Councillor backs Maori seats

New Plymouth’s Maori seats argument is being supported by Bay of Plenty Regional Councillor Doug Owens, who claims opposition to them is ‘political prejudice’.

In a letter to New Plymouth Mayor Andrew Judd, Doug states the assertion that Maori wards are separatist has no relevance in today’s political environment.

It has, instead, become an issue of political prejudice as parties vie for the ‘prejudice vote against Maori’ and their declared and accepted right to self-determination, as a culture and an indigenous people, says Doug.

“The essential advantage of direct representation via a ward system is the pragmatic solution to a profound political problem,” he says.

“That being an indifferent electorate having no interest in Maori and no guaranteed election of Maori and therefore continued poor communication and misunderstanding.

“Under wards, local Maori can select the people they want to represent them and in a competitive environment, vote for them. It is then up to these representatives to communicate with their Iwi and Hapu and bring their issues to the top table for resolution.”

The three Maori wards have given way to greater tolerance and understanding of Maori issues and these relationships have grown and deepened as a result of Maori representation at the top table, says Doug,

He adds: “The political prejudice that still exists in the BOP is no longer evident in the Regional Council.

“Ratepayers can also take comfort that having three wards representing all Maori in the Waiariki Region is cost effective, as opposed to statutory boards, which are not.”

He recommends the Local Maori Ward system as the most viable political option for local New Zealand, as local government moves into the new statutory environment of Co-Governance.

“Through the monthly meetings of the BOPRC Komite Maori, the full Council have resolutions prepared that are acceptable to Maori,” says Doug.

“In my tenure as a Councillor we have never experienced conflict or any dissatisfaction with this process which works effectively and efficiently and is growing in stature.”

Maori requested direct representation on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council in 1996. The BOPRC Maori Regional Representation Committee was then formed which prepared a submission for council proposing the introduction of Maori seats.

The proposal received strong support and the Bill was drafted in early 1999 and passed in October 2001.

It provided for the establishment of three Maori seats on the Regional Council, one elected from each of the three Bay of Plenty wards: Mauao in the west of the Bay of Plenty, Kohi to the east, and Okurei for the central/south.

Tauranga City Councillors unanimously rejected a similar proposal from its own Tangata Whenua Committee on November 17.

You may also like....


Maori are homless ?

Posted on 08-01-2015 18:41 | By YOGI BEAR

Pete’s ramblings about NZ is the "Home of Maori" is complete garbage. No one invited any people here, Maori are very much on that list. In fact Maori do have a home elsewhere as Janet Wilmshurst verified, pick an island north somewhere, oh that’s right Maori were evicted or was it that they were dropped off by General Zheng He, Pete what myth are we on today?


Posted on 08-01-2015 17:08 | By crazyhorse

{crazyhorse pure supposition}, Peter, the Maori party and Mana party are for maori, maori based politics maori based policies,run by maori,as for Peter Sharples and Tariana Turia, and you for get poor old Hone, the were not really doing very well with them at the helm any way. ""Maori are catching on quick, to the IWI elite"", quite a catchy phrase, watch’a reckon?.

I give up - for now

Posted on 08-01-2015 15:40 | By Jitter

It’s difficult arguing against extremists who accuse us of not being able to see the light. They should open the blinds and then they might see the light themselves.

I'm offended Wisechief,

Posted on 08-01-2015 13:10 | By robin bell

bracketing me with yogi,crazy and "jitter" cuts to the quick. Mind you one thing I have learned in almost 55yrs living in a predominantly Maori family,is there are as many nutters in the Maori world as there are in the Pakeha world. Read into what I say,anything you like,I stand for justice,nothing more, nothing less. What do you stand for Wisechief? put your name up and quit the contradictions. Robin Bell.

55% is a majority

Posted on 08-01-2015 11:23 | By YOGI BEAR

Perhaps Robin would like to ask Honi or Brendan about the level of voter support for the radical ideas and notions that appear everywhere from them. The voters made is clear for all to see. The candidates need to learn from that, "miss-chief" making souls will always be shown the door out into the cold in politics. Robin I suggest you go on a NZ wide crusade to look for suitable candidates for your cause. You could fund them like Dotcom did, lets see how you get on.

crazyhorse pure supposition

Posted on 08-01-2015 11:01 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse has no way of knowing for certain why Maori did not vote for the Maori Party or Mana in the elctions. His explanation that Maori do not want race based parties is pure supposition. There were a number of factors involved. Race based parties was only one factor. The Internet coalition was a factor. The retirement of Peter Sharples and Tariana Turia was a factor. The better organisation of Labour was a factor. The economic difficulties of Maori voters was a factor. The election result was proof of nothing.


Posted on 08-01-2015 10:54 | By Wise Chief

Robin, you hit nail on head via Your’s and hidden supporters veiled threats Maori should continue to cow-tow to Your Brits & now South Africans,German,Yanks living locally DEMANDS and for-go continual drive to achieve autonomy via economic development etc. YOU and others here consumed by HATRED & FEAR of anything not of the dermally pale hued is arrogance & what is termed velvet glove totalitarianism which as record of history including the Bible show very clearly eventually results in civil discontent of the most extreme kind. This type of arrogance eventually attracting the type of response we now see happening in France. Do know NZ so called French legal-justice system was corrupted via British for their own greedy ends & as we can see has been applied here with obnoxious outcomes Maori now owning a puny 5% of all land. Yourself,Yogi,Jitter, deeming this to be righteous outcome.

Yet more misinformation

Posted on 08-01-2015 10:46 | By robin bell

from the forked tongue of yogi the boringest bear.Anyone can stand in a Maori ward or seat. If Maori choose to vote them in so be it. No chance for the old boring bear though. All of these "objections" are designed to denigrate any variation from majority rule is absolute. No prizes for guessing who the majority are.A clue, Its not the one N.Z. foundation. Robin Bell.

Big mistake Wisechief

Posted on 08-01-2015 09:52 | By robin bell

when your ancestors asked for protection from illegal immigrants. Now everything you say is classed "Race based" welcome to democracy. Your only way out is to become what "they" demand. Good luck with that. Robin Bell.

Wise chief

Posted on 08-01-2015 01:22 | By YOGI BEAR

I accept the appointment.

crazyhorse, 55% is a majority

Posted on 07-01-2015 19:05 | By crazyhorse

I’m not arguing about that, I’m saying the average maori person won’t vote for a "race" based party, I will say once again, the ballot box has proved this, maybe you can tell us how "Mana" and the maori party went at the last election, you obviously know something we don’t?.


Posted on 07-01-2015 17:13 | By Wise Chief

Lets vote Yogi to be dictator of NZ as he seems rather knowledgeable about mechanisms involved of how one should work & be maintained much as it currently is while also supported via our ever present foreign controlled media & armed aggressive Police State. One thing is clear by this ongoing debate about why Maori are STILL NOT allowed as per long standing orders issued out of London City via the Guilds now coming on 160 years. This directive is still enforced & will be out to 200 years is to oppose all efforts by Maori for economic autonomy & development. WHY? For British Gov..maintain control of THEIR resources and to strip them of their lands. Note how few Maori have or are engaged in the business extracting mineral resources, THEIR Gold/Silver/etc taken from them long ago and mechanisms then inbuilt to prevent any participation to this day.

YOGI BEAR, Maori only seats are preferential treatment

Posted on 07-01-2015 16:37 | By YOGI BEAR

What else can they be, at every level tested here they are, example, can a non Maori stand in a Maori ward? No. Can a non Maori vote in a Maori ward? No, are there any Maori in New Zealand? No. The whole thing is a completely fascicle charade with the single aim of power control and money for a few, there is nothing different here than what happened in Uganda a few years ago, once in then the opposition is shot on sight.

YOGI BEAR, democracy is by the will of the people

Posted on 07-01-2015 16:35 | By YOGI BEAR

So Robby, I see that the maori voters have amazingly increased from 2-3%, to 7%, then around 1975 (then the handout treaty fake gravy train got started) 14%, now you have 20%, this is amazing, in just a few days the % has increased by 6%. The only believable thing here is how fast the B-S**t Alert flag goes up. The voters made a clear statement in the last TCC election, change was required and of the bunch available some were voted in. I guess the real answer is in the votes cast, if you have trouble understanding what I mean, go look at Honi Harawera and Brendan Horan. have a look at what these wee chappies are all about, perhaps you will then see why even Maori voters will not give them a shot at anything. Recommendation for the sunset looking for a credible Maori candidate, good luck.

"Race based" is a misnomer.

Posted on 07-01-2015 15:58 | By robin bell

New Zealand is unique,in that it was formed by two distinct races. With the subsequent survival and development of both races it is inevitable that inequity exists. To remedy this imbalance our democracy has to be flexible. Flexibility is not the domain of extremists. Flexibility is their enemy. Dogmatic insistence on "their" way is all that matters,no matter the cost. Robin bell.

In yet another,

Posted on 07-01-2015 14:56 | By robin bell

classic example of over indulgence,our three sufferers of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (N.P.D.) yogi,crazy and "jitter" continue their tirade against Maori political representation. Poor old "jitter" is totally bamboozled, claiming if we "give" a seat or two to Maori,then we have to "give" seats to all other ethnic groups. What kind of alarmist claptrap is that "jitter"?? Whether these three remnants of the defunct one N.Z. foundation accept it or not, democracy is quite capable of embracing seats for the founding partner of N.Z. MAORI. They (seats) are token at best,but at least offer a dignified solution,to a difficult problem. Sorry old bore,no place for "eddie" Armin or any other of your racist fantasies. Robin Bell.

YOGI BEAR demolished Janet Wilmshurst

Posted on 07-01-2015 14:31 | By YOGI BEAR

it is as hard to prove as well as it is as hard to disprove something that does not and never existed. These simple facts seem to completely banbusel Robby and Pete for no apparent reason. Oh wait on that is it the idea at the start and the desire result at the end (more handouts from the hard working NZ taxpayer) means that any and all myths get created and spun to fill the gap. Some days myths are truth, but the next day when suits they are the all made up, this all has the look of the tails about the wind and which way will it blow 5 minutes from now? Perhaps it is all about where the next pot of gold resides that did belong to someone else.

DEMOCRACY, the correct view

Posted on 07-01-2015 14:27 | By YOGI BEAR

That a small self interest group wants to run a dictatorship, there are few rules shown about how they are trying to achieve that, but what we do know: it is real, no basis in fact or science, all about power tripping, money wealth and living off the hard work of real New Zealanders. There’s nothing about sharing as agreed, nothing about "all laws apply to all people of New Zealand". Yet somehow we are expected to believe that this is a good thing, genuine, whatever other BS-story floats to the top for now. What we do know is that all stories of Maori are myths and are fictitious, changed/altered to the desired final answer. Seems like Maori have repeatedly breached the Treaty as signed/written. If all reverts back to Maori custom then that means all lands, assets whatever belong to the Queen by right of the spear.

crazyhorse, 55% is a majority?

Posted on 07-01-2015 13:10 | By YOGI BEAR

I think that Robby is a little confused, "Maori" means 50% bloodline proved, there are no 50% or more Maori in NZ or in fact the world. Robin has happily noted UN stuff before but not that rule, so what is Robby to do now I wonder, the stories seem to be conflicting yet again and some.

Jitter, Maori are not superior

Posted on 07-01-2015 12:53 | By Peter Dey

Maori do not claim to be superior. Men and women are each different and special but not superior. Maori are special. They are the indigenous people of New Zealand. They agreed to share New Zealand with the rest of us. Asians, Indians, and Pasifika all have their own countries to identify with. Maori deserve to be represented in Government. They can never overthrow Pakeha majority rule so Pakeha have absolutely no reason to get uptight about a Maori ward councillor.

You just made that up YOGI BEAR

Posted on 07-01-2015 12:39 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR, there is nothing in United Nations declarations that says that race based seats are racist and discriminatory in a democracy. YOGI BEAR just made that up.

Robin wants no democracry

Posted on 07-01-2015 10:01 | By YOGI BEAR

So that is the real desire isn’t it, so the logical next question is who is to be the dictator? You know the guy who just makes decisions as wanted and desired, take a look at Eddie Armin, Mogarbe Hitler, Pol pot, Stalin and a few others about the place. Perhaps Robin, you could make a few comments about what style of dictatorship you see as best for Maori (forget about everyone else) ...

YOGI BEAR in denial over Janet Wilmshurst

Posted on 06-01-2015 21:14 | By Peter Dey

Every time YOGI BEAR makes a comment about Janet Wilmshurst he does not make sense. It is clear that YOGI BEAR in fact has no answer to Janet Wilmshurst’s research showing clearly that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand. YOGI BEAR simply writes any nonsense that comes into his head in order to pretend that he has an answeer when in fact he does not.

YOGI BEAR, Maori seats are not preferential treatment

Posted on 06-01-2015 21:08 | By Peter Dey

If Maori seats were preferential treatment they would give Maori an advantage over Pakeha. In fact with a Maori seat the council would have 9 Pakeha councillors and 1 Maori ward councillor. The Maori ward councillor would have absolutely no power at all to change any decision that the other councillors wished to make.

YOGI BEAR, democracy is by the will of the people

Posted on 06-01-2015 21:04 | By Peter Dey

Democracy means government according to the will of the people. At present the Tauranga City Council is made up of 10 Pakeha councillors and 0 Maori councillors. The voters are split 80% Pakeha and 20% Maori. Clearly the 20% Maori voters are not represented on the council. This is not truly democratic. Having Maori voters represented by a Maori ward councillor would be more democratic.

DEMOCRACY, the narrow view,

Posted on 06-01-2015 20:27 | By robin bell

Gain control of a nation by denying the minor founding partner a voice.It’s easy,simply out breed,outnumber and out-muscle and then ignore. All the time claiming you stand for democracy. What a wonderful legacy for your descendants. Looks like the Queensland sun is more to crazy’s liking. Robin Bell.

Biased System

Posted on 06-01-2015 20:06 | By Jitter

According to Messrs Bell and Dey the local body electoral system is biased against "Maori" and is undemocratic as 14.9% of population state they are "Maori" but only 5% get elected to councils. OK the same applies to Asians, Indians and Pacifica people. Is that also undemocratic and unfair ? What Messrs Dey and Bell have made quite clear over and over again is that "Maori" are superior to all other cultures and should therefore be given special priveleges in the electoral system over everyone else. Is this racist and separatist, if not what is it ?

crazyhorse, 55% is a majority

Posted on 06-01-2015 18:45 | By Peter Dey

crazyhorse, 55% of Maori voters are on the Maori roll. This means that the majority of Maori voters support having Maori electorates. Crazyhorse provides these figures and then denies the conclusion. Arguments about why Maori voters support particular parties is pure supposition. Crzyhorse is starting out with a conclusion and then trying to justify his conclusion with a theory that is pure supposition. 55% means that Maori voters do support race based politics. It gives them no advantage. It gives them minority representation. It gives them no control. It is not apartheid. It is not racist, because Maori are making no claim to be racially superior.

Robby diversions

Posted on 06-01-2015 17:32 | By YOGI BEAR

The UN says that race based seats are racist and discriminatory in a democracy. Clearly Robby’s attempts to preserve racist based seats is contrary to even the UN’s most basic of rules.

Sink in?

Posted on 06-01-2015 17:30 | By YOGI BEAR

Crazy Mun, I believe the correct spelling of that is "Sunk" as in Titanic. But sadly even that will not be enough, Robby will head back to the favourite fall back position where there is no remotely plausible excuse left of "racist", that is what you repeat label will be. Take heart in that though as that means yet again Robbin has lost all hope of anything at all to throw back yet again in self defense of the indefensible.


Posted on 06-01-2015 16:49 | By crazyhorse

Robin, calm down, couple of deep breaths and, we will start again. the "average maori person has proven at the ballot box they are not interested in race based politics. There is the, now listen carefully this time Rob, the ""MAORI PARTY" and there is, ooops sorry, was, the Mana party, that stands for pride Robby? they got "wiped" out by maori voters and the maori party went from 5 seats to 3, only got in with a "little help from there friends, now mull that over, I know it’s hard when you spend all your time on your knees frothing at the mouth but this time, think about it?, give it time to sink in.

Cleared up teh issue

Posted on 06-01-2015 16:38 | By YOGI BEAR

Robin, at last you have confirmed that the Maori seats (parliament of some silly Councils) are not democratic, are race based preferential treatment at the expense of everyone else. I am glad we are clear on that. Of course that also means that the scripted "mythical" report of Janet Wilmshurst has now also been made very clear to, well done mate. Now go find some other disaster happening to convert into some convoluted drama all based on myth and legend.

Maori cause

Posted on 06-01-2015 14:03 | By YOGI BEAR

That sadly is only what this is all about, the carrot at the end of the gravy train is power control and domination, generally know as apartheid/dictatorship.

Maori councilors, YAH WHAT?

Posted on 06-01-2015 13:24 | By YOGI BEAR

So Robin, what you are saying is that irrespective of ability, knowledge, democracy, fairness, equity, the treat of Waitangi you want preference and unquestioned pay-dirt, position and all that as of right? Like is the racist or what?

Maori councilors,

Posted on 06-01-2015 10:08 | By robin bell

"pushing" Maori ways (whatever that means crazy-hoss) is not what this is about. Maori have a basic human right,to be represented by their own people. Those that freely choose not to exercise that right, will do so. It is not your right to deny the opportunity. Nor is it the right of the N.Z. Government in a true democracy. The Maori people align themselves (generally) with mainstream political parties,because historically they had NO CHOICE. Now that is all changing, in spite of your screams. Robin Bell.

Maori seats

Posted on 05-01-2015 23:59 | By crazyhorse

Maori are not keen on separate representation . Last year’s Maori electoral option resulted in 45 percent (184,630) of Maori voters opting for the general roll and 55 percent (228,718) choosing the Maori roll, and who did they vote for, yes a mainstream party, The proud "mana" party headed up by hone harawira sold his soul for 3 million big ones to the "blob," how many votes did his party for maori get, from maori?. the Maori party only got in with a little help from their friends. Up North part maori make up 40% of the population, if they were interested in maori councilors pushing maori ways they would get in easy, but is that what the average maori wants, I don’t know but I know what "elite" IWI want, and it doesn’t concern the average maori and they are catching on to that real quick.

Hogwash crazyhorse

Posted on 05-01-2015 19:04 | By Peter Dey

crazyhorse, writing about descent based groups creating artificial social divisions, sounds plausible but is totally contradicted by the way democracy operates in practice. Democracy is always careful to try and protect minorities. The United Nations allows one vote per country. Large countries get no more votes than small countries. In the United States every state gets 2 senators. Large states get the same as small states. In our local council the Maori community gets no councillors and the Pakeha community gets 10 councillors. That is undemocratic.

The terrible trio,

Posted on 05-01-2015 18:08 | By robin bell

yogi ,crazy, and "jitter" continue their pathetic attempt to "disappear" the Maori race,Their rights to representation as co-founders of this nation and their absolute rights to be compensated,for the blatant theft of much of their land. All talk of preference and privilege is merely an expression of frustration and selfishness. yogi-bore admits at long last,that this campaign is failing.It actually failed years ago,when the one failed. Its over ,our democracy is strong and a credit to the rest of New Zealand. Robin Bell.

crazyhorse, apartheid is not possible in New Zealand

Posted on 05-01-2015 17:35 | By Peter Dey

Apartheid in New Zealand would be Maori, who make up 15% of the population, having total control of the Government, the army, the police, and all local bodies. Anybody, like crazyhorse, who thinks that could possibly happen is delusional, or trying to stir up totally unjustified anti-Maori resentment.

Wrong again YOGI BEAR

Posted on 05-01-2015 17:29 | By Peter Dey

Getting obsessed about Maori having non-Maori ancestors gets you nowhere, YOGI BEAR. The New Zealand Government has decided in the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974 that anybody descended from a Maori can claim to be Maori. They decided that the nonsense that people like YOGI BEAR want to write about degrees of ancestry is just divisive and unhelpful. Anybody who has Maori ancestry and wants to be part of the Maori cultural world is accepted as Maori. They are 10% of the population. They get only 5% of councillors. That is biased against Maori.

maori Councilor proviledges

Posted on 05-01-2015 16:38 | By YOGI BEAR

Run rife through some Councils, just take a look at the wiffle-woffle in Auckland where the non elected, non democratic Maori committee sits there and tries to make decisions, aid abet and conspire to cause harm to the disharmony in a multi-cultural society where preference and preferential treatment are provided to a few at the expense of everyone else, welcome to apartheid NZ.

7 of 70?

Posted on 05-01-2015 16:23 | By YOGI BEAR

Well thanks for proving I am right, you just need to make the one last adjustment for the blood lines (that you have previously accepted) and you will be about right then.

Dear Robin

Posted on 05-01-2015 16:21 | By YOGI BEAR

I rest my case on Janet Wimshurst mythical writings, that are purported to be factual and scientific, such outlandish comments are in the category of "flat earth believers". Have another go Robin.

YOGI BEAR 7 electorates out of 70 is 10%

Posted on 05-01-2015 15:34 | By Peter Dey

10% of voters are on the Maori roll (7 electorates out of 70). 5% of councillors around New Zealand are Maori. This means that our election system for councils is biased against Maori candidates.

Robin, you are right

Posted on 05-01-2015 08:28 | By YOGI BEAR

When you say "denied the fundamental right of representation". This is indeed correct and it results from the one/only issue of taking away from the majority there entitlements in a democracy to determine their destiny, placing that right into the hands of a few radical minority preferential privileges that are totally undemocratic. The result from this will be an up rising by the majority to restore fairness, equality and democracy sooner or later. The more the greed pushes the soon the response will unfold.


Posted on 04-01-2015 21:34 | By crazyhorse

There is much that can be learned from international experience about what governing arrangements are best when a society, "like ours", is made up of diverse ethnic groups, including an "supposedly" indigenous people. There is a lot of debate about it. However, where there is anything approaching consensus it is this: giving unique political rights to a group or groups based on rigid descent-based criteria is not recommended. You risk creating artificial social divisions and exacerbating any divisions which already exist. But this is what New Zealand has done, and is increasingly doing. Not only do you infringe on the democratic rights of individuals but when you create unique political power for some groups, so the argument goes, the leaders of those groups arguably have an incentive to accentuate the difference between their group and the rest of society, that’s the other 85%of NZER’S for the dummies!

YOGI BEAR forget Janet Wilmshurst

Posted on 04-01-2015 20:32 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR, every time you write about Janet Wilmshurst you prove that you have not even read her research paper.She is a scientist. She does not write myths. Her results are fact. Myths are fiction.


Posted on 04-01-2015 20:07 | By Wise Chief

Dey correct & Jitter via using one example of 1 Maori candidate being elected makes obvious issue we have long operated here of like voting for like as per Majority Rules scenario. This one-sided imposed at point of gun and imprisonment & now trespass for any small reason fiasco has been playing out since colonist arrived. Thus we indeed have some poisonous snakes living among the community here and in my long experience of them across all avenues of life here in NZ but rarely in other countries is these persons likely have and are still holding senior positions of authority in government related employment or businesses. Strong possibility some are recent imports and if not are instead 4-5th generation descendants of Royal Armed British Militia who encamped at Oripi (Europe) prior to initiating wars with Maori. More important issue is how WE ALL going to survive Climate Change?


Posted on 04-01-2015 17:09 | By Jitter

Maori are not denied the right of representation as claimed by Robyn Bell, yet again. If Maori put up worthy and suitable candidates anywhere they would have the same chance of being elected as anyone else. How is it that Asians, Indians and Pacifica people manage to be elected to boards and councils. They are not given any advantage such as an Asian, Indian or Pacific ward. They get off their butts, put up good candidates, fight a good campaign and don’t whinge continually about being disadvantaged because of their ethnicity. Neither do they fall back on "the spirit of the treaty" all the time which is what Messrs Bell and Dey do continually.It appears this is the only argument they can put forward.

To deny equality for all

Posted on 04-01-2015 16:45 | By YOGI BEAR

In doing this Robin, you are seeking to breach the treaty agreement (the real one, the Littlewood draft) but breaking one of the three prime elements of the treaty being that the settlers and Maori were to be treated the same under the Queens laws. So if you seek that then of course Maori then are acting in an ultra-vires manner and the agreement will become void by way of Maori’s own hand. To be honest here Robin, any realistic Maori residing in NZ will not want that to happen, few would want to lose the current gravy train state that exists at present.

Dear Robin

Posted on 04-01-2015 16:41 | By YOGI BEAR

Merit says that in a democracy that all representatives should stand and all have equal opportunity to be voted in, When you have voter preferential seats then obviously you have preferentially treated representatives. whose merit, motivation and intent then get beyond real. In reality an apartheid state has been created within a democracy, this farcical situation that can not survive. Either one or other will prevail as was the case in South Africa. This is democracy 101 Robin. What you are pushing for is a dictatorship, once the populous realise this (most have not as yet) then the reaction will not be petty to see at all. It is clear to me that you have failed to consider the consequences of what you wish for.

5% of councillors

Posted on 04-01-2015 15:21 | By YOGI BEAR

Well Peter that is still a bit high and an over representation of Maori for sure, the Census shows that about 14% of the NZ population claim to be Maori but not one has 50%+ Maori blood, in fact the average is around 20% and dropping after every generation, so 14% (if right and that is very questionable) @ 20% means that in NZ today there is about 2.8% Maori blood, so that reflects a fair representation. To do otherwise creates an imbalance based singularly on race. If reality as applied here then other real cultural groups have been in NZ for thousands of years, based on adjusting for time Maori would rate perhaps around 0.4% NZ representation. After all it is genuine ethnicity that really matters and that is a factor of time in NZ and who was here when. Maori at best were 7-8th here in NZ.

jitter conveniently ignores

Posted on 04-01-2015 09:40 | By robin bell

the social damage created, when one treaty partner is denied the fundamental right of representation, by Maori for Maori. To continually claim they have no such rights,that the treaty is null and void,that "other" ethnic groups have similar "rights" or that Maori no longer exist,are all aimed at degrading the undeniable position held by these people.It is, among other things,self destructive. "Jitter" would be well advised to look to other nations, and celebrate the positive "differences" rather than the negative. Robin Bell.

Here we go ...

Posted on 04-01-2015 03:06 | By YOGI BEAR

Myths are all made up stories, Janet Wilmshurst so called research so selective a to be facial to the nth degree, what else needs to be said here and now.

argument not shot down Jitter

Posted on 03-01-2015 14:54 | By Peter Dey

One exception does not prove an argument. Check with Te Ara the Government online Encyclopaedia. 5% of councillors throughout New Zealand are Maori out of 15% of the population being Maori. Maori candidates generally do not get elected by Pakeha voters.

Argument Shot Down

Posted on 02-01-2015 10:05 | By Jitter

The argument that "Maori" are not elected to boards or councils because the general public will not vote for them is crap. How did Matua Parkinson come to be elected to the District Health Board ? Lets see how he does in the election of a new Mount/Papamoa councillor. If he has the qualities required (and he obviously does) he will be elected. However does he intend to resign from the Health Board if successful in gaining a council seat ?


Posted on 31-12-2014 12:30 | By Wise Chief

Hopefully commentators saw Herald journo Chapman’s article in with picture from Able Tasman’s visit dated 1642 depicting Giants upon their arrival here. Spanish I was told were here much earlier about mid 1500 and Chinese 1400 & 1200 AD. Reciprocal trade in Greenstone/Jade occurring long centuries before. Oh,and please don’t forget the Jesuits role in deliberate cover up an attempted genocide of Maori.They were sent out worldwide to destroy as much evidence of Giants existence as was possible via instructions of Vatican/West-Munster/Minster Religio Bankers Cartel, designed to steal their countries and lands for the so called fake Annunaki-Summerian descended European Royalty. Shapeshifters whom Maori called Ngagara. Serpentine/Reptilian Humanoid types. Thank GOD for SON of GOD.Son of Man --Yeshua who via incarnation as man via merging of the two species in one body created new humanoid race...US humans today. Thus racism is evil and common error.

Its not working,

Posted on 29-12-2014 10:16 | By robin bell

yogi old bore. Your attempt to manipulate mythology is failing miserably. In order to discredit Peter you make the fatal mistake of using your own myths, very childish. Peter uses nothing but fact. Frustrating as it is you must realize the futility of fighting it. When your British ancestors signed the treaty,they set in motion the inevitable day of reckoning. Now its here,the inevitable reaction from ’the few’ Robin Bell.

YOGI BEAR we know that myths are fiction

Posted on 27-12-2014 20:15 | By Peter Dey

The scientific evidence we now have such as Janet Wilmshurst’s research can be verified so it is totally credible. That is why we know that myths are fiction because they are contradicted by the scientific evidence.


Posted on 27-12-2014 19:30 | By Wise Chief

It seems a couple of vociferous commentators have missed the point here in that due to the major Tsunamis which occurred here wiping out coastal populations same as volcanic eruptions over the last 5000 years and more since the true first arrival here the story of the resettlement after are in fact confirmed by Janet Wilmshursts findings. This era however was not the first arrival of the Maori upon Giant three masted Catamarans which if one traces the history of such craft goes back to ancient Eqypt, Mesopotamia etc. To argue then Maori have no rights over later arrivals today after so much of their lands have been taken is to add fuel to the long burning fire of denial of natural human rights as land owners which is an owners right established since time immemorial yet seemly under Colonial Rule today anathema for Maori. WHY SO?

Small correction ...

Posted on 27-12-2014 18:38 | By YOGI BEAR

174 years ago

Robin the history of NZ

Posted on 27-12-2014 18:37 | By YOGI BEAR

That is what has happened. Oh by the way Robin, just so you can get all your stories in a row here, Peter, your matey mate has absolutely confirmed already that all the stories passed on from generation to generation are myths and are all made up and changed randomly more often that told. The real problem here is that Peter has not only shot himself in the foot but also the random shots taken here have wiped out the minuscule fraction of truth that maybe resided 154 years ago.

The myth

Posted on 26-12-2014 11:13 | By robin bell

of yogi bears ’Intelligence’ and therefore his inability to engage in rational debate,is finally confirmed. Whatever ’influence’ he claims to have in his murky world of ’political activism’ is equally mythical. Lost in the mists of his ego. Destroyed by his use of fantasy and provocative stupidity. Obliterated by his inability to modify his outlandish ’belief system’ Buried by his reliance on dishonesty and the cover of his symbolic hood. ALL symptoms of N.P.D. the latest scourge. Robin Bell.


Posted on 24-12-2014 14:27 | By YOGI BEAR

The Robin and Peter show and Fact are like chalk and cheese. There is nothing here that relates, there is nothing that can relate as they details provided are contradictory. A simple question for Robin (asked before) Please confirm if you stories about Maori are from myths? Please answer, if you cant then obviously they are and we all now know what that means don’t we Peter.

Some history education for YOGI BEAR

Posted on 23-12-2014 21:20 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR says that no respectable historian would be associated with Janet Wilmshurst’s research. In fact one of the co-authors of Janet’s research paper is Atholl Anderson from the Australian National University in Canberra. Atholl happens to be well enough regarded as a historian that he is one of the authors of the New Oxford History of New Zealand. So we can safely conclude that YOGI BEAR, writing about Janet Wilmshurst, is still writing nonsense, and that people who want honest truth should not be fooled by YOGI BEAR’s contributions.

Thinking carefully,

Posted on 23-12-2014 17:05 | By robin bell

yogi -bear just like his best mate crazy-hoss display the ultimate arrogance in believing they "run" this debate Peter like me dispenses nothing but fact. We have no hidden agenda, unlike the above. Fairness,justice and honesty are our only motive. Yogi chooses to continue making his pathetic claims,so be it.Peter and I are very,very patient people. N.P.D. is treatable yogi old bore, take a few tips from Marj, she knows how to treat people. Robin Bell.

YOGI BEAR should read Janet Wilmshurst

Posted on 23-12-2014 16:09 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR keeps producing evidence that he has not actually read Janet Wilmshurst’s research paper even though he keeps writing about it. The authors of Twisting the Treaty accept the validity of Janet’s research because it is clearly accepted by the scientific community. Janet was not told to write anything by anybody else. She had 3 co-authors: Terry Hunt University of Hawai’i, Carl lippo California State University, and Atholl Anderson Australian National University. Her paper was reviewed and edited by James O’Connell University of Utah. YOGI BEAR should explain why he disparages the opinion of the authors of Twisting the Treaty who obviously accept the calibre of Janet’s associates.

Twisting the Treaty accepts Janet Wilmshurst?

Posted on 23-12-2014 14:07 | By YOGI BEAR

that is a strange one, Janet merely verifies what we all know, that Maori at best arrived here in NZ around 1300-1400AD, she takes an extreme view on that and extends it back to about 1250AD. That is as far as she can go in copying down what she was ordered to write. She was unable to address the real question of "Who was in NZ first?" that clearly was not Maori, sadly the lack of a credible peer review carried out in a proper, independent scientific way then leaves poor old Janet out in the cold when she tries to find a credible peer reviewer, even just one. Desperate she dumps a manipulated script choreographed by her tainted benefactors behest to scoot overseas where naivety pervades about the real plan of Maori radicals for NZ. Sadly for them whatever credibility remained has long since left the room.

Maori making up the numbers

Posted on 23-12-2014 13:12 | By YOGI BEAR

So the slightest hint of Maori (lets say 0.00000001%) means you are Maori, is that right Robin? Think carefully before you answer this one else you will also end up in the Myth category just like Peter is already.

Its Marj: for xmas,

Posted on 23-12-2014 12:43 | By robin bell

With Sunlives permission I’d like quote Marj."I have learned this week that finding and seeing credit in others is positive and therefore self fulfilling. That finding and believing criticism becomes defaming and destroying of oneself. Criticism is a negative, self-destructive force. Criticism of others is like a Psychological cancer which grows and destroys its own body. Lets be positive. Lets discard criticism and search for a happier New Zealand - both politically and humanely". Yogi bear,crazyhorse "jitter" take note. Marj. has more common sense and intelligence in one sentence than all your comments combined. Robin Bell.

YOGI BEAR making up numbers

Posted on 23-12-2014 11:56 | By Peter Dey

The New Zealand 2013 census states that 15% of the population claim to have Maori ancestry. The numbers that YOGI BEAR throws around regarding the fraction of ancestry that Maori have is just unverifiable guesswork. In New Zealand the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974 classifies anybody as Maori who has a Maori ancestor. Being Maori has everything to do with ancestry and nothing to do with percentages.

Twisting the Treaty accepts Janet Wilmshurst

Posted on 23-12-2014 11:25 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR has a problem because his Twisting the Treaty bible accepts the findings of Janet Wilmshurst. This means that even anti-Maori writers accept her findings. So YOGI BEAR is denying evidence that even his own team now accept. YOGI BEAR has lost the plot.

Peter is right ...

Posted on 23-12-2014 10:32 | By YOGI BEAR

No one could possible challenge Janet Wimshursts results as they are so left field out of this world and complete unrealistic that no genuine historian would be able to get near it. In fact no respected historian would want to even consider getting near it as it would be a complete self destruction of all credibility as os the case with JW, there is no coming back from these things for her.


Posted on 23-12-2014 09:47 | By Wise Chief

Those who don’t believe Maori are actually WARDS of NZ STATE need to strutinize many of the so called Settlement deals and other contracts concerning Maori trust where one will find the state demands specific compliance conditions for use of Maori’s own money and one of them is that the must use approve accounting firms like the big four KPMG/EY/Delloites etc who charge like wounded bulls. Add all the other compliance cost and one will soon see the vast sums being so called earned to manage Maori Affairs both personal (via police,courts, prisons etc) many Maori in prison lose their land by being disqualified from ever having input into the decision making process. Police sate via Bonds etc tap these and spend it on policing other Maori etc. Social Welfare the same. Maori generate 24% of NZ economy and receive back less than 4% with about 4% on pensions.


Posted on 23-12-2014 09:30 | By Wise Chief

Robin Bell is absolutely correct in his statement that Kiwi Pakeha and Plastic Pakeha the SA from the Cape and Zim land cannot be trusted to any degree when dealing with Maori issues. As the American Indians say, White Man speak with Forked tongue. Reptilian DNA modifications from time of Annunaki. In NZ and elsewhere within the commonwealth they uniquely being permitted by yet to be repealed laws to manage a Maori Persons Affairs both domestic & commercial without court approval.Social Welfare & Police State.Maori legally are wards of NZ State. SLAVES. This is little known fact which few Maori let alone Pakeha know but there are very large numbers who exploit this act of law who use it to control and tap vast amounts of money via trusts,low wages,taxes etc.

Serious unverified accusation by Jitter

Posted on 23-12-2014 06:35 | By Peter Dey

Jitter says that the US National Academy of Sciences has made mistakes. That sounds like a wild guess by Jitter not based on any factual evidence. Jitter should give us some details and his source of information.

Peter rantings desperate

Posted on 23-12-2014 01:19 | By YOGI BEAR

Clearly if the 15% is right (those claiming to be Maori) then how did that increase by double around 1975 is just a few years? The real deal is here that there are no "Maori" with 50% true Maori blood, the real deal here is that the average is about 1/16th and at best up to say 1/4 in a few. The numbers are vanishing rapidly. This is like the RSA’s around NZ they have had to throw open the doors to bolster numbers, so now "anyone" can get in whenever they want to. Sadly that facts don’t change only the TTT stands left as all that matters.

maori looking after Maori

Posted on 23-12-2014 01:14 | By YOGI BEAR

That is a great idea Robin, I would suggest that you copy and paste that idea all over the place, that will lift the burden of all other citizens by a huge amount, go create your own world and go live there, fantastic ....

Jitter, Janet Wilmshurst is unique

Posted on 22-12-2014 22:58 | By Peter Dey

Jitter is unjustifiably dismissive of Janet Wilmshurst. Her research results were published in 2011. Since then there has been no scientific research that challenges her findings. Her research is unique at this point because she developed new techniques that gave much greater certainty to her dating than previous carbon-dating had done. Her research has not been contradicted by any other scientific research. The fact that the US National Academy of Sciences published her paper vouches for her credibility. All non-scientific evidence that is inconsistent with Janet Wilmshurst’s results is untenable.

Yet more misinformation

Posted on 22-12-2014 19:41 | By robin bell

From "jitter" ignoring Maori rights to being represented by Maori on Maori issues. Pakeha have consistently shown the cannot be trusted to fairly represent Maori. Robin Bell.

Crazyhorse, Krishnamurti lives in India

Posted on 22-12-2014 18:58 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse is at it again taking things out of context. In India over many centuries religious and cultural differences have lead to violence. In New Zealand religious and cultural differences have been managed without major violence. Obviously there is wisdom in Krishnamurti’s comment but in New Zealand we are evolving towards an acceptance of the fact that we can have cultural differences that enrich society. The only people who go on about racism, apartheid, separatism, and Maori privilege are those who have a false and unjustifiable belief that Maori leaders are on a grab for money and power.

No put down, Jitter

Posted on 22-12-2014 18:49 | By Peter Dey

Maori candidates do not generally get elected by Pakeha voters. This is not a put down of Maori candidates, or a racist criticism of Pakeha voters. It is simply an historical fact of what has happened all over New Zealand for a long time. Why it happens is a separate issue that does not change the fact that it does happen. The fact that it happens is unfair to Maori. People who object to Maori wards seem to be saying that unfairness in election systems is alright so long as it is only unfair to Maori and not unfair to the rest of us.

Crazyhorse is misquoting the Treaty

Posted on 22-12-2014 18:43 | By Peter Dey

Article 3 of the Treaty says "the Queen of England extends to the natives of New Zealand Her royal protection and imparts to them all the Rights and Privileges of British subjects". This does not make Maori and non-Maori the same because Maori were guaranteed also "full, exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties". Article 3 did not take any of this away from Maori.

YOGI BEAR has not read Janet Wilmshurst's paper

Posted on 22-12-2014 18:27 | By Peter Dey

Janet Wilmshurst’s research was carbon-dating of early Polynesian settlement sites. She dated sites from Hawaii (United States) to New Zealand. Her research was scientific which was why the US National Academy of Sciences published it. The research had nothing to do with Maori related myths as YOGI BEAR claims. That is why it is clear that YOGI BEAR has not read the research even though he keeps writing about it. It is clear that YOGI BEAR does not actually believe what he writes because he keeps repeating misinformation that is clearly proved wrong.

Oh Dear

Posted on 22-12-2014 16:57 | By Jitter

I have been put in my place by Mr Dey. However I don’t really care who the US Academy of Science are advisors to as they have been known to make mistakes.Mr Bell is not happy either. They both hold Janet Wilmhurst in high regard and I have no argument with that but her opinions and findings are only one of many.Never mind I have broad shoulders. I intend to have a good Christmas.

Put Down

Posted on 22-12-2014 16:45 | By Jitter

Dey and Bell stating that if "Maori’ candidates stood in the existing wards they would not have a hope of being elected by the general public is absolute rubbish.These two are putting their own people down in a form of reverse racism. If ""Maori candidates stood who voters could see had the necessary qualities and were worthy then of course they would be elected. The same applies with Asian, Pacifica and Indian etc.

Crazyhorse, Treaty settlements go to iwi

Posted on 22-12-2014 16:12 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorese is confused over Treaty settlements. He suggests that because no Maori have total Maori ancestry that they should no longer be able to make Maori based claims. That shows ignorance of the fact that Treaty settlements are made to iwi, and that iwi have existed continually since the signing of the Treaty. Individual Maori do not make Treaty claims so arguing about their degree of ancestry is just more misinformation. Crazyhorse is obviously a disciple of Twisting the Treaty and their false message that Maori leaders are in a grab for unjustified money and power.

YOGI BEAR still in denial

Posted on 22-12-2014 16:00 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR is trying to wriggle out of the fact that Janet Wilmshurst’s research results were published by the US National Academy of Sciences which is the official science adviser to the US Government. Their credibility and Janet’s credibility are secure. She offered her paper to them. They published it. Her published results show quite clearly that Maori were in New Zealand first because she found no evidence of anybody else here before them. We discount stone artefacts because only imaginary people can leave stone artefacts with no evidence of human habitation.

More fiction from YOGI BEAR

Posted on 22-12-2014 15:47 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR is wrong. The United Nations has no rules for ethnicity. In New Zealand any descendant of a Maori is a Maori. This is laid down in the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974. The 2014 Census had Maori as 15% of the population, although people can claim dual ethnicity. YOGI BEAR should quote his source for the amount of Government spending on Maori. Maori make up 15% of the population and probably get 15% of Government spending.

It seems strange,

Posted on 22-12-2014 10:41 | By robin bell

very strange.That "JITTER" is prepared to accept the non peer reviewed works of "alternative history" by writers such as those who wrote T.the T. The Great Divide etc. Yet desperately tries to discredit the most highly respected Palaeontologist in N.Z. and the U.S. Academy of Science. Strange very strange. Or maybe not. Robin Bell.

In your DREAMS,

Posted on 22-12-2014 10:12 | By robin bell

crazyhoss. I understand your desperation to score a point. However I repeat, its People who create cultures,not Waka. Of course in your narrow minded world of chancers,you will grab at anything. I see your mate yogi is back,we can look forward to some Zheng He fantasy again,How dumb can he get? Robin Bell.

Historical expert?

Posted on 22-12-2014 09:55 | By YOGI BEAR

One can but presume that Peter holds Janet in the same high regard as himself, sadly the recitals below only serve to highlight the simple fact that just like the Waitangi ROR-Tribunal as being nothing less than a multi-billion dollar scam on genuine citizens of New Zealand.

A grammar point for crazyhorse

Posted on 22-12-2014 09:54 | By Peter Dey

"Consider for a moment (a mad moment) that Polynesians drifted here on a log raft,or dugout canoe. In order to develop a sustainable culture,there must have been a minimum of three hundred Big raft,big canoe." Crazyhorse needs a comprehension lesson. Notice the capital B on Big. The quotation clearly refers to one raft or canoe and 300 Polynesians. Crazyhorse spends his whole time trying to score debating points with tortured reasoning. All he proves is that his arguments totally lack credibility.

The National Academy of Sciences of the United States

Posted on 22-12-2014 09:53 | By YOGI BEAR

Great organisation, however what possibly do they know about New Zealand, the average American would not have even heard of it never mind where it is nor anything historic. Simple result of that is that they are clueless when it comes to peer reviews of Maori related myths and so on. In addition the Wimshurst paper was not about who was first to NZ it was simply a selective recital of known selective information to appease her pay master. All of these reasons actual serve to discredit is meaningless. The fact ten that Peter/Robin then wander along and then misquote that then puts any view of it as completely negative.


Posted on 22-12-2014 09:26 | By crazyhorse

I’ll leave you with a quote by Krishnamurti: “When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.” LET’S ALL BE K1W1’S, BY CRAZYHORSE.

Jitter is losing credibility

Posted on 22-12-2014 07:14 | By Peter Dey

The National Academy of Sciences of the United States is the official science adviser to the US Government. They published Janet Wilmshurst’s research paper. If Jitter wants to argue about their credibility then he needs to produce some authoritative source for his information, which he clearly has not done.

Jitter is losing credibility

Posted on 22-12-2014 07:14 | By Peter Dey

The National Academy of Sciences of the United States is the official science adviser to the US Government. They published Janet Wilmshurst’s research paper. If Jitter wants to argue about their credibility then he needs to produce some authoritative source for his information, which he clearly has not done.

Quotation for Jitter

Posted on 22-12-2014 07:05 | By Peter Dey

Quote from Janet Wilmshurst’s paper: High-precision radiocarbon dating shows recent and rapid initial human colonization of East Polynesia: New Zealand’s well-established short colonization chronology (11), which was further shortened and refined by dates from nonarchaeological sites on short-lived woody seed cases gnawed by the Polynesian-introduced Rattus exulans and compared with terrestrial avian eggshell from an early human cemetery (4, 15), and the short colonization chronology for Rapa Nui (6), are both confirmed here (EAEM–LAEM range: A.D. ?1230–1282 and A.D. ?1200–1253, respectively).

More falsehood from crazyhorse

Posted on 22-12-2014 06:51 | By Peter Dey

crazyhorse misuses the words social and historic engineering,segregation – or giving one race a false hope, or false start, or false advantage based on nothing more than skin colour. “This is a recipe for disaster and acrimony. None of these words apply to Maori wards. There is absolutely no justification by crazyhorse for the use of these words. His use of these words is total falsehood.

Logs, trees, twigs and things?

Posted on 21-12-2014 23:22 | By YOGI BEAR

It is lovely that Maori got to NZ via General Zheng He, not a bit of flax holding a couples of logs together. Far better to have stepped off the ship than be all washed up on the beach.


Posted on 21-12-2014 23:20 | By YOGI BEAR

You are correct, the peer review suited the report, nothing else to it. Janet was never going to risk asking anyone knowledgeable. The real question was not answered, that being who was in NZ first? That means who was here before Maori, there were plenty, that simply explains why there was one peer reviewer and that they have naively rubber stamped it. She never addressed the question of who was in NZ first, it si simply that Peter/Robin have drawn the most extraordinary and convenient conclusion that suits them. That my friends about sums up all three of them.

?14% population gets 14% spending?

Posted on 21-12-2014 22:53 | By YOGI BEAR

Now there is an odd pair of numbers, Maori are not 14% of the population they are in fact about 8%. Of those none qualify under UN rules to be recognized as actually Maori because not one Maori in NZ has 50% Maori blood lines at present. In fact most "Maori" are more in the region of 10-25% at best. The NZ Government spending on Maori is near to 20% with all the direct and indirect spending that goes on.

Oh! no I forgot,

Posted on 21-12-2014 22:47 | By crazyhorse

Blaming it on bad "grammar" now, pathetic, look before you leap princess, your stuck with 300 hundred waka, rafts, or lilo’s now, LOL. Nobody else has complained about my comment, ring Dey up, you look up to him, I’m sure he will help you out. 300 waka, I’m guna get huge Mileage out’a this, sure you don’t want to go for the tsunami or "burn the waka trick", it’s christmas even I will give you a break, "you need it me old mate!".

Trougher Properganda

Posted on 21-12-2014 22:03 | By crazyhorse

“The best way to take control over a people and control them utterly is to take a little of their freedom at a time, to erode rights by a thousand tiny and almost imperceptible reductions. In this way, the people will not see those rights and freedoms being removed until past the point at which these changes cannot be reversed.” ? Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf


Posted on 21-12-2014 22:00 | By crazyhorse

Maori are not the “Distinct race of people that signed the Treaty in 1840? and therefore should not be treated as such. There is far too much foreign blood in all Maori today for the Waitangi Tribunal or Government to attempt to compensate or give special privilege such as Customary Title etc to one group of New Zealand Citizen at the expense of the others. Through intermarriage of their own free will, Maori today have more of the ancestry of the people they are claiming against than that of their Maori ancestors that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840. It’s a fact, this race of people have long gone. Article Three of the Tiriti o Waitangi gave the same rights to all the people of New Zealand, irrespective of race, colour or creed,{only treaty troughers argue with this, ask the average part maori, take a pole, find out??}.

Abuse or privilege

Posted on 21-12-2014 21:39 | By crazyhorse

Is it a pre-requisite to be an idiot to run for local body politics? New Plymouth’s Mayor Andrew Judd has dreamed up the idea that the law should be changed so that half of all councillors are Maori. He’s already wanting to create a Maori ward. He bases all of this on the Treaty – yes, the same Treaty the Tribunal suggested hadn’t ceded authority to the British. “Top tip for "Councillor Dougy Owens" firstly, councils are in the business of mowing lawns, collecting rubbish, not for social and historic engineering; secondly, no country’s future is based on segregation – or giving one race a false hope, or false start, or false advantage based on nothing more than skin colour. “This is a recipe for disaster and acrimony, and New Plymouth - not to mention the rest of the country – deserves a hell of a lot better, "honestly"??.

Peter Dey

Posted on 21-12-2014 17:45 | By Jitter

We must be looking at two completely different Janet Wilmhurst findings.I am not pretending to quote from her findings. The one I have read definitely states that she "estimates" that "Maori" arrived in NZ between 1280 - 1300. Why were her findings not peer reviewd by more than one scientific organisation instead of only the US National Academy of Science ? Normally a peer review is done by at least 3 similar organisations in different parts of the world. Or was this the one that supported her findings and was the result that certain people wanted ?

Oh! no I forgot,

Posted on 21-12-2014 16:02 | By robin bell

the full stop after 300. Even the most uneducated would have realised,when talking of establishing a culture,we are talking of PEOPLE,not rafts or logs or Waka. Not crazy though,he will grasp anything he can,to make a breakthrough. Not this time old fruit. Robin Bell.

crazyhorse, still no evidence of separatism

Posted on 21-12-2014 15:09 | By Peter Dey

Separatism has to physically divide a community to be bad. None of the separate activities that Maori are involved in, or that churches are involved in, or that community clubs are involved in divide the community. They are all part of the fabric of society and make it better. The irrational fear that crazyhorse has towards Maori activities is not shared by younger New Zealanders. We are an evolving society that is celebrating our cultural diversity and crazyhorse is living in the past. None of the Maori activities that he resents are separatist. They are separate but they do not divide us.


Posted on 21-12-2014 14:47 | By crazyhorse

I will look forward to reading the literature you have suggested,you can never stop learning, the rock structures here and world wide are fascinating, so little is known of what is in NZ unfortunately!. te pai katoa ki a koutou ko tou whare , waimarie pai mo te Tau Hou


Posted on 21-12-2014 14:43 | By robin bell

at last we reach the inevitable destruction of credibility.We are now asked to "consider" the hypothetical ranting of a beaten man. What if,what if? All previous discussion becomes irrelevant, its all about, What if? Fear tactics are all crazy has. He thrives on them, all the time hoping he can reach the masses, that to date have eluded him . Meanwhile those of us who live at the "coal face" will continue to work it all out, in that great humanitarian way, COMPROMISE. Robin Bell.


Posted on 21-12-2014 14:26 | By crazyhorse

Posted on 28-11-2014 16:41 | By robin bell of broken minds. In their desperate efforts to promote the totally discredited witterings of numerous,alternative history tomes,crazy hoss and yogi drift from the ridiculous to the demented. Consider for a moment (a mad moment) that Polynesians drifted here on a log raft,or dugout canoe. In order to develop a sustainable culture,there must have been a minimum of three hundred Big raft,big canoe.In less than 250yrs they increased,Inhabiting the whole of the east coast.Then they were wiped out (almost) by a giant Tsunami in 1500. Increased again to number 100,000+ by the time Cook arrived,and these two demented jokers, reckon,they were eating themselves into extinction. The truth, is so much simpler and much more believable. Robin Bell.

crazyhorse, there is no separatism in NZ

Posted on 21-12-2014 14:14 | By crazyhorse

I will say again separatism is fine if it’s part maori practicing it, just for an example if New Zealanders of south african descent wanted to start up schools, speaking Afrikaans only, teaching no religion or part maori culture how would you "perceive" that?, or, say we reverse this example against part maori. An author of a popular Maori children’s book series has been excluded from entering a national library award because she is Pakeha. Te Reo Singalong creator Sharon Holt was told she could not enter the Te Kura Pounamu Award for children’s literature because she had no Maori blood, or I had a franchise of stores with a standard greeting as part of company policy eg how’s it going mate"part of the job discription every one knows the rules, but, one person wont tow the line and uses the greeting kia ora, now what happens here?.


Posted on 21-12-2014 13:18 | By Wise Chief

Kai pai e te porangi hoiho. Please look through some of photos of Maori artifacts via Turnbull Library from last and late 18th century if you want to know where to find the stones mention here and where those ancient giant relatives of mine from the stars put them. Might want to read some of Bruce Cathies work to know the where the what the why of their precision star & trigonomic alignments. We have buried pyramids etc here. The geo settings & placements are for triangulation from points above in the stars aligned with the 12 poles. Don’t try to compute in head or one could end up in ward 17 as the locals so quaintly refer for those having lost a neuron-synapse or two. Merry Xmas. Oh, don’t forget their other more numerous large stone structures on island throughout Pacific and East Coast USA etc.


Posted on 21-12-2014 12:59 | By robin bell

continues his desperate effort to discredit. I have never,ever claimed 300 Waka. His penchant for distortion knows no bounds. It takes a minimum of 300 PEOPLE to establish a viable culture,according to many experts. My comment in response to his ridiculous claim Maori floated here on a log was,"big canoe,big log" as per usual crazy spins it to suit. Robin Bell.

crazyhorse, there is no separatism in NZ

Posted on 21-12-2014 12:47 | By Peter Dey

Tuhoe did not ask for separatism in their Treaty settlement. Of course there are individuals who want all sorts of extreme things like separatism, but nowhere in new Zealand does the Maori community support a policy of separatism. The separatism that crzzyhorse goes on about does not exist and no Maori community wants it. Separatism would be a separate physical community having nothing to do with anybody else. Separate activities like Maori TV do not divide the community and are not separatism.

Crazyhorse Tauranga is not Tuhoe

Posted on 21-12-2014 12:07 | By crazyhorse

Separatism is separatism, it does not come in different forms or have different values or rules, if there is a system for one race of people only, eg education, tv, ""sports teams, in particular"", remember the apartheid south africa, no blacks in the team, here we have the maori all blacks, a lot of them are not real "brown" but as you have said on numerous occasions that has nothing to do with it they are "maori", I will say again separatism is fine if it’s part maori practicing it, just for an example if New Zealanders of south african descent wanted to start up schools, speaking Afrikaans only, teaching no religion or part maori culture how would you "perceive" that?.

WiseChief is in denial over carbon dating

Posted on 21-12-2014 10:50 | By Peter Dey

WiseChief is hopelessly misinformed when he says that carbon dating is flawed. The results that it provides are not flawed. Because it is science it is not dogmatic. There is always room for more scientific evidence to improve our knowledge. However the fact that Janet Wilmshurst’s paper was peer reviewed and published by the US National Academy of Sciences gives us complete confidence in the integrity of her findings, and modern carbon dating methods.

Wise Chief amusing clever

Posted on 21-12-2014 10:40 | By crazyhorse

Good to hear from you again, your comments are articulate and clever.Also you do not get "to" personnel, a trait some of us could learn from, but, I have asked you a couple of times about these Stone Tuahu/Dolhems -Crystals used by maori as "navigational markers. Where are they {buried}?? If I don’t get an answer this time I can only assume they are "hidden together with me old "mate" bongle Bell’s 300 humongous ocean going cargo carrying waka, raft, lilo what ever he wants to call them, that brought polynesian, melanesian, asian, and who"ever"else plus the "tons of rock" you speak of to NZ, I would also like to hear more of lower particulate wave physics to determine the linear effects of time, this interests me greatly, you are truly a wise chief. Good luck to you.

Crazyhorse Tauranga is not Tuhoe

Posted on 21-12-2014 10:39 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse is being hopelessly illogical bringing Tuhoe into a discussion of Maori wards in Tauranga. Anything that Tuhoe might want or have achieved for the Urewera is based on the fact that the Urewera has been the home of Tuhoe and almost nobody else since Pakeha arrived. There is no logical connection between separatism for Tuhoe and Maori wards in Tauranga.

Jitter has got it wrong

Posted on 21-12-2014 10:24 | By Peter Dey

Jitter is pretending to quote Janet Wilmshurst over the date of Maori settlement in New Zealand, but his quote is actually not correct. Janet Wilmshurst gives a period between 1230 and 1280 as the period of Maori first settlement in New Zealand. Also Jitter’s suggestion that radiocarbon dating is suspect is not what the US National Academy of Sciences says. They peer reviewed and published Jante’s findings. She carbon-dated 1400 sites, so saying she might not have searched far enough is nonsense.


Posted on 21-12-2014 08:54 | By robin bell

There are many ways people can be separate yet remain joined to society in general.You yourself being a perfect example. You have lived in Australia for years,yet remain a ’political’activist in New Zealand. Maori will never be anything but Maori,get over it,Its working well for everyone. Robin Bell.


Posted on 21-12-2014 07:03 | By Wise Chief

There seems to be a reliance upon the use of Carbon Dating data to supposedly establish the arrival dates of Maori. Firstly Carbon Dating is flawed for several reasons of which I will not go into at this time.Few know Carbon is only link between the non physical quantum fluid state (waters above the waters-Genesis) all around in and through YOU and ME and that this molecule when connected with water is the building blocks of living creatures in this Universe, which is one of many. The method of burning a portion of a fossil in vacuum to examine residue matter is very primitive in the context of pure quantum or lower particulate wave physics to determine the linear effects of time.Basically there are far easy more reliable means of proving Maori got here long before SOME Porangi Hoiho Pakeha would like to admit. Stone Tuahu/Dolhems -Crystals.

Crazyhorse, being separate is not separatism

Posted on 20-12-2014 20:14 | By crazyhorse

,I’m confused over separatism, are you catching on to these 2 yet campers, anyone see a "pattern to the "BS", read the "quote from Dey below. Posted on 27-09-2013 10:46 | By Peter Dey Crazyhorse, separatism is another word being used in a misleading way. Recognising Maori culture with Maori television, schools, sports teams, and members of Councils is not separatism. Separatism would be Maori wanting to live in a separate area with their own funding and Council. Tuhoe possibly want that for the Urewera, but nobody else in New Zealand does. Tuhoe do want separatism for the Urewera’s they talked about it as part of their treaty settlement, strange because Tuhoe didn’t sign the treaty, but again, this, and a little bit of separatism is ok with Dey, ""as long as it’s maori practising it, HELLO!anyone catching onto yet, separatism’s fine if it’s part maori promoting it!.

Lets Get It Right

Posted on 20-12-2014 20:04 | By Jitter

Frequently recently Janet Wilmhurst’s reports have been misquoted by our ardent "Maori" "history" supporters.They state "Maori"arrived in NZ in 1250. Fact - Wilmhurst’s writings state "Maori" arrived in NZ between 1280 and 1300. A small error but an error all the same. Carbon Dating - This is not as accurate as origionally thought. Archaeologists no longer rely on this fully. Reason - extraneous factors can drastically effect the results eg Cosmic rays from the sun can effect the results either way. The further back you go the more inaccurate carbon dating is. Results can be out by 100 years either way. The sites Wilmhurst carbon dated had previously been excavated could have had a major effect on the results ie exposure to many extraneous factors. Perhaps she didn’t find evidence of earlier inhabitants because she didnt search far and wide enough but came up with the result required !

Maori 'only'

Posted on 20-12-2014 11:47 | By robin bell

prison initiatives are designed to re-connect Maori with their culture,It works well. Pakeha prisoners have plenty of re-hab aimed at them. How can that be ’privilege’? It seems crazy-hoss won’t be happy until all reference to Maori is ’disappeared’ Robin Bell.


Posted on 20-12-2014 11:23 | By robin bell

seems to forget Maori are CO-signatories to the formation of this country. We all know he simply cannot come to terms with that fact. ALL of the initiatives he mentions,recognise that fact and are open to pakeha who wish to participate. ’Personal choice’ is what its called dummy.There are TWO participants in co- governance Maori and Pakeha. Take time out,and enjoy the Queensland sun. Boy do you need it. Robin Bell.

Crazyhorse, being separate is not separatism

Posted on 20-12-2014 11:10 | By Peter Dey

Crzyhorse is spreading more half-truth with his list of separate Maori bodies. Separatism is wanting to have a completely divided community with each division having nothing to do with the other. The Maori community is separate. So are churches. That does not make them separatist. They are not campaigning for a divided community. We have always had a separate Maori community and it has never divided us. Maori TV is separate. It does not divide us.

DAP, read the UN definition of indigenous

Posted on 20-12-2014 10:13 | By Peter Dey

DAP needs to do some reading from the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous Peoples are the first settlers in any land. The meaning "originating from" that is found in dictionaries is no longer accurate for Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations recognises this.


Posted on 20-12-2014 10:04 | By robin bell

The word indigenous is used in many different ways, your definition is far too narrow. Maori were and are classed as ’indigenous’ by the British and now the rest of the world. Good luck with your ’battle’ to change that fact. Robin Bell.


Posted on 20-12-2014 09:52 | By crazyhorse

Here’s a list of "some" of what you get now "Bell & Dey," you make your own list of what else you want, I’m sure people would be real interested in knowing . Maori only prisoner programmes Maori only positions in government agencies Maori only consultation rights under the RMA Maori only co-management of parks, rivers, lakes and coastline Maori only seats on local councils Maori only local government statutory boards Maori only local government liaison committees Maori only seats in parliament Maori only welfare (Whanau Ora) Maori only health prioritisation and initiatives separate maori tax rates (17.5% vs 30% for everyone else) separate maori television station separate maori radio stations separate maori ministry (Te Puni Kokiri) separate maori political party (Maori Party)


Posted on 20-12-2014 09:48 | By crazyhorse

Perhaps the Maori people of Northland fail to vote because they are sick and tired,of being marginalised}. Listen to yourself, bloody sad even by your standards, part maori make up 40% of the population in the north, all they have to do is vote, just takes a few minutes, but, no, better things to do and I don’t blame them when you vote for a goose and get a gander {as in honest Dougy} we are all talking about. We are talking about treaty troughers, these 2 sad apologists can’t hide that, look at the last election, didn’t the 2 maori parties "carve’ it up with the voters, Maori party just scraped in with a "little" help, golly, and how did the Mana party go, now are they not a great example of what the average maori thinks of the system, how did hone or johny do? Lol.


Posted on 20-12-2014 09:28 | By Wise Chief

Interesting this idea Maori are supposed to put up a candidate and we can then expect a fair outcome from what are entrenched overtly biased majority pale crew voters and now large numbers who are recent immigrants. These newbies like most incumbent long in tooth mult-generationals who have NEVER even been to a Marae and NEVER will vote a Maori. Local brown Commentators who believe this drivel need to look at full stats going back to start of British IMPOSED councils here which were designed to take as much land as so called legally able in order to increase their Sovereign Charge-Tax take. Lets not forget Royal Armed British Militia Stronghold at Oripi of which the descendants reside local today who in turn control councils, police, courts, prisons, law and order system much as they did 180 years ago. Nothings changed so why the strong resistance Maoris having say.

Far North Council,

Posted on 20-12-2014 08:16 | By robin bell

If indeed Mayor Carter has described Maori seats as apartheid he is a bigger fool than crazy and yogi put together. It is ludicrous to suggest a minority can outvote a majority, Thus creating apartheid. It is equally ludicrous to suggest a referendum can deliver justice to a minority. Perhaps the Maori people of Northland fail to vote because they are sick and tired,of being marginalised. Robin Bell.

ROOCO our present system is Pakeha biased

Posted on 19-12-2014 20:17 | By Peter Dey

ROOCO says that Doug Owens espouses Maori bias, because he supports Maori wards. What ROCCO ignores is that without Maori wards the voting system shuts out the Maori community from being represented. In Tauranga there is 20% Maori voters and no Maori councillors. The system is biased in favour of Pakeha. Removing the Pakeha bias does not mean that it becomes biased in favour of Maori. It is still a one person one vote system so it is totally democratic.

Snow always turns to slush

Posted on 19-12-2014 18:01 | By robin bell

in yet another attempt to mislead.Yogi bear and crazy-hoss resort to yet more slush. All yogi has to do is produce his ’Naval’ records. He can’t, he knows he can’t and he never will. Similarly crazy horse. None of the Maori ’only’ initiatives he mentions are in FACT Maori only, the lies persist. The ’blizzard’ continues. Robin Bell.


Posted on 19-12-2014 15:40 | By crazyhorse

The Far North District Council is to investigate setting up a Maori standing committee as an alternative to dedicated seats. Mayor John Carter has described Maori seats as a form of apartheid. The council voted last month to have a non-binding referendum on the seats issue, upsetting far north iwi who say it’s "insulting" that Maori would need the permission of the rest of the electorate before they can choose their own representatives. Deputy Mayor Tania McInnes says the standing committee proposal was a starting point for discussion only. Maori make up 40 per cent of the Far North population, but only one councilor is Maori. If Maori make up 40% of the population and they were interested in having more maori councilors "they as in maori" would get out and "vote" but they "don’t vote", why is that?, obviously not that interested?, "elite" IWI are though,{"TROUGHERS"}.

crazyhorses misrepresents Te Ururoa Flavell

Posted on 19-12-2014 14:35 | By Peter Dey

Te Ururoa Flavell is making a very simple point about new immigrants. The interests of Maori should not be placed behind the interests of new immigrants. Crazyhorse is deliberately falsely accusing Te Ururoa of talking about all citizens when he is only talking about new immigrants. It is good that we get these opportunities to counter the half-truth that crazyhorse and Twisting the Treaty spread. Ultimately their anti-Maori campaign will fail because it uses so much half truth.

Crazyhorse, 14% population gets 14% spending

Posted on 19-12-2014 14:27 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse needs to do his sums better. Spending on Maori is just a fair share of their percentage of the population. Also local Maori received $50 million compensation for $500 million of land defrauded by the Government. When is crazyhorse going to demand that taxpayers pay full compensation to Maori for what was fraudulently taken from them.


Posted on 19-12-2014 13:19 | By OAP

Before people describe Maori as indigenous, they should check the true meaning of the word, which is "originating from". Maori did not originate from New Zealand ,they arrived here as immigrants, just like the rest of us!!

ROCCO, Maori wards are democratic

Posted on 19-12-2014 12:47 | By Peter Dey

ROCCO is wrong to describe Maori wards as undemocratic. Maori wards are as democratic as Maori electorates. International surveys never criticise Maori electorates as undemocratic. They are a completely democratic way of ensuring that the Maori minority is represented.

Snow at Xmas

Posted on 19-12-2014 09:05 | By YOGI BEAR

Yes that would be great Robin, only problem is that you are at the wrong end of the planet, the pattern fits you well there and at least you are consistent.


Posted on 18-12-2014 23:57 | By YOGI BEAR

Who, sorry looked through all the records of reputable historians, not there, you must have made a mistake with the name, please do try again. Oh that’s right it will be like the tricky little myths that are never the same on any two given days. Naval log is a little more reliable, that is because it was written down and is still there to read, verify "everything" right.

YOGI BEAR, you are the only one

Posted on 18-12-2014 20:38 | By Peter Dey

Over the past month letters have appeared in the Weekend Sun and in the Bay of Plenty Times with the facts of Janet Wilmshurst’s research showing that Maori were the first settlers in New Zealand, and are therefore the indigenous people of New Zealand. Nobody has written to deny this evidence. It seems that YOGI BEAR may be the only one left refusing to accept the scientific evidence. It is time to concede, YOGI BEAR, and join the real world.


Posted on 18-12-2014 18:37 | By crazyhorse

The real cost of Maori only gov’t funded organisations is out of control and why is it so hard to find out the real costs, or, where it’s going. Requests for spending details for the 2012-13 year under the Official Information Act revealed Te Wananga o Aotearoa receives about $170-million, Te Puni Kokiri spends $205-million, kohanga reo language nest pre-schools receive $67.5 million with $2.64 million for administration, Whanau Ora takes $49-million. The “economic base for Maori” treaty settlements industry meant that in the 2012-13 year Vote Treaty Negotiations consumed $519.97-million, and the Waitangi Tribunal took $10.7-million out of the Courts budget. Waikato River co-governance costs $16-million a year. Environmental accords and other co-management cost a further $6-million. The" 177" Maori social service providers around New Zealand could chew through $1.7-billion each year. Joint ventures with tribal corporations for social housing will open up another trough worth billions.

Te Ururoa Flavell states

Posted on 18-12-2014 18:24 | By crazyhorse

The power base created by the Maori seats is being used to fuel the notion of race-based superiority. Te Ururoa Flavell states that the needs of Maori must be put ahead of the needs of others: “Maori have a unique position in New Zealand and advancing their cultural and social needs must be put ahead of the needs of immigrants”. once again manipulating local government, to the exclusive advantage of iwi – at the cost of equal treatment of all citizens – compromises representative democracy and the principle of one-person one-vote, to such an extent that the legitimacy of government is fundamentally undermined. Perhaps we could "chip" in and send Regional Councillor Doug Owens,a copy of Twisting the treaty, it would open his eyes to "truth", as in the history of NZ, he would see the light and arise from his knees after years of "grovelling" in the dark.

Question your Councillors

Posted on 18-12-2014 18:11 | By crazyhorse

Before these seats on council are""given""!!!!!to unelected unwanted and uncalled for people. Who exactly do the “mana whenua” representatives actually work for? How does one join this group and obtain power? By what process do they get their positions? Apart from them representing just one population segment, have they been checked for any other conflicts of interest? Who pays their costs? How is their performance evaluated and by whom? What confidence can ratepayers have that the interests of all New Zealanders in the region will be protected?


Posted on 18-12-2014 18:08 | By crazyhorse

Voted in by the Tauranga "rate payers" promises made, hmmm, non like this, separatism, apartheid,= resign, you came in under false pretense, I’m sure you can get a job on some "racist" unelected board that keep springing up all over NZ!.


Posted on 18-12-2014 17:40 | By ROCCO

Just because Bay Regional Council is stupid enough to have 3 maori ward seats that are totally race based and contribute little or nothing other than guard their own patch, along with a powerful a maori committee that seems to run the place,some sort of maori flag is embraced and maori lingo is flavour of the month there is no reason why the rest of us Kiwis should endorse this anti democratic aberration.It is not political prejudice at all it is racial bias and separatism that is opposed Mr. Owens. For example how would you Mr. Owens feel about a part maori roll being created having due regard to the numbers which would determine the number of maori wards and part maoris on that roll could then vote only for maori ward candidates and for no other candidates.The silence is going to be deafening. !!!

Looks like snow for xmas,

Posted on 18-12-2014 15:50 | By robin bell

Yogi the boring bear,seems to believe his usual snow job,of endless stupidity, will pass as "debate". Sorry, but you are losing this,on the grounds of outrageous, stupid claims, for the purpose of insult. Classic symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder(N.P.D) you should google it yogi ,fits you perfectly. Robin Bell.

YOGI BEAR in denial again

Posted on 18-12-2014 12:39 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR has tried and failed to disprove the scientific evidence of Janet Wilmshurst, available on the internet, that Maori were the first and only settlers in New Zealand about 1250AD. Doug Owens says that the BOPRC has not experienced conflict. He was at the meetings. YOGI was not. More argument based on hope not fact by YOGI.

YOGI BEAR, NZ is bicultural and multicultural

Posted on 18-12-2014 12:32 | By Peter Dey

Two peoples signed the Treaty of Waitangi, our founding document as a nation. Those two peoples were Maori and Pakeha. That is historical fact that you cannot change. We will always have a bicultural heritage, so we are always a bicultural nation. The arrival of many cultures through immigration makes us multicultural but does not change the fact that we are also bicultural, Maori and non-Maori. All new cultures fit into the non-Maori side of our biculturalism.

Douggy boy says ...

Posted on 18-12-2014 11:40 | By YOGI BEAR

"never experienced conflict", that is not right, clearly in the BOPRC meetings all decisions are made that are acceptable to Maori, what a crazy notion and thing to say! Perhaps Doug should get out into the real world and see what is really happening out there. The public generally are far from happy about the Maori issues and preferential treatment. Wake up and smell the roses mate.

bi-cultural ?

Posted on 18-12-2014 11:32 | By YOGI BEAR

Sorry Robin, New Zealand is multicultural not bi-cultural (Maori + the rest). Reality here is that the actual indigenous peoples of NZ have been here for 2500-3000 years and these peoples do not include Maori, you just have to accept the facts of it without being single mindedly racist about it.


Posted on 18-12-2014 11:30 | By YOGI BEAR

One people, yes we are meant to be but when one small radical little group gets some crazed notion of superiority (a bit like ISIS) then all runs amuck.

removing disadvantage is not privilege?

Posted on 18-12-2014 11:28 | By YOGI BEAR

What disadvantage, it is actually creating a story (myth) and pretending it is true, having a see tantrum, hand out endlessly of "I want ... I want ..." and somehow out of all of that expecting everyone else to be genuinely disadvantaged by means of apartheid, separatism, preference and unadulterated privilege ... meanwhile we are still waiting for Peter to say which myth that all of this was created from.


Posted on 18-12-2014 08:37 | By robin bell

The proponent of "the jitter doctrine"fails yet again to understand the bi-cultural nature of New Zealands formation.TWO peoples one nation, its not rocket science, that we are now multi-cultural, in no way negates Maori rights to PROPER representation by Maori, for Maori. To deny that,is to deny democracy,for the founding partner of this nation. References to other immigrant minorities are simply designed to hide prejudice against that partner. Robin Bell.

Based on merit

Posted on 17-12-2014 21:58 | By SiouxLioux

I agree with Rastus + get onto councils based on merit. Look at part-Maori people who have become MPs - voted on. (not from Lists) We are supposed to be ALL ONE PEOPLE.


Posted on 17-12-2014 20:21 | By Jitter

Messrs Dey and Bell both want a special ward set up for a "Maori" seat on the council. They cannot see that this would favour one cultural group over all others. Europeans, Asians, Pacifica and Indian etc do not have special wards. If a worthy person with the right qualities of any of the above cultural groups stood for council they would have the same chance as anyone else of acquiring a seat on council. We are no longer a bicultural nation but are multi cultural. As the Maori party leaders have been saying for years "We are one nation one people". Unfortunately when it comes to the crunch every time they push for special priveleges for "Maori" and bugger everyone else.I would be pleased to see a representative from the various cultural groups on the council as regularly occurs in other towns and cities around NZ.

YOGI BEAR, removing disadvantage is not privilege

Posted on 17-12-2014 14:13 | By Peter Dey

YOGI BEAR seems to think that a Maori ward would be a special privilege. A special privilege would put Maori in a better position than Pakeha. At present Maori are in a worse position than Pakeha. A Maori ward would put Maori in just the same position as Pakeha, being represented at Council meetings. That would be fairness not privilege.

Jitter is right

Posted on 17-12-2014 13:12 | By YOGI BEAR

This Councilor obviously needs "Counseling" and the case looks to be rather server ... perhaps ward 17 assistance is required here as he seems to have completely lost the plot. Democracy and special privileges and the time of voting are in fact opposites, they are mutually exclusive, they can no co-exist, simple as that.

Jitter, removing discrimination is not privilege

Posted on 16-12-2014 20:54 | By Peter Dey

Jitter says that having Maori wards is granting one small group privileges over all others. At present Maori do not get elected by the majority of Pakeha voters because people vote for candidates with a similar background and ideas. Pakeha voters generally do not connect with Maori candidates and do not vote for them. This is not racism. It is simply like goes for like. The system discriminates against Maori. Maori wards help to counter discrimination. That is not a privilege.

How about this view needs a rethink

Posted on 16-12-2014 20:47 | By Peter Dey

The number of people objecting to Maori wards may be misleading if these people cannot support their opposition with credible argument. People who believe that Maori wards are not democratic are clearly totally ignorant of the fact that democratic election systems differ all around the world. In New Zealand we have Maori electorates. Maori wards are no more nor less democratic than Maori electorates.

Caveman, Maori wards are democratic

Posted on 16-12-2014 20:41 | By Peter Dey

The level of ignorance of people here writing about democracy is hard to believe. Democracies have all sorts of election systems. People who say that all elected people should be from one pool of candidates embarrass themselves. We have the MMP system for Parliamentary elections. It is democratic. Some members are elected from lists. Democratic countries all over the world have different systems.

you.could.say.that needs a dictionary

Posted on 16-12-2014 20:29 | By Peter Dey

you.could.say.that seems to misunderstand the meaning of racial discrimination as used by the United Nations. Discrimination occurs when a person or group has their human rights impaired. Look up the United Nations Convention on the elimination of racial discrimination. A Maori ward is quite clearly not forbidden in any way by any United Nations Declaration. More misleading information from anti-Maori writers.

Please explain fonzie

Posted on 16-12-2014 20:23 | By robin bell

how a complete shutout 85% to 15% can be a fair reflection of democracy ’fonzie’ style. You may think Doug Owens is ridiculous but in actual fact it is you who is. No matter, things are going along just fine without your input. Robin Bell.

Fonzie opposition to Maori ward is prejudice

Posted on 16-12-2014 20:17 | By Peter Dey

Fonzie you are not quoting Doug Owens correctly. Doug says that opposition to Maori wards is based on political prejudice against Maori desire for self determination as a culture and as an indigenous people.

Equal opportunity

Posted on 16-12-2014 14:48 | By Fonzie

To stand for council is political prejudice says Doug Owens Could there be a more ridiculous political statement than that?


Posted on 14-12-2014 13:32 | By crazyhorse

Chickens allow us to date the voyages of the ’CHINESE", after eating or sacrificing the birds, they were thrown into refuse heaps as were the fruit and vegetables . Helen Wallin, Kuchinski; D.W. Steadman and JS Athens have dug into these middens. From the depth inside the midden they can estimate the dates – Hawaii post 1300, Cook Islands post 1100. Could they have been brought from South America by Polynesians? – If they had, Polynesian DNA should be found in South American peoples – none ever has been (Professor Bryan Sykes). Could South American peoples have crossed the Pacific – their DNA has never been found in Polynesians (Dr Matt Hurles and Colleagues). The only peoples whose DNA appears on both sides of the Pacific in the South American Incas (Novick and Colleagues) and in the "Maori" (Dr Geoffrey Chambers) are the Chinese.


Posted on 13-12-2014 08:16 | By robin bell

sums it all up perfectly. Sadly those who vent similar sentiments still exist. Products of generational indoctrination and the current resentment over long overdue settlements. Stirred by the political racism referred to by Doug Owens. Robin Bell.

When all else fails,

Posted on 12-12-2014 15:20 | By robin bell

yogi bore trots out the Admiral Zheng He. Of course yogi completely ignores the truth of it all.The closest the good Admiral came to N.Z. was The Straights north of Australia,with some believing he may of landed in Northern Australia,found nothing worthwhile,so buggered off to Africa. Source, The Admiral Zheng He Society Of China. Of course yogi knows best,yeah right. Robin Bell.

Maori Commerce

Posted on 12-12-2014 12:17 | By Frostbite

1840 Maori accounted for 95% of GDP Maori had large acreages under cultivation,Wheat Potatoes Fruit Tree and significant stocks pigs/ cattle. Combined with trading vessels traveling to AUS/USA Early P?keh? representations of M?ori were generally denigratory, patron- ising and exclusionary (ballara, 1986; Colvin, 2010; McCreanor, 1997; Petrie, 2006) and their accounts of M?ori economic activity shifted to increasingly portray M?ori as lazy, dishonest, greedy, incompetent and criminal (nairn & McCreanor, 1991; Petrie, 1998). P?keh? discourses, such as those depicting resources that were not exploited by M?ori as ‘waste’, imagery such as ‘ragwort and blackberry’,1 along with notions that M?ori had unfair advantages such as free resource and communal labour


Posted on 12-12-2014 08:51 | By YOGI BEAR

Kumara, yes of course kumara has to be "cultivated" and to do so means a mix of the right conditions, the same occurred when General Zheng he arrived in New Zealand and dropped off the handful of pacific Islanders, who in turn had been "given" the kumara that came from elsewhere.

Still flogging a dead hoiho,

Posted on 12-12-2014 08:29 | By robin bell

yogi bore. No evidence just irrational claims and nonsensical statements. Symptoms of yet more N.P.D.brought about by the need to insult,everyone and everything. Robin Bell.


Posted on 11-12-2014 20:47 | By YOGI BEAR

Some of the occupants here in NZ have only been here a little while so the responses and actions tend to be a little immature. This reflects and generally youthful type response. There are some genuine cultures that have been in NZ for thousands of years, the opinions of these peoples are of far better quality. The American Indians are similar, they have been around for a long time and the mindset is superior also.


Posted on 11-12-2014 20:44 | By YOGI BEAR

So perhaps we should be looking at those noted as killed by Maori, would they be part of Maori legend? If they are then I would recommend that information is passed on to Janet Wilmshurst, the quality of information provided will fit well with the level of data and information that she loves to write about. The quality has already been confirmed thoroughly by Peter Dey, so the accuracy cant then be que3stioned by anyone now can it?


Posted on 11-12-2014 17:03 | By robin bell

have you ever tried growing Kumara,without cultivation? Like most of your assertions,you give little thought to facts. Cook and Tasman were the vanguard of insurgency,killing always follows.British history is full of examples, check it out. Robin Bell.


Posted on 11-12-2014 16:15 | By morepork

Perhaps it would be interesting to have a conversation with Abel Tasman (4 men killed by Maori) and James Cook (10 men from the Adventure killed by Maori) just to refresh yourself on the warm and hospitable welcome Europeans received when coming here. The idea of the North American Indians actually feeding the starving Pilgrims may be confusing you. It has no more relevance here than living in Texas does. We have all come a long way since 1642. BTW, it was Europeans who introduced the idea of growing things (Cook noted that the locals undertook no cultivation) so it is just wrong to say that Europeans would have starved without assistance from Maori. Certainly, there were instances where both races traded amicably and supported each other but that was not always the case. What we have today would be impossible without BOTH races.

Like Living in Texas

Posted on 11-12-2014 09:33 | By Frostbite

When I read the comments posted here I feel a deep sorry. N.Z. Is a young country by international standards and the comments here reflect this. The first europeans in NZ would not have survived if Maori had not been here to feed them they would have starved. This generosity was paid back with all out war followed by laws against Maori that were race base. The white master lording it over the native people Taking their productive land and placing Maori on American style reservations out of sight out of. mind Destruction of culture destruction of Mana.All justified by some superior idea of religion and authority under God. A good place to start in repairing this damage would be to have Maori at the table contributing to the future shape of our city as the current model of extraction of every thing Fish Dairy Single Cropping are unsustainable


Posted on 11-12-2014 09:01 | By YOGI BEAR

Correct sir, the reason for the squeaking from Owens is a need to self create a reason to exist, be heard even if that means jump off the jumpy castle into lala land.

Right person...right job....

Posted on 10-12-2014 23:15 | By groutby

Mr Owens, in my opinion you are a birk...any person of whichever colour they may be has the right to go for any position in the world..Mr Mandela...Mr Obama for just two..there are many more, but on a local basis, the suggestion is even more crazy than the fact that the BOPRC exist in the first place?..go figure..?

What planet?

Posted on 10-12-2014 23:00 | By YOGI BEAR

Is this guy on, the RBOP is about to become redundant why is this thing even squeaking.


Posted on 10-12-2014 17:43 | By Carcass

Don’t know about some of these Councillors some of them don’t like democracy and and people had no say on the Maori ward for the BOPRC and that was push through by John Kenney and some weak Councillors at the time why don’t the put it to the vote now

Agree With Previous Comments

Posted on 10-12-2014 16:12 | By Jitter

I’m afraid I have to agree with all of the preceding comments. If "Maori" want a seat on TCC then they put forward their candidate/s and vote them in as is done with all other candidates. Doug Owens does not realise it but he is making a rod for his own back with his racist/separatist atitude. Why should one small cultural group have special priveleges over all the others even though they believe they are indigenous. Giving in to this demand by "Maori" (14.1% of the population) is the first step in them demanding 50% representation on local councils and central government. In a letter to the paper recently it was stated that- The late Michael King historian said "Pakeha NZers who are committed to this land and its people are no less "indigenous" than Maori". This goes for all other cultural groups also.

Democracy clearly does not work

Posted on 10-12-2014 15:24 | By The Tomahawk Kid

@ maccachic: Although I do agree with what you said, It is ironic that Your comment proves my theory on democracy: Democracy is simply a synonym for mob rule. It’s a counting of heads regardless of content. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses. It’s three wolves and a sheep voting for dinner. The Tga council is PROOF that the MAJORITY are not capable of voting in the best person for the job. Unfortunately it is the system that we are lumbered with - but it simply does not work

Voted only

Posted on 10-12-2014 14:55 | By roseh

Any race can stand for council but they need to be voted in Not get there unelected.None of the groups should expect favours.Stand up and be counted and be voted in like everyone else

Every person is special

Posted on 10-12-2014 14:42 | By Annalist

It’s just that some people by reason of birth are more special than others.


Posted on 10-12-2014 13:17 | By rastus

This is a silly suggestion because it is saying that a Maori cannot gain political power unless it is simply given to him. A lot of the racial problems present in the USA are caused by this selection by race rather than selection by ability - when I first came to Tauranga in the 50s we had an excellent councilor in Vic Smith who got there simply because he was a switched on guy - there are lots of Maori who are really switched on, who would be insulted to just be given a place rather than winning a place through their own endeavours.


Posted on 10-12-2014 12:18 | By maccachic

If Maori want representation they vote for it - no one want racism in any form. Best person for the job deemed by the voters.

Makes me wonder

Posted on 10-12-2014 12:18 | By morepork

Why do we need and support a REGIONAL Council, especially when it has people like this serving on it. The goal should be to REDUCE red tape and let local people represent themselves by the usual democratic process. Annalist said the same and I agree with ALL of the people who have posted under this. We don’t want Racism, reverse or otherwise, in our future; we need a level playing field that is fair to all, including Tangata Whenua.

I was under the understanding

Posted on 10-12-2014 11:05 | By How about this view!

That ALL COUNCILLORS were elected to represent the wishes of the electorate. I would suggest that ALL COUNCILLORS spend just a few moments researching public opinion before opening their mouths. This subject was raised earlier this year and the overwhelming response in the comments to this website was "WE DON’T WANT THAT HERE!"

We don't need a regional council

Posted on 10-12-2014 10:18 | By Annalist

The regional council should be joined with the local council. Then at least we only have one bunch of bureaucrats to deal with and easily elect them or boot them out at election times.

ONE Council ONE Vote

Posted on 10-12-2014 09:14 | By The Caveman

Tauranga City Councillors unanimously rejected a similar proposal from its own Tangata Whenua Committee on November 17. ................. There should be NO unelected people on any council, AND all elected people should be from a SINGLE pool of candidates, elected by a single pool of voters. NO group should be special favours.


Posted on 10-12-2014 08:58 | By RawPrawn

of one’s stance on the perceived racial inequities of this, it marks the beginning of the end of a democratic New Zealand/Aotearoa

The United Nations Say No!

Posted on 10-12-2014 08:45 | By Disappointed

Councillor Owens needs to familiarise himself with the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. Advocating public policy that provides for a seat based solely on race is a clear breach of Article 4. Some would argue that such an allowance is "reverse racism" - if they mean a backward step then yes it is. Others have called it "positive racism" - pray tell how there can be any positive that comes from racism? We are either ALL New Zealanders or we are not. Period!

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to make a comment. Login Now