View our latest NZCPR Weekly Newsletter …
– to receive this free newsletter each week by email click the button and register
Dear NZCPR Reader,
This week…
In this NZCPR newsletter, we reveal that the tribal takeover – orchestrated by the Labour Government without any mandate from the public – that is now underway is not only targeting the state sector but the private sector as well, our NZCPR Guest Commentator Anthony Willy outlines how, against their will, lawyers are now being pressured to include the Treaty in their regulatory framework, and our poll asks whether you believe the Marine and Coastal Area Act should be repealed.
Last week…
In In case you missed it, in last week’s newsletter we outlined how New Zealand has been transformed into a woke society under Labour HERE, and our NZCPR Guest Commentator Dr Greg Clydesdale shared concerns that woke ideology is a major threat to New Zealand’s future and outlined measures to address the problem HERE.
Treaty Book Project…
Thank you so much to those kind readers who have supported our Treaty book project to print and distribute around New Zealand The Treaty of Waitangi by the great Maori leader Sir Apirana Ngata. Written in 1922 to explain the Maori version of the Treaty (long before activists began re-interpreting its meaning), the booklet was delivered to all Maori families at the time. Since we now know that what our children are being taught through the new New Zealand history curriculum is blatant Treaty propaganda, this project has taken on a new urgency. The more funding we receive, the more books we can distribute, so if you haven’t had a chance to contribute as yet, but would like to do so, please click HERE.
*In the meantime, don’t forget you can read the book on our website HERE.
Ensuring our newsletters continue…
To maintain our independence and keep our information freely available, the NZCPR does not seek State assistance, run ads, have paywalls, or ask for subscriptions. Instead, the significant role we play in informing public opinion and influencing decision-makers is only possible through the wonderful support of our newsletter readers. If you value these newsletters, please click HERE to ensure they continue.
*And if you don’t like website forms, you can donate directly via Internet Banking: please credit NZCPR Bank Account 12-3099-0833814-00 – but please include your first name as well as surname in the reference area … and email receipt@nzcpr.com if you would like a receipt.
As always, thank you so much for on-going interest and support – and please feel free to share these newsletters with anyone you think would be interested.
Warmest regards,
Dr Muriel Newman
NZCPR Founding Director
NZCPR Weekly:
TRIBAL TAKEOVER
By Dr Muriel Newman
Probably the most important court case of recent times was held in Wellington last month, yet it attracted no mention in the media.
It was a Court of Appeal hearing seeking to overturn a High Court decision to grant multiple customary marine titles over a 40 km stretch of coastline near Opotiki. If the Edwards Marine and Coastal Area Act ruling stands, it will set a precedent for almost 600 yet to be determined claims, with the likely result that the ownership of virtually the entire New Zealand coastline – right out to the 12 nautical mile edge of the Territorial Sea – will pass to Maori.
The implications of tribal control should not be underestimated. Gaining customary title provides rights akin to ‘ownership’. Tribal owners can ban public access to beaches and fishing spots by declaring an area is ‘sacred’ or wahi tapu – or they can impose rahui. And commercial operators holding coastal permits – including councils, port companies, marina operators, and boat ramp owners – are likely to be targeted with annual levies to create an income stream in perpetuity.
The rich mineral wealth and natural resources like seaweed found within the coastal marine area will belong to tribal ‘owners’, who will have the right to mine it, sell it, or otherwise exploit it.
And while the legislation is meant to guarantee on-going public access to the coast, if aggressive tribal owners decide to block others from using ‘their’ area, it is difficult to see how access could be enforced.
This situation, where New Zealand’s coastline could effectively be privatised to Maori, is the complete opposite of what the National Government promised in 2011, when they repealed Crown ownership of the foreshore and seabed and opened up the coast for tribal claims.
They assured the public the law change would result in only a relative handful of successful claims – all in remote areas. And we were never informed that there was a chance the whole coast could end up in tribal hands.
To make matters worse, while no financial assistance is available for anyone wanting to oppose tribal claims, the government has provided lucrative funding of up to $458,000 for applicants to prepare their case, with further funding available for historical research as well as for legal fees and other costs associated with court hearings – including accommodation, air fares, meals and so on.
At the time National passed the Marine and Coastal Area Act they assured New Zealanders that the criteria for gaining a customary marine title were stringent. Under section 58 of the Act claimants had to satisfy two tests: firstly, they had to “hold the specified area in accordance with tikanga” – where ‘tikanga’ was defined as “Maori customary values and practices” – and secondly, they had to have “exclusively used and occupied the area without substantial interruption from 1840 to the present day.”
Overlapping claims, which are inconsistent with the concept of ‘exclusive’ use and occupation, were expected to be ruled out, as were claims for areas where third-party usage resulted in substantial interruption. And since tribal groups had limited ability to navigate far from shore back in 1840, it was expected that few Territorial Sea claims would succeed.
The Court of Appeal case hinges on the fact that in the High Court case Justice Churchman determined that since applicants had been found by a Court appointed ‘expert’ to have held their claimed areas according to ‘tikanga’, this was sufficient for Customary Marine Titles to be awarded, thereby over-ruling any requirement to consider the second limb of the test – whether the areas had been used and occupied ‘exclusively’ and continuously since 1840.
Furthermore, instead of ruling out overlapping claims for failing to meet the ‘exclusive’ use and occupation test, the Judge created “shared exclusivity” in order to accommodate them all.
Should the Appeal Court find the High Court’s interpretation of section 58 was wrong in law, then it is likely the case will be returned to the High Court for further consideration, although such a ruling would more than likely be appealed to the Supreme Court by claimants.
However, the bigger issue is that by prioritising tribal demands over the public good rights of all New Zealanders, the National Government has put the nation into an untenable situation where it could effectively be held to ransom by private owners of the country’s foreshore and seabed.
The last time this happened was after the former Chief Justice Sian Elias ruled in 2003 that ‘some’ customary title might still exist in the coastal marine area. That decision triggered such a flood of tribal claims for the coast that Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark was forced to step in, cancelling the claims, and reaffirming Crown ownership through the 2004 Foreshore and Seabed Act.
And that is the only practical solution for the situation New Zealand is now in – an incoming government must revoke the Marine and Coastal area Act and return the foreshore and seabed to Crown ownership.
What this case highlights is the huge threat to the Rule of Law and the stability of our country that’s being caused by the inclusion of ‘tikanga’ – which can be interpreted as meaning virtually anything Maori want it to mean – into legislation.
There should be no place in the law for tikanga.
Nor for Treaty ‘principles’, since the Treaty of Waitangi contains no principles.
Nor should there be any place in our regulatory system for the fictional Treaty of Waitangi ‘partnership’, since it is constitutionally impossible for subjects to be ‘partners’ with their Sovereign.
Yet, the brazen claim that Maori are ‘partners’ with the Crown is being used by the tribal elite to justify ‘co-governance’. Through 50:50 decision-making powers and the right of veto, they are gaining political control across the public and private sectors – and accumulating wealth.
Back in 2010, political commentator Chris Trotter warned what can happen if separatists gain control of organisations, by describing the demise of Corso, a charity established in 1944 to provide clothing and footwear to millions of people around the world:
“Throughout the 1980s Corso was steadily infiltrated and eventually taken over by radical Maori nationalists. Led by the Harawira family, the radicals insisted that Corso recognise and promote tino rangatiratanga – the Maori right to self-determination. To prove its bona fides to the cause of the tangata whenua, Corso was also required to devote two-thirds of its income to Maori projects. When Corso workers and supporters objected to this takeover they were subjected to withering criticism – it was much easier to leave than to fight. By 1990, the organisation was little more than a hollowed-out shell. New Zealand’s largest and most successful home- grown aid organisation had been destroyed: initially, by ideological extremism; and finally, by radical Maori nationalism.”
Under the Labour Government, not only has the public sector been radicalised by being forced to embrace the Maori supremacist agenda, but private sector organisations that have some association with the government, either through registration or funding are now being pressured to swear allegiance to the Treaty, embrace the Treaty partnership lie, and establish co-governance boards.
Sport New Zealand is a case in point. With a new Maori name, “Ihi Aotearoa”, its website states its “commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the Treaty principles of Partnership, Protection and Participation”. Affiliated bodies, like Sports Northland, have already introduced co-governance.
Local Government New Zealand, the so-called industry body for councils, has been well and truly captured, not only through their funding agreement with Nanaia Mahuta to promote Three Waters, but through their prolific advocacy for the Treaty and co-governance – including Treaty training for newly elected local government representatives.
Auckland Council’s withdrawal from LGNZ is to be applauded. Other councils should follow suit.
Real Estate Agents have also been targeted with a new requirement to undertake compulsory Treaty training: “A practical introduction to Maori culture, language (te reo), custom (tikanga) and te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi) in the real estate context”.
To say the profession is outraged by this requirement is an understatement, but since their registration will depend on it, they will need to endure it until new political leadership hopefully sweeps it away.
Treaty training is also underway for engineers, as their website explains “a two-hour Treaty training module has been developed to help engineers understand the modern day implications and obligations of The Treaty.”
Even the accounting profession has been caught: “Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand is committed to honouring the Treaty of Waitangi through a process of building our own cultural competency, knowledge and connection to te ao Māori…”
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, former Judge and Law Lecturer Anthony Willy, outlines how lawyers are now being pressured into swearing allegiance to the Treaty:
“On 1st March 2022 the New Zealand Law Society or as they now call themselves Te Kahui Ture o Aotearoa commissioned a report by an ‘independent panel’ into ‘Legal and Structural Change in the Law Society’… Three Commissioners were appointed: Professor Ron Paterson ONZM whose area or expertise is in health and disability services and ‘medical law’; Professor Jacinta Ruru Australian born of some Maori ancestry and lecturing at Otago Law School; and Jane Meares who has an extensive background in commercial legal work at a high level and could be presumed to understand how the legal profession works. Neither of the other two appear to have practised as barristers or solicitors and must therefore take their understanding of the profession from others.
“The report comprising 192 pages was tabled in the House in March 2023. It has a Maori name which apparently in English translates as ‘Regulating Lawyers in Aotearoa New Zealand’.
“Much of the report, deals at tedious length, with the case for an independent regulator and an independent complaints system. But at page 95 the commissioners record that their terms of reference require them to: ‘Consider changes needed to promote a commitment to honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the bi cultural foundations of New Zealand including Te Ao Maori concepts… We believe it is time for this to change.’
“Interestingly this approach was rejected by 44% of those surveyed on the grounds that it would cause separatism and uncertainty within the profession and the public and dilute the lawyers’ obligation to uphold the Rule of Law…
“The commissioners had no hesitation in rejecting the view of the majority of practising lawyers and recommended that a clause be included in the proposed legislation that: ‘All persons exercising powers and performing functions and duties under this Act must give effect to the principles of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi’.”
Against the wishes of the majority of lawyers, those driving this separatist agenda not only want to force the Treaty into their regulatory framework, they also want the new regulator to ‘partner’ with Maori.
Orchestrated by the Labour Government without any mandate from the public, the tribal takeover that is now underway in New Zealand is creating deep social division and unrest. And while the State Sector has been their priority, using threats of deregulation and funding cuts, it is now being forced onto private enterprise.
Those New Zealanders who are aware that Labour is giving the iwi leaders of multi-million-dollar business development corporations power over our lives, are horrified.
But not enough Kiwis understand the threat that ‘co-governance’, which is of course a euphemism for totalitarian tribal rule, poses to freedom and democracy.
With the election fast approaching, it’s imperative that we do all we can to alert voters to the danger – and please feel free to use our newsletters to inform others, if that helps.
But we also need to know whether politicians will step up and defend our Kiwi way of life. Will they stop the tribal takeover? Will they remove references to tikanga and the Treaty from legislation? And will they repeal the Marine and Coastal Area Act?
Why not contact MPs you are thinking of voting for and ask those sorts of questions – then let us all know what they said!
All MP email addresses can be found through our Have Your Say page HERE.
Please note: To register for our free weekly newsletter please click HERE.
THIS WEEK’S POLL ASKS:
*How important do you believe it is to repeal the Marine and Coastal Area Act?
(Very important; Moderately important; Not important at all)
*Poll comments are posted at the end of the main article.
*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.
NZCPR Guest Commentary:
WHO GUARDS THE GUARDS
By Anthony Willy
“The Commission’s proposals do not exist in isolation. Indeed they forecast that such ‘maorification’ and diversity provisions will become common in other professions. They have every reason to make that prediction.
“Engineers for example exist to ensure that built structures, or machines, or electrical devices and systems are safe, state of the art and reliable, and will do what they are designed to do. The sole function of an architect is to design buildings and related structures to the instructions of the client and in compliance with building codes.
“Both of these professions are private enterprises that owe nothing to the State other than to comply with the necessary safety requirements and certainly do not owe anything to a pre-European stone age culture.
“Yet the virus has already entered their hitherto collegiate activities. Their institute’s publications are now heavily comprised of lengthy passages in maori which virtually none of the members is capable of understanding or wishes to do so.
“The Commission’s expectations that these hitherto private enterprise bodies will in future become subject to the ‘Treaty’ fabrications is no idle threat. This is entryism (destroying an institution from the inside) of the worst sort dressed up as it is in high sounding, but empty phrases masquerading as ‘principles.’
“It is designed to hollow out control of the lawyers’ professional affairs and substitute state interference and control. It is in many ways the parting, He Puapua shot of our late unlamented leader…”
*To read the full article, please visit the NZCPR.com website.
BREAKING VIEWS:
What’s new on our Breaking Views blog…
Breaking Views is administered by the NZCPR – the views are those of the authors. Here is a selection of this week’s articles…
- Alistair Boyce: A ‘Pot Of Tears’ At Rainbows End
Mainstream New Zealand will be in quiet mourning today. We have witnessed the violent intolerance of mob rule that was countenanced from its elected government and actively supported by a compliant, fomenting media…
- Point of Order: Marama Davidson was reminded of the Maori numbers
Marama Davidson, Minister for the Prevention of Family and Sexual Violence, has been caught on tape claiming: “I am the prevention violence Minister, and I know who causes violence in the world, and it’s white cis men”…
- Dr David Lillis: Allegations of Racism in New Zealand Universities
In recent years we have heard many allegations of systemic bias and racism in various sectors, including education, health and indeed in the New Zealand workplace. We have also heard allegations of racism within our universities…
- Frank Newman: Straight Talk – Crime wave continues
This morning’s press is again full of crime stories, two screaming out with messages of what’s so wrong with our justice system and our government’s pathetically soft approach to crime that borders on condoning the actions of criminals…
- Derek Mackie: Just another Labour day at the Office
Feeling groggy, he slowly opened his eyes. His neck felt like it had been stood on by a squad of riot police and, for a split second, he had some sympathy for the parliamentary protesters. Where the hell was he?…
- A.E. Thompson: Our Non-White and Female Rights Commission
Tusiata Avia writes and performs hate-fuelled material such as ‘poetry’ stating that she and “a car full of brown girls” are going to drive around looking for “white men” and ‘f… them up’ with a pig hunting knife…
- Ian Bradford: Speed reduction to 90 kph for all SUV’s
Recently, Len Gillman, Professor of Biogeography at the Auckland University of Technology wrote an article in which he stated that SUV’s should have a speed limit of 90kph…
- Karl du Fresne: Traffic cones and the precautionary principle
Driving between Eketahuna and Masterton recently, I came across some road works. The road was reduced to one lane each way. There were the usual Stop/Go controls at either end, but this time there was a new twist…
- Bob Jones: Trans-Rights mobs not just sexually confused
The shouting turnouts in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch were obsessed in their cries and placards with “rights”. The indisputable fact is that trans folk have exactly the same legal rights as everyone else…
- Mark Riggall: Is this the start of another GFC?
Recent events bear an eerie resemblance to those of the 2008-9 Global Financial Crisis. Banks have failed, rumours swirl about the next victim and investors hold weekend vigils awaiting the next alphabet soup solution from banking authorities. So should we be concerned?…
- Garrick Tremain: Mr Chippie
Here is Garrick Tremain’s cartoon commentary on the great Kiwi swallow!
Spreading the Message:
**REGISTER FOR OUR NZCPR WEEKLY NEWSLETTERS**
Anyone who would like to receive our free NZCPR Weekly newsletter is more than welcome to register for the mailing list HERE.
Please help us spread the message by sharing our newsletters…
Please help us spread the message about our newsletters by sharing them as widely as possible. This can be done by forwarding the newsletter itself, or, if there are problems with spam filters, by sharing the newsletter link: www.nzcpr.com/newsletter. Content from the newsletter can also be copied into your own email. To share individual articles on social media, please visit the website and click on the article in question – the Facebook and Twitter “share” buttons can be found on the top right, along with buttons to “share by email”, and “Print”.
Have Your Say…
Speaking out in a democracy is crucial – please find all MP email addresses, local authority councillor email addresses, contact details for newspaper letters to the editor, social media links, and other useful contacts on our “Have Your Say” page HERE.
Ensuring you receive our newsletter…
To ensure you receive our newsletters, please whitelist our newsletter mailing address – or add it to your ‘safe senders’ list. The address to whitelist is: newsletter-bounces@nzcpr.com … If your newsletter fails to arrive, it can be viewed at the ‘Newsletter’ link on our NZCPR.com website.
    |
___________________________________________________
New Zealand Centre for Political Research
PO Box 984 WHANGAREI
Ph: 09-434-3836, Fax: 09 434-4224, Mob: 021-800-111
muriel@nzcpr.com
www.nzcpr.com
To unsubscribe from the newsletter, send this email – but don’t forget to reply to the confirmation message.
If you need help unsubscribing, please email admin@nzcpr.com with “REMOVE” in the subject line.
Please note it’s important that you contact us over unsubscribing problems because
it’s often caused by the fact that it was an older address that was registered,
not your current one, and we will need to search for that.
To change your address please email admin@nzcpr.com with “ADDRESS CHANGE” in the
subject line, advising the new address to be added and the old one to be removed.