Thursday, 18 October 2012

Waitangi? It imposed no such obligation

I’m sorry, but this news this morning is ridiculous.

The Waitangi Tribunal has called on the Crown to apologise to the country's kohanga reo because they have suffered significant prejudice from early childhood policies of successive governments… The report follows a claim made to the tribunal by the Kohanga Reo National Trust last year.

“Prejudice”?!  Really?  What sort of “prejudice”? 

And a claim? A Waitangi claim?  About this? Have we gone mad?

The only prejudice I can see here is race-based early childhood centres set up and paid for by taxpayers on the basis of racial prejudice.

I have no problem at all with anyone wanting to send their children to early childhood centres using whatever language or languages they like. At that age children learn languages so easily, and the learning of them is so good for their development of literacy that introducing them to a wide range of languages is ideal.

But let’s not confuse that boon with the separatist aims of these race-based schools. Their aim is not literacy, but separatism.

[The Tribunal report says however] government policies have failed to support the Maori language immersion centres and to recognise their special role.

It would be far more accurate to say parents themselves have failed to support the centres by sending their children to them in large enough numbers, and the Kohanga Reo movement has failed those parents who do send them to their centres by filling them with teachers not fit for the role.

If there’s an apology needed here, it’s to parents from the movement for failing their children.

And what  “special” role do these centres have? What could possibly be so “special” about them it needs to be recognised by government, apologised for by past governments, and paid for (through the nose) by taxpayers? Here’s your answer:

Kohanga reo are so important for the survival of te reo Maori, [says the Tribunal’s report], that the Crown's obligation to protect the language extends to kohanga too.

What “obligation” is that then? An “obligation” to “protect the language”? Where does this obligation come from? Well, remember that the Waitangi Tribunal is not just a race-based talking shop. It is also a supralegal body, with its opinions not grounded not in prejudice but in law.  At least in theory. So this is a legal obligation they’re talking about.

And the law they point to? You guessed it: Te Tiriti, in which the British Government promised to protect Maori property. Except since Maori had no concept of “property,” the explicit concept “property” was translated as the vague and indefinable concept “taonga”—allowing gravy-train riders ever since to define and re-define and all along the line to claim government protection (and taxpayer resources) for whatever “treasures” they feel like.

Including language.

It gets worse:

The Tribunal found that the Crown’s early childhood education system … had failed to adequately sustain the specific needs of kōhanga reo as an environment for language transmission and whānau development. These failures constituted breaches of the Treaty principles of partnership and equity.

What “breach” is this then? Of the treaty principle of “partnership”?!

But the Treaty has no principle of partnership. It neither mentioned nor implied partnership. In three short articles it simply offered the introduction of British law, and the rights and protections that were then protected by British law. One law for all, you might say.

The Treaty which was drawn up and signed talked neither about race nor culture nor any partnership between them—nor about any permanent welfare, or a tax-paid gravy train into perpetuity.  Like British law itself at the time it was colour blind, and welfare-free.  What it promised was not the politics of either race or welfarism but the simple legal promise of protection of the rights of all, regardless of race, creed or skin colour.

This principle of partnership supposedly appearing in the Treaty, on the back of which so much garbage has been said and so many millions given away, is a myth. A modern myth.

A myth made up from whole cloth by modern politicians for reasons of political expediency.

If they do have anything in this about which to actually apologise , they could start there.



  1. The "treaty" and the "tribunal" should be DUMPED NOW!

  2. Wholeheartedly agree.

    I've been dumbstruck with the absolute silence on this today.

    I was thinking "where is the common sense in New Zealand any more?" Until your comment, no-one in the entire country has blinked at this national stupidity. Congrats on speaking up.

    It's like it's so damned expected as to be "normalised" New Zealand affairs.

    If it's got anything to do with Maori, never mind what has actually taken place, we whities need to apologise for it.

    I have nothing to apologise to Maori for. We took 5,000 - 10,000 years to advance from stone age to modern times. And the process was not a painless one. There were many, many pitfalls and magnificent disasters along the way.

    We handed the same advance to Maori on a platter all within the space of 200 years, and all they can do is bitch and complain and never acknowledge the progress they have been handed on a platter. And New Zealanders are so brainwashed into actually believing they have something to apologise for.

    We took Maori New Zealand from "Rule of War" to "Rule of Law" virtually overnight, and we have to apologise for it? Bugger that.

    Bring on the revolution to stop this politically correct bullshit.

    And just by the way, in the world advance from stone age to modernity, we probably lost as many as tens of thousands of languages along the way - so what! Where's the recognition of our losses to get where we are now.

    New Zealanders. You are baked in the heads for allowing things to get this far out of hand and out of reality.

  3. ""Iwas thinking "where is the common sense in New Zealand any more?""

    It has gorn (well, come..) to Australia I'm afraid. How many of those 50,000 pepole a year move across here to get away from that Treay shit. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

    NZ- such a basket case its just not worth living there anymore!

  4. KP, I'll call your bluff.

    If we fix the Treaty bullcrap, (and some of us are working on it), will you come back home?

  5. We need a referendum on the Treaty—whether it should be retained or scrapped. (I vote scrap it.)

    There should be just one NZ citizen in Law, with no reference to colour, racial derivation, religion—one citizen under the impartial protection of the law; and the law to protect the rights of the Individual.

    While I'm here I may as well wish for a Lotto win ...


1. Comments are welcome and encouraged.
2. Comments are moderated. Gibberish, spam & off-topic grandstanding will be removed. Tu quoque will be moderated. Links to bogus news sites (and worse) will be deleted.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say it, it's important enough to put a name to it.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.