An article by K Gurunathan in the Kapiti Oberver (April 2008) highlighted the way that Maori
radicals have done their maths and worked out that democracy will not give
them absolute power, so they had better use back-door methods! After all,
traditional Maori society was not democratic, either.

In fact, Article 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi guarantees that Maoris should have the same
(not more) rights as other citizens, but my tutor at Law School, Thalia
Rowden, just concidentally never managed to have time to get to Article 3,
because she was so busy talking about Maori rights in Article 2 -- so beware
of the hidden agendas and forked tongues of law lecturers on this issue!
When I was teaching at the Correspondence School, we were force-fed a
particular anti-White interpretation of the Treaty, with Deputy Principal
Denys Latham standing behind me to make sure I did not ask any democratic
questions -- so beware any interpretations of the Treaty that emanate from
the education system, period!

We can't trust legal opinions emanating from the Greater Wellington Regional Council, either,
with people like Chris Laidlaw involved there. Any decision by the Council
to impose apartheid upon us should be challenged in the courts, who have
never really been presented with competent non-Maori arguments on the
Treaty, in living memory.

According to the Kapiti Observer of May 12, 2008, Greater Wellington
Regional Council Chairwoman Fran Wilde claims that appointment of Maori
representatives to council committees with voting rights is not a deviation
from democratic principles, but that is clearly wrong in law.

Fran Wilde cited the Local Government Act 2002 as her justification for
saying that, but subclause 3 of clause 31 of Schedule 7 of the Local
Government Act 2002 states only that

"The members of a committee or subcommittee may, but need not be, elected members of the local authority, and a local authority or committee may appoint to a committee or subcommittee a person who is not a member of the local authority or committee if, in the opinion of the local authority, that person has the SKILLS, ATTRIBUTES, or KNOWLEDGE that will assist the work of the committee or subcommittee."

Having a Law degree, I can confidently state that the broad legal test is
always what the intention of Parliament was when it passed the Act
concerned. The intention of Parliement here is clearly to enable certain
individuals' expertise to be called on as and when needed. There is no
evidence, in the above wording, that Parliament intended a whole class or
category of people (e.g. Maori representatives) to be appointed - especially
to every single committee! Such an intention by Parliament would have had
important constitutional implications and would have to have been spelled
out explicitly.

Being a Maori representative does not imply that you have special skills or
knowledge that is relevant to every single committee, so the the relevant
word in the above subclause must be "attributes", rather than "skills" or
"knowledge". Otherwise, every single ethnic group should be represented on
every committee. However, if people are to be appointment because their
attribute is that they are Maori, then that is clearly racial discrimination, and is
arguably illegal under the Bill of Rights Act Act 1990, in terms of the grounds
of discrimination set out in the Human Rights Act 1993.

This would also be a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi, since Article 3
guarantees that Maoris will have the SAME rights as other citizens -- not
more rights. It is funny that the Maoris, for decades, have been shouting
"Honour the Treaty!" (and good on them for doing that!), but when what
they want is a breach of the Treaty (as here), they conveniently forget to quote the
Treaty!

Obviously, the full Council cannot relitigate every issue in detail that has
already been debated and discussed in one of its committees, and many
committees' recommendations will be passed by the full Council
substantitally unchanged, as a matter of course. If every committee has
Maori representatives who have researched every issue from their point of
view, but no Non-Maori representatives who have researched issues from a
Non-Maori point of view, what will result is a de facto Maorification of
Council policy -- whether this be the regional council, the Kapiti council,
or whichever council is involved. Non-Maoris on Council committees
are not selected to represent Non-Maoris, and do not see themselves as doing
that, although they may have Non-Maori biases, of course.

This Apartheid-style initiative has extremely serious constitutional implication, because Maori
radicals have long been proposing -- in clear breach of the Treaty of
Waitangi -- that we move to a constitutional system at the national level,
where individual Maoris have more rights that other New Zealanders, because
the votes of all Maoris will be taken as having the same political weight as
the votes of all the rest of the population. Giving Maoris racist
privileges on councils is the first step in a process of making this seem
normal and acceptable.

 

Last Update: 1 June 2008