brother thanks for the back up. If you read the history without any bias it is hard not to come to my position. So if anyone brings that "Māori arguments that ignore reality" I tell them to read any non Hobsons pledge members argument who studies this stuff. They usually take this line of Te Tiriti is not a cessation of sovereignty and that this country would be a better place if the agreement was upheld.
Maori ceded sovereignty, the crown was given absolute authority. You ignore the writings of your own past leaders, and have woven a new history into New Zealand 🇳🇿 that is not true. Treaty breaches? What about the 1000 complaints laid against maoris ripping of settlers in the NSW court, that the Waitangi tribunal don't want a bar of. Biased, equals not fit for purpose.
Equal rights for all? His proposed principles explicitly give more rights to land owners!
Are you in charge of the gulags?
Listen again
Not true@@JamesClark-cg1qk
Sadly this govt is backed by private investors - they will be erroding pakeha rights as we as Māori have pre - existing rights.
If someone is kind enough to explain me, why ACT:
- focus on this as if it was the most important thing to do?
- why passing that bill, what really going to change if accepted?
- why so much opposition? Why so many people are against? What are their views? Should we be concerned by this proposal?
🤷 Neither in favor or against, just lost in this political/societal debates
It's a massive deflection to distract us, while they get on and pass bills that screw average kiwis.
1. Act got voted into govt, the treaty principles bill was something they campaigned on. It is important for a govt to focus on the things they campaigned on, because that is the policy that people who voted want.
2. it will change the interpretation of the treaty by the courts and as a constitutional document
3. opposition is part of a democracy, however the opposition did not win the election, so we should not be concerned that there are people who disagree.
This is the most important thing in my opinion. If you work for a number of years in New Zealand, you will feel that the resources, rights, promotions, are not fairly distributed, even taxpayers money. People with Māori bloodline, even only 1/4 of Māori, has much higher privilege than immigrates from other countries. The evaluation is not merit based and is not fair. NZ is an immigration country, a remote island in the middle of no where. If it cannot retain talent by treating them fairly, talent just can leave, to Australia, to US to elsewhere. If the trend started by the last government is not reverted, New Zealand could become a Māori country, close its door to the outside of the world, a doomed dead end. For example, if travelers to NZ need to learn Māori language to live here, who would stay?
1. They likely campaigned on this as a way of appealing to people with anti-left sentiment especially based on 3 waters and co-governance before the election.
2. The main thing I see that this Bill looks like it wants to change is that third principle, that "All NZers are equal". It's hard on the surface to disagree with equality as a principle, but in answer to your third question, in effect, it seems Seymour wants to use that to remove the protections that have been written into law to try to restore the rights of Māori in things like consent with Iwi (for an excellent summary of why Iwi consultation and co-governance should be protected, read @ajk4842 's comments), and they are against having any kind of organisation designed to protect Māori well-being. National and ACT are already doing things like dismantling the Māori health authority, for example, despite being well aware of the inequalities faced by Māori (he is quite happy to go on about the statistics that make Māori look bad but ignore what kind of societal injustices led to those statistics in the first place). People are also against the underlying racism in assuming that "all New Zealanders" would actually do anything to include the views of groups other than the dominant one. Personally I'm extremely concerned about the proposal. I don't think it will go ahead (at least I hope it doesn't), but I think he'll do a lot of damage with the racism it's going to stir up (a few comments in this thread back that up). (Edited for typo)
You're reinventing the wheel? We covered this with the Lange Labour Government, and the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal which resulted in the many individual iwi claims nearly half a century ago now. The Sea Lord deal, and the many asset reclamation for confiscated Taonga have been recompensed somewhat with the Tipene O'Regan Chairmanship of the Tribunal. First and foremost, the overarching principle addition which is important to note is the removal of the Crown and the British Privy Council from Waitangi settlement proceedings, that has been well and truly established. The ACT Legislative proposal further emphasis this fact with their first proposed Principle. It is in actuality a preemptive step towards a New Zealand Republic via Principle One of the Act Proposal. I agree with it, being a former Councillor for the Queensland Branch of the Australian Republican Movement, I would strongly advocate for this principle wholeheartedly. The rest of the proposed principle bill proposal seems to resonate citizenry egalitarianism which would undermine the Tangata Whenua Article II entitlements for the Tangata Whenua from each respective Iwi, Hapu, Kainga claimants to whenua taonga (Assets). The notion of equality of citizenry rights superceding the Tinorangatira or Governance by the Tangata Whenua is assimilationist and denudes the special tinorangatira status of the Tangata Whenua.
This contentious and somewhat Egalitarianism before the law, whilst empowering for all New Zealanders denude the special status for the First Nations people of New Zealand. Right from the outset, you have opened a can of worms, a Pandora's Box whereby all First Nations Peoples worldover will pounce onto White Assimilationist New Zealand like the Denizons from Hell will outrage all First Nations People since the Post Colonialism enlightenment (the Awakening of the First Nations Peoples worldover) White People call this WOKE Culture. They despise with venom WOKE which seems to be synonymous with the LGBTQ community rather than the First Nations people, and the Black Lives Matter people in which WOKE culture moniker was intended. With the LGBTQ community capturing the WOKE Moniker the First Nations people have been tarred by the same brush with the Silent Majority derision and outrage. Needless to say, the Waitangi Treaty amendment may be considered an Egalitarianism proposal to directly challenge the Tangata Whenua, under the guise of Citizenry equal rights for all New Zealanders. This is a morally reprehensible mistake and will adversely affect the 5th Principle the Redress principle under the Lange Administration back in 1984.
The ACT proposal passes the Republicanism by stealth priciple test, but, fails to address the second article of the Treaty of Waitangy with specific reference to TinoRangatira principles for the special claimant rights for the Tangata Whenua. This will lead to civil unrest and racial tensions throughout New Zealand Society. The Pacific Islanders themselves will enjoin the Maori in this First Nations effrontery by the ACT Party. It is White Supremacy denudation of the Tangata Whenua through Government Legislation. If the entirety of the three proposed Principles passes then there will be outrage by the Maori Community. If the First Principle passes, then that would be considered very acceptable by the Tangata Whenua. The Second Proposed Principle which affect the denudation of the Tangata Whenua tinorangitira status to New Zealand citizenry equal rights this removes the Tangata Whenua from their Status as Tangata Whenua by merely being considered an equal to all New Zealand Citizens even with regards to rights to freehold claims in hitherto Customary land claims by the Tangata Whenua on a case by case litigation. The Third Principle of Equality of citizenry democratic rights denudes the Tangata Whenua Customary Taonga rights which will open a pandora's box of Hell for White New Zealand Society moving into the next New Zealand election when the ACT Principles, if it is legislated into Parliament, will easily be repealed by a returning New Zealand Labour Government. nonymous with the LGBTQ community rather than the First Nations people, and the Black Lives Matter people in which WOKE culture moniker was intended. With the LGBTQ community capturing the WOKE Moniker the First Nations people have been tarred by the same brush with the Silent Majority derision and outrage. Needless to say, the Waitangi Treaty amendment may be considered an Egalitarianism proposal to directly challenge the Tangata Whenua, under the guise of Citizenry equal rights for all New Zealanders. This is a morally reprehensible mistake and will adversely affect the 5th Principle the Redress principle under the Lange Administration back in 1984.
The ACT proposal passes the Republicanism by stealth priciple test, but, fails to address the second article of the Treaty of Waitangy with specific reference to TinoRangatira principles for the special claimant rights for the Tangata Whenua. This will lead to civil unrest and racial tensions throughout New Zealand Society. The Pacific Islanders themselves will enjoin the Maori in this First Nations effrontery by the ACT Party. It is White Supremacy denudation of the Tangata Whenua through Government Legislation. If the entirety of the three proposed Principles passes then there will be outrage by the Maori Community. If the First Principle passes, then that would be considered very acceptable by the Tangata Whenua. The Second Proposed Principle which affect the denudation of the Tangata Whenua tinorangitira status to New Zealand citizenry equal rights this removes the Tangata Whenua from their Status as Tangata Whenua by merely being considered an equal to all New Zealand Citizens even with regards to rights to freehold claims in hitherto Customary land claims by the Tangata Whenua on a case by case litigation.
The Third Principle of Equality of citizenry democratic rights denudes the Tangata Whenua Customary Taonga rights which will open a pandora's box of Hell for White New Zealand Society moving into the next New Zealand election when the ACT Principles, if it is legislated into Parliament, will easily be repealed by a returning New Zealand Labour Government.
Historical records show instances where certain Maori chiefs or leaders entered into agreements with European settlers to sell land without consulting or obtaining the consent of all members of their tribes or communities. These transactions, often facilitated by language barriers, cultural misunderstandings, or coercion, resulted in significant loss of land for many Maori communities. The benefits to Maori chiefs who engaged in selling land without proper consultation with their tribal people varied depending on the circumstances. In some cases, chiefs may have received immediate material gains such as weapons, tools, blankets, or other goods from European settlers in exchange for land. Additionally, they may have perceived the agreements as a way to establish alliances or secure protection from potential conflicts with other Maori tribes or European settlers.
Yeah, sure. The historical records compiled by the european colonizers.
The european colonizers were the most perfect human beings ever. Never killed, never looted, never forced, and certainly never abused the naivety of the more naive natives.😂
@@mordfustang3794 my brother don't act like Maori were perfect either. The tribe i whakapapa too, Ngati Whatua, was defeated and disbursed by Ngapuhi (Hone Hika) in the 1800s. Maori were not stupid either. They took the opportunities they had at the time, traded and fought as they saw fit. The nature of humanity does not change just because the resources they have access to were less.
No the treaty has never been Honored it was dishonerd by pakeha not long after being signed .
They knew what they were doing and you know that
@@BlackStallion_19 yes some chiefs knew they were selling land, they had no authority over, to disposess land underneath their enimies feet. British wouldn't care to establish the true owner of land before buying it from the so called owner. They just wanted the land by any means. Let someone sell your house they have no authority over and the government (that's meant to protect your rights) allows it, see how pissed you get.
We sold our boat witha written signed agreement for $65 thousand but it was worth 3 times that!! Will the new owners please compensate us ??
Ridiculous - move on grifters
Maori are not the indigenous race. We have a treaty with those who ate the original occupants.
That's another English myth made up story. Ask the Moriori, they still survive today.
Oh sheez. Really? This incorrect rhetoric is the result the NZ education system not knowing/teaching Aotearoa NZ history.
What a dumb and misinformed thing to say
Dude doesn't even here the contradictions in his argument- just glazes over with, I don't accept that! He doesn't understand the treaty is an internationally ratified document by the highest court on earth. Made in perpetuity, should've seen Mahinarangi Forbes face when he gave her the- "I don't accept that"🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
Good you on Jack.. although a brief interview, it is pertinent and gives a better understanding on Acts aims to give clarity to where all of us are in NZ today concerning our founding Treaty (not constitution). It was after all a Treaty to bring sovereign rule to a country that required peaceful settlement with its indigenous inhabitants. The treaty was not intended to provide seperate rights to one group of people… and for it to be interpreted as such is ridiculous … let’s bring focus back on its intentions and what it now means for all kiwi’s to have equal rights under NZ law..
If that was the purpose of the treaty to peacefully take over why did they then break the treaty, subject them to the genocide suffered in all other colonies after they broke treaties there too? Seems like it is just the English playbook, make treaties then break them, genocide the indigenous people during the take over.
Wrong - 1835 He Whakaputanga already recognised the extant sovereignty of Māoridom. 1840 Te Tiriti in te reo Māori reaffirms this sovereignty and invites the Queens representatives to govern the settlers only.
The corporate theft of the 19th century Māori economy sent the nation down the institutionally undemocratic racist Nation Māori have been protesting against to have Aotearoa New Zealand honour the equality promised in the constitution of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
All David is doing is creating a smoke screen by employing the cute concepts of “mana” as his way of attempting to suggest all Kiwi’s were signatories to Te Tiriti … they were not … Only Māori were signatories with the Crown on behalf of the Nation - redefining that history is effectively erasing Māori history, culture and language by an unjust outcome of David’s pathologically ignorant definition of the history of Te Tiriti.
David is the ultimate simp who is the perfect example of Paulo Freire’s statement in his Pedagogy of Oppression where he illuminates the following:- “The colonised seek to become like their coloniser” and David is that colonised Māori seeking to profit from his service to his coloniser who are his corporate sponsors seeking to remove Te Tiriti from their access to as yet unexploited natural resources protected by Geoffrey Palmers current Principles defined in the 1980’s and now fully integrated in 86 pieces of Treaty Settlement Acts since 1996 valued at a pithy 1% of the total stolen 19th century economy lost to sovereign Māoridom through illegal invasion, genocide, hegemonic policies and institutional racism.
In a nut shell 🐚
Were we watching the same video. 😂 This gives context and validation as to why Māori have stood against this bill. Equality sounds good but when you’ve had 184+ years of discrimination and systemic racism, it just hasn’t happened and this is with the current Treaty principles. You see the so called ‘Gravy train’ people talk amounts to pittance in comparison to the land and resources lost. Equal to Māori could look like everyone learning and understanding the Māori culture and language alongside English.
@@YoCalmYaFarm Just like Tibet where the Han Chinese immigrants learn Tibetan at school.
95% of people in Tibet know the Tibetan language. There are about 10% of Han in Tibet so that means they learn it at school there.
Press on David . Dont look back WE ARE ALL BEHIND YOU .😮
This gives context and validation as to why Māori have stood against this bill. Equality sounds good but when you’ve had 184+ years of discrimination and systemic racism, it just hasn’t happened and this is with the current Treaty principles. You see the so called ‘Gravy train’ people talk about amounts to pittance in comparison to the land and resources lost. Equal to Māori could look like everyone learning and understanding the Māori culture and language alongside English.
theres only one gravy train and thats the pakeha gravy train. pakeha are squatting on stolen land.
The solution to discrimination is equality not more discrimination.
Pakeha, you seem to forget a few basics. You also have Pakeha ancestry, also your great great great grandfather may be one of those that took the land you speak of, many kiwis came after those times, you also forget that Pakeha brought to the then Māori who were still in the Stone Age, the wheel, iron tools, justice, currency, education, stopped cannibalism and slavery. Also if you look back at your European history you also might find that your great great grandfather was also leaving the oppression of England. Do some research and look on the bright side of life, you have the same self determination as everyone else, your choice to live in the past or make a go of the future
@@marsspacex6065 cool so we should get started on the equality and not, as act want to do, discriminate against maori MORE
And your maori ancestors were cannibals, slavers and wiped out entire tribes including their children and raped and enslaved the woman and raped them, but i do not think you have anything or blame you for that. Because there is no such thing as inherited guilt.
In 1835 Maori were declared a sovereign nation under He Whakaputanga which was recognized by another sovereign nation the United Kingdom. Maori as the sovereigns of Aotearoa entered into a partnership with the British Crown via the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840 bringing about a new beginning for both Maori, the Crown and Non-Maori (British Subjects) currently living in Aotearoa at that time.
This is the distinction between Maori and Non-Maori living in NZ. Non-Maori citizens living in New Zealand are not Treaty Partners, they are beneficiaries of the Te Tiriti because their Sovereign formed a relationship with Maori. This is facts but it does not mean that Maori are not inclusive, this does not mean that Maori want apartheid between Maori, the Crown and Non-Maori residents and citizens living in Aotearoa/New Zealand both past and present.
So to look at Maori in the same light as you would a Non-Maori citizen is incorrect. The correct way of looking at things and the structure of New Zealand is and should be the following...
There are two authorities and two powers in Aotearoa / New Zealand...
1. Maori
Under Maori you have all Maori descendants who are beneficiaries of He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Non-Maori descendants who reside here in Aotearoa under Maori Sovereignty who have come into Aotearoa through Maori.
This does not apply to Non-Maori residents who have come into Aotearoa by way of the Crown.
The reason why this is not visibly seen is because Maori are yet to establish a Whare o Nga Rangatiratanga o Aotearoa (Maori Parliament) and suffered colonization and assimilation by the Crown representatives for the last 184 years and continuing.
2. The Crown
Under the crown you have British subjects and Non-British subjects which includes all Non-Maori and Non-British citizens that resides in New Zealand who have come into New Zealand by way of the Crown.
The Governing stewards of the Crown have spent the last 184 years strengthening their hold of the country by way of deceit, fearmongering and establishing a narrative that Maori are ugly, despicable, criminals, violent, thieves, supporters of apartheid, lack the capability of governing and managing affairs and that Maori just wants to take from everyone for their own self benefit.
No, the Independence was from warring tribes done together with the missionaries they adopted the CMS flag of St George's flag. Those Northerners mostly became Christians and that is the separation under God!
That's what maori are like tho, don't mirror onto us the former Chiefs told it like it was in the 1860 Kohimarama Conference records read them!
The majority voted to redefined this treaty and the Govt can't go back on it's word.
Act got about 9% of the vote?
@@ajk4842maoris got 2.5% lol
@@StGammon77 I actually voted National.
But 9% is still not the majority voting for treaty reform. National didn't campaign on a treaty referendum.
the treaty was signed by maori and the british crown, no one but those two parties can change it
11:42. this is about what we have here in New Zealand. Treaties overseas are for those people to figure out, nothing to do with New Zealand. The politicians should leave this to the Courts as we have done for the past 40 years or so. We already have universally applying Laws here in NZ along with being part of the Maori or Crown side of the Treaty and Tirity. I am quite happy with this thanks. No need to change anything.
Agree what do internal German politics have to do with us?
I think as Maori, we are Tangata Whenua, people first to populate this land. I think we see it as our House, the Europeans busted into our house and set up shop in our house and started causing problems. We were like "fine, if you wish to be here, these are the rules and agreement, sign the treaty, and we live in partnership in this land". Europeans ended up killing us reducing our population, confiscating land, Europeans have then invited more of their other European family, and friends from all other parts of the world, now we are outnumbered in our own house. Now they have power to out vote us on policy that affect us in our own house? How would you feel if someone came into your house and out powered you in your own house when you were trying to live along side each other?
I am Tangata whenua on my property thankyou miss snob!
@@StGammon77 Congratulations to you. I'm Male by the way. My pronouns are "StGammon77's Dad" hahaha
Read some true history and educate yourself .Thats how Maori operated prior to 1840. Commiting genocide of other tribes. The stronger tribes taking what they wanted, whenever they wanted. The treaty with Crown sort protection for Maori from the marauding tribes. Maori killed more Maori than any colonial army ever did thats fact. Seems to be know appreciation for the advancement of this country built by colonial and Maori side by side since 1840. Maori had already wiped out all Moa and were struggling to find enough food to be sustainable. Colonials introduced domestic and wild animals for food forveveryone. this was a good colonial thing. There were more positive than negative outcomes.
@@racingescorts6976 no one is arguing maori killed more maori than colonial forces did. Most of us are grateful for Europeans taking us out of cannibalism and tribal warfare, into the modern area. We understand that.
We may have taken out the moa, but Europeans have taken out other species and some are almost gone today. It's only later we realise the mistakes of humans.
What we don't like, is even after signing the treaty that was meant for "protection" of supposedly all NZers, British still favoured the European settlers stealing land from Māori. They did it sneakily by enticing one willing or drunken single Maori, to sell land of 100s of people. Māori living and occupying that land had their homes ripped from under their feet. After peaceful protests, they were seen as rebels and then Brittish forces came and pushed them off. Brittish knew the strength of the Maori communal living needed to be separated and individualised into a single title to obtain land for settlers.
I am tangata whenua on my land thankyou biarch
David Seymours answer to proper compensation.... Dollar for dollar value would put NZ into debt..... . EXACTLY NZ has has debt on its hands to all the Maori that were shafted, betrayed and taken advantage of due to a lack of knowledge and not to mention had their trust violated by corrupt colonialist.
Time to extend your heart and apologise properly. Compensation isn't just going through all the nuances of the law in order to give as little as possible back.
Apologies are extention of love and support in order to encourage trust and bring healing over the trust that was violated.
But no colonialist are too self interested, prideful and arrogant
Stfu were voting NO! To your bullshit
One of the things I like about David Seymour is that he makes perfect sense when her answers questions.
By contrast, look at what Natalie Coates said in her interview - just a load of emotional meaningless dribble at best. She was not able to leave viewers any the wiser about anything.
How can Maori expect to move forward in some positive way when they are not able to articulate any coherent sense?
perfect sense… did you see the reporter have to re address his question?
Nobody is asking THE QUESTION ." WHY did Maori want to sign a treaty in the first place ? Impress me.
It was a baptism into new Mana and tikanga Christianity total change of lifestyle
Its interesting that the written Maori language in 1840 was in its infancy. History says Hongi Hika instigated the written Maori language on a visit to England. He died in 1828, only 12 years before the treaty was signed. I would suggest that the Maori was not very advanced at the time of signing and the amount of interpretation that has gone on since is merely opportunistic
Idiot just because they were orators doesn't make them as stupid as they were when they were missionary literate, learn the reo of your conquer idiot
the irony of all these angry people posting on here is every working New Zealander, and often those on benefits have a lifestyle today that the richest man on earth 100 years ago could only dream about!!! Back then he had no internet!, he could not travel the world by jet!, refrigeration did not exist! he had a car with no radio,power steering, rubbish tires, no airconditioning and no electric windows not to mention it was slow and uncomfortable, there were poor food standards, medicine and healthcare was very basic by today!! He could only communicate by landline or writing a letter, he had to write a cheque to pay for something!! He did not have access to the roads and bridges we take for granted, there were no supermarkets back then, He lived at a time when the whole world was at war. polyester and nylon velcro and lycra all unknown to him!! Yet all these people act they are hard done by!!! the world is so hard!!! Wake up!! you are living in a nation where you are free to vote!! two thirds of the world's population cannot do that today! You have choices in your life because we live in a free country!! and you are living better in almost every respect than the richest man on earth 100 yrs ago !!
What % blood are those who identify as Maori? Aren't most of us a mix of many races/nationalities now? Do we have that data?
It seems so strange how so many are willing to discard 75% of their heritage for 25%, e.g. Kelvin Davis.
Blood quantum is a racist European idea. You should look into how citizenship is actually done in Iwi or other Indigenous nations such as Cherokee.
Strange?
It’s a family trust.
Ask the Todd family to forgo theirs.
@@illogicalslayer9856 The U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., ruled that these descendants have citizenship rights in the Cherokee Nation “ In accordance with Article 9 of the 1866 Treaty, the Cherokee Freedmen have a present right to citizenship in the Cherokee Nation that is coextensive with the rights of native Cherokees.” The Cherokee Nation did not appeal the decision.
@@johnflave In favor to whom? Don't you think that the majority of people who settled worked extremely hard and their mortality rate was high. It was no easy feat to establish an infrastructure, settlements and social institutions. Every person today in NZ benefits from their efforts. Mind you, with those pot holes, waiting lists to get care etc. one wonders whether we go back to the "good ol days".
The principals should have been put to the people of Nz and we should have voted on them it a general election, that’s how a democracy works
If there is equality in NZ now, why does Moari student have lower passing grade requirements than other students?
source? Im in school mate u have been seriously mislead.
Ask your self?????
That is a canard. Canard being a lie. A racist one at that.
@@haydsbeks6550 Rural students who score lower on tests than non Rural get into medical school with lower passing scores in premed. Because you need more rural doctors. Same with minority groups. They all still pass the same standards, it is a good thing that it happens for rural and minority groups to serve those communities better.
@@haydsbeks6550 I couldn't find data from NZ but Aus has a 80% rural medical student retention rate in the rural areas they come from. We can say that since they are similar to us we will have similar numbers or at least above 50% which is enough to make the program viable.
For minorities in many nations there are up ticks in health outcomes if the minority group is seen by a doctor of their own group. Now to improve health outcomes by any doctor would need all doctors to become culturally competent for all groups of people within Aotearoa New Zealand which I will support alongside these programs.
There's more Chinese in NZ than Maori lol
Chinese make up 5.3% of the population, this is not true.
White people too
I love that David Seymour is apparently a Te Reo Māori expert now and has the “correct” interpretation of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. He obviously has no cultural understanding of the meaning of the words or comprehension skills in reading, writing or speaking Te Reo Māori to understand its text in relation to the Treaty of Waitangi. His views on the both documents are heavily influenced through colonialism, western views and bias perspectives. His narrative is divisive, racist and disgusting. He’s pushing an agenda of assimilation which Māori have been fighting for a very long time. Btw, this is written in English so the people that support him can understand better. As apparently that is the only language y’all know, ka aroha ki a koutou ngā kuaretanga 😉
We can’t be equal if the playing field hasn’t been equal for over 100 years with the amount of historic and systemic racism that has happened. Māori lands were taken, Māori traditional medicinal practices banned, Māori were sent to native schools where they were beaten streamed into labouring jobs and taught to bow to white women. There are still kaumātua alive that lived through this. You can’t talk about equality if the starting line is unequal to begin with.
For someone that wanted to discuss Māori issues. He clearly doesn’t want to do that with Māori or he would have gone to the Hui ā motu and Rātana.
No solution in your comment , just a speil of wrongs that even whites put up with?? Offer solutions if you actually care about it
He doesn’t understand te tiriti at all. Or he does, and hates what it says because he know it gives Maori tino rangatiratanga and the government a governor an that’s it. What people forget is that we’ve been forced into a white mans system, a white mans world. And many of us haven’t thrived in it. If the shoe was on the other foot, white oriole would’ve probably feared better than we have in their system. We need to take back our power, our sovereignty and reaffirm and reassert it by creating our own parliament. That’s what they’re trying to do I heard whispers of it. It will be a govt for all people, it’ll just be our people leading the way with tangata tiriti on board the waka. We can leave thr w.h.o, the UN, and all these other bullshit organisations and become a self sustainable sovereign nation. How does that sound? 😊
I don’t agree with either of you. You can keep looking back or forward. The chinese were discriminated against. I know a dutch women up north who was married to a to an iwi member up North Her Maori work mates would not talk to her. Until they found out who she was married to. I have a friend who looks chinese and was told she was not a proper maori. I think you guys need to. Get off you high horse and realise you are not the only people with historical grievances. My mother a Japanese prisoner of war has had to let it go. Her son has worked for a Japanese company for over 30 years. I would agree even in the 80s things were wrong. Maori jokes were racist. And put Maori down not perfect but a lot of progress made since then. What will you take back. You want 100s of iwi chiefs?
@@chrisnipper9163you best get back on your hoiho ehoa, the discrimination of Maori is still happening today. Read comments from this forum, its all white privilege, racist, discrimination. Get over yourselves!
@@chrisnipper9163 it’s not about historical grievances bro. It’s about what te tiriti says. And it says Maori have sovereignty over themselves. The UN and the WHO etc want to get rid of this because it flys in the face of what they’re trying to get us to do. Even look at the document he whakaputanga. It creates a sovereign nation for New Zealanders that exists alongside the authority of the king. It makes each one of us a sovereign being under God. Not that we needed that to get that, but it just reaffirms it in a Declaration of Independence. My main gripe is that this govt is illegal under te tiriti and they have sold out to global powers. I want a govt that will take care of our affairs at home first and turn us into a self sustainable sovereign nation. Both Te Tiriti and He Whakaputanga give us that opportunity.
The Waitangi Tribunal failed NZ. There nothing in the treaty about redress and their reading of reciprocal is also not in the treaty. The exchange was about property, protection of property, rights and duties under the crown.
The Maori version in Article One clearly states the crown will govern over “their lands”, as in Maori lands. Article One being the main point of the treaty. To them think Maori have complete authority of their land is makes no sense. It’s obvious that the point was that Maori have the right to their property and resources on their land, like everyone does, not government over the whole country which is clearly defined in Article One .
Treaty breaches?
But no discussion about the Maori breaches of the treaty. No discussion of the Maori land theft and genocide of other Maori.
What was the backdrop of the treaty? The musket wars that killed 20,000 and wounded 30,000. That’s why protection from the crown was central to the treaty signing.
equal mana for all? does that mean were all going to be wealthy ? because i earnt my mana and if you want some you can earn it too, but if its mana for all i better be wealthy
earnt your mana by squatting on stolen land.
@@chriswhata grow up .
Mana isnt just wealth
Seymour wants equals RIGHTS for ALL NZers Non Maori and Maori
Yeh Pakeha and non Pakeha
Shame he lives in a country where Maori were the original inhabitants, and Maori made the mistake of letting the whiteys in. Would be good to see the Maori just kick everybody the fuc# out!
And Im a whitey
There's no Maori left they married our men 😅😅😅
Maoris are mostly Euro non maori
We all have culture, some have survived only to be attacked over and over, wake up now 😢
Who signed the treaty? Why do Māori think we the people owe them? Got a problem go to the uk and see the people you signed with
The treaty is a treaty it's not a surrender document.
Yes it was sorry look around you
@@StGammon77 def not. Changes require unanimous agreement between all signatories not a referendum by one signatory.
The Treaty was a surrender a simple nullity
@@TrakaBatwell as David pointed out the Tribunal has been doing that for 40 years without an ounce of explanation or consultation of NZdrs who you seem to think have nothing to do with it but oh we do, we are ALL protected by the Treaty, our purchased lands, our Tikanga Christianity, customs, traditions, beliefs, ways etc but Maori don't have the mandate to shove their bs up our noses and on our public spaces or private lands! Should stayed on your territory but you didnt you assimilated to our lifestyles cos it was supreme it cannot be changed we are mixed now, all Pakeha culturally
@@StGammon77 actually doesn't change anything.
Everyone still think this is about equality for non Maori? ...or seizure of all our lands for American empire?
The treaty is clear already. The treaty gives Maori rights should the Maori ask the crown to forfeit there right's
Have you actually taken the time to read it yourself, honestly I can tell you haven't. The Te Reo version is tiny, its poorly written and extremely vague, makes vague refences to land ownership but does not actually define who owns what as an simple example. Hell there is still arguments around Maori ceding sovereignty to the British Crown even though its clearly written in both versions.
read it your self-
In Article 1, the Treaty in Māori gave Queen Victoria governance over the land. In English, it gave Queen Victoria sovereignty over the land
In Article 2, the Treaty in Māori guaranteed rangatira ‘te tino rangatiratanga’- full rights of chieftainship over their lands, villages and taonga (treasured things). It also gave the Crown the right to deal with Māori in purchasing land.
In the English version of the Treaty, rangatira are given ‘exclusive and undisturbed possession’ of lands, forests, fisheries and other property. The Crown was also given an exclusive right to deal with Māori in purchasing land.@@Battleneter
@@jasonpoihegatama1347 The argument is Maori did not understand what they singed, BUT then these same people argue its a legal binding live document, its ridiculous lol
Some Maori do make that argument it is they did not know they were going to be treated bad by the crown and become second class in there own land. However the treaty agreement is clear legal binding document @@Battleneter
@@jasonpoihegatama1347Maori have EXACTLY the same rights as me. I should add NZ has become a modern democracy, the British Crown is all but gone, entirely symbolic, its the main reason why the treaty is largely pointless here in 2024. Most Kiwis that identify as "Maori" here in 2024 also have European ancestry, makes the entire debate even more stupid. But we know its about land and $$, that's why this stupidly drags on.
I'd like to hear Seymour's "many examples" of countries that have failed miserably because they have indigenous rights? I wish Jack Tame called his bluff on that one.
I like how Seymour states that as a Nga Puhi bla bla, and then claims to be a poor, part Scottish immigrant. Pick a lane and stay in it, rookie
NZ is a current example of how this coup detat takeover of 50% of Govt is NOT WORKING!! Doesn't work in South Africa either the Country is a mess and look at Palestinians turned into barbarians teaching kids to hate and kill.
Bottom line is no rights or acknowledgment to tangata whenua -indigenous people of Aotearoa.
Wow I wished they acknowledged this ‘mana’ to all people at the time of the signing of the Te Tiriti because it was all one sided.
Yeah, the indigenous peoples around the world, tangata whenua are still fighting for the injustices from colonisation.
When the Treaty was signed the lowest person in the land and highest person became equal under the law. That protection meant no more tikanga massacres, cannibalism or slavery. Everyone was equal and worthy. What greater mana could be afforded than that? It is easy to forget how revolutionary and beneficial the Treaty was to Maori.
Not "no rights or acknowledgment to tangata whenua" but rather EQUAL RIGHTS for all. Im indigenous to NZ...but you, being a racist, exclude me because of my race.
@@kiwiyogi2846 Europeans were still practising cannibalism and slavery at the same time.
That you don't know that and single out indigenous people is just racism.
Te Tiriti would have been revolutionary had the Crown adhered to it as a bi national state with proper representation for all, foreigners through the Crown and through Hapū Māori, with joint decisions made between the Crown and Hapū. What happened is that Māori were regulated to second class citizenship and that you don't acknowledge that is racist.
@illogicalslayer9856 Your racism is showing through loud and clear. The British ended slavery out of the goodness of their heart and for no other reason. You won't acknowledge that because you are racist.
"A bi national state" is pure fantasy. There are no mergers only takeovers. The British took over NZ and the Maori got themselves a great deal.
Now Maori are over-represented in parliament and two of the leaders of the coalition government are Maori. That is the result of the fairness of the British system where everyone is equal.
Lots of Maori don't want any part of your corrupt tribal grift.
Indigenous? , wasn’t there other peoples on the land before Māori sailed in?
Universal Human Rights for the win woop.
All NZ should understand te Tiriti benefits all Tangata Tiriti (NZ citizens) and the motivation behind ACT and co's efforts to dismantle it. Te tiriti protects NZ water from foreign/private ownership or control. This is behind the we are the world BS from Seymour. It is an ugly con job by Act on behalf of their private international funders. #ToitūTeTiriti #AtlasNetwork
Your forgetting the Foreshore and Seabed Act changes under John Key that allow iwi overriding rights over other New Zealanders for use of our Beaches and access to them
@@glennanthony3165 The Queens chain exists too.The thing many non Māori don't understand or value is the difference between ownership and kaitiakitanga, guardianship. This benefits all tangata tiriti.
Never happy. After another 50 years, they will want it revised again, and again, and again...