Not for councillors to decide

Posted on 10-11-2014 12:04 | By Annalist

Any change in the way we elect our councillors should be up to the voters themselves. So whether they're deciding on ward vs at large or first past the post or STV or whatever, the decision should be made by the voters themselves. Councillors don't have a mandate from the community to make any changes. The community as a whole should decide.

Oh the rhetoric

Posted on 10-11-2014 12:06 | By penguin

Councils should be comprised of the best people for the job, not from favouritism shown towards any particular group or culture.

We have enough trouble already

Posted on 10-11-2014 12:14 | By How about this view!

Electing the right person for the job! What hope do we have of having an effective council if one of the positions is a statutory roll, Any Tom, Dick or Hone could be forced onto the payroll. Do we want or need an Un-elected Councillor? At least if they have the courage to stand up at an election to state their case, the electorate feel as if there is a chance of electing a WORTHY candidate. Put your name on the ballot paper and don't try and sneak in the back door. If you're a creditable candidate then you stand just as much chance of election as anyone else. Ethnicity, Colour or creed is no longer an issue, but moreover honesty, integrity and commonsense are what is desperately required.

Maybe

Posted on 10-11-2014 12:45 | By Jitter

I agree as long as the "Maori" representative is democratically elected in the same way as the balance of councillors. I strongly disagree with a "Maori" representative just being appointed and then given full voting rights in the same way as elected councillors. If "Maori" want a "Maori" councillor then they nominate candidates and elect one in the democratic manner. No one should be appointed to council on race alone. If this is done then there should also be Asian, Pacifica, Indian, Sri Lankan etc repesentatives appointed in the same way. However as a democratic multicultural society all representatives should be nominated and elected in the usual way.

Maori Seats?

Posted on 10-11-2014 13:05 | By mlow

So much for the "one country"

No More!

Posted on 10-11-2014 13:13 | By jimmyant

At a time when it is becoming more PC to not have racially biased selection processes, the only example I see Tauranga setting (in going ahead with this proposal) is a divisive and backward one that panders to a minority. If there is a strong desire to have racial representation, then field an appropriate candidate in the next elections and do it the proper and correct democratic way! Sorry - had enough!

do you want democracy or NOT - please decide

Posted on 10-11-2014 13:21 | By The Tomahawk Kid

I am ALL FOR maori representation HOWEVER - it should be on the same basis and equal footing as ANY OTHER representation. It should be based upon MERIT and the democratic process (which I personally disagree with - but that is the way things are done under our present system). Special rules and concessions to ANYBODY - especially those of skin colour should not be acceptable Anybody wishing to be represented should compete on the same basis for a seat. If Maori (or any other group) wish to be represented, they should compete on the same level as everybody else. Personally I would be ashamed to think I was elected because of the colour of my skin - not the quality of my brains. If its important to them, maori should promote themselves to ensure they get the representation they wish on equal terms

wheres the democracy

Posted on 10-11-2014 13:52 | By Steves

If the Tangata Whenua Collective want a councilor then let them put a candidate up and the people will have the say ,not the minority council.

Carcass

Posted on 10-11-2014 14:04 | By Carcass

If you want to be a Councillor stand like every one else

opps

Posted on 10-11-2014 14:48 | By lpm67

There are several things wrong with this move. Number one being that its still treating Tangata Whenua as illiterate idiots incapable of getting seats the usual ways. I dont think most maori fall into this category and to treat maori this way is insulting.

Democracy Please!

Posted on 10-11-2014 15:21 | By Bestlife

Anyone with a bit of pride would want to be voted on to Council, to prove they are the best person for the job. To be given the position,based on skin colour rather than being a worthy candidate, without going through proper selection reduces their mana.There is too much of this going on. Enough is enough!!!

I cannot wait.....

Posted on 10-11-2014 15:32 | By Jimmy Ehu

for a comment from "Tinker" Bell.

HEARD IT ALL BEFORE

Posted on 10-11-2014 15:41 | By Colleen Spiro

I believe in democracy, but the sad fact of the matter is, that when Maori do put themselves up for election for Council and Hospital Boards....only the ex celebrity rugby players make it......mainly because of the attitude displayed here by some of the commenters....

No Thanks

Posted on 10-11-2014 16:48 | By Captain Sensible

Just another nail in the coffin of democracy. To even contemplate such a racist privilege shows how these people think. Why do maori get everything on a platter while the rest of us non-maori are racially discriminated against?

Jimmy Ehu

Posted on 10-11-2014 16:57 | By Capt_Kaveman

lol me too

Rastus

Posted on 10-11-2014 17:01 | By rastus

What an insult to past Maori councilors who stood among others and were voted onto our council for their own strengths and commitment - apointing anyone on race is an absolute insult - not for me brother!

Maori Have The Ability to Win via Democracy

Posted on 10-11-2014 17:14 | By Milo Ovaltini

Maori judged incapable of fielding their own candidate? That's a gross insult to Maori. Iwi leaders should protest to Government in the strongest possible terms and demand equal democratic rights for all Maori and not allow TCC to inflict overt racism on them. There is way too much similarly happening in other cities. TCC must acknowledge Maori capability to win on merit, not by way of freebie(s).

Racially appointed council positions

Posted on 10-11-2014 17:29 | By bogside

Forget it - I have been disappointed with our new councils lack of spine when they promised not to compromise on a host of issues. So for me this would be the tipping point to join the Rates Withhold movement. In a true democracy no one gets preferential treatment.

What?

Posted on 10-11-2014 19:58 | By DanielT

That idea is completely racist and against what we should be progressing towards. The seats on the council should be filled by the most suitable candidates, regardless of what race they are.

Wisechief

Posted on 10-11-2014 20:40 | By Wise Chief

Rather amusing reading all this drivel that we have a democracy which few likely know is based upon Capitalism supposed superiority over labour when for 179 years Maori Lands cannot be used as collateral for loans from Uk/USA/Aussie owned banks for land development purposes to better their lot in life but still have to pay rates like the Pakeha. These favoured chaps who CAN use their land as collateral for loans to develop their lands which have been purchased for below market price or taken from Maori using many different government and council endorsed practices to make it all legal. Also I think the nasty example of deeply imbedded local racism which came to the fore at a Bethlehem meeting over the building of a Maori Kura/School highlights the degree of ugly racism in our community.

Bloody Hell

Posted on 10-11-2014 23:09 | By Ross01

Don't we ever want to be one country with one set of rules for all? BRING WINSTON PETERS BACK TO TAURANGA AS OUR MAYOR

I find myself...

Posted on 11-11-2014 01:57 | By morepork

... in full agreement with most of the posters in this thread. I support Maori and Maoritanga as an essential part of our culture but this is exactly the kind of Apartheid (one rule for you and a different one for me) measure that will create deep resentment and divisiveness. It will set race relations back decades. We need ELECTED councillors, not APPOINTED ones, and it cannot be based on skin colour, religious belief, sex, age or any other prejudicial factor. Do we need to spend $170,000 to formally have the community reject this? Maori who see this as a "victory" are being severely misled; what mana is there in this? Put up one or more candidates and win on merit, that's the honourable way.

More Tokenism!

Posted on 11-11-2014 08:12 | By Mackka

If Maori candidates don't have what it takes to be elected to council then the back door should remain securely closed to their approaches for favouritism.

Bog side

Posted on 11-11-2014 10:52 | By YOGI BEAR

Agree, it is a tipping point, the likely end of democracy, plain and simple.

So sad

Posted on 11-11-2014 11:12 | By maccachic

This Country just gets more and more racist - if there is going to be a Maori candidate then we demand candidates for every other race in this city too. Stand on your own two feet.

@ wise chief

Posted on 11-11-2014 11:41 | By Captain Sensible

The racism in NZ is all directed towards us non-maori where maori are the beneficiaries every time. Can you name one law that has been in force for the last several decades that discriminates against maori based on race? There are an estimated 169 laws that favour maori and that number keeps climbing. As one of the second class, racially discriminated against non-maori, I find this racism obscene.

Zimbabwe

Posted on 11-11-2014 11:43 | By Captain Sensible

Imagine the howls of protest and the maori "academics" being wheeled out in support of the protestors if the council decided to have one seat that was not available for a maori to win. The racist double standards and hypocrisy in NZ can only be matched by Zimbabwe.

Maori Seats

Posted on 11-11-2014 17:14 | By robin bell

are a Democratic right,driven by the Treaty and the rule of justice. Maori were the only 'other' race to sign the treaty.Fact. Wisecheif is correct,not so the usual suspects.To compare N.Z. to Zimbabwe is yet another attempt to mislead. Special concessions are already a distortion to democracy,giving Pakeha total control on Maori democratic rights. Perhaps the 'experts' in this thread,can name one,just one Politician or Councillor, who has been elected,standing as a representative of Maori,treaty based,human rights.Just one. Of course you can't.Hence the absolute need for Maori seats. WHAT ARE YOU ALL AFRAID OF? Robin 'Tinker'Bell

HAPPY NOW

Posted on 11-11-2014 22:04 | By crazyhorse

Jimmy Ehu, CaptKaveman, ask and you shall receive, the culturally hypnotised Bell has arrived, "enjoy".

@ robin bell

Posted on 12-11-2014 07:00 | By Captain Sensible

I have been asking you for years to name any special race based privileges available o non-maori that excludes maori on the basis of race. Still waiting.......

Robin Bell

Posted on 12-11-2014 09:01 | By Mackka

To reply to your question - 'Name one,just one Politician or Councillor, who has been elected,standing as a representative of Maori,treaty based,human rights.Just one. Of course you can't'. M?kere Rangi?tea Love, known as Ralph, was elected to Wellington City Council. His nephew, Peter Love, was elected to Petone Borough Council How about these two then??

Robin Bell

Posted on 12-11-2014 09:23 | By Mackka

M?kere Rangi?tea Love, known as Ralph, was elected to Wellington City Council. His nephew, Peter Love, was elected to Petone Borough Council. Ralph Love worked as private secretary for the MP Eruera Tirik?tene, and later for Tirik?tene's daughter, MP Whet? Tirik?tene-Sullivan. He became mayor of Petone..... Ray Ahipene-Mercer was elected to the Wellington City Council. These maori were elected without special seats reserved for their race - they earned their places.

You forgot Winston macca.

Posted on 12-11-2014 11:42 | By robin bell

perhaps you think people are stupid,I don't know.All of the ones you mention including winnie,were elected to represent their electorates.Any work they undertook on strictly Maori issues, were outside of their mandate.In any event,they were clearly unsuccessful in advancing Maori rights, which was achieved primarily by direct action,within N.Z. and through the U.N. Tokenism didn't work in the past,and it won't work now. Robin Bell.

Robin Bell

Posted on 12-11-2014 14:34 | By maccachic

If Maori need representation why are they not voting their own in as per a democracy? Best person for the job is the best person for the job - regardless of race, colour, gender, etc and the people of Tauranga get to decide who this is via voting.

@ Robin Bell

Posted on 12-11-2014 15:02 | By morepork

You ask for an example and Mackka gives you one, but before that you state that, as there has never been a Maori elected on the platforms you name, "hence the need for Maori seats". OK, so no 18 Year old has been elected standing on the platform of government subsidised partying, free beer at weekends, and the right to get up when you feel like it. Hence the need for Teenage seats. What are YOU afraid of? If people can't get democratically elected on the platform they present, it is because the electorate rejects that platform. That's Democracy; you don't empower and privilege a platform that the majority don't want. Certainly, social injustice must be addressed, but that is true for the whole society, not just one part of it. Most fair-minded Kiwis would be perfectly happy to see Maori candidates elected ON MERIT.

But,but,but

Posted on 12-11-2014 15:59 | By robin bell

Mackka didn't give an example did he. Mikere Rangiatea Love,was elected to the Wellington City Council,but not on Maori issues.It was after his Council term that he became active in Maori Affairs,land in Taranaki etc,etc. Ray Ahipene Mercer was elected on his history as a tireless campaigner on clean water for Wellington. As for the Tirikatene-Sullivans they were elected in designated Maori seats. Is it any wonder you people are so prejudiced,when you are so badly informed. Maori have an absolute right to political representation,unimpeded by your 'version' democracy. Robin Bell.

But,but,but.

Posted on 12-11-2014 21:54 | By crazyhorse

Does the"average maori really want this, I mean the average maori that wants to be a K1W1, I mean to say, how did Hone go with "blob".com, or the maori party,labour got the maori vote, this is not about a say for maori on local council, it's another grab for power, "Koha," ask any Aucklander,at least Rotorua's stevie chadwick is not here with the ""back door"" policy, or have we a council pushing it's own agenda, is our council going to go to the people???. This is nothing but "treaty troughing", saying "no" doesn't make you racist, believe it or not?, up to you.

Maori issues, Bell?

Posted on 13-11-2014 21:51 | By crazyhorse

Being very part maori or just feeling maori, remember the [1974 Maori Affairs Amendment Act].people on paper wasn't it bell??, fill us in on these maori "issues""you constantly yodel about, what are they exactly, well apart from constantly having a hand in my wallet.

Robin

Posted on 14-11-2014 06:58 | By YOGI BEAR

You have not provided any real basis for there to be Maori seats that are nothing less than racially based, privileged based seats that should have ended 130 odd years ago when intended to go. I see no difference here to South Africa from a few years ago, eligibility is based on racial grounds and no real basis to do so.

@Robin Bell

Posted on 14-11-2014 12:12 | By morepork

Robin, your post really gives me some concerns.Even if I accept your point that the people noted were not elected specifically on "Maori" issues, I can't accept that "Maori have an absolute right to political representation,unimpeded by your 'version' democracy." as a basis for debate. That is a given. But Maori ALREADY have that, just as everybody else has that in our democratic society. We ALL have "an absolute right to representation" and we can exercise that right every 4 years. NZ has been trying to make amends for past injustices for many years now. It has cost us billions and it has held back ALL our development (not just Maori). I'm not saying Maori issues should be ignored; but they won't be addressed by creating an unelected elite. I'm against Maori (or any other specific Ethnicity) seats on TCC. Get over it and move on as ONE nation.

Concessions favour Maori

Posted on 14-11-2014 14:57 | By crazyhorse

Jim Gray is a kaumatua and former member of the original Te Arawa Standing Committee, five years ago he wrote a paper on the anomalies of the time as to why this committee was not working. For example, there was conflict between the different Maori organisations such as occurred with resource consents. On one hand, the Standing Committee was there to be involved and advise and on the other hand, there were kaumatua that the council took its advice from ignoring the Standing Committee in the process. However, the point I make is that the council is making special concessions in regards to Maori representation and these concessions are not being granted to other ethnic groups, regardless. In other words, the only way - as seen by council - that I am able to get representation is through ""special legislation"".

morepork,

Posted on 14-11-2014 16:20 | By robin bell

I am pleased my posts give you concerns.What you 'accept' is irrelevant,your acceptance of incorrect information given by mackka,gives rise to doubt about your motives.N.Z. is a unique nation,in that it was formed by two totally different peoples.It was the belief of the British that Maori would assimilate or die out. They did neither,they are still here. In the N.Z.context they are unique. They therefore cannot be compared to 'other ethnic' groups,to do so is to deny them their rights as co-founders. The birth pangs of creating this nation marginalised Maori. Democracy has many forms,N.Z. is in the process of creating its own version.The size and value of the Maori stake in their only country,demands political representation,both central and local body. That is NOT elitism. Robin Bell.

Separatist maori appointments

Posted on 14-11-2014 21:15 | By crazyhorse

Special treatment before the courts and in this case, the appointment of unelected and unaccountable Maori representatives to numerous local body committees on bogus claims of partnership and the payment at the taxpayers' expense of millions of dollars on spurious Treaty grievances are just a few of the examples that endorse the fact that 85 per cent of New Zealand is held to ransom by a Maori iwi elite who are interested only in fulfilling their own greedy objectives. It is ironic that in New Zealand this iwi elite and their supporters are hellbent on establishing racial separatism and race-based privilege at the same time the rest of the world is trying to establish democracy. And my generation, who've NEVER taken ANYTHING from anybody, will continue to pay for a generation who've NEVER had ANYTHING taken from them.

@Robin Bell

Posted on 15-11-2014 17:06 | By morepork

As someone who was born and raised here (although I lived overseas for many years and have now returned) my motive is only that we don't allow our country to descend into Apartheid and "favoured special groups". You say:"It was the belief of the British that Maori would assimilate or die out." As you have no idea what the people at the time believed, this is just cynical assumption. Again:"The birth pangs of creating this nation marginalised Maori." On the contrary, The Treaty made sure they had the same rights as everybody else and could claim the protection of the British Crown (which was quite important at the time). There WERE subsequent injustices which led to bloody war and neither side were blameless. Today, Maori businesses flourish alongside other businesses and Maori have the same voice and rights as everybody else. 170 years on, Maori don't need special treatment.

Robin

Posted on 16-11-2014 15:59 | By Mackka

Why don't you stand for council? You could push your 'Maori' barrow till the cows come home. As far as having a 'special' maori councillor goes, that person would be a voice in the wilderness having only one vote - so what would be the point of it all?

19th Century Way Of Thinking

Posted on 16-11-2014 20:23 | By Jitter

Robin Bell has stated "that this country was formed by the merging of two separate groups". Correct but that was nearly 200 years ago. As Mr Bell is so keen to see a "Maori" representative appointed to TCC to look after their interests perhaps he would be as keen to see also an Asian, Indian, Sri Lankan, Pacifica etc representative appointed to TCC to look after their interests also. If not he is supporting racism/separatism and giving a small cultural group in our population (14.1%) more special privileges.We have moved on from being 2 cultural groups and our country is now multicultural so all should have the same opportunities and privileges.Plus there is still no concrete evidence that "Maori" were the first inhabitants in NZ and therefore the indigenous people.

morepork,mackka,and

Posted on 17-11-2014 09:11 | By robin bell

good old jitter. Come on guys,what are you talking about. I don't 'push the Maori barrow',I simply counter your prejudice. New immigrants to N.Z.arrive accepting the status quo. Maori are NOT 'a special interest group' that is condescending twaddle. Maori are the co-founding,indigenous people of this Nation,and as such deserve respect for that at least. Central government has asked all local bodies,to voluntarily appoint Maori reps' to council,its not about voting power,its about their right to be 'at the table' Finally your use of the word Apartheid,is a joke (the Afrikaner Broederbond will be laughing up their sleeves)No one I have ever met desires that abomination. jitter read Peter Deys reference to the work of Janet Wilmshurst,in his current letter to the Ed' Robin Bell.

morepork,

Posted on 17-11-2014 09:30 | By robin bell

your understanding of your Nations history is,frankly appalling. I suggest you google N.Z. history,State Services Commission. One quick example of marginalisation. Ngai Tahu. The Crown 'purchased' 34.5 million acres for 14,750 Pounds. Ten per cent to be retained for Maori,Schools and hospital to be built by the crown. At the time Ngai Tahu had thriving business growing supplies for Whalers,sealers and New Immigrants. None of the above was carried out.Ngai Tahu lost everything. This unconscionable theft,has been acknowledged by the Crown and latterly compensated for,with agreed top ups to come. Robin Bell.

@Robin Bell

Posted on 17-11-2014 12:33 | By morepork

My knowledge of history is appalling? Your ability to have a coherent logical discussion is much worse and I see I am wasting my time even trying. Your response was an example that you yourself ackowledged has been reviewed and recompensed, just as I acknowledged injustices and a need for such recompense in my previous posts. You see it going on indefinitely with Maori becoming a degraded race of panhandlers living off the injustices of the past. I don't see that and neither do most Maori who have mana and a proud history. The nation can't afford it and it isn't necessary. I suggest you go and talk to some of the very successful Maori entrepreneurs and businesspeople who are very happy to move forward without handouts (deserved or otherwise). Social injustice has to be addressed without prejudice and ALL Kiwis who need help should get it.

Unanimous Rejection!

Posted on 17-11-2014 13:35 | By Mackka

Sanity has prevailed and TCC has unanimously rejected this proposition! Cheers TCC!! Miracles can happen!

Dear Mr Bell

Posted on 17-11-2014 13:37 | By Jitter

you continue to push racism/separatism in all you say. I have not mentioned arpartheid recently so I don't know where that comes from. I have read Janet Wilmhursts work which has a very narrow focus. No way does she convince me that "Maori" are the indigeonous people of NZ as the Maoriori arrived here at about the same time, according to Wilmhurst the late 1200s. Ngai Tahu did not own the South Island to begin with. They moved down from the North Island killing all in their path and then settled in the SI.Special "Maori" priveleges, are written into much of NZ legistlation so you cannot continue to say this does not exist. No other cultural group has these priveleges. Finally "Maori" have no more right than any other cultural group to be "appointed" to council.

Why can't they be voted in like everyone else...

Posted on 17-11-2014 19:31 | By drgoon

No special entry for Maori.... let them stand as everyone else does on their own merit. If they are worth having then they will need to make positive contributions to our society. I am against any special treatment and an easy way onto Council just because of race. What happened to the discrimination laws. Nobody should be discriminated against because of race. If Maori again get preferential treatment then that is discrimination against all other cultures in our community who have to abide by the Law. Is this one law for Maori and one law for the rest???

morepork,

Posted on 17-11-2014 19:45 | By robin bell

In a 'debate' such as this it is inevitable that sensitivities are damaged. I'm lucky,I have a very thick skin. It is also critically important to know the real facts,not simply 'opinion'The 1852 Constitution Act set up N.Zs. first parliament.Section 71 provided for Native Districts,own law,own economy, own customs etc. etc. Governor Grey refused to implement this, arguing that 'amalgamation of the races was proceeding well' Amalgamation was believed to be the only future for a race,otherwise thought to be doomed. N.Z. History on line. I do NOT make these things up,morepork,that is why I put my name to all I write. I truly wish you would do likewise. Robin Bell.

Dear Mr jitter

Posted on 17-11-2014 20:24 | By robin bell

I will not dignify your personal attack with any response. Perhaps you could supply the waiting fans,with the names and positions of the authorities who peer reviewed you 'assessment' of the works of Janet Wilmshurst. Your own 'qualifications' would also be a revelation. By the way Ngai Tahu were resident and widespread in the South Island long before the arrival of Europeans.FACT. How they got there is irrelevant' Sadly for you that makes them Indigenous. Robin Bell.

Janet Wilmhurst Papers

Posted on 18-11-2014 14:24 | By Jitter

Nobody peer reviewed my opinion after reading these papers. They were easy to read and understand so that is why I concluded they had a very narrow focus. Why after nearly 200 years should "Maori" (most of whom claim to be Maori have far less than 50% Maori ancestry) continue to be handed privileges over the rest of the population ? Indigenous or not isn't it time they/you stopped living in the past and moved into the 21st century.NZ will never move ahead if you and they continually try to drag the country back into the past and endeavour to force tribal rule on the country.'Maori' are currently 14.1% of the population (Stats NZ) so it is like the old saying it is the tail trying to wag the dog.

Mr jitter,

Posted on 19-11-2014 08:11 | By robin bell

you continue in your somewhat pathetic attempt to 'disappear' a whole race of people.No doubt you get your jollies that way. Every effort to justify your position has been discredited by fact. You and your friends morepork,d.r.goon etc suffer a very narrow understanding of democracy,which I believe is the basis of your confusion. Those Maori people who choose to live as Maori,have that right,you have no right to stop it. As a result of that they have the right to be represented in local and Central government.To deny them that,on a numerical basis,is tantamount to oppression. Robin Bell.

Anonymity

Posted on 19-11-2014 11:06 | By morepork

I don't understand why knowing who I am has any bearing on my posted argument, Robin. The posts stand or fall on their content and not on who wrote them. There are some places on the Net where I do use my true identity but that is in matters relating to my profession. As I live in Tauranga, and it is very likely that some of my posts will not sit well with some people, I prefer to claim the anonymity provided by Sun Live when posting here. It doesn't mean I have no courage of my convictions or am "hiding". Just that I recognise the Internet as a potentially dangerous place and consider others, who are are close to me, as well as myself. The decision taken by Council is a refreshing response to reason. Hopefully, Tangata Whenua will accept the challenge and post a candidate anyway.

Back to basics,morepork.

Posted on 19-11-2014 12:51 | By robin bell

The Maori people of N.Z have a basic right to appoint representatives,just as you and I do. In fact,this right was provided in the 19th. century. It is now seemingly under threat,yet again. You're clearly not stupid,but I firmly believe you to be misguided. Facts or fallacy shape opinion. Your opinion is,that T.C.C. has just made a 'refreshing' decision,when in fact,they have just denied local IWI the right to representation. You do the maths, morepork,then let me know how on earth can Maori expect to get anyone elected,on the basis of 'one man,woman one vote. You cannot force people to accept injustice,as you claim,but to deny basic human rights is far more dangerous. Perhaps your use of a nick-name will come in useful then. Robin Bell.

Back to basics 2

Posted on 19-11-2014 13:50 | By Fonzie

There are 120 MPs in parliament 26 are maori or call themselves such ie 21.66 percent representation There are 113 MPs who are not Maori electorate MPs 19 are Maori ie 16.8 percent representation Maori who identify as Maori Represent 14 percent of the population How do Maori expect to get representation? Very easily

Robin Bell

Posted on 19-11-2014 16:37 | By Jitter

I am not trying to stop in any way "Maori" representation on TCC. However if they want representation let them put forward candidates in the normal democratic manner. Then have their representative voted on. I have nothing at all against "Maori" living in their traditional way as long as they do no try to force this on everyone else as a number of their radicals want to do. I have not tried to "disappear" a whole race of people as you put it, but am just pointing out that "Maori" are a very small percentage of our multicultural population and this percentage is projected to decrease to 10% by 2026 (Stats NZ).Incidentally I have noted that where "Maori" have had representatives appointed to a number of governing boards etc they have chosen to appoint highly qualified Europeans. Why ?

Duplicitous thinking by

Posted on 19-11-2014 19:29 | By robin bell

jitter and fonzie. It is a simple fact of life for Maori in N.Z. that They are at the mercy of the dominant race. World events currently show how disastrous that can be. Maori elected in general seats have virtually no chance of,advancing legitimate concerns, ask yourselves what has Winston Peters done to advance his people,answer nothing. All of the current advances made,have come from confrontation or activism or both. The Maori Party has been at the forefront. Maori have no so called privileges simply targeted spending,within the general budget. If Maori could expect proper representation,government would not be recommending it. You will not force amalgamation,it is impossible. Robin Bell.

Wisechief

Posted on 20-11-2014 10:30 | By Wise Chief

Rather interesting observation recent immigrants from nowhere who have slithered into NZ and now drinking at the taxpayer trough which Maori though only some 14% of population contribute 20% + to National income pool not including rates paid throughout country. Yet according to angry mostly fraidy comments here, Maori as a minority in THEIR own land who cannot pack up and go back to the country of supposed ancestors like the intransigents or rather immigrants should not have the same comparative rights accorded the majority SETTLER pale crew to vote upon decisions which impact their lives and lands continually forever and a day going forwards etc. WHY SO ARE THEY DENIED EQUAL SAY? This denial is INSTITUTIONALISED APARTHEID written into law. Remember Regional Council here DOC, RMA Crown Mineral Act were direct rebuttals by fearful Government & Councils to Maori Claim for REDRESS made via Myself and Others. TRUTH

@ Fonie

Posted on 21-11-2014 04:25 | By YOGI BEAR

Maori seats were to be temporary for 2-3 elections in the 1860's yet they remain.This is crazy.They should have been deleted 140 years ago. The numbers of Maori voted in properly is 19/113 = 16.8% so Maori is properly and adequately represented already. The exclusive Maori seats must feel like an insult to the genuinely voted in 19 MP's.

(abridged - editor)

Robin Bell

Posted on 21-11-2014 09:06 | By drgoon

Thanks for pointing out my narrow view of demcracy. My mother is from Maori ancestry, my father was from the Cook Islands Maori. I believe I am very conversant with democracy and efforts to give equal representation to all groups in our community. To deny them (representation in local and central government) on a numerical basis,is tantamount to oppression.. let them seek representation through the same channels as everyone else. What you propose is unequal and discriminatory in a democratic society. Let me say it again... we, Maori, need to prove to ourselves that we can in our own right achieve equality.

Get a load of this ...

Posted on 21-11-2014 11:44 | By Murray.Guy

'Maori have no so called privileges simply targeted spending, within the general budget.' ... typical sadly of the quality of the one-eyed debate from most postings! Are Maori denied access based on cultural affiliation to ANY non-maori spending, entities, and or benefits? Not that I am aware of. Are Maori provided all manner of considerations that specifically EXCLUDE non-maori? The answer is YES! Until the day comes when debate based on this quality of contribution is noticeably absent, we will never collectively move forward in a manner that is respectful and based on best outcomes for all (as far as that is reasonably possible). As an aside but relevant, we don't hear the same angst in regard MMP which sets out in part to better ensure our governance structures better reflect the community (more MPs are female, cultures, Maori, hearing impaired etc). We have geographical representation (Wards).

drgoon,

Posted on 21-11-2014 14:08 | By robin bell

My observation on your 'narrow view of democracy' is based on what you write,I still have it. It is impossible to define democracy accurately. Some eminent people argue that democracy alone cannot provide political or personal freedom,unless institutions of civil society are adhered to. One such institution,The Human Rights Commission has recommended special seats for Maori,to overcome the obvious imbalance. The Majority rule,you advocate can and did lead to the so called 'tyranny of the majority' You made the choice to be what you are,why deny it to those who made a different choice? Robin Bell.

Murray Guy,

Posted on 22-11-2014 13:52 | By robin bell

Your negative judgment is one thing,evidence to back it up would be appreciated. Many of the so called race based laws,bandied around are not laws at all. The initiatives I speak of are all available to non Maori,most of whom choose, not to use them. My provocative style may well be somewhat difficult for you, I do it to counter the wishful thinking,you seem to represent. Robin Bell.

Drgoon

Posted on 22-11-2014 14:27 | By YOGI BEAR

I agree sir, correct on all counts.

drgoon,

Posted on 22-11-2014 21:40 | By robin bell

you must be thrilled to get yogi's endorsement.I suggest you read his ridiculous comments on other threads.Delusion is the sanctuary he indulges in,no place for you I suspect,or am I wrong again? Robin Bell.

@drgoon

Posted on 23-11-2014 13:05 | By morepork

I agree with your view and I suspect that many self-respecting Maori do too. There is no room for racism in NZ's future but we need a level playing field that is fair to ALL. Please see my response to Robin Bell. Many Maori are running successful businesses that are of benefit to the communities they run them in. Maori don't NEED further indefinite hand-outs and reparations, and the nation can't afford it. The Treaty has held us ALL back because of the time, energy, and money that has gone into arguing it. 170 years on the world has changed and we need to let it go. Social injustice needs to be addressed fairly for ALL and not on the basis of race or any other "qualifier". I'm proud to be a NZer and I'm proud to have Maoritanga as part of the culture that raised me.

robin........

Posted on 23-11-2014 17:23 | By groutby

Please, I ask yet again, what is "equality", for Maori have priviledge well above that of the people who saved them (you) from certain extinction?...is it money?..how much?..the Treaty Settlements are taking care of this, is it total Control of the Country under Maori rule?..what is it?..last time I asked for an answer you said "Justice"...define it in words please...bet you can't...

drgoon,more endorsment

Posted on 23-11-2014 20:41 | By robin bell

for your position.There is no question many Maori such as yourself have succeeded in the last 50 yrs. However,these people have benefited primarily from the changed circumstances bought about by Treaty settlements,Government policies,and United Nations pressure. Not the goodwill of people like morepork. Maori extremists are constantly given as a reason for the reaction we are witnessing. Some of the more extreme of your supporters would see a return to the days of marginalisation. Your choice. Robin Bell.

groutby,morepork,

Posted on 24-11-2014 11:14 | By robin bell

sadly money is your obsession. Since fair reparations started in earnest,around 1.5 billion has been paid. Most of it in 'kind' ie land returned. In total that amounts to less than $50 per head per annum. The use of emotive terms,such as Apartheid race based privilege, Maori elite etc simply reflect your inability to rationalise the true situation. Just today a Mayor of a large N.Island city,has called for Maori representation on Council,as usual Tauranga lags behind. Robin Bell.

Money obsessions?

Posted on 24-11-2014 17:12 | By YOGI BEAR

That is a bit strange and rich from you, it is clear that the money obsessions are via the Waitangi tribunal and the back door deals done based on myths and so on that Peter Dey for example says are not real. The mind boggles at how this comes about but also how that makes others money greedy ?

You and I,groutby

Posted on 24-11-2014 19:46 | By robin bell

didn't save Maori from extinction, if anything we contributed to their demise, almost. To answer your leading question, 'equality' and 'justice' are values held by fair minded people. Equality of opportunity is a better term. With the completion of the settlements, the ability to house their people (denied for generations),self confidence,from proper education,and targeted health care many Maori are now finding the pride,that you take for granted. You should be proud of our progress as a caring nation. Or are you? Robin Bell.

Yogi bear

Posted on 25-11-2014 08:01 | By robin bell

you finally admit you have a boggled mind. Not surprising then that you accuse me of being a beneficiary of settlement money,WRONG yet again,yogi. Settlements for stolen land, are not myths yogi. The proof is contained in government records,court documentation etc. You only have to look yogi,but then your boggled mind won't allow it. Tuff!!! Robin Bell.

Stick to the argument

Posted on 27-11-2014 09:39 | By Bestlife

@ Robin Bell Your comments are sometimes worth reading (even though we don't agree with them) until you attack the person and not their argument. You lose credibility then and obviously have lost the argument.

Winning or losing,

Posted on 27-11-2014 12:06 | By robin bell

is irrelevant bestlife. Yogi bear insults all things Maori, from their history to their right to just compensation,for stolen land. The references I make to his persona simply reflect my contempt for his use of race based insult. Robin Bell.