As our mothers will have told us this as we stood staring in to fridge looking for something which is under our nose but often when simple truths are staring us in the face we look the other way rather than face them. Such is happening today on a massive scale threatening to undermine our democracy and our way of life yet our senior politicians ignore them hoping no doubt these portents will somehow go away. They will not, and the tragedy is that we have one of the best governments in my political lifetime. One needs only to look at the calibre of a number of the members comprising the three parties to understand the potential. To mention a few: New Zealand First, Winston Peters the most experienced politician in the House, Shane Jones, highly educated and with forthright common sense which he will debate with all comers, Casey Costello a former Detective Sargeant and vice President of the Police Association of the New Zealand Police, and for reasons which will become apparent all of Maori ancestory. The ACT Party is led by David Seymour, surely one of the most impressive politicians and human beings, Brook Van Velden young with a commercial background, Andrew Hogard with an extensive farming background so crucial to New Zealand’s economic survival, Simon Court with a background in civil engineering, Parmjeet Parmar a PhD in biological sciences and a business background, Mark Cameron with a lifetime experience in the dairy industry. And those are the minor Parties. In National there is a line up of members having a wide range of skills and experience: Christopher Luxon, international business experience, Stuart Smith with a lifetime of experience in farming and in the wine industry, widely read and a fund of common sense, Chris Bishop first class honours in law and Batchelor of Arts. Before entering Parliament, he was a debater both here and overseas (Cambridge University). He was the 2006 young Wellington of the year. Simeon Brown holder of law and commerce degrees, Erica Stanford, BA with first class honours followed by a time working in the export sector. Judith Collins, another of the most highly experienced MPs with an impressive legal and business background. Paul Goldsmith an historian and author. The list goes on and behind these Member waiting in the ranks are such impressive young people as: Nicola Grigg, James Meager, Maureen Pugh and Joseph Mooney. With this array of talent and experience what could go wrong? We should be in for at least a three-term coalition government which will advance and safeguard our way of life. Sadly, not so instead they are presiding over the greatest threats to our democracy and its twin pillar the Rule of Law in the history of our country. In addition, they are signed up to a quasi- religious belief that humans can by their everyday conduct influence the climate of the planet. When we add to that a concerted effort to replace our common language, and stand by while our schools, universities and professional bodies teach and tolerate demonstrably phoney corruption of the ideals for which those institutions once stood it signals widespread erosion of our way of life. By far the most sinister of these is the way in which the coalition has turned a blind eye to the unceasing infiltration of all things Maori into every institution and commercial enterprise so vital to the success of New Zealand and its way of life.
Separatist Maori Infiltration
It goes without saying that if some – a diminishing number of people with Maori blood – wish to preserve the language, practices, customs and way of life which existed in New Zealand pre 1840 they are free to do so. What they are not entitled to do is foist those tribal practices on all New Zealanders living here in 2025. This for the simple reason that they have no possible relevance to how we live our lives and grow our civilisation to meet changing circumstances. Overwhelmingly citizens having some Maori blood understand this. They do not wish to be governed by despotic tribal chiefs or practice any of the what we now think of as revolting tribal practices: slavery, cannibalism, subjection of women, incessant warfare which although may have been thought necessary for survival in earlier time cannot have any relevance to life today. It is the few Maori separatists who maintain this fiction and for the basest of motives cheating other people out of their hard earned money and assets, and very successful they have become for the simple reason they have the ear of the highest reaches of the government. That this is so is evidenced by their success in so many areas of our life. To take a few examples: The word ”Tikanga” crops up whenever the separatists seek to obtain some unearned privilege. I invite readers to look it up in the Maori English dictionary. It covers a range of notions which have no relevance to life for the overwhelming number of New Zealand citizens. The stand over tactics of those tribes who extract large sums of money from our energy companies for the use of “their water.” The list goes on.
Water
The separatists realised early in their journey through our institutions that whoever controls the fresh water controls every aspect of life in New Zealand. They persuaded the disastrous Ardern government to hand it over and although that has been substantially (but not completely) rectified by the coalition government that does not deter Ngai Tahu seeking similar rights in relation to all South Island fresh water in litigation in the High Court. More about the judiciary later but this claim will succeed in the Courts certainly when it reaches the Supreme Court.
Public Land ownership
Muriel has dealt extensively with this separatist claim and I cannot improve on her analysis. Suffice to say there is every indication that the separatists will obtain effective control of the DOC estate which by far the largest publicly owned land mass in New Zealand. This based on claims of Tikanga rights. As Muriel also points out if the He Puapua mischief is allowed to fester then Maori claims are likely to later extend to private land.
Coastal Marine Title
A Helen Clark Labour government legislated that all coastal marine areas were owned by the Crown. It was a National government which overturned that legislation and allowed for Maori claims to those areas based upon exclusive Maori enjoyment since 1840. The Court of Appeal ignored that requirement and in effect decided that any Maori could claim rights to the foreshore and seabed if they could prove that they along with other Maori groups had continued to enjoy the foreshore and seabed since 1840. Thereby introducing the oxymoron of shared exclusivity into our law as a basis for these claims. The Government intervened and introduced the Marine and Coastal Area (Customary Marine Title) Amendment Bill. In an extraordinary, rushed intervention the Supreme Court on the eve of the second reading of the bill decided that the Court of Appeal was wrong but referred it back on terms little better than what the Appeal court had decided. This has derailed the amending legislation which is now with a law reform committee. Given the recent decision of the Cook Islands government allowing extensive rights to the Chinese Communist government including rights to mine the seabed this matter has acquired a new urgency. It is no coincidence that John Tamahere has recently visited The Peoples Republic of China. If any of the hundreds of Maori claims to the foreshore and seabed are successful it is not fanciful to predict Maori Chiefs attending on the Chinese government with offers of mining rights to our seabed. Ominously the Courts are continuing to grant such rights notwithstanding the Marine and Coastal Area Amendment Bill is before the House.
Partnership
As has been said so many times before, there is no legal authority for the proposition that some unidentified group of Maori tribes or any of their members are in “partnership” with the Crown. The notion stems from the wilful misinterpretation of the agreement signed in 1840 between the Crown and some tribal leaders. A process actively promoted by academia, Maori and non Maori supported by a wilful misreading of the 1984 Court of Appeal decision in the Lands case. That said the notion is now widespread and the coalition has done nothing to quash it. Indeed, among some senior coalition members it is being supported
Language
Overwhelmingly the common language of New Zealand is English. There is no particular virtue in this, it is simply an accident of history but it remains a fact. A common language is crucial to a settled and ordered society. Unchecked by any action of the government we are witnessing the corrosion of the common tongue and in its place confected words which purport to be a mixture of Maori and English describing concepts and practices current in New Zealand today and for which there are well understood English words. Practices and concepts which would not have been in the wildest dreams of those living when the Maori language came into existence. A more transparently futile yet insidious attack on our common language is hard to imagine, but it is gaining in currency. As an example of the damage it causes a recent visitor from Sweden who speaks impeccable English and lived here for some ten years can no longer with confidence read the local paper and understand what is being said. For increasing numbers of news seekers they simply don’t bother with the print media and get their news from reliable sources.
Education
Those who have children or grandchildren at school will have noticed the steady increase in the compulsory use of Maori language in schools. None of which has anything to do with acquiring the necessary skills and education needed to succeed in an ever changing and complex world. Time spent on subjecting children to this vanity project erodes the available school time and compromises the child’s learning. It is reassuring that the Minister has withdrawn the funding from this development leaving it to the parents of children who wish to learn Maori to do so.
Science
The legacy of hundreds of years of fact-based science is being devalued by attempts to introduce Maori spiritual values, and experiences. Scientists are being de platformed for speaking out.
The Rule of Law
The Common Law is a heritage that has been developing over the past four hundred years, and some of its elements are very much older than that. It is no exaggeration to say that it has been one of our most precious gifts which came with the signing of the 1840 agreement. It has served well, becoming the glue which ensured that we remain a civilized society in an uncertain world. It is currently under threat from the separatists, their handmaidens the academics and an increasing number of judges at all levels of our jurisdictions. This sea change is of recent origin and dates back to the appointment of Justice Williams to the High Court and currently the Supreme Court. He has persuaded at least two other Supreme Court Justices that it is timely and necessary to incorporate Maori myths, legends and tribal practices into the Common Law, and he has met an enthusiastic response.
This has culminated in a proposal by a recently appointed Court of Appeal Judge for a system of what he calls ‘bijural law’ which apparently will result in a legal system by which all New Zealanders public and private have their legal affairs regulated and decided by reference to whether or not there was a traditional Maori tribal practice said to cover the issue. Should this bizarre notion gather currency New Zealand will no longer have a legal system which is certain, knowable in advance and applicable to all New Zealanders. It will also affect the way in which Parliament conducts the business of democracy in unknowable ways. Gaining currency it is. The Ardern government passed regulations requiring all law schools to teach these tribal practices as a compulsory requirement for all Batchelor of Laws degrees. The Regulations Review Committee declined to repeal these regulations.
Democracy
The He Puapua report commissioned in secret by the Ardern government, if implemented requires that by 2040 Maori be returned to their “rightful place” as the de facto sovereign authority in many crucial areas of public necessity such as land and water use and “must be able to participate in Crown governance.” The agenda is therefor clear, and it involves the removal of the ability for Parliament to legislate over all spheres of public interest affecting all New Zealanders. In short, the death of democracy and the birth of a tribal New Zealand, tribal because no two tribes practiced the same tribal practices. As some commentators have observed a Zimbabwean and increasingly a South African Apartheid nightmare.
The foregoing is not intended to be exclusive but to give readers some idea of what is awaiting them and their descendants if Parliament does not immediately confront these insidious developments. But first how did it all begin and reach the parlous stage it has.
The origins of these developments-Treaty settlements
The overriding mindset which allows and promotes this racial inequality is that confronting much of the Western World; a sense of guilt arising from the colonisation of these Islands in our case by inhabitants of the British Empire. The notion apparently is that the native inhabitants should have been left alone to enjoy the country in which they were living. The validity of this idea however can be simply tested. Would any New Zealand citizen having some Maori blood lines willingly wish to abandon the benefits that colonisation has brought and return to their pre 1840 tribal existence including as it did incessant warfare, slavery, cannibalism and an absence of any unifying authority? There can only be one answer to that question, and it gives rise to the related issue of how to deal with the dispossession which some Maori people undoubtedly suffered at the hands of the Colonists as the races strove to exist together. Again, the answer is straight forward, one needs to create a balance sheet. In the one column what has been lost and on the other side what has been gained. Balancing the tribal way of life against the current circumstances of people of Maori bloodlines currently living in New Zealand, the answer is overwhelmingly that the benefits for all those who wish to avail themselves of them far outweigh what was lost by long dead ancestors.
The answer given by the separatists to this analysis is that it does not apply to us because we signed a Treaty with the Crown guaranteeing, they say inter alia rights to our property. Leaving aside the fact that the inhabitants in 1840 did not enjoy any notion of property rights of ownership of land, these Islands were not Colonised in the usual sense of the word. On the contrary there was a peaceful meeting of the representatives of the Crown and some Chiefs which resulted in an agreement ceding Sovereignty over the Islands to the British Crown in return for the grant of full rights as British citizens. This in a short time resulted in the end of the incessant warfare, outlawed slavery and cannibalism and conferred on all citizens undreamed of benefits of which down the generations most citizens of Maori extraction have availed themselves. None of these demonstrable facts were taken into account when the Treaty settlement process, in modern times began in 1990 with a one million dollar loan to a tribe simply labelled “Waitomo” but gathered steam with the $170 million commercial fisheries settlement. This began the process of compensating one group in society for wrongs committed by the ancestors of another group. Since that time there have been 106 Treaty Settlements involving payments by the New Zealand taxpayers of 4.6 billion dollars. It is ironic that this included taxpayer of Maori ethnicity who may well have been making payments to tribes who were bitter enemies of their ancestors, but nobody engaged in the settlement process seems to have thought of that. Clearly these massive payments to, in some cases relatively small tribal entities has done nothing to persuade the separatists that enough is enough and we should get on and live according to the agreement which they signed up to in 1840. So the question is what can be done. Do we surrender our democracy and all that entails or do the majority stand up and not only halt the separatists’ ambitions but reverse them.
Reversing the drift to separatism
This is not as difficult as it may first appear. All that it takes is common sense and political courage.
Tikanga and Maori spiritual values: Parliament should amend the Constitution Act and the various Courts’ legislation to simply provide that Tikanga and Maori spiritual values are not part of the common law of New Zealand. No more activist judicial legislation in such matters and no more bijural law experiments.
Foreshore and seabed: Return the coastline and seabed to Crown ownership.
Crown land: Legislate that the DOC estate remains vested in the Crown and not subject to competing claims to ownership.
Language and customs: Legislate that the learning of the Maori language and customs cannot be imposed upon any institution or members of society. This will avoid the nonsense of members of professional bodies, such as architects, engineers and land agents being forced to acquire some knowledge of Maori customs or risk loosing or not acquiring their livelihoods. The proposal of the internet NZ Council which if enacted has the potential to leave any user who does not agree to the Maorifying its web site will be excluded from the internet. That could include this publication. Protestations that this could never happen are empty words.
Crown Maori Partnership: Repeal any legislation in which this notion occurs.
Water. Legislate to provide that naturally occurring fresh water is a public good which cannot be privately owned.
Maori seats in Parliament: Adopt the Electoral Commission recommendation abolishing race -based seats in Parliament. This would need to be the democratic wish of voters and therefore a binding referendum would be required for voting at the 2026 election.
The principles of the Treaty: It is hard to disagree with New Zealand First that there are none, but for the avoidance of any future specious arguments clauses 1 and 3 of the ACT legislation should be allowed to proceed to a majority vote in Parliament or at the very least make it the subject of a binding referendum. This would not need to accompany a general election.
The Political courage
It is probably fair to say that politicians don’t like to upset sections of the voting public unless they have no choice. It is also a truism that the Prime Minister as leader of the Party and in this case the coalition, is expected to set the tone and exercising acquired political skills lead the government to what is necessary to protect the institutions which give it legitimacy. For present purposes democracy and the rule of law. There can be no more important task. Of course, the electorate expects a government to spend its tax dollars wisely and to ensure that the market economy flourishes. I do not underrate the difficulty the present government has inherited in attempting to sort out the disastrous mess left by the previous government. This task does not diminish the importance of the need for sound business practices but that is essentially bookkeeping and economics 101. The expenditure must not exceed income, and the balance sheet should show a surplus of assets over liabilities. We have a Prime Minister who understands this and exercising his undoubted business skills and acquired experience, has this task firmly in his sights. Progress is slow but the path ahead is clear.
Important as this task is however it pales into insignificance if the society which the market economy serves loses its democratic institutions and the twin pillar the Rule of Common Law. That is what is what is happening as the foregoing examples illustrate. For all the Prime Minister business acumen it is clear that he and members of his caucus must be aware of the gathering clouds, yet there is no urgency or any willingness to steer our ship of state to calmer waters. They appear content to hide below decks serving drinks agonising over school lunches hoping that the storm will blow over. It will not. The indications of where our Prime Ministers sympathies and political imperatives in these matters lie were on show when he became Chief Executive Officer of Air New Zealand. It soon became apparent after his appointment that the passenger experience took on a novel and distinctly Maori flavour. From the greeting and farewells of cabin crew to the Billy T James safety message, which only some passengers could be bothered watching. Even the onscreen entertainment which passengers were treated to was given a Maori flavour. Was it really necessary to screen a work of Shakespeare with Maori sub-titles? On taking office as Prime Minister the trend continued by informing New Zealanders that he was quite comfortable with changing the country’s name to Aotearoa but not for use overseas because that would adversely impact trade. These things passed largely unnoticed but looking back they help explain why Parliament is wasting its valuable time legislating to confer human personhood on a mountain, once called Mt Egmont. It has become Taranaki Maunga in recognition of Its battles with Mt. Tongariro over the beautiful maiden Pihanga. Given the acquisitiveness of the separatists, it will no doubt be the first of many such spiritual initiatives which will in short order place our natural landmarks under the same threat as our foreshore and seabed and our rivers. Examples could be multiplied, such as government inaction on the millions of dollars Ngai Tahu is extracting from the Power companies for the use of “their rivers” used for generating our hydro-electricity. If left to continue the way ahead is clear; a separatist race- based society.
The Prime Minister has bought into the Maori grievance mentality and is allowing it full reign without apparently understanding the threat it represents to our Political and legal institutions, and our way of life. If this analysis is wrong or unfair then let the Prime Minister say so and if not, then begin leading on these vital issues. To do so will no doubt cause a major upset among the separatists and result in the usual demonstrations even violence, but every day lost exacerbates the problem. To the appeasers, those politicians hoping that current demands will be the last is naivety of the worst order. Either the Prime Minister comes to realise this and is prepared to lead, or he must step aside. There are people in the array of talent set out above who understand this and who are prepared to take the hard decisions necessary.