‘Full and final’ foolery

There has been a lot of foolery expressed over the supposed ‘full and final’ Waitangi settlements made between the Crown and Ngai Tahu and Tainui.

Stuff stirs this up with Ngāi Tahu and Tainui receive $370 million in Treaty payment top-ups, with more to come

Ben Thomas points that ‘full and final’ included provisions for additional payments, so those payments are not on top of their agreements, they are a part of their agreements.

Helped by headlines many have been fooled by what ‘full and final’ means – which is false representation.

26 Comments

  1. sorethumb

     /  January 21, 2018

    Full and final means “for now”.

  2. Corky

     /  January 21, 2018

    I’ve said repeatedly the key to understanding the treaty gravy train is to study Ngai Tahu’s treaty settlement. One of over seven

  3. Strong For Life

     /  January 21, 2018

    It may be “false representation” from Stuff but the issue has been ineptly handled by Mr Little. The additional payments are part of the treaty agreements the tribes signed so why did Mr Little keep it quiet? He should have told the public about the payments when they were made. By keeping quiet about the payments it now looks as if there was something to hide.

    • Blazer

       /  January 21, 2018

      how is it…kept quiet?The parties to the agreement the Crown and the tribes had absolutely nothing to..hide.

      • Strong For Life

         /  January 21, 2018

        Clearly you have not read the article. The details of the payment were hidden from the public and tribal members. Mr Little’s reasoning as to why the payments were not announced, stated in final paragraph below, is non-sensical.

        https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/100542696/ngi-tahu-and-tainui-receive-370-million-in-treaty-payment-topups-with-more-to-come

        “The Government made the payments on December 15 without any public announcement, but they were discovered by Stuff and confirmed by the Office of Treaty Settlements this week.
        In response to Stuff’s inquiries, Ngāi Tahu released information about the payout to its 58,000 iwi members, who hadn’t been told about it.”

        “Treaty Negotiations Minister Andrew Little said no-one had expressed unhappiness to him, although several members of the new Government were unaware of the clauses. 
        He said the payments were agreed by Cabinet and would have been made public, but the timing wasn’t right. “We didn’t want to look like we were burying a significant announcement in that final rush to Christmas.”

    • Corky

       /  January 21, 2018

      There is something to hide..legal rorting of the taxpayer. That’s one reason I have much respect for Don Brash. He calls this bs when he sees it. And gets hammered for pointing out the obvious.

      I’m just trying to remember who signed off on this rort. I think it was Lord Montrose.. Bloody Tories.

  4. PartisanZ

     /  January 21, 2018

    If the original payments of 1.2 cents-in-the-dollar of the present-day value of confiscated land and other money-measurable grievance issues has perhaps been topped-up to 3 cents-in-the-dollar, the ‘New Zealand’ taxpayer is still doing pretty damn well out of it …

    • Corky

       /  January 21, 2018

      What about Maori confiscation of other Maori tribal lands? When are they going to pay compensation? How many times does the taxpayer have to settle? Over seven? Bear in mind many Maori claims have been hotly contested in court, but no one seems interested in evidence not supporting Maori claims and narratives.

      We as a country aren’t moving forward as long as this bs is operating.

      • PartisanZ

         /  January 21, 2018

        I already know this is a waste of my time and energy, but for some reason I keep coming back for more …

        @Corky – “What about Maori confiscation of other Maori tribal lands?”

        That’s between them, surely? This also answers the “when are they going to pay” question.

        “How many times …?” Okay, firstly, these are payments under one agreed settlement, so the taxpayer does not have to settle over and over. Also the process of “settlement” has become [deliberately] confused with ‘giving’ taxpayers money to Maori.

        The taxpayer isn’t giving Maori anything they don’t deserve, we’re ‘giving back’ what the Crown stole or illegally confiscated. We’re returning to Maori what is rightfully theirs.

        You’ll have to cite examples of Claims being contested in Court for me to understand what you mean. If you’re on about Allan Titford …. don’t bother … If you’re on about claims of Waitaha, Patupaiarehe, Celtic, Chinese and other earlier inhabitants …. also don’t bother.

        Many Maori are contemplating a “post-grievance” future around things like Wai 262, Matike Mai (Constitutional transformation) and long-term planning … One Taranaki iwi apparently has a 300 year future plan …. Oh that Pakeha could conceive of such wisdom!?

        What are you doing …?

        • Gezza

           /  January 21, 2018

          Tau toko all that. I flagged it away. Never seen anyone opposed to these settlements change their stance no matter what is said & you get tired af butting your head against brick walls. But I forget there are others who read & don’t comment, & plenty who don’t have any problems at all with our redressing these historic thefts & injustices. Brilliant summary there, PZ.

          • Conspiratoor

             /  January 21, 2018

            ‘Brilliant summary’. No it wasn’t, but it was typically patronising

            “I already know this is a waste of my time and energy, but for some reason I keep coming back for more”

            Hint for partisanz …don’t come back

            • Gezza

               /  January 21, 2018

              Sorry. I’m watching Lord of the Rings 3.
              I’ll probably miss seeing this.

            • PartisanZ

               /  January 22, 2018

              And I suspect C probably missed ‘getting it’ Gezza …

              Even you are not usually this subtle …

            • Gezza

               /  January 22, 2018

              I never saw LOTR 3. I have to say, it was far too bloody long, a lot of the scenes with Frodo in them were boringly unnecessary, Frodo is a fecking pansy & a half-wit – anybody could see that Smeagle/Gollum was an evil, lying, devious little shit who couldn’t be trusted, and Sam is the real, unrecognised hero who ultimately saved everybody.

            • PartisanZ

               /  January 22, 2018

              That’s the best review of LOTR 3 I have ever read Gezza … Superb!

              Were there any trolls …?

              I remember almost nothing about it … after seeing it 5 times …

            • Gezza

               /  January 22, 2018

              Yes there were trolls. They are the really big ugly fuckers who were pushing the seige towers up to the walls. Gandalf told the archers to aim for the trolls. They were also the first shock troops to enter thru the smashed open gates of Gondor. They’re grunters.

            • PartisanZ

               /  January 22, 2018

              I thort so …

        • Corky

           /  January 22, 2018

          ”I already know this is a waste of my time and energy, but for some reason I keep coming back for more …”

          I know that feeling too, but sometimes I fail and come back for more. Maybe we should just call it quits on this subject?

          My questions are simplistic because i try to compress a tomb of reading and experience in the land court into simple form.

          ”What about Maori confiscation of other Maori tribal lands?”

          ‘That’s between them, surely? This also answers the “when are they going to pay” question.”

          My point here: Maori aren’t called to account even though friendly Maori in some instances helped colonial forces with their agendas. The modern tax payers must, by
          way of a flawed constitutional agreement pay taxpayer dollars to Maori, for both real and perceived wrongs. That some hapu claiming under the treaty have no one in their grouping who can speak Maori, and need Europeans to research their supposed grievance is conveniently forgotten in court. I guess I’m arguing the socialist principle of being ‘fair,’ given Maori were still land grabbing during earlier colonial times.

          And about this treaty. Not signed by all tribes; disagreement on interpretation; disagreement on which draft is correct, and most importantly, it’s not ratified. Yet we have a whole legal process based on this, and you say:

          ”The taxpayer isn’t giving Maori anything they don’t deserve, we’re ‘giving back’ what the Crown stole or illegally confiscated. We’re returning to Maori what is rightfully theirs.”

          So confident. so sure and so arrogant… the sign of a fanatic.

          • PartisanZ

             /  January 22, 2018

            Just a couple of things Corky …

            The Crown [British] created the complex web of intrigue known as the Maori Land Court and ethnicity has nothing whatever to do with either taking advantage of it – which let’s face it was overwhelmingly done by Pakeha – or unraveling its machinations for ToW claims …

            The Crown decided that Te Tiriti o Waitangi was binding upon all Maori hapu iwi including the whole South Island by ‘right of discovery’. The not-everyone-signed argument is a dead duck. We have established agreement about the meaning … Maori did not cede sovereignty …

            There’s really only a couple of things a person or polity can do when they’ve done wrong … one is make amends …

  5. Gezza

     /  January 21, 2018

    After 20 minutes of Googling looking for a full list of Treaty Settlements this was the only list I could find – and it’s only to 2008. Pretty slack that the Office of Treaty Settlements doesn’t have one & with link to it on their home page.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Waitangi_claims_and_settlements#List_of_Treaty_Settlements

  6. Alan Wilkinson

     /  January 21, 2018

    To be fair, I doubt that the Treaty gravy train will cost NZ a fraction of the cost of the RMA gravy train. Or the climate gravy train if Labour manages to get it out of the station.

  7. Ray

     /  January 21, 2018

    It is lucky that it was only the two Settlements that had this clause as it ignores the fact that Kai Tahu at least have done very well with the received monies with the right of purchase of redundant crown properties being very profitable and some very good management.
    Add in later Settlements increases due to inflation and you have a double dip, legal and still only cents in the dollar I might add.

  1. ‘Full and final’ foolery — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition