Herald on Sunday 30/9/18

OUR TRUE FOUNDING DOCUMENT WAS VICTORIA’S ROYAL CHARTER

Not only did Massey's vice-chancellor Jan Thomas transgress on free speech and her efforts to deflect the issue, but in her enthusiastic support of the Treaty she showed her ignorance of the histories of her homeland and New Zealand.

The Treaty only made New Zealand a dependency of the Colony of New South Wales, subject to its governance and legislation.

It was not until May 31840 when Queen Victoria's Royal Charter/ Letters Patent was issued that New Zealand became a self-governing colony with its own governor, parliament, constitution, judiciary, flag and "one set of laws for all".

It is our true Founding Document, a fact that has been avoided or ignored by subsequent governments, the Maori elitists, many academics and our esteemed historians.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa.

Waikato Times 29/9/18

`TRUE FOUNDING DOCUMENT'

Not only did Massey Vice-Chancellor Jan Thomas transgress in the matter of free speech and her subsequent efforts to deflect the issue, but in her enthusiastic support of the Treaty, she showed her ignorance of the histories of her homeland and New Zealand.

The Treaty only made New Zealand a dependency of the colony of New South Wales, subject to its governance and legislation.

It was not until May 3, 1840, that Queen Victoria's Royal Charter/Letters Patent was issued that New Zealand became a self-governing colony with its own governor, parliament, constitution, judiciary, flag and one set of laws for all. The charter is now buried with a million other documents in the vaults of New Zealand Archives.

It is our true founding document, a fact that has been conveniently avoided or ignored by subsequent governments, the Maori elitists, many academics and our esteemed historians.

The charter was officially gazetted in London on October 3, 1840.

Since the 1970s, the Treaty and other official statutes have been revised or altered for political expediency and by immoderate legislation, but history cannot be revised.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

NO TO NZ WARS COMPULSION

Small wonder that Tom O'Connor (Waikato Times, September 22) doesn't want the Musket Wars included in any compulsory school curriculum study of New Zealand Wars.

The inter-tribal Musket Wars highlight the violent nature of Maori society pre-colonisation with the death rate estimated from at least 20,000 and up to 120,000. It was this same belligerence, particularly the deliberate terrorisation and murders of early settlers in Taranaki and Counties Manakau, including women and children, some of whom were axed to death, that sparked the Taranaki, and consequently the Waikato, campaigns.

These killings, largely ignored, would nowadays be called hate crimes and are more in line with the racism experienced in the Southern United States than the insulting comparison Tom O'Connor makes against those who simply are not interested in learning to reo Maori.

I have a strong feeling that anything seemingly criticial of Maori will be glossed over or eliminated from any curriculum study of the so-called New Zealand Wars.

During the last few weeks, this paper has subjected us to a tirade of one-sided rhetoric and emotional anecdote about this period in our shared history and this is exactly why any compulsory study of it should be treated with great scepticism.

P WHITE, Cambridge

Rotorua Daily Post 29/9/18

TRULY ONE PEOPLE?

Jackie Evans, I don't think you need to cry for Mike McVicker (September 22). You certainly don't have to cry for me.

Nobody is stopping anybody learning te reo, the problem is that some want to make it compulsory learning in schools. What for?

Surely it is better to write and speak English correctly before thinking about te reo?

English is the financial and trade language of the world. Most world leaders address the United Nations in English. What good would it be if they spoke Maori?

At the recent basketball game against Lebanon played in Rotorua, only the Maori version of the national anthem was performed. You can keep it. Let's compose another one for other language speakers instead of the dirge we have.

Dr Brash was heavily criticised for complaining about the haka. The haka is not New Zealand, it is Maori. You might like to know that there were only three Maori in the last All Black starting line-up. Why perform the haka?

The late Sir Howard Morrison used his very amusing English version of the haka in his comedy act. Everybody laughed, nobody complained.

Sir Keith Holyoake at a Waitangi celebration in the 60s said "We are all one people" Are we? Not the way it is going on.

MARTIN GIS Rotorua

The Press 29/9/18

SENTENCE DISCOUNT

I see the decision of High Court Justice Christian Whata to uphold a District Court decision to apply a 30 per cent reduction when imposing sentence upon Rachael Heta on cultural grounds as unacceptable (Editorial. Sept 24).

That decision means there are now two categories of offenders: those who identify as Maori. and the rest.

As has been said. justice is supposed to be blind.

Sadly, Maori are all too likely to experience deprivations and domestic violence during their formative years.

There are many reasons for that, but to claim those deprivations are "systemic" is a claim that might be expected of Maori activists.not a High Court Justice.

The relevant section of the Sentencing Act 2002 allows a judge to take into account an offender's personal circumstances.

But an upbringing that was appalling is not confined to Maori.

Is it now being said that deprivations and abuses experienced by non-Maori will not count as much when determining a sentence?

This is a deeply flawed decision that must be appealed.

BRUCE ANDERSON, St Albans

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 28/9/18

BOARD DECISION PLEASES

It is pleasing to note that WBOPDC councillors have voted to maintain community boards.

Mayor Webber's wish to do away with boards and have councillors choose who will represent the community smacks of elitist favouritism and the idea has again been trounced.

In my view, the role of Mayor is to facilitate, through council processes, the wishes of the 'majority' of the community.

Minority lobby groups that promote any hypothesis based on race can only be perceived as divisive by the community at large.

M ANDERSON, Pyes Pa.

Dominion Post 28/9/18

WHERE'S THE HATE?

Doreen D'Cruz and John C Ross (letters Sept 25) say the Hobson's Pledge group come close to hate speech on Maori wards. I would have said quite the opposite.

The group are not saying they hate Maori or that they are unable to cast a vote.

Maori men and women have been actively involved in New Zealand's electoral system for 150 years (longer than any other indigenous people) and know as much as anyone about the system.

But because many Maori, like at least 50 per cent of the population, chose not to get involved in local politics, some busibodies have decided they need to choose someone to represent them, even if they want them or not. That seems racist and patronising to me.

CHRIS BOWEN, Lower Hutt

OWNING UP

At last, someone who gets it. Victims' advocate Maanki (Blame must stop if we're to break family violence cycle, Sept 26) understands that offenders have to own their offending to stop their behaviour.

Blaming extraneous forces for personal violence prevents this from happening.

Sentencing discounts for cultural background conflict with this reality.

Whether the offender is Maori or non-Maori, only they can decide to change. Making excuses for why people offend only makes it easier for them to continue.

LINDSAY MITCHELL, Eastbourne

Northland Age 27/9/18

AN OPEN TROUGH

Treaty-based lawyers and culturally hypnotised political lenders fraudulently push a “Treaty partnership” between Maori, “us” and the “Crown”. This is disingenuous and ultimately damaging.

In the name of partnership, many changes have been introduced to the way New Zealand is governed there has been no specific definition of the Treaty partnership. It is an open trough to be fed from at all angles.

The glaring contradiction is that the power-sharing arrangements that we’ve arrived at are in direct conflict with the wording of Article 3 of the Treaty, that clearly states that everyone in New Zealand — Maori and non-Maori are equal citizens.

On any reasonable interpretation, equal citizenship means equal opportunities to influence decisions that affect everyone — political equality, in other words.

Power-sharing arrangements, which reserve opportunities for Maori to influence public policies that affect Maori and non-Maori alike, breach the ideals of the Treaty, not the other way around.

REX ANDERSON, Lower Hutt

REPAIRING THE DAMAGE

Re Dominion Post article September 24 ‘Call to scrutinise history in schools.’ Canterbury University senior lecturers Dr Richard Manning and Garrick Cooper are calling to the education system racist for not teaching New Zealand colonial history, such as the New Zealand Land Wars.

The Ministry of Education should be teaching our true history by going further back than 1984, like 1000 years or more, when New Zealand was inhabited by people well before the arrival of a group of people who are now called Maori. Some ancient sites go back at least over a few thousand years, like the site in Waipoua Forest, where carbon dating done goes back to 225AD, and other sites about 1000 years.

Teach the children about the ancient people like Ngai Hotu, Celts, Patupairarehe, Waitaha, Moriori and Chinese, who were all pre-Maori people. Yes, and the Land Wars where Maori were fighting Maori. This would be a good start for now repairing the damage to our country. That our governments have been hiding the truth and taking us down the road of apartheid .

IAN BROUGHAM, Wanganui

Rotorua Daily Post 27/9/18

TROUT BILL LUNACY

Who on earth is putting up the harebrained idea of this bill being introduced to parliament?

I believe this give the Department of Conservation extreme power over Fish &Game, allowing them to ride roughshod over our extremely beautiful and vulnerable fisheries.

Why are we considering Maori being allowed to gather and sell trout for profit?

Trout and salmon were introduced species to New Zealand and nothing whatsoever to do with the Treaty of Waitangi.

In my opinion, this dabbling is lunacy.

As an avid fly fisher, I’m appalled this bill is even being considered. I think it will damage tourism, to say nothing of the impact it will cause to our local fishermen's future.

MARTIN GREEN Lake Okareka

New Zealand Herald 26/9/18

BRASH BAN HIGHLIGHTS ISSUE

Vice Chancellor Jan Thomas has done New Zealand a favour. By banning Don Brash from speaking at Massey University, she has highlighted one of the dangers of basing our constitutional arrangements on the Treaty of Waitangi.

Massey University prides itself on being a Te Tiriti o Waitangi-led institution. This led to the deplatforming of Dr Brash because, according to Professor Thomas, his views on the Treaty are incompatible with Massey.

This stance sends the message that, if the Treaty was to be at the heart of our constitution, we run the risk that any voices deemed ideologically unacceptable by the arbiters of Treaty orthodoxy would also be silenced.

SUSAN SHORT, Meadowbank.

Dominion Post 26/9/18

CASE OF WHEN, NOT IF, FOR THOMAS

That was an interesting letter from Phil Etheridge on September 22, but pity his information was incorrect.

You mention Don Esslemont walking out of a forum in May. Don Esslemont was my lecturer, tutor and mentor when I was studying for my undergraduate degree and I was always impressed with his listening to all sides in discussions, then identifying the empirical data before coming to a conclusion. He always taught us not to make assumptions but to understand the veracity of any argument before making a decision. If Don walked out of a forum, I would have complete faith in him believing that what was being discussed was a load of tripe.

For your elucidation Phil, Don Brash was invited to talk about his time as the governor of the Reserve Bank. Are these extreme and divisive policies? Perhaps to you and Jan Thomas they are. If Don Esslemont was vice-chancellor of Massey University, it would have far more credibility than it does with Jan Thomas.

I read that Massey University's academic board has tabled two motions to censure Thomas. I believe that it's now not a question of whether Thomas should resign but when.

RAYWARD CHUNG, Broadmeadows

Bay of Plenty Times 26/9/18

WAITANGI RIGHTS

Article III of the Treaty of Waitangi gave Maori equal rights to those enjoyed by all other British subjects.

Nothing like it happened anywhere else in the world. It means that today we are all equal.

We want to work together as equals, not see those who happen to have at least one Maori ancestor have a separate systems with a preferential status.

In local government an elected councillor should see every person as his or her equal, and should represent them all without fear or favour.

We already have people who are elected representatives on our council who are part-Maoris one of them on the Maori roll, and I understand they are insulted when people argue that we have no Maori in our local government.

So, to Mr Dey, the Treaty gave us equality before the law, please respect that and stop twisting the truth.

MARGARET MURRAY-BENGE Bethlehem

Waikato Times 25/9/18

FRASER PRINCIPAL’S SPEECH 2

The be congratulated on publishing non-PC letters as submitted by Bryan Johnson to thus give a more balanced picture to the thorny subject of Pakeha -Maori relations. Incidentally, do Chinese, Indians or Somali New Zealanders count as Pakeha? Nobody seems to be able to tell me.

And what a brave if controversial speech by the Fraser High principal it was to tell it as it is, working as she does at the coal face. I just cannot accept that colonisation is solely responsible for Maori over-representation in our prisons, domestic violence, gang-run drug cartels and violent dairy robberies. Without doubt there were many injustices perpetrated throughout the 19th century, but so there were worldwide: Wounded Knee in the US and the massacre of the Tasmanian indigenous population being just two examples.

There is an old saying that ‘‘self-help is best help’’ and this is particularly relevant to the present situation.

Iwi have been given megabucks in Treaty settlements (where else in the world has this happened?). It is a Maori problem – it is up to them to fix it with increased social services rather than real estate investment.

FRANK BAILEY, Hamilton

The Press 25/9/18

JOEL MAXWELL SURPRISE

Cathy Sweet (Sept 24) rejoices in the writings of Joel Maxwell.

Remarkable.

To me, Maxwell’s columns come close to being racist, ageist, divisive rants, masquerading as satire.

Possibly Cathy Sweet believes the colonial oppressors deserve Maxwell as some kind of payback.

I will be more charitable; in my view she is well intentioned but misguided.

BRUCE ANDERSON, Christchurch

Waikato Times 24/9/18

INSTITUTIONAL RACISM

Often these days we hear allegations of institutional racism and unconscious bias levelled at our judicial system and police, respectively, to explain the high numbers of Maori appearing in our courts and being incarcerated in our prisons. The latest allegation is that police are pursuing more Maori drivers than others and more Maori are dying in police pursuits as a result.

First of all, before you can be arrested in this country, a police officer has to have good cause to suspect or believe on reasonable and probable grounds that a person has committed a crime or an offence. That is the law. You cannot be arrested for just being a Maori in a public place or for being a Maori driving a motor vehicle.

Once arrested, you go to court, where you have the choice of pleading guilty or not guilty to the offence or crime with which you are charged. You will be seen by a duty solicitor, provided free of charge, courtesy of the taxpayer. If you plead not guilty, you may well be eligible for legal aid, again free of charge, courtesy of the taxpayer (i.e. members of the society against whom you are alleged to have offended.) By pleading not guilty, you have the right to challenge the evidence presented to the court and defend your actions.

The court, not the police, will determine whether you are guilty or not guilty and will decide on an appropriate sanction.

A PAUL, Hamilton

Dominion Post 24/9/18

THOMAS CAN'T STAY

"Come clean about Brash ban" (Editorial, Sept 20) says it all. Jan Thomas has been dishonest about her reasons for banning Don Brash from speaking at Massey University, and her position as vice-chancellor is untenable.

If she doesn't resign willingly, Massey must pull its head out of the sand and fire her. For the sake of the reputation and integrity of the university, it cannot allow such bigots to remain in such a prestigious and influential position.

Whether you agree with Don Brash or not, he at least has the integrity to be unwavering and vocal about his belief§, unlike Jan Thomas, who dissembles and obfuscates.

RAYWARD CHUNG, Broadmeadows

Bay of Plenty Times 24/9/18

HAPPY WITH VOTE

It is pleasing that Western Bay of Plenty District Councillors have voted to maintain community boards.

Mayor [Garry) Webbet's wish to do away with boards and have councillors choose who will represent the community smacks of elitist favouritism and the idea has again been trounced.

In my view, the role of mayor is to facilitate through council processes the wishes of the majority of the community.

Minority lobby groups that promote any hypothesis based on race can only be perceived as divisive.

MAUREEN ANDERSON PyesPa

Otago Daily Times 24/9/18

MASSEY BOSS SHOWS LITTLE UNDERSTANDING OF FREE SPEECH

MASSEY University vice­chancellor Jan Thomas may have no intention of resigning (ODT, 21.9.18), but it is clear that she has to go.

The contents of her emails, released through an OIA request, are jaw­dropping, and not least for her appalling grammar.

She shows no understanding of what free speech is, of why it is important, and of where it can legitimately be restricted.

Merely finding speech disagreeable or even offensive does not provide grounds for its restriction.

Crude distinctions such as ‘‘Hate Speech is not Free Speech’’ gloss over much problematic territory, as has been ably explored in Nadine Strossen’s recent book: Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship (NY: Oxford University Press, 2018).

As an example of her absolute unsuitability for the role of a vicechancellor at a New Zealand university, in her July 13, 2018 email she writes:

‘‘So I sum, I really want to find a way to indicate that Brash is not welcome on campus unless he agrees to abide by our values and the laws against hate speech.

‘‘He is not a sitting politician so why is he getting this airing,’’ she says in the email.

The situation is sad for current Massey students and recent graduates, particularly in the humanities, as the VC’s actions are already affecting the reputation of their degrees.

Perhaps Massey can learn from Evergreen State College in the United States.

At that institution, one year after the campus culture went full­social justice warrior mode, student enrolments plummeted.

MALCOLM MONCRIEF ­SPITTLE Dunedin

Herald on Sunday 23/9/18

ONE NATION, ONE PEOPLE

All permanent residents of New Zealand are New Zealanders. They live in a mono-cultural society that is the amalgam of 231 ethnicities from all parts of the world Depending on their ancestral lineage there are Maori New Zealanders, Irish New Zealanders, Chinese New Zealanders etc but if they regard and accept this as their homeland then they are New Zealanders.

Maori are no longer a separate race. Their [inter-breeding] with other ethnicities over the past 200 years means there are now no full-blooded Maori. There is no legal or logical reason for them to be treated separately.

That the Government regards them as equal partners in the control of the country, as expressed by the Prime Minister, is a politically motivated travesty, creating a divided society with unjust, undemocratic, ethnic privilege and not what was agreed to in1840.

It also makes the role of the Governor General, as the Queen's representative, redundant.

A subject by definition, cannot be a partner with the Crown.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY

Whilst I am delighted at the apparent success of another Maori language week Fm not sure teaching to reo should be compulsory in our schools. To avoid becoming even more isolated and parochial in this rapidly changing world, I would suggest that of far greater value would be the teaching of Spanish, with an estimated 570 million speakers worldwide, or Mandarin, of which there are some 1000 million speakers.

WILLIAM WRIGHT, Rotorua

Sunday Star Times 23/9/18

UNIVERSITY DISGRACE

What a disgraceful state of affairs that a former leader of an Opposition party is denied an opportunity to present views for discussion at a forum in a New Zealand university, at the whim of the vice-chancellor.

It is not the business, nor should it be, of a university to stifle debate. Rather, the ivory tower should grasp such a nettle.

Much as we see the behaviour of neo-fascist liberals in America seeking to suppress unwanted propaganda, so too apparently are we seeing it here from those styled in a similar fashion at another end of the political spectrum.

Whether or not we agree with the views of others in this respect is not important. What is important is that we hear them and counter their views in the debating arena. If we do not do this, running sores will fester and we risk the eruption of a violent demonstration.

This particular vice-chancellor should think again or vacate the post to the more open-minded.

JOHN D MAHONY, Christchurch

Bay of Plenty Times 22/9/18

VIEWS ON TE REO NOT MAINSTREAM

Regarding Mr Williams and Ms Marvelly's opinions (Opinion, September 15). Their views are pertinent to them but not to mainstream New Zealand citizens.

Statistics tell as that the uptake of te reo is waning as a language, but how many readers know that te reo has $600 million poured into its promotion annually through a multiplicity of providers?

How many homes for disadvantaged Maori would that build?

The Flavell/Fox Maori Party spent an allocation of$35 million over four years, and fewer than a dozen homes were built. Why didn't the National Party hold them to account? All political parties wring their hands over the homeless, promise the public the earth, deliver very little and then spend hundred s of millions of dollars 'looking into it'.

Western civilisation has given New Zealand everything that we have, and there is only one 'global race', and that is the 'human race'.

MAUREEN J ANDERSON Tauranga

Waikato Times 22/9/18

BRASH SPEECH AT MASSEY

In all the controversy relating to Massey University and the failed attempt by Don Brash to speak on campus, something appears to be missing. One often hears the comment along the lines of, I may not like what they say, but will defend their right to say it. And basically it is true.

That, perhaps, explains Vice Chancellor Jan Thomas’ primary concern being ‘‘safety of you as staff and the student community’’.

My concern would have to be, what are they teaching the student community in that institution?

Where is the respect, tolerance and consideration that should be at the forefront of all interaction within a university?

The students could have listened and made up their own minds. Instead, they were virtually labelled as a security issue and the opportunity was taken away from them. Not a good advertisement for the institution.

MICHAEL L EARL, Te Aroha

MULTICULTURAL NZ

All permanent residents of New Zealand are New Zealanders. They live in a monocultural society that is the amalgam of 231 ethnicities from all parts of the world. Depending on their ancestoral lineage, there are Maori New Zealanders, Irish New Zealanders, Chinese New Zealanders, etc, but if they regard and accept New Zealand as their homeland, then they are New Zealanders.

Maori are no longer a separate race. Their inbreeding with other ethnicities over the past 200 years means that there are now no full-blooded Maori.

They have at least half-immigrant ancestry and are a local group of mixed ethnicity but not a separate race.

There is no legal or logical reason for them to be treated separately.

That the Government regards them as equal partners in the control of the country, as expressed by the Prime Minister, is a politically motivated travesty, creating a divided society with unjust, undemocratic, ethnic privilege, without the assent of the general population and not what was agreed to in 1840. It also makes the role of the Governor-General, as the Queen’s representative, redundant.

A subject, by definition, cannot be a partner with the Crown.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

Wanganui Chronicle 22/9/18

WORK FOR PATEA

It's pleasing to see the TTR sand miners are going to appeal the decision to block the mining.

It's an economic activity needed in Patea and surrounding areas.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer has many Maori in her pedigree who I played rugby with in Patea. Debbie seems not to see the benefits to the area and resorts to protest mode.

I know Maori who are keen for the mining to go ahead, so she does not speak for all.

If you had a referendum, the silent majority — both Maori and Pakeha — would be putting their hands up for mining.

You won't stop it, Debbie — just delay.

Patea closed the works with their anti-business work practices, and now they have a chance of some economic activity they are trying to do that again.

G R SCOWN Wanganui

TEACH MANDARIN

Maori language week — as John Key said years ago, all schools should teach Mandarin as the day will come when we will need to speak that language.

GARY STEWART Foxton Beach

Waikato Times 21/9/18

LAND WARS HISTORY

Last week, the Waikato Times compared the competing visions of Vincent O'Malley and Don Brash.

Dr O'Malley shows bias and often ignores facts that don't fit his vision.

Dr Brash is a good analyst who considers all facts.

Dr O'Malley says the Land Wars had more impact than any other wars.

Dr Brash suggests that the loss of about 30,000 Maori lives during the Musket Wars had greater impact.

Dr O'Malley and others' drive to denigrate anything to do with colonialism is an insult to thousands of well-meaning immigrants who came to improve their lives.

Dr Brash seems to want to bring people together, not drive them apart.

In 1864, 62 per cent of Europeans were living in the South Island. Clearly, they were almost two different countries. By 1876, all eight of my great-grandparents were in New Zealand with no wish to dominate anyone, as Dr O'Malley suggests. They would have spent their entire lives with minimal contact with Maori.

Dr O'Malley mentions Rangiaowhia. In recent years, it has been popular to claim that over a hundred innocent Maori civilians were locked in a church and burnt to death. That simply didn't happen. Dr O'Malley never denies this.

I suggest that Dr Brash has a more honest grasp of New Zealand history.

MURRAY REID, Leamington

NZ Herald 21/9/18

ON BRASH

If a person who calls for equality between the races in New Zealand is called a racist why aren’t people who call for equality between the sexes called sexist?

NICK HAMILTON, Newmarket

ON NEW BODY

Without a hyphen the new Maori Crown relationship unit and its minister could easily be interpreted as an adjunct of the kingitanga political movement and not an agency of the Crown. The Te Arawhiti in the title also adds to this interpretation.

BRIAN GILES, Hauraki

CULTURAL DISCOUNT

I was appalled when I read that a High Court ruling had dismissed the appeal from the Solicitor-General against a high cultural discount in a sentencing. Judge Moala had granted a 30 per cent discount for “post-colonial trauma” for a woman who stabbed her partner.

So, we do not have a legal system that treats all people in the same equitable way — does this mean in another 200 years my descendants can protest on how they have been treated?

How do you expect people to become accountable for their own actions when they can use a historical event as a reason every time?

This type of inconsistency divides a country and is no better than what happened at the time of colonisation.

CAROL RICHARDSON, Bayswater

Rotorua Daily Post 21/9/18

GOD DEFEND THE NZ NATIONAL ANTHEM

Re. Peter Williams' opinion of te reo or Maori Language week (Opinion, September 15). He stated drop the English verse of the national anthem and in the 21st century do we really need to be singing about voices entreating and being guarded from the shafts of strife and war?

I'd like to remind Williams that this precious anthem was written by and for New Zealanders. God Defend New Zealand began life way back in the early 1870s when newspaper editor Thomas Bracken wrote the words and he offered a prize of 10 guineas for the best musical settings. This was won by John Joseph Woods, a school teacher at Lawrence it became a national anthem in 1939. Has Williams read the words of the five verses of our anthem? What can he have against these words?

Its like a prayer; and hasn't God defended New Zealand all these years?

Most people nowadays speak English and can hear and understand what's been sung Peter wants to drop the English version and only have it sung in Maori. Why?

The overwhelming majority of New Zealanders do not speak the Maori language, particularly our new immigrants. At least we sing it in Maori and we get the interpretation in English, which is great. That's how ft should be done so both parties are happy and in harmony.

Peter Williams' opinion is certainly not mine or that of many others. Why fix something that isn't broken? (Abridged)

CONK DE BOER Rotorua

Northern Advocate 21/9/18

SPENDING DECISIONS

I agree with Chris, what a waste of money for new signage. The council seem hellbent on wasting ratepayers’ money.

Why don’t they fix up the footpaths that I keep tripping over and the roads — they are shocking!! Stop trying to make everything look pretty! They think the ratepayers are a bank.

Another thing — the signage is boring. Sort it out!

2. A few comments to Marianne Robson’s letter. Most Kiwis are not interested in learning Maori, can’t use it in everyday life — waste of time.

Can’t go in to a shop and use it, [although it is] okay to know some basic Maori.

Maori spoken today is not the same way it was spoken when I went to school, not the true spoken Maori.

WAYNE ALEXANDER Whangarei

Northland Age 20/9/18

KIWIS ALL

All permanent residents of New Zealand are New Zealanders. They live in a monocultural society that is the amalgam of 231 ethnicities from all parts of the world.

Depending on their ancestral lineage there are Maori New Zealanders, Irish New Zealanders, Chinese New Zealanders etc, but if they regard and accept New Zealand as their homeland then they are New Zealanders.

Maori are no longer a separate race. Their breeding with other ethnicities over the past 200 years means there are now no full-blooded Maori. They have at least half immigrant ancestry, and are a local group of mixed ethnicity but not a separate race.

There is no legal or logical reason for them to be treated separately. That the government regards them as equal partners in the control of the country, as expressed by the Prime Minister, is a politically motivated travesty, creating a divided society with unjust, undemocratic, ethnic privilege, without the assent of the general population and not what was agreed to in 1840.

It also makes the role of the GovernorGeneral, as the Queen’s representative, redundant. A subject, by definition, cannot be a partner with the Crown.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

BOGUS

Swiss immigrant Marianne Robson preaches to us about te reo and “Aotearoa’s colonial wrongdoings”.

For a start, she needs to know that Aotearoa is a bogus name for New Zealand, only one of many names for the North Island. My authority is the Treaty of Waitangi. I invite her to look for it there.

As for alleged “colonial wrongdoings”, whatever they were, they were vastly outweighed by the huge benefits which British civilisation brought to the Maori people – no more inter-tribal slaughter, cannibalism, slavery and female infanticide for a start.

As for forcing to reo down the throats of our children, its $600 million annual budget would be spent far more humanely building houses for the homeless, many of whom are of Maori descent.

BRUCE MOON Nelson

Bay of Plenty Times 20/9/18

PROUD NEW ZEALANDER

I am proud to be a New Zealander. I am proud of our standing in the world. I am surprised that Peter Williams in all his media career has not aspired to that pride and would extinguish our presentation to the world in its recognition.

Having led the world in enfranchising women. New Zealanders are at the forefront of world political recognition, business and export world, the sporting world, and our country participates in and has led the world in science.

Our soldiers fought and died in wars as New Zealanders as did our Maori Battalion.

Our international status and recognition will always be as New Zealand and not Aotearoa, and we should never disappear to Pacific island obscurity which would be his next step. New Zealand comprises over 180 different ethnic groups.

They did not come to Aotearoa and do not ask for individual naming rights. Maori has always been acknowledged in this country's heritage and place name recognition.

We are an English-speaking nation and our anthem, dirge though it is should continue to reflect this and be recognised as the NZ anthem.

Accepting te reo does not mean extinguishing the right to be New Zealanders in our own language.

If Maori are not leaming/speaking te reo now it is presumably by choice. Despite our Westminster background and recognition of the Queen as head of State, te reo influence has succeeded in the constitutional and religious traditional parliamentary prayer being abandoned in favour of a karakia. There was no consultation. Where would this influence end?

RE.STEPHENS Papamoa

Rotorua Daily Press 20/9/18

KEEP ENGLISH TOO

Peter Williams suggests that in our effort to make te reo Maori more every day and acceptable we should drop the English verse of the National Anthem (Opinion, September 15).

He also asks: “In the 21st century do we really need to be singing about voices entreating and being guarded from the shafts of strife and war? “

If we drop the English verse, our anthem will no longer be bilingual. We can't build up one culture by tearing down another. Both are important and significant to our country.

Add te reo Maori to the road signs (or English, as the case may be). Find other ways to support and encourage the use of te reo too. Let's value and celebrate both languages and cultures, it will be enriching for us all.

Unfortunately, though it is the 21st century, we do need to worry about the shafts of strife and war. I’d encourage Williams to look at the full National Anthem (which actually has five English verses and five Maori verses) and think about all of its words.

They are worth keeping. I'd like to see us all take them to heart and strive to make our country as good as the song entreats.

VICKI ARNOTT Rotorua

The Press 20/9/18

LANGUAGE

Languages are ever-changing, dynamic, and non-linear. Language can neither be shut up in a cage of correctness nor artificially created.

The te reo spoken today is undoubtedly vastly different from that spoken by those in the first waka. Twenty-first century English speakers would struggle to understand Captain Cook.

Each language is a taonga of the world view of its speakers. Each language reflects the unique and rich perspective of its time.

Our modern question is, ‘‘Do we want our languages to reflect our landscape of monoculture and polluted rivers or the richness of diversity?"

MARY TINGEY, Richmond

Rotorua Daily Post 19/9/18

TE REO IS FRUSTRATING IN PARLIAMENT

Recently I dialled into Question Time at Parliament to listen to the debate of the day.

While there was the usual cross-party scrapping which one has become familiar with, the 10 minutes of debate between two Labour Party Maori MPs, spoken in te reo, was frustrating to say the least.

Sure, the majority of MPs could switch into the English commentary available but what about the thousands of listeners who had no idea what they were talking about?

Then we had to listen to the debate as to the interpretation of the Maori words spoken. which again tested one's ability to remain listening.

Hence the question must be asked as to the benefit of te reo in the highest court in the land let alone everyday spoken language.

Consequently, one can only conclude that the suggestion of compulsory te reo in the future is not the way forward f or a multicultural society such as ours. (Abridged)

MIKE MCVICKER Rotorua

NZ Herald 19/9/18

ON TE REO

Maori Language Week is over for another 12 months and it certainly had a lot of exposure. However, I sense a certain amount of hypocrisy in the corridors of power because we have yet to see a single political hoarding in Maori at election time.

BEN WALKER, Hamilton.

Otago Daily Times 18/9/18

HOLD A REFERENDUM ON MAKING TE REO COMPULSORY

A FORMER South African doctor, Moyra Sweetnam-Evans, is 100% supportive of making the Maori language compulsory in our schools (ODT, 14.9.18).

As a New Zealander of Maori heritage, I have taken it upon myself to look up the meaning of Maori place names as I travel.

Dr Sweetnam-Evans, the Green Party and others want the teaching of Maori to be compulsory. To my knowledge, Maori are not prevented from learning their own language.

Many unelected bureaucrats and fellow travellers supported by the media wanted a flag change. A referendum by the New Zealand people brought them all down to earth.

I suggest that a referendum be held in which Dr Sweetnam-Evans and members of the Green Party can have their say.

This may better decide whether the Maori language be made compulsory in our schools.

EVAN SADLER, Henley

NGAHIWI Apanui (ODT, 13.9.18), implies that Garrick Tremain’s cartoon doesn’t have a shred of truth in it. But what better way of hitting home the stupidity and the impossibility of making te reo compulsory.

The 1970s and ’80s witnessed the rise of kohanga reo preschool and bilingual departments at high schools. By the ’90s kohanga reo were in decline and bilingual ‘‘marae’’ struggled to get fluent teachers.

Criticism was rife over the standard of Maori being taught by nonfluent teachers.

So te reo is now back in vogue with the word ‘‘compulsory’’ being added by dreamers who have no experience or knowledge of the impracticality of achieving this. Many schools can’t even get qualified maths or science teachers. And the dreamers ignore children’s rights to choose and the limited time in school days.

There have been big improvements in Maori pronunciation, but for Maori children the huge gap in education achievement is sadly a socioeconomic problem.

RON ROBERT, St Clair

The Press 18/9/18

COMPULSORY LOSS

Fae Stewart (Sept 17), in a touching letter about her grandchildren, says, ‘‘Bring on compulsory te reo. It is a toanga for all.’’ She (and the others who advocate a similar policy) lost me at ‘‘compulsory’’.

The status of the Maori language has in some respects paralleled that of Welsh, which until relatively recently was at risk of extinction until various laws were passed to elevate it to an official status on a par with English. Well, good for them, I thought but imagine if the Welsh (who historically speaking occupy a similar position to Maori, being one of the oldest cultures and languages in the British Isles) then turned around to the rest of Britain’s pupils and said, ‘‘You will all learn Welsh’’.

Some might claim my English-speaking ancestors imposed their own cultural hegemony upon Maori and turnaround is fair play. To my mind two wrongs do not make a right. Te reo should be an option for any New Zealand student, but to make it an obligation merely repeats the mistakes of the past.

DARREN A SAUNDERS, Waltham

LANGUAGES

MF Wood (Sept 17) needs to read Chomsky. Children always pick up a new tongue quickly, adults take longer. Originally, monolingual Maori leaders and elders depended on their children learning English, and interpreting thousands of new ideas. The elders had every reason to encourage the children to rapidly learn English on their behalf.

As the monolingual Maori leaders died off, Maori were left with English-speaking leaders. This process happens with immigrants today. Where two languages meet, the most useful language survives, the other fades to a ceremonial language.

PHILLIP REX ROBINSON, Waltham

TE REO CONCERN

This week’s column by Joel Maxwell demonstrates my concern with te reo activity. It will inevitably drive a wedge between pakeha and Maori. As he attacked pakeha yesterday for not joining in the language movement, Joel was insulting, sarcastic and hostile.

Surely we can see how this gulf will widen, especially among young people.

Language is communication, and when we lose that, both groups - each of equivalent importance in humanity - will be lessened as we split into suspicion and distrust.

JOHN BURN, Merivale

NZ Herald 18/9/18

CROWN-MAORI PARTNERSHIP

New Zealand First is to be congratulated for declining to support the establishment of a Crown-Maori Partnership Office.

The Government promised that all New Zealanders must agree on what should be done to achieve a strong Crown/Maori relationship, and yet there has been little consultation with the wider community about the implications of the radical idea of establishing a formal Crown-Maori partnership.

Instead, the Government has even failed to publicly acknowledge that a relationship in the form of a partnership would not happen in a vacuum, and that the rights of all citizens would be affected.

The disrespect shown to other New Zealanders with this venture is palpable.

SUSAN SHORT, Meadowbank.

Bay of Plenty Times 18/9/18

INSULT TO VETERANS

The English language is a national, and global, treasure. Peter Williams' call (Opinion. September 15) for the English language to be expunged from our national song is, in my view, an insult to many English-speaking New Zealanders and to the many English-speaking men and women who fought and died for this country.

R RIMMER Welcome Bay

Waikato Times 17/9/18

MAORI CULTURE

The headmaster of a prominent Wellington school said ‘‘Maori culture that we need to engage with ...’’ What Maori culture? Before the arrival of Europeans, Maori culture – through several centuries of isolation – was the most primitive in the world and consisted of inter-tribal aggression, the very basic needs of survival that were required by Stone Age tribal units. Kill or be killed.

This is what happened but you will not see it recorded by Orange, O’Malley and co.

Te reo is a bastardised form of English and bears no relation to the language that greeted Cook.

The problems that Maori have in education are not because of the evils of colonisation but by the reluctance of present day part-Maori Renaissance elitists to accept the advice of their former leaders, like Sir Apirana Ngata, who said that education and proficiency in English were the keys to Maori achieving equality.

The lack of objectivity in the general media was obvious with the TV1 news, where only Maori or pro-Maori opinions on te reo were presented.

A national binding referendum on these matters is the only democratic solution but this can only succeed when there is acceptance that we are all New Zealanders and not seek ethnic exclusivity and privilege.

But the ‘‘privileged’’ need not fear these comments, as the less-than-objective media will see that they are not published.

Some may regard this as ‘‘hate speech’’ but it is verifiable history.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

NZ Herald 17/9/18

PRIDE SWELLS IN ANTHEM

I have watched via TV many All Blacks games of late and one thing comes to mind and that is how much I enjoy the New Zealand national anthem, God Defend New Zealand, sung in both te reo Maori and English words by Thomas Bracken, and music composed by John J Woods. I am sure many other Kiwis also feel the proverbial lump in the throat. The te reo Maori version followed by the words and music by Bracken and Woods is emotionally inspiring.

I sincerely hope there is no thought of ever changing the New Zealand current national anthem or would anyone want to especially after the fiasco of trying to change our traditional flag that many Kiwis have been proud of for many years.

Thomas Bracken also wrote the beautiful words to the poem Dunedin from the Bay, and is buried on a hill overlooking Dunedin.

JIMMI FARRY, Auckland.

IT MUST BE SATIRE

I read Peter Williams’ column (September 15) choking on my morning coffee. Was he seriously suggesting having the national anthem only in te reo ( hardly an acknowledgment of bi-culturalism or diversity) and “give way” and “stop” signs only in Maori? (Gosh, we have enough trouble with tourists not knowing which side of the road to drive on, without them not knowing what to do at an intersection.)

Then I realised that this was a brilliant piece of satirical writing exposing some of the silly demands for promoting te reo Maori.

Well done, Peter, I was still laughing as I poured the milk on my corn-flakes.

RICHARD PRINCE, Welcome Bay.

MAORI BELITTLED

In his desire to belittle the call for equality, Paul Little conveniently chooses to ignore the co-leader of Hobson Pledge. Casey Costello is of Ngapuhi descent and is a high-achieving woman living a successful life. She just doesn't fit Little's narrative.

Many, many Maori are leaders in science, education, business, the arts and political fields to name a few.

Many, many others may not be at the top of any ladders but they are living very good lives just like most other Kiwis.

Little delivers on his name by belittling all Maori by treating them all as one permanently damaged group with special needs.

FIONA MACKENZIE, Whangaparaoa.

TE REO NOT FOR ALL

Although I respect those people who genuinely wish to speak te reo, I don't wish to. I resent having the views of others forced down my throat. Learn te reo if you wish, but don't make everybody learn it.

Similarly, the haka. I squirm with embarrassment when this war dance is trotted out. It is being performed on too many occasions now. And as for the suggestion that our national anthem be sung only in te reo — I would consider that an insult.

A N CHRISTIE, Rotorua.

Northern Advocate 17/9/18

TO `H' OR NOT TO `H'

The Wanganui Chronicle has changed the spelling of the Wanganui name by inserting the 'h' in it without consulting the people.

Mayor Hamish McDouall has welcomed the change. The editor Mark Dawson says it's the correct Maori spelling and NZME chief executive Michael Boggs is proud to see the change. Mark and Hamish know that Wanganui is not a Maori name as it has nothing to do with Maori as I have written many times and have researched it.

It belongs to a pre-Maori people known as Waitaha who arrived about 300 years before the people who are now called Maori, there is a pa site in Wanganui named Waitaha pa.

The broken down name for Wanganui according to a Waitaha chief is Wa, is energy, nga, is many, nui, is large. The Waitaha name means 'beside the waters", who lived close to the sea, lakes, and rivers. They originally began as a fair skinned Caucasian people who were part of the blonde, red-haired people like the Ngati Hotu- Celts-Patupairehe.

The people that want the 'h' in Wanganui have turned against their own people as our ancestors were connected to these groups. One lot of the Waitaha people now live in the South Island where the name Wanganui appears six times without the ‘h’.

IAN BROUGHAM Wanganui

Bay of Plenty Times 17/9/18

NO TO MAORI ANTHEM

I have just re-read Peter Williams' drivel, again, (September 15) wanting to delete the English version of our national anthem, and clutter up the road signs with dual language.

I read it twice to make sure my eyes weren't playing tricks the first time. if it wasn't for the English version we wouldn't have an anthem in the first place.

As for the road signs, I say leave them well alone. We've got enough confusion on the roads now without exacerbating the problem.

We've got a fair proportion of signs in both languages already to keep all logical thinking people satisfied.

If this makes me a redneck, whatever that means, so be it, bring it on!

BOB HARVEY, Matua

UNIFIED LANGUAGE

I am in agreement with Peter Williams (Opinion, September 15). I have worked in Switzerland, France, Italy, Nigeria, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea and Ethiopia. Although I speak German and some French, most of my work was facilitated by the English language.

When I retired I took up teaching English in Switzerland, where it is used as an “in-house” language by major companies. This was the same throughout Western Europe.

In parts of Africa where there is a multiplicity of local languages, English is used in business and commerce. It has a unifying effect where people of different tribes and religious affiliations work together using English as a common tongue they bond in a common purpose.

In Ethiopia when! proposed to employ a young Amharic speaking man in an Oromo-speaking district I was told, lf you leave him here we will kill him. Asked why, the answer was “because he does not speak our language”.

So perhaps the use of to reo will help to unify this nation of ours, but we must not neglect the international languages, Mandarin. Spanish and English in our schools.

Intelligent Maori people can achieve major advancement when they have fluency in one of these languages. (Abridged)

ROBERT SHAW Pyes Pa

WAS WILLIAMS' COLUMN SERIOUS OR SATIRE?

I read Peter Williams' column (September 15) choking on my morning coffee.

Was he seriously suggesting having the national anthem only in te reo (hardly an acknowledgement of bi-culturalism or diversity) and give way and stop signs only in Maori? (Gosh. we have enough trouble with tourists not knowing which side of the road to drive on, without them not knowing what to do at an intersection).

Then I realised this was a brilliant piece of satirical writing exposing some of the silly demands for promoting Maori to reo.

Well done Peter. I was still laughing as I tucked into my cornflakes.

RICHARD PRINCE Welcome Bay

Wanganui Chronicle 17/9/18

NEW GENERATION, NEW WORLD

It never ceases to amaze me — this never-ending argument of the way Maori ancestors and colonial ancestors treated each other.

We all came here in boats (until planes).

You are not your ancestors; you do not come from New Zealand. so you are not indigenous.

You are a new generation living in a new world. —Edited

R PEARSON Feilding

Dominion Post 15/9/18

TE REO NOT THE WAY

Jim Friel (Letters, Sept 13) believes Maori got a "raw deal" from colonisation. Equally they got a raw deal from their ancestors turning east instead of west when they left Africa. Their situation is a consequence of history.

If Pakeha now feel a need to address the inequality Maori suffer because of this, what is the means? Financial redress and apologies through the mechanism of the Waitangi Tribunal? Making Maori landowners of all, and Pakeha as tenants pay rent? For activist Maori, their culture demands there will never be sufficient compensation.

For activist Pakeha, Maori have not done enough to merit more than their present situation.

The current world scene of confrontation of extremes, and aggressive challenge, is natural ground for the war dances of Maori culture.

This is not the way forward. Diplomacy and compromise, through the democratic principle of one person, one vote in a multicultural society, is international best practice.

The present call for the Maori language to be made compulsory in schools, to become a general language of conversation, and to be given equal status to English in place names and public signage, in order to create a bicultural Maori/Pakeha society, is wrong.

MIKE WILLIAMS, Tawa

WHY SHOULD youngsters be compelled to speak Maori when they can't even speak English properly. Maybe there is a case for starting free lessons for all at universities, then we can all be in the same waka without compulsion.

STEVE ANDERTON, Paraparaumu

NZ Herald 15/9/18

TE REO DEMO

Students from Westlake Girls High School, Carmel College and Milford Primary demonstrating their support of Maori language week on Tuesday with placards, posters and verbal chants along the kerbs of Shakespeare Rd and Wairau Rd struck me as a lesson in civil disobedience.

Obviously the Ministry of Education think it is a good option to teach public demonstration but why did each school need a police presence? Who pays for the police?

! don't think we should be having our school kids protesting in that manner. I felt threatened.

LESLEY BAIILIE, Murrays Bay

Wanganui Chronicle 15/9/18

TREATY NOT BINDING

"All the people of New Zealand" appears three times in Hobson's final English draft; on translation one remained intact in the 2nd Article, the other two replaced with Maoris only in preamble and 3rd Article.

Therefore, Maoris and "all the people of New Zealand" have right to "rangatiratanga, land and tao-nga".

The Treaty was ruled "a simple nullity" by Chief Judge Prendergast in 1877, a ruling up-held by the Privy Council in 1941 with the comment that unless it was incorporated into New Zealand statutes, the Treaty was not legally binding. It is not included in statutes.

British Sovereignty over New Zealand was announced on the October 2, 1840, in the London Gazette and has never been challenged by any other country or nation.

IAN BROUGHAM Tawhero

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 14/9/18

AUTOCRACY IN THE BAY

In spite of the overwhelming results in the Maori wards referendum from the people he has been chosen to represent – 78 per cent against them – the Western Bay of Plenty Mayor, Garry Webber, has chosen a reprehensible path to achieve his personal wish and give powers in decision-making to unelected Maori by creating new committees for them. Is that the office for which he was elected?

Mr Webber, what do you see as the requirements of your office? To carry out your mayoral duties to satisfy the will of the constituents who appointed you, and who expressed their wishes comprehensively in the poll on Maori wards? Or is it to gratify your ego by carrying out a personal agenda, and to appoint unelected Maori to advisory positions on new committees?

B JOHNSON, Omokoroa.

The Press 14/9/18

MAORI INSTRUCTION

Te reo Maori is a cultural language. To suggest that it be compulsory in all schools is nonsense.

Pupils have a variety of languages which are available to them and which they may or may not choose to study. Te reo isn’t even widely used among Maori.

The public should not be frightened to say ‘No’ to the ridiculous. This country has become so PC that we are in danger of losing our right to free speech.

ANNE FOGARTY, Ilam

TE REO AT HOME

How amazing that there’s a huge lack of te reo speakers to teach in our schools. Had Maori been consistently using the Maori language in their homes this would not be the case.

Education begins at home, not in the taxpayer’s pocket.

PHILLIP REX ROBINSON, Waltham

NZ Herald 14/9/18

MAORI PRONUNCIATION

I agree wholeheartedly with Brian May’s call for tolerance of the everyday pronunciation of Maori words, especially place names. It has always seemed ironic to me that Maori constantly call for “correct pronunciation” of words borrowed from their language, while te reo is peppered with mispronunciations of English words, such as “wiki” for week, “Tiriti” for Treaty, “Kawana” for Governor and “puka” for book. Nobody objects to Maori adopting their own version of English words, even celebrating them as essential elements of their culture, so why shouldn’t they be equally tolerant of Pakeha pronunciation?

JOHN NEAVE, Chartwell.

Northern Advocate 14/9/18

BEING BILINGUAL COUNTRY IMPRACTICAL

Why are the Greens pushing for a bilingual nation?

We certainly need the basics of Maori language for our correct pronunciation, also, in many instances for respect.

But at the end of the day English is the commercial language of the world and that is the one all, Maori included, will use most of the time.

I mean can you imagine someone going into a dairy and asking for their order in te reo Maori, or at a restaurant, or a movie theatre? And can you imagine the annoyance on both sides if it is not understood?

It's impractical, unnecessary and will be costly, as of course every sign in the country would have to be in two languages.

JOANNE WIKLUND Kerikeri

Wanganui Chronicle 14/9/18

TREATY FUDGE

David James (Chronicle, September 7) twists the Treaty with lengthy talk about New Zealanders". Not once does the Treaty mention them.

Article second refers to tangata katoa o Nu Tirani whose direct translation, as in Hobson's final draft of February 4, is "all the people of New Zealand" and that means exactly what it says.

By contrast, Article third refers to tangata maori katoa o Nu Tirani", specifically referring only to those inhabitants of Polynesian descent to whom all the rights of the people of England were granted. Existing British subjects were not included, as they had such rights already, while people of other nationalities were excluded.

I say James fudged the Treaty's meaning by including “[ie Maori]” and he does so now with his "New Zealanders”. (Edited)

BRUCE MOON Nelson

Bay of Plenty Times 14/9/18

TE REO NOT A PRIORITY

Tommy Wilson wants us all to learn te reo (Opinion, September 11)

Why not teach young people to speak English properly first and then if they want te reo, later.

He thinks once we learn this language we will pronounce Maori names correctly.

Why do TV newsreaders and sport commentators continue to pronounce Whanganui as Fonganui, totally incorrect? Waikato as Waicarto, and so on? In my opinion, nobody who lives in these places pronounces then like this and the rest of us don't either.

NEIL HARVEY Welcome Bay

MAORI WARDS A NO

In spite of the overwhelming results in the Maori wards referendum from the people he has been chosen to represent, 78 per cent against them, the mayor, Garry Webber has, in my opinion, chosen a reprehensible path to give powers in decision making to unelected Maori by creating new committees for them. Is that the office for which he was elected?

Mr Webber, what do you see as the requirements of your office? To carry out your mayoral duties to satisfy the will of the constituents who appointed you and who expressed their wishes comprehensively in the poll on Maori wards?

Or is it to gratify your ego by carrying out a personal agenda and to appoint unelected Maori to advisory positions on new committees?

BRYAN JOHNSON Omokoroa

NZ Herald 13/9/18

TE REO PURISM

I think the current wave of emotion for the correct pronunciation of Maori is fair enough but so what if we don’t pronounce Maori place names totally correctly. We’ve spent too many years perfecting our own uniquely Kiwi way of saying them to suddenly throw it all away for the sake of correctness. The really important thing is that the name of a place connects us to its location. Maori is understandably important to many Maori folk but leave us non-Maori alone. We’ve worked out our own easy ways to say some of those hard-to-say Maori names, so those noble defenders of the Maori language need to learn something just as important in life — how to loosen up and let us be.

KEVIN TIDMARSH, Paeroa.

LANGUAGE WILL SUFFER

The written Maori language is the product of the creativity of the first Pakeha missionary settlers. A living language is constantly evolving. If te reo Maori is made compulsory in schools, the language will be butchered by us all and together with Maori culture and traditions will be lost forever. We hear and see examples of this happening every day.

For example, common Maori words such as whanau, koha and whakapapa are used regularly by me. I am now told that they have wider or different meanings, but they are embedded in my vocabulary. There are many more I cannot spell but use regularly. In the Army, Maori friends taught me to greet people with “Tin-acoco, tin-a-coco, car-door.”

Pakeha women are starting to display sacred tattoos on their person. Maori have already lost the haka, it now belongs to all us Kiwis, and new variations appear at regular intervals, and are performed by both sexes. If you want this butchery to continue, make te reo Maori compulsory in schools.

BRIAN MAIN, Hamilton.

Northern Advocate 13/9/18

MIND YOUR LANGUAGE

I have no problem with folk who wish to learn another language, that's freedom of choice.

I object to compulsory learning of a second language in schools, that is dictatorship.

The word compulsory means, mandatory/forced. That in fact nullifies the Bill of Human Rights.

So what comes next, will we get a new role for our police, a language squad?

BJ CRAIG Whangarei

The Press 13/9/18

LIBRARY GRIPE

On Tuesday my husband and I were at Parklands Library. When my elderly husband went to check out his several books, the computer was all in Maori for this week. He is in his late seventies and not computer-literate. I am in my early seventies and am computer-literate to a point. We couldn't find personnel to help with checkouts, and as we do not understand Maori we were frustrated at the way we are being forced to comply. If we want to learn Maori, we will enrol in a course, but we don't wish to.

JANET WILSON, Christchurch central

COMPULSORY TE REO

Could the proponents of compulsory te reo Maori lessons in schools please inform parents which of the current school subjects will be cut back in order to fit te reo into the curriculum? School timetables are completely full. Please tell us if our kids will be doing less English, Maths, Science, Health or Physical Education if te reo is made compulsory?

JOHN STONE, Harewood

Northland Age 13/9/18

IT'S NOT MAORI

The 'Wanganui Chronicle' has changed the spelling of the Wanganui name by inserting the 'h' in it, without consulting the people.

Mayor Hamish McDouall has welcomed the change. The editor, Mark Dawson says it's the correct Maori spelling, and NZME chief executive Michael Boggs is proud to see the change.

Mark and Hamish know that Wanganui is not a Maori name. It has nothing to do with Maori, as I have written many times, and have researched it.

It belongs to a pre-Maori people known as Waitaha, who arrived about 300 years before the people who are now called Maori. There is a pa site in Wanganui named Waitaha pa.

The broken down name for Wanganui, according to a Waitaha chief is Wa- is energy, nga-is many, nui- is large. The Waitaha name means 'beside the waters.' They lived close to the sea, lakes and rivers. They originally began as a fair-skinned Caucasian people who were part of the blonde, red-haired people, like the Ngati Hotu - Celts - Patupairehe.

The people that want the 'h' in Wanganui have turned against their own people, as our ancestors were connected to these groups.

One lot of the Waitaha people now live in the South Island, where the name Wanganui appears six times without the 'h'.

IAN BROUGHAM Wanganui

Northland Age 11/9/18

THEY WERE EATEN

Your article ‘Time to grow up ‘(Cr Mike Finlayson, September 6) is disturbing, as the true facts on using the toxin 1080 are unknown.

You state that large flocks of kukupa 70 years ago were killed off by pests, but the truth is they were mainly killed off by humans, Maori poaching.

I listen to past Maori staff when I was engaged for 11 years at Waitangi Forest, and stories heard were certainly an eyeopener, as they regard kukupa, a delicacy whereby bagfuls were culled for eating, as told.

JT Kaitaia

The Press 11/9/18

MANDARIN WEEK?

The Press is celebrating Maori Language Week, so why not a Mandarin-speaking week, as there are more people of Asian descent in New Zealand than there are of Maori descent? I also wonder what the actual interest among average New Zealanders in learning to speak Maori is, because if there was genuine interest among the public then they would avail themselves of the opportunity to learn without all the publicity we are getting at present.

R LUCAS, Papanui

PRONUNCIATION

Now that we have Maori Language Week with everyone telling us how to pronounce Maori words correctly, it is sad to hear the radio and TV commentators saying the word "pronunciation" incorrectly. Too many are saying it as "pronounciation". It does not have "noun" in the middle, but "nun".

K GWATKIN, Casebrook

New Zealand Herald 11/9/18

ON TE REO

How can the Green Party insist this must be compulsorily taught when spoken and written English is so poor, and universities have to provide remedial English classes?

HYLTON LE GRICE, Remuera.

Dominion Post 11/9/18

ACADEMIC ON A CULTURAL CRUSADE

Anne Salmond (Between two worlds, Sept 8) has a snipe at colonisation as a possible reason for jail numbers of young Maori (really; a bit simplistic don't you think, Salmond?), then asks how can Don Brash can "know about what it's like for people now?' . . . what does he know about what life was like for them then?". Then she answers: "Nothing because he's never really studied it."

How does she know the extent of Brash's learning? What did she know before embarking on her crusade? How does anyone learn anything? By reading, listening and watching.

It doesn't require immersion in another culture to get to know something about it, and it is dear that Salmond actually got enough information using the aforementioned methods ("observer of Maori culture", as she is styled) before she launched herself into Polynesian culture and history.

She is a good example of an academic climbing and riding on the back of others using all her Western methodology and skills, and then being ready to denigrate them when it suits her. The English language has a number of terms that describe her attitude, and "smug" particularly suits.

ALLEN HEATH, Woburn

RACIAL BIAS

Time to fix the gap in our history (Editorial, Sept 8) shows racial bias. You remember Waioeka Gorge, but not Matawhero, where 54 people were murdered in 1868. You remember Parihaka, where none died, but not the Chatham Islands, where 2000 Moriori were enslaved and cannibalised from 1835 to 1862.

This bias, which is habitual in The Dominion Post, denigrates Europeans, patronises Maori and excludes everyone else.

Are you critical of European superiority because you despise in others that which you most fear in yourself?

Is this transference of self-imposed guilt contracted in an Orwellian politically correct groupthink?

Whatever the reason, you need to fix the gap in your own perception before you exhort your readership. Your present behaviour is unduly polarising the nation.

BARRIE DAVIS, Island Bay

FIRST LANGUAGE

The editorial Te reo Maori is who we are (Sept 10) points out the decline of Maori language. This is probably because there is so much pressure on students to learn subjects of use in the wider world that they have to be pragmatic when choosing to, or not to, learn Maori.

However, the editorial goes on to say Swedish, Japanese and Thai are languages used as mainstream in those countries but are of no use outside them. This is a blatant attempt to mislead readers.

In the countries mentioned the everyday language is the language of that country. For them, having English as a second language is an advantage.

For us, English is the everyday language and having Maori as a second language is of minimal use.

REG FOWLES, Walkanae

TE REO IN SCHOOLS

Tom Scott's cartoon (Sept 10) about the thuggish compulsion to speak Maori in schools misses one essential point. The legal requirement that Maori students not speak Maori at school was placed in the 1867 Native Schools Act at the request of Maori.

It was enforced by the usual corporal discipline of the times.

The reasonable rationale of the Maori elders who made the request was that young people would learn Maori at home, but at school they should get the English skills that would enable them to benefit from higher education and jobs.

ROB HARRIS, Dannevirke

Waikato Times 10/9/18

PRE-COLONIAL MAORI

The present day, non-Maori bleeding hearts who figuratively flagellate themselves to atone for the ills that our covetous colonial forebears inflicted on the noble Maori should acknowledge that their behaviour was preferable to what Maori inflicted on each other: cannibalism, infanticide, slavery and ritual slaughter, which were endemic. Such barbaric practices ceased when the chiefs accepted the Queen’s Sovereignty and the British Legal System. The eating of people can rightly be called barbaric. Basic scrutiny of recorded history would have enlightened the apologists to these facts but it seems that they chose to ignore history as it disparaged their claims. Pioneers may have stolen their land, but at least Maori got to keep their heads. The colonists’ greed could scarcely be more rapacious than that of the present day tribes of part-Maori claiming all of the coastline of New Zealand.

Our officially acknowledged historians – Orange, O’Malley and co have been remiss or reluctant in recording that. Even before the Treaty signing, over half of the country had been sold by tribal chiefs, some of whom went to Port Jackson, Sydney, to seek buyers. After the Treaty, the sales were invalidated, the land returned to the tribes and no compensation paid.

From 1840, life certainly improved from the rude, crude, violent and brief lives that Maori had led before and yet still the cry goes out of ‘‘postcolonial stress’’.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

Waikato Times 8/9/18

GOOD OLD NZ — THERE’S NO BETTER PLACE TO LIVE

Phil Goff didn’t like the Canadian speakers and Simon Bridges doesn’t like Chelsea Manning.

Shane Jones is not happy with Air New Zealand and Jacinda Ardern is not happy with two of her ministers.

A couple of sports teams are dissatisfied with their coaches and Wellington commuters are dissatisfied with their buses.

Paul Judge painted an ugly picture of our dairy industry whilst Taitimu Maipi did an ugly paint job on Captain Hamilton.

The Greens want plastic out of the oceans and Joel Maxwell wants Pakeha out of Aotearoa.

An eight-year-old (for God’s sake) boy doesn’t like being taught a bit of religion and Max Christoffersen couldn’t handle cross country runs.

A large construction firm has imploded and costs for a local DHB building have exploded.

And the price of cauliflowers?

Internationally, we read of famines and fires, Bashar al-Assad and Kim Jong Un. Murder, rape and genocide. Corruption and extortion, Putin and Trump. Suicide bombers and mass shootings. Refugees and sinking boats. Landslides and floods. Climate change and rising seas. And all on a scale we simply cannot comprehend.

I put my newspaper down and say to myself, thank God I live in New Zealand.

BILL CROOK, Hamilton

STATUE PROTEST 2

Captain Hamilton was a senior naval officer from a distinguished military family when he lost his life bravely leading his men at Gate Pa.

He had served with distinction in the British navy for 29 years, in the Americas and at Crimea, before coming to New Zealand, where he commanded one of two large warships.

When the Waikato Wars commenced, his ship was involved in the major exercise to convey over 1000 troops from Auckland to Miranda.

As a naval officer he took orders from the Queen via Governor George Grey and General Duncan Cameron.

The actions he was engaged in were a direct result of the Kingitanga movement defying lawful direction from the Governor-General whose position was established at Waitangi in 1840.

The misguided vandal that defaced his statue described him as a murderer.

The irony is that it is doubtful whether Capt Hamilton ever directly caused loss of life during his time in NZ.

I would ask the council to quietly restore the statue and take no further action.

Let’s not create a martyr of a vandal. I am proud to have been born in the city that is named after a hero. It is also part of my identity.

MURRAY HAMILTON REID, Tuakau

STATUE PROTEST 3

Since arriving in New Zealand 48 years ago, I have been blamed by some activists in recent years for the way colonisers treated the indigenous people.

I am not responsible for the actions of contemporaries of my fellow countrymen who, 200 years ago, traded muskets with Maori for such barbaric artifacts as dried heads and set in motion genocide of Maori by Maori. I have an alibi, I wasn’t there!

Must I feel guilty? Do Ngapuhi feel guilty about the massacres at Totara Pa , Matakitaki, Mokoia and all places in between that they boast of? Or can they claim Customary rights?

Captain John Hamilton is labeled "a murderer" by activist Taitimu Maipi. So is Duncan Cameron, who avoided huge casualties on both sides by refusing to assault Paterangi.

There were many Maori who, eager to see the end of utu, fought against other Maori and who have been labeled turncoats, traitors and murderers. Utu is murder. Ethnicity is not a defence.

I owe my survival to brave airmen such as Kiwi Keith Parke who, with many other New Zealanders, served in all the British services when Hitler was bombing the hell out of us. It takes more than arrogant posturing and an audience to make a hero.

BRIAN DUNSTAN, Cambridge

PRE-1840 HISTORY

A world view that isolates a selective sliver of history to target a sector of the community has the right to go into the melting pot of debate, understanding and compromise, but I am not convinced that it has the right to dominate and destroy.

As a man well versed in his own history, I suspect that Maipi Taitimu can recount tales of pre-1800 battles won and lost, oral scorecards of pre-1800 ancestors and foes alike left lying on the battlefield and in ravaged villages.

Let’s hope that Mr Taitimu is not driven to vengeance on all the sacred sites, taonga and marae associated with those who dispatched many of his pre1800s ancestors on a premature journey to Te Reinga. Were he to attempt to do so, I suspect that the response would be somewhat more dramatic than a precharge warning.

Personally I would be very happy to see standing next to Captain Hamilton a statue of the warrior who pulled the trigger.

But I suspect that Ngati Wairere would have a justifiable word or two to say about that.

By the way, nice coat, Mr Maipi. Looks like you and Captain Hamilton have the same tailor and button-maker.

FRANK CARTER, Hamilton

Northern Advocate 8/9/18

TREATY TRUTHS

The only reason the Government and the academics say the "Littlewood Treaty" is not the "final English draft" is because "it is not signed", but a draft is never signed!

All the evidence confirms the document found by John and Beryl Littlewood in their deceased mother's estate in 1989 was the "final" English draft that was translated by the Rev Henry Williams and son Edward into the Tiriti o Waitangi, which was signed by both parties on February 6, 1840 at Waitangi with a handshake and the words, "He iwi tahi tatou — We are now one people," then by over 500 tangata Maori chiefs around the country.

The English version of the treaty signed at Waikato was never meant to be an "official" English version of the Treaty of Waitangi. It was only used to hold the overflow of signatures at Waikato. Lt Governor Hobson never made nor authorised an "English version of the Treaty of Waitangi".

The English version of the Treaty was a compiled version by James Freeman, Lt Governor Hobson's secretary from James Busby's early draft notes. It was never read, discussed or signed on February 6, 1840 as is stated at the bottom of this document.

It is a document that has been used by governments over the years in an error that has destroyed the honourable intention of those who signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840 to save a race of people determined to become extinct by their own hand.

A mixed race of people today who show absolutely no gratitude towards their ancestors, neither tangata Maori nor European, who fought so hard to save them from total extinction.

IAN BROUGHAM Wanganui

New Zealand Herald 7/9/18

TE REO EDICT

I was a relief teacher at Hato Petera School when the news came through that only teachers who could speak Maori would be employed in the school. It was obvious to me the brothers who taught there were devastated, but not a word was spoken about it in the staffroom. I really enjoyed teaching there as the boys were very well behaved, and respectful, happy and achieving. It was very hard to find qualified teachers who could speak Maori well enough to teach it.

After many years living and working in Maori communities in remote areas of New Zealand, I feel I can safely say Maori parents wanted their sons to do well in an English speaking country. Were the parents consulted before this dreadful decision was made? I think not. It breaks my heart to see what has happened to the school after such a racist decision was made.

BETTY ROBB, Beach Haven.

Northern Advocate 7/9/18

WE SHARE THE LAND

Concerning that Kathleen Bright portrayed 19th century Maori as the goodies and early colonists as the baddies (Letters, September 1).

The Whangarel library has a book Blood and Tears, 34 chapters based on historical facts of the many early civilian settlers who lost their lives at the hands of Maori, not all Maori were as hospitable as Kathleen portrays.

How could "greedy unscrupulous settlers take large tracts of land"? In the main the only purchaser was the Crown (TOW), landowner Maori were actually protected.

"Land wars" (skirmishes) initially started with inter-tribal dispute over the disagreement in selling of their land (Taranaki), this spilt over on to surrounding settlers' farms and the Government restored peace.

The other "wars- (mid North Island) were "sovereignty skirmishes” where a few dissenting tribes rejected European rule and influence — in short a Treaty breach by rebel tribes.

Kathleen's "Maori welfare system' does not look so salutary if one includes female infanticide, Maori slavery, placing the sick and aged at the elements of the weather, and Tohunga healing practices which had a supernatural or spiritual element, eventually prohibited by law.

The chiefs ceded sovereignty, therefore we "share' this land as New Zealanders, not as Maori and later migrants.

GEOFF PARKER Whangarei

Northern Advocate 6/9/18

MUTUAL BENEFIT

Kathleen Bright (September 1) has described how Taranaki Maori helped the first British settlers. This was for their mutual benefit.

The few Te Atiawa remaining near New Plymouth lived in constant fear of another attack by Waikato who had killed and enslaved so many of their compatriots some years before.

The presence of settlers provided the much desired protection and security so that they could return from hiding to their homes.

The fighting some years later was not at all caused by “greedy unscrupulous settlers” as Bright claims. Civil war in Taranaki was first among Maori, savage feuds in the 1850s that cost more than 50 lives, between different Te Atiawa — some who wanted to sell their lands in accord with the Treaty of Waitangi, and some who took up arms to prevent their fellow Maori from doing as they wished.

In 1859 Governor Gore Browne decided to bring law and order to Taranaki. With that promise, Teira (an ally of Ihaia, who lived in constant fear under armed attack) demanded that he be allowed to sell his land. His opponent Wiremu Kingi (and ally of Katatore, who had been killed in the feud) was determined to prevent any such sale.

A commission was set up, under the law, to adjudicate the rival claims, and it was ruled that Teira did indeed own that land and could sell.

War between British forces (supported by many Taranaki Maori) and rebel Maori began in 1860 when Kingi defied the law and built a fortified pa on that land.

Debate still rages around the definition of land ownership in Maori culture, but the basic fact is that the law was called for and reached a decision according to due process.

JOHN ROBINSON, Waikanae

Northland Age 6/9/18

A PERSONAL AGENDA

Free speech versus hate speech, or is it being used to further a racist agenda?

Recently a speaking event at Massey University involving Don Brash was cancelled. ViceChancellor Professor Jan Thomas claims recent debate on Maori wards came close to “hate speech,” mobilised in large part by the Hobson’s Pledge network. She then goes on to say the Treaty of Waitangi is at the centre of university strategy with its emphasis on partnership.

I’m sure this Australian with a PhD in Veterinary Science is a capable person, but describing talk against Maori wards as hate speech or fantasising about partnership in the TOW is pushing her own personal agenda, not an academic view using proven research.

Universities are there to educate our children, not groom them with myth and racist propaganda.

REX ANDERSON, Lower Hutt

Dominion Post 5/9/18

PUZZLED BY PRAYER

I was puzzled to read (Sept 1) about a day in the life of a Palmerston North teacher, whose schoolday began with a karakia. But in Khandallah (Sept 3) we are reminded that state school education has to be secular and religious instruction is an opt-in. Did I miss the fact the Palmerston North school is integrated? Or is it more religious in that city?

ANNETTE PARRY, Walkanae Beach

Northland Age 4/9/18

PSEUDO VICTIMS

Alison Mau's take on prisons is a load of cobblers. Maybe the prison system is broken, but primarily because of increased crime sprees, and because we can't fund or build prisons fast enough to house the recidivist violent offenders.

Perversely, these misfits are treated as pseudo "victims," while completely ignoring the real victims. Let's start by looking for the root causes, the real culprits, the breeding grounds, parental upbringing, and nail all those with culpability.

Yes of course, as Moa Jackson asserts, pre-1840 there were really no prisons as we know them today, because victims and witnesses were routinely slaughtered or enslaved (that's incarceration), or is that yet more stuff that never happened?

Ms Mau's flawed idea of releasing dangerous thugs and felons back into the community willy nilly to harass law-abiding citizens really is as crazed as it appears.

Ms Mau's better option is just blow up the prisons, perhaps with the inmates inside then let's start afresh! Honestly, where do these idiot magnets get the oxygen to float and air this claptrap?

Frankly this PC nonsense has all to do with race-based whingeing, sub-cultures and finding excuses for unreformable and incorrigible serial violent offenders, nothing else. For minor offending (does anyone ever go to prison for this these days?)

Let's try supervised, fenced, secure boot camps like detainment centres (without the luxuries), getting the wrong-doers working to pay the cost of maintaining them.

Short sharp spells of a month, say, during annual holidays, with all benefits and wages going to the government for upkeep might just focus the offenders and dissuade them from moving up the next step on the criminal career ladder.

Any robust criticism of PC proposals will no doubt be met with the current catchcry of hate speech, racism and threats of violence to shut down comments being the latest ploy by the arrogant numbskulls.

ROB PATERSON Matapihi

Waikato Times 4/9/18

STATUE VANDALISM 2

It was interesting reading in the of August 31 that the statue of Captain John Hamilton in Civic Square had been defaced and vandalised in protest.

It is well known this statue is Hamilton’s namesake and to add insult to injury, the distressing behaviour of the vandal was let off with a pre-charge warning, which was nothing but a slap on the wrist.

There is no justification or excuse for this illegal act and any citizen could see that this was a deliberate act of vandalising Hamilton City Council property.

We also understand that the response of Mayor King on this matter has been sadly weak, which sets a precedence of turning a blind eye to any vandal who decides to prove a point by defacing and smashing public property and for the city to willingly clean up and repair the damage with hard-earned ratepayer money.

DANIEL SILVA, Hamilton

Northland Age 4/9/18

FABRICATED HISTORY

What a lengthy ‘Last word’ rant from Mr Rashbrooke (August 14). His inference that ongoing settlements validate claims approved by the controversial Waitangi Tribunal is easily dismantled by the fact that, individually, some tribes have accepted several “controversial” full and final settlements since 1840 (https://tinyurl.com/ yc7awu97).

The reality is that the Waitangi Tribunal sells Maori sense of entitlement rights just as vigorously as the tobacco industry sells cigarettes, therefore its findings should be treated with the utmost scepticism.

I have put forward irrefutable factual evidence that, sovereignty was ceded by the chiefs that signed the Treaty (letters July 24), mainly based on the chiefs speeches themselves, as per Bruce Moon’s excellent letter, June 19.

I also hasten to say the fact that many tribes embraced the concept of legal title to their land that British sovereignty brought, further many neo part-Maori today accept government benefits, others pay taxes, and members of the Waitangi Tribunal have accepted positions on a government commission, are all further proof that these people have accepted that British sovereignty was obtained.

As I have stated, British sovereignty was obtained in many ways. That is a fact still valid today, except now New Zealand sovereignty is vested in all Kiwis.

Mr Rashbrooke says “. . . on a foundation of mutual goodwill.” After New Zealanders paying at least $3.07 billion in dubious settlements, plus at least $1.16 billion annually for Maori initiatives, and there are at least 20 separatist special race-based privileges and rights in place for Maori, just how much more ‘mutual goodwill’ does he want?

There is no fear and envy, Mr Rashbrooke, simply that fairminded New Zealanders advocate for democracy and oppose all forms of racism or race-based privilege in New Zealand and the fabricated fake history of our country.

GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei

IT WAS A DRAFT

The only reason the government and the academics say the Littlewood Treaty is not the final English draft is because it is not signed, but a draft is never signed.

All the evidence confirms the document found by John and Beryl Littlewood in their deceased mother’s estate in 1989 was the final English draft that was translated by the Rev Henry Williams and son Edward into the Tiriti o Waitangi, which was signed by both parties on February 6, 1840, at Waitangi with a handshake and the words, “He iwi tahi tatou — We are now one people”, then by over 500 tangata Maori chiefs around the country.

The English version of the Treaty signed at Waikato was never meant to be an ‘official’ English version of the Treaty of Waitangi. It was only used to hold the overflow of signatures at Waikato. Lt Governor Hobson never made or authorised an “English version” of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The English version of the Treaty was a compiled version by James Freeman, Lt Governor Hobson’s secretary from James Busby’s early draft notes. It was never read, discussed or signed on February 6, 1840, as is stated at the bottom of this document. It is a document that has been used by governments over the years in error that has destroyed the honourable intention of those that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840 to save a race of people determined to become extinct by their own hand.

A mixed race of people today that show absolutely no gratitude towards their ancestors, both tangata Maori and European, that fought so hard to save them from total extinction.

IAN BROUGHAM, Wanganui

Gisborne Herald 3/9/18

WHAT IS RACISM?

Racism is of course abhorrent to most people, but is it racist to identify people by ethnicity in media reporting or just conversing in general?

This could be about:

General academic success

Sporting achievements

Crime statistics

Gang warfare

Homeless people

Welfare benefits

Unemployment

Drug and alcohol dependency

Life expectancy

Obesity.

Or is it racist to even ask the question?

Is it not time to be open about these issues and set about being constructive about reversing these shocking and worsening trends?

Pouring in more money is not working!

PS – is it racist to just identify people by ethnicity?

NO LONGER WANTING TO BE CALLED A PAKEHA

The Press 3/9/18

MAORI UNEMPLOYMENT

Willie Jackson’s plan to solve Maori unemployment by tossing lumps of cash at the problem smacks of Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory rather than of any serious consideration by a serious and dedicated government minister of what needs to be done.

Bragging of being ’on track’ and of great expectations for the future will not provide jobs in places where no facilities exist to supply them.

VIC SMITH, Halswell

Waikato Times 1/9/18

HONE HARAWIRA NO ADVOCATE OF FREE SPEECH

Your correspondent Edward J Lye (Waikato Times letters, August 21) asks why advocates for free speech did not speak up when Hone Harawira was denied the right to speak at Auckland University in 2013.

Perhaps they all remember Hone Harawira and friends entering a room at the same university with weapons after locking the doors and breaking bones of students who were doing a haka he didn’t approve of (editor’s note: this event occurred on May 1, 1979).

He has since stated (editor’s note: in a 2009 news story that referenced the 1979 event) that sometimes you have to step in and do what’s right. Mr Harawira advocates violence.

G FAULKNER, Tauranga

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 31/8/18

GOVERNMENT-DRIVEN COMPULSION

New Zealanders that assert a Maori race as such doesn’t exist are quite correct as it meets no universal definition of race, only being propped up by the controversial statutory (a legal fiction) definition in the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974. Kiwis that affiliate to the Maori label invariably have considerably more ‘other’ ancestry than Maori.

Treatyists’ besottedness with the Maori language is not voluntarily shared by over 75 per cent of Kiwis who don’t particularly treasure Maori as various public polls regularly show.

Apart from state schools (at the request of Maori leaders) prohibiting Maori language being spoken in schools for a short time early last century, there has never been any law preventing Maori from maintaining or speaking their language, which is encouraged.

It seems, however, Maori, like the cuckoo bird, are depositing their modern fabricated language (bearing little resemblance to original Maori language) in everyone else’s nest in the misguided hope that it might survive. The catalyst currently is that Kiwis are being forced to learn Maori if they want a job or retain their job/get promotion and that is an unacceptable compulsion.

Kiwi taxpayers’ bankroll the Maori language excesses annually – millions that would be far better spent on health, housing and beneficial education for all Kiwis.

R PATERSON, Matapihi.

A FAIR FUTURE FOR ALL NZERS

Top marks for Don Brash and his policies. Sure, Maori have a place in history but as long as we have any form of privileges for any one group there’ll always be a division and disharmony between races.

There are some very enterprising, hard-working and good-living Maori, but unfortunately there’s so many others that let them down (like some Europeans).

Overall, the Maori population is only approximately 15 per cent yet we are continually giving in to their demands of both property and money. When does it stop?

After nearly 200 years how can Europeans be expected to keep giving so many privileges and compensations? If Maori had anything taken from them it’s been more than compensated by now.

Is there any thought of the many advantages that we all, Maori and European, have today due to our early European settlers’ hard toil breaking our land, felling trees, building dwellings and carving out roads etc.? We never seem to show any recognition of these pioneers.

Let’s face facts and have a fair future for all. Let common sense prevail. We have a beautiful country, sadly lacking in sound sense and management.

One law for all. I remain a proud New Zealander. (Abridged).

K COLLINGWOOD, Welcome Bay

GOING TOO FAR

Didn't your mother tell you Brian, that one day you'll go too far?

That day hasn't come yet, and hopefully is a long way off. In the meantime, your contribution to free speech and distaste for PC censorship is great to read. I particularly like it when you skewer the so-called liberals over climate change – as if the climate should stop changing at our command – and point out the modern-day absurdities of identity politics.

You'll know though when you've gone too far. The phony tolerance of the liberals will define your opinions as hate speech, your distaste for sharia law will be termed Islamophobic. Your scepticism over AGW will become denial, and your desire for racial equality under the law will become racist.

In the meantime more power to your elbow and more profit to The Weekend Sun – a great read in the desert of predictable and boring PC media.

M HOULDING, Mount Maunganui.

Southland Times 31/8/18

RACIST JUSTICE SYSTEM?

The Minister of Justice, Andrew Little, doesn’t dispute claims that one of the reasons why so many Maori and Pacifica are in prison is because the justice system is racist.

To clarify this nonsense, the system has police, courts (judges) and Corrections (probation officers and prison officers).

If you don’t commit a crime, you will not come in contact with these government employees, as most Maori don’t.

With the exception of judges, all these other government ranks are filled with Maori staff, well above their 14 per cent community representation.

To understand why Maori are over represented in the system, look at the factors that determine crime.

It is a range of complex issues including low income, poverty, drugs and alcohol, mental health, poor health, poor education, broken family structures, constantly moving house (and schools), domestic violence, intergenerational welfare and role modelling, gang behaviour etc.

Changing the justice system, to be more focused on a group of citizens after they have committed many or serious crimes, will only change the deck chairs on the Titanic.

The true solution is in the factors above and requires massive, targeted, wraparound services for at-risk children and teenagers.

This debate is not about racism or cultural suppression, as some would like to promote, but one of being a "have not", a sense of dissolution and no family or culturally installed sense of worth and community. (Abridged - Editor )

NOBBY CLARK

Taranaki Daily Times 31/8/18

`NO SOVEREIGNTY CESSION' ABSURD

Jock Lee's claim (TDN, Aug 27) that chiefs did not cede sovereignty when article 1 of the Treaty includes both 'cede' and 'sovereignty' is absurd.

Mr Lee would agree that the Treaty was drafted in English and translated into Maori.

The word 'sovereignty' in article 1 was translated into `kawanatanga', and 'possession' in article 2 into ‘rangatiratanga’.

Despite arguments that chiefs did not understand 'sovereignty', on February 5, 1840, numerous chiefs opposed signing because it would mean accepting a chief over them- which is a real-world understanding of sovereignty.

To verify this, google-search missionary William Colenso's account of the Treaty signing.

Mr Lee does not say that his understanding of the Treaty is based on a re-translation by Sir Hugh Kawharu in the 1980s and promoted by the Waitangi Tribunal. In this version, `kawanatanga' was redefined as `government' and ‘rangatiratanga' meant 'chiefly authority'. This created a nonsensical Treaty in which the chiefs agreed to the governor governing settlers while the chiefs could carry on being chiefs.

Unfortunately for Mr Lee, the chiefs did not sign the 1980s Kawharu translation. They signed the 1840 Tiriti.

MIKE BUTLER, Hastings

Nelson Mail 31/8/18

MAORI PRISONER NUMBERS

Newscasts of Andrew Little’s conference made much of how high prison numbers of Maori were grossly unfair compared to their population percentage.

While I never expect anything substantial from Little or from any on his side of the House, I would’ve loved to hear just one ‘‘media person’’ ask about what was once hailed as personal responsibility, or question the fact that inmates averaged 86 convictions apiece, before asking why a touchy-feely, hand-wringing ‘‘conference’’ was necessary to let numbers of Maori delegates expound irrelevant anti-prison views, when what was actually needed were some solid, realistic admonitions about perspectives and individual attitudes.

This is the downside of welfarism, which now has to be confronted forcibly – and without pretending or kid gloves.

JIM CABLE, Nelson,

Northern Advocate 31/8/18

TAX BREAKS

Correspondent Diane Henare (Letters, August 30) seems unaware of the tax breaks that Maori corporations enjoy, ie Maori Authority tax rate of 17.5 per cent (non-Maori counterparts 28 per cent plus), also many tribal corporations operate as charities and pay no or greatly reduced tax.

In 2011, Te Puni Kokiri advised Maori Affairs Minister Pita Sharples that yes indeed welfare payments to Maori exceed the tax contribution that Maori make to the economy.

Henare’s inference that Maori tax should be channelled to things Maori must be the epitome of separatism.

A 1 per cent (her figure) Treaty settlement payout is probably fair value when one considers the land was minus forest cover burnt off by earlier Maori generations to flush out game, there was no development whatsoever. The land grew in value as settlers invested capital and labour, developing farms, building roads, towns, industry, schools, hospitals. Further, some tribes have had multiple “full and final” settlements since 1840.

Agreed the hospitality of some tribes did help the early settlers to survive in a new environment, but history also records that other tribes invited settlers to dinner — as the menu!

It must be remembered that in an exploring era Maori could not stay isolated and that the settlers brought with them many things that improved the life of a primitive and tribal warring people.

GOFF PARKER, Whangarei

Wanganui Chronicle 29/8/18

CHIEFS UNDERSTOOD TREATY

Jock Lee. who describes himself as "Rhodes Scholar", claims I misrepresent how the Treaty of Waitangi was understood by the tribal chiefs who signed it and notes that I am not a "serious historian".

I may not be a "serious historian", but I strongly disagree that I misrepresent how the Treaty was understood by the tribal chiefs at the time.

I claim — on the basis of the English draft from which Te Tiriti was translated by Henry Williams, and on the basis of the speeches that tribal chiefs made at the time and again at Kohimarama in 1860 — that the chiefs absolutely understood they were ceding sovereignty to a higher authority.

And nobody has yet found any word like "partnership", or any synonym of that word, in the Treaty.

Politicians as different as David Lange and Winston Peters have described the idea that Queen Victoria was entering into some kind of partnership with 500 largely illiterate chiefs whom she had never met as "absurd".

And the notion that any nation can long endure in peace with two different sovereignties is surely just as absurd.

Contrary to Mr Lee's assertion, what he calls "the colonial Pakeha sovereignty model" has worked extraordinarily well for most Maori —bringing an end to inter-tribal warfare. an end to cannibalism, slavery and infanticide, and the introduction of a written language, all the benefits of modem medicine and sanitation, indeed the benefits of modernity.

I can’t claim to have ever been awarded a Rhodes Scholarship, but I did major in history in the three years of my Bachelor degree at Canterbury University.

DON BRASH Co-spokesperson for Hobson's Pledge

Dominion Post 29/8/18

COLUMNIST OFFENSIVE

Re columnist Joel Maxwell, how offensive can one get in a hate-filled rant? Let’s start with ‘‘then woman-hating Pakeha weirdos arrived’’. To class an entire ethnic group as woman hating weirdos is racist in the extreme. I am surprised it was published.

Maxwell then goes on to contemplate if he was born ‘‘a thin-lipped, blue-eyed middle-class god of worldwide destruction. You know, born Pakeha ’’. Wow, so many inaccurate racist stereotypes in one sentence. I was born Pakeha and am neither blue-eyed nor middle-class, let alone a god of worldwide destruction.

Maxwell needs to provide factual examples of where white New Zealanders have been gods of worldwide destruction. I think his derogatory sentence requires some explanation.

He also states if he was born Maori, as he claims to be, he faces ‘‘jail time, poverty’’. I doubt Maxwell has spent any time in jail and, as a middle-class journalist, I doubt he faces the poverty that I and many of my working-class Pakeha friends face.

DARREN LONG, Hamilton

Waikato Times 28/8/18

JOEL MAXWELL COLUMNS

I write in response to the opinion page columns by Joel Maxwell. How offensive can one get in a hatefilled rant? Let’s start with ‘‘then woman-hating Pakeha weirdos arrived’’. To class an entire ethnic group as woman-hating weirdos is racist in the extreme. I am surprised it was published.

Maxwell then goes on to contemplate if he was born ‘‘a thin-lipped, blue-eyed middle-class god of worldwide destruction. You know, born Pakeha .’’ Wow, so many inaccurate racist stereotypes in one sentence. I was born Pakeha and am neither blueeyed nor middle-class, let alone a god of worldwide destruction.

Maxwell needs to provide factual examples of where white New Zealanders have been gods of worldwide destruction. I think his derogatory sentence requires some explanation.

Maxwell also states that those born Maori, as he claims to be, face ‘‘jail time, poverty’’. I doubt Maxwell has spent any time in jail and as a middleclass journalist, I doubt he faces the poverty that I and many of my working-class Pakeha friends face.

DARREN LONG, Hamilton

NZ Herald 28/8/18

TREATY SHEETS ON DISPLAY

Brian Rudman’s column about the Treaty grounds and related issues was somewhat misleading about the Treaty of Waitangi documents.

There are nine Treaty sheets in total (eight in Te Reo, one in English), all signed in different places with the first sheet taking signatures at Waitangi and other places in Northland.

Whatever the arguments may be for returning the original Waitangi sheet to the North, all nine Treaty sheets are not currently stuck in a Wellington vault as Rudman suggests. They are on display on the ground floor of the National Library in our capital city as part of the permanent He Tohu exhibition. Here it is very easy and rewarding to get up close to the Treaty sheets. A stone’s throw from Parliament, their present location is arguably apt.

ROSE YUKICH, Balmoral.

Northland Age 28/8/18

WRONG NEST

The so-called Maori race is really non-existent, as it meets no universal definition of a race, being now only propped up by the quixotic controversial statutory (a legal fiction) definition in the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974.

Many Kiwis that affiliate to the Maori label have considerably more other ancestry than Maori ancestry. Only government and political intervention perpetuates the myth.

Our current government’s infatuation (Government sets goal to have a million Kiwis speaking basic fabricated te reo by 2040 — TVNZ August 9) with the Maori language is not shared by over 75 per cent of Kiwis, as various public polls regularly show.

Apart from state schools (at the request of the astute Maori elders of the day) prohibiting Maori language being spoken in schools for a short period of time in our distant past, there has never been any law preventing Maori from maintaining or speaking their language, and of course this should be encouraged.

It seems, however, Maori, like the cuckoo, are depositing their modern day fabricated language (which bears little resemblance to the original Maori language) in everyone else’s nest in the forlorn hope that it will survive, as they seemingly have not the interest nor the will to nurture it themselves, as other cultures in New Zealand do without copious public funding and government promotion.

The catalyst currently is people are being forced to learn Maori if they want a job or retain their job/get promotion etc. and that is unacceptable compulsion.

Most Kiwis seem blissfully unaware of the tens of millions of dollars pumped into Maori language every year by the Kiwi taxpayer, money that would be far better spent on health, housing, and beneficial education for all Kiwis.

The agenda of those pushing the Maori language bandwagon is far more sinister than many realise. It is the key to enable the Maori sovereignty movement to impose their self-serving agenda on to New Zealand, as hinted in a NZ Listener interview (May 29, 2016).

As someone recently said, while the Maori language and culture may be treasured by those few who value it, to others who do not embrace these things it means very little.

ROB PATERSON, Mount Maunganui

NOT SO SMART

In 1963, Martin Luther King dreamt of the day when people in America would be judged by their character and not the colour of their skin. In those days New Zealand had no Treaty claims and practically no racial unrest. Yet if we fastforward to 2018, we have people such as Joel Maxwell and Marama Davidson who look at the world through a cultural Marxist lens.

For those unaware of what that means, it is a social or political movement that promotes unreason and irrationality through the guise of various causes. These people tend to categorise people in terms of their group identity, race, gender and so forth. They then make sweeping judgements about the entire group.

In doing so, ‘we’, the people Maxwell is judging, lose our individuality and become either a Maori or Pakeha in his eyes. It is clear that his motivation is to separate us into oppressors and the oppressed, which is simply untrue and counter-productive for us all.

For the benefit of those who read his article ‘Let’s hear it for Davidson’s C word and Brash’s M word’ (Stuff, August 13), I feel it is important for Maxwell’s rather racist untruths be corrected.

There were no pre-colonial Maori. The tribes of New Zealand were not one collective known as Maori, they were completely separate groups and were known internationally as New Zealanders. When the British were asked to govern in 1840, everyone, including the natives, were known as New Zealanders. We still are. The social construct ‘Maori’ began after the Treaty signing in 1840.

The C word was not brought to New Zealand by “Pakeha weirdos.” It first entered the Oxford Dictionary in 1972, and people who define as Maori use it equally along with other New Zealanders. Davidson cannot reclaim a word that never belonged to her.

Maxwell has no idea whether every pre-colonial New Zealander didn’t have a hang-up about genitals. What we do know, by reading books by the people who were here at the time, is that many New Zealanders did not have a problem walking around naked, defecating where they stood, were extremely dirty, kept slaves, ate one another, and treated women on the whole very badly.

Hobson’s Pledge are not a group of Pakeha antagonists towards tangata whenua (yet another of Maxwell’s special groups). Their spokeswoman is Nga¯puhi, and they want to return New Zealand to a place where people are equal before the law, irrespective of when they or their ancestors arrived in New Zealand. I understand it is that that Maxwell can’t stomach.

Maxwell states that if he were born a Pakeha, statistically he would have everything better. He is wrong. Statistics clearly show that people with European ancestry, which includes him, lead every negative social statistic there is in New Zealand. It is only when the European ancestry is denied or pushed back for political purposes that the statistics become skewed.

So, how did we go from practically no racial unrest in 1963 to the media literally pumping it out in 2018? In my opinion it is because of the racist Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 and the biased Waitangi Tribunal it enacted. It creates people like Maxwell and Davidson, who pretend to be a different race and make claims against the rest of us.

It’s got to go.

ANDY OAKLEY, by email

Bay of Plenty Times 28/8/18

DON'T LET THE PAST DEFINE US

Suicide rates as outlined in the NZ Herald (August 24) are a blight on our society and I agree that issues like poverty and violence are a major issue.

However, I strongly object to the Mental Health Foundation dragging in the so-called legacy of colonialism" into the debate, as said by Ellen Norman.

This is clearly aimed at laying the blame on Pakeha (the colonialists) and creates a sense of injustice that does nothing to help in addressing the high rate of suicide amongst Maori. It only makes the divisions in our society worse.

Surely as an organisation, the Mental Health Foundation should be doing the opposite and encouraging people to not let things that happened in the past define where they are at today. We all have issues that we have been though but encouraging people to blame others and to dwell on the past cannot ever be helpful.

Let's get this racist blaming of a 'legacy of colonialism* out of the debates around suicide, crime and other such issues so that these people (and the nation) can move forward with their lives.

B INGRAM Papamoa

Wanganui Chronicle 27/8/18 & 28/8/18

TREATY DOCUMENT FUDGING

l invite David James. who denigrates me, (Chronicle, August 25) to identify any flaws in my work on the Treaty of Waitangi and related topics.

James is or was a principal of the Rowan Partnership which gives seminars explaining the Treaty —something which can actually be done in five minutes.

One of the handouts on such occasions has been a copy of the 1869 official translation of the Treaty by T E Young of the Native Department which in article Second “agrees to give to the Chiefs, the Hapus and all the people of New Zealand the full chieftainship of their lands".

However, after the words “all the people of New Zealand have been inserted the words “[ie Maori]”. Can Mr James explain this fudging of the wording to write everybody but Maori out of the rights guaranteed by Article second?

BRUCE MOON Nelson

Gisborne Herald 27/8/18

‘MERE SIGHTING’ IN 1642 . . .

As Dame Anne Salmond writes (20/8), Captain Cook was not authorised to claim possession of any island which had “hitherto been discover’d by any Europeans”. Cook confirmed in his journal that Abel Tasman had discovered “part of the east coast” of New Zealand, but added a curious proviso: “he (Tasman) however never landed upon it probably he was discouraged from it by the natives killing 3 or 4 of his people at the first and only place he anchor’d at”.

Was Cook suggesting that Tasman’s failure to set foot on the country meant that his mere sighting of it was something less than discovery? If so, then the land remained available for British annexation (with the consent of the inhabitants) according to the terms of the Admiralty’s instructions. In my book “Lying for the Admiralty” (Rosenberg, Sydney, 2018), I suggest that this supports the statement made by Sydney Parkinson (Joseph Banks’ young artist) that Captain Cook took “possession of the country, in form, for the king” on 9 October 1769 at today’s city of Gisborne.

MARGARET CAMERON-ASH, Woollahra, NSW

NZ Herald 27/8/18

NO ATTACK ON MAORI

In his column in last Saturday’s Weekend Herald, Simon Wilson claims that I attacked Maori in 2004 — presumably a reference to my speech to the Orewa Rotary Club that year — and that I have kept myself willfully ignorant of the history of Maori/Pakeha relations.

He claimed that since then, I have “received many invitations to visit marae, read books, listen to speakers, learn more about what he’s talking about. He confesses he has done very little of it.”

He’s completely wrong. There was nothing about my speech to the Orewa Rotary Club in 2004 which “attacked Maori”. I simply argued that it was high time we stopped discriminating between New Zealanders depending on when they or their ancestors came to New Zealand.

Our history is substantially irrelevant to that contention. Anybody wanting to check that speech can do so at this URL: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0401/ S00220.htm.

To the best of my recollection I’ve had only one invitation to visit a marae since I left Parliament at the beginning of 2007, and that was late last year when I was invited to take part in a panel discussion on the Papakura marae (which I accepted).

DON BRASH, Auckland.

Hawkes Bay Today 25/8/18

TE TIRITI FACTS

Re “Brash-itus”: Gwyn John ( Hawke’s Bay Today, August 23) would agree that the Treaty was drafted in English and translated into Maori.

The word “sovereignty” in article 1 was translated into “kawanatanga”, and “possession” in article 2 into “rangatiratanga”.

Despite arguments that chiefs did not understand “sovereignty”, on February 5, 1840, numerous chiefs opposed signing because it would mean accepting a chief over them — which is a real-world understanding of sovereignty.

To verify this, Google-search missionary William Colenso’s account of the Treaty signing.

Gwyn John bases his understanding of the Treaty on the re-translation from Maori to English done by Sir Hugh Kawharu in the 1980s and promoted by the Waitangi Tribunal.

In this version, “kawanatanga” meant “government” and “rangatiratanga” meant “chiefly authority”.

This created a treaty in which the chiefs agreed to the governor governing settlers while the chiefs could carry on being chiefs, which is nonsense.

But the chiefs did not sign the Kawharu translation. They signed Te Tiriti, and that was after an intense debate about the implications of ceding sovereignty.

Gwyn John then promotes “equitable opportunities for Maori”, which is fair enough, except that the targets of his beneficence may find his thinking quaint and patronising.

MIKE BUTLER Hastings

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 24/8/18

DEMOCRACY AT WORK

P Dey’s letter (The Weekend Sun, August 10), that mentions my name three times, deserves a balanced reply – that is democracy at work.

Good representation depends on public understanding of the issues and the policies and integrity of those standing for office. We are now in a multicultural society, where even minority people, regardless of race or skin colour, can be elected on merit.

For example, the Mayor of Gisborne (which has a strong Maori population) is Chinese and a popular and skilled leader. The ex-Mayor of Dunedin was Indian. So both, from a minority race, got there totally on merit.

P Dey needs to reassess his thinking in this 21st century and realise that ability, policy, and good philosophy will engender public support, even if they come from a minority race.

Thank goodness for that. This is true democracy at work. The handing over of power on a silver platter has to stop, and good riddance. Long live democracy and common sense.

N MAYO, Katikati.

SUN REFLECTS ON ALL CULTURES

After reading B Johnson’s letter (The Weekend Sun, August 10) I was prompted to back up his experience re writing letters to newspapers with my own. For many years I subscribed to another newspaper in the area, sometimes writing letters to the editor when an issue being promulgated required some input for balance.

In the early years many were published, but as the years passed and editors changed it got to the point where it was rare to be published, probably because of the subjects I wished to comment on.

In the end I gave notice to the paper that if they wished to retain my paid subscription they needed to have articles that reflected the actual population that resided here. No notice was taken, so I cancelled my subscription some 12 months ago.

Luckily in the BOP we have The Weekend Sun that reflects well on all the cultures that live here and, more importantly, an editor of exceptional talent who isn't afraid to tell it like it is as per his editorial on ‘NZ’s systematic bullying and censorship’. Brian Rogers, you are not only an inspiration to the silent majority, but in my eyes you are a bloody legend. (Abridged).

B BROWN, Pyes Pa

CONGRATULATIONS

Congratulations to the editor of this special newspaper, The Weekend Sun. I raise this issue because of the excellent opinion piece on page 2 of the August 10 issue.

For instance, it showed how protesters against free speech are using their free speech to try and stop our right to free speech! And the likening of the silent majority of NZ to a sleeping bear which the bullies and troublemakers are poking with a stick.

The prediction that we, ‘the sleeping bear’ will turn on our tormentors. So very true if you understand history.

As Winston Churchill said, after years of warning the British, now you will have to fight and because you have allowed the enemy to get so strong, you may very well lose!

K EVANS, Tauranga.

RATEPAYERS COULD LOSE VOICE

The desire of Mayor Webber and some WBOPDC councillors to introduce Maori wards was roundly trounced by a district-wide referendum which clearly showed that citizens and ratepayers views were very different from the aspirations of the Mayor.

Having lost that round, the same team have decided to get rid of the five democratically elected community boards and substitute them with community committees which will be made up of 'appointments' made solely by the Mayor's team.

Should this 'back door' choice of representation based on Mayor/Councillor choice go ahead, democracy will be gone and Mayor Webber will have achieved his personal wish for unelected persons to grace his council table.

Democracy is not easy to navigate but it is far superior to the tyranny of dictatorship.

Ratepayers within existing community board areas could lose their voice if Mayor Webber's proposition succeeds.

M ANDERSON, Pyes Pa.

MORE THAN DEMOCRATICALLY FAIR

Once again P Dey (The Weekend Sun, August 10) has let his ethnic bias get in the way of the facts. The Maori seats were introduced as a temporary measure in 1867 to allow male Maori to vote in national elections. This was before all male colonists gained the right.

In the last election the Maori Party failed to get re-elected as too few Maori supported them, however from 15 per cent of the population, Maori now has 25 per cent of the parliamentary seats including the Leader and Deputy Leader of the National Party. Maori's 166 per cent representation in the government would seem more than democratically fair.

$1.4 billion approximately, paid by the taxpayer annually and exclusively to Maori, would also seem a rather large bite of the national cake. This sum is not available to any other of the country's 231 ethnic groups. This does not include settlements proposed by a racially selective Waitangi Tribunal.

B JOHNSON, Omokoroa.

Otago Daily Times 24/8/18

MOVE BEYOND RACE

THE current review of the justice system seems to have its focus on Maori reoffending and the preponderance of Maori in prisons and is looking for ways to improve both of these issues.

The objectives are laudable, but I’m concerned that the focus is on ethnicity rather than the individuals when, given that there is no definition of ‘‘Maori’’, the statistics are unreliable at best.

We already have too much policy being developed on this assumed ethnicity when the problems are much more complex and more to do with social, environmental and economic issues rather than race.

Can this justice review, and in fact all government policy formation, move beyond this simple and often emotional categorisation?

ALAN POLLOCK, Queenstown

Bay of Plenty Times 24/8/18

EQUALITY FOR ALL NEW ZEALANDERS

Top marks for Don Brash and his policies. Sure, Maori do have a place in history, but as long as we have any form of privileges for any one group, there'll always be a division and disharmony between races.

There are some Maori, very enterprising, hardworking and good living people but unfortunately, there are so many others who let them down (like some European).

Overall, the Maori population is only about IS per cent yet we are continually giving in to their demands of both property and money, when does it stop?

Surely, after nearly 200 years how can Europeans be expected to keep giving so many privileges and compensations? If they did have anything taken from them (as they put it) it has more than been compensated for by now.

Is there any thought of the many advantages that we all, Maori and European, have today due to our early European settlers' hard toil, breaking our land, felling trees building dwellings and carving out roads, etc. That's how civilisation really started.

Somehow, we never seem to show any recognition and honour of those men and women pioneers. Let's face facts and have a fair future for all, let common sense prevail. We have a beautiful country, sadly lacking in sound sense and management. One law for all! I remain, a proud New Zealander.

KEN COLLINGWOOD Welcome Bay

NZ Herald 24/8/18

ON RACISM

I think that Jayne Crothall is very much closer to the truth regarding racism in New Zealand than is Justice Minister Andrew Little in his denial. The very emphasis on race in this country is creating ever more racist policies and agendas.

DONALD MURRAY, New Plymouth.

SOCIAL INVESTMENT

If Andrew Little had decided before the last election that he wanted to see the prison population fall by 30 per cent within 15 years he would have voted National. For Sir Bill English was already onto the solution with his social investment concept. When we look at the disproportionately high Maori representation in our prison population we are lifting the wrong end of the telescope to our eye. We should instead be horrified by the even more disproportionate representation of Maori children who are in foster care, who are the victims of family violence, who leave school without any meaningful qualification. That is where we should be concentrating our attention.

That is where we have some hope of correcting the imbalance. That is where generosity of spirit and community care would pay dividends. And yes, it is likely it would take 15 years and perhaps more before we began to see meaningful results but the results would come.

PETER NEWFIELD, Takapuna.

Hawkes Bay Today 24/8/18

POT, MEET KETTLE

The snide remarks of Bruce Bisset ( Hawke’s Bay Today, August 17) about Don Brash are the sort of hate speech which he claims to deplore.

As for Maori being “the victims of colonisation”, I remind him that pre-Treaty Maori life was short and brutish. Colonisation saved them.

With colonial times came widespread interbreeding between the races. Without their own white ancestors, how many of today’s Maori would be here in the flesh?

Nowhere does Brash “deny Maori rights and values” as Bisset seems to think.

What Brash actually said at Orewa was: “The Treaty of Waitangi should not be used as the basis for giving greater civil, political or democratic rights to any particular ethnic group” [his emphasis].

Bisset should explain why he is opposed to that. (abridged)

BRUCE MOON, Nelson

Northland Age 23/8/18

REVERSE RACISM?

Poor old Don Brash and his reputation as a racist. And in reality it is not he that is the racist, rather organisations like the Waitangi Tribunal, TV1, every iwi and tribe in the country, and for the most part, all marae.

There was a programme on TV1 about a funeral parlour, not just a normal one, but one only for his people. He happened to be Maori. Is that not racism? A service to the exclusion of all other ethnicities?

It would appear to many that the biggest racists in the country are indigenous-born. There is no Pakeha Party, no Chinese Party, no Asian Party and no Island Party.

No ethnicities are being invited to join local councils without elections, but, Maori are. Who are the real racists here? Or is it reverse racism?

PETE BENSON Awanui

Bay of Plenty Times 23/8/18

WESTERN BAY RISKS LOSING DEMOCRACY

The desire of Mayor Webber and some Western Bay District councillors to introduce Maori wards was roundly trounced by a district-wide referendum which clearly showed that citizen and ratepayer views were very different from the aspirations of the mayor.

Having lost that round, the same team is looking at getting rid of the five democratically elected community boards and substitute them with community committees which will be made up of appointments made solely by the mayor's team.

Should this backdoor choice of representation based on mayor/ councillor choice, democracy will be gone and, in my opinion, Mayor Webber will have achieved his personal wish for unelected persons to grace his council table.

Democracy is not easy to navigate but it is far superior to the tyranny of dictatorship.

Ratepayers within existing community board areas could lose their voice if this proposal succeeds.

MAUREEN J ANDERSON Pyes Pa

Waikato Times 22/8/18

JOEL MAXWELL COLUMN

Joel Maxwell intensely dislikes the words Hobson’s Pledge, believing the people behind that name represent ‘‘the depths of Pakeha antagonism towards tangata whenua’’ as they are working to dismantle Maori wards in councils (Waikato Times, August 13). He would have been more accurate to say they are working to dismantle undeserved privilege for tangata whenua, or any other race-based group. There is indeed a depth of antagonism towards that.

He somehow seems to hold his Pakeha blood responsible for the hazards his Maori side endure, including ‘‘ . . . a shorter life, jail time, poverty, and ongoing existential threats to your culture, history, language and consequent alienation in your own country’’. Yikes! No other colonised race in history was ever treated so badly!

I am all for having my Maori side represented in councils as valued advisers, but to grant them unelected voting rights is immoral and contrary to Hobson’s pledge at the Treaty of Waitangi. Maori today, who are almost all part-Pakeha , have to suck up the suffering and pull themselves up with the billions received in Treaty settlements, just as Pakeha had to suffer in their own time to earn their envied statistics. In 2018, to promote Maori victimhood and Pakeha guilt is to promote a major stumbling block to Maori well-being.

TONY MOLLOY, Morrinsville

JOEL MAXWELL COLUMN 2

I write in response to the disgusting opinion column by Joel Maxwell. How offensive can one get in a hate-filled rant? Let’s start with ‘‘then woman-hating Pakeha weirdos arrived’’. To class an entire ethnic group as woman-hating weirdos is racist in the extreme and is hate speech. I am surprised the Waikato Times published it.

Mr Maxwell then goes on to contemplate if he was born ‘‘a thin-lipped, blue-eyed middle-class god of worldwide destruction. You know, born Pakeha ’’. Wow, so many inaccurate racist stereotypes in one sentence. I was born Pakeha and I am neither blue-eyed nor middle-class, let alone a god of worldwide destruction. (Or maybe Iam...)

Mr Maxwell needs to provide factual examples of where white New Zealanders have been gods of worldwide destruction. I think his derogatory sentence requires some explanation.

Maxwell also states if he were born Maori, as he claims to be, he faces ‘‘jail time, poverty’’. I doubt Mr Maxwell has spent any time in jail and as a middle class opinion page columnist, I doubt he faces the poverty that many of my workingclass Pakeha friends face.

Maxwell’s article is hate speech in the extreme, but what is worse is that Maxwell is Pakeha . Judging by his appearance, I would say he has more Pakeha blood in him than Maori. He hates what he is and tries to deny that he carries the blood of a ‘‘god of worldwide destruction’’. We can only feel pity for the poor chap.

DARREN LONG, Hamilton

Northern Advocate 22/8/18

KEEP YOUR COLONIAL GUILT

According to Tomas Lauterbach from August 8, te reo Maori should be a taonga — a treasure. I don’t know what his problem is because I don’t imagine anybody would argue that the Maori language does not qualify as a taonga to the Maori people as per article two of the Treaty of Waitangi.

What I would argue strongly against is his angst-laden, anticolonial, bicultural, revisionist take, on what the Treaty means.

There is nothing in the Treaty that can be interpreted as stating or implying that the Crown has any responsibility to protect or assist in revitalising the Maori language. Yet every year vast sums of government money are spent on this, as well as pushing Maori culture into every area of New Zealand life. There is no mandate in the Treaty for this.

I am sick and tired of people like Tomas telling me that Maori is somehow my language and that Maori culture is somehow my culture. It is not my language. It is not my culture. I do not want it.

Maori language and culture belong to the Maori people. If they want to retain their language and culture they need to do it themselves. It is not up to us to do it for them. Such paternalism is never helpful. And don’t tell me that Maori children were punished for speaking Maori. What did they expect when sending their children to European schools? I have heard often that this was the wish of the Maori elders who wanted Maori children to succeed in the European world. Sounds believable to me.

Mr Lauterbach can keep his bicultural humbug and colonial guilt, I don’t want them.

DAVID K FOOTE Whangarei

Bay of Plenty Times 22/8/18

THE SILENT MAJORITY

Now that the 85 per cent silent majority has finally emerged to protest against civic and academic efforts to muzzle free speech, it is to be hoped that they will continue to make their voices heard to recapture control of our nation from the liberal left politicians, academics, public servants, ethnically selective historians, much of the media and Maori elitists.

Our MPs must prove to be professional, ethical and aware that they are in Parliament to serve all New Zealanders and not just an exclusively favoured racial group.

Don Brash and Hobson's Pledge are consistently vilified in many quarters. They are campaigning for equal rights for all New Zealanders, irrespective of when they arrived in the country. Does that sound inclusive or racist?

His claim that all official civic, national and international events, whether it be the opening of a public building, an overseas embassy or the welcoming of foreign guests, should not be the exclusive rights of Maori when there are 230 other ethnic groups in the country.

Many visitors might conclude that Maori are the only cultural entity in the country. When Christian prayers and biblical traditions are considered unsuitable in a secular society, should we, therefore, have karakias instead?

Lets share it around. Don Brash's claims then seem reasonable. (Abridged)

BRYAN JOHNSON Omokoroa

Northland Age 21/8/18

ILLS LONG GONE

You have repeated an intemperate letter from Wally Hicks (August 16). Previously I wrote with corrections in response to comments ridiculing my work.

Now I wish to raise a far more fundamental issue — that of equality, blind to race.

Mr Hicks writes of terrible deeds in past British society in centuries gone by — “hung-drawn-and-quartered, tortures, witch burnings, head-on-a-pike, slavery, child labour, squalid slums, debtors’ prison, transportation and cat-o-nine-tails”.

It was in order to rid society of any such wrongs that many marched under the 18th century slogan of freedom, equality, fraternity. Those ideals were brought to New Zealand by missionaries and colonial governors, and taken up by Maori to transform their society.

There was to be no more inherited privilege, and power, handed down through the generations. Place in government was to be free to all, with every person of equal value in a democratic society.

The ideal of equality, voiced in the first principle of the United Nations, is now denied by Maori exceptionalism and race-based laws. Hicks raises a red herring. The ills he lists are long gone. As is Maori cannibalism and infanticide. Thank goodness for that.

We should return to the fundamental ideals that brought so much advancement, and go into the future together.

JOHN ROBINSON Waikanae

THE SILENT MAJORITY

Now that the 85 per cent silent majority has finally emerged to protest against civic and academic efforts to muzzle free speech, it is to be hoped that they will continue to make their voices heard to recapture control of our nation from the liberal left politicians, academics, public servants, ethnically-selective historians, much of the media and avaricious Maori elitists supposedly representing 15 per cent of the population.

Our MPs must prove to be professional, ethical and aware that they are in Parliament to serve all New Zealanders, and not just an exclusively favoured racial group.

Don Brash and Hobson's Pledge are consistently vilified in many quarters. They are campaigning for equal rights for all New Zealanders, irrespective of when they arrived in the country. Does that sound inclusive or racist?

His claim that all official civic, national and international events, whether it be the opening of a public building, an overseas embassy or the welcoming of foreign guests, should not be the exclusive rights of Maori when there are 230 other ethnic groups in the country. Many visitors might conclude that Maori are the only cultural entity in the country.

When Christian prayers and biblical traditions are considered unsuitable in a secular society, should we therefore have karakia, spells and incantations, and calls upon Atua, pagan gods, instead?

Let's share it around. Don Brash's claims then seem reasonable.

BRYAN JOHNSON Omokoroa

A HISTORY LESSON

Judith Myers Holloway's letter published in the Dominion Post (August 15) shows how little she knows about our true New Zealand history. If she had done any research on this she would have come up with a different story.

Here is a bit to go on with.

By 1840 large areas of land had been sold by the chiefs to people from other lands. After Te Rauparaha had attacked and virtually depopulated the South Island, many of the South Island chiefs travelled to New South Wales, where they sold large areas of the South Island. By 1840, over two-thirds of New Zealand had either been sold to people from other lands or had contracts to purchase.

Over 1000 deeds of sale are still held in the New South Wales Supreme Court Although most of these were never challenged when New Zealand became British soil, in most cases they were returned to the chiefs and repurchased by the government many times over.

Also Judith mentioned colonisation of Aotearoa. New Zealand has never been called Aotearoa.

In the Treaty it is called Nu Tirani.

Maori never owned land, they only occupied it for as long as they could defend it. They had acquired New Zealand from the tangata whenua, who were pre-Maori people through conquest or intermarriage.

IAN BROUGHAM, Wanganui

Hawkes Bay Today 21/8/18

BISSET’S TAKE ON TREATY’S INTENTIONS ‘WASTE OF TIME AND EFFORT’

Bruce Bisset in his opinion piece of Friday, August17, does nothing more than get lost in his own verbosity.

Reinterpreting everything said or written by another, based on one's own misunderstanding prejudices and bias, is a total waste of time and effort.

If he truly believes that the `subtext" of the Treaty of Waitangi was supposed to mean “in partnership", why did the chiefs `cede", or give away, sovereignty to the Queen in Article 1?

The chiefs/tribes' right of ownership and use of their own lands and property was acknowledged in Artide 2.

In Article 3, they were given the protection of the Crown and the same rights and privileges as British citizens.

Nowhere in the actual wording of the Treaty is the term "partnership" used.

In his Orewa speech, Dr Don Brash was commenting on those who reinterpret the Treaty to give effect to their own political and financial goals Dr Brash also champions "free speech", not -hate speech", Mr Bisset If we do not like what some persons say, we simply do not go to hear them.

That is our right as citizens of the Crown. It is, however, not our right to forcibly prevent them from expressing those views, as long as they are not inciting lawless behaviour.

IAN MCINTOSH Napier

Wanganui Chronicle 21/8/18

STRAIGHT TALK

When Danny Keenan (Chronicle, August 15) attacks Don Brash, the "sound over substance" and "carefully coded messages" of which he speaks are his own.

Brash speaks plainly and if Keenan doesn't like it — well, tough.

By relying on the tales of Claudia Orange, as he appears to do, he has got a very twisted view of our history.

It would be better if he put all her books into the recycling bin, as being turned into egg cartons would be the best use for them.

BRUCE MOON, Nelson

NZ Herald 21/8/18

FREE SPEECH

The letter writer who told Ms Marvelly yesterday that she should leave her comments to us older folk has got me beat. We can no longer say that it was made plain to us that the haka challenge, while an age-old ritual, was mainly intended as a threat of physical violence.

A lady did get a letter published in the Herald about 10 years ago that said until the haka was banned from sporting activities how could Maori families like hers escape the intergenerational cycles of violence that plagued her community. But she was never heard from again. Professor McCutcheon was right.

There are now laws to stop us expressing opinions about almost anything. I just wish the same rules would apply to George Soros’ media outlets that place all that fake climate alarmist stuff in the media.

JOHN ROFE, Pakuranga Heights.

Dominion Post 20/8/18

MAORI IN PARLIAMENT

Glenn McConnell's column (Aug 16) leaves me in despair over the state of our education system.

He claims "Maori are not over-represented in Parliament". Well, let's do some simple maths. Maori are 12 per cent of the population (more or less) which currently means they should have 14 MPs (more or less). At the last count there were 28 MPs in Parliament of Maori descent, many of them in senior positions in all of the parties. This equates to 25 per cent of the MPs (more or less). Clearly Maori are grossly over-represented in Parliament.

If any ethnic groups are under-represented in Parliament it is Pacific Islanders and Asians. But this doesn't fit the columnist's views. Perhaps he would be happier if Parliament was 100 per cent Maori, and the views and the rights of all others were totally ignored.

It worked well in South Africa for a while. [abridged]

TONY WOOD, Carterton

Hawkes Bay Today 20/8/18

‘PREJUDICE TRUMPS REASON’ ON IDEA OF AWARD FOR BRASH

The idea of Don Brash as New Zealander of the Year triggered, on Friday, a rant from columnist Bruce Bisset in which prejudice trumped reason.

But anyone who checks out the Hobson’s Pledge website will see what Bisset is railing against is a fake version of what Brash says, created by detractors.

The Hobson’s Pledge website is where a detailed record of Brash’s views on Treaty policy may be found.

For instance, that website says “All New Zealanders should be equal before the law, irrespective of when they or their ancestors arrived in New Zealand’.

Yet Bisset implies that Brash “appears to believe Maori have no rights”.

Reality looks stunningly opposite to the world that Bruce Bisset appears to live in.

Bisset may or may not realise that he is presenting an intentionally misrepresented view that is easier to defeat than Brash’s real argument.

In the discipline of logic, the Bisset approach is known as the straw man argument.

If Brash’s position is so unacceptable and unpopular, perhaps Bisset could ask himself why he devoted an entire column in an attempt to undermine him.

MIKE BUTLER, Hastings

NZ Herald 20/8/18

MARVELLY COMMENTS

Lizzie Marvelly’s pronouncements on her indigenousness, the respect she feels this ought to command and her shame at not having stepped on the stage to perform the art forms of her ancestors are hard to swallow.

She claims the haka is a sacred treasure and an acknowledgement of Maori as our first people. If this were so why have its guardians (kaumatua, kuia etc) allowed the haka to play second fiddle to such an obvious legacy of our colonial past as rugby?

Finally, some advice for Ms Marvelly: pomposity is the preserve of we seniors. Let’s keep it that way.

KERRY CRAIG, Mt Eden.

Nelson Mail 20/8/18

FREEDOM OF SPEECH

I agree with Joel Maxwell (Nelson Mail, August 13) – Don Brash should never have been banned from speaking at Massey. But it is there that our consensus ends. Maxwell’s opinions mostly annoy me. He is, however, allowed them. It’s his style that really grates – pedantic and over-clever to the point where what’s not unintelligible is downright objectionable.

He seems to agree with Marama Davidson, that over-proud young Maori woman who looks as if she has an inflated opinion of her social standing. Ms Davidson advocates (in the name of free speech) the free usage of the c-word. But all freedom comes with responsibility. This also applies to the way we communicate, because language and words carry considerable power. Maxwell and Davidson are like 13-year-olds looking up vulgar sexual words in the dictionary and using them behind the bike sheds.

LARRY PETTERSON, Takaka,

Waikato Times 18/8/18

WORLD VIEW NEGLECTED

Your columnist Glen McConnell has that fire in the belly – expressive penmanship – that marks an excellent social commentator, and as many of his followers would expect, he strikes blows for the ‘‘Maori point of view’’.

Yet he neglects the world view in regards to our global society, of which Maoridom is like all other ethnicities, a small part, albeit as important as any other constituent part.

Of course Maori have been wronged in our colonial history, but our Kiwi history is merely a microcosm of world history, and of virtually every worldwide ethnicity which has been wronged in the past.

In acknowledging that, we find the wrongness of trying to elevate a single ethnicity to be the ‘‘royal houses’’ of ‘‘Kiwidom’’ and falsely labelling all other ethnicities under the global name of Pakeha . . . thus, them and us.

The world itself will soon give testament to the falseness of that.

Yes, we need to feed, clothe, and house all Kiwis and give that hand-up where it is obviously needed. And only then will we look at the colour of their skin . . . and then celebrate the cultural diversity that is all of us.

DENNIS PENNEFATHER, Te Awamutu

TRANSLATION, PLEASE

I wonder what the to reo translation of the phrase "when thieves fall out" is.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

Nelson Mail 18/8/18

MAORI AND PAKEHA

Martin Hanson Richmond, August 13 Born-again Maori columnist Joel Maxwell continues to plumb new depths with his racist tirades against Pakeha . In his latest effort (Nelson Mail, August 13), he bemoans Pakeha weirdos for removing open discussion about woman’s genitals, among other things.

I wonder if Maxwell feels the same way about the removal of cannibalism, slavery, infanticide and tribal warfare. Lets face it, it was the same Pakeha weirdos who disapproved of all those things.

By the way, Joel, despite minimal education, this Pakeha enjoys his privileged lifestyle through much hard work, thrift and personal responsibility. My children enjoy the same for identical reasons, along with the the added advantage of being hugely supported and encouraged, at home, to gain qualifications. Actually, much like my Maori first cousins.

KEN MILLWARD, Upper Moutere

Wanganui Chronicle 18/8/18

FLAWED ASSERTION

Readers should check the Hobson's Pledge website to see whether Danny Keenan's representation in his "Brash speaks" piece (Chronicle, August 15) is accurate

Instead of alleging that the website language has been "carefully coded" to "frighten more than they inform”, Dr Keenan should debate the issues raised, which are:

* All New Zealanders should be equal before the law, irrespective of when they or their ancestors arrived in New Zealand;

* The Treaty of Waitangi is not, in any meaningful sense, New Zea-land's constitution;

* The Treaty did, however, estab. lish three important points —namely that, in signing the Treaty, Maori chiefs ceded sovereignty to the Crown: in turn the Crown would protect the property rights of all New Zealanders; and all Maori would enjoy the rights and privileges of British subjects;

* The Treaty of Waitangi did not create a "partnership" between Maori and the Crown;

* The Treaty of Waitangi did not establish any "principles" and all references to such "principles" should be removed from legislation.

As a Ngapuhi and Hobson's Pledge co-spokesperson, I say Dr Keenan's assertion that he is able to represent a Maori view is flawed. Maori are not frightened or intimidated by information and knowledge.

CASEY COSTELLO, Co-Spokesperson Hobson's Pledge

Dominion Post 17/8/18

WE’RE ONE PEOPLE

Re Joel Maxwell’s column about Pakeha anatgonism to ‘‘tangata whenua’’ (Let’s speak freely even if it gets a bit messy, Aug 14), Octavius Hadfield was one of the most enlightened Europeans here in the decades after the Treaty, and he advocated assimilation as the best way forward for Maori, whilst also ensuring the survival of Maori culture by encouraging Sam Williams to set up Te Aute College in Hawke’s Bay.

Now, almost 180 years later, we really are one people. No group, race, ethnicity or tribe should have special privilege over any other. Treaty compensations should be wound up as soon as possible and consigned to history.

We should not try and be bilingual, excepting the use of expressions, like ‘‘tangata whenua’’, as it is divisive.

We who have made this country our home, irrespective of our arrival date, are all in effect ‘‘tangata whenua’’ – people of the land!

BRANDON HOLMAN, Paraparaumu

Wanganui Chronicle 17/8/18

KEENAN'S CLAIMS

I am surprised at some of the things Dr Danny Keenan has written in his article(Chronicle, August 15).

All he has put forward are his opinions of what the Treaty of Waitangi says or does not say. What we do know is that the Queen, in 1840, was asked to send troops to New Zealand to stop Maori killing each other, which she did.

These troops were involved in dispensing justice and restoring order as they saw fit.

Mistakes were probably made on both sides.

The Treaty dearly states the tribal chiefs ceded their sovereignty to the Queen but, by reinventing the Treaty, one can change the interpretation and unfortunately, this is happening more.

The debate will continue about race-based rules for council seats and all the other things Dr Keenan mentions.

It would be nice if, some time soon, Hobson's words 'We are one"— apparently said after each chief signed the Treaty — were to be seen to be actually in place.

PJ BURRELL Katikati

Northland Age 16/8/18

WHEN DOES IT END?

I read today in another newspaper that the government has given $750,000 of taxpayer funds for the rebuilding of the dining room at a marae in Kawhia. The report mentioned also that three other marae in Northland, have been given a total of $2·9 million for “rebuilds”.

The report went on to inform readers that Oranga Marae, funded by taxpayers via the Department of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Maori Development, has a 2018-19 budget of $17·5 million “to support maraes by ensuring that cultural taonga and traditions are preserved for future generations. It assists to build, repair, and restore whares, while also encouraging maraes in the revitalisation of tikanga, te reo Maori and matauranga Maori”. Well, a few questions arise from this.

One might ask whether $750,000 is not a little extravagant for the rebuilding of a dining room. One might be able to purchase a whole house in Auckland for that much.

But, then, this will no doubt be an extravagant dining room, with all the cooking and food storage and preparation facilities/utensils traditional to Maori, in the spirit of revitalising Maori tikanga.

Another question that could arise in the narrow minds of those mean-spirited taxpayers who've so far forked out billions to part-Maori via the Treaty gravy train is, When are part-Maori gonna be expected to start paying their own way?

LEO LEITCH Houhora

CRYSTAL CLEAR

When Mike Rashbrooke writes in his lengthy letter (last word, August 14) “British sovereignty was, as far as Ngapuhi and the Waitangi Tribunal are concerned, not acquired by their knowingly ceding it by the act of signing the treaty”.

He, like that Tribunal, obscures the known facts of history.

The words of those chiefs who spoke against signing on February 5, 1840, make it crystal clear that they knew that by doing so they agreed to become subordinate to the Governor, himself a subject of the Queen.

To quote just one of them, Te Kemara: "Governor high up, up, up and Te Kemara down low, small, a worm, a crawler - no,no,no." He signed the next day.

Who is whinging, Mr Rashbrooke?

BRUCE MOON Nelson

The Press 16/8/18

TOLERANCE AND UNDERSTANDING

Joel Maxwell (Aug 13) seems intent on creating division in Aotearoa with his vitriolic opinions targeting European New Zealanders. Tolerance, understanding and forgiveness need to be part of our multicultural society, not finger-pointing and blame at specific groups. We should all be looking through the same lens to a future where we feel valued and respected. Climate change is our biggest threat so we must stand united to confront the challenges ahead.

RACHEL DU VAL, Hillsborough

The Press 15/8/18

DON BRASH CORRECT

I can’t understand the persistent criticism of Don Brash. He speaks only the truth and he does so calmly and honestly – he is no rabblerouser. He wants to shore up democracy and equality for all.

What is there to take offence over that? I find his attitude refreshing.

I noticed in the Weekend Press that iwi were included in the consent process for a driveway. We are all represented through elected councillors. What justification is there for unelected, unrepresentative iwi to be involved in these processes?

Is this New Zealand’s version of democracy in action? Are other people happy with these arrangements? I am not and would be delighted if our political representatives could speak out as Brash is doing.

His views are not minority views, as some would have us believe.

L TUFF, Prebbleton

NZ Herald 15/8/18

ON FUTILITY

It seems to me that there are three really futile aims being pursued by humankind. Firstly to achieve world peace, secondly to find intelligent life on another planet and thirdly to settle all claims under the Treaty of Waitangi.

MIKE JARMAN, One Tree Hill.

ON THE HAKA

Maybe toning down the haka isn't such a bad idea. After all you can have so much culture jammed down your throat.

BRIAN CUTHBERT, Army Bay.

Wanganui Chronicle 15/8/18

TIME TO END MAORI SEATS

Act party policy has always been to reduce Parliament to 99 MPs, and abolish the Maori seats. Even without the Maori seats, Maori are well represented in Parliament.

The leaders of Act (David Seymour), National (Simon Bridges), and NZ First (Winston Peters) are all Maori. Yet most Maori vote for parties led by Pakeha — Labour and the Greens.

Do the Maori seats benefit Te Tiriti millionaires? I don't know, but the seats do little for ordinary Maori people. It is time they went.

ALAN DAVIDSON Gonville

Northland Age 14/8/18

HISTORY PERVERTED

Have you heard about the Kohimarama conference of chiefs, 1860? Of course not.

One of the most significant events in our nation’s early history, the largest gathering of Maori leaders after the signing of the Treaty, has been purposely ignored by selective historians, compliant politicians, educators, the media, recalcitrant Maori and Treaty revisionists for obvious reasons.

This was a meeting of some 200 chiefs with Governor Thomas Gore Browne. He encouraged them to speak openly, fully, and raise any questions of concerns over the Treaty.

As many of them had been present at Waitangi in 1840, they knew the commitment of the Treaty.

They unanimously confirmed that the Queen was the sole legitimate ruler of the country, with the term kawanatanga meaning sovereign.

They disparaged the Tainui Kingite movement in the Waikato, describing it as ‘child’s play,’ and not representative of Maori.

Kingitanga was a movement that started as a rebellion against the Crown, and therefore a breach of the Treaty.

Tainui tried to claim equal government with the Crown, a claim that was not granted by the Treaty. The subsequent confiscation of their land was considered legitimate by the conference and the great Maori scholar, lawyer and Cabinet Minister Sir Apirana Ngata.

Subsequently, government, through the offices of Christopher Finlayson, has given large financial compensation, the ridiculous ‘Top Up’ clause and national apologies for this lawful confiscation.

That the present-day population of New Zealand should apologise for actions over a 150 years ago is ridiculous. Ignoring this major event in our history is gross official deceit.

Not one of the 122 MPs has the professional integrity and courage to challenge the politically motivated perversion of our history, or to research Queen Victoria’s Royal Charter/Letters Patent, our true founding document.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

NGAPUHI OWES

When Hongi Hika returned from England he had exchanged all the gifts the King had given him for 300 muskets when passing through Sydney on his return to New Zealand.

Ngapuhi then went on a rampage south, slaughtering an estimated 60,000 of their defenceless, unarmed countrymen, but soon realised the southern tribes were arming themselves and would travel north for utu — revenge. The French, who the Ngapuhi feared, had also established themselves at Hokianga, and were showing interest in claiming New Zealand for France.

The chiefs wanted to put Britain between them and the French.

In 1831, 13 northern chiefs wrote to the King, asking him to be their guardian and protector, not only from the French but also from their own people — the southern tribes. The King acknowledged this request by sending a resident, James Busby, to New Zealand in 1833.

In 1835, Busby tried to get the chiefs to sign the Declaration of Independence, but as usual tribal tension and fighting took precedence over politic co-operation, and he could only attract 26 signatures at the time. Maori were now completely out of control.

A very old Maori gentleman asked the question, “Do you know why Ngapuhi were so keen to sign the Treaty?” He replied, “Ngapuhi had more muskets than any other tribe, and under the leadership of Hongi Hika in 1820 had gone south slaughtering, eating and taking slaves of hundreds of his fellow countrymen.

This had continued for about 10 years until the southern tribes had gained enough muskets to lodge a counter attack on Ngapuhi for utu — “revenge”. So now Ngapuhi owes the government big time.

IAN BROUGHAM, Wanganui

Dominion Post 14/8/18

CLOSE TO INCITEMENT

Joel Maxwell's crude generalisations of Maori and non Maori maybe free speech, but his opinions are also bordering dangerously dose to incitement.

GREG CHRISTENSEN, Raumati Beach

Waikato Times 13/8/18

ASIANS NEED A SEAT, TOO

Hamilton has a diverse ethnic population. According to the Department of Statistics, there are more Asians in Hamilton than Maori. Why do the Asians not have a seat as well?

BRIAN MAIN, Hamilton

NZ Herald 13/8/18

HAKA DEVALUED

For years I have expressed the view, hitherto regarded as politically incorrect, that the All Blacks are not well served by the haka.

Too often the vigour and spirit expended on the prematch performance results in a lacklustre first 15 minutes of the game when the opposition takes advantage of the unnecessary and primitive ritual.

The currency of the haka has also been devalued by the multiplicity of inappropriate occasions on which a poor rendition is performed by unqualified persons. Let the haka be restricted to its proper place as an element of Maori ceremonies.

PETER CLAPSHAW, Remuera

Nelson Mail 13/8/18

STEREOTYPING

It is impossible to tell whether Shade Hippolite's story (Nelson Mail, August 8) is factually true or merely an amalgam of the stories claimed by Maori youth.

Regardless, it appeared on the front page primarily for the message it bears - that, based on a single instance, we are still a very racist society, and Maori youth typically bear a daily cross of negative stereotyping.

I am more than three times Shade's age, and have shared schoolrooms, army barracks and university flats with Maori.

Maori also are prone to stereotyping white people.

My flatmates supposed that being Pakeha meant that I had always benefited from privilege, doors had magically opened before me, and I never had to struggle for anything.

My actual experiences of life are most different to their assumptions.

BRYAN FORREST Nelson

Wanganui Chronicle 13/8/18

FREE SPEECH IS DEAD

Now here is a tip for all you racial. gender-inconclusive. left-wing. radical non-conformists. Pick up the phone and mention 'security concerns" to protest against any speaker who may have a contra view to yours and you have won the battle before it has even commenced.

Phil Goff folded, Jan Thomas surrendered.

It appears laws have no place in our society when those most expected to uphold those laws can use their positions of 'authority" to render the laws ineffective.

Free speech is dead in this country, because there will always be some person with an opposing view or slightly different skin colour who will claim oppression, ill-treatment or special rights and threaten protest action.

This is so farcical that if a person was to notify the council that the Anzac Day Parade was to be the target for a protest, the council would rightly have to forbid it for "security reasons'.

Can you imagine the damage a bunch of ageing veterans could do to a group of protesters who p• •••d them off?

D PARTNER Eastown

EQUALITY DENIED

Like almost everyone else, my ancestors came here by boat. But l am denied equality by the separatists who increasingly rule all parliamentary thought.

Or is it a social media "fake news" phenomena where a ‘bot’ button can generate thousands of fictional support messages?

We have the Don Brash denial of "free speech" at Massey University fiasco, and the Wanganui High School Joseph Parker motivational speech "apartheid" reversal — and not a race relations conciliator in sight.

A deceptive monologue of past wrongs consistently emerges, followed by claims for earth, air and water.

Settlement is achieved by more and more money being shipped from our collective economy by threat.

KEN CRAFAR Durie Hill

Bay of Plenty Times 13/8/18

BRASH NOT RACIST, HE'S A KIND EGALITARIAN

From the rather rude and disparaging remarks (Opinion. August 10) made about Dr Don Brash. I am assuming that the writer does not know him.

I, on the other hand, am fortunate enough to be well acquainted with this kind and generous man who I would describe as a "gentleman. He is also highly intelligent and very interesting to listen and talk to.

What Dr Brash is trying to achieve is simply equality for all New Zealanders, irrespective of race.

How can it be unjust or racist to ask that all New Zealanders are treated with the same respect and have the same rights as every other New Zealander?

To argue that some branches of society should have more rights or benefits than others. just because of the colour of their skin or historical background, is exactly what Dr Brash is trying to extinguish.

He is not racist, people misconstrue his views without fully understanding his reasoning which is that all New Zealanders should be treated equally.

DAVE ‘BRIDGENS, Bethlehem

Waikato Times 11/8/18

MAORI ON COMMITTEES

What is wrong with the mayor and councillors of Hamilton, in that they want to leave democracy behind and return to feudalism?

There is no agreed Maori voice, let alone a Maori world view, and certainly not anything based on any democratic process. Leaders are there based on privilege by birth.

So why pander to the newly emerging Maori wealthy elite by putting unelected Maori seats on important council committees?

Treating them as a coherent minority ethnic group is apartheid, which, as a country, we were against in the past.

With numbers, and, for goodness' sake, the voting rights on these committees, I ask "what is their skill" that other non elected members were appointed for?

This placing of ordinary citizens below a favoured minority hark back to the Magna Carta and there will be hidden resentment when our equal citizenship is removed by seeming stealth.

The comment that Maori wards for the council table would have "caused a furore" shows that ratepayers want to retain their democracy.

There are Maori members in all the major parliamentary parties through their own efforts, so do we need this apparent local paternalism?

PETER H WOOD, Thames

Waikato Times 10/8/18

ETHNIC SEATS ON COUNCIL?

Hamilton is a wonderful city with a wide and growing number of different ethnicities. Some of these would have large and measurable numbers of our citizens.

Now that the council has resolved to appoint one group to have representation on the governing body, is it intending to offer the same opportunity to other groups?

GRAEME C HENRY, Hamilton

INTERESTING WEEK

It certainly was an interesting week in New Zealand politics last week, what with bomb threats from a Green Party supporter against overseas visitors who were planning a speaking event at the Powerstation, and hate speech against Don Brash promoting his assassination by semi-literate gang members.

Also a state-funded school, Whanganui High School, promoted a speaking event open only to Maori and Pasifika males.

It seems threats of violence, hate speech and racist/sexist discrimination is now accepted in New Zealand as part of the political discourse, which is a shame, because I thought such activities were illegal.

DARREN LONG, Hamilton

Dominion Post 10/8/18

There is irony in the decision to ban Don Brash from speaking at Massey University on the one hand and the waste of $1 million on a rebranding exercise to rename Victoria University of Wellington on the other.

Are these academic leaders (and our city council) completely out of touch with society – or perhaps they reflect it?

What worries me is the growing propensity to label as ‘‘racist’’ anyone who expresses a contrary opinion on the Treaty of Waitangi or anything to do with tangata whenua. This is blatant bullying in an effort to silence them. How long before they’re called ‘‘dissidents’’? I’d trust most New Zealanders would know hate speech if they heard it. Expressing a contrary opinion is not hate speech.

Increasingly, New Zealand is looking like a cross between Animal Farm and the abhorrent apartheid regime in South Africa. Freedom of speech is being stifled and racebased legislation is becoming commonplace.

Hamilton City Council has just adopted a system of representation on council based solely on race, without the appointees attracting a single vote in an election. Sounds like apartheid to me.

STEVE PLOWMAN, Seatoun

Rotorua Daily Post 10/8/18

TOO PC FOR ME

Are we as crazy as the rest of the world with all this so-called PC crap?

The so-called offensive sign at Hell's Gate has been removed. What for?

When Billy T James, our most loved Kiwi comic was on TV not too many years ago, he did skits of Captain Cook and Hone Heke and took the mickey out of Maori and European.

Did we think it was offensive? No, it was great humour and I bet that Maori blogger Moata Tamaira used to have a laugh as well.

Howard Morrison and his quartet made a record about Puha and Pakeha and put him in the pot many moons ago and we loved it.

Now little ole NZ seems to be so PC ... I say. come on, get back to the laughter and fun we once had

CLIVE PHILLIPS Selwyn Heights

Northland Age 9/8/18

PATENT NONSENSE

I’ve just read Anahera HerbertGraves’ ‘Inside an Iwi’ article on paedophilia, and while her quote of research that 71 per cent of child sex crimes in New Zealand are committed by Pakeha males may well be correct, her own interpretation thereafter is not.

Quote “. . . or 50 per cent of those who identify as Pakeha, are responsible for 71 per cent of all paedophile offending.” What she is saying here is that half the Pakeha males, or one out of two Pakeha men, are paedophiles. This is patent nonsense.

A full breakdown of the statistics would have been helpful. What we don’t know from her article is what percentage of paedophiles are female. What percentage came from other races.

Her final sentences, based on her interpretation, are easily explained: “In that context, this extraordinary statistic is a shock. But the silence around it is not a surprise.”

From her own figures 74 per cent of the population identify as Pakeha. So if paedophilia was equally distributed among races then you would expect that 74 per cent of child sex crimes committed by men to be committed by Pakeha, but her quoted figure is 71 per cent. Lower than expected.

Thus the silence — there’s nothing in her figures.

LAURIE COPLAND, Broadwood

Wanganui Chronicle 9/8/18

RACISM PROBLEM

There was a cry of racism that boxer Joseph Parker might just be speaking to Maori and Pacifica males and their fathers at a motivational event.

This is not racism it is just recognition of what is recognised — that this group has specific needs when it comes to motivation in education, a well-documented situation.

This was a very good idea and would have had good results for this group. Many of them learn better among their own kind

These upset people are just going for what might be termed 'the low-hanging fruit’.

We do have a problem with racism in New Zealand and it is being foisted on us by Maori through the Waitangi Tribunal.

If these people were genuine, they would be protesting the Maori roll and Maori seats in Parliament— plus the attempt to have Maori wards.

We also have a real problem in the area of free speech It appears journalists will be a thing of the past as they will only be allowed to have an opinion already decided for them.

G R SCOWN, Wanganui

Dominion Post 8/8/18

SHUT DOWN BY THE ‘THUG’S VETO’

Today I was due to speak to Massey University’s Politics Society in Palmerston North, which invited me two and a half months ago.

Yesterday, vice-chancellor Jan Thomas announced the university had cancelled the booking due to ‘‘security concerns’’, my involvement with Hobson’s Pledge, and my views on Maori wards on councils, which she says ‘‘come dangerously close to hate speech’’ and fail to recognise ‘‘the values of a Tiriti o Waitangi-led organisation’’.

She also references my ‘‘support’’ of Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux (which was merely support of their right to speak, not an endorsement of their views).

The vice-chancellor’s position is a disgraceful contradiction of publicly funded universities’ role in hosting robust debate and the free exchange of ideas.

Tomorrow night I am scheduled to take part in a debate at the University of Auckland. We now fear it too will give in to the vocal minority. It must commit to providing a secure environment for free speech, lest it spark a domino effect that will wipe away the long-standing tradition of free expression on university campuses.

These issues are not limited to university campuses. Several visiting international speakers are now all vulnerable to the ‘‘thug’s veto’’, by which anyone can shut down speech they disagree with by threatening violent protest. [abridged]

DON BRASH, Free Speech Coalition

IT’S ABOUT CHOICES

The propaganda being distributed by a government department to our newspapers regarding the Treaty is getting tiresome. I grew up with alcoholic parents and was out on the street at an early age.

I learned to be careful with money. I saved and invested and made a life. Inequality does not come from the system and cannot be blamed on others. It is the choices we make in life that determine our situation.

DAN MCGUIRE, Nelson

IT’S EQUALLY UNDEMOCRATIC

Joel Maxwell (August 6) expresses his delight that ‘‘a gorgeous collection of Pakeha ’’ has ‘‘gone and broken up the set’’.

He refers to the Hamilton City Council voting for five Maori to sit on some key committees, entitled to full voting rights on those committees and to salaries paid by Hamilton ratepayers.

Maxwell rejoices that ‘‘Johnny and Jane Redneck can’t get rid of them through a referendum’’ as if this was a triumph for accountability and good governance. But Maori won’t be able to get rid of them either at local body elections. That was among Democracy Action’s objections: the appointees will not be accountable to voters for their decisions.

BOB EDLIN, Pauatahanui

NAME-CHANGE PLAN SEXIST TOO

Queen Victoria was the reigning British monarch when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed, and for nearly 60 subsequent years. The Duke of Wellington was a Tory politician and a soldier, famed for all-round excellence in killing and with no connection to Aotearoa New Zealand.

The irrelevant man of war gets his name attached to a volcano and suburb in Auckland, the capital city, its harbour and its university. Queen Victoria gets a modest mountain range south of the Buller Gorge and a valley near Kaitaia. And Victoria University of Wellington.

Roll over, Your Majesty, and stop complaining. You’re just a woman, after all, and Professor Guilford says it’s time to be in earnest about erasing your name because it may confuse some people. Tough, but you have to understand that this is what happens to female historical figures. As a woman, you simply can’t expect to compete with a high-output soldier, let alone with a veterinary nutritionist-turned-vice-chancellor. [abridged]

RAEWYN BROCKWAY, Karori

The Press 8/8/18

YOU ARE UNIQUE, NOT BETTER

The sooner people don’t decide to lump others in groups based on skin colour, geographical situation and so forth, the better.

No matter what "race" you may be, there are also "goodies" and "baddies". There would be no movies, novels, operas, religions etc without them.

Whatever your skin colour, or geographical origin, you are unique. It is uncool to think you are better than anyone else.

PETER BOOL, Halswell

Waikato Times 8/8/18

DEMOCRACY YOUR CHOICE

Do you want to live in a democratic nation or in an ethnically favoured country?

Follow the media. The choice is yours.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

Wanganui Chronicle 8/8/18

RACE-BASED EVENTS

Well done to Joseph Parker coming to Wanganui High School to give a motivational session to students.

However, I was shocked to read that this closed motivational session is available to Maori and Pasifika students and their dads only.

What? Since when are our public schools being permitted to implement race-based activities?

What an uproar there would be if someone promoted an event and publicly excluded attendance by Maori and Pasifica folk.

In today's society we teach children that racism is bad and for a high school to publicly exclude students from an event based on their ethnicity is wrong

Wanganui High School can't sugarcoat this — it is racism at its worst

ROBERT ALLEN, Durie Hill

Gisborne Herald 4/8/18

LINKS TO OHAEAWAI BATTLE

I was most interested to read of the “wahi tapu” status declared on the site of the Battle of Ohaeawai.

I must be one of very few Pakeha New Zealanders to have had a ancestor on two sides of the family to have been present at that battle. My great-great-grandfather Thos. Finch was a private in the 58th (Rutlandshire) Regiment of Foot at the battle. My triple-great grandfather J.R. Clendon was also present, along with the Rev. Williams, as a non-combatant adviser to Colonel Despard.

JOHN NEWSHAM

The Press 7/8/18

MAORI NAMES

The renaming of Linwood school makes me wonder whether I have missed the discussion regarding the use of Maori names that seems to be common at the moment. Are we happy with this realignment?

BARRY PYCROFT, Shirley

Taranaki Daily News 6/8/18

MISSING MAP

I contend that a highly relevant 'map' was missing from the recent article: 'Extent of Maori Land Loss'? The map that shows the forced displacement, resettlement or exile of nearly the entire indigenous population from Auckland south, including the mass exodus of Taranaki tribes, to Wanganui-a-Tara, and on to Te Waipounamu.

The outcome of 39 years of inter-iwi conflict between 1806 and 1845, (The Musket Wars) that resulted in the conservatively estimated death in battle, of over 18,000 souls. Plus an unknown number forced into slavery, or worse.

Pre-1840, this country had been in a state of near incessant inter-tribal warfare, and utu.

Depending upon which side one's allegiances lay, the actions of any party could have been viewed as being either cunning plans and strategic master strokes, or acts of back stabbing treachery and treason.

One of the most significant outcomes of all of which was the radically altered and once traditional boundaries from pre-1806. Locally, we can still see one such prominent local boundary marker, in the form of the 'Fitzroy Pole' at the intersection of Smart Rd and Devon Rd. To which end, a similar practice of surveying and marking boundaries with poles has been used all around the world for millennia.

TIM BUSBY, Taranaki

Gisborne Herald 3/8/18

ARTICLE 2 ‘PROMISE’ TO ALL PEOPLE OF NZ

I don’t know what Treaty Maui Whangapirita (July 31 letter) is talking about but the true Maori language Treaty of Waitangi that most chiefs signed makes no mention of the foreshore and seabed being promised to Maori. If he believes the “promise” is in Article 2 then that clause promises to all the people of New Zealand — not just Maori.

Whangapirita seems misinformed when he talks about an island in the Hauraki Gulf. The foreshore and seabed does not encompass dry land, only the area made wet by the tide and seawards out to 22km. Further, any private landowner (Maori included) is entitled to prohibit others from accessing/crossing their land.

He believes that Maori are the true custodians of the foreshore and seabed. Well, under British law “the sea from high water mark to a point three miles out belonged to the Crown”. Therefore, due to the chiefs ceding sovereignty in 1840, New Zealand’s foreshore and seabed was deemed to be in Crown ownership and any customary rights to this resource was extinguished by the Treaty. This was clearly affirmed in the 1963 Court of Appeal Ninety Mile Beach case ruling.

If Maori thought they owned the foreshore and seabed, then most Treaty of Waitangi claims would have included it. None did.

However, I and no doubt most New Zealanders do agree that we can all share it and its bounty. But to do so it must not be “privatised” (Customary Marine Title).

GEOFF PARKER, Whangarei

Waikato Times 4/8/18

MAORI APPOINTMENTS

Hamilton City Council instructed staff to find another way of appointing unelected iwi to council (Waikato Times, August 1). I thought they were instructed to make savings. What is it, spend or save?

What does cultural diversity have to do with running our water, waste, sewage and essential services'

Remuneration for these five new unelected seats will be $54,000 to $68,000 per year plus $12,000 technology costs, with full voting and speaking rights to be given at committee level. Our mayor, who unsuccessfully tried to change council's name, is now set to take it a step further.

Cr Ryan Hamilton said "it's an opportunity that has to be taken", yet ironically he stood and restood at least four times before being elected. He stood on his own merits, as I believe everyone should. Why should others have a free pass?

What about other sectors of our rate-paying community? Will they feel aggrieved they have no representation or voice around council? What about women - only three elected to council? What next, gender-based seats as well?

Let's not forget our rates have to be increased because HCC spends more than it earns. Now HCC is creating five unelected seats with salaries, despite supposedly looking to make savings.

Cheese and crackers, anyone?

TANIA HENNEBRY, Hamilton

Dominion Post 4/8/18

HONOURING HISTORY

Readers will welcome the series When New Zealand was made (August 2). They will also be hoping for a balanced coverage.

It is important to realise that not all Maori were good and not all settlers were bad.

The excessive damage done to Parihaka, remembering that no lives were lost, needs to be set against incidents such as the massacre of more than 65 innocent settlers and kapapa Maori, and the subsequent destruction of property, carried out by Te Kooti and his warriors at Matawhero.

As the writer in the article observes, this history is not in dispute.

The article also notes that the history of our country has not been adequately taught in our schools. The author and the public will be pleased to know that this is being rectified. In 2017 Philippa Werry brought out a textbook entitled The New Zealand Wars and later this year another text One Law or Two Monarchs? will be published.

Some history is in dispute and interpretations change. Fortunately, teachers of history and social studies are careful to balance fact and opinion in their tuition, and encourage students to form their own opinions based on evidence.

ROGER CHILDS, Raumatf Beach

The Press 4/8/18

ABORTION AND TREATY

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern proposes that abortion should be taken out of the Crimes Act and treated as a "reproductive issue of choice for women".

Right to Life believes this idea and current law are in breach of Article 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi. When the treaty was signed in 1840, the Crown gave assurances that Maori would have the Queen's protection. That protection included the right to life of Maori from conception to natural death.

In 2017, 13,285 were abortions reported in New Zealand, 3111 of these on Maori women. If abortion is decriminalised, it will result in more pressure and coercion imposed on Maori women to terminate.

KEN ORR, Right to Life

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 3/8/18

WHERE DOES DEMOCRACY FIT?

Democracy is a very precious principal in a free world and anyone who tries to water it down in any way is playing a contentious and unpopular game.

For the last 50 plus years in Katikati we have elected local people to represent us. Prior to 1989 this local group was called a community council, which I was on from 1977-1989.

The government made some changes: the Katikati County Council became the Western Bay of Plenty District Council and the KKCC became the Katikati Community Board. During Tony Dauphin’s chairmanship it changed to a ward board to better represent rural people. Now two out of four members are rural people!

Council recently proposed some race-based representation, along with four other councils, but all were soundly defeated by an indignant public.

Council then supported Local Government NZ to ask government to make that compulsory. NZ First has given an assurance there will be no race-based legislation in this trimester.

Now we are told council is proposing to form selected committees. The detail is currently lacking, but is it a back door way to achieve racially chosen people? What number will be on the committee? What is the criteria for selection? Have you the support of the people in this move? Where does democracy fit in all this? (Abridged).

N MAYO, Katikati

The Press 3/8/18

PROPERTY VALUES

I read your article Maori Land Loss (Aug 2.) with interest, especially the bit where, in 1857, 1.14 million acres were sold in North Canterbury for about $57,000.

In 1956 I purchased a house in Beckenham for $5400 and sold it seven years later for $6000. Today it would be worth more than $300,000.

Can I ask the Government to compensate me?

BRUCE NEWBURGH, Shirley

Gisborne Herald 2/8/18

SUBMISSIONS BY AUGUST 24

I wonder if it is timely to remind people that they have until August 24 to make submissions to the New Zealand Geographic Board Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa, regarding the proposed name change to Poverty Bay.

An instructive website is the GDC one as follows:

www.gdc.govt.nz/place-name-consultation/

RON TAYLOR

Hawkes Bay Today 1/8/18

DEMOCRACY SHOULD APPLY FOR ALL, NOT THE SELECT FEW

Mr Toro Waaka and his fellow “Treaty Settlement Groups representatives” seem determined to destroy the application of democracy (by which regional councillors are elected) and replace it with the tribal leadership style that pre-dated the Treaty of Waitangi, in which ordinary citizens play no part in deciding who is going to make decisions on their behalf or what those decisions are. They need to be reminded that “governance” was given to the Crown by the tribal leaders who signed the Treaty, specifically to end the intertribal warfare that had decimated the Maori population prior to 1840.

It is sad to see the reference to the recent claims of “Treaty Partnership” which does not rate a mention in the Treaty itself, along with the “processes and mechanisms for the sharing of decision making”. There was no provision in the Treaty for Maori to have special status above that of other citizens. Indeed Hobson, who signed on behalf of the Crown, said “Now we are one” to each of the tribal signatories on February 6, 1840. That acknowledged that all had equal rights as British citizens, there was no provision for an elite group to have rights of “consultation” on matters affecting the whole population.

IAN MCINTOSH Napier

The Press 1/8/18 (A few words section)

LEARNING TE REO

Who is Joel Maxwell (July 30) to tell Simon Bridges that, as a part-Maori, he should learn te reo?

If Bridges sees himself more as a citizen of the world than as a Maori, that is his prerogative.

PETER JOYCE, Nelson

Dominion Post 1/8/18

WHY SO BELLIGERENT?

I have been quizzically reading Joel Maxwell's articles. What is he really getting at? If he was getting pleasure from learning Maori he would not be so belligerent.

Now I think he has allowed me to put my finger on it (Come on Simon, put your best foot forward, July 30). He berates Simon Bridges, believing that because Bridges has some Maori blood coursing through his veins, he should be taking a year off from his busy political life to learn the Maori language.

This leads me to believe Joel thinks he has failed in the world the majority of New Zealanders live in. This is leading to him venting his spleen on us regularly.

Joel, enjoy your journey into the Maori language world and, when you are fluent, you will be able to explain to us uncouths and the busy the advantages it will bestow on them.

GARTH SCOWN, Wanganui

Sunday Star Times 29/7/18

TAINUI KARMA

King Tuheitia had a chance to avoid the horrendous loss of mana for Tainui caused by the Serious Fraud Office raid, when, a number of years ago, he took the extraordinary step of sacking a top Tainui figure over a critical report she wrote about the tribe's finances.

He removed Tania Martin, an elected official, as the chairwoman of Waikato-Tainui's parliament, Te Kauhanganui, which represents the tribe's 66 marae.

Martin, who represents Hiiona Marae, was dismissed after writing a report to tribal members that criticised spending by Tainui's executive board, Te Arataura.

Te Arataura chairman Tuku Morgan said the king had to intervene. "There's only one boss in Waikato-Tainui," he said.

Well, good, because that one boss may have to answer questions.

There will be some major falls from grace, mark my words, and no doubt Martin will be on the sideline cheering the SFO on, thinking "what delicious karma".

PAUL EVANS-MCLEOD, Hamilton

Gisborne Herald 28/7/18

ABOVE LAW, BEYOND REPROACH?

I was bemused to see the front page of our Herald showing a possibly illegal map of our shoreline, with our local area (possibly just the river mouth) named as Turanganui a Kiwa.

I have understood that this name, according to the National Geographic Board, is not an officially-recognised name and should not be used on a map. How strange that it appears on this front-page map and also (still) remains on local road signage.

Are our local council and newspaper above the law and therefore beyond reproach? Can the editor please explain why this name was used on the map in our paper?

For goodness sake, it is illegal. It may be a historical name for Maori, but it is not an officially recognised name for any part of our district.

To the best of my knowledge, it means “The great standing place of Kiwa” and applies to the area of our river mouth, not the entire “Poverty Bay” area. However, it now appears that the “Kiwa” area has grown from the Turanganui River.

Is it not now time that those responsible for illegally using this name be brought to task? If any of us broke the law, we would suffer the consequences. Let us see the law upheld on this occasion. Why was Poverty Bay not on the map?

Local iwi also seem to be in a place of discontent over who owns rights to what area. Surely if iwi cannot decide among themselves over who owned what, then let us revert to nobody owns these areas — they belong to all of us.

MIKE MULROONEY

HERALD MAP SHOWS NEED TO HAVE SAY

To the ratepayers of Gisborne, re the proposed name change to Turanganui a Kiwa/Poverty Bay.

I was shocked to see on the front page of The Gisborne Herald on Tuesday, July 24 a map showing the areas along our coast from Waikanae to Pouawa. Did anyone else take note that the name Poverty Bay was missing? In its place, Turanganui a Kiwa.

This name has not even been approved. At best it should have shown Poverty Bay/Turanganui a Kiwa. Perhaps there was not enough room to print the whole name.

This was an early warning that the name Poverty Bay will be dropped if we allow this name change to occur.

On August 24, submissions to the NZ Geographic Board close. You have until then to either post a letter or submit an email giving your reason why the name change should or should not be adopted.

Everyone needs to take the time to do this.

You can email: nzgbsubmissions@linz.govt.nz or drop a short letter to: The Secretary, NZ Geographic Board, C/- Land Information NZ. P O Box 5501, Wellington, 6145

That board has asked that you give a reason why you want or don’t want this name change to occur.

This is the last chance for you to have your voice heard on this subject.

RUTH WALTON

LET’S GET ON WITH LIFE

Racists remarks in council are not a good look, but neither are continuous references to Cook being a murderer. We the “pakeha” (which I consider a racist term) should not have to continually be told about the sad few days when some Maori people got shot. There are lots of bad days in this world and the thing to do is get over it and get on with life.

Mrs Akuhata-Brown was not there, nor were the others so ready to pass judgement. Perhaps the crew were seriously threatened, maybe not, it’s history.

We will never sort out these differences when a councillor wants to take down colleagues over a private comment. It should have been sorted out in-house, not become a big deal for the local paper.

I worked on state houses for many years and I was told I was a honky, a pakeha pig and told to f... off on many occasions. I took it on the chin and just would go to the next job. I did not report it to Housing NZ as I knew some people were having tough times, and that they did not really mean it anyway.

Mrs Akuhata-Brown has lifted the lid on this issue and may I say that this is not the first time she has mentioned what they are saying, that Captain Cook was a murderer. The same situation happened when Meng and his mate opened the Waikanae walkway.

I have said some derogatory things during my 74 years that I regret. We are not perfect. It’s not a perfect world.

Let’s be mates and work together. Let’s follow the lead of the campaigners in Kaiti who are helping put food in the mouths of their people by stopping the pokies. Good on you all, you can be very proud of yourselves.

RAY HILL

Waikato Times 28/7/18

USE OF PAKEHA

Tom O'Connor (July 21) may well claim the word Pakeha is not an insult, but the problem with the term is that it refers to everyone who is not Maori no matter what race or ethnicity.

Being Maori means being tangata whenua and therefore holding a special status that comes with ethnic-based rights and a superior recognition of culture and beliefs.

The term Pakeha is not in itself derogatory, but it does by definition carry a cultural inferiority. For these reasons, Pakeha is an inherently racist term.

I am of European heritage, of Welsh and Scottish descent. I don't describe myself as Welsh or Scottish, and nor as a Pakeha, but rather as a New Zealander or a Kiwi, because these are inclusive terms.

They include everybody who considers New Zealand home, be they of European, Asian, African or American extraction and is also inclusive of Maori.

We need to be country where we celebrate our differences, where our diversity enriches us, where ethnicity matters but does not bestow privilege, where all all citizens are united equality under the law. If we continue down the path of separatism and don't unite as New Zealanders, we will fail as country.

RICHARD PRINCE, Tauranga

Hawkes Bay Today 27/7/18

TE TIRITI GUARANTEES EQUALITY FOR ALL NEW ZEALANDERS

In Tuesday's Hawkes Bay Today, the Vice-chancellor of Massey University, Jan Thomas, accused Hobson's Pledge as coming "dangerously dose to hate speech" in our opposition to the creation of separate Maori wards in five districts of New Zealand earlier this year.

She is quite wrong.

Our opposition to Maori wards was based on our strong support for the principle that political representation in New Zealand should not be based on race.

The large number of Maori New Zealanders who have been elected to Parliament without the crutch of the Maori electorates shows just what patronising nonsense it is to suggest that Maori wards are needed to enable Maori representation in local government.

She writes that Te Tiriti [of Waitangi], with its emphasis on partnership, respect and tolerance, has much to teach us all."

She appears to be unaware that Te Tiriti makes no mention of partnership, and the idea that Te Tiriti created a partnership has been descnbed as absurdby political leaders as different as David Lange and Winston Peters.

TeTiriti guaranteed to all New Zealanders the same rights, no more and no less. For that, we should all be hugely grateful.

CASEY COSTELLO Co-spokesperson for the Hobson's Pledge Trust

Gisborne Herald 26/7/18

BEING HELD TO RANSOM

Re: Boundaries in dispute, July 24 story.

Having read about local iwi in-fighting over the coastline around Gisborne, my view is that not one of these groups have a right to the foreshore and seabed. However, one stupid government after another has seen fit to pander to them.

The truth is that all New Zealanders of all creeds and colour own the foreshore and seabed.

It is time as a nation that we grew up.

These customary title claims are similar to the gravy train of the Treaty of Waitangi, and disrespect the intention of the Treaty that New Zealand would be one nation, one people.

This is not a racial view but one of fairness.

We are being held to ransom.

One nation, one people! One nation, one people!

RACHEL JORION

Northland Age 26/7/18

INFANTICIDE COMMON

A friend told me of a critical article that mentioned me several times had appeared in the Northland Age (‘It’s a duck’ by Wally Hicks, July 19), and sent me a copy. I would like to comment on some of the issues raised.

Why consider the problem, why does it matter? I have two reasons. One is that I am interested in the story of our country and what happened. The second is that a false picture of British wrongs has been spread, generating grievance and demands for payments for supposed past wrongs – and leading to the racial division of New Zealand in law.

Any understanding must be based on facts. I am a scientist, and try to follow the ideal of facts-based scientific reasoning, and I find that others agree. To this I add the obvious, that cause precedes effect. In the case of the nineteenth century Maori population, the decline was readily visible in 1840. Colonisation brought stability and the population steadily recovered. The decline was over after 50 years (a rapid change for a demographic transition) with population increase following in the twentieth century.

A population is reduced by deaths, by disease, accident, old age and war. This is balanced by new births, babies born to mature women. If there are too few fertile women, the births will not be enough to replace the deaths and the population declines. If there are too few young people – and most particularly, young girls – there will be a shortage of breeding stock later and a future decline is assured.

The census measures from 1857 showed a considerable shortage of young, and even more, shortages of girls and women. Counts by missionaries around 1840 showed similar imbalances. A pre-modern population of this type requires around 40% of young to assure stability; the observed 25% of young was clearly inadequate.

This imbalance and population decline did not occur suddenly, but had been created in the past and was the consequence of the previous inter-tribal wars. There had been two major demographic consequences of that warfare: deaths in battle and thereafter, and the poor health and fewer births resulting from the widespread social disruption.

The population was further seriously affected by the observed relative shortage of females – girls and women. The reason why there were significantly fewer girls than boys, as well as fewer women than men (despite the fact that the male warriors were the first to fall in battle), is the widely reported practice of infanticide, which was mostly female infanticide (the killing of new-born girls).

The practice of infanticide was recognised by a Maori, Nayti, when he appeared before a select committee of the House of Lords in 1838. As historian Margaret Orbell wrote in 1978, “Abortion and infanticide seem both to have been fairly common. … With infanticide it was usually the mothers who killed their children, and it was usually females who were killed. … In the first decades of the nineteenth century, nearly all European observers were agreed that males considerably outnumbered females in the Maori population.”

All of this was noted by many observers, including Maori, before 1840 and for a long time after. It is not racist to consider the facts.

JOHN ROBINSON, Waikanae

MISINFORMED

Wally Hicks appears to hold himself out to be an authority on ducks (‘It’s a duck’ Northland Age, July 19) but is clearly naïve, ill-informed and misinformed on all other matters.

For Mr.Hicks information, Waatea News, Maori Television, NZ Herald and Scoop are also referenced on Kiwi Frontline, do they also ascribe to Kiwi Frontline’s terminology and give it credence, support and affirmation?

The Kiwi Frontline site looks to be a centrepoint knowledge base that has compiled a wealth of credible information, from many sources, pertaining to the escalating Maori vested interests, duplicitous efforts and attempts to control and take sovereignty of an apathetic​ New Zealand via mistruths and reinventing history.

The ‘Introduced Diseases’ entry on the KF site clearly states that “From the files (Auckland University Library) of History Professor James Rutherford only 13,000 maori deaths between 1801 and 1840 were by disease and other causes - that is only 333 per year”, it was certainly not Dr John Robinson as Mr.Hicks states. A PDF link as to how Rutherford arrived at this conclusion is at the bottom of the KF ‘Introduced Diseases’ entry.

Incidentally Dr John Robinson is a qualified reputable research scientist and futures scholar with mathematics and physics degrees subsequently obtaining an internationally recognised PhD from Massachussetts of Technology (US) - not some homegrown “mail order” type PhD in the likes of culture, mythical creative history or fabricated language. Having been hired to research and report on matters Maori by the following: the Faculty of Business Studies at Massey University, the Royal Commission on Social Policy, the Ministry of Maori Affairs, Te Puni Kokiri, the Treaty of Waitangi Unit at the Department of Justice, the Treaty of Waitangi Research Unit at Victoria University - He is well qualified to comment on most things maori.

When Mr. Hicks stated that Dr. Muriel Newman and Hobson’s Pledge used the term ‘daughter slaughter’ (‘Democracy is broken’, June 14), I challenged him to produce evidence of this (‘Many small voices’ June 19) but, to date he has not done so – need I say more about his credibility?

Summing up in a nutshell without further ado and putting it succinctly the only conclusion to be reached is that Mr. Hicks is wrong in his assertions and will undoubtedly continue to be wrong in the future.

GEOFF PARKER, Kamo

Dominion Post 26/7/18

COMMENDABLE, BUT A LITTLE SAD

Joel Maxwell is to be commended for learning the Maori language (July 23). Learning a language as an adult is much more difficult than learning as a child.

Along the way, with luck, he will also learn a few uniquely Maori things that go with the language which, from his writings, he has yet to discover. Among them is accepting one's own shortcomings without blaming others.

In the past few weeks, Joel has blamed almost everyone for not having being taught the language as a child, castigated Pakeha baby boomers for dispossessing him and his new-found Maori people, and found racism at every turn.

There are few people more annoying than new converts to anything, be they born again church-goers, non-smokers, reformed alcoholics, repentant wife-beaters or vegetarians. Joel's writings put him in that category.

As a reasonably bilingual Pakeha of the baby boomer generation who started life in a predominantly Maori community in the middle of last century, I have found his comments laughable and a little sad.

Learn Maori by all means and enjoy it for what it is. Don't boast about it or use it as a weapon. That denigrates both speaker and the language itself.

TOM O'CONNOR, Timaru

Northland Age 24/7/18

BEGGING FOR PROTECTION

Bruce Moon never seeks to diss, demean or dismiss Maori culture or intelligence he merely patiently and fastidiously corrects the misinformation that people like Mike Rashbrooke (letters 12/7/18) try to propagate and regurgitate.

With regard to the claims that Ngapuhi chiefs did not cede sovereignty, the overwhelming and indisputable evidence was that they did just that - we have their speeches at Waitangi, Colenso’ s recordings, Reverend John Warren’s recordings, and the fact that tribal warfare, slavery, female infanticide and cannibalism ceased.

Further we have Hobson’s words to the chiefs before they signed - "You yourselves have often asked the King of England to extend his protection unto you. Her Majesty now offers you that protection in this treaty ... But as the law of England gives no civil powers to her Majesty out of her domain, her efforts to do you good will be futile unless you consent” - and after robust debate consent they did.

Anyway it was irrelevant as British sovereignty was acquired in so many other ways.

Finally it defies logic to believe that, arguably, the Greatest Empire of the 19th century with the utmost reluctance sailed half way around the world to go into a ‘partnership’ with a menagerie of warring maori chiefs who were begging for protection.The British did not do partnerships at that time and there is absolutely no shred of evidence they did.

Like many of his ilk Mr.Rashbrooke appears to place a lot of misplaced faith in the findings of the discredited lamentable controversial Waitangi Tribunal (WT). A Ngapuhi elder recently had this to say about the WT - The Tribunal makes up and fabricates history as it goes along. It has turned out to be a body that is bringing about apartheid in New Zealand. The Tribunal is a bully. Go against it, and you will be labelled a racist or worse. It seems the Tribunal exists to make some lawyers, and a few elite Maori very rich.

Brian Priestley MBE said about the WT > “It would be hard to imagine any public body less well-organised to get at the truth".

Dr. Michael Bassett CNZM QSO a respected noted political historian who was on the WT for 10 years said “what you have been dealing with for the last 30years are some very inventive people stretching the wording of the Treaty so far it is falling apart because of the games that are being played with it.” (NBR March 2005)

Tribunal history shows/demonstrates a strong unacceptable race based maori bias. Dr. Byrnes says Maori characters and stories are given significantly more emphasis and weight than Pakeha characters and stories. "The reports increasingly champion or advocate the Maori cause." Other historians - including Keith Sorrenson, Michael Belgrave and Bill Oliver - have raised similar concerns.

As a former Waitangi Tribunal researcher Dr. John Robinson now a noted commentator was forced to ‘rejig’ his findings, which were not what his state masters wanted to hear, in order to get paid.

Any outfit that seeks to be applicant judge and jury deserves all the criticism it gets and the immeasurable conflicts of interest involved nullify all the WT decisions.

Many public polls and referendums clearly show that Mr. Rashbrooke’s claim to be ‘thinking like a New Zealander’, is clearly out of step with what the vast majority of New Zealanders think, so perhaps he falls into another category?

GEOFF PARKER, Kamo

NZ Herald 24/7/18

BASTION POINT POU CLAIMS

Simon Wilson appears to be a very busy person. Columnist, propagandist for Auckland Transport, cheerleader for a totem pole which “will become Auckland’s largest and best visitor attraction, by far”. Not a chance. The same man proclaimed “The Lighthouse is a great work of public art, quite possibly Michael Parekowhai’s greatest work, and it will be renowned. It will make the city renowned.” It didn’t.

MURRAY FITCHETT, Remuera.

Herald on Sunday 22/7/18

BASTION POINT STATUE

Happy for Ngati Whatua to spend their own money on what they like but why should ratepayers fund a religious idol?

NEIL EVANS, Albany

Maybe a bronze nude sculpture of Mayor Phil Goff at Bastion Point would be a good incentive for him to get back to the bare essentials of Local Government?

BRUCE TUBB, Belmont

We do NOT need another statue on Bastion Point. What a waste of money. Maori claim that it is their land — if they want it, let them pay for it. I suppose Phil Goff wants it to look like him seeing as he seems to go along with the idea.

DAWN CHOTE, Stanmore Bay

NZ Herald 20/7/18

MAORI GODDESS

According to the recent survey of religious beliefs published in the Herald,

33 per cent of New Zealanders identified as Christian. The percentage following traditional Maori beliefs did not register. A year or two ago the cross on Mt Roskill was removed because it was deemed not to “fit”, yet an enormous Maori goddess on Bastion Point would be acceptable, according to the mayor. Go figure.

JOHN LEMAN, Mt Albert.

HOBSON’S CHOICE

I was amazed to learn on reading Professor Jan Thomas’s article on free speech that she considered the Hobson’s Pledge network, when opposing the establishment of Maori wards, “as dangerously close to hate speech”.

I suggest she read Hobson’s Choice constitution. Simply stated it is, “One Treaty, One Nation”. Under The Treaty of Waitangi, Maori were given the same rights as all British citizens, no more and no less.

I have no problem with her closing comment on “partnership”. All New Zealand ethnic groups should work in partnership with each other.

PETER SEWELL, Campbells Bay.

MAORI SEATS

Your correspondent Susan Healy misconstrues the recent citizens’ initiated referenda to enable electors the right to choose whether or not they support racebased council representation. Instead, she claims this was a campaign against Maori having a voice on local and regional councils.

This is patently untrue. Maori have just as much right as any other citizen to stand for a seat on council, and are frequently successful when they do so.

SUSAN SHORT, Meadowbank.

Northern Advocate 19/7/18

PAYING FOR WANTS NOT NEEDS

What is it with councils that they are funding "wants" rather than "needs"?

Whangarei with Hundertwasser and now Auckland with Papatuanuku both costing millions when there are thousands living in poverty, and homeless.

Surely a supply of affordable houses, and adequate infrastructure to go with it must take precedence over these expensive 'wants'.

With dysfunctional families and a greater proportion of Maori in the prison, health, unaffordable rentals and lower education level systems, any money should be prioritised for fixing these first before spending millions on statues and fancy buildings.

MARIE KAIRE Ngararatunua

NZ Herald 18/7/18

HARBOUR STATUE

Move over Jesus, make way for Papa the Earth Mother. Christianity is out, primitive mythology is embraced. In the past proposals to erect a Christ figure overlooking Auckland Harbour and a cross on a hillside have been rejected. Now it seems Auckland’s mayor has set aside $1 million of ratepayers’ funds to facilitate plans to erect an image of Papatuanuku at Orakei.

V. SHERWOOD AYERS, Epsom.

LOSING THE PLOT

The Shane Jones criticism of the proposed monument was scathing and fully justified. Jones was also right when he nailed Air NZ for abandoning the regions and laid into the Fonterra executives for being out of touch. Jones is right on the money here as opposed to Phil Goff, who is losing the plot. Auckland could do a lot worse than Jones as a future mayor.

DAVE MILLER, Lake Tarawera.

SCULPTURE OF WOMAN BETTER

What a ghastly concept the proposed “pole” statue for Bastion Pt appears to be. Tourists visiting Hawaii can readily identify the big bronzes of King Kamehameha as the last Hawaiian monarch and even in our own Napier, Pania of the Reef sits elegantly on her plinth as a beautiful part of history.

Why has the idea of a recognisable traditional Maori woman standing aloft above our harbour been reduced (but not the cost) to a questionable carved kauri symbol, so abstract in design no one will know what it represents?

CORALIE VAN CAMP, Remuera.

NZ Herald 18/7/18 (Short & Sweet section)

ON POU

Can we hope that the proposed monolithic icon at Bastion Point does not display the scowling imagery of most Maori figures.

GRAHAM STEENSON, Whakatane.

If the Auckland Council feels the need to increase visitor appreciation and understanding of Maori, they might consider re-creating an authentic historic pa on Mt Wellington instead of an overlarge statue. Pa are uniquely associated with Maori, statues are not.

PATRICIA ALEY, Panmure.

Let those who want a statue on Bastion Point pay for it. Taxpayers’ money would be better spent on stopping sewage going into Auckland’s harbour.

D. MACCULLOCH, Remuera.

Dominion Post 18/7/18

CAREFUL WITH BRANDING

Several letter writers have expressed their dislike at being termed Pakeha. Those who dislike the tag have every right to express their dislike and to use a public forum in which to do it.

Fact: the word Maori did not originate from the first inhabitants of this beautiful land, but was introduced by missionaries in the early 19th century to term the above said people into one group.

We called ourselves "people of the land" or tangata whenua; wherever a village was situated the people there were of that land.

We don't necessarily like the term Maori, yet are branded with it I have a "spit's worth" of native blood in me; indeed I am more Scottish than tangata whenua, but I am branded as Maori whether I like it or not. [abridged]

RAY TAUNOA, Napier

Northland Age 17/7/18

PRECIOUS LITTLE AROHA

Your correspondent Mike Rashbrooke (‘Clear as mud,’ July 12), despises the ‘colonial Brits’ from whom he’s descended.

And, while dismissing the intelligent conclusions of professor Bruce Moon, offers his own “understanding of the personal motivations and ethics of sundry [of his ancestral] European colonialists around that time”. Oh, yes, we’ll all give Mike’s understandings priority over those of Mr Moon.

Mike, your foaming at the mouth over your despicable European settler ancestors and the noble Maori savages is just so much twaddle. Indeed, too much twaddle.

The celebrated long-serving Maori parliamentarian Whetu Tirikatene-Sullivan told us that there was “precious little aroha before the arrival of the missionaries”.

Fantasising doesn’t really help, Mike.

GRAEME SMITH, Hamilton

CENSORED

Mayor Goff will find no shortage of supporters for his decision to exercise pre-emotive judgment and cancel the Canadian speakers from feminist and ethnic groups who may feel vulnerable to their disclosures. On what grounds did he decide there was a threat to public safety? If someone suggested threatening protests then surely that is a case for the police?

There was a similar council cancellation recently in Nelson, where noted historian Dr Bruce Moon was booked to give a lecture on the Treaty of Waitangi in a public hall. The mayor cancelled the lecture on receiving threats from anonymous sources of disruptions that the mayor considered might endanger public safety. So decisions on freedom of speech are decided by anonymous self-appointed arbiters using illegal threats.

This power of vocal pressure groups is becoming more prevalent in the administration of Western societies.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

NZ Listener 16/7/18

IT’S OUR WAKA TOPATOPA

In addition to Weet-Bix, another post-colonisation English word that Māori needed to adopt was helicopter ( Letters, July 14).

But far from settling for the humdrum, they coined my favourite term, waka topatopa, an imaginative mix of transliteration and onomatopoeia and such a satisfying sound to roll off the tongue. We Pākehā need to steal it by putting it in the NZ edition of the Oxford Dictionary, and be quick about it before those Australians claim it.

ROGER CLARKE (Te Awamutu)

Otago Daily Times 13/7/18

GUARDIANS OF THE DEEP

THE forebears of today’s bornagain kaitiaki were not such great guardians of marine mammals as we are being led to believe.

Dolphin, seal and whale remains were found in middens along our east coast by University of Otago researchers (ODT, 10.7.18).

Irrational deference and delusion continues unabated.

BRUCE MASON, Ranfurly

Waikato Times 13/7/18 (Also published in Sunlive 13/7/18)

ROYAL COMMISSION ON ABUSE

A governmental Historical Abuse in State Care Royal Commission is to be set up and it will be chaired by Sir Anand Satyanand, respected lawyer, judge and former ombudsman and governorgeneral. It is expected to take three years and will doubtless cost many taxpayer dollars. Public submissions on the issues are requested.

It is to be hoped that, at its conclusion, the preponderance of Maori and Pacific Island children in state care is not blamed on colonisation and the solutions of the problems not be made entirely the Government’s responsibility. That Sir Anand’s comment, ‘‘Through truth comes joy,’’ will extend to full and frank investigation, and that the issues of parental responsibility and of differing ethnic and cultural practices be researched and reported accurately and completely.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa

NZ Herald 13/7/18

PRESSURE GROUP POWER

Mayor Goff will find no shortage of supporters for his decision to cancel the Canadian speakers’ venue from feminist and ethnic groups who may feel vulnerable to their disclosures. On what grounds did he decide there was a threat to public safety? If someone suggested threatening protests then surely that is a case for the police?

There was a similar council cancellation recently in Nelson where noted historian Dr Bruce Moon was booked to give a lecture on the Treaty of Waitangi in a public hall. The mayor cancelled the lecture on receiving threats from anonymous sources of disruptions that the mayor considered might endanger public safety. So decisions on freedom of speech are decided by anonymous self-appointed arbiters using illegal threats. This power of vocal pressure groups is becoming more prevalent in Western societies.

BRYAN JOHNSON, Omokoroa.

Dominion Post 11/7/18

CALL ME A KIWI

Joel Maxwell (9 July) writes: "I can't tell you what Pakeha means."

The problem with the term Pakeha is that it refers to everyone who is not Maori, no matter what race or ethnicity.

Being Maori means being tangata whenua and therefore holding a special status that comes with ethnic-based rights and a superior recognition of culture and belief.

The term Pakeha is not in itself derogatory, but does by definition carry a cultural inferiority. For these reasons Pakeha is an inherently racist term.

I am of European heritage, of Welsh and Scottish descent. I don't describe myself as Welsh or Scottish, nor as a Pakeha, but rather as a New Zealander or a Kiwi, because these are inclusive terms.

They include everybody who considers New Zealand home, be they of European, Asian, African or American extraction and is also inclusive of Maori.

Maxwell writes that it is Pakeha who need to have generosity of spirit. Maori also need to be reminded that generosity of spirit has to be reciprocal and that they also share this land with those whose ancestors came later.

If we don't unite as New Zealanders we will fail as a country.

RICHARD PRINCE, Tauranga

Bay of Plenty Times 9/7/18

IT’S TIME TO GET OVER RACISM AND MOVE ON

I wholeheartedly agree with the dismissal of the two salesmen regarding the voicemail message left on Narelle Newdick's phone.

I have been in the past referred to as a honky by Maori people, but that goes unaddressed.

l’m also of Irish descent and every year on March 17 it seems okay for everyone to take the mickey out of my race, and I find that racist.Its time to get over the racist thing and move on because it ain't going away.

ALAN RYAN Welcome Bay

Herald on Sunday 8/7/18

TRAIN ANNOUNCEMENTS

With Auckland motorists now experiencing eye-watering high fuel prices, the supposedly cash-strapped Auckland Transport, the main recipient of the new fuel tax, has recently announced the introduction of automated announcements in Maori on the city’s trains.

This feature wouldn’t have come cheap — with the reported difficulties the train’s Spanish manufacturer had with installing it — and demonstrates how out of touch AT is with what most people actually want from the city’s transport organisation.

While the people of NorWest Auckland cry out for train services to be extended to Kumeu/Huapai to provide an alternative to heavily congested roads, AT ignores this and chooses to waste money on train announcements.

The only useful announcements made on the trains come from the crew — ironically AT and train operator Transdev want to remove them.

G SINCLAIR, Taupaki

Weekend Sun / Sunlive 6/7/18

WE ARE ALL NEW ZEALANDERS

It should be obvious to even the least mentally astute politician, public official or local councillor that, as indicated by the results of the five recent regional polls on establishing Maori wards, the majority of the population is against racially-based and biased legislation, yet governments seem to favour a Maori-slanted agenda. The same results have been shown in all other areas where similar polls were taken.

Surely the terms and concepts of Maori and Pakeha are anachronistic and we are all now New Zealanders, with equal rights and responsibilities. The idea that a person with one-eighth Maori ancestry should have privilege over one without Maori blood is absurd.

A census of seven million people world-wide found only one 33-year-old woman with exclusive Maori DNA. One can therefore dismiss the idea of full-blooded Maori.

Any legislation, government-approved schemes or national organisations that give exclusive advantage or special treatment to Maori are undemocratic and untenable. What other Western democracy is so ethnically divisive? Our claims to exclusivity should be that we are New Zealanders.

It is also time for the media to become objective in its reportage of ethnic issues and present fairly all points of view. (Abridged).

B JOHNSON, Omokoroa

Dominion Post 5/7/18

WHAT IF FUN WAS POKED AT MAORI?

Joel Maxwell says that Europeans who cannot take a joke about themselves or their world are racist (July 2). That can be debunked by turning it around and poking fun at Maoridom — writing Maori as Mouldy, say—and calling those Maori who complain about it racist.

Perhaps they are, but it could also be that they just don't like having the mickey taken out of the way they pronounce te reo. A bit sensitive perhaps, but not necessarily racist.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander and Maxwell's association of humour and racism is not credible either way.

We despise in others that which we most fear in ourselves. Maxwell sees racism everywhere and calls Europeans who "flinch at humour at their expense" racists, bigots and rednecks "living in the gutter," and villains, "like the gorgon".

This is hateful stuff and possibly due to conflation of his own feelings with his percep-tion of others. What he sees as their "strange, angry preoccu-pation with their own resent-ment" could come from him.

BARRIE DAVIS, Island Bay

Taranaki Daily News 2/7/18

NO JUSTICE IN SPECIAL TREATMENT

Did I really read this correctly? In the Thursday Taranaki Daily News it was reported that Murray Bidois was convicted on seven counts of obtaining $66,000 from the Ministry of Social Development by deception.

No reparation was sought and he was given a 5-month home detention sentence.

But, and this is what astounds me, this was deferred until July 2 so that he could attend a ceremony at Waitara Marae "because he is an important person in the community"

Is this really punishment for blatant dishonesty and who cares how important he may be, he should be treated as any other criminal. Shame on him and our justice system.

MARGARET BROWN, New Plymouth

Marlborough Express 2/7/18

OUR ANTHEM HOLDS MEANING

No-one I know has any desire to ditch our anthem because some foreigner made a mess of singing it. To compare it to a dirge [June 29 in the Marlborough Express] is not displaying much sense.

New Zealand is, and its people are, far from dead.

A relic is an object surviving from an earlier time, especially one of historical interest, so yes, our anthem is just that.

It is sung, for example at occasions which celebrate the lives and sacrifices of all the young men who left our shores to defend our freedom. It is not necessary to be religious to show empathy and goodwill to our fellow beings.

The meanings of the Maori "version" of our anthem bear no relation whatsoever to the original.

In fact it would be interesting to print the Maori version in your newspaper, for the edification of your readers.

The word "clunky" is derogatory and the words are the result of being written in a time when life was a bit more lyrical and are therefore totally appropriate.

Perhaps you would like to see operas and Shakespeare's works rewritten.

Finally, for your edification, the triple star referred to in our anthem is the set of three islands which comprise New Zealand.

DENIS WATERS, Picton

Wanganui Chronicle 2/7/18

AGAINST ‘H’

I congratulate David Cotton for voting against putting the ‘H’ in the spelling of Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council.

Here is the letter I sent the regional council, which was totally rejected: "I read in the paper (May 24) you are debating whether to insert the "H" in Wanganui.

"At the time, I wrote to all Wanganui District councillors, the New Zealand Geographic Board and the Minister of Land Information, Louise Upston, that there is no ‘H' in Wanganui.

"I sent a copy of the Treaty of Waitangi document which 14 Wanganui chiefs signed on May23 and May 31,1840, signing it as 'chiefs of Wanganui'. There are six Wanganui places in the South Island spelt without the ‘H’.

The Wanganui Maori chiefs accepted this pronunciation and spelling in 1840, so who are you to change it 178 years later?"

lAN BROUGHAM Tawhero