Peter Dey – your command of language would do credit to a fourth form pupils I have taught. Your logic would not. You considered me simple-minded because I do not accept your facts. A fact, Mr Dey is an incontrovertible truth. Your writing is noted for unsubstantiated opinions expressed as facts.
Can you produce one fact confirming occasions where, how and when our governments, including Maori members, did not honour the Treaty and when and by whom the phrase ‘Principles of the Treaty' was first coined? There was certainly no mention of them in 19th Century. Please don't include the Land War's phantasies and land grabs but read the true Treaty and accurately documented history.
Mr Dey, wishful thinking, personal acrimony and meaningless generalisations are your forte. Truth, logic and history are not.
B Johnson, Omokoroa.
7 comments
Only in NZ
Posted on 19-02-2016 12:24 | By Captain Sensible
"living document", "partnership" and "principles of the treaty" were all cowardly thought up and implemented after every signatory to the treaty had died. Only in NZ.
Captain Sensible the Treaty had no breach of contract clause
Posted on 19-02-2016 15:13 | By Peter Dey
Captain Sensible when the Government breached the Treaty of Waitangi contract for over 100 years Maori had no easy way to address it. The Waitangi Tribunal was set up to deal with breach of contract by the Government. That did not happen until 1975. Only then was it necessary to have the equivalent of breach of contact clauses. That is what the Principles of the Treaty are. Every time a Treaty settlement is signed the Government makes an admission and apology of a breach of the Treaty. Nothing cowardly about. Standard business practice.
@pdey
Posted on 21-02-2016 17:17 | By tutae.kuri
Interesting that you are interpreting the meaning of Principles of the Treaty? No one else to my knowledge has been able to. It has been left open so that anything dreamed up by Iwi can be deemed a principle. I really hope that the Tribunal will be consigned to history together with the last of the old outstanding claims.
@ Peter Dey
Posted on 22-02-2016 08:53 | By Captain Sensible
Interested if you could enlighten us over these breaches by the government. Again, your definition of 'principles' is just that - your definition. Stop making stuff up to suit your endless whinging. There was NO mention of 'principles' or 'living document' or 'partnership' in the original, so stop trying to alter it after everyone involved in the writing and signing is dead. The treaty is technically breached every time a part-maori breaks the law be it jay walking or burglary or violence. Much of the land confiscated from tribes was punishment for taking up arms against the government...this is still illegal BTW.
.
Posted on 22-02-2016 09:20 | By Captain Sensible
Just a thought, but wouldn't the 'principles of the treaty' be limited to the ideas and conditions at the time it was signed rather than the 1970's?
A one way street
Posted on 27-02-2016 09:57 | By Murray.Guy
I certainly wouldn't engage in any argument about the validity of 'The Treaty', it's interpretation or related matters, BUT as I'm likely as information as most commentators who think they are. I do know that the Crown, and its agencies, local governments, corporations and individuals of all ethnicities continue on their quest for self enhancement at the cost of others, to the detriment of others. EG: The Rena decision just made, to defile our coastline and the rights of those most directly affected. In regards 'treaty breaches', I genuinely do NOT understand why the focus appears to be solely on breaches by the Crown. Can someone tell me why this is so, how can it be?
Murray Guy Maori offences were dealt with by the courts
Posted on 01-03-2016 16:37 | By Peter Dey
This is simply an opinion but it was only Government offences of fraud against Maori that were never fully and fairly dealt with by Governments before 1985. Any offences by Maori would always have been dealt with by the courts at the time. People can always find reason to complain about court decisions but there has never been a pro-Maori bias in the New Zealand justice system and courts.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.