“The Treaty is a fraud,” is a mantra I grew up with in the seventies and eighties. A heap of Maori were upset that in 1840 the Crown signed a document they had no intention of honouring. “The Treaty is a Fraud,” became “Honour the Treaty”, and we still feel the repercussions a hundred and seventy years later after that original deceit.
How ironic that some of those upset Maori of the seventies and eighties are now part of the Crown that has signed another document that the Crown has no intention of honouring.
Because the Maori Party is part of this hoax, it now seems acceptable.
It is indicative of how far race relations have come that the Crown can sign a document for Maori, look us in the eye, smile, and tell us they have no intention of honouring their signatures – and we don’t get upset.
Unless of course, what Judge Eddie Durie and public law expert Mai Chen say is correct. Then there may be potential over time for Maori to claim back territory and resources Maori traditionally owned as well as the right to veto legislation.
When the Declaration was adopted in September 2007, Rosemary Banks our permanent representative in the United Nations noted there were four provisions that were fundamentally incompatible with New Zealand’s constitutional and legal arrangements.
No legislation has been introduced since then that aligns the Declaration with New Zealand’s constitutional and legal arrangements and yet Crown Law advice to John Key differed substantially to that given to Helen Clark. He should explain this difference.
It will be interesting to see whether this government has the stomach to make this a binding Declaration.
I hope our children, grand children and great grandchildren are not going to spend the next one hundred and seventy years protesting, marching and getting arrested in order to have this Declaration honoured.
I hope that in one hundred and seventy years a government doesn’t have to establish a Declaration of Indigenous Rights Tribunal to sort out the grievances that have arisen because the Declaration wasn’t honoured.
I hope in one hundred and seventy years Ngapuhi aren’t preparing for a hearing to sort out our claims against the Declaration of Indigenous Rights.
I hope we haven’t condemned ourselves to repeating history.
As one chapter of grievance nears a conclusion, I hope we haven’t just opened another.
Kelvin, I would not worry at all.
Politicians should master the art of timing… you just have to wait and see…
Wait and see what John Key has to say about the expectations this situation will create among Maori. Before signing it, they should have told New Zealand the real implications of doing it and that they do not consider it a binding document.
At the end of the day I’m sure they will say everything is a bunch of good intentions.
So when we get full and final treaty settlements ( in 2015?), we can start all over again with the ’so called DIR’ opening the gates to do it all again?
Thanks John Key ( youll have ‘moved on’ of course) but the nation may come to deeply regret your shallow views
Crown Law advice to John Key differed substantially to that given to Helen Clark. He should explain this difference.
Wouldn’t it be a little bit more proactive to just like, you know, ask Crown Law for an explanation?
I still believe that if many Maori see Labour as their enemy and National as their friend we are likely to have some storms ahead… I keep wanting to believe that national have changed their attitude toward Maori and Maori issues…Joyce, Key and McCully right there in the planning fo the Orewa speech… strategising away…
Labour has to very careful to avoid being seen to be against the Declaration. Perception is everything and there are not that many people who will consider the finer points, just the effect. In time it will be the real interpretation of Customary Rights that will be the biggie. Where do we stand?
Labour should continue to stand by their principle that the Declaration was inconsistent with New Zealand’s constitutional and legal arrangements, and as a result they couldn’t sign off on it, not they they were against it per se.
If Labour continues to maintain this stand, I believe they will gain respect and some voters back.
@ Phil Crown Law can’t release the advice. Key or McCully is the client. The advice is theirs to release.
@ Trevor Mallard. If Labour knows that the Crown Law advice given to John Key in 2009/10 was “substantially different” to the Crown Law advice given to Helen Clark in 2007, then why can’t Labour explain the difference so that the public will be better able to pass judgment.
Does the government have the stomach to make the Declaration binding?
Well, I have to say that with Key anything is possible. He seems so desperate to make the Maori Party a long-term coalition partner that he has been giving them anything they want (foreshore & seabed, whanau ora, Declaration, forests, etc.). So, in their desperation, Key may not have the stomach, but he does have the INSANITY to make the Declaration binding.
Key thinks that ACT will be gone next election, and so he is making sure the Maori Party sticks with him. Key will give them what they want.
Actually I Dream, I am not so sure that the Maori Party has gained anything of substance – yet. A sort of framework exists but what the translation is, remains to be seen.
I thought
the nature of these things
are quite clear
first, aspirational
and then, realisable
Have you not heard
the phrase
Aspire, Focus then Attain
Step 1 of three
was taken
Now work on Step 2
and where will they lead?
I had a Dream too.
We are all equal and their are no privilege of birth, race or creed.
Indigenous really equates to being born here.
Dangerous political games to set up another term of National in office so their privatisation agenda can get into top gear.
They have a lot to do and need the time .
This secret underhand trick was known to the Maori party as they took part before the public were notified.
Where are the cries of ” Nanny State doing out thinking for us”. Media is hardly mobilised.
Where do people stand that are part Maori.
I hope we are all in this as equal partners.
The real inequity is wealth distribution and that is not a race issue.
Funny that almost the rest of the world (not the USA) has been able to sign up to this declatation
Why should we have problems or more to the point why did Labour feel the problems out weighed the positives….
Anti-Maori, certainly that plus the sea shore makes you wonder
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
On December 10, 1948 the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted and proclaimed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Article 1.
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
And so on down to article 30.
I cannot see any recognition anywhere of privilege bestowed by birth except life itself.
Articles 1 and 2 should never be over ridden for political expedience or want.
I don’t hear this declaration being celebrated.
We should not stray from these important fundamentals no matter what racism. greed or class distinction may evolve from time to time.
When reading the Declaration of Indigenous rights it appears that adoption of this declaration may give people of the Chathams some redress for the invasion slaughter and subjugation prior to the Treaty oF Waitangi.
The old pitiful cry of conquest or slavery being a right of force may finally be addressed.
This will open up another industry of claims between iwi of past conquests for which much land is held today.
Kahungunu may claim back Wellington from Ngati Toa and Te Ati Awa
The Declaration of indigenous Rights also is noted as:
“The Declaration does not represent solely the viewpoint of the United Nations, nor does it represent solely the viewpoint of the Indigenous Peoples.”
While many nations abstained from its formal recognition there were 4 nations opposing its adoption.
Australia, Canada, USA and NZ.
Perhaps the latest move by Nation was hasty and ill advised for Maori and non Maori indigenous people as well as the general population.
Obama is now planning, after consultation with Native Americans, also to sign…The whole world agrees, except a few New Zealand members of the Labour Party