On Sunday Judith Collins was quizzed on Q&A about New Zealand’s high rate of inprisonment. Here’s an extract from the exchange:
GUYON: …how can it be that we lock up people at double the rate of France?
JUDITH: Well what we have for instance is we have say 15% of the population Maori…
The Maori Party must be so proud every time they vote to prop up Judith Collins and her National government mates.
She’s a class act for sure !
If you want to sleep with dogs you WILL catch fleas.
I suspect she did not stop there – can you please provide the whole exchange.
@ Loota classy,
@ Chris, this seriously the best you got?, don’t you lot usually wait for the last couple of weeks before the election before you really start scrapping the barrel and misrepresenting anything and everything
JUDITH Well what we have for instance is we have say 15% of the population Maori, we have 51% of our prison population’s Maori. That’s a shocking statistic. It’s also true for other countries, for instance Australia, there are some parts of Australia where they have 3% of the population is Aboriginal but 30% of the prison population is.
GUYON So that’s the difference?
JUDITH I think the fact is, is that when we have a quite significant group of people who unfortunately often feel that they are not part of the system, not part of the social connections that the rest of us have, there is more of a likelihood towards crime.
GUYON So you seem to be saying that if it weren’t for the Maori population, then we would be similar to those other countries, because that’s the explanation you’ve offered me.
JUDITH No, the explanation is, is that when we have more crime, particularly violent crime, we will have people imprisoned, and you know we’ve made big roads over the last 20, 30 years, when it comes to for instance, family violence.
Chris
Why is comparing our lock up rate to France of any relevance?
Why not China , why not USA.
Stupid question and you havent given us the answer.
What did Collins say.
What was her full answer to the question.
Im sure if someone were to take some of your answers to questions and pick part of the response you could be made to look rather silly
Thank you Ben – exactly as I thought.
I saw that, they must’ve been crushed
Chris – if the full quote is as Ben has posted – then you should be ashamed for your selective editing. Thats a deliberate manipulation of what she is saying.
Thats the kind of thing that the voting public had had enough of – try finding real issues and picking on them – but making a post based on 1/2 a comment to make it sound far worse than it really was simply to try an pick points comes back and bites you in the butt every time.
Great – can you please explain why then Maori are about 50% of the prison population (64% in female prisons). Why every time there is another kid murdered way to often the person is Maori.
And most importantly what Labour did to reduce the % of Maori in prison during their nine years of power.
Why is is that we as a society are relunctant to tell the truth and call it as it is for the sake of offending some person.
I was thinking about this last night incidently and the Jewish dancing to the tune of “I will survive” on you Tube – and the outcry. The fact is that no one can mention the words Concentration Camp in any context for fear of offence. Here is the NZ version of the same.
I say to you and the rest of the Labour PC brigade – Go and get a life.
Woohoo, Chippy does a Breitbart.
Now I suggest this makes good reading:
http://lindsaymitchell.blogspot.com/2010/07/un-rapporteur-listen-up.html
This then is where the state has played a damning role by supporting the alienation of Maori men from whanau. It does this through the benefit system and through the legal system (family court and CYF). The odds are stacked against too many a Maori boy from birth. Consider that;
1/ He will be raised on welfare in a workless household
2/ Most of the male role models he is exposed to are disaffected
3/ Most of the female role models he is exposed lack the capacity to ‘mother’ in the full sense of the word (which is possibly why so many Maori males have relationships with much older women – looking for the mother figure they never had.)
4/ He is stereotyped (rightly or wrongly) by Pakeha institutions
5/ He is failed by (or he fails – take your pick) the education system thus subjecting himself to a life of menial work which does not provide enough money to compete with the DPB.
6/ He will father children very young also subjecting himself to a life of penury being bled dry by the child support system.
7/ Crime becomes the only avenue through which he can make some real money and prove his machismo.
8/ He will grow up in an environment where going to prison is part of the wallpaper.
No one is disagreeing that there’s a problem. The disagreement is how to solve it.
While Aborigines are proportionally less numerous in Oz than Maori in NZ, their position is far worse. And we’re thankful so far that Molotov cocktails haven’t been thrown – yet. Even then, that’s no cause to rest on one’s laurels.
Sadly, it’s the same pattern in every new world settler nation. Colin James had some wisdom on the topic a few years back.
“Let’s draw an analogy and call France a one-culture country and Britain a one-country culture. Which one works better? A British analysis of the Muslim underclass’s riots in the Paris suburbs is that it has learnt from its Brixton riots in 1981 (as the United States did from its Watts riots in 1965?) but superior France has insisted on being monocultural.
All three riots were a legacy of history: American slavery of the blacks who became a huge underclass; British exploitation of vast swathes of the world, starting with black slaves in the West Indies whose descendants came to live in the “mother country”; French imperialism in North Africa whose muslims have turned up in the metropolis.
We’ve been there: dawn raids on Samoan overstayers in the 1970s, legacy of our piddling Polynesian empire. And our occupation and assimilation of the Maori, who turned out in the 1980s not to have been assimilated after all and demanded dignity and restorative justice.
The lesson: displace a people and their descendants will haunt your descendants. Unless you exterminate them or reduce them to tiny numbers.”
Judith Collins is simply displaying the same mindset as the Prime Minister. Maori are not like “Us”. They are not “Mainstream” (as Orewa Don put it).
Here’s John Key, answering Questions in Parliament yesterday:
“I meant that because the Government has guaranteed absolute access to the foreshore and seabed, the average New Zealander will not notice a change. The people who will notice a change will be M?ori.”
So there you have it. Maori: not average New Zealanders. They are Other.
Sammy, is your point that you think all New Zealanders should be treated equally? No special considerations or policy based on race?
truly bizarre that the rightwing trolls posting here can think that any reading of Collins’s remarks shows her and the govt in a good light!
Only bizarre to those who won’t admit to the reality of the situation dorothy. The problems exist, even if you choose to ignore them.
I tell my friends if they have bad breath, what do you do?
Dorothy, you fail to realize that what Chris has done is blatant misrepresentation and selective editing to try and skew the real truth. He should be publicly humiliated and stoned for that kind of behavior, he’s supposed to be a role model leading our country, yet stoops to that?
The facts state there’s more Maoris in the prison than anything else, does that fact change if the Labour party read it? No. Fact is there’s more Maoris in the prison. Call a spade a spade and get over yourself. The fact is it’s not going to show any “reader” in good light, but at least it’s opening the issue so it can be addressed rather than letting such crime rates continue to increase.
I don’t think the rest of Collins quote makes her look any better. Her first response when asked why NZ had a higher imprisonment rate than other countries was to say it was because of our Maori population. Her “them and us” attitude reflects the National Party’s “Iwi/Kiwi” heritage, yet the Maori Party continue to support them in government.
Chris
print the all of Collins statement and do something unusual for Labour , and let “us” make up our mind on what her statement meant.
LabRat, the Maori have a contractw ith our Government/Crown. It is not about treaty anyone equally it is about honouring that contract. Are you saying that only contracts which treat everyone equally ought to be honoured?
Chris drew a very long bow in his post BUT it has generated comment and some to find what she actually said. However, how is what she said in the rest of it namely
“a quite significant group of people who unfortunately often feel that they are not part of the system, not part of the social connections that the rest of us have, there is more of a likelihood towards crime. ”
being dealt with by this government, 3 strikes and you’re out, longer sentences and so on dont actually address the points JC raises.
I can see where Whanua Ora is trying to address this, but let’s remember that is MP initiative/trade off, not National.
What JC is saying (the bit I’ve quoted) is old news, it’s been well established as some of the root causes of crime, now addressing it other than by the failed harsher sentences technique, therein lies the rub.
Tracey, I have no problem with honouring the treaty, however aside from the treaty there are still differences in a) the way Maori are treated (positively and negatively) and b) particular social and economic circumstances that contribute to less than ideal outcomes for Maori.
I do implore you to read again the post I quoted from Lindsay Mitchell. I firmly believe that only by looking at the situation dispassionately (if even only temporarily) can you understand more of the drivers of the imbalance in outcomes.
Ideally I’d like us to reach a point where Maori and ‘average’ New Zealanders have the same chances and outcomes, where Maori aren’t over-represented in crime/prison/unemployment statistics.
While National may not have come up with any great initiatives themselves, at least they didn’t turn their noses up at catching that Maori cab. They’re working with the Maori Party and giving them a lot of support.
What exactly did Labour do?
The wider issue here, as alluded to by Colin James’ essay, is how to deal with the thorny issue of ‘involuntary minorities‘. Slobodan Milosevic had a very simple solution for it – problem was, it landed him on the first plane trip to the Hague for all the wrong reasons.
I was specifically addressing your response to sammy who specifically mentioned the foreshore and seabed wherein you appeared to be suggesting the seabed and foreshore was about all NZers having equal access to something, irregardless of their contractual right to do so.
“Ideally I’d like us to reach a point where Maori and ‘average’ New Zealanders have the same chances and outcomes, where Maori aren’t over-represented in crime/prison/unemployment statistics.” agreed
So far the NATs have given one week of borrowing to Maori Party iniatiatives. I’m not sure it serves any of us, including maori to presuppose the MP speaks for ALL Maori anymore than Labour speaks for all workers, or national all employers etc
I agree that it was useful for JK to work with MP, as to tangible benefit and changes for maori and therefore all NZers, time will tell.
I still believe rightly or wrongly that Mrs Turia’s rift with Clark has created an “over my dead body” attitude from the former, and whethr that will benefit Maori in the long term I don’t know.
I have followed Pita Sharples for along time having met him in 1991 when I did some work with him. Som of his views and stances ahve surprised me, and I respect him, so I continue to watch with interest.
Agreed.
Yesterday in the House Judith Collins and Tariana Turia were sitting next to each other having a chat and giggle.
LabRat
I have read that opinion piece you recommended and copied in part.
Many of the items listed can be attributed to the result of what beagn in 1820 and carried on into the dessimation of the population by flu and later poverty and displacement. To discount the impact of being hit in school if you speak Maori, of seeing the world in a different way from those grading your educational progress, and so doesn’t stop because one day Tipene O’Regan negotiates a monetary deal…
Many Maori were thriving commercially before having land confiscated and iwi members killed, usually men by tose seeking their land… taking away an economic base harms a nation of people for far longer than that point in time.
Almost ALL the systems we had in place in this country by the year 1900 were entirely from the British culture. land taken, people dead, leaders dead, disease attacking, language forbidden, “crimes” different, including punishment,
I think people really DO discard too quickly what it is like to have TOTAL displacement following death of many loved ones.
The scots still recall the clearances with bitterness… the Irish their deportations and so on and they got to stay in the relative comfort of everything that was their culture.
I agree that Maori have to meet us half way. I have seen evidence of this over the last 30 years in all kinds of forms. However many pakeha NZers still believe they should “get over it”, whatever they consider it to be… and almost always an “IT” that they have not experienced in this or a recent ancestors lifetime
Tracey, I confess my response to sammy had nothing to do with the foreshore and seabed issue. I had assumed sammy had simply used that quote to demonstrate what he thought Key’s opinion of Maori was.
I think the F&S issue is very complex. On one hand I love having the freedom of enjoying our beaches and believe that right should be preserved (almost in the vein of customary use), on the other hand I believe Maori should have the right to contest ownership.
Also, I don’t think the amount of spending is relevant (or a good measure) to solving an issue. Smart initiatives, not expensive initiatives, are what we need. I think Key is letting the Maori Party propose solutions, and where they can convince him they are viable I think he supports them. A lack of National’s own initiatives is thus irrelevant, if their strategy is to let Maori (at least the MP) determine what would work best for themselves.
I do agree the MP don’t necessarily speak for all Maori. But I think that, as opposed to having a white PM deciding what’s best for them, it’s better and more empowering (i.e. not mana diminishing).
Tell me, did you read that Lindsay Mitchell post? I realise sometimes it’s tempting to dismiss other viewpoints from sources you may not usually agree with, but I think she makes some crucial observations.
Small steps. We need to be getting more Maori men into work, and encourage them to be good role models in their family.
I realise the jobs aren’t there right now, and there are attitude shifts that may take many years to change, but I think that’s what we need to work towards. I understand the real reason Key didn’t change the S59 amendment was because the MP had asked him not to because they wanted to change the attitude of Maori to physical discipline. A small step.
Judith is just a realist, she’s the most honest member that National has, a shame that she isn’t the PM, she would be staunch.
Judith Collins is just another ignorant Pakeha who doesn’t care at all concerning Maori issues in the criminal justice system. If your not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
If anything, welfarism is the main reason Maori are not performing like they used to. A proud race disintegrated by a Government that promised to look after them. Sad.
LabRat: “I realise the jobs aren’t there right now, and there are attitude shifts that may take many years to change, but I think that’s what we need to work towards.”
You can also add in that low-skill jobs once done by Maori & Islanders have been made obsolete by machines, or otherwise off-shored. It’s the same story in any other country:
“Is this “one law for all”? Well, yes. And, well, no. If one law means “do it my way” and that way is British, it won’t work, just as imposing the home country’s business culture worldwide didn’t work for the bank. But without a framework within which everybody operates, the place will disintegrate. There have to be common rules. There have to be core values to which everyone subscribes.
This awful conundrum is taxing some fine brains in Europe as the legacy of empire and of “guest workers” imported to do the slop jobs repeats on this generation. France is in the gun now. It was Holland’s turn a couple of years back. There will be more.”
I also read in an article once that it’s futile to turn meatworkers into engineers in a fortnight.
@Clint – Hey – Labour looked after Maori, didn’t let them starve, closed some gaps. Yay Maori
@Rosa: “Judith is just a realist, she’s the most honest member that National has, a shame that she isn’t the PM, she would be staunch.”
How staunch exactly? As staunch as a water cannon.
The same arguments arise.
I listened to a Great Grandfather’s stories from the West of Ireland. Almost 600 years of English domination for profit, parishes given to friend of the English nobility to collect rent from as the poor Irish tried to live of their own land and traditional home. The starvation as crops were taken away to be sold by the “landlords”, the deaths to those opposing the cruelty and the children stolen to work in the factories of Liverpool. How many generations in 600 years and French and Dutch soldiers used by the English to keep the rebelling Irish down.
There weren’t many weakling because they died while young amid high mortality. Not so the English Lords and friends who lived richly off their ill gotten gains.
If I tried to claim recompense then I would be crazy believing the present day English were responsible.
We are caught up in a NZ scene where all came here from elsewhere at some time and the clash of cultures and technological differences made for a period of up to 80 years of trading and bouts of open conflict. Conflict and death also occurred before Europeans arrives about 300 years ago.
The oppression today is largely that which has created the inequity that is not being resolved but strengthened by greed of those with plenty who want more.
Nowdays it is all done with financial markets.
The Business Round table has international roots and is Ruthless in fostering conscienceless exploitation.
We have a large class difference in NZ and prisons are filled with poor people mainly.
It is consistent that as inequity grows deeper then more stringent measures are used to keep society “safe ” from the screwed up individuals it produces, as well as those who flout the rules as it is the main chance they see of getting anywhere.
There are plenty of examples of well off traders getting rich by ripping off in great style and relative impunity.
In Matt Mullanys other world an “Ignorant Pakeha” is someone who tells the truth.
Typical Labour, pick out the bits and deliver in the context that suits them. They never offer any constructive alternative, just bag anyone who does something solid. The national party have done a lot more than the sloppy Labour Party. 9 years of CRAP.
Must be rubbing off from your NACT masters
LabRat, I did read it, and commented as such at the beginning of my post so you would know.
I think you and I are largely in agreement and I apologise because I think I misinterpreted your stance. I agree at addressing those issues outlined would go a long way, and I suspect Whanau Ora is one method to do some of it.
Thanks Tracey, I didn’t see your 4.43 post before I wrote my 5.11 post – do your comments go in moderation too?
I don’t think any reasonable person actually wants to maintain any sort of divide between Maori and non-Maori, but we often have different ideas on how to get there. Honouring the treaty is important, but settlements don’t necessarily help Maori as a whole. Welfare is vital to ensure nobody is living in poverty and suffering the associated ill effects, but has unintended consequences that can actually lower long term outcomes.
Having the Maori Party raise initiatives that they develop through consultation with Maoridom is (I think) a sensible approach to looking for long term solutions.
LabRat I agree, and believe that honoring the treaty doesnt just mean giving them money, but it does mean consultation, something which seems to annoy some out there.
Let’s face it Judith Collins has extreme racist views in which many other Pakeha also have at this present time. It’s a shame she has the position and portfolio she does, because she gets to make decisions for those whom she secretly snears at. She does not bother to look deeply into the reason why there are 50% Maori men in prisons, nor does she bother to look at why Australia and the US also have very high rates of indigenous peoples in their prisons. She comes from an overprivileged pakeha middle class background and wouldn’t have the slightest clue of being brown in a very white dominated country nor does she have the background in coming from poverty which she blames on the underclass being lazy in 2006. If she bothered to put her lilly white tooties into some poor, ethnic shoes then I’ll listen to her, otherwise she is just an ignorant angry human with a chip on her shoulder.
Maori TV interviews Young Nats