Don Brash’s Waitangi speech – out of date, out of touch

PartisanZ / February 6, 2019

Extraordinary … I just now watched Don Brash’s whole speech on FaceBook …

He began by presenting his kaupapa, which was perfectly reasonable: How can Ngapuhi and Maori improve their economic position … and economics in general …

Then he immediately diverged from his stated kaupapa. He proceeded first to insult his hosts, by expressing his ‘opinion’ on the general uselessness of their language, te reo – “tee ray oh” – and then went on a series of misguided and equally insulting tangents … most with thinly veiled insulting anecdotes …

The crowd were surprisingly restrained … They were kind to him, relatively speaking ,,,

Gezza:

Frankly, I can see where Parti’s coming from. Don’s speech really is out of date & I think completely misses the bus on the issue of Te Reo,

There are some points he raises which at least I can argue are a valid way of looking at issues of Maori “welfare dependency”, but it certainly has the rather out of date tone of a patronising lecture.

It’s hardly surprising it stoked up some heckling.

It’s not clear to me whether Don delivered this speech in its entirety or not. Parti claimed he did get to finish it, the Herald says he didn’t.

I think that Don Brash should have been given a fair go with his speech at Waitangi yesterday – but it highlighted how out of touch he is.


Brash at Waitangi: Where to now?

Tena koutou ki a koutou a Ngapuhi

E hari ana taku ngakau ki te mihi atu ki a koutou

He iwi kotahi tatou

No reira tena koutou.

Can I begin my comments today by saying how much I appreciate your invitation? I have no doubt that some of you see me as a racist of the worst kind. It is a great tribute to you that you are nevertheless willing to have me here today, at this place of great importance in our history, even though you may disagree with me on a whole raft of fundamental issues.

Perhaps we are continuing a tradition which dates back to 1840, to the Treaty which we remember this week, when people with very different views met and reached an agreement which affects all our lives to this day.

So I thank you for inviting me to speak.

When Rueben Taipari invited me, he suggested I touch briefly on my own background – he had recently read my autobiography, and suggested that there were aspects of my life which most people are not aware of.

And he suggested I should comment on how Ngapuhi, and perhaps Maori New Zealanders generally, can best improve their economic status. I’m willing to do that, though I will do so with great trepidation. I don’t know nearly enough about the circumstances of your iwi and hapu to do that with confidence, so my observations will be tentative.

Before I do either of those things, let me briefly comment on my views on Te Reo. You will have heard, and perhaps been surprised, that I began today with a mihi. Yes, I can, when properly coached by a Ngapuhi chief, say a few words in Te Reo!

And to be perfectly clear, I was enthusiastic to do so in this context.

I have absolutely nothing against the Maori language and for many New Zealanders it is a vital part of who they are.

What I have objected to is two things.

First, the use of the Maori language where almost nobody can understand it seems to me to be totally inappropriate. When I was young – and that’s quite a few years ago now! – if anyone spoke in Maori in an environment where at best a tiny minority understood it they immediately translated. I thank the organisers of events this year for providing simultaneous translation earpieces to those of us who don’t speak Te Reo.

I first made a comment on this issue in relation to the use of Te Reo on Radio New Zealand, or RNZ as they now prefer to be called. I came across the same issue two weeks ago when I was briefly in China. I had reason to call the New Zealand embassy in Beijing, and was astonished to find that the phone was answered with a message in Te Reo, followed by one in English, and followed finally by one in Mandarin. I would guess that not one person in a thousand calling the New Zealand embassy in Beijing understands Te Reo.

Secondly, I have spoken out strongly against making the teaching of Te Reo mandatory, as some politicians and others now advocate. I am entirely comfortable with taxpayers providing funding to teach Te Reo to those who want to learn it, and to fund Maori TV and a number of Maori language radio stations – it is a valuable treasure to many New Zealanders.

But it seems to me that for most New Zealanders it has no practical value. As you might expect from a person with an economics training, I look at the cost of every new proposal – and by cost I don’t just mean the dollar cost, but the opportunity cost. What do we have to drop from the school curriculum in order to make time to teach Te Reo? Do we have less maths, less history, less science, less physical education? Something would have to be dropped to make space to teach Te Reo.

Without question the most important language for all New Zealanders to speak, read and write fluently is English – not just because it is the predominant language of this country but also because it is the only truly international language.

Chinese is the most widely spoken first language in the world, followed in turn by Spanish and then by English.

But the total of those who speak English exceeds that of any other language.

When I was Governor of the Reserve Bank, I used to attend annual meetings of the central bank governors from the entire Asian region – from Mongolia in the north, through East Asia, South-East Asia, Australia and New Zealand, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Iran – a huge sweep of mankind. Every meeting was conducted in English, with no translation provided. It was just assumed that everybody who had reached the status of central bank governor could speak English.

English is the language of international commerce and of science. It is the language of aviation. When a Lufthansa plane, with a German pilot, lands in Frankfurt, the pilot speaks to ground control in English. Legislation in India is in English. In Singapore, it is compulsory for everybody to learn English.

Tragically, too many New Zealanders don’t have the strong knowledge of English they need to prosper in the modern economy. I have never forgotten being told by the manager of a small company in Hawke’s Bay that he couldn’t hire most of those who applied for a job as a forklift truck driver because they couldn’t read well enough – couldn’t read labels on the pallets, couldn’t read the safety instructions.

It was for good reason that in decades past some Maori parents insisted that their children learn English: English was the passport to the modern world. It still is, and it probably will be for the next century at least.

As I’ve mentioned, in inviting me to speak today Rueben Taipari said that he had recently read my autobiography. He said it showed a side of Don Brash that most people are not aware of.

So let me briefly, and in the Maori tradition, explain where I’ve come from.

I called my book “Incredible Luck”. And I called it that because I’ve been extremely lucky in many different ways.

First, like everybody else, I’m lucky to be alive. When you think about how many things had to happen for each of us to be born – for our parents to meet, for our grandparents to meet, for our great-grandparents to meet, and so on back through thousands of generations – the odds against being born who we are are absolutely extraordinary.

Second, like all of us here, I was born into the most extraordinary time and place in human history. When your ancestors arrived in this country centuries ago, it was by means of a dangerous sea voyage which lasted weeks if not months. When my ancestors arrived here in the 19th century, they too would have endured months of difficult and unpleasant travel. Today, we take safe and fast air travel for granted; we take for granted being able to communicate without cost with people on the other side of the world – I was coached on the mihi with which I began my speech today by a Ngapuhi chief talking from the other side of the world while he was visiting Beijing. We take for granted that we can watch events on the other side of the globe from the comfort of our homes. It never occurs to us that we might die of a tooth infection. Just a century ago, a tooth infection could be fatal.

And while New Zealand is a long way from being perfect, it is nevertheless a place where all children are provided with almost free education, where healthcare is highly subsidized, where our daughters have the same opportunities as our sons, where nobody is jailed for criticizing the Prime Minister. It’s a country ranked by the Legatum Institute in London as the second most prosperous country on the planet, behind only Norway. (That is not to say our per capita income is the second highest on the planet – the assessment included a range of other factors measuring the quality of life, what the Prime Minister might describe as “wellbeing”.)

Indeed, when Jeremy Clarkson, the star of Top Gear, visited New Zealand a few years ago, he said that visiting our country made him question the wisdom of God. If God really did have perfect knowledge and perfect foresight, why would he have his only son born in a lousy place like Bethlehem, when he could have been born in Palmerston North?

Your ancestors no doubt signed the Treaty for a variety of reasons, but none of those who signed 179 years ago could have imagined the vast improvements in the status of women, the enormous improvements in healthcare and life expectancy, or the benefits which modern science has conferred on all of us. Yes, some of us have benefited to a greater extent than others, but all of us are vastly better off today than our ancestors were in 1840.

But third, I have been lucky because of the parents I had. They were not wealthy. My father was a Presbyterian minister on a very modest salary; my mother was trained as a milliner and, until well into mid-life, had only a single year of high school education. Until I was at high school, most of my clothes were made by my mother. Every week we had one or two meatless days – allegedly because that was good for our health, but in retrospect I realise that that was at least in part because we couldn’t afford meat every day. And I regard that background as one of my huge advantages: I learnt that nobody owed me a living.

Rueben pointed out to me that my autobiography also admitted to failures in my life, and yes, I’ve had many of those.

I structured most of my book around a metaphor. In the 1960s, the US Air Force developed an experimental aircraft called the Bell X-15, designed to test the strength of various alloys at very high speeds. The Bell X-15 still holds the record for the fastest manned flight ever. It reached an altitude of 100 kilometres – some ten times the altitude at which commercial jets typically fly – and speeds of 7,000 kilometres per hour.

But it only reached that altitude, and reached those speeds, because it was launched by being dropped from another aircraft at 40,000 feet. I felt that, by being born in New Zealand with the parents I had, I had the advantage of being launched from 40,000 feet, and I analysed my life into what I regarded as successful “flights”, partially successful “flights”, and dismal failures. I won’t recount those failures now, but there were plenty of them! I console myself with the thought that those who’ve never made mistakes haven’t been brave enough!

So much for my personal story. Rueben suggested that as Ngapuhi wait, and wait, for their turn at settling with the Crown, I should make some observations about how to improve the economic status of Maori New Zealanders, and Ngapuhi in particular. As I’ve said, I’m willing to do that, though I do so with great trepidation.

The first observation I want to make, however, I make with some confidence. Most Maori New Zealanders will never become economically prosperous through Treaty settlements.

Nobody knows at this stage what the total of all Treaty settlements will be. But let’s suppose it’s $5 billion – five times the original so-called “fiscal envelope” that Jim Bolger envisaged back in the nineties. Let’s assume also that that total is invested to yield an average of 5% per annum in perpetuity. And finally let’s assume that 15% of New Zealanders, or some 750,000 people, are entitled to a share of that. That would increase the annual income of each Maori New Zealander by the grand total of just $333 – better than a kick in the pants but certainly not enough to transform the economic status of Maori New Zealanders. (Incidentally, I owe this insight to Ngati Porou leader Sir Rob McLeod.)

So waiting around for a Treaty settlement would be a tragic mistake. Of course, for some Maori the Treaty settlements have been the source of considerable income – they are the directors of the companies established to manage the assets received in Treaty settlements and their legal advisers (both Maori and non-Maori).

But for far too many Maori the Treaty settlements have delivered little or nothing – just walk down the main street of Huntly to see what I mean, despite the very substantial settlements which Tainui has received.

And to the extent that some Maori New Zealanders have been lulled into the false notion that their prosperity will be assured once the Treaty settlement has been made, the long-drawn-out settlement process has almost certainly done lasting damage to the economic well-being of Maori.

That was one of the two reasons why, when I was National Party leader last decade, I committed the next National Party Government to a policy involving one further year to lodge a grievance and a maximum of five further years to resolve all outstanding grievances. I believed it was crucial for Maori that the process was hastened, because as long as too many Maori retained the false notion that their economic prosperity would be assured once the settlement had been made, there was a risk that too many Maori would remain passive, waiting around for their Treaty settlement, and that would be totally contrary to the interests of Maori.

(The other reason why I wanted to put a finite deadline on the settlement process was because I knew that the longer the process dragged on, the more impatient the Pakeha community would become, wrongly believing that a high proportion of all tax revenue would be devoted to compensation.)

More generally, there must be at least serious doubt whether the positive discrimination intended by successive governments over the last half century to assist the economic status of Maori New Zealanders has actually worked as intended.

More than a year ago, The Economist magazine had an article about the effects of positive discrimination in favour of Malays in Malaysia. The article noted that the positive discrimination had been introduced with the very best of intentions, to improve the lot of Malays as compared with other Malaysians, mainly Chinese and Indians. But the effect had been to benefit a small minority of Malays, while leaving most of the Malay population not much better off.

And that experience is surely directly relevant to New Zealand, with more and more special programmes reserved for those who chance to have a Maori ancestor. These include:

– different entry standards to medical school and some law faculties,
– appointments to local government committees without democratic process,
– required representation on every government board or agency,
– separate government funding for Maori tourism,
– exemption from corporate tax for the businesses arising out of Treaty settlements,
– taxpayer funding for customary marine title claims,
– a legal requirement that Maori have special entitlement to be consulted on environmental planning laws, and
– mandatory respect for Maori spiritual rites and process despite New Zealand’s officially being a secular society.

As in Malaysia, these benefits were originally intended to lift the incomes of Maori New Zealanders, which on average lagged behind those of other New Zealanders. But they have now come to be regarded by a great many Maori as privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of landing in New Zealand prior to European and other settlers.

And who benefits from these race-based entitlements? Assuredly not most ordinary Maori.

Not only have most Maori not benefited at all from this growing affirmative action, many have been positively harmed by it.

Why? Because it has led many Maori to assume that other taxpayers owe them a living, and that in due course other taxpayers will have to discharge that obligation.

What on earth could be more demotivating than to be told, again and again, that your poor education, your poor housing, your low income or inability to get a job is not your responsibility at all – it’s the fault of a grossly unfair system arising from injustices done to some of your great-grandparents by some of your other great-grandparents?

It is surely not in the least surprising that too many people with a Maori ancestor are unemployed and poorly educated – the present environment positively encourages helplessness.

It is significant that Maori New Zealanders who migrate to Australia often do much better than those they leave behind. To some extent, that is because those who have the courage and the initiative to take themselves off to a new country are almost by definition those with “get up and go”, and so more likely to succeed wherever they end up.

But I suspect that part of the reason why Maori New Zealanders in Australia seem to be more economically successful than those they leave behind is that those who migrate know they can’t look to anybody but themselves for their success: the Australian government doesn’t owe them anything more than it owes any other immigrants.

I have always believed that government should lend a helping hand to those who are down on their luck, those who are sick and those who are otherwise unable to help themselves – hopefully in a manner that doesn’t demotivate the recipients of that help. But I believe it is absolutely fundamental that that help should be based on need, and not on ethnicity.

It is a huge tragedy for all New Zealanders that we appear to be on the same destructive path that Malaysia is on. Unless we move decisively to a new path, it will not end well for most Maori.

Not only does positive discrimination create a demotivating sense of entitlement, it is also patronising – it appears to imply that without such positive discrimination Maori New Zealanders can’t quite make it, that they’re not as capable as other citizens. If I were Maori, I would find this grossly insulting. We know, from the huge success of many Maori in New Zealand and internationally, that they are as capable as any other New Zealanders. Just look at how many political leaders in Parliament are Maori – a quarter of the total, including the leaders, deputy leaders, or co-leaders of every party in Parliament! Constantly suggesting that Maori need special assistance to compete with others is insulting and demotivating.

Moreover, as one Maori elder pointed out to me recently, we know from history that those who succeed most spectacularly are often those who, far from being the beneficiaries of special entitlements, are the victims of political persecution and discrimination – think of the enormous success of the Jewish people, in science, in banking, in retailing, in technology and in economics. They didn’t achieve those things through positive discrimination – they achieved them despite being the victims of widespread anti-Jewish sentiment and sometimes violent persecution.

On a smaller scale, the Quakers and the Huguenots had similar success despite, or perhaps even because of, the discrimination to which they were subjected.

A crutch may sometimes be essential, but becoming dependent on a crutch never enables its user to walk unaided, let alone to run.

Let me make one other point about the dangers of dependence. Many years ago, at the advent of the modern welfare state, Sir Apirana Ngata, in my opinion one of New Zealand’s greatest Maori leaders – and a man I was privileged to put on New Zealand’s $50 bank note – warned of the serious damage which the welfare state would do to Maori society. He believed that readily available welfare would erode the proud tradition of independence which most Maori had. And I believe his warning has been amply borne out, with a disproportionately high proportion of those on the unemployment benefit, and on the single parent benefit, being Maori.

Decades after he gave that warning, when I was Governor of the Reserve Bank, I met with a prominent kuia at her request. She wanted to talk about Maori unemployment. After a very long discussion, I finally asked her what she would want me to do if by some chance I found myself in the position of a benevolent dictator. Without hesitating she replied “Abolish the dole with effect from the first of January”.

I thought at first she was joking, and asked her to explain herself. She said that “Unfortunately too many of my people don’t have many skills. They can’t live well on the dole but with three or four of them in the same house all getting the dole, and a few under the table cash jobs, they can live adequately on the dole, and that’s a disaster.” She was deadly serious, and in a sense was simply echoing what Sir Apirana Ngata said 80 years ago.

I don’t believe New Zealand can abolish the dole, but I have a good deal of sympathy with politicians like Shane Jones who make it quite clear that one of his main objectives in politics is to “get the bro’s off the couch”. And I suspect he wants to achieve that not to save money for taxpayers, though it would do that also, but rather because life on the dole is obviously leading nowhere, or at least nowhere good. It’s a shameful waste of young Maori lives.

Today, I’ve suggested that Treaty settlements, no matter how generous, will not provide economic prosperity for most Maori. I’ve suggested that positive discrimination may hurt more than it helps.

Well, what would help? I hope that Ngapuhi can quickly reach agreement with Government on the terms of their Treaty settlement so that you can start looking ahead, not backwards. I hope that we can all accept that Maori New Zealanders are every bit as competent as other New Zealanders, so that we can move to helping people on the basis of their need, not on the basis of who some of their ancestors were.

But beyond that, what would help? I don’t think any outsider, no matter how well qualified, is able to suggest particular industries that you should invest in. And I’m not qualified to comment, for example, on whether the law needs to be changed to enable Maori to make better use of communally-owned land, though the Government announcement of a few days ago, providing taxpayer money to Maori enterprises where banks are reluctant to lend, certainly suggests this is an urgent need.

But what I would say without any fear of being contradicted is that in the 21st century being well educated is an absolutely crucial ingredient to economic success. That does not necessarily mean getting a tertiary qualification, but it does mean coming out of secondary school having a strong ability to read, to write, and to reason logically.

And for that reason I think it is a matter of enormous regret that the current Government has been so strongly opposed to partnership schools – on the evidence to date, those schools provided enormous benefits to those pupils lucky enough to get into them, and that appeared to be especially true for those Maori pupils who were not well served by the traditional state schools. (I seem to recall that the Member of Parliament for Northland, now Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, said he would resign if a Labour-led Government abolished partnership schools.)

Finally, let me make a few closing remarks about where we are as a country.

I think we are at quite a dangerous junction. Many Maori New Zealanders feel they have been left behind by the rest of the country and perhaps that’s an especially strong feeling up here in Northland. Too many Maori are unemployed; too many Maori are in prison; too many Maori are coming out of school unable to read and write; too many Maori are living in poverty. Too much of what successive governments have tried to do to help hasn’t helped, and in some cases has positively hurt.

On the other hand, many non-Maori New Zealanders have become increasingly impatient with the never-ending Treaty settlement process, and more particularly impatient with the constitutional preferences which have increasingly been written into law.

A great many New Zealanders reject any notion that the Treaty of Waitangi created a “partnership” between Maori and the Crown, a partnership which has been described as absurd by politicians as different as David Lange and Winston Peters. Yet this is the interpretation which is more and more taken as the foundation of Government policy.

At some point, hopefully soon, we will need to determine whether we really believe in Article III of the Treaty. That affirmed the equality of political rights for all New Zealanders. At that point we really will be able to say, with Governor Hobson, “he iwi tahi tatou”, “we are now one people”.

Don Brash, February 5, 2019

Leave a comment

128 Comments

  1. Gezza

     /  6th February 2019

    Hope Blazer doesn’t mind. I’m taking the liberty of re-posting this comment of his just posted in Open Forum, because I think this is also a valid way of looking at Don’s speech.

    Blazer / February 6, 2019
    Brash ex leader of the National Party…is a racist…but a very polite…racist.

    Reply
    • Gerrit

       /  6th February 2019

      I struggle with the notion that wanting equality for all races is racist. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  6th February 2019

        Well, I could pick it apart I suppose because parts of it aren’t but the tone of the speech is that Maori language is of little or no value to anyone but Maori and shouldn’t be spoken as a greeting in embassies (absurd, imo) and it has the flavour of lumping nearly all Maori together as a group which he then criticises. It’s not a big thing for me. I don’t think he’s racist, personally. I’m just saying I can see how some, particularly Maori, might perceive him as such.

        Reply
        • Gerrit

           /  6th February 2019

          Did you read the full context of the Brash speech regarding Te Reo as posted above and re-posted by me below. He did not say it had little value.

          Actual quote from the speech;

          “I have absolutely nothing against the Maori language and for many New Zealanders it is a vital part of who they are.”

          Reply
        • Trevors_Elbow

           /  6th February 2019

          Oh bollocks Gezza… he said it was a treasure – its there in the text in the post above. He did say it is of little value in day to day activity…which is on the money and he gave the context for why he thinks that…namely English is an International language for trade, science and transportation….

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  6th February 2019

            Certainly a shame I didn’t learn it. There was a fair bit of discussion going on in Maori at Te Tii from the little bit of Te Kaea on Maori tv that I saw before shooting down to ma’s for din dins about a possible change of Treaty Negotiations Minister, with possibly Shane Jones stirring the pot, but only some of the reporting had subtitles. This wasn’t being reported in the msm.

            Reply
  2. Gerrit

     /  6th February 2019

    Was his speech actually out off touch?

    Here in South Auckland’s many ethnic communities, his speech rings out true, especially;

    “On the other hand, many non-Maori New Zealanders have become increasingly impatient with the never-ending Treaty settlement process, and more particularly impatient with the constitutional preferences which have increasingly been written into law.”

    There seems to be a growing groundswell off opinion in the community, that somewhere a line has to be drawn.

    It will be “out of touch” with those who can not and will not move forwards towards an equal society irrespective of race. The fact that his voice was drowned out is a reflection of the divide and bitterness within Ngapuhi (one invites and another disrupts).

    A chance for Ngapuhi to listen, debate and persuade Brash towards the Ngapuhi way of thinking was truly lost. As was the notion that a Marai is a place where dialog happens, issues are discussed and differing opinions offered and respected.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  6th February 2019

      telling people their language is redundant and of no use is glaringly…racist.

      Reply
      • Gerrit

         /  6th February 2019

        Is it? Or a reality check. Where did he say it was redundant? Where did he say it was of no use? I read:

        “Before I do either of those things, let me briefly comment on my views on Te Reo. You will have heard, and perhaps been surprised, that I began today with a mihi. Yes, I can, when properly coached by a Ngapuhi chief, say a few words in Te Reo!

        And to be perfectly clear, I was enthusiastic to do so in this context.

        I have absolutely nothing against the Maori language and for many New Zealanders it is a vital part of who they are.

        What I have objected to is two things.

        First, the use of the Maori language where almost nobody can understand it seems to me to be totally inappropriate. When I was young – and that’s quite a few years ago now! – if anyone spoke in Maori in an environment where at best a tiny minority understood it they immediately translated. I thank the organisers of events this year for providing simultaneous translation earpieces to those of us who don’t speak Te Reo.

        Secondly, I have spoken out strongly against making the teaching of Te Reo mandatory, as some politicians and others now advocate. I am entirely comfortable with taxpayers providing funding to teach Te Reo to those who want to learn it, and to fund Maori TV and a number of Maori language radio stations – it is a valuable treasure to many New Zealanders.

        But it seems to me that for most New Zealanders it has no practical value. As you might expect from a person with an economics training, I look at the cost of every new proposal – and by cost I don’t just mean the dollar cost, but the opportunity cost. What do we have to drop from the school curriculum in order to make time to teach Te Reo? Do we have less maths, less history, less science, less physical education? Something would have to be dropped to make space to teach Te Reo.”

        You read…racism, redundancy and no use.

        I read….common sense and practicality.

        Reply
    • Gezza

       /  6th February 2019

      A chance for Ngapuhi to listen, debate and persuade Brash towards the Ngapuhi way of thinking was truly lost. As was the notion that a Marai is a place where dialog happens, issues are discussed and differing opinions offered and respected.

      I’m not completely sure that this is the case, Gerrit. I posted this yesterday. now [edited a little}
      … … … …
      Gezza / February 5, 2019
      Just watched a few seconds of Don commenting on Prime News. He was quite accepting of what had happened. Said what he was hearing there was a lot of anger at a lot of things that have impacted Maori negatively, economic factors included.

      Watched an interview the megaphone lady on Te Kaea on Maori tv but it was all in Maori and no subtitle provided as there was for the most of what else I saw, so I have no idea what she or the reporter were saying.

      This was also interesting – it hasn’t been picked up by Pakeha media

      On Te Kaea their reporters claimed Ngaphuhi are unhappy with Andrew Little and want him replaced – that possibly Winston Peters might become Treaty Negotiations Minister. Jacinda was shown saying that was news to her. Couldn’t hear what Winston muttered but Jacinda indicated it supported her “there you go, can’t be much clearer than that” or similar, followed by a vid clip of Jonesy appearing to say Winston would be the next MInister.

      Ngapuhi subtribes will all be turning up tomorrow, when, it was reported, the discussions would continue all day.
      … … … …
      Don at least gave the impression he had hung around and talked maybe to Reuben and others & possibly picked up some more of a different perspective. Time will tell.

      Reply
  3. Gezza

     /  6th February 2019

    At some point, hopefully soon, we will need to determine whether we really believe in Article III of the Treaty. That affirmed the equality of political rights for all New Zealanders. At that point we really will be able to say, with Governor Hobson, “he iwi tahi tatou”, “we are now one people”.

    This statement by Hobson really is part of the problem. That might be what he said, and what he thought, but we didn’t suddenly at the point of the signing of this treaty at Waitangi become “one people”.

    We were still many peoples. We became one subservient (to the crown) nation, perhaps, but not one people. I happen to think Hobson was wrong.

    Reply
    • Gerrit

       /  6th February 2019

      Irrespective if you think it is wrong, the current system of separate development is not carrying Tauiwi along for the ride in terms of forging a nation.

      If we read the prayer from the Ardern;

      “The PM quoted Dame Whina Cooper in her prayer: “Take care of our children. Take care of what they care. Take care of what they see. Take care for what they feel. For how the children grow so will be the shape of Aotearoa.””

      That I would say; includes ALL children from ALL races to grow and shape the future. Not separate development based upon race.

      Reply
      • Mother

         /  6th February 2019

        I value te reo.

        The only way it can properly be learnt is through immersion. If I had the opportunity, this is how I would learn it. I would do so for these goals –

        – to express to the Maori that I regret whichever decisions and wrong attitudes of my ancestors which led to the initial demise of their culture and language. I would tell them that some colonists’ greed and disrespectful ways sit badly with me. I would acknowledge the Maori’ continuing unfair disadvantage.

        – to tell them I want to be one people with them and to ask them to consider that the meaning of ‘mana’ is confusing and worrying. I would talk with them until they acknowledged that Maori mana is a religious attitude.

        – to tell them that I believe God is the one with sole rights to mana. Mana, as the Maori traditionally view it, is very deep and on a spiritual plane of the mysterious. I would help them to see that their mana keeps the Christian God out if they hold to the attitude that non Maori cannot understand ‘mana’.

        – I would talk to them again about Jesus Christ who is the Way, the Truth and the Life. I would study with them the various pathways that Christianity took in Aotearoa’s history and humbly ask them to consider seeking purer Church with me, acknowledging that we in Aotearoa need a fresh approach to life together.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  6th February 2019

          Fair enough. You would at least eventually get a proper explanation and understanding of mana from them.

          Reply
      • Fight4NZ

         /  6th February 2019

        “Not separate development based on race”
        What do you think has been happening for the last 150years or so?
        You see no way that some catch up is in order?

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  6th February 2019

          Separate developments based on parenting, not race. Correlation is not causation.

          Reply
  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  6th February 2019

    Gezza seems to have read and heard a different speech fromo the one Brash gave.

    Waitangi just remains a nasty day for racist bigots to shout at each other until we can get back to living together for the rest of the year.

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  6th February 2019

      if that’s the case, perhaps you can explain why that didn’t happen at the official parliamentary powhiri?

      https://yournz.org/2019/02/06/waitangi-day-celebrations/#comment-346287

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  6th February 2019

        It was run in an hermetically sealed isolation chamber.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  6th February 2019

          I disagree. I think full credit is due to the Waitangi organisers and Kelvin Davis for the change in procedure and atmosphere and tikanga this time. Long may it continue.

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  6th February 2019

            I’ll believe it when Nga Puhi settles.

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              I don’t think the two aren’t necessarily dependent on each other, but yes I would be good if this could be settled. The fractiousness between Ngapuhi hapu seems endless and doesn’t help anyone to move forward in the relationship.

            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              Sorry
              I don’t think the two ARE necessarily dependent …

            • Wayne commented on this yesterday:

              Ngapuhi took a claim to the Waiting tribune on the meaning of the 1835 Declaration of Independence, and its relation to the Treaty of Waitangi. The Tribunal gave it some credence and stated Ngapuhi didn’t surrender sovereignty. But in practical terms what does that mean today? I can’t see the government going beyond the Tuhoe settlement in giving local governance powers.

              The government should recognise Ngati Hine as a seperate entity if they want to settle the collective Ngapuhi claim. Some might say Ngati Hine is a hapu, but it is a hapu of 20,000 people, one third of Ngapuhi. Not sure why the government is being so obstinate about this.

              https://yournz.org/2019/02/05/the-articles-of-the-treaty-of-waitangi/#comment-346234

  5. lurcher1948

     /  6th February 2019

    Waitangi Day…Time and a half…..and a day in lieu,if you had proper working conditions

    Reply
  6. Pickled Possum

     /  6th February 2019

    As one who was IN THE TENT to hear Done Brash I would say he is the politest raycst I have ever had the good fortune to meet. He is a little frail and was very excited to be invited by Rueben …..and the above speech … he didnt get to say it all as by about the 10th tee rayohh people were getting a little weary .. he talked for quite some time before ruebens wife came in with her megafone to say we dont want your crap here don brash.
    I am really pissed off that once again media have distorted the facts about the forum tent.
    Talking bout you david fisher shit-stirrer extraordinaire. Investigative journo pffffffttttt

    No korero about Andrew Judd recovering raycst ex-mayor from Taranaki what a beautiful korero he gave and the de graf boy who came to the tent to talk about 1080 …maaki herbert ALCP co-leader who spoke passionately about medical cannabis.
    There was no shouting violence or bad buzz at Te Tii yesterday only in some people minds that they wish it so. All the people that weren’t there should STFU. the don’t know anything.

    Reply
    • Unfortunately most of us only see what media report and what is scattered across social media.

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  6th February 2019

      You don’t have to be in the tent to read his speech, Possum.

      Reply
      • Pickled Possum

         /  6th February 2019

        yes you do alan that was the speech he wrote but the speech he gave was a lot of adlibs and different ….that speech was written for him to look at now and then which he didn’t do much of.
        so now you believe all that the msm write

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  6th February 2019

          You don’t think the adlibs may have been forced on him by a rude ignorant crowd? One you were part of?

          Reply
          • Pickled Possum

             /  6th February 2019

            the crowd was neither rude or ignorant like you.
            kupapa….means if you really are maori (which i doubt) you are a traitor a turncoat you may even be dons little sista or brother if you weren’t there you cannot say in all honesty that you got it right. The crowd I was with was mostly respecting dons right to speak. rueben did a hard mahi the lady with the mega fone was having her 1min say thats all it was 1 minute that lady was ruebens wife

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              Reuben maybe should have tried out my “Don’t start Maureen, I’m not in the mood” approach?

              Mind you, that doesn’t always seem to work with Maureen.

            • Corky

               /  6th February 2019

              ”Kupapa….means if you really are Maori (which i doubt) you are a traitor a turncoat you may even be dons little sista or brother.”

              ”The crowd was neither rude or ignorant like you.”

              I think the defense will rest at this time, Your Honour.

            • Corky

               /  6th February 2019

              Make that ”’juncture”..just to bignote.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  6th February 2019

          Well, you have told us people walked out even before he said anything and a woman used a megaphone to shout him off so I’m not sure the media reports were very misleading.

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  6th February 2019

            Lol..Judge Judy uses the same technique.. let them ramble…and trip themselves up.

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  6th February 2019

              Judge Judy…FFS Corky!!

            • Corky

               /  6th February 2019

              ”Judge Judy…FFS Corky!!”

              Maybe you should watch a few episodes, Blazer? She’s one of the most logical minds I have ever seen. And she doesn’t rate herself as a judge. But she does say experience and going around the block a few times gives you certain skills.

              I agree.

          • Pickled Possum

             /  6th February 2019

            alan pakeha people got up and walked out some Maori listen then got up and walked out if you have ever been to a marae you would know that this is entirely acceptable … comings and goings its all part of the marae experience

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  6th February 2019

              Seems to me the fundamental issue is that Maori hear Brash as denying them mana and Brash sees them as locking themselves in a cage demanding handouts.

    • Corky

       /  6th February 2019

      So..Cuz.. what was the point of Don’s speech from your perspective? Or did you turn off before he starting speaking because he’s raysct?

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  6th February 2019

        I’ve downticked you for calling Possum cuz because you know she’s not your cousin, she doesn’t speak like that to others & she finds that gratuitously offensive, and so, therefore, do I.

        Reply
        • Pickled Possum

           /  6th February 2019

          thank you, bro, this corky is he is offensive alrighty and heshe wants to close me down hahaha in ya dreams corky kupapa

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  6th February 2019

            What does kupapa mean?

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              Te Aka Maori Dictionary
              kūpapa
              1. (verb) to lie flat, stoop, go stealthily.
              Kūpapa ana rātou, ā, whati haere ana ki roto ki te huru
              They stooped down and fled into the undergrowth.

              2. (verb) to remain quiet.
              Nō te tekau mā waru o ngā rā o Mei kūpapa ana tētahi rangapū hōia (e toru tekau takitahi rātou) i tētahi taha o te awa.
              On the 18 May a company of soldiers (there were thirty of them) were waiting quietly on one side of the river.

              3. (verb) to be neutral (in a quarrel), collaborate, collude.
              Ko Mangakāhia te māngai mō te hunga kāore i kūpapa ki ngā hiahia o te kāwanatanga koroni. / Mangakāhia represented those who would not collaborate with the wishes of the colonial government.

              4. (modifier) at a low level, near the ground, above the surface.
              E rere ana tēnā manu ki runga riro, mahue noa iho te kapua. Ko au ia e rere kūpapa ana i te mata o te whenua (TKM.MM 30/3/1863:22).
              That bird flies very high leaving the clouds below. I fly close to the surface of the land.

              5. (noun) collaborator, ally, fifth column – a term that came to be applied to Māori who sided with Pākehā opposition or the Government. There has been a shift from a general meaning of neutrality to the modern use, which now sometimes has derogative connotations, similar to such terms as ‘turncoat’, ‘traitor’, ‘quizling’ and ‘Uncle Tom’.
              Ka whakatika atu a Te Whitimoa me ngā hōia Pākehā, me te rau kotahi o Te Arawa, me ngā kūpapa kotahi rau e whā tekau, ko Te Keepa te meiha o aua kūpapa
              Whitmore and the Pākehā soldiers set off with one hundred Te Arawa and one hundred and forty allies led by Te Keepa who was the major of those collaborators.

              Ko te tikanga ake o te kūpapa ko ērā iwi i tautoko i te kāwanatanga i ngā pakanga whenua o te rautau 1800. Nō konā kua ara mai anō tērā kupu mō te hunga Māori e haukoti ana i ngā hiahia o te iwi Māori (Te Ara 2015)
              The original meaning of the word ‘kūpapa’ was for those tribes that supported the government in the 19th-century land wars. Subsequently it has been revived as a term for Māori who act against the interests of Māori in general.

              6. (noun) New Zealand passionfruit, Passiflora tetrandra – native tendril climber with alternating, pointed, shiny leaves, white flowers smaller than the garden passionfruit and orange-coloured, pear-shaped fruit.

            • Corky

               /  6th February 2019

              That’s fine and dandy..but I’m waiting for PP.

        • Corky

           /  6th February 2019

          Yes, well….raycst? Tee rayohh ? Just not for me…right?

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  6th February 2019

            That’s not the point, bro. You are insulting her personally by calling her cuz when she is no relation of yours. You have been told that by her several times.

            Reply
            • Corky

               /  6th February 2019

              That’s the problem. I have pointed out to you many times it is/can be, a generic greeting among Maori. This mock offence I find weird.

              That said, I won’t call her CUZ again. It’s 1.2 seconds of my life I now realise I can ill afford.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  6th February 2019

              My impression is that Possum doesn’t believe Corky is Maori and that is her objection to the term and its implications.

            • Blazer

               /  6th February 2019

              I thought Corky was..Raro.

            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              @Al

              Yes, well, I haven’t seen him demonstrate any particular fluency with Te Reo so I don’t know whether he’s Maori or not. You and I have had the pleasure of meeting and spending time with Possum & her fella so we know that altho she also has Pakeha ancestry, she is culturally Maori in her perspectives and she looks Maori. She doesn’t get a choice about whether she is perceived as Maori or not. Pakeha call her Maori & classify her as Maori, as they do any other person who has obvious Maori features. They will have done so all her life, I would guarantee. And that means she gets treated differently from Pakeha in all kinds of situations.

            • Corky

               /  6th February 2019

              @ Al

              I have a problem with people, who from my perspective, try just a little too hard to be ”Maori.” I don’t need to prove my Maori side. No need for pidgin English.. I know what I am..and I’m proud of my Scottish, Maori, English and Spanish heritage.

              However, my blood doesn’t define me. My individuality does. And that’s where I diverge from PP. It’s why I can understand perfectly where Don is coming from…; and PP can’t. Her blood defines her.

            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              @ Corky

              Possum’s blood does define her to a large extent – by choice and by appearance. I don’t think she does “try a little too hard to be Maori”. Her style of communication here isn’t pidgin English; it’s a bit of fun for her to play with English with innovative spelling. And she never pretends to be highly educated or particularly fluent in the English language. She has every right to express herself as she chooses and to take a Maori perspective by the same right of choice you have not to do so. That’s my perspective anyway, having met her. I’ll say no more because I have no right to speak for her and am not claiming one. She’s a good cook. I know that.

            • Mother

               /  6th February 2019

              We need to realise when we are practising a religion, and be up front about it.

              Mr Hobson’s declaration of us as one people was a religious statement. The safest dumbing down of that is to focus instead on economics.

              If individuals want to try hard to be Maori, they need to believe in the pagan myths and practices too. If many people are going to choose paganism (and many Christians are doing just that) then they are free to make those choices. I’m asking people to look ahead. Where will those choices lead us as a people?

              You can’t undo the spiritual aspect of the 1840 ‘one people’ claim.

            • Corky

               /  6th February 2019

              @ Gezza.

              ”And she never pretends to be highly educated or particularly fluent in the English language. ”

              Well, I give her credit for that. We already have one person who’s a pseudo intellectual ..and that’s enough.

              . ”She has every right to express herself as she chooses and to take a Maori perspective by the same right of choice you have not to do so.”

              Yes, and I respect that. But she has question me on my understanding of things Maori before. However, when I ask her simple things that most Maori would know..she can’t answer them. For example she had no clue what ”having your cupboards full” meant for many beneficiary Maori.

              You should check her credentials..she may be Portuguese.

            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              I’ve checked her credentials. It’s yours I can’t check.

          • Blazer

             /  6th February 2019

            @Corky…no wonder…you are a MESS….Maori,English,Scottish,Spanish.😁

            Reply
    • Pickled Possum

       /  6th February 2019

      When Don Rash got up to speak my pakeha friends said I’m outta here dont need to hear it again, 1 stayed and when Don said pakeha think that tay rayohh is a valid language my other pakeha mate was cringing crying and when I asked do you feel like that?
      is don telling it like it is for you? she cried and said NO how dare he ….many people walked out I stayed to hear why he is so relevant in todays world … I stayed listen and NO he hasnt got anything of important to listen too. When we got called on to the marae and the whaikorero was said mostly in english the kaumata from te tii fawned all over don and he thought they were speaking to him and only him … when he spoke in the wharenui he said so much love has been bestowed on me … NO don on US te manuhuri we and nga wahine that sang for you … honestly, he lives in a bubble that fella ..nice kind and polite but his Tongan friend was heckling andrew judd and the violent feeling we got from him was scary. didnt write about that did you david fisher didnt write about maaki herbert no just the celebrity don fawning all over him.

      Reply
    • Gezza

       /  6th February 2019

      It intrigues me that Winston Peters has essentially been saying many, perhaps even most, of the same things as Don Brash does for decades and yet he never seems to cop the same reaction from Maori.

      Why do you think this is, Possum?

      Like, is it because he’s smart enuf to say it elsewhere than on nga Marae? Genuinely interested because I find this a really curious situation.

      Reply
      • Pickled Possum

         /  6th February 2019

        You know Gez A maori woman who came to sit and listen half way thru dons speech said to me Yes I believe that what he is saying is true …. and so did I… just that point …. then he went and blew it all by saying something stupid like ..when I was in China last week they all spoke english so no more tay rayohhh for nz its outdated and I wish I could have learnt it!
        don says many times that he wishes he could have learnt te reo but he didnt so we had to put up with him mangling it. and we did mostly it was the content that was the issue.

        Winstone is maori gez so he can say what he thinks about maori and we have to harden up and hear what he is saying. on te marae you can say anything you want its a safe place for your opinion. not like here YNZ its not safe to have your say otherwise some will call you a ……….. On the marae you have your say Winstone is trying to pull his maori people out of the ghetto but winstone NOT many of us live there!!

        At Te Tii yesterday in the welcome in the wharenui there was a little situation and a telling off was given a harsh one and it was said in te reo so don didnt know what was said but he knew there was a trouble going on with the maori visitors and the tangatawhenua …and he thought that the taumata was sticking up for him … they were sticking up for the kawa and tikanga of the whare. My first and last visit to waitangi
        I was impressed with the wahine toa of nga puhi

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  6th February 2019

          Ok but that’s fair enuf but you are saying only Winston can say this sort of thing on a Marae because he is Maori. And Don can’t because he isn’t Maori? So perhaps they shouldn’t have given him the invitation.

          Winstone is trying to pull his maori people out of the ghetto but winstone NOT many of us live there
          Also a fair point, But I also think part of what he wants is for Maori people to be able to pull themselves out of the ghetto too. Don’s problem is doesn’t really have any kind of connection to Maori and doesn’t see any need to want to find out much about their culture, which I think is a blinkered attitude.

          As an aside, from what little I heard of her speech, Jacinda’s pronunciation of Te Reo seems to have improved.

          Reply
  7. Corky

     /  6th February 2019

    I have just read the full text of Don’s speech. For the life of me I can’t see why people are calling it out of date..or why Maori heckled Don’s speech.

    But It’s just dawned on me.. most people don’t understand. European through lack of real world contact with Maori. Maori through educational ignorance. Both push their narratives to appease a variety of guilt’s and failures and real and perceived wrongs.

    These people see our way forward based around some nebulous understanding between Maori and European and the Crown. That will never happen..it can’t happen.

    Talks on a constitution was proof of that.

    What Don is showing people is the only sane option moving forward.

    Don is trying to explain in the real world crutches aren’t an option. Things either work or they don’t.

    Welfarism; from corporate to individual to race based hides an ugly truth just below the surface of our great little country

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  6th February 2019

      Very well said, Corky.

      Reply
    • Blazer

       /  6th February 2019

      what do you think Brash has ever gone without in his life?

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  6th February 2019

        Apparently meat..twice a week. We have only just caught up with how good that is for us, Blazer. Perhaps he has other good suggestions?

        Reply
  8. david in aus

     /  6th February 2019

    Don Brash’s speech is good. Cannot disagree with most of it.
    Maori is not an international language, that is correct. Don Brash does not say the Maori language has no value. Where does he say that? It’s incredible that people make up accusations without evidence.

    Widespread Affirmative Action in Malaysia is an abomination, South Africa has copied the model, line-and-sinker. Is it a coincidence that corruption is endemic in both countries. Singapore which has the same ethnic groups as Malaysia but is Chinese dominant has 5 times the per capita income. And the average ethnic Malay in Singapore is better educated, healthier, and richer than Malaysian Malays without the Affirmative Action policies.

    The best method to remove racial discrimination is to stop discriminating based on race, including Affirmative Action.

    Call New Zealand Aotearoa; Isn’t it already called Aotearoa in the Maori language? In English, New Zealand is called New Zealand.

    Lets us not do cultural appropriations.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  6th February 2019

      A cherry pickers argument comparing Singapore and Malaysia.
      Corruption takes on many forms.Western countries disguise it better.
      Apart from English what are the ‘international’ languages?

      Many countries have changed their names…life goes on.

      Reply
      • david in aus

         /  6th February 2019

        It is not cherry picking. Malaysia is a model for many countries; South Africa, and at one point Fiji. Luckily there a neighboring country with a similar composition for comparison.

        Reply
      • david in aus

         /  6th February 2019

        English is the Lingua Franca (French word, ironically) of the world. It does not mean it is superior. It is an accident of history: British and then American domination of Business and Sciences. Early in the 20th century, German was an important language in the Sciences and in the 19th Century French was the language of diplomacy.
        The status of languages rises and falls with the preeminence of its speakers.

        There is a reason that the Dutch learn excellent English but few learn Dutch.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  6th February 2019

          I thought ‘Lingua Franca’ was Latin.

          So there is 1 international language atm…is that what you say?.

          Reply
          • david in aus

             /  6th February 2019

            Correction: Italian origin according to Wikipedia. From Italian meaning Frankish tongue.

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  6th February 2019

              ‘A lingua franca (English plural “lingua francas”, although the pseudo-Latin form “linguae francae” is also seen) is a language systematically used to make communication possible between people not sharing a first language, in particular when it is a third language, distinct from both speakers’ first languages.’

              ‘Italian is a Romance language, and is therefore a descendant of Vulgar Latin (the spoken form of non-classical Latin)

        • Duker

           /  6th February 2019

          Dutch and English are both Germanic languages is a better reason why its easy for them to learn. I think its the dutch dialect Frisian- which is closest of all other languages to modern English.
          The other reason for Englishs predominance is its flexibility and its shear size of vocabulary, with the additions over the centuries of Norse,Norman french and even latter words from the ‘Empire’. Not for English an academy which approves new words or the strange German system of compound words and other issues.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_orthography_reform_of_1996

          Its also significant that the German system of higher education was the model for the english speaking world, but they improved on it so that the UK/US system is now widely copied as a standard.

          Reply
          • david in aus

             /  6th February 2019

            I disagree, English is a difficult language to learn from non-native speakers: Idioms, turn of phrases and spelling that must be memorised. Most of the world do not speak a language with similar linguistic roots.

            People learn English because it is useful. It is the google of languages now, Winner takes all. Once you have groups of peoples learning a language it makes sense to learn that language for basic communication. Rwanda has abandoned French for English partly for the reason, French is now a marginal international language.

            If Latin America was not an economic and social basket case, more people would be learning Spanish. There was the Japanese learning craze in the 1990s when it was thought that Japan was going to rule the world.

            Vocabulary or the sheer number of worlds is not an advantage for a lingua franca. It may provide nuance for native speakers but it can hinder communication for non-native speakers. In the EU, where English is the de facto lingua franca, they have developed their own English dialect with limited vocabulary and sentence structure similar to their native languages.

            There is nothing permanent about the lingua franca. Latin, Spanish, Chinese, French, English; each has waxed and waned with the fortunes of it’s speakers.

            Reply
    • Fight4NZ

       /  6th February 2019

      Singapore is economically way ahead of Malaysia due to its geographical luck to be an ideal world shipping hub. Therefore its citizens benefit from advantages this provides including the Malays. Affirmative action as a negative influence causing the difference is just ridiculous.

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  6th February 2019

        Utter tosh. Singapore is where it is because of the culture Lee Kwan Yew imposed on it, not because of it’s location or physical resources.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  6th February 2019

          Darn. Remove apostrophe.

          Reply
          • Blazer

             /  6th February 2019

            so dictatorships are the way to…prosperity?

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  6th February 2019

              Obviously depends on their culture. Essentially rule of law, upholding property rights and liberties and supporting open markets and good education are key.

            • david in aus

               /  6th February 2019

              Singapore has Free Elections and is not a dictatorship. The ruling party lost many seats due to the locals unhappiness in regards to immigration.
              But when you transform from a poor country to one the richest in the world, a smart population would re-elect the people in power.

              Lee Kuan Yew was initially a Fabian Socialist in his Cambridge University days before he saw the light. He was smart.

            • Blazer

               /  6th February 2019

              @David in A…you having a bad hair day…

              ‘Singapore is not an electoral democracy. The country is governed through a parliamentary system, and elections are free from irregularities and vote rigging, but the ruling PAP dominates the political process. … Singapore has had only three prime ministers since independence.’

            • David in aus

               /  6th February 2019

              At Blazer. NZ is also a parliamentary democracy . Does that mean NZ is a dictatorship under your definition that parliamentary democracy is not electoral democracy.

            • Blazer

               /  6th February 2019

              @David in…semantics…

              The main types/forms of democracy are:
              Direct democracy.
              Representative democracy.
              Presidential democracy.
              Parliamentary democracy.
              Authoritarian democracy.
              Participatory democracy.
              Islamic democracy.
              Social democracy.

        • Fight4NZ

           /  6th February 2019

          Still using subtitles on your posts i see.

          Reply
        • Griff.

           /  6th February 2019

          I always cracked up when redbeater pushed Singapore as a capitalist Nirvana
          It is if you think capitalism is best described as a socialist dictatorship.
          The goverment owns most the land, the housing, the banks and the infrastructure .
          If he moved there he would find his views would not be tolerated.
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
          For those who think it is somehow different now
          The unelected ruling class still the means of supply though holding companys and controls the courts
          You stand up and appose them and the consequences are dire.
          Yes Lee Kuan Yew was responsible for lifting the population Far above its neighbors.
          It is not a path any western democracy could follow and neither should we look to their system to improve on our own.
          Because freedom.

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  6th February 2019

            An unmentioned vital factor was simply: English language.

            Reply
          • david in aus

             /  6th February 2019

            There is no place on Earth that that has free unfettered capitalism. The only country that came close was Hong Kong. But with increasing Chinese government influence that is waning. That is why nearly all “right wingers” believe in the role of government, but limited government.

            Singapore like most countries has a mixed system. No minimum wage but has one of the highest average salaries in the world. Little public welfare but prescribed private savings for health care, and superannuation. For a small country that is a reasonable system but it requires an able leadership. I am not sure NZ has the caliber of leaders in the Public Service to produce similar outcomes, or has the caliber of voters to elect able politicians.

            Public housing was publicly built in the early stages but is owned privately. It is disingenuous to say that most of Singapore is government owned. Banks: 120 banks in Singapore, most are privately owned and foreign. Locally owned banked have the Sovereign wealth fund as shareholders. It is like saying ASB, ANZ is government owned because ACC owns a significant shareholding. It is not socialist as you try to describe it.

            But if you are on your bare-bones and have no family the government will pay for basic healthcare and services. This is not well advertised and the expectation is that the first port of call for help is the individual and their whanau. There isn’t an entitlement culture, bleating from the bleachers- “where’s the gummit”. There is an expectation of personal responsibility first, the government is the last option.

            Reply
            • Griff.

               /  7th February 2019

              Singapore like most countries has a mixed system. No minimum wage but has one of the highest average salaries in the world

              Singapore relies on offshore workers with no human rights to do low wage jobs for all intents and purposes legal indentured slavery. Such workers are not include in official numbers for income as they are not even considered resident in the country.

              83%of all housing is owned by the government it is only leased out..
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore
              Little public welfare?
              At the most basic level of welfare possible The 83% of government housing is heavily subsidized and controlled .

              Temasek holdings .
              Is a fully goverment owned and controlled holding company that basically owns Singapore’s infrastructure. It in no way the equivalent of investments in shares by ACC in public traded company’s here .
              How much goverment control?
              The CEO of Temasek holdings Ho Ching is the Prime Minister of Singapore’s wife.

              You like many right wingers have no fickin idea and make up bullshite that any carfull inquiry will debunk.

      • david in aus

         /  6th February 2019

        Geographic luck? There is a distance of 2 km between Malaysia and Singapore.
        Also 30 km between Singapore and Indonesia. Malaysia’s Penang and Melacca were major trading centres.
        When Singapore was kicked out of the Malaysian federation, most Western commentators wrote Singapore off as being an isolated city with no hinterland, far-away from rich countries. The major use was as a military base and the British left in the 1960s.

        Singapore grew initially as a manufacturing hub, cheap labour, foreign direct investment, oil refining. Then the middle-men of SE Asia. It has transitioned to a Financial hub only recently. There is no reason why Malaysia cannot be the shipping hub that Singapore is. It makes more logical sense to do so being a larger country with natural resources. Singapore has no natural resources, only human resources. It imports nearly everything it consumes including water.

        Reply
        • Fight4NZ

           /  6th February 2019

          There is a reason Singapore is by far the massive hub that it is and it isn’t the affirmative action policies of Malaysia

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  6th February 2019

            Spouts tosh. Repeats.

            Reply
          • David in aus

             /  6th February 2019

            Affirmative action policies of Malaysia is why they are no way near as wealthy as Singapore.
            Malaysia had 2 to 3 times the ethnic Chinese and Indian population of Singapore at partition.
            We now why Singapore is wealthy: hard work and smart people. Why is Malaysia doing so relatively poorly?

            Reply
  9. PDB

     /  6th February 2019

    Brash should be hammered for making such a boring speech (which one would expect from such a boring man) but being ‘racist’ not so much.

    English is understood by more people than Maori & the treaty payments overwhelmingly benefit the Maori sitting at the top of the table (partially due to how widespread now each tribe’s people are throughout the country) & the professional Maori set (lawyers etc) – hardly new revelations.

    Reply
    • Fight4NZ

       /  6th February 2019

      So you’re contention is that Treaty settlements should be scrapped because they only benefit Maori at the top table?
      I like your thinking. So we should scrap the National Party too. In fact let’s flush the capitalist system.

      Reply
  10. Gezza

     /  6th February 2019

    video of Brash giving his speech taken by an audience member included in this article

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/02/don-brash-heckled-throughout-waitangi-speech.html

    Reply
  11. PartisanZ

     /  6th February 2019

    Brash ” … he had recently read my autobiography, and suggested that there were aspects of my life which most people are not aware of … And he suggested I should comment on how Ngapuhi, and perhaps Maori New Zealanders generally, can best improve their economic status. I’m willing to do that …”

    Then look what he says next … “Before I do either of those things, let me briefly comment on my views on Te Reo.”

    And off he goes on a lengthy convoluted insult of his host’s language … He didn’t need to do that … This is the action of not only a poor orator and diplomat but frankly a stupid old man.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  6th February 2019

      How did he insult the language?

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  6th February 2019

        He went to a fucken place where it is going to be spoken predominantly to tell them in his opinion it didn’t really have any value to anyone other than a few Maori. And then went on to say it was a waste of time and money for schoolkids to learn it because it would mean they couldn’t learn other things like science n shit at the same time. Fuck it I was studying two foreign languages (Latin – yuk, and French – yay) at the same time as I was studying physics, chemistry and biology. This is just stupid stuff to say at that place and had damn all to do with covering economic issues for Maoridom. It’s totally tone deaf.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  6th February 2019

          Crap. He said it shouldn’t be compulsory. Plenty of Maori can’t speak Te Reo. No doubt some would like to and some wouldn’t. He didn’t say it was a waste of time and money. He said it had a cost in time and money. Stop putting your obsessions in his mouth.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  6th February 2019

            He had more than those criticisms.

            Yes, I can, when properly coached by a Ngapuhi chief, say a few words in Te Reo! And to be perfectly clear, I was enthusiastic to do so in this context.
            What context? So he could come along to talk about Maori economics and launch into telling them the language was only important enuf to learn to greet them so he could the criticise it?

            First, the use of the Maori language where almost nobody can understand it seems to me to be totally inappropriate. When I was young – and that’s quite a few years ago now! – if anyone spoke in Maori in an environment where at best a tiny minority understood it they immediately translated. I thank the organisers of events this year for providing simultaneous translation earpieces to those of us who don’t speak Te Reo.
            If it was compulsory when he went to school he wouldn’t have needed an earpiece. Neither would I.

            But it seems to me that for most New Zealanders it has no practical value. As you might expect from a person with an economics training, I look at the cost of every new proposal – and by cost I don’t just mean the dollar cost, but the opportunity cost. What do we have to drop from the school curriculum in order to make time to teach Te Reo? Do we have less maths, less history, less science, less physical education? Something would have to be dropped to make space to teach Te Reo.
            Bullshit, as I have already explained. Your response was the crap, not my comment.

            Without question the most important language for all New Zealanders to speak, read and write fluently is English – not just because it is the predominant language of this country but also because it is the only truly international language. Chinese is the most widely spoken first language in the world, followed in turn by Spanish and then by English. But the total of those who speak English exceeds that of any other language.
            Nobody is suggesting Maori don’t learn English.

            It was for good reason that in decades past some Maori parents insisted that their children learn English: English was the passport to the modern world. It still is, and it probably will be for the next century at least.
            More tone deafness. The country is still full of Maori people who were PUNISHED for speaking Maori and forced to speak ONLY English.

            You don’t go onto a Marae where you were invited to speak and insult your hosts by telling them their language isn’t important in the only country where it IS the native language – especially when you can hardly utter a fucking word of it without being told exactly what to say when you grew up here. Tone deaf as fuck. You have to wonder if he wanted to provoke controversy for attention with this whole language spiel. It has nothing to do with the Maori economy.

            Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  6th February 2019

            It was an attempt to teach some economics about opportunity cost which has obviously passed straight over your head.

            He didn’t say Maori had no value, just less than English. You continue to put words in his mouth. Just because you could cope with your subjects doesn’t mean all kids can. It’s pretty obvious they can’t.

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              Those are his words. They sound to me like invention of reasons to support an already existing viewpoint. Just because you agree wholeheartedly with his views doesn’t make an alternative viewpoint crap, Alan.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  6th February 2019

              It’s not your alternative view that is crap but your misrepresentations of what he said.

            • Gezza

               /  6th February 2019

              I am not misrepresenting them – I am saying how they would be and were perceived in that environment. And I am done – I now want to find and watch that video of the guy explaining what a fraud Trump is, it looks like it’s a long one. And then watch that video of Corks’s on Tommy Robinson, So good night on this issue.

            • PartisanZ

               /  6th February 2019

              Freaky!!!

              It’s like a case of ‘reverse misrepresentation’ Alan … like you misrepresent what you yourself say … instead of what you hear …

              Gezza, good night … and good luck.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  7th February 2019

              @PZ, translate from gibberish please.

  12. Corky

     /  6th February 2019

    Any one see Sonny Tau chastise the PM for not knowing the treaty?

    Lol…Sonny of all people. Bro, you lost your mana down South..remember?

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  6th February 2019

      Was this that suspiciously microsecond long video clip on 1ewes at 6 Corks, where he was criticising “those of us who can’t recite the articles” and had nothing before or after that so we had no context at all? I saw them try to pass that off as a shot at Jacinda but not enuff was shown to know if it really was. He may have even been criticising himself too. A suspect piece of video and reporting that looked to me like a misrepresentation for sensationalism’s sake.

      Reply
      • Corky

         /  6th February 2019

        Maybe? However, if I was Sonny, shame would preclude me from getting up in public and pontificating.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  7th February 2019

          Point taken, but as both of us post here under pseudonyms that’s probably our existing situation anyway.

          Reply
  13. If you barrack for the All Blacks or the Wallabies, you are practicing racism.

    Reply
  14. I don’t think Brash gained much if anything by his speech.

    Reply
  1. Don Brash championing Apirana Ngata, but… | Your NZ

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s