A.Taylor replies to Robin Bell, re treatment of American Indians, saying there is little similarity compared the treatment of Maori.
'Maori were given equal status under British law with the Clause that if they wished to sell their land under the Crown they could if they wished to, which they did many times over. Aboriginal North Americans got nothing. Maori asked for protection against other tribes and got it via the Treaty...”

Mike Kuipers von Lande: Responding to Mr Bidois' rationale 'for the $millions we will pay him is due to ancestors being killed in the battle of Orakau…. Mr Bidois will get his $millions due to the corrupt workings of the Waitangi tribunal and the government. He and his supporters should hang their heads in shame and dishonour. As a parting shot Mr Bidois stated 'The level of money is all that we can expect at this time. This code has been used for many decades to mean 'We will be returning for more in the future”.

Richard Prince: I was saddened to read Colin Bidois' letter. He writes of putting things in the past and moving forward in positive manner, yet he spends most of his letter fulminating about how badly Maori have been treated in the past…. Mr Bidios writes that he cannot forgive the killing of a forebear nearly 150yrs ago at the Battle of Orakau. My family forbears were pioneers in both Australia and New Zealand and experienced some terrible tragedies. I hold no grudge, it is pointless. It happened in the past, I live in the present, and look to the future. What I can say, Mr Bidios, is embrace forgiveness, it heals the soul and will set you free.”
Peter Dey: responds to
W. Lawrence, claiming untrue information re Hobson's signature… 'The English Treaty version makes it clear that the Treaty agreement was between the Government and Maori only, not other New Zealand citizens. It seems that this is one reason people claim the English Treaty version to be false. Unfortunately for them there is absolutely no valid evidence to support their claim.”

R. Paterson: 'Mr Dey certainly doesn't like valid criticism. From the outset the British generally treated maori in a paternalistic way, doing no one any favours as it turns out now… However, this is really of academic historical interest only, as all Kiwis should be looking to the future and moving on after 150 years.”
Another from Mr Paterson, claims Mr ‘Kapai' Wilson did not understand his letter.

Roger Bailey: Ref Peter Dey's letter 23 November. Does Peter Dey have any solid evidence to the contrary to show what Mike von Lande, Cedric Sutherland, Richard Prince, R.Paterson, Graham Cliff and myself claimed in our letters is incorrect?

Dr Graham Cliff: Claiming he was misquoted by Peter Dey. 'Throughout Mr Dey's running correspondence in these columns, he repeatedly stresses what he perceives as the Pakeha-Maori divide; he describes our society as being 'Pakeha dominated”, and evidently has a polarised view of our country.
The fact of the matter is that New Zealand is now multi-cultural; there are, for example, large communities from the Pacific islands, and also from Asia (including the sub-continent).
These people are participating in our nation-building and, quite rightly, want a say in how things are done; the balance of ethnicity will steadily shift throughout this century, and I, for one, of European background, welcome this. The solution to our differences is both counter-intuitive and (at present) politically incorrect: we need assimilation into a unified 'common ethos”. This doesn't mean the suppression of cultural identity but, rather, its secondment to being, first and foremost, New Zealanders.
There are sound reasons - ethical, psychological, and pragmatic - why this should be so, but the argumentation is too complex to outline here (it's covered in chapter seven of my recent book on civil control and antisocial behaviour). Those favouring Maori separatism will doubtless strongly oppose any such move...”

Ian Brougham: 'Our country will always be divided as long as the wrong treaty is in place, and the truth brought out that Maori are not the indigenous people of New Zealand [first to arrive here].
It is well known that the final English draft that William Hobson authorized to be translated into the Maori Language has not been used because Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer put in place a rejected false draft and had written the majority of New Zealanders out of the Treaty, and also that when Maori arrived in New Zealand it was already inhabited by a fair skinned race of people called the Celts who were our ancestors, and 4 other races were also here before Maori.
This information has been sent to all our MPs in parliament, but not one has been interested in the truth.
Our Governments have refused to allow this to be officially investigated, as any remains or artefacts believed to be pre Maori are by default given to Maori to dispose of.”