LETTERS

[Opo 182]

Sunlive paper (Tauranga)

Cutbacks should be for all

Posted Friday 25th October 2013

This week, we have been informed that funding is being cut for Conservation of Kiwis (about $1 million per year). And a need has been established for a Commissioner for the Elderly (about $3 million). In the last year, funding has been refused to restore the East Coast Railway( which will serve locals and tourists).

Essential roading in the Wellington area has been curtailed through lack of funding.

Long-suffering Christchurch residents have lived in substandard homes and received a pittance from the EQC - Earthquake Commission. And some are still waiting to move ahead; and the pace for government payouts is sluggish in the extreme. I could go on.

In the meantime, the total of Treaty settlements are approaching $2.5 billion mark and will continue to increase.  Vote Treaty Negotiations (see the document at: www.budget.govt.nz/budget/2013/by/vote/treneg.htm) contains a multi-year appropriation of $140 million for the five year period 2013-2017.

This appropriation is for the settlement of historical Treaty claims. A further provision sets aside millions of dollars for administration (not settlement), of claims under Foreshore and Seabed legislation. Something is very wrong when essential infrastructure and support systems in all fields affecting all New Zealanders and its fauna are being cut for lack of funding.

 

Yet monies are endlessly available for Maori in all fields

R.E.S
Mount Mauganui.

[Opo 182]

Bay of Plenty Times 29/10/13

NO REVISIONISTS
Let's not pre-judge Buddy Mikaere and the Pukehinahina Charitable Trust and their planned commemoration of the Battle of Gate Pa. I trust they spend the TCC grant wisely and that the event will be a success for the community.

 My only reservation is when he mentions that the emphasis will be placed on educating the community.

Let's hope that this isn't an effort to re-write history.

Tommy "Kapai" Wilson and Colin Bidois have both made unfounded historic claims in local newspapers. Tommy Wilson claiming a non-existent massacre at the Battle of Rangiaowhia and Colin Bidois wrongly claiming that Maori at the Battle of Te Ranga were unarmed.

I hope that revisionists such as these are not involved in the "educating" part of the activities.
R P
Welcome Bay

[Opo 182]

NZHerald 29/10/13

PROBE INTO MAORI AFFAIRS
John Drinnan's media piece "TV probe labelled too pushy quotes several Maori media figures and leaders who have criticised the Maori Television investigation into irregularities at the Te Kohanga Reo National Trust.

These criticisms include the view that the Native Affairs story was too Pakeha-fied", not done in a "more Maori way". was not in line with "tikanga", and that it didn't show enough "respect" to trust members.

Apparently some feel any such investigation should be "dealt with behind closed doors". Well, I can assure John Drinnan that many other Maori people feel quite the opposite. Such people, myself included, applaud Native Affairs for its probe and are actually happy that it was done in the open, allowing public scrutiny of a body seemingly intent on keeping its idiosyncratic business practices shrouded in mystery. Organisations such as the Te Kohanga Reo National Trust should have any insinuations of dodgy financial transactions or family favours thoroughly scrutinised by the media — just as with any other New Zealand public body.

The children and parents at kohanga throughout the country deserve nothing less. Nor do the taxpayers whose money, after all, is what the trustees are spending.
B M.
Auckland Central.

[Opo 182]

Northern Advocate 30/10/13

 

Mind language
Whangarei mayor Sheryl Mai intends to learn Te Reo. I would have thought it would have been more productive for her to learn a little about an Asian language. After all, English is spoken by all Maori. It is most certainly not so, for the many other cultures we are welcoming into our communities.

VS

Whangarei

Letters in the Wanganui Chronicle 30/10/13

 

No 'F'

I can’t understand why anyone in the Wanganui District Council would want to rekindle the ‘‘Great H’’ debate.

 

It seems to me it will do nothing to unify the community. Most people appear to accept the dual spelling, and probably best we wait for a decade or two before deciding on one spelling. The first letter I wrote to the Chronicle was about the ‘‘Great H’’ debate. My mother’s paternal great grandfather was one of the signatories that signed a petition in 1844 asking Governor George Grey to change the name of the town from Petre to Wanganui. Because all the signatories were European, I asked the question as to whether they had consulted local iwi about a name, and if Whanganui or Wanganui was the correct spelling. Whanganui, meaning great harbour, at that time, made sense to me.

 

Since then I have listened to many arguments regarding the ‘‘Great H’’ debate and have to admit that I have no idea of the correct spelling.

 

These days, because of my almost geriatric state, it takes a while for what’s still functioning in my brain to assimilate all the information, but both camps in the debate, at times make sense to me. The one thing I am sure about is that I can’t stand television and other misdirected media people, mispronouncing the name of our beautiful city as ‘‘Fonganui’’.

 

Until these people learn our local dialect and get the 'F' out of our place, it will be Wanganui to me.

J C

Mowhanau

 

H again

Re: article ‘‘H’’ debate rises anew ( Oct 25) It is good to see some councillors are concerned about the spelling of Wanganui.

 

The first thing this council must do is put the name right for this town of ours.

 

Wanganui is not a Maori name, it was originally named by the Waitaha people who were a pre-Maori race who came from South America, a few hundred years before the people who are called Maori. The Waitaha people bred with the Celtic people who were already here.

 

The Waitaha people now live in the South Island where the word Wanganui appears six times without the ‘‘H’’ in it.

 

Even coastal Maori from Taranaki to Wanganui did not use the ‘‘H’’ sound, only the ‘‘W’’ was pronounced.

 

In Adventures in New Zealand, by E J Wakefield, Wanganui is spelt without the ‘‘H’’ for both the river and the town prior to the treaty.

I B

Wanganui

 

 

 

[Opo 182]

Published in the Northland Age 31/10/13

 

Who's a hyporcrite?
Some northern Maori have accused new Mayor John Carter of being hypocritical when he refuses to automatically allow Maori to take seats on the council without being elected by public vote.

If Maori are so interested in having a say regarding council matters and being represented, then let them stand for election, the same as any other New Zealander. They may have a trace of Maori blood in them, but those wishing to be on council and air their views ought to take their chances the same as any other New Zealander.

Under the Treaty of Waitangi we are all equal. To just go on the council because of your ethnicity, then that is definitely apartheid.

M B

Tauranga

[Idolmite 2,560]

What about that Melbourne Cup field eh Opo?

 

And do you think CM can beat TTL in the NZ Trotting Cup?

[Opo 182]

NZHerald 31/10/13

 

On council swearing-in

Auckland among the 10 most liveable cities in the world? How about among the 10 most sexist?

Why do we continue to allow old-fashioned Maori to dictate that at the swearing-in of the mayor. all the women councillors must be seated behind the men? Or the last in line for the hongi?

In 1913, perhaps. In 2013, shameful.

R P

Remuera

[jack 431]

Dominion Post 24/10/13

 

Learning in Maori restricts options

OPINION: Your editorial about the fight for the right to education (Oct 16) reminded me of South Africa in the 1970s, when the Soweto riots occurred. They were about the right for children to be educated in English instead of Afrikaans because education in that non- transportable language effectively restricted them to South Africa. Being educated properly in English, French and more widely used languages allowed opportunities anywhere.

 

I therefore continue to shake my head in disbelief at why some Maori insist on the opposite for their children through the te reo and ''total immersion'' education process. They're effectively condemning their children to a future with very limited horizons.

 

In the early colonial days, many Maori were sent overseas for education because their parents or elders realised the importance of being properly educated and exposed to the ways of the world.

 

One has only to look at some of the present Maori MPs compared with those back in the 1840s and 50s to realise how far we've fallen.

T B

Lower Hutt

  

Here`s a real opinion Opo , not goobledeegok!!

 

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10759752

[Opo 182]

LOL @ jacko - anny salmond ROFLMAO

[jack 431]

LOL @ jacko - anny salmond ROFLMAO

 

 

Dame Anne Salmond , Distinguished Professor of Maori Studies and Athropology at Auckland University.

 

 

A Real New Zealander ....

[Opo 182]

Letters in the Sunlive Tauranga 1/11/13

Moving on is key

A thought for those part-Maori still holding long-term grievance, dating back to the early days of colonisation – specifically to the insensitive enforcement of the English language in schools.

 

Exactly the same thing happened in the Cape, South Africa, in the 1800s.

 

The Dutch had been settled there since the mid 1600s, as a halfway house serving their Dutch East Indies trade route. It was designed to supply fresh produce to the scurvy-prone sailors on a lengthy sea voyage. Holland and England are European neighbours, with much in common. Then came British colonisation. Thus, it was not a question of repression of a ‘primitive’ race when the language problem arose; and, arguably, long-term benefits were possible, as in NZ.

 

The Dutch resented the imposition bitterly, however, and it became a contributory cause of the legendary Great Trek – a marvel of courageous endeavour by any standards.

 

Entire families, plus large covered wagons, (dismantled to negotiate the intervening mountain range to the interior) and clumsy oxen, were manhandled over the mountain, and from there to seek freedom. But were still beset by the dangers of very real wild animals and snakes, unfamiliar to them – life went on.

 

Unfortunately, we are all involved in history. Nothing is tailored to our preferences. And we keep the past alive, kicking and screaming, or move on.

D H, Otumoetai.

 

 

History led to generational dependency

Before the arrival of Europeans in New Zealand, Maori lived in groups, hapu, iwi and whanau under strict tribal traditions, rules and strictures in a very hierarchical culture. No Maori had the right to make personal decisions on how his life was run; this depended on the combined will of the tribe as directed by the elders. Breaches of the tribal rules were dealt with by the rangatira (leaders) and Kaumatua (respected elders), often with severe or even fatal consequences.

 

If an individual was responsible for some transgression, such as harming a child, he could have a ‘muru’ applied by the whanau (family), which meant his whare (home) could be entered and all his possessions taken. Some of the actions may be considered as bringing shame on the tribe, causing loss of mana (pride) could result in hurt or execution by a club blow to the head.

 

When the urbanisation of Maori, their move from the pa and kainga tipu (ancestral home) to the city began in the 1930s, and became accelerated after the war, many were unable to adjust to individual decision-making; and they lacked the training, or experience, to accept personal responsibilities. No longer was there an authority to direct and guide them. This has led in areas to generational dependency.

B J, Omokoroa.

 

 

Treaty not founding document

The true document that founded New Zealand and our first constitution was Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter dated November 16, 1840.

 

It allowed New Zealand to break away from New South Wales and with the consent of the British Parliament, to form its own British colony with its Governor and Government to make its own laws based on English law under the watchful eye of the British Parliament.

 

Our governments and historians have ignored this document for more than 173 years. Are they afraid of the repercussions it will cause when the people realise they have been misled into believing the Treaty of Waitangi was our founding document, when it was no such document.

 

Queen Victoria’s charter gave New Zealand the authority to become its own British colony with its own Colonial Government to make and enforce its own laws under its own flag on the May 3, 1841. So, May 3 is New Zealand’s Independence Day.

 

One New Zealand Foundation has published a book on this document where you can order one.

I B, Wanganui.

 

 

 

[jack 431]

Dame Anne Salmond , Distinguished Professor of Maori Studies and Athropology at Auckland University.

 

 

A Real New Zealander ....

 

 

This is where you should be looking to for Real New Zealand Opinions , not some twit from Wanganui Opo...Someone with a High standing in the Community and is well respected in the University Fraternity , Maybe you`ve been reading to many of those cheap trash papers ...Expand your horizons , Don`t limit yourself to posting other peoples garbage , you will become their  Useful Idiot!

 

 

..

[Opo 182]

Wairarapa Times-Age2/11/13

 

A bit much

I share your view (Opinion October 31) about the tendency to push a powhiri into every conceivable occasion.

 

In particular, powhiri to accompany the release of an endangered bird into the wild is questionable. A Forest and Bird study a few years back revealed that of all the birds that had ever existed in NZ and had become extinct, the majority had died out before Western contact.

 

A little less political correctness and a bit more shared blame and credit for environmental problems and successes is well overdue.

R H

Carterton

 

 

Sunlive (Tauranga) 1/11/13

 

Racism exists because we allow it

R. Stephens RE Stephens’ letter ‘Cutbacks should be for all’ is correct, when he says in spite of cutbacks for essential infrastructure, there is always money for Maori projects.

The tribal elite have a list of demands and if refused, the ‘racist’ card is pulled out of the hat.

To our detriment, the ‘R’ word immediately shuts down dialogue.

Tommy Kapai wrote a wonderful article in 2009 about a white American actor who asked: “Why is it that only whites can be racist?”

Mr. Kapai turned it around to a New Zealand scenario. To make a precis his article, “You pass me on the street and sneer, you call me pakeha, honky, white boy and that’s okay. But when I call you hori, nigger or curry muncher you call me a racist.

You have Maori Television but if we had White Entertainment Television, or any organisation for whites’ only to “advance” our lives, we’d be racists.

You rob us, rape us and shoot at us, but if a Pakeha police officer shoots a black gang member, or drug runner posing a threat to society, you call him a racist.

You have sports awards and tertiary scholarships exclusive to Maori. But if there was a college that gave money to whites’ only, we would be called racists.

I have kept this memorable article for a long time now.

Mr Kapai ended with some very astute thoughts - “For my two bob’s worth, whatever colour we were born with, racism has no respect for religious freedom or the colour of a man’s skin. It exists because we allow it to exist”.
R. B, Pyes Pa.

 

 

Return democracy

In response to RE Stephens’ ‘Cutbacks should be for all’ in last week’s Weekend Sun, he is absolutely correct.

The reason being we don’t have a democratic government that cares for the general welfare of all the NZ people anymore. NZ’s government is just a company; and therefore has to produce a profit/loss each year. Look at our traffic police. For example, their goal is revenue collecting. Our councils are running up debt; and none of these acts are by consent of NZ people.

These entities in our country are controlled from overseas. One entity is the United Nations, which wants disharmony in all our countries.

Every country in the world has a civil war going on (either ethnic or religious), which is easy to incite.

While these civil wars carry on it keeps everyone distracted, while decreasing the world’s population.

The One World government can get on with their other agendas. The UN Agenda 21 is one already in progress in our country. Check out all the smart growth, smart card, and other unitary plans.

Maori do not see they’re being used and manipulated while on their own crusade against 85 per cent of New Zealanders, wanting un-ending Treaty claims and self-rule  - creating division and disharmony.

The UN has encouraged them; allowed them to sign the Declaration on Indigenous Rights in 2010, with no mandate from our government or people, which says they have the right to autonomy or self-government.

Folks you need to put your hand up and stop the apathy that’s allowing this to happen in NZ. Somehow, we have to claim back our democracy. A binding referendum would be a start.      
C H, Katikati.

[jack 431]

This is where you should be looking to for Real New Zealand Opinions , not some twit from Wanganui Opo...Someone with a High standing in the Community and is well respected in the University Fraternity , Maybe you`ve been reading to many of those cheap trash papers ...Expand your horizons , Don`t limit yourself to posting other peoples garbage , you will become their  Useful Idiot!

 

 

..

 

.... A useful idiot!

[Opo 182]

Do these two letters ring a bell, bigoted blunty, wacko jacko & hilarious hedley

Potonga - a reply please! (Sent to Wanganui Chronicle 28/10/13)

 

Dear Sir,

Your correspondent Potonga Neilson does finally inform us of just how much Maori blood he has.  According to him, not much at all!

 

Potonga, with your few drops of Maori blood - perhaps you can answer a question I have been asking for years and no-one has answered it?

 

In Maori homes and marae, I see many photographs of Maori ancestors. However I never see any of their pakeha ancestors, which in your case would far outnumber any others.

 

Do Maori not honour all their ancestors, and if so, where are the photographs of the many pakeha ancestors - or in your case, your Norwegian ones. Do they not have equal value?

 

You are who you are today because of ALL your ancestry.

 

Dr. Brian MCDonnell is a university lecturer of mixed ancestry - Tuhoe, Irish, French. He has written several articles about Maori who do not acknowledge any other ethnicity except their Maori-ness. He said "Where there is intermarriage, it is a bridge between ethnic groups, not a process in which one identity is sucked and absorbed into the other until it disappears." He wants Maori to get beyond grievance mode and "apply the brakes to the Waitangi Express to slow its headlong rush into a divisive future."

 

Potonga, I await your reply with interest!

R. B

Tauranga

 

 

Dear Editor, (Sent to Wanganui Chronicle 28/10/13)

 

Your persistent correspondent Gary (Potonga) Neilson, who has called me 'ignorant' in your columns, is apparently so ignorant that he does not know that the forests and fisheries he says were guaranteed by the Treaty of Waitangi to Maoris are not even mentioned in that document which is in the Maori language.  Instead it says simply that all the people of New Zealand were guaranteed the right to own property.

 

I understand that he himself has more Norwegian than Maori ancestry.  Thus he will know that his Viking ancestors raped and pillaged in Britain from the year 787 until King Harold of England defeated and killed King Harald Hardrada of Norway at Stamford Bridge in 1066.  (Without that invasion, Harold would not have had an army tired by forced marches to confront William the Bastard of Normandy at Hastings soon afterwards.)

 

Neilson's few Maori ancestors should have been glad that English settlers here did not act like that.  They purchased land, sometimes several times over in Taranaki and the South Island, and brought peace to lands which previously had seen only brutal Maori tribal warfare, slavery and dispossession of land of the defeated tribes. 

 

Yours faithfully,

B M

Nelson

[Opo 182]

Wanganui Chronicle 6/11/13

 

H TIME AGAIN

In the Chronicle's October 25 reporting on the council meeting. I see Messrs Bullock, Stevens etc wish to bring up the dreaded It debate again. I would like to remind them they were elected to run the city, not to destroy the city's good name of 170 years just to please Ken Mair's mob, who say Wanganui's name has no meaning.

 

Evidently the three Wanganuis down south have no meaning also, such as the large Wanganui Valley north of Mt Aspiring National Park, the great Wanganui cliffs in Westland that drop into the Tasman Sea, not forgetting the Little Wanganui River and its whitebait.

 

Note that all the five Wanganuis are on the West Coast of NZ and the Whangareis and Whakatane are on the east.

 

Another point is there are 318 Maori place names that start with Wa, so why pick on Wanganui for change, as this nonsense started in Wellington when the National Government wanted the Maori Party's vote for reasons unknown. It was about the United Nations Copenhagen climate change. Save the World fiasco, the trade-off was for all government departments to rename Wanganui to Funganui, and the only other to follow was the stand-alone, the editor of the Dominion Post.

C W S

Wanganui

[Opo 182]

Dear Editor, (Sent to Wanganui Chronicle 28/10/13)  
 
Oh dear, Potonga Neilson is licking his imaginery wounds again and spouting Maori entitlements!   Particularly amusing are his comments "But the greatest right WE lost is the right to occupy and utilise our own land and resources".     During the several hundred pre-Treaty years of Maori occupation, they did nothing to utilise the land and occupied it by force.   Maori wiped out almost all animal and bird life.  Their cloaks alone would necessitate the slaying of hundreds of birds to get their feathers.   Conservation was a word unknown to Maori.  And when the protein ran out, they slew and ate each other.   They kept slaves and when there was a market for shrunken heads, killed said slaves without mercy and shrunk their heads for sale.  Some of these heads are being returned and will be welcomed to Te Papa with the usual song and dance, which is ironic considering they were murdered by Maori in the first place!
 
Maori expectation of life was around thirty-five.  Due to European health care and non-human protein, their life expectancy is around seventy.  Neilson  implies that Maori just want their land back - what for?  So they can cover it with ferns as it was pre-Treaty,  and then sell it many times over to buyers in Australia and the UK?
 
Neilson admirs he has  "bugger all Maori blood in his veins" so I think he just likes to stir and see his name in the paper.  In future I will treat his rantings with the contempt they deserve.
 M. B
Tauranga

[Opo 182]

.

Nelson Mail

 

[Opo 182]

Wanganui Chronicle 12/11/13

 

[Uriah Heap 481]

Dear Editor, (Sent to Wanganui Chronicle 28/10/13)  

  

Maori expectation of life was around thirty-five.  Due to European health care and non-human protein, their life expectancy is around seventy.  Neilson  implies that Maori just want their land back - what for?  So they can cover it with ferns as it was pre-Treaty,  and then sell it many times over to buyers in Australia and the UK?

 

 M. B

Tauranga

 

The life expectancy of Europeans (residing in Europe) pre 1840 was, at best, around 40 years old. Similar to NZ Maori at the time.

[Opo 182]

Bay of Plenty Times 14/11/13

 

Wanganui Chronicle  14/11/13

[Turny 1,224]

more from the racist nutter

[hedley 1,900]

..obsessed..24~7_

[Opo 182]

Letters in the Sunlive (Tauranga) 15/11/13

Divisive groups plot path as we snooze
Are you aware the separatist Maori sovereignty group is currently holding talks with the Ngapuhi tribe, with the sole purpose of establishing their own government.

Among others, they are involving the military Frank Bainarama of Fiji, and Indonesia, in discussion.

As Maori are 15 per cent of the population, and the Maori and Mana Parties collectively only received aboutfour per cent of votes at the last election, it is abundantly clear three-quarters of Maori do not follow the radical bent of the parties who allegedly speak for them.

If these groups aim to run their own government side by side with our Westminster system, that would be apartheid on a grand scale. About 50 per cent of the power in New Zealand would be controlled by Maori radicals totalling 4 per cent of the population.

Then there is the Takimoana Government, from the East Coast, who want to be a separate nation and pay no taxes to the New Zealand Parliament. However, I am sure both of these groups would still want to suck at the teat of the benevolent government from where all funding comes.

Meanwhile, this month, the racially-biased Constitutional Advisory Panel is considering the nation’s response to their attempt to permanently entrench the Treaty of Waitangi into every statute of law, which would enshrine Maori privilege into every aspect of our lives - forever.

I am sure most genuine rational Maori are horrified by the intentions of these divisive groups.

People - wake up to what is happening while you are sleeping.
R B, Pyes Pa.


Founding doc: Common sense will prevail
With our constitution now under review, and a report to be tabled to Parliament on December 1, 2013, by the Constitutional Advisory Panel, few would know that Lieutenant Governor Hobson’s superior was Governor Gipps of New South Wales, Australia.

From this point, New Zealand became annexed to Britain and became a dependency of NSW, Australia, with Governor Gipps authorising a proclamation be made in this respect.

Recently, coming to light (via http://www.onenzfoundation.co.nz), is a document quietly held for 173 years, Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter of November 16, 1840, our first constitution and true founding document.

Annexing us to Britain, the Treaty, a document whereby the Queen gained international recognition as New Zealand’s sovereign - and Maori became British subjects, no more no less -  could not be considered our founding document, nor did it do all of what Queen Victoria’s Charter did.

This Charter separated us from NSW, created NZ a separate  British colony, promoted Hobson to be Governor of NZ, gave us our own legislative council, our own executive council, our first constitution, English law, our own judicial system and our own flag; though annexation to Britain persisted for some time afterwards.

Common sense will prevail in that Queen Victoria did not have the power nor authority to grant special favour to any ethnic grouping, all are regarded the same (article 3 of the Treaty), under English law.

The date of Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter, November 16, 1840, should be the day we all celebrate New Zealand’s foundation as a separate and independent colony under the watchful eye of our Queen.

Without the demonstrations, assaults on dignitaries and harassments of Waitangi Day, it would be a day for all to celebrate in peace and harmony.

For the full story, log on to: http://onenzfoundation.co.nz/wordpress/ ... stitution/
G G, Tauranga City.


Memorial not needed
The Maori Party wants Parihaka remembered November 5. But I think Parihaka has been blown out of all proportion by today’s part-Maori.

Maori were squatting, living on land that had been purchased by the Crown from their conquerer, Te Whero Whero and had no right to squat on this land.

As illegal activity was known to be occurring at Parihaka, as well as the habouring of “wanted rebels”, the Colonial Government sent in a large force to remove them peacefully. While one young boy had his foot stood on by a horse, there were no other casualties.

Te Whiti, the leader of the group, was jailed for 18 months for sedition; others were sent to the South Island.

Taranaki tribes were driven from their lands by Waikato Maori, one-third slaughtered, one-third taken as slaves and the rest fleeing to the Wellington area.

Taranaki was left “empty”, with the 900 that fled to Wellington commandeered the ‘Rodney’ and sailed to the Chatham Islands, where they slaughtered the peace-loving Moriori. More than 1000 were killed at the Chathams, no-one was killed at Parihaka. There was a holocaust, but it was at the Chathams not Taranaki. All the evidence is held in our New Zealand Archives.
I B, Wanganui.

http://www.sunlive.co.nz/news/4_28_letters-to-the-editor.html

[Opo 182]

Our democracy is in tatters. A new election will not solve this. (Sent to NZHerald 5/11/13)

Helen Clark systematically undermined families and social structure. P.M. John Key has his own financial agendas, and is seduced by arrogant visions of personal glory, via association with world figures, who assuredly have determined agendas we might prefer not to investigate. NZ democracy is the least of his priorities . Witness his open mockery of recent public referenda .

The minority Maori Party radicals are hellbent on subverting our "democratic" constitution and installing their own loaded, Treaty-based, irreversible version, favouring a tribally-focussed governmental anachronism. The stealthy manner in which this government- facilitated plot has proceeded, and nears their hoped-for completion, is beyond disgraceful. Increasing " Maorification" is evidence of their premature optimism.

A recently published book ,"100 Days - Claiming Back NZ " (Amy Brooke), discusses the successful Swiss system in which all newly- passed, important legislation is subjected to a 100 day trial period, enabling scrutiny by the public, before being passed into law. This reminds politicians where their focus should be. On the will of the people, not their own private agendas or self-serving "deals", at the cost of democracy.

What does it take to wake up the sport-besotted public !!
D. H
Tauranga.


Dear Editor, (Sent to Gisborne Herald 8/11/13)
 
With reference to Ohaumari Joss Ripia`s attack on Captain James Cook when he discovered New Zealand, I would like to correct some of the allegations he makes.  Captain Cook came in the Endeavour but was not the first to sight the land as Tasman had sighted it about 100 years before, but was afraid to set foot because on casting anchor he was fiercely attacked by natives.
 
However Cook, along with Banks, went ashore and bravely walked to some huts, leaving four boys in charge of the boat in which they had come ashore.     The natives attacked the boat and when one threw a spear he was shot dead.  Cook wanted to show the natives he was friendly and and sent men in a boat to invite Maori on board.  However   the nearest natives in a canoe fell upon the sailors with stone axes and paddles and four Maori were shot.   The remaining three were taken onto the Endeavour where Cook showed them much kindness.  Two days later they were returned to the shore but were reluctant to go back!
 
Cook continued his journey but met only hostile resistance.  In the Bay of Islands, two years after Cook`s visit, Maron De Fresne, a Frenchman, and sixteen of his crew were killed and eaten by the natives.
 
Ripia states that out of sixty-six million acres of land, Maori now only own three million.  This is because when Maori found they could "sell" land, they did so with gusto, the same piece sometimes, over and over agian.
 
James Cook did his best to befriend Maori but all they wanted to do was fight.
 Yours sincerely,
 M. B
Tauranga