Geoff Parker
Recently Taranaki Daily News published a propaganda piece titled ‘Maori Wards and all the things not to be afraid of’ authored by Mr Dinnie Moeahu, a New Plymouth District Councillor (at large). My responses to his piece are as follows.
Firstly Moeahu asks, “What are you afraid of?”
Response: Fair minded New Zealanders are not afraid (of Maori wards). They simply advocate for democracy and oppose all forms of racism in New Zealand and the fake history of our country on which so much of it (racism) is based.
Moeahu writes: “Out of all the issues that currently plague our country, Maori wards are one of the biggest threats to democracy that must be stopped at all costs. Why?”
Response: Why? – Because Maori wards contradict the very foundation of democracy. Democracy is about one nation, people, all equal, one law, one vote. Maori wards establish a separate people and no community vote, therefore no accountability to the community.
Moeahu writes, “The Waitangi Tribunal under urgency released a damning report on the bill stating multiple breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi demonstrating the coalition Government failed in its Treaty obligations to protect and consult with Maori.”
Response:
1. The Waitangi Tribunal is not a dispassionate, fact-finding body. It is heavily biased towards Maori preference and should be abolished.
2. There is nothing in the Treaty that states or even infers that Maori have to be consulted, and Article 3 grants Maori the rights and privileges of British subjects which gives them the same ‘protection’ as other New Zealanders.
Moeahu writes, “Furthermore, the bill does not affect any other ward, only the Maori ward causing further prejudice to Maori.”
Response: Other wards do not change the voting system as does introducing Maori wards with a new voting system based on the Maori Electoral Roll and the General Roll.
Moeahu writes, “More than fifty mayors and chairs from around Aotearoa signed an open letter challenging the Government’s overreach and providing their support of Maori wards.”
Response: LOL, only fifty out of five million? See here for real numbers https://sites.google.com/view/kiwifrontline/enlightenments/polls-results
Moeahu writes, “The cataclysmic event which occurred in 2014 when then Mayor Andrew Judd proposed the introduction of a Maori ward in the New Plymouth District Council.
The vote barely passed 7–6, setting off a chain of events that included a petition from the president of the New Plymouth Grey Power branch to force a binding referendum.”
Response:
1. Moeahu slyly cut short of publishing the results of the 2015 referendum being 83% against Maori wards and only 17% for separatist Maori wards https://www.npdc.govt.nz/council/about-the-council/elections/previous-elections-including-expense-returns/maori-ward-poll-2015/
2. It appears that the only people who want to divide the country by race, through Maori wards, are a small but vocal minority of tribal elitists and their supporters like LGNZ – and the former New Plymouth Mayor Andrew Judd.
Andrew Judd started his battle over Maori representation on the New Plymouth District Council in 2014. He had been approached by local iwi demanding a greater say in council decision-making, but since the Council rejected his plan to appoint iwi representatives onto council committees with full voting rights, he proposed Maori wards instead.
This was challenged by local resident Hugh Johnson, a retired engineer and former Lower Hutt councillor, who collected signatures from more than 5 per cent of voters to force a referendum. The Maori ward was rejected by 83 per cent of local electors.
Mr Johnson explained that he called for a referendum because he believed voters should have a say in a change as fundamental as the establishment of Maori wards: “I believe we are one country, one lot of people, not divided. The Maori seats in Parliament separates the Parliament and we don’t need to spread it out into local government. It’s as simple as that. If you want to get voted on council, you go through one voting system.”
In response to the defeat, Mayor Judd called the citizens of New Plymouth racists, and vowed to fight to remove the right of local electors to call for a poll on Maori wards. He also called for 50 per cent of all councillors to be Maori.
The public response to Andrew Judd’s divisive proposals was outrage. As broadcaster Mike Hosking said at the time, “Is it a pre-requisite to be an idiot to run for local body politics? New Plymouth’s Mayor Andrew Judd has dreamed up the idea that the law should be changed so that half of all councillors are Maori. He’s already wanting to create a Maori ward. He bases all of this on the Treaty – yes, the same Treaty the Tribunal suggested hadn’t ceded authority to the British. Top tip for the Andrews of this world: firstly, councils are in the business of mowing lawns, collecting rubbish, not social and historic engineering; secondly, no country’s future is based on segregation – or giving one race a false hope, or false start, or false advantage based on nothing more than skin colour. This is a recipe for disaster and acrimony, and New Plymouth – not to mention the rest of the country – deserves a hell of a lot better.”
nzcpr.com/local-democracy-undermined
Moeahu writes, “The growth of Maori participation and representation in local government since 2001-2002 has been significant.”
Response: Yes, as a result of the ongoing pressure on councils from Labour and iwi to adopt Maori wards 32 councils imposed separatist Maori wards on their communities knowing that, with two exceptions, whenever a vote was held, substantial opposition from the community overturned such proposals. Maori are now seriously over-represented in local government.
Moeahu writes, “Even with this progress, it still only equates to 13.5% of the overall representation within local councils.
“Therefore Maori wards are necessary to address the under-representation of Maori in local government, aligning with the partnership principles in the Local Government Act 2002.”
Response: Moeahu either cunningly or unknowingly is quoting old statistics – see following excerpt from a NZCPR newsletter.
Back in 2020 a LGNZ survey showed the proportion of Maori elected to local authorities was 13.5 percent – virtually identical to the 13.7 percent of Maori in the adult population according to the 2018 census.
This means that before Labour abolished petition rights, there was no under representation of Maori in local government. All of the claims about barriers to Maori representation were deliberate lies.
There was no need to introduce Maori wards because Maori were quite capable of getting themselves elected in general wards.
However, as a result of Labour opening the floodgates, the number of councils with Maori wards exploded from 3 to 35, and Maori representation has blown out to 21.6 per cent.
That means Maori are now grossly over-represented in local government – just as they are in central government.
nzcpr.com/coalition-promises/
Moeahu writes, “This approach is similar to the Maori seats in central government, which have been in place since 1867 and have increased in number to reflect the growing Maori population.
“These are the same seats the National Party and the New Zealand First Party have stood candidates in. So what’s the difference?”
Response:
1. At a national level, governance is about ideology (how a country should be run), whereas at a local level it is about addressing a community’s needs (i.e. infrastructure, consents, freshwater, resource management, parks and playgrounds, community centres, libraries, sports arenas, concert halls, beaches and rivers etc); therefore it should be free from ideology.
2. Only a fool would justify a wrong by drawing a parallel with an existing wrong, Local government largely hasn’t had Maori seats (up to 2021, when Mahuta intervened); why should central government have them?
In 1986 the Royal Commission recommended abolishing Maori seats but the Bolger government was too woke to do so.
Moeahu writes, “The establishment of Maori wards in local councils is a significant step towards promoting genuine partnership between Maori and wider communities.”
Response:
1. Mr Moeahu appears to support racial separatism as he sees Maori as separate from others in the community.
2. “Partnership” ideology is a nonsense pushed by the woke.
Moeahu writes, “These changes pave the way for more sustainable and resilient governance structures, benefiting everyone in the region.”
Response: That is Moeahu’s opinion only.
Moeahu writes, “While some argue that creating specific wards for Maori could contradict democratic principles, it is essential to recognise that true democracy seeks to provide equitable opportunities for all voices to be heard.”
Response: Those that affiliate to cult Maori have the same equitable opportunity as other New Zealanders to have their voices heard as individuals on a general roll.
Moeahu writes, “Maori wards are a corrective measure aimed at addressing historical and systemic inequities, enriching the governance and social fabric of Aotearoa.”
Response:
1. There are at least twenty special Maori only privileges that are not available to others in New Zealand https://sites.google.com/view/kiwifrontline/enlightenments/maori-special-privileges
2. Funding specifically for Maori is renewed every year and is at least $1.16-billion (2012-13 figures, no doubt much more now), and is on top of other funding distributed through Health, Housing, Social Development, and Education. https://sites.google.com/site/treaty4dummies/home/race-based-funding-cost
3. Treaty settlements $4.6 billion https://sites.google.com/site/treaty4dummies/home/treaty-settlements-list
4. Aotearoa?? https://sites.google.com/view/kiwifrontline/maori-agendas/renaming-new-zealand-by-stealth
Influential members of our society should be uniting our country, not driving division with separatist ideology. And governance must be based solely on citizenship, not ethnicity.
