Soon after it was established in 1975, the Waitangi Tribunal was hijacked by Maori radicals.
It’s now 2022 and nothing has changed. Only the radicals are even more radical than they were in 1975
The Tribunal has become a complete farse, a massive agency for conning Kiwis out of billions of dollars, all to fill the pockets of elite Maori.
Of course, the Tribunal cannot itself pay out money. It can only recommend to the government that the government pays out.
Now when you have a radical Maori tribunal and radical Maori government, there is absolutely no handbrake
What you have is unrestrained corruption and fraud. There are foxes inside the chicken hutch and they are feasting.
In my previous blogs on the subject of the Waitangi Tribunal, we discussed a. newspaper report which stated (basically) that Tribunal recommended that Northland be given to Maori. Hard to believe, but true.
You can read the newspaper report HERE
In today’s blog I am going to pass on helpful comments made by two contributors to this blog on the subject of the Waitangi Tribunal.
You can read their comments HERE
“The nearly 2000-page report, released on Friday,
details breaches between 1840 and 1900 it said caused “severe and lasting
prejudice for Northland whanau, hapū and iwi.”
Aha I see instead of writing something like “ For Northland maori “ they chose to write “ Northland whanau, hapū and iwi. “ So that’s how they do it ,100 words with a single meaning
F-arse is right
How could a single page document result in a 2000 page report.
Now if these same ahoes who got to such conspicuous could tell me how to turn my $10 into $20.000 I would be very pleased to hear from the buggers
Have you read the report? The answer to your question is there.
Hugh Perrett asserts that the way the selection and appointment of “Maori-sympathetic“ appointees is a fraud on non-Maori New Zealanders (why it can’t be a fraud also on Maori is a good question).
I assume he objects to the process because the tribunal doesn’t include those unsympathetic to Maori. The tribunal website says that it’s members come from all walks of life and are appointed for their expertise in matters that are likely to come before them. Many come from a legal, public service or academic background with extensive expertise across a range of areas. I imagine a pre requisite of any appointment would be an understanding of Maori issues and the treaty.
The appointees ( ie non-Maori) are supposed to be IMPARTIAL , objective , informed , not able to be intimidated and capable of contesting the grievance claims ( many of which are clearly contrived for purpose) appropriately and fairly. I am sure / very confident an objective retrospective assessment of past appointees (ie non-Maori) will prove my point. Maori appointees are of course “totally partial” to their own carefully constructed grievance claims, no matter how “rigged” or “invented” or even dishonest they might be .
Hugh Perrett
Who of the current non Māori Tribunal members do you consider NOT to be Impartial , objective, and informed?
Neil Foreman, one of the contributors, objects to the tribunal process:
1) “the tribunal accepts claims that have already been initally settled” – If the prior settlement was unequitable, unjust or incomplete, these cases can be re investigated and if proven to be unfair the tribunal can recommend compensation. For example, in 1921 the Native Land Claims Commission recommended that Ngāi Tahu receive £354,000 compensation. Ngāi Tahu rejected this as inadequate; the Crown considered it too much. The Ngai tahu Claim Settlement Act 1944 provided for annual payments of £10,000 for 30 years to the Ngaitahu Trust Board. The tribe was not consulted on this until the legislation was passed. Ngai Tahu pursued their claim and in 1998 the iwi and Crown signed a Deed of Settlement that provided compensation valued at $170 million.
2) “Non Maori cannot lodge a claim or repeal a recommendation. ” Of course non Maori cannot lodge a claim as they were not signatories to the treaty. Representation in the Waitangi Tribunal is provided by the Crown Law Office which gives advice on policy proposals with implications for Treaty settlements.
3) “Researchers fabricate and modify evidence”. It is the role of the tribunal to look at all the evidence, interpret and evaluate. Given that many are from a legal background, it would not be unlike looking at evidence in a court case, and Crown Law also evaluates all documentation to provide alternative advice to the government.
It’s very easy to criticise when the only alternative offered is to get rid of the tribunal. However there can be no objection, where there are documented and agreed breaches of the treaty, that adequate compensation should be paid.
“2) “Non Maori cannot lodge a claim or repeal a recommendation. ” Of course non Maori cannot lodge a claim as they were not signatories to the treaty. Representation in the Waitangi Tribunal is provided by the Crown Law Office which gives advice on policy proposals with implications for Treaty settlements.”
.
WTF?
Clearly you do not know anything of worth about Tiriti o Waitangi. Have you read it? Are you capable of understanding the concepts that it was built upon?
.
“He Iwi Tahi Tatou” – We are now one people.
.
This means that I as a New Zealander of British descent have EXACTLY the same rights and privileges as a person of Maori descent in New Zealand.
There are NO if’s, but’s or maybe’s.
.
Why are the numerous ,(and often violent), breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi by Maori deliberately ignored?
We all have the same rights and privileges that is not disputed. The Treaty was between Māori and the Crown.
No, it was between ALL THE PEOPLE OF NZ, and the crown
The only signatories are Maori and the Crown (represented by Hobson). The British residents had no need to sign the tready, nor did the Maori represent them.
Brilliant reply Barry. You are right on the money here.
John, you state in your comment above, ” Of course non Maori cannot lodge a claim as they were not signatories to the treaty”, but neither were Ngai Tahu. Hobson claimed British Sovereignty on 21 May 1840 over the North Island by Treaty and over the South Island by Discovery. The Proclamations were published in the London Gazette on 2 October 1840.
Ngai Tahu had also been driven off their land and sold most of it before the Treaty was signed. Many of the Deeds of Sale are still held in the New South Wales Supreme Court. Most of this land was returned to Ngai Tahu after the Treaty was signed by the govenrment without compensation to the purchasers.
For full details on Ngai Tahu and their land Sales etc, research Jean Jackson’s many books. Jean Jackson was a Ngai Tahu elder who knew their true history.
As for the Waitangi Tribunal, even its Chairman, Chief Judge Eddie Durrie complained of the coruption within the Tribunal in his article in the NZ Herald in 1990. If you would like a copy email: ONZF@bigpond.com.
John you are obviously totally pro-Maori ( maybe you are Maori in terms of having a Maori ancestor or ancestors — and if so that is good and good luck to you ). The point is you are clearly not impartial or interested in any views other than pro-Maori views —- and therefore you are not interested in objectivity and impartiality / fairness —- only in grabbing what you can get. Think back to our pre-1840 history and how Maori lived in a constant state of inter-tribal war , “utu” and self-genocide —- and all the accompanying. “Tikanga “practices such as slavery, canibalism , infanticide etc and then think about the massive benefits Maori have had from (at their request) the Treaty and consequent colonisation. . Hopefully such reflection might open your mind a little.
Respectfully,
Hugh Perrett
Well said Hugh.
Mr Finlayson when at Bell Gully was the leader of the legal team that won the $170 million claim by Ngai Tahu that had sold all their land before Te Tiriti was signed in 1840.
The same tribe that the crown returned their land, repurchased it and then had to continually grant them more land as the Northern Tribes released their Ngai Tahu slaves.
It was only the false information given by their legal team, led by Finlayson that allowed Ngai Tahu to become so powerful today at the taxpayers expense.
Mr Finlayson was the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations (2008-2017).
A list member of Parliament that had a taxpayer’s open cheque-book to write out cheques and/or, give our land and/or assets to one small group of NZ citizen that can claim a minute trace of tangata maori ancestry.
The people of NZ cannot cross-examine any of the unfounded evidence, including Maori that is accepted by the Minister without question, while the Select Committees in most cases misleads Parliament so the claim can proceed.
Mr Finlayson was also settling claims in secret, claiming he gave away taxpayer’s money in more Maori financial settlements than all previously reached, 59 in all. (Ref- ONZF)
The Apartheid Waitangi Tribunal must be abolished ASAP.
My understanding is that the Crown has no right of appeal to be able to counter false/ untrue deliberation by the Waitangi Tribunal. Past and current governments have led us the people into this current pickle of separatism. When we see the success of both Free Speech and the Taxpayer’s Unions that seems to be the way to go to push back on those who want to take over the county. Create a Voter’s Union or whatever with the aim to;
* Force the government to correct the use of the English version of the TOW from the Freeman version to the Littlewood.
* Correct any organization or individual that asserts that the TOW created a partnership between the Crown and Maori chiefs.
* Tackle laws that discriminate in favour of Maori. The most obvious one is the Maori Electoral Roll and the Maori electorates.
* Get rid of all references to the Principle of the TOW in all laws and statutes..
. Tackle recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal if founded on false information.
One could go on, but you get the picture. So far our politicians can not be trusted.
We have to do it ourselves.!
Donald, there is no mechanism to appeal because the iwi enters into negotiations with the Crown in order to come to an agreement before any legislation is passed. A summary of the Ngai Tahu Treaty settlement negotiation is here if you’re interested. (https://ngaitahu.iwi.nz/our_stories/the-ngai-tahu-treaty-settlement-negotiation-with-the-crown-key-players-and-background-tk75/)
– There is only one official English version of the Treaty (the Littlewood is only a draft) that was signed.
The fact that there is no right of appeal is the nub of the lopsided arrangement that the Waitangi Tribunal delivers on.
Yes, the Littlewood draft is the draft from which the TOW was created into the Maori version.
The ‘official ‘ English version does not sit correctly alongside the Maori TOW and is attributed to Freeman who was Governor Hobson’s secretary.
That Freeman’s version in English is one of the errors that needs correcting. The Littlewood Draft needs to be recognised and take its rightful place up on the walls of Te PaPa
We can’t turn back time and “unsign” the English version, despite the variations between it and the Maori version.
There is no agreement that the Littlewood document is the draft from which the Maori version was created despite Martin Doutre’s investigations. The draft is discussed in Chapter 7.12 of the Te Paparahi o Te Raki Inquiry.
It is also interesting to note that the tribes that caused most of the trouble such as Waikato, Ngaitahu, Taranaki and Tuhoe were the tribes that in most cases did not sign Te Tiriti o Waitangi but have used it to gain most in compensation and assets!
Ref – ONZF
While there have been millions, possibly billions of words written about the Treaty of Waitangi since it was signed in 1840, there are only 20 that really matter. They are,
“All the rights and privileges will be given to them, the same as her doing for the people of England”.
A question that needs to be asked, why do iwi continue to exist in New Zealand?
It’s a serious question that requires a straightforward answer rather than the obsequiously trite gobbledegook on Government sites such as: https://www.nzstory.govt.nz/about-us/news/iwi-entities-focusing-on-sustainable-wellbeing-and-development-of-their-people/.
Iwi do not usually farm or add value in other ways to the land that they own like for example Amish cults. Neither is there a group productivity and profit sharing goal such as in the Kibbutz movement also working the land (which ended disastrously as the notion of a ‘socialist’ group where everybody pulls their own weight simply isn’t how humans operate). The need to band together in large groups for personal protection and survival in a land without laws, also no longer applies.
No, a more compelling answer I would suggest, is that iwi are still with us only because of the Waitangi Tribunal providing an ongoing funding pipeline of taxpayers’ money which keeps them unnaturally alive where they would otherwise disappear naturally over time as surplace to the requirements of a modern, democratic, technological society.
An excellent question, Ron Segal. Why on earth do Iwi continue to exist? It’s long overdue for the Waitangi Tribunal to be disbanded. Their original remit is no longer there so they should go. The Treaty should also be filed away. Surely after all of the time that has passed, it is by far no longer relevant. Today scenarios are being ‘made up’ on the hoof to extract ever increasing funds from the poor taxpayer. I find it incredible that over 180 years after it’s signing, it is still being used. Today is nothing like it was way back then so surely it is entirely irrelevant. Disband the Waitangi Tribunal and file the Treaty of Waitangi away – full stop!!
It is also interesting to note that the tribes that caused most of the trouble such as Waikato, Ngaitahu, Taranaki and Tuhoe were the tribes that in most cases did not sign Te Tiriti o Waitangi, but have used it to gain most in compensation and assets.
So why have we a Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, the Waitangi Tribunal, Five Principles for Crown action on the Treaty of Waitangi and a Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations?
As Sir Apirana Ngata, Minister of Native Affairs 1922 stated:
“The chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England, the Sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority, war arose and blood was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in payment. It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty”.
If the confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, why do we have a Treaty of Waitangi Act and Waitangi Tribunal again? ( Ref- ONZF)
Frankly for tribes that did not sign the ToW it is difficult to comprehend why they are entitled to any kind of settlement, or indeed title to any land at all. There was no concept of land “ownership” before 1840, only occupation by force of arms. No records of claims that had been staked or otherwise marked out by obvious working of the land other than for dwellings and fortifications. How could there be when Maori had no method of information codification other than word of mouth.
John, the reasons you cite for forming groups, from religious, to sporting, to social, or whatever, is not in question. Clearly humans have done that forever. However when those groups demand total life commitment such as iwi or Kibbutz, for them to be self sustaining there had better also be reasons that make sense from sound economic, health and well being perspectives. It didn’t work for Kibbutz and it isn’t working for iwi generally, given the statistics.
What are these monetary losses that you mention John?
They exist because John Key signed, “The Declaration on the Rights of the Indigenous People”, which gave iwi and the Waitangi Tribunal a new lease on life when they were both running out of puff.
Both the Treaty of Waitangi and the Waitangi Tribunal are well past their use by dates and must be abolished ASAP if New Zealand is to regain its Democracy and honour our ancestors who faught for it in the 1800’s and in 2 world wars in the 1900’s. If we have to, we will fight for it again in the 200o’s when the sleeping giant is eventually woken up.
Sir Apirana Ngata stated in his book, The Treaty of Waitangi- An Explanation in 1922,
“The Chiefs placed in the hands of Queen of England, the Sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority, war arose and blood was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in payment. It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty”.
If the confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty of Waitangi, why do we have a Treaty of Waitangi Act and Waitangi Tribunal? ( Ref – ONZF)