Peter Dey has his rose coloured glasses on again looking into a long tunnel. He castigates Mary Brooks over her 'fi ctional” story of Taine Mhor arriving in NZ in 1120AD. However he himself does not advance any evidence to support his earlier claim that no other people inhabited NZ before the arrival of Maori.I am interested in both sides of the argument as I would like to know the true facts.

There has been far too much evidence put forward (and found) indicating that there were various peoples living in NZ before the arrival of Maori (including stories passed down by Maori elders through the generations) for it to be dismissed out of hand as Peter Dey wants to do.

D Holm in the same issue refers to the writings of Associate Professor Elizabeth Rata of Auckland University (a brilliant writer) writing about the 'corruption of the settlement process” and the ”Massive rort on the NZ public”.

A friend pointed out recently that the Treaty Settlement machinations have become a major industry employing thousands of people and costing the claimants and the country hundreds of millions of unnecessary dollars annually.This is one major reason the Government does not put a stop to the claims.

The longer all this unnecessary anger and friction continues the deeper the mess NZ is going to fi nd itself in and the harder it will be to get out of. There is no way a written version of the NZ constitution is going to solve this mess.

Roger Bailey, Papamoa.