There is no way a media company of any description in NZ is going to support what he says or even listen to him. There are government polices, processes and funding in place that they would lose. And probably career suicide for the person. NZ is not big enough for any of them to have a career if they started supporting hm or anything he says. You only get supporters on the Internet because nobody is going to get behind this without it been anonymous. The only supporting "media" are you tube media because they are not dependant on the system. Its why if there was a referendum it would be major problems because most NZ'ers would support his position.
Its so sad that a group of people has made it so bad that you now feel the need to clarify your race before commenting about a fact that I believe most people in NZ would understand, how can you not- this place is magical. ACT seems to be the only party wanting to unite the nation.
@@duandebeer2669 I totally agree! Seems some maori think they are the only ones with deep connection to this magical land…. They are so wrong 😑 And yes, how sad I have to state I am not one , but have a depth of love for the land that I suspect is deeper than any of them could ever feel.
I love how there leaders pocket all the money and there communities look like shit, just like the African Americans one day New Zealand will learn but many people would have already died this country will either end in civil war or will become India there is no other way now
David is like a teacher trying to help delinquent kids understand that theft and violence hurt everyone at the end of the day. Te Pati are like kids who realize that crying and screaming and threatening have a big impact on weak parents.
The Hori from Epsom called David Seymour, got slapped in the mouth TWICE last week from his Principle Luxon and the DP Peter's. Howzat that for teaching?
I think your description of Te Pati māori reflect Davids behaviour as a child. He Doesnt listen to anyone, has a tantrum when people ask for real answers and much like a thief he hides his intentions. And then theres Te Pati māori, telling him to stop being a seymour and be a Do-Mour 🤣
@@tukauaetaufitu-moses7140 Do you have examples of such a tantrum? I have only seen him answer calmly and clearly when journalists try to goad him into making any stupid response they can clip a sound-bite out of. Please, any examples would be great, to expand my understanding
@@tukauaetaufitu-moses7140 r u kidding? When has he ever thrown a haka display in parliament when he dosent like the topic people are talking about? Just a thought.
Me too was just wondering if we tpm objectors should put in our own petitions to the govt to let the country of nz know we don't agree with this bi cultural rascism and elitism!!!!
Nz gangs are tame. White Australian organised crime groups in nz are an infinitely more significant threat to new Zealand. You're just anti maori because they look different to you.
And do you really understand the legal implications of breaking a treaty and what Dave and the Atlas Network want to achieve in NZ? Don't just rely on one politician and their views control this non issue. Think for yourself....
Seymour is so correct he hit the nail on the head. These Maroi Mps don't run this country the new Zealand government does, these races racial Maori Mps need to be voted out, most Maori just want to live a normal life with all races under on unbrella.
@@corrietabak5573 who created racism? Definitely not Maori… the only Maori you know are the ones you see on tv I bet.. no need to hate so much it must be tiring for the mind.
@@GavinWhitmore And what exactly makes him racist? Point out one thing he said that's racist. I can point out countless things said by white people in this comment section that's wildly racist.
You can’t scrap the treaty. It’s already been fulfilled when Maori ceded sovereignty, became British citizens and got equal rights and protection under law. The Waitangi tribunal was MEANT to be just sorting out any unlawful violations of British law under British sovereignty against Maori as British citizens from the date of the signing of the treaty.
@@Matt-us1gt The point being raised, in clear English, was that this bill is just a ploy to sell the land and resources to foreign investors. And what was his response? "Oh nah all New Zealanders love New Zealand🥴" that didn't address anything. It completely doged the question.
@@tumatauenga6433 So you agree that all New Zealand should have the same rights? and that the real issue is foreign investment in NZ. Being against foreign investment in NZ doesn't mean u think that Maoris and others should have different rights tho. What David Seymour was trying to get across is that being born a maori or being born white or asian or whatever doesn't change that we're all from NZ. The belief that Maori are entitled to things that others aren't is inherently a racist belief. Because what if we lived our lives in a similar way? because you're a different skin color to me you get different rights to me? I'm trying to hear your logic because im curious.
Jenny May is alway crying oppression despite being a professional sportsperson and highly paid TV presenter all her life. She's probably lived one of the most privileged lives in human history.
Yep her, the members of TPM, Willie Jackson & TJ Perenara for some of the most entitled, well off people In this country they do alot of complaining about being allegedly oppressed
Moriori are simply Maori who washed up on a different island. They adapted their culture to suit life there. That worked for them until they were colonised by Maori and many were killed by Maori in 1835.
No, wrong. Just like certain plants are indigenous to certain places on earth, you can’t move a Protea from South Africa to NZ and call it indigenous even if it thrives there for over 100 years.
@@fionam.1784 Yes you can because everything was all one land mass once.. The land mass broke up into what it is today.. Māori's are not indigenous, they were just stuck on that piece of land as was all other 'races".. Where do you draw the line.? Let me guess, you draw the line on what fits your narrative..
Seymour's awesome and presently the ONLY politician determined to defend his corner. I don't subscribe to all his policies but with his courage there's only one choice for me in 2026 (I've never voted ACT).
@@Arms26Maori have to stop saying they are indigenous they arrived by boat and when you arrive in any country to settle by a mode of transport then you are an immigrant,like all the rest of us.
How are the maori not indigenous? Maori didn't exist before their ancestors settled in nz, and became the indigenous people of an uninhabited land. And before you bring up the moriori, I'm from the chathams, and there were no moriori in mainland nz. They are only from the chathams.
@@TimGuy-q2d My observation, the 3 Māori in this clip have European heritage and at what period do you become indigenous. 400 years or do you still remain Polynesian? Can I claim Māori heritage as one of my GG grandfathers was born in NZ and kidnapped by the Maoris and held by them for a period of time?
But he didn't even say anything you knob. The claim put forward was that the bill is a ploy to exploit resources his response was "oh nah bro we all love NZ 🥴" you people are braindead
Unfortunately so long as the media and Govt (All the other parties) side for racism and racial inequality then we are destined to continue down this racist path.
It actually need to get more apparent that Maori "want" in equality and separatism. These small minded Maori activists will cause major problem if not nipped in the bud. Luxon is a one term PM!!
Maori is the special class since they are the original owners of the land. The rest are foreign immigrants. The land owners should have more than the immigrants
TVNZ is very disappointing to a lot of people. It fails to deliver a fair point of view in many issues. I now do not want to even turn on the TV for their broadcasting.
@rustyboyspeed Oriini Kaipara has pakeha lineage whose DNA test results only show Maori DNA. She's 98% with 2% said to be background noise, which you get with every DNA test. She was told she's 100% Maori ✊🏿 were there's one of us there's more of us we're on the rise 💯.
Maori we're the immigrants who owned the land like native Chinese own China and the native Spanish own Spain Nga Puhi tangata own Nga Puhi Whenua, New Zealanders (kiwis) are forgien immigrants Maori are the native immigrants 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:10
New Zealand is home to people from diverse backgrounds, including many who have moved here from overseas and now call this country home. These individuals often approach New Zealand's cultural and historical context with fresh perspectives and may not share the same sense of historical connection or obligations toward Māori people. As a result, they may question the idea of Māori being afforded distinct rights, viewing such measures as inconsistent with principles of equality. For many, these views are deeply held and unlikely to change through persuasion or educational efforts, as they perceive such distinctions as fundamentally unfair.
@@nyamnyam1416 you don’t even need to perceive them as such, simply put: they are unjust and biased toward one race only, maori. Nothing about that is acceptable or lawful.
Maori need to pull their collective heads in as they are not indigenous to New Zealand. They are on an equal footing as anyone else who arrives here in a canoe ,sailing ship or jumbo jet. Moriori are the first settlers of New Zealand and they have the respect to be grateful for what settlement has brought them..Be interesting to hear their take on things.As for a news reader with attitude being given a role like a cultural clown, just shows how twisted the whole reality is.
I hear things like this a lot. In this case, it's very obviously a false dilemma if you've been paying any sort of attention to the body of work ACT has managed to achieve in their short time as a member of this coalition government. This is one part of ACT's policy. Meanwhile, they've been fighting for and quietly achieving on a frankly surprising range of issues. Just off the top of my head (and not saying I support or agree with all): Charter schools, Oranga Tamariki reform (with an actual eye on protecting children... who knew?), employment relations, work on personal grievance law, work on the Arms Act, massive overhaul of the RMA, working for farmers with emission standards... there's more but these are just the very few that popped into my head. All are focused on humanist values and economic principles of fairness and ability to trade fairly and voluntarily, and "do more with your property" while ensuring all rights are preserved. What's 1780 about any of that? But I get it, wouldn't want to let facts get in the way of a cheap and easy sarcastic response. Honestly, whether you support ACT or not, I don't think I've EVER seen a political party work so hard and achieve so much, all of which they SAID they would do. That's not how politics is supposed to work! 🤣
@GreigMcGill you miss understand. I 100% agree with ACT. Luxon is weak and not meeting my expectations on the race issues NZ has. My issue is the amount of energy and resources which are wasted on a merry go round of grift. Its a distraction thats bringing all of NZ down for all of NZer's, regardless of which fence your on. It needs putting to bed once and for all. Then people can decide if its a country which has a future for them or not and can decide whether to stay in NZ or not. 2026 is my deadline for NZ to sort out its shit. Maoridom is not inclusive and I will not live under IWI control. We already have co-governance by stealth as just proven by Tauranga Counsel. I have given up on Luxon. If by 2026 ACT or 1st have not made good ground to stop Maoridom, we leave for good. Doesnt effect you or all the Maori trolls on here, but I dont see a future under Maori control. To much self interest, not one policy for non Maori and know global awareness at all. Look at the industry already closing and the effect is has on areas. South Africa is a mere blueprint of how bad NZ would become under Maori control.
It frightens me sometimes how easily and stupidly people can go through life- NOWHERE in the known universe has apartheid or any form of segregation or legislation based on race (racism by definition) worked to further the economy or humanity. There are too many radicals out there pushing for the separation of the nation, albeit through systems of process or service delivery that resemble BEEE. As an immigrant who fled such conditions, it has become hard to ignore the signs. ACT is at least speaking about it and trying to remind us that we are 1 nation, KIWI's! NOT SUBDIVISIONS classed by HOW WE LOOK, if you choose to live in NZ you accept the social contract, the same contract applies to all. As a very young country we have an opportunity to shape our culture, let it reflect our diversity and highlight our combined strengths. GOD save NEW ZEALAND
Most NZers also see the signs. Its the weak Politicians like Luxon that is the problem!! In the 1860's it was nipped in the bud. The rebellion by a few Maori caused a war!!
What I'd like to know is why the treaty is still considered to be a valid agreement at all. If its essentially a contract then it should surely be null and void on the basis that neither party understood its wording fully. The crown believed maori were ceding sovereignty based on the english version and the chiefs believed they were retaining it based on the Te Reo version. If an analogous situation went to the courts today between two parties then i reckon the court would rule the contract null and void. Im no lawyer, but it seems odd to me nobody has seriously floated that concept given how much debate there is on the matter
they understood fully as all the speeches afterwards by the chiefs are on record , every one. and when the kohimarara conference was help in 1860 all those speeches are recorded for us to see and read. The problem is thr real english draft , the Littlewood draft" sits in archives NZ and they say they cannot find it. But we have many copies , it is an exact word for word of the Maori treaty bar 2 spelling ,mistakes. the problem is they use the rogue Freeman version which is totally different.many are unaware of these facts and MSM dont want a bar of educating the citizens , they want to indoctrinate the school kids ie the latest "booklet " which is a total mis rep of the history ... we cannot re write history we must honour it, we are all equal under the crown .. time to move on from them and us , we are all Kiwis..
I am also... all the hard working and greatly contributing citizens of NZ need to be given the recognition as equal citizens, irrespective of their ethnicity or heritage, and the democratically elected government must have the right to govern.... Maori must be the only race of people in the world who fight against being classed as equal they act like the spoilt over indulged children they are! The greater majority of Maori have a very small amount of Maori blood in their dna... the Packer woman is 3/4 European 1/4 Maori for a start.. the majority of her dna is European.
I used to like Jenny May. She was a top Sportswoman, seemed Bubbly with a sense of Humour. Now she seems to be a bitter and hate filled person. I think she spends too much time with other haters .
The local Iwi where I live are so interested in the environment that they grow pine forest on the land gifted to them. If they were so interested in the environment and the people they would have planted it in native bush and not be actively trying to block people from entering the forest for recreation. The council stopped planting pine on council owned land because of the fire risk and to improve the local rivers and environment. As soon as someone from the maori party starts bleating about "the people" and "the environment" I switch off because it's ultimately all about money to them as the local Iwi has proven.
@@karenrhodes9973 Iwi have all sorts of veto rights in resource management act at present, If i dig a hole at my property I have to pay one or two to sit outside my house while I do it, and they do not have to tell me what they are there for. They have claimed to have a special spiritual connection to 1/3 of the land in Queenstown lakes area. My niece missed out on getting into Medical school in both auckland and otago to part maori students with lower grades. Moari wards on councils. Some examples of race based priveledge.
They wouldn't lose any human or civil rights or any intangible or qualitative mythical rights like they are eluding to but are unable to describe.They would lose the disproportionate influence they have over the democratic process, that's what they are really mad about. They just won't admit it bluntly.
Jenny may time to move on. For that role you need to be a journalist or an entertainer. You fall well short of both. An embarassement to new Zealanders.
Pre European Moa were driven to extinction along with many orher species. The pre European fondness for Huia feathers made them extinct. The Native bush from Blenheim to Christchurch was torched also.
Te Tiriti ensures Māori are at the decision table. Partnership ensures that all laws passed meet matauranga (lessons learnt from the past) and ecological (mana whenua) criteria that affect all New Zealanders.
A typically logical and succinct reply from David Seymour. I'm sure even his opponents would acknowledge he's a highly intelligent and effective politician. One of the most impressive of that much disparaged class in the world today, in my opinion. I have no doubt he will be PM before the end of the decade. I just hope he has decent security, because some who can't win by fair argument and discussion resort to other means.
Well almost the whole world is at war with themselves because people are in their country telling them how they should be living I can see a storm is brewing
I don't really get why these two often use Maori words when there is an equivalent English word or phrase that would allow the English listeners to understand what they're talking about without having to google what they mean. I had to find that "Moana" means Ocean - according to one source. The majority of what they're saying is English and saying some words in Maori doesn't seem to be an attempt to teach others the language through inference, but more to mystify the meaning. They try to make it sound like the concepts just can't be understood without knowing a sort of Maori cultural nuance which is only possible to convey using those Maori words.
KAWHARU’S RE-WRITTEN TREATY Complaints that ACT Party leader, David Seymour wants to “re-write the Treaty of Waitangi” don’t stack up, considering that Te Tiriti was quietly re-written under a Labour Government almost 40 years ago. In 1986, the Lange Labour Government commissioned Professor Sir Hugh Kawharu, Professor of Maori Studies at the University of Auckland, to produce a contemporary translation of Te Tiriti’s Maori text. At the same time, Kawharu had just been appointed to serve on the Waitangi Tribunal, a highly influential appointment he would hold for 10 years from 1986. At the time of his Tribunal appointment, Kawharu was also a claimant on behalf of Ngati Whatua, working on his tribe’s various Treaty claims, and representing it in the Bastion Point land claim negotiations. Hardly someone without an axe to grind. Many might also recognise several conflicts of interest. We might also ask why a further back-translation was needed, when James Busby’s final English language draft, and TE Young’s 1869 back-translation compiled for the Native Department, were already available. Kawharu’s deliberately mischief-making back-translation of Te Tiriti was accepted as definitive by the government of the day. His radical reinterpretation of Te Tiriti soon morphed into the manifesto of the Maori Sovereignty movement. Kawharu’s New Zealand Dictionary of Biography page describes “a man of quiet persuasion” noted for “persistent advocacy for the Maori right to exercise rangatiratanga (self-determination).” “Rangatiratanga” or Māori self-determination lay at the core of Kawharu’s reinterpreted Treaty, complete with 11 footnotes radically redefining key words away from what was understood by all in 1840. At footnote 7, he asserted that “rangatiratanga” in Article II of Te Tiriti meant “the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship.” Ignoring the historical record of what the chiefs actually said on the lawn at Waitangi, Kawharu declared that this “would emphasise to a chief the Queen's intention to give them complete control according to their customs.” In arriving at this conclusion, Kawharu completely overlooked the fact that “rangatiratanga” as used in Te Tiriti at Article II narrows any broader meaning it might have to being a right to ownership and control of land and personal property. He also ignored the fact that Te Tiriti’s guarantee of property rights applied to everyone here on 6 February 1840, both white and brown. By redefining “rangatiratanga” as self-determination, Kawharu set up Te Tiriti to be used to justify Maori sovereignty aspirations. His commentary around the word “kawanatanga” in Article 1 was a further re-write. Kawharu asserted: “there could be no possibility of the Maori signatories having any understanding of government in the sense of ‘sovereignty’.” Eyewitness accounts of the treaty debate on February 5, 1840 at Waitangi, say otherwise. The primary source account in CMS printer, William Colenso’s “Authentic and Genuine History of the Signing of the Treaty of Waitangi” shows that the chiefs were well-aware their acceptance of Hobson would place him in authority over them, and that behind Hobson was Queen Victoria. Kawharu’s assertion at footnote 6, that the chiefs could not comprehend “sovereignty”, opened the way for the false claim that the chiefs never ceded it. His third substantial re-write applied to the word “taonga” in Article II. At footnote 8, Kawharu asserted that “taonga” included “all dimensions of a tribal group's estate, material and non-material - heirlooms and wahi tapu (sacred places), ancestral lore and whakapapa (genealogies). “ This opened up the public purse to Maori claims to anything and everything, including assets not even in contemplation in 1840, such as radio and television frequencies. Kawharu’s Te Tiriti reinterpretation has allowed radical activists to glove-puppet politicians and jurists into adopting his political manifesto dressed up as a Treaty translation as the basis for judgments and policies. Kawharu’s reinterpreted Treaty text was the one applied by Cooke CJ in the NZ Māori Council Court of Appeal case of 1987. Kawharu was one of 20 radical activists submitting affidavits for that case along with New Zealand Maori Council chair Sir Graham Latimer, historian [sic] Claudia Orange, land march activist Whina Cooper, history lecturer and Ngai Tahu claimant Harry Evison, medical practitioner Mason Durie, and accountancy professor and later Maori Party chairman Whatarangi Winiata. Legal Positivists apply the law according to law and precedent. Their commitment is to upholding the Rule of Law. Judicial activists are woke social justice warriors. They apply the law acco in rding to their own social and political opinions. Here, the rule of law is trumped by personal opinion filtered through the lens of social justice concerns. The rise of judicial activism in New Zealand traces back to Lord Cooke of Thorndon (Robin Cooke), a liberal bleeding heart who should never have been allowed near a judicial appointment, let alone to preside over New Zealand’s highest Court of his time. Lord Cooke had, during the course of his legal education, been heavily influenced by another judicial activist, Lord Denning, of the British Privy Council. Here’s David Baragwanath, Counsel for the Appellants in the 1987 NZ Māori Council case from which the Treaty ‘partnership’ fiction derives, skiting about the outcome at a commemorative symposium held some 20 years later : “I began to read [Dame Whina Cooper’s] affidavit [asserting land somehow had a special meaning to her as a part-Maori]. By the end of the first paragraph , the President’s familiar handkerchief was out. As it continued, his emotion was evident. By the end of the affidavit, Dame Whina had taken the case from his head to his heart, and we had captured him.” Say goodbye to the rule of law. Kawharu’s redefinition of “rangatiratanga” as “the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship” underpinned the Court of Appeal’s finding in the Māori Council case that Te Tiriti was “akin to a partnership.” This bogus reinterpretation soon made its way over to the Waitangi Tribunal, on which its author was already a key player. The Kawharu rewrite later formed the basis of Sir Geoffrey Palmer’s five Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi. These five principles, kawanatanga, or government; rangatiratanga, or self-management; equality; cooperation; and redress, were published on 4 July 1989. Leftist academics, the Waitangi Tribunal, and ‘woke’ senior public servants, then amplified the partnership’ fiction over succeeding decades, culminating in the Arden Labour Government setting up a Treaty Partnership Ministry in 2017. This in turn blossomed into the He Puapua blueprint for two governments by 2040, one by Maori for Maori; the other a fully bicultural version of what we already have, subject to a tribal monitoring committee. Behind these developments are wealthy tribal entities flush with ill-gotten pee from Treaty Settlements, greedy for political power over their non-Māori fellow-citizens. In summary, the ‘Treaty Partnership’ ideology behind these developments traces back almost 40 years to Kawharu’s rewrite of Te Tiriti and the government’s adoption of Geoffrey Palmer’s Principles For Crown Action . Bypassing Kawharu’s reinterpretation, ACT leader David Seymour has based his three brief principles on Te Tiriti’s actual black letter wording and the recorded contemporary understanding of its meaning and intent in 1840. ACT’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill would provide that: 1. The government has the right to govern and there is one government for all New Zealanders. 2. We all have rights within the law to “tino rangatiratanga”, or self-determination, and to ownership and control of our lawfully acquired property. 3. We all have “nga tikanga katoa rite tahi” or the same rights and duties. This poses a major problem for brown supremacist part-Māori riding a Treaty commonly misrepresented today as justifying Maori self-government. For brown supremacists to argue against Seymour’s Bill is to deny and dishonour the selfsame Te Tiriti that their tupuna signed up to in 1840. In 1922, Sir Apirana Ngata summarised the effect of the Treaty of Waitangi with considerable clarity, finality, and certainty: “Article I of the Treaty transfers all chiefly authority to the Queen forever, and the embodiment of that authority is now the New Zealand Parliament. For that reason, all demands for absolute Maori authorities are nothing more than wishful thinking.” “The Treaty … made the one law for the Maori and the Pakeha. If you think these things are wrong and bad then blame our ancestors who gave away their rights in the days when they were powerful.” New Zealanders are becoming increasingly aware that there are two Treaties, the 1840 treaty and a 1986 re-write. So let’s have and be accepting no more of this nonsense that David Seymour is “rewriting the Treaty.” Outrage over ACT’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill boils down to this: the fear that brown supremacist part-Māori who have turned their white ancestors into a toilet bowl to identify monoculturally as ‘Māori, might lose their unearned ethnocentric privilege. As Thomas Sowell reminds us: “When people become used to special treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.” ENDS
Great comment, however there is another problem with the Kawharu translation. His translation of the 3rd article contains the term "ordinary people". Now that terms sticks out as a very odd term in such an important document. It should strike you as very, very odd that he used the term "ordinary people"? Well, here is the text in Maori... "tangata maori katoa o Nu Tirani ka" Now anyone, even someone who doesn't speak Maori can see that Kawharu was being deceptive there... It says "tangata maori" That means Maori people... NOT ordinary people... he hid the fact that this section is referring to Maori by replacing Maori with ordinary! So the Maori text actually says... "For this agreed arrangement therefore concerning the Government of the Queen, the Queen of England will protect all the MAORI PEOPLE of New Zealand and will give them the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of England" So... when you get past the activist deception you can see that the Maori text explicitly surrendered sovereignty in the third article as well, in exchange for rights and duties of citizenship. And this of course means that the activists are telling us the exact opposite of what it actually says. So try to remember that when Maori try to divide us into tangata whenua and tangata tiriti... In the treaty of Waitangi... Maori are referred to as tangata Maori. Every person born here is both tangata whenua and tangata tiriti, we are all people of the land and the treaty. Basically in order to swallow the activist interpretation, the majority of people need to believe that "ordinary people" refers to non Maori... that's the deception that Kawharu was getting us to swallow.
@ The word “maori” in article III is small “m.” At that time “maori” didn’t refer to an ethnic group it simply meant “otdinary” as you correctly identify. So article III gave ALL the natives-not just the chiefs-all the rights of the English under the sovereign power henceforth prevailing as per article I. There was no need to include the white pre-Treaty settlers in Article III, since they were already British subjects. Article II already protects their property rights, so that’s them covered.
Would liked to have seen the rest of this interview. Clarkson no match for David Seymour. TPM know full well the result should there be a referendum. 😊
Seymour is quite possibly the most intelligent and erudite thinker and leader we have at present. TVNZ has been shite for a long time, and TBH Te Pati Maori actually come across as the racists and Coffin, sour as she is is little better - thy dont have an all NZers together agenda, they have a me/ us agenda
In signing Te Tiriti, all Maori - including the chiefs - became not ‘partners’ but EQUAL SUBJECTS of the Crown in a nation state the white settlers would henceforth create where none had existed before. EQUAL SUBJECTS means INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENSHIP - nothing more and nothing less. Te Tiriti cannot possibly be construed as a guarantee of perpetual group rights to brown supremacist part-Maori (with an ever-declining Maori blood quantum). It is ludicrous and intellectually incoherent to propose that the cession of sovereignty in Article I, restated in Article III, would be countermanded-as the delusional now assert-by a reservation of chiefly authority in Article II. “Sovereignty” means “the supreme power or authority.” It is thus Constitutionally impossible for a sovereign to be in ‘partnership’ with a subject or group of subjects. On 6 February 1840, one party [the Crown] absorbed and digested the parties of the other side [the chiefs and those whom they represented]. This rendered Te Tiriti from the moment it was signed analogous to a used table napkin after a meal, and other than as a historical artefact, about as relevant. Feel free to tell us all: (1) how Maori could enjoy all the rights of the English (Article III) without becoming subjects of the Crown; and (2) how Maori could enjoy all the rights of the English (Article III) if still subject to tribal-style rule by their chief(s) (Article II as claimed by the delusional). NO PARTNERSHIP 1. Before Te Tiriti was signed there was no collective Māori or nation state. 2. Prior to 6 February 1840, what is now NZ consisted of two main landmasses and some offshore islands inhabited by around 600 ‘dispersed and petty tribes’ of subhuman cannibal savages in a constant state of war with each other. 3. Ngapuhi were in mortal fear of the French after French warships bombarded a pa site killing hundreds, following the vile massacre and cannibalism of Marion du Fresne and his crew. 3. Maori tribes throughout the land were in mortal fear of one another after two decades of Musket Wars started by Ngapuhi had more than halved their population. 4.The wiser and more farsighted chiefs knew that only by becoming subjects of the Crown under a single sovereignty and system of laws could they be protected from each other and from annexation-minded foreign powers. If you believe otherwise you have four challenges to meet. Betcha can’t even do one. 1. Point to the Māori words for ‘partnership,’ ‘principles,’ and ‘co-governance’ in Te Tiriti. You can’t, because they never existed. 2. Put up a link to a primary source document containing the words of even a single chief who when Te Tiriti was debated thought that he was being asked to agree to a ‘partnership’ or ‘co-governance’ arrangement. You can’t, because no chief is on record as having held or expressed that understanding. 3. Explain why, for 147 years between 1840 and the NZ Māori Council Court of Appeal case in which five activist judges invented ‘partnership’ and ‘principles’ out of thin air, NOBODY was claiming Te Tiriti was a ‘partnership’ or ‘co-governance’ arrangement. Probably because it wasn’t. 4. Explain why, if Te Tiriti was intended to be an open-ended ‘co-governance’ arrangement, it is expressed in terms that confine its meaning and intent to the permanent surrender of whatever sovereignty subsisted in the chiefs at the time. An open-ended co-governance arrangement would surely have been worded at Article II: the Queen of England HER HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS [emphasis added to additional wording] and “the chiefs THEIR HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS [emphasis added to additional wording]. “Tino Rangatiratanga” would have been used in Article II in an entirely unrestricted manner, not narrowed as it was to being a guarantee of property rights TO BOTH MĀORI AND THE SETTLERS ALREADY HERE. 5. Even if Te Tiriti was intended to be an open-ended ‘co-governance’ arrangement-I’ve already shown it was not-any Treaty has a lifespan, and the passage of time will invariably render it redundant. A clear example might be where one party to an agreement had effectively ceased to exist. For instance, imported bloodlines have so diluted the original Māori race to the extent that it now only exists as a cultural concept. As far back as the 1970s, the Labour Government passed the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974. Most ‘Māori’ by that time had more of the blood of the coloniser than of the colonised. This meant the existing legal definition of ‘Maori” by blood quantum no longer applied to most New Zealanders: “A person of the Maori race of New Zealand or a half-caste descendant thereof.” The notion of ‘Māori’ as a ‘race apart’ for political purposes could only be sustained by altering the legal definition of ‘Māori.’ After panicked complaints from its Maori MPs that soon nobody would be able to prove eligibility for the Maori Electoral Roll, Labour struck out the blood quantum definition of ‘Māori,’ replacing it with: “A person of the Maori race of New Zealand or any descendant thereof.” If you genuinely believe the meaning and intent of Te Tiriti was to confer separate, different, or superior group entitlements in perpetuity upon brown supremacist part-Māori-with an ever-declining Māori blood quantum- you’re delusional. Go boil your head to clear your thoughts.
Cut the BS! Maori Party are Full of it. Maori are better off without these anchors holding back Maori. Maori people are hard working and extremely underestimated by TPM.
Over the last 10-15 years I've seen language of indigenous people around the world change to being the stewards of the land, careers of the land. why was this not 30 years ago?
Yes David, thanks for boldly, calmly and intelligently talking about these issues with the attitude of inclusivity as opposed to those who are utterly devisive...
She is obviously biased and not really fit to give an independent interview. We have long since stopped watching tv one breakfast shows and any others that have a predetermined agenda.
I'm fine with tangata whenua having first dibs as long as everyone born here is tangata whenua. Calling 5th generation Pakeha (with no other citizenship or ancestry visa pathway) second class citizens is a sure-fire way to have them not support your agenda.
So Mr Seymour, where does your right wing capitalist ideology fit and operate in Te Ao Maori. It just doesn’t fit…..and that’s why we need the Treaty..
She wasn’t listening to him at all. Sighed when she thought he’d said enough! I’m so sick of her and TVNZ.
I don't take anyone seriously who has chin dribble
There is no way a media company of any description in NZ is going to support what he says or even listen to him. There are government polices, processes and funding in place that they would lose. And probably career suicide for the person. NZ is not big enough for any of them to have a career if they started supporting hm or anything he says.
You only get supporters on the Internet because nobody is going to get behind this without it been anonymous. The only supporting "media" are you tube media because they are not dependant on the system.
Its why if there was a referendum it would be major problems because most NZ'ers would support his position.
I noticed that too..she couldn’t give a hoot what Seymour says she’s totally biased and self serving.
Just a netball player pretending to know something about something she knows nothing about
Free your mind - NEVER watch it!
You can see the hate in Jenny Mays eyes
yes- that is a hateful look, the one you get when there no place in the heart for anyone whos not like you.
@@hugeeuge810 do you see David eyes creepy
What are you talking about
@@JamesDio-yu5yd We can see she is not happy with what David is saying,, we can see it, its called body language.
thats not hate,its syphilis.
I’m non Maori and care for this country more than anything! It’s my birth country, I am deeply connected to it!
same
Its so sad that a group of people has made it so bad that you now feel the need to clarify your race before commenting about a fact that I believe most people in NZ would understand, how can you not- this place is magical. ACT seems to be the only party wanting to unite the nation.
@@duandebeer2669look up there history act party Don brash his family built around racism against Māori people
@@duandebeer2669unite under the one people one rule thing?
@@duandebeer2669 I totally agree! Seems some maori think they are the only ones with deep connection to this magical land…. They are so wrong 😑
And yes, how sad I have to state I am not one , but have a depth of love for the land that I suspect is deeper than any of them could ever feel.
Te Pati Māori should just be called Te Pati Tamihere. They care and speak only for one small elite group.
I love how there leaders pocket all the money and there communities look like shit, just like the African Americans one day New Zealand will learn but many people would have already died this country will either end in civil war or will become India there is no other way now
Te Potty Maori?
Tampons
Its a pity labour dragged nz so low that the maori party's actions and lying is seen as acceptable behavior now days
Send them to Antarctica to play with polar bears
David is like a teacher trying to help delinquent kids understand that theft and violence hurt everyone at the end of the day. Te Pati are like kids who realize that crying and screaming and threatening have a big impact on weak parents.
The Hori from Epsom called David Seymour, got slapped in the mouth TWICE last week from his Principle Luxon and the DP Peter's.
Howzat that for teaching?
I think your description of Te Pati māori reflect Davids behaviour as a child. He Doesnt listen to anyone, has a tantrum when people ask for real answers and much like a thief he hides his intentions.
And then theres Te Pati māori, telling him to stop being a seymour and be a Do-Mour 🤣
Lucky the Hori from Epsom isn't a teacher as his Principle Luxon and DP Peter's have put him in the Dunce corner.
@@tukauaetaufitu-moses7140 Do you have examples of such a tantrum? I have only seen him answer calmly and clearly when journalists try to goad him into making any stupid response they can clip a sound-bite out of. Please, any examples would be great, to expand my understanding
@@tukauaetaufitu-moses7140 r u kidding?
When has he ever thrown a haka display in parliament when he dosent like the topic people are talking about?
Just a thought.
Politicians need to sort this once and for all,, referendum let the people decide
Māori land Māori law sit down boy
@@Alty-u3g What have you got to be afraid of? Referendum lets the people speak. What have you got to be afraid of? I'll tell ya. THE TRUTH. 😉
@ sorry to say this is Maori land It’s not up to the people they didn’t sign the treaty
😂😂😂
@ act party are crying slipping in the polls spreading bs people who support Tim jago
Just sick of racist tpm and one side race bating by so called reporters especially her
Me too was just wondering if we tpm objectors should put in our own petitions to the govt to let the country of nz know we don't agree with this bi cultural rascism and elitism!!!!
Exploitation is what the gangs do to Māori people, but you’ll never hear te pati Māori speak about that!
It is also what they were doing to their own people long before any Europeans arrived.
And David Seymour and his minority right wing party and the Atlas Network are not trying to do the same to the whole NZ?
@@logicalanswer3529 Bet the Moriori wouldn't argue with that
Yes
Nz gangs are tame. White Australian organised crime groups in nz are an infinitely more significant threat to new Zealand.
You're just anti maori because they look different to you.
The whole population needs to sort it out, NOT ALL MĀORIS AGREE WITH IT ,let's have a referendum
And do you really understand the legal implications of breaking a treaty and what Dave and the Atlas Network want to achieve in NZ? Don't just rely on one politician and their views control this non issue. Think for yourself....
@@Oznz-m5cthe treaty is not going to be broken by the referendum. The 1975 principles are simply going to be clarified.
@Oznz-m5c tell us you havnt read the bill and just watch the tv without saying it.
@ryanparker8773 funny you believe what seymour is saying. He does not care about kiwis just the people who donate to his party for favours
@@Oznz-m5c What are your thoughts on Slavery since the people you support were the only ones that practiced it in NZ?
This bill is deeply necessary. Keep working hard David!
No it is not....
@@Oznz-m5cyes it is
@@Oznz-m5c Yes it is...
I agree, the NZ first approach is too easy to overturn, the national approach is nonsense.
@@Oznz-m5c your right too, now state your case
There is no longer ANY reason to have a Maori Roll. We should close it down.
I'm registered with my iwi, but, I'm not on the Maori roll, because I'm not a supporter of apartheid.
Close you down, I don't want to go on the general roll.
Under MMP there is no need for Maori seats.
@@susanpockett4314 id like to see you try. I bet you cant 🤣
David speaks clearly and consistently. He's correct.
Yeah at removing checks and balances and allowing the Atlas network to abuse this country.... as Willy said "he is a liar".
David full of shit clear as day
Hear, hear for taking her on and remaining calm and collected!
Seymour is so correct he hit the nail on the head. These Maroi Mps don't run this country the new Zealand government does, these races racial Maori Mps need to be voted out, most Maori just want to live a normal life with all races under on unbrella.
And David doesn't run the treaty
@@corrietabak5573 who created racism? Definitely not Maori… the only Maori you know are the ones you see on tv I bet.. no need to hate so much it must be tiring for the mind.
Maroi ? You can’t even spell mate, so what makes you think you know what you’re talking about ? Get your facts straight and learn to spell.
@@blazdaohsais a Maori racist !🤣👍🏽
@@GavinWhitmore
And what exactly makes him racist? Point out one thing he said that's racist. I can point out countless things said by white people in this comment section that's wildly racist.
Identity politics is so divisive. The majority NZers care about the environmental. It's where we live.
Referendum, let the people decide
Decide on what exactly?
@@tukauaetaufitu-moses7140 Decide on common sense One People, equal rights. Is that to hard to understand?
The Maori people are the natives. I think that alone should qualify them for some special benefits against all races.
@@jordansims9162 Natives ??...Really ?? 🤔
@@jordansims9162 They already get special benefits being the natives.
The real problem with the proposed Bill is that it does not go far enough - it is time to scrap the Treaty entirely.
The only problem is that its an opinion piece by one man, who got upset because his redefinition wasnt good enough 🤣
Ok, we can scrap the treaty and you can leave new Zealand. Later bo
@@tukauaetaufitu-moses7140nobody cares about you. you need to realise that tutakawhackaehqckawoka-moses
You can’t scrap the treaty. It’s already been fulfilled when Maori ceded sovereignty, became British citizens and got equal rights and protection under law. The Waitangi tribunal was MEANT to be just sorting out any unlawful violations of British law under British sovereignty against Maori as British citizens from the date of the signing of the treaty.
They never ceded sovereignty at all, despite you twats wanting that to be true.@@BC-tp8ep
Would have loved to hear the racist and politically biased Jenny may coffin’s response
@@davidthomson692 happy i didnt
Would've loved to hear a response from Seymour too. Instead of talking absolute nonsense and avoiding the point being raised here.
@@tumatauenga6433 What exactly was the point being raised? That he avoided?
@@Matt-us1gt
The point being raised, in clear English, was that this bill is just a ploy to sell the land and resources to foreign investors. And what was his response? "Oh nah all New Zealanders love New Zealand🥴" that didn't address anything. It completely doged the question.
@@tumatauenga6433 So you agree that all New Zealand should have the same rights? and that the real issue is foreign investment in NZ. Being against foreign investment in NZ doesn't mean u think that Maoris and others should have different rights tho. What David Seymour was trying to get across is that being born a maori or being born white or asian or whatever doesn't change that we're all from NZ. The belief that Maori are entitled to things that others aren't is inherently a racist belief. Because what if we lived our lives in a similar way? because you're a different skin color to me you get different rights to me? I'm trying to hear your logic because im curious.
Couldn't let him quite finish what he was saying before she interjected to control the narrative , activist more than a journalist
Jenny May is alway crying oppression despite being a professional sportsperson and highly paid TV presenter all her life. She's probably lived one of the most privileged lives in human history.
Yep her, the members of TPM, Willie Jackson & TJ Perenara for some of the most entitled, well off people In this country they do alot of complaining about being allegedly oppressed
@@iankinnell5643 TJ literally living my dream and he's still upset about the 1800's.
Te Pati should pay Coffins wages since she's clearly working for them. An ethical unbiased reporter she's not.
Keep up the pressure ACT
Yep keep up the rhetoric of lies and racism to allow the Atlas Network to achieve their aims like in Australia Canada the US etc.
@Oznz-m5c what is do bad about the Atlas network? Besides, I doubt that the Atlas network even knows that the ACT party of NZ even exists.
@@Oznz-m5cTell us, what does rangatiratunga mean?
@@Oznz-m5c HAHA Cry and Cope harder. The only racists here are the ones that support Te Party Clowns
@@ryanparker8773tell us what rangatiratunga means first? 🤣🤣🤣 havent read that in Te Aka
What about the Moriori?
What about them ? Do you know any of them ? You will find they are Māori.
I think they were a takeway
What’s your point? Do you need to read a history book?
Moriori are simply Maori who washed up on a different island. They adapted their culture to suit life there.
That worked for them until they were colonised by Maori and many were killed by Maori in 1835.
@@julianprice1587 Moriori were still the first settlers in New Zealand Not The Maori
Everybody born here is indigenous to this land.
no
Absolutely
Not indeginous lol
No, wrong. Just like certain plants are indigenous to certain places on earth, you can’t move a Protea from South Africa to NZ and call it indigenous even if it thrives there for over 100 years.
@@fionam.1784 Yes you can because everything was all one land mass once.. The land mass broke up into what it is today.. Māori's are not indigenous, they were just stuck on that piece of land as was all other 'races".. Where do you draw the line.? Let me guess, you draw the line on what fits your narrative..
Seymour's awesome and presently the ONLY politician determined to defend his corner. I don't subscribe to all his policies but with his courage there's only one choice for me in 2026 (I've never voted ACT).
Black , White people are also New Zealanders...
That’s cool
But they are NOT indigenous people. International law recognises unique rights of Indigenous peoples. Semours law doesn't. So who is racist here?
@@Arms26 Maori are NOT indigenous.
Tell that to my ancestors
@@Arms26Maori have to stop saying they are indigenous they arrived by boat and when you arrive in any country to settle by a mode of transport then you are an immigrant,like all the rest of us.
Let people to decide . Simple
The people 😂? Sheeple don’t have any real power .. it’s an illusion
Yeah put it to a referendum/vote. No one has the balls to do that!
More like simplistic.
Yes how can u argue with that reason he wasn't running no one down he wasn't saying anyone is more or less. but not all the same and he is right
Equal rights is just better than apartied(race based laws), in every way
Maori seats should be gone. If Pakeha Kiwis acted like the Maori Party the media would be up in arms.
Here here, David!
The treaty should be in a museum . Maori were not indigenous .
How are the maori not indigenous? Maori didn't exist before their ancestors settled in nz, and became the indigenous people of an uninhabited land. And before you bring up the moriori, I'm from the chathams, and there were no moriori in mainland nz. They are only from the chathams.
@@TimGuy-q2d dont you come here with your facts‼️‼️‼️
@@TimGuy-q2d Spirit world is in control not flesh
You should be in a museum cause you're not indigenous either.
@@TimGuy-q2d My observation, the 3 Māori in this clip have European heritage and at what period do you become indigenous. 400 years or do you still remain Polynesian?
Can I claim Māori heritage as one of my GG grandfathers was born in NZ and kidnapped by the Maoris and held by them for a period of time?
He's spot on.
But he didn't even say anything you knob.
The claim put forward was that the bill is a ploy to exploit resources his response was "oh nah bro we all love NZ 🥴"
you people are braindead
Nah he's just a spotty creep. Typical of his party. Now who was it that recently got name suppression lol
@@crosseyedone7960
no he's not. He didn't even answer the question. And you think he's "spot on"? God you people are dumb
@@crosseyedone7960
how!? All he did was avoid the question!
The TVNZ anti white te pati, is more accurate for the maori party
and their ratings reflect that, least trusted News source in the world, no one watches it.
@@jeremysmith5232
Wrong, ACT watches TVNZ.
Jenny May got owned again...
She knows exactly what exploitation is she's doing it to her own people
How?
You cant even speak English. Go home. Now who was it that recently got name suppression lol
Unfortunately so long as the media and Govt (All the other parties) side for racism and racial inequality then we are destined to continue down this racist path.
It actually need to get more apparent that Maori "want" in equality and separatism. These small minded Maori activists will cause major problem if not nipped in the bud.
Luxon is a one term PM!!
What the yt nonsense? 🤣
Maori is the special class since they are the original owners of the land. The rest are foreign immigrants. The land owners should have more than the immigrants
TVNZ is very disappointing to a lot of people. It fails to deliver a fair point of view in many issues. I now do not want to even turn on the TV for their broadcasting.
Has she been eating a chocolate sundae?
I thing it's spinach dribbling down her chin.
she been felching whoever it can.
Māori were immigrants and there are no pure Māori left total crap
@rustyboyspeed Oriini Kaipara has pakeha lineage whose DNA test results only show Maori DNA. She's 98% with 2% said to be background noise, which you get with every DNA test. She was told she's 100% Maori ✊🏿 were there's one of us there's more of us we're on the rise 💯.
@@Ironian-kd6 "test she was told she's 100% Maori" 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Maori we're the immigrants who owned the land like native Chinese own China and the native Spanish own Spain Nga Puhi tangata own Nga Puhi Whenua, New Zealanders (kiwis) are forgien immigrants Maori are the native immigrants 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:10
Still made it here before you lot… how did savages make it here before Europeans?
sooky racist Act PARTY stop misinforming the iwi, and our ancestors left us a heritage bind by Te Tiriti o WAITANGI NOT yr ancestors 😂😅😂
New Zealand is home to people from diverse backgrounds, including many who have moved here from overseas and now call this country home. These individuals often approach New Zealand's cultural and historical context with fresh perspectives and may not share the same sense of historical connection or obligations toward Māori people. As a result, they may question the idea of Māori being afforded distinct rights, viewing such measures as inconsistent with principles of equality. For many, these views are deeply held and unlikely to change through persuasion or educational efforts, as they perceive such distinctions as fundamentally unfair.
@@nyamnyam1416 you don’t even need to perceive them as such, simply put: they are unjust and biased toward one race only, maori. Nothing about that is acceptable or lawful.
The land owners should have more rights than the immigrants
Maori need to pull their collective heads in as they are not indigenous to New Zealand. They are on an equal footing as anyone else who arrives here in a canoe ,sailing ship or jumbo jet. Moriori are the first settlers of New Zealand and they have the respect to be grateful for what settlement has brought them..Be interesting to hear their take on things.As for a news reader with attitude being given a role like a cultural clown, just shows how twisted the whole reality is.
Meanwhile, the economy is burning......lets focus on 1870 though. Thats the best way....
I hear things like this a lot. In this case, it's very obviously a false dilemma if you've been paying any sort of attention to the body of work ACT has managed to achieve in their short time as a member of this coalition government. This is one part of ACT's policy. Meanwhile, they've been fighting for and quietly achieving on a frankly surprising range of issues. Just off the top of my head (and not saying I support or agree with all): Charter schools, Oranga Tamariki reform (with an actual eye on protecting children... who knew?), employment relations, work on personal grievance law, work on the Arms Act, massive overhaul of the RMA, working for farmers with emission standards... there's more but these are just the very few that popped into my head. All are focused on humanist values and economic principles of fairness and ability to trade fairly and voluntarily, and "do more with your property" while ensuring all rights are preserved. What's 1780 about any of that? But I get it, wouldn't want to let facts get in the way of a cheap and easy sarcastic response. Honestly, whether you support ACT or not, I don't think I've EVER seen a political party work so hard and achieve so much, all of which they SAID they would do. That's not how politics is supposed to work! 🤣
@GreigMcGill you miss understand. I 100% agree with ACT. Luxon is weak and not meeting my expectations on the race issues NZ has. My issue is the amount of energy and resources which are wasted on a merry go round of grift. Its a distraction thats bringing all of NZ down for all of NZer's, regardless of which fence your on. It needs putting to bed once and for all. Then people can decide if its a country which has a future for them or not and can decide whether to stay in NZ or not. 2026 is my deadline for NZ to sort out its shit. Maoridom is not inclusive and I will not live under IWI control. We already have co-governance by stealth as just proven by Tauranga Counsel. I have given up on Luxon. If by 2026 ACT or 1st have not made good ground to stop Maoridom, we leave for good. Doesnt effect you or all the Maori trolls on here, but I dont see a future under Maori control. To much self interest, not one policy for non Maori and know global awareness at all. Look at the industry already closing and the effect is has on areas. South Africa is a mere blueprint of how bad NZ would become under Maori control.
@@BobBarb OK, so we're pretty much in agreement then. All good, nothing to see here! 😁
Yuck whos that person in green?
You don't watch much TV do you ?
Gorgeous ay
She's a former netball player who became a sports commentator. She doesn't have any background or education in politics or economics.
@@TheLiquidMix so basically a thicko
Ha she's a joke well A very sad joke
I agree. . And a Rubbish program..biases
Ha that must be hard to see your reflectiom in her 🤭
Ink well ?😄
Tova who ?.
We are New Zealand
And Āotearo New Zealand ☺️
No you're not. You are foreigner unless you are Maori.
It frightens me sometimes how easily and stupidly people can go through life- NOWHERE in the known universe has apartheid or any form of segregation or legislation based on race (racism by definition) worked to further the economy or humanity. There are too many radicals out there pushing for the separation of the nation, albeit through systems of process or service delivery that resemble BEEE. As an immigrant who fled such conditions, it has become hard to ignore the signs. ACT is at least speaking about it and trying to remind us that we are 1 nation, KIWI's! NOT SUBDIVISIONS classed by HOW WE LOOK, if you choose to live in NZ you accept the social contract, the same contract applies to all. As a very young country we have an opportunity to shape our culture, let it reflect our diversity and highlight our combined strengths. GOD save NEW ZEALAND
Most NZers also see the signs. Its the weak Politicians like Luxon that is the problem!! In the 1860's it was nipped in the bud. The rebellion by a few Maori caused a war!!
@@DW_Kiwi please can you point me to where i can read more about it?
She’s a disgrace to TVNZ
Jeanie May the “newscaster”
Jenny may the racist
What I'd like to know is why the treaty is still considered to be a valid agreement at all.
If its essentially a contract then it should surely be null and void on the basis that neither party understood its wording fully. The crown believed maori were ceding sovereignty based on the english version and the chiefs believed they were retaining it based on the Te Reo version. If an analogous situation went to the courts today between two parties then i reckon the court would rule the contract null and void.
Im no lawyer, but it seems odd to me nobody has seriously floated that concept given how much debate there is on the matter
they understood fully as all the speeches afterwards by the chiefs are on record , every one. and when the kohimarara conference was help in 1860 all those speeches are recorded for us to see and read. The problem is thr real english draft , the Littlewood draft" sits in archives NZ and they say they cannot find it. But we have many copies , it is an exact word for word of the Maori treaty bar 2 spelling ,mistakes. the problem is they use the rogue Freeman version which is totally different.many are unaware of these facts and MSM dont want a bar of educating the citizens , they want to indoctrinate the school kids ie the latest "booklet " which is a total mis rep of the history ... we cannot re write history we must honour it, we are all equal under the crown .. time to move on from them and us , we are all Kiwis..
Well said David....
If David and Act can promise a binding referendum on this next cycle then they have my vote.
An activist who does journalism on the side
I’m for the bill
I am also... all the hard working and greatly contributing citizens of NZ need to be given the recognition as equal citizens, irrespective of their ethnicity or heritage, and the democratically elected government must have the right to govern.... Maori must be the only race of people in the world who fight against being classed as equal they act like the spoilt over indulged children they are! The greater majority of Maori have a very small amount of Maori blood in their dna... the Packer woman is 3/4 European 1/4 Maori for a start.. the majority of her dna is European.
Luxon said that the bill is dead
I used to like Jenny May. She was a top Sportswoman, seemed Bubbly with a sense of Humour. Now she seems to be a bitter and hate filled person. I think she spends too much time with other haters .
The local Iwi where I live are so interested in the environment that they grow pine forest on the land gifted to them. If they were so interested in the environment and the people they would have planted it in native bush and not be actively trying to block people from entering the forest for recreation.
The council stopped planting pine on council owned land because of the fire risk and to improve the local rivers and environment. As soon as someone from the maori party starts bleating about "the people" and "the environment" I switch off because it's ultimately all about money to them as the local Iwi has proven.
What rights do Maori have that they would lose?
Everything thats what
@@zanealpha4075 like what?
@@zanealpha4075 Please be more specific, everything ??????? Name some actual things.
@@karenrhodes9973 Iwi have all sorts of veto rights in resource management act at present, If i dig a hole at my property I have to pay one or two to sit outside my house while I do it, and they do not have to tell me what they are there for. They have claimed to have a special spiritual connection to 1/3 of the land in Queenstown lakes area. My niece missed out on getting into Medical school in both auckland and otago to part maori students with lower grades. Moari wards on councils. Some examples of race based priveledge.
They wouldn't lose any human or civil rights or any intangible or qualitative mythical rights like they are eluding to but are unable to describe.They would lose the disproportionate influence they have over the democratic process, that's what they are really mad about. They just won't admit it bluntly.
TPM woke grandstanding
and racist
Jenny may time to move on. For that role you need to be a journalist or an entertainer. You fall well short of both. An embarassement to new Zealanders.
The same goes for Jenny may, seems nowadays any Maori woman think they are entitled to wear facial tattoos
Debbie more Irish then tangata whenua... Te Parti Maori pushing bs propaganda
being of mixed decent or something more doesn’t make you less of what you are 🤣 propaganda or observations 👀
Pre European Moa were driven to extinction along with many orher species. The pre European fondness for Huia feathers made them extinct. The Native bush from Blenheim to Christchurch was torched also.
Te Tiriti ensures Māori are at the decision table. Partnership ensures that all laws passed meet matauranga (lessons learnt from the past) and ecological (mana whenua) criteria that affect all New Zealanders.
She needs to be removed....no way is she unbiased.
Well done David
One wonders where they find these people
Is Debbie Packers father a chief of her IWI , if not she has no rights to wear the facial tattoo,
A typically logical and succinct reply from David Seymour. I'm sure even his opponents would acknowledge he's a highly intelligent and effective politician. One of the most impressive of that much disparaged class in the world today, in my opinion. I have no doubt he will be PM before the end of the decade.
I just hope he has decent security, because some who can't win by fair argument and discussion resort to other means.
It’s like watching Punch and Judy watching policy less,clueless te pati maori
But the Māori are already the major group that are exploiting these resources.
Who would take what anything these clowns says!. David Seymour should be our leader
Well almost the whole world is at war with themselves because people are in their country telling them how they should be living I can see a storm is brewing
U need to look at history you Maoris don't own this country and are not indigenous to New Zealand, there were people here way before you lot
read book in library off 200,000 skeletons found in caves in 1850 - assumed maori untill modern technolgy found out they were pure '' pakeha.''
I don't really get why these two often use Maori words when there is an equivalent English word or phrase that would allow the English listeners to understand what they're talking about without having to google what they mean. I had to find that "Moana" means Ocean - according to one source. The majority of what they're saying is English and saying some words in Maori doesn't seem to be an attempt to teach others the language through inference, but more to mystify the meaning. They try to make it sound like the concepts just can't be understood without knowing a sort of Maori cultural nuance which is only possible to convey using those Maori words.
She not even full maori lol
There hasn't been any full Maori since the seventies
As a former NZder now living in Aus, I feel so sad for what our country is becoming. Hope everything works out well.😢
KAWHARU’S RE-WRITTEN TREATY
Complaints that ACT Party leader, David Seymour wants to “re-write the Treaty of Waitangi” don’t stack up, considering that Te Tiriti was quietly re-written under a Labour Government almost 40 years ago.
In 1986, the Lange Labour Government commissioned Professor Sir Hugh Kawharu, Professor of Maori Studies at the University of Auckland, to produce a contemporary translation of Te Tiriti’s Maori text.
At the same time, Kawharu had just been appointed to serve on the Waitangi Tribunal, a highly influential appointment he would hold for 10 years from 1986.
At the time of his Tribunal appointment, Kawharu was also a claimant on behalf of Ngati Whatua, working on his tribe’s various Treaty claims, and representing it in the Bastion Point land claim negotiations.
Hardly someone without an axe to grind.
Many might also recognise several conflicts of interest.
We might also ask why a further back-translation was needed, when James Busby’s final English language draft, and TE Young’s 1869 back-translation compiled for the Native Department, were already available.
Kawharu’s deliberately mischief-making back-translation of Te Tiriti was accepted as definitive by the government of the day.
His radical reinterpretation of Te Tiriti soon morphed into the manifesto of the Maori Sovereignty movement.
Kawharu’s New Zealand Dictionary of Biography page describes “a man of quiet persuasion” noted for “persistent advocacy for the Maori right to exercise rangatiratanga (self-determination).”
“Rangatiratanga” or Māori self-determination lay at the core of Kawharu’s reinterpreted Treaty, complete with 11 footnotes radically redefining key words away from what was understood by all in 1840.
At footnote 7, he asserted that “rangatiratanga” in Article II of Te Tiriti meant “the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship.”
Ignoring the historical record of what the chiefs actually said on the lawn at Waitangi, Kawharu declared that this “would emphasise to a chief the Queen's intention to give them complete control according to their customs.”
In arriving at this conclusion, Kawharu completely overlooked the fact that “rangatiratanga” as used in Te Tiriti at Article II narrows any broader meaning it might have to being a right to ownership and control of land and personal property.
He also ignored the fact that Te Tiriti’s guarantee of property rights applied to everyone here on 6 February 1840, both white and brown.
By redefining “rangatiratanga” as self-determination, Kawharu set up Te Tiriti to be used to justify Maori sovereignty aspirations.
His commentary around the word “kawanatanga” in Article 1 was a further re-write.
Kawharu asserted: “there could be no possibility of the Maori signatories having any understanding of government in the sense of ‘sovereignty’.”
Eyewitness accounts of the treaty debate on February 5, 1840 at Waitangi, say otherwise.
The primary source account in CMS printer, William Colenso’s “Authentic and Genuine History of the Signing of the Treaty of Waitangi” shows that the chiefs were well-aware their acceptance of Hobson would place him in authority over them, and that behind Hobson was Queen Victoria.
Kawharu’s assertion at footnote 6, that the chiefs could not comprehend “sovereignty”, opened the way for the false claim that the chiefs never ceded it.
His third substantial re-write applied to the word “taonga” in Article II.
At footnote 8, Kawharu asserted that “taonga” included “all dimensions of a tribal group's estate, material and non-material - heirlooms and wahi tapu (sacred places), ancestral lore and whakapapa (genealogies). “
This opened up the public purse to Maori claims to anything and everything, including assets not even in contemplation in 1840, such as radio and television frequencies.
Kawharu’s Te Tiriti reinterpretation has allowed radical activists to glove-puppet politicians and jurists into adopting his political manifesto dressed up as a Treaty translation as the basis for judgments and policies.
Kawharu’s reinterpreted Treaty text was the one applied by Cooke CJ in the NZ Māori Council Court of Appeal case of 1987.
Kawharu was one of 20 radical activists submitting affidavits for that case along with New Zealand Maori Council chair Sir Graham Latimer, historian [sic] Claudia Orange, land march activist Whina Cooper, history lecturer and Ngai Tahu claimant Harry Evison, medical practitioner Mason Durie, and accountancy professor and later Maori Party chairman Whatarangi Winiata.
Legal Positivists apply the law according to law and precedent. Their commitment is to upholding the Rule of Law.
Judicial activists are woke social justice warriors. They apply the law acco in rding to their own social and political opinions.
Here, the rule of law is trumped by personal opinion filtered through the lens of social justice concerns.
The rise of judicial activism in New Zealand traces back to Lord Cooke of Thorndon (Robin Cooke), a liberal bleeding heart who should never have been allowed near a judicial appointment, let alone to preside over New Zealand’s highest Court of his time.
Lord Cooke had, during the course of his legal education, been heavily influenced by another judicial activist, Lord Denning, of the British Privy Council.
Here’s David Baragwanath, Counsel for the Appellants in the 1987 NZ Māori Council case from which the Treaty ‘partnership’ fiction derives, skiting about the outcome at a commemorative symposium held some 20 years later :
“I began to read [Dame Whina Cooper’s] affidavit [asserting land somehow had a special meaning to her as a part-Maori]. By the end of the first paragraph , the President’s familiar handkerchief was out. As it continued, his emotion was evident. By the end of the affidavit, Dame Whina had taken the case from his head to his heart, and we had captured him.”
Say goodbye to the rule of law.
Kawharu’s redefinition of “rangatiratanga” as “the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship” underpinned the Court of Appeal’s finding in the Māori Council case that Te Tiriti was “akin to a partnership.”
This bogus reinterpretation soon made its way over to the Waitangi Tribunal, on which its author was already a key player.
The Kawharu rewrite later formed the basis of Sir Geoffrey Palmer’s five Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi.
These five principles, kawanatanga, or government; rangatiratanga, or self-management; equality; cooperation; and redress, were published on 4 July 1989.
Leftist academics, the Waitangi Tribunal, and ‘woke’ senior public servants, then amplified the partnership’ fiction over succeeding decades, culminating in the Arden Labour Government setting up a Treaty Partnership Ministry in 2017.
This in turn blossomed into the He Puapua blueprint for two governments by 2040, one by Maori for Maori; the other a fully bicultural version of what we already have, subject to a tribal monitoring committee.
Behind these developments are wealthy tribal entities flush with ill-gotten pee from Treaty Settlements, greedy for political power over their non-Māori fellow-citizens.
In summary, the ‘Treaty Partnership’ ideology behind these developments traces back almost 40 years to Kawharu’s rewrite of Te Tiriti and the government’s adoption of Geoffrey Palmer’s Principles For Crown Action .
Bypassing Kawharu’s reinterpretation, ACT leader David Seymour has based his three brief principles on Te Tiriti’s actual black letter wording and the recorded contemporary understanding of its meaning and intent in 1840.
ACT’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill would provide that:
1. The government has the right to govern and there is one government for all New Zealanders.
2. We all have rights within the law to “tino rangatiratanga”, or self-determination, and to ownership and control of our lawfully acquired property.
3. We all have “nga tikanga katoa rite tahi” or the same rights and duties.
This poses a major problem for brown supremacist part-Māori riding a Treaty commonly misrepresented today as justifying Maori self-government.
For brown supremacists to argue against Seymour’s Bill is to deny and dishonour the selfsame Te Tiriti that their tupuna signed up to in 1840.
In 1922, Sir Apirana Ngata summarised the effect of the Treaty of Waitangi with considerable clarity, finality, and certainty: “Article I of the Treaty transfers all chiefly authority to the Queen forever, and the embodiment of that authority is now the New Zealand Parliament. For that reason, all demands for absolute Maori authorities are nothing more than wishful thinking.”
“The Treaty … made the one law for the Maori and the Pakeha. If you think these things are wrong and bad then blame our ancestors who gave away their rights in the days when they were powerful.”
New Zealanders are becoming increasingly aware that there are two Treaties, the 1840 treaty and a 1986 re-write.
So let’s have and be accepting no more of this nonsense that David Seymour is “rewriting the Treaty.”
Outrage over ACT’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill boils down to this: the fear that brown supremacist part-Māori who have turned their white ancestors into a toilet bowl to identify monoculturally as ‘Māori, might lose their unearned ethnocentric privilege.
As Thomas Sowell reminds us: “When people become used to special treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.”
ENDS
Great comment, however there is another problem with the Kawharu translation. His translation of the 3rd article contains the term "ordinary people". Now that terms sticks out as a very odd term in such an important document.
It should strike you as very, very odd that he used the term "ordinary people"?
Well, here is the text in Maori... "tangata maori katoa o Nu Tirani ka"
Now anyone, even someone who doesn't speak Maori can see that Kawharu was being deceptive there...
It says "tangata maori"
That means Maori people... NOT ordinary people... he hid the fact that this section is referring to Maori by replacing Maori with ordinary!
So the Maori text actually says... "For this agreed arrangement therefore concerning the Government of the Queen, the Queen of England will protect all the MAORI PEOPLE of New Zealand and will give them the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of England"
So... when you get past the activist deception you can see that the Maori text explicitly surrendered sovereignty in the third article as well, in exchange for rights and duties of citizenship. And this of course means that the activists are telling us the exact opposite of what it actually says.
So try to remember that when Maori try to divide us into tangata whenua and tangata tiriti... In the treaty of Waitangi... Maori are referred to as tangata Maori. Every person born here is both tangata whenua and tangata tiriti, we are all people of the land and the treaty.
Basically in order to swallow the activist interpretation, the majority of people need to believe that "ordinary people" refers to non Maori... that's the deception that Kawharu was getting us to swallow.
@ The word “maori” in article III is small “m.”
At that time “maori” didn’t refer to an ethnic group it simply meant “otdinary” as you correctly identify.
So article III gave ALL the natives-not just the chiefs-all the rights of the English under the sovereign power henceforth prevailing as per article I.
There was no need to include the white pre-Treaty settlers in Article III, since they were already British subjects.
Article II already protects their property rights, so that’s them covered.
Seems like a very simple concept. Why can’t they understand this.
Well said David Seymour
Outstanding response to a ridiculous statement.
Would liked to have seen the rest of this interview. Clarkson no match for David Seymour. TPM know full well the result should there be a referendum. 😊
Get rid of the cowboy hat bro it looks so much better on JOHN Wayne.
Word salad all they talk in clap trap with no actual meaning? How does anyone make head or tail of all that? Need a good sort out. Its areal bad joke
Seymour is quite possibly the most intelligent and erudite thinker and leader we have at present. TVNZ has been shite for a long time, and TBH Te Pati Maori actually come across as the racists and Coffin, sour as she is is little better - thy dont have an all NZers together agenda, they have a me/ us agenda
how did the Moa, Haast Eagle become extinct why is the Kiwi, Takahe, Kea population so small
_No races should be in politics. The same for Religion._
Period, point-blank!
Why are Te Pati Maori so against equality for all?
In signing Te Tiriti, all Maori - including the chiefs - became not ‘partners’ but EQUAL SUBJECTS of the Crown in a nation state the white settlers would henceforth create where none had existed before.
EQUAL SUBJECTS means INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENSHIP - nothing more and nothing less.
Te Tiriti cannot possibly be construed as a guarantee of perpetual group rights to brown supremacist part-Maori (with an ever-declining Maori blood quantum).
It is ludicrous and intellectually incoherent to propose that the cession of sovereignty in Article I, restated in Article III, would be countermanded-as the delusional now assert-by a reservation of chiefly authority in Article II.
“Sovereignty” means “the supreme power or authority.”
It is thus Constitutionally impossible for a sovereign to be in ‘partnership’ with a subject or group of subjects.
On 6 February 1840, one party [the Crown] absorbed and digested the parties of the other side [the chiefs and those whom they represented].
This rendered Te Tiriti from the moment it was signed analogous to a used table napkin after a meal, and other than as a historical artefact, about as relevant.
Feel free to tell us all:
(1) how Maori could enjoy all the rights of the English (Article III) without becoming subjects of the Crown; and
(2) how Maori could enjoy all the rights of the English (Article III) if still subject to tribal-style rule by their chief(s) (Article II as claimed by the delusional).
NO PARTNERSHIP
1. Before Te Tiriti was signed there was no collective Māori or nation state.
2. Prior to 6 February 1840, what is now NZ consisted of two main landmasses and some offshore islands inhabited by around 600 ‘dispersed and petty tribes’ of subhuman cannibal savages in a constant state of war with each other.
3. Ngapuhi were in mortal fear of the French after French warships bombarded a pa site killing hundreds, following the vile massacre and cannibalism of Marion du Fresne and his crew.
3. Maori tribes throughout the land were in mortal fear of one another after two decades of Musket Wars started by Ngapuhi had more than halved their population.
4.The wiser and more farsighted chiefs knew that only by becoming subjects of the Crown under a single sovereignty and system of laws could they be protected from each other and from annexation-minded foreign powers.
If you believe otherwise you have four challenges to meet.
Betcha can’t even do one.
1. Point to the Māori words for ‘partnership,’ ‘principles,’ and ‘co-governance’ in Te Tiriti.
You can’t, because they never existed.
2. Put up a link to a primary source document containing the words of even a single chief who when Te Tiriti was debated thought that he was being asked to agree to a ‘partnership’ or ‘co-governance’ arrangement.
You can’t, because no chief is on record as having held or expressed that understanding.
3. Explain why, for 147 years between 1840 and the NZ Māori Council Court of Appeal case in which five activist judges invented ‘partnership’ and ‘principles’ out of thin air, NOBODY was claiming Te Tiriti was a ‘partnership’ or ‘co-governance’ arrangement.
Probably because it wasn’t.
4. Explain why, if Te Tiriti was intended to be an open-ended ‘co-governance’ arrangement, it is expressed in terms that confine its meaning and intent to the permanent surrender of whatever sovereignty subsisted in the chiefs at the time.
An open-ended co-governance arrangement would surely have been worded at Article II:
the Queen of England HER HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS [emphasis added to additional wording] and “the chiefs THEIR HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS [emphasis added to additional wording].
“Tino Rangatiratanga” would have been used in Article II in an entirely unrestricted manner, not narrowed as it was to being a guarantee of property rights TO BOTH MĀORI AND THE SETTLERS ALREADY HERE.
5. Even if Te Tiriti was intended to be an open-ended ‘co-governance’ arrangement-I’ve already shown it was not-any Treaty has a lifespan, and the passage of time will invariably render it redundant.
A clear example might be where one party to an agreement had effectively ceased to exist.
For instance, imported bloodlines have so diluted the original Māori race to the extent that it now only exists as a cultural concept.
As far back as the 1970s, the Labour Government passed the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974.
Most ‘Māori’ by that time had more of the blood of the coloniser than of the colonised.
This meant the existing legal definition of ‘Maori” by blood quantum no longer applied to most New Zealanders: “A person of the Maori race of New Zealand or a half-caste descendant thereof.”
The notion of ‘Māori’ as a ‘race apart’ for political purposes could only be sustained by altering the legal definition of ‘Māori.’
After panicked complaints from its Maori MPs that soon nobody would be able to prove eligibility for the Maori Electoral Roll, Labour struck out the blood quantum definition of ‘Māori,’ replacing it with: “A person of the Maori race of New Zealand or any descendant thereof.”
If you genuinely believe the meaning and intent of Te Tiriti was to confer separate, different, or superior group entitlements in perpetuity upon brown supremacist part-Māori-with an ever-declining Māori blood quantum- you’re delusional.
Go boil your head to clear your thoughts.
Cut the BS! Maori Party are Full of it. Maori are better off without these anchors holding back Maori. Maori people are hard working and extremely underestimated by TPM.
Over the last 10-15 years I've seen language of indigenous people around the world change to being the stewards of the land, careers of the land. why was this not 30 years ago?
It’s not really the case now.
The people I see dumping their McDonald’s rubbish out of their car windows are very often Maori.
3 Species of Moa disprove Packers point.
Next
Only thing he shattered was himself who he is as a person..
Greed only ends one way
Yes David, thanks for boldly, calmly and intelligently talking about these issues with the attitude of inclusivity as opposed to those who are utterly devisive...
Are we a country of victims and losers what is its future?
His body language say it all
She is obviously biased and not really fit to give an independent interview. We have long since stopped watching tv one breakfast shows and any others that have a predetermined agenda.
He is making total sense, I don't understand the contention.
I'm fine with tangata whenua having first dibs as long as everyone born here is tangata whenua.
Calling 5th generation Pakeha (with no other citizenship or ancestry visa pathway) second class citizens is a sure-fire way to have them not support your agenda.
Can a non Maori be a member of the Maori party?
My Votes For Act. Bye Bye National.
Te Pāti Māori MP propagating the reasons apartheid should be law in New Zealand
Jenny May is not a journalist. Get rid of her TNNZ
So Mr Seymour, where does your right wing capitalist ideology fit and operate in Te Ao Maori. It just doesn’t fit…..and that’s why we need the Treaty..