Table of Contents
In a lengthy article about NZ First’s deputy leader, Shane Jones, is this gem.
“I feel that the purveyors and advocates of indigenous rights are trying to unpick the treaty. There is no native sovereignty, there is no indigenous sovereignty, there is an indivisible citizenship and indivisible sovereignty and indivisible nation. Within that nation, sure, there are a host of Maori property rights, there’s some cultural rights, there’s some customary rights. But none of them eclipse what the true contribution of the treaty was, which was indivisibility. Matiu Rata said that. It’s good to test those boundaries. I’ve tested those boundaries… But I never heard of the word indigenous when I grew up. And I can bet you any other bugger at Awanui had never heard of it.” […]
“I’m over this notion that Pakeha people, farmers, investors, pioneers are not indigenous. They don’t belong anywhere else – they’re Kiwis. And that’s the problem I have with this, this newfound zest for indigeneity. It suggests that other Kiwis – who have been here five, six, seven, eight generations – don’t have the same level of reverence, same level of love, same level of blood for the land.”
Read more here. Discuss it on the BFD.
