The BFD | The Big Lie

In illuminating the lie at the core of our proposed new school ‘history’ curriculum:

“It is clear that Maori did not cede their mana to the Crown, and that they signed in the belief that it would give them power to govern in partnership with the Governor”

We saw that the origin of this fiction relies on the hyper-critical inter-textual conspiracy-theory of one Ruth Ross in the early 1970s. For Ross’s meanderings to be anything more than empty theorising or to have any validity, they need more than her re-imagining of events, more than word-substitution theory and more than slighting of the personalities involved. There must be human agency displayed contemporaneous with the events in question: manifest evidence of the historian’s specific claim.

In fact there were matters exciting both pen and emotion in the years immediately following the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, best conveyed and demonstrated in the antics of ‘the bandit’ ‘Johnny Heke’, or the patriot Hone Heke; the very same bloke viewed from a different perspective.

Impetuous, brave, narcissistic, jealous, forthright, business-like, unscrupulous, chivalrous Mr Heke. He who guaranteed the safety of the newly-widowed wife of the redoubt watchman at the sack of Korarareka (Russell) and refused to take part in the town’s plunder, despite observing several considerably paler ghouls helping themselves by stealing from the very hands of misfortune in the opportunistic unhappy-stance as it unfolded. He was a better man than they, of that we can be certain.

Mr Heke suffered, or claimed to suffer, myriad miseries under the treaty and regime following. He too felt misled by the ‘pre-emption’ land purchase clause, or curse, but more were his reversals. He had been ‘taxing’ arriving vessels by way of de-facto duty, as well as trading his tribe’s agricultural products and wild pork for all manner of currency and doing well. He, as enthusiastically and as famously, first-signed the treaty destined to bring more, many more, customers to his store, so to speak.

Imagine his chagrin as the new man-in-charge Hobson immediately planned to move the centre of trade south to the land of Heke’s sworn enemies, the Ngati Whatua living close by the Waitemata harbour. Heke was incensed as his trade dried up and, worse still, as the new Chief-of-chiefs imposed Crown Duties on arriving vessels, leaving the skippers unwilling, and oftentimes unable, to pay to Heke what he considered his due.

Of Heke’s many impediments to trade, fortune, and honour imposed by the treaty, the ‘belief’ of any form of the ‘power to govern in partnership’ was not one of them; he simply wished to throw off British authority altogether and was joined in such measures by Kawiti, whose interests were more mortal and short-term than Heke’s lofty ambition to dispose of British authority. Flagpoles came and went; I’m very sure you’re all aware of that.

Heke’s bad behaviour eventually invited response, and in an important week in our history, when the various peoples of Maoridom, if united, might arguably have turfed or frightened our forebears from these shores, they sat down to talk in the early spring of September 1844 at various places around the Bay of Islands. It culminated in a large meeting at the mission station in Waimate, to air their grievances with the Governor, who had travelled up from Auckland for the important discussions.

At Waimate the Governor spoke of the British flag, what it represents, its values and, in way of an apologetic, spoke of the munificence of Britain vis-à-vis dastardly French who were presently pillaging Tahiti.

He knew that mischief was afoot and some miscreants were present at the meeting, which led to him demanding the offering-up of “ten guns”, a hallowed good, on account of Heke’s many more-than-minor misdemeanours, but received “more than twenty”, as well as “many tomahawks” as signs of respect for his position. He then promptly returned them to their respective owners and invited response to his Kawanatanga from the gathered tribal and sub-tribal heads:

Hakera was there, along with Kareka, Wakarua, Wapuku, Ruhi, Paratene Kakeau, Rewa, Hihiatoto, Wai, King George, Raitara, Kekeau, Paora, Waka Nene, Tuwakawa, Taonui, Noa, Ropata Tahu, Erueru Patuone, Tareha, Anaru, Waikato, Mohi Tawhai, and Pakirau.

Some of those present were Anglican as a result of missionary exertions, and had been blamed by settlers for the troubles. Some were Catholic as a result of missionary exertions, and had been blamed by settlers for the troubles. Some held to their ancient beliefs whose paganism had been blamed by settlers for the troubles. Yet this pan-tribal, pan-religious grouping occurred, all concerned for the future, all of whom had the opportunity to say their piece; all.

Yet not a single one, not one, mentioned any disappointment with the ‘belief’ our modern-day fairy-tellers would have you believe was the elusive ‘power to govern in partnership’, because it didn’t exist, had never been promised, and was never expected.

The production of the curriculum’s ‘belief’ statement is but a manufacture of modern mendacious minds.

Erueru [Edward] Patuone to Governor Fitzroy, September, 1844:

“Governor, welcome! Chiefs of Ngapuhi, welcome! Welcome! Governor, you are the great chief of this place. Formerly there was no great chief. I am pleased with you, Governor… Some time ago there were many chiefs, then all was confusion…”

Confusion reared again, beginning in 1987 at the New Zealand Court of Appeal, when in a landmark ruling Justice Cooke wrote his famous words regarding ‘partnership’ alongside treaty ‘principles’. The two words welded together thereafter in all manner of legitimate, and illegitimate creations. Like the words of historian Ross, Justice Cooke’s words have been only selectively remembered. In his judgement he noted the ‘modern day’ update of the Treaty into English by distinguished anthropologist Professor (Ian) Hugh Kawharu “put before us by the applicants. [The New Zealand Maori Council] The Crown likewise accepted it for the purposes of this case” in which we hear, in the Preamble, of the Queen’s desire:

“that their chiefs will agree to the Queen’s Government being established over all parts of this land and (adjoining) islands”

And in Article The First:

“The Chiefs of the Confederation and all the chiefs who have not joined that Confederation give absolutely to the Queen of England for ever the complete government over their land.”

Kawharu’s translation, accepted by both parties in Court, leaves no room for invented interpretations; it is solely the “Queen’s Government, to be established, over all parts of the land, forever. There is no doubt. There is no partnership in Governance either expressed, or implied. At all.

The school curriculum statement is false, demonstrably false, deliberately false, as false as Ardern, as malevolent as He Puapua, and that, my fellow citizens, is the lying tripartite: the Big Lie-Partite of Curriculum, He Puapua and Ardern, intending to brain-wash our young.