Index To All The Stop Co-Governance Videos

INDEX TO STOP CO-GOVERNANCE VIDEOS

The content of most of the videos produced by the Stopcogovernance organisation have been recorded here.

Each page contains:

• The name of the video with an embedded link to the video on YouTube.

• The date of release if known.

• A short synopsis of the content.

• A longer bulleted and more complete record of the content.

• All but a few short videos have a five question quiz on the video content. This can be used by individuals or as a discussion starter for a group.

Searching the issuu flipbook:

1. Go to the right side of the bottom menu.

2. Click on this icon .

3. Type your target word or phrase into the box that appears at the top.

4. Press the ENTER or RETURN key. Your target word appears highlighted throughout the flipbook text.

5. Use < and > to move between occurrences of the target word in the text.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 1

Jun 2024

Luxon is a closet Māori activist. He is advised by Māori activist Potaka. Luxon believes in Māori.

QUIZ

1. Who is Luxon’s adviser on Māori matters?

2. What is the difference between Government and Private Land sovereignty?

3. What is the difference in the English meaning of ‘Tino rangatiratanga’ in the TOW compared to the current activists.

4. What does Luxon think ‘taonga’ means and how is this different to the TOW meaning.

5. Why does Potaka avoid answering the question: ‘Did Māori cede sovereignty in the TOW?’

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Pataka is Luxon’s advisor on Māori matters. Ref: John Robinson ‘Who Really Stole the treaty’ (Tross Publishing, 2024) calls Potaka a ‘Fox in the Henhouse’.

• Two types of sovereignty: Governmental sovereignty of a country; Private land Sovereignty (council laws must be observed). In the Treaty Of Waitangi (TOW) 540 chiefs ceded sovereignty to the Queen (Art 1) and were granted sovereignty over the land they owned (Art 2 S 1). ‘Tino rangatira-tanga’ was used to mean ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’ in 1840.

• From 1989 activists say it means: ‘unqualified exercise of chieftainship’. They think the Queen gave Māori over land for ever. This contradicts Art 1.

• VIDEO: PARLIAMENT QUESTION TIME:

• Willi Jackson questions Potaka about the fact that Māori ceded sovereignty. Potaka avoids answering four times and changes the subject.

• Potaka’s thesis states that more political power needs to go to Māori; he slyly replies ‘the Crown would protect the ‘tino rangatira-tanga’ of our people because the TOW says so.

• Shane Jones quotes Apirana Ngata. Potaka pretends to believe what Ngata wrote. This is a lie since Ngata wrote that Māori ceded sovereignty to the Queen in Art 1.

• VIDEO: TV JACK TAME INTERVIEWS LUXON:

• Luxon admits he lacks knowledge of TOW. He has an activist understanding of Art 2. He thinks ‘tino rangatira-tanga’ means ‘partnership’ and not ‘cogovernance’, and thinks ‘taonga’ means ‘treasure’.

• Luxon is waiting for the Waitangi Tribunal to pontificate on whether Māori ‘ceded sovereignty’. He is unaware that 240 Ngapuhi chiefs signed the TOW and ceded sovereignty.

• Giving a special place to Māori is not equality. ‘Equal but’ indicates he believes Māori need a special place. He adds ‘there are many inequities’.

• Luxon is a closet activist. The Fast Track Bill has iwi all through it. He keeps Māorification going.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 2

Jun 2024

Chris Luxon is a closet Māori activist. He believes in Māori partnership which is not in the TOW.

QUIZ

1. Who was the Māori member of the Waitangi Tribunal who changed the English meanings of the original Māori words?

2. How do we know Ngapuhi chiefs thought ‘toanga’ meant property?

3. What was the activist reason for changing ‘taonga’ to mean treasure?

4. What word was added to the Māori version of Art. 3 of the TOW?

5. Luxon thinks the TOW is ‘a partnership’. What did Justice Cooke actually say the TOW was?

BULLET POINTS

• REVIEW OF PART 1

• Luxon thinks ‘Tino rangatira-tanga’ means ‘authority’ rather than the TOW meaning of ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’.

• He thinks ‘taonga’ means ‘treasure’ rather than the TOW meaning of ‘property’ (or chattels). Ngapuhi chiefs used ‘taonga’ to mean ‘flax, pork potatoes’

• He thinks the TOW is a ‘partnership’ ‘ because Judge COOKE said it was ‘akin to a partnership’.

• VIDEO: TV JACK TAME INTERVIEWS LUXON:

• Luxon admits he lacks knowledge of TOW.

• He has an activist understanding of Art 2. He thinks ‘tino rangatira-tanga’ means ‘authority’

• TOW is a ‘partnership’ but not ‘cogovernance’. (Art 3 in Māori is the same as Busby’s final English draft, except the word Māori was added to the Māori version.)

• The change of ‘taonga’ to mean ‘treasure’ was done by Sir Hugh Kawharu and it opened the gates of corruption, as ‘treasure’ is broad and vague and even includes the air waves.

• Luxon is waiting for the Waitangi Tribunal to pontificate on whether Māori ‘ceded sovereignty’. He is unaware that 240 Ngapuhi chiefs signed the TOW and ceded sovereignty because they wanted a British government in NZ.

• Giving a special place to Māori is not equality.

• Luxon is a closet activist. The Fast Track Bill has iwi all through it. He keeps Māorification going.

• NZ was misled by what Ardern kept secret; Luxon is doing the same. He is not reversing race-based legislation.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 3

Jun 2024

• Luxon believes the myth that TOW is a partnership. However there is no legal authority for this as has been explained by judge Anthony Willy. QUIZ

1. Who was the legal expert who disproved the TOW was a partnership?

2. In what year did the idea of ‘partnership’ appear in the Waitangi Tribunal?

3. What was the important case that produced the ‘partnership’ concept?

4. Name two politicians who also said the TOW was not a ‘partnership’.

5. Is it possible to run a democracy in which one racial/ethnic group has special status?

BULLET POINTS

• Luxon believes the TOW is a partnership

• Ex-judge and lecturer Anthony Willy shows the TOW is not a ‘partnership’. The TOW does not state this. It is a myth.

• Māori activists, Eric Stanford, Chris Luxon believe it. There is no legal authority for this.

• The myth is based on the report from the five judges’ 77 page report in the State Owned Enterprises Case 1987. They sometimes used the term ‘partnership’ figuratively, but none of them believed it was in the TOW. Willy’s analysis proves this.

• Activists have misread the report.

• Parliament can stop this myth. Seymour’s Bill deserves support, although Māori activists will kick up a storm.

• It stands to reason that Britain would have set up a partnership with a few low ranking tribes. This idea is backed by statements from Judge Willi, David Langey and Winston Peters.

• Separation is the opposite of democracy. People in NZ are equal under the law, there cannot be one group with higher status than another.

• Tuki Morgan thinks the TOW is a partnership but says that Māori are superior and should have more status than other NZers.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 4

Jun 2024

• Luxon believes that TOW says the relationship between Māori and Pākehā is a partnership or a cogovernance relationship. Giving Māori a special status contradicts Article 1 of the TOW.

QUIZ

1. Give two examples of how Luxon Māorified Air NZ.

2. What does Luxon believe will be the main advantage of co-governance?

3. Where in the TOW is co-governance mentioned?

4. Luxon supports UNDRIP. Why is giving special rights to an ‘indigenous’ group incompatible with democracy?

5. Why is the concept of co-governance inconsistent with Art.1 of the TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• TV INTERVIEW: Moana & Chris Luxon

• Luxon has watched Moana’s show over the years. He does seem to be entranced with Māori

• When Luxon returned to NZ he Māorified Air NZ. He ‘went on a big journey, focused on Māori scholarships, allowed employees of to wear the moku and embraced Te Reo

• Obviously believes the TOW is a partnership

• Despite being asked several times Chris never defines co-governance. Complains that the government never defined it and that it is essential to ‘bring people together’ around the TOW

• It is needed for iwi managing resources and for better Māori outcomes. Devolution allows for iwi control of local resources (beaches, DOC land etc), health, education.

• Chris contradicts himself by saying we are all equal until the law.

• TOW does not mention co-governance and is open to many different interpretations [i.e. activist spin]

• Chris seems to be pro-co-governance. If Māori ceded sovereignty then this relationship is impossible. He cannot give a definition of co-governance because he would have to deny sovereignty.

• He thinks UNDRIP was ‘a good thing’. He does not understand that giving one subgroup special rights is unlawful in a democracy

• Chris is learning Te Reo and wished he had learned it earlier. He admires Kelvin Davis and Willi Jackson.

• Chris wants to befriend everyone, even opposition MPs. NZ needs a true leader.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 5

Jun 2024

• Luxon permits the wastage of taxpayer funds to support the Māori practice called rongoā. This contravenes the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907

QUIZ

1. What was rongoa?

2. Who was a tohunga?

3. Who pushed the Tohunga Suppression Act of 1907?

4. Which government corporation is supporting the reintroduction of rongoa?

5. What aspect of rongoa practice is likely to lead to negative effects?

BULLET POINTS

• MĀORI HEALTH PRACTICES: RONGOA

• Pre-colonial Māori ‘medical’ practices were primitive and not based on scientific rigour. Rongoā is akin to voodoo

• In the past tohungas held great power within the tribes

• The Tohunga Suppression Act 1907 was supported by Māori medical doctors and politicians

• In rongoā patients & practictioners are related

• ACC supports and funds rongoā which contravenes the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907

• Since 2000 ACC has been offering rongoā in more than 10,000 claims across 200 practitioners. This covers 77,000 sessions

• 41% of people using rongoā are nonMāori

• Why is Luxon, who sets the standard for National MPs, not stopping the waste of public funds on the practice of rongoā?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 6

Jun 2024

• Luxon continues maintain separatism, apartheid and racism by allowing Māori business to pay low tax (17.5%) or no tax. This is unfair on other businesses and tax payers. Māori receive more in welfare than the provide inn tax.

QUIZ

1. What is the tax rate for Māori businesses compared to non-Maori businesses?

2. Is it desirable for NZ to have differential tax rates for different ethnic groups?

3. Why do Māori corporations register as charities?

4. What is the difference between the cost of Māori welfare and the Māori tax take?

5. If some Māori businesses pay no tax and some pay a lower tax rate, who is covering the tax shortfall?

BULLET POINTS

• Inland Revenue Website: go to Businesses & Organisations > Tax rates for businesses > Most businesses 28%, Māori businesses 17.5%

• Low tax rate for Māori businesses gives them an advantage and means they are not paying their fair shar of the tax burden.

• In 2011 Māori welfare exceeded the Māori tax take

• Māori corporations have bought up businesses and the government allows them to turn these businesses as charities to avoid paying tax.

• Thus NZ pays Māori corporations to take over the country

• Example: Ngai tahu net worth was $1.27 billion in 2014. Tax free income was $157 million. $6.5 million was given to shareholders.

• Ngai tahu settlement in 1998 was $170 million. Bought ‘Go Bus’ for $1.3 billion and ran as a charity so paid no tax. Other companies cannot complete.

• Has 30 businesses paying no tax, so these are not paying their fair share of the cost of running NZ (Ref: NZ Centre for Political Research)

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 7

Jun 2024

• Luxon pushes Te Reo and Māorification because he has an activist understanding of the TOW. He is naïve and does not realise that there is a Māori activist agenda to take over NZ by 2040.

QUIZ

1. What is the main objective of He Puapua?

2. What was the long term political goal of bilingual signage, teaching Te Reo and Māorification in schools?

3. List some social statistics that indicate Māori are not succeeding as much as Pākehā.

4. What is the largest ethnic/racial group in NZ?

5. What percentage of NZers are Māori and what fraction of the group speak Te Reo?

BULLET POINTS

• He Puapua is a Māori plan to set up a dual government to take over NZ by 2040.

• According to the government Coalition Agreement work on He Puapua was to stop; this has not happened due to Luxon

• Luxon is motivated by Māori activist misunderstandings of the TOW, i.e.

o TOW is a partnership

o ‘Rangatira-tanga’ means ‘chiefly authority’ not ‘ownership’

o ‘Taonga’ means ‘treasures’, not ‘property’

o ‘Kāwanatanga’ means ‘governorship’, not ‘sovereignty’

• Luxon is naïve and does not realise Māori activists (& Potaka) are pushing Te Reo as part of the grooming process towards tribal rule.

• Te Reo is used in Education (via Pākehā teachers) to brainwash students into accepting Māorification culture/religion. (Te reo has limited use in the non-tribal world.) When at voting age current children will vote more Māori into parliament for the takeover.

• ‘It is about Māori identity’ ‘so they stand out’. Māori already stand out in social statistics i.e. unemployment, violent crime, drug use, welfare dependency etc. It would be better to improve these stats.

• By promoting Te Reo Luxon does not realise he is pushing an idealogical agenda

• NZ has 19% Māori, but only 3% of the group speak Te Reo. There are now more Asians than Māori in NZ

• Luxon likes co-governance. Bilingual signs are idealogical. Bilingual nations do not have a minority trying to take over.

• Before the 2023 election National promised to eliminate Māorification and bilingualism. Luxon refuses to hold a referendum on Māori wards

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 8

Jun 2024

• Luxon and his government are funding apartheid, racism and separatism by giving Māori $800 million in the 2024 Budget. This contravenes the TOW.

QUIZ

1. What was the main objective of the Three Party Coalition Agreement of 2023?

2. What example of race-based initiatives appeared in the 2024 Budget?

3. Is the pay out of $80 million over 4 years for the Māori kapa haka programme justifiable?

4. $800 million was allocated to Māori interests in the 2024 budget. Is any of this mandated by the TOW.

5. Why are the Māori activists so concerned about the Treaty Principles Bill?

BULLET POINTS

• Treating Māori to special handouts is not in the TOW. People who cannot support themselves do need government help

• The Coalition Agreement pledged: ‘to improve outcomes for all NZers & not advance policies that seek to ascribe different rights and responsibilities to NZers on the basis of their race or ancestry’.

• Race-based initiatives were funded in the 2024 Budget, breaking the Coalition Agreement (Ref: Muriel Newman)

• Māori received $800 million which is 7547 times more than that received by other NZ cultures

• The Coalition has given Te Matatini $34 million over two years for a regional kapa haka programme and a further $48.7 million over three years from 2025. This is not justified by the TOW

• There are 169 other cultural groups in NZ. These received a total of $17.886 million or $106,000 each per year while Māori get $0.5 billion per year

• Matariki gets $3 million

• National supports bilingual signs

• From the Budget Māori received:

o $142 million for language

o $64 million for well-being

o $56 million for housing

o $48 million for assistance (????)

o $10 million to support tourism

o $182.3 for Whau ora which is exempt from the auditor general check

• Clearly National is pushing co-governance and partnership. None are mandated in the TOW

• Māori activists fear the truth of the TOW being exposed by Seymour’s treaty Principles Bill

• The TOW sets up a parliamentary democracy; all NZers have the same rights

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Chris Luxon

Activist Prime Minister Pt 9

Jun 2024

Luxon is a closet Māori activist. Māori activism. He is fuelling a freight train that is headed for disaster.

QUIZ

1. What were the 1840 English meanings for: Kawanatanga, Rangatiratanga & Taonga?

2. What is the Māori activists’ interpretation of rangatira-tanga and why is it significant?

3. Why does Luxon not commit himself to one side of the ‘ceding sovereignty’ discussion?

4. Why is it untrue to say that the TOW gave the Government power to rule over settlers and not Māori?

5. What evidence does Rawiri Waititi give to back up his assertions?

BULLET POINTS

• TERMS ACTIVISTS HAVE TWISTED:

• ‘Kawanatanga’ means ‘sovereignty’ (lit. ‘governorship’). Modern activists say the TOW only gave the government authority to rule over settlers. [This is contradicted by speeches of chiefs on 5 Feb 1840, Hobson’s instructions to pull out of NZ if sovereignty was not ceded etc.]

• ‘Rangatira-tanga’ was used to mean ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’ in 1840. From 1989 activists say it means: ‘unqualified exercise of chieftainship’. They think the Queen gave Māori sovereignty over land for ever, even after it had been sold. Māori own all NZ, so can have their own government

• ‘Taonga’ originally meant ‘property’ or chattels’ e.g. timber, flax, pork, potatoes in 1840, i.e. property and land they owned. Modern activists say this means ‘treasure’ i.e. anything they like

• Luxon has an activist knowledge of the key words in the TOW.

• Luxon is unable to say whether Māori did or did not cede sovereignty for fear of losing votes from either side. Thus he has painted himself into a corner.

• RAWIRI WAITITI INTERVEW:

• Rawiri plays the victim card after Māori got $800 million in the 2024 budget

• Art 1: Māori did not cede sovereignty in the TOW. Māori gave permission to rule over settlers only untrue.

• Art 2: Protected Māori existing rights partially(?) untrue. Māori say government does not have sovereignty over Māori untrue. Treason. (Kohimarama resolution 1860 Queen had complete sovereignty.)

• Luxon’s understanding of the TOW is consistent with that of Waititi

• Luxon’s freight train of ignorance is heading fast towards a train wreck

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 1

The Church leaders believe that Seymour’s Principles Bill will lead to racial division without giving any reasons. They seem to be ignorant of the fraud behind Māori claims.

• Letter from 440 Church Leaders (CLs)telling MPs to vote against the Seymour Treaty Principles Bill

• Church leaders need to read the Busby’s final English Draft from which the Māori translation was made

• CLs say Seymour’s Bill is creating racial division; to create peace the Bill should be dropped.

• However, if CLs side with the Māori activists a false peace will be achieved since the Māori activist claims are based on lies.

• NZ needs to expose the corruption behind the Māori elite and the politicians.

• In the CLs’ letter no evidence is given that the BIll will create division. The Bill will create racial harmony.

• Where doe Seymour’s Principles Bill breach the Treaty?

• Bill Principle 1: The New Zealand Government has the right to govern all New Zealanders. This fits TOW Art 1 where Māori ceded sovereignty.

• Bill Principle 2: The New Zealand Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chieftainship of their land and all their property. This fits TOW Art 2 sentence 1. In 1840 ‘property’ was translated into the Māori word ‘taonga’ which means literally property procured by the spear (i.e. through warfare). Property, including slaves, was more tribal than individuals at this time.

• In 1898 ‘taonga’ was translated as ‘treasures’. This is a mistranslation and a deceit and treaty fraud ramped up. E.g. Māori claimed the 5G cellphone network. Note the TOW does not agree to protect Te Reo.

• Maori want the government to pay for the preservation of their culture. Cultural preservation should be the responsibility of the cultural group. NZ’s other 169 cultures preserve their own cultures.

• The grievance industry is a racket. From 1974 the Māori activists have moved the goal posts.

• Activists fraudulently say the TOW promised Māori all land and resources in NZ. ‘Rangatiratanga’ refers to tribally occupied land and possessions (i.e. chattels) rather than ‘self-determination’ etc as mistranslated in 1989

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 2

The Church leaders believe that Seymour’s Principles Bill will lead to racial division without giving any reasons. They inappropriately use Psalm 15 to just their claim based on historical ignorance.

• Letter from 440 Church Leaders (CLs) quotes Psalm 15

• Are the CLs ‘blameless’? No, they have joined in with the corruption of Māori activists.

• Are the CLs ‘righteous’? No, making harmful accusations against Seymour is morally incorrect.

• Are the CLs ‘only speaking the truth’? No, They have made a series of untruths.

• Are the CLs ‘making no slander? No, they have slandered Seymour by accusing him of spreading division without any proof.

• Are the CLs ‘doing no wrong to a neighbour? No, they have been spreading Treaty misinformation to the public. E.g. the Bill is inconsistent with the Treaty, which is a lie. The spread the idea that the Treaty is a partnership between Crown and Māori. Spreading misinformation is not loving a neighbour.

• Are the CLs ‘casting no slur on others’? No, they have insulted Seymour.

• Are the CLs ‘despising vile persons but honouring those who fear the Lord’? No, they do not appear to know right from wrong.

• Are the CLs able to ‘keep an oath when it hurts and do not change their mind’? No, they have insulted Seymour. Dr John Robinson’s recent book (Who Really Broke The Treaty?, 2024) shows that it is Māori rather than the Crown have breached the treaty, making virtually all settlements frauds. It seems the CLs are history ignorant.

• Conclusion: The CLs use the quote ‘keep an oath when it hurts’ to justify continued handouts for supposed injustices. This is not borne out by history, yet they they believe the Bill should be stopped.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 3

While Church Leaders follow the Māori activists’ TOW interpretation, a careful study of the TOW shows the activist interpretation to be in error

BULLET POINTS

• TOW Preamble: If Māori cede sovereignty Britain would set aup a government to govern all the people of NZ

• TOW Art 1 :Māori cede sovereignty

• TOW Art 2 S1: Māori were to own their own tribal land. Māori sold 92% of their land. Activists say, incorrectly, Māori were to be given all the land and resources of NZ

• TOW Art 2 S2:Only the government could purchase Māori land

• Art 3: Granted Māori British citizenship. Activists say that Māori received the rights and responsibilities of British Citizenship without being British citizens, which is ridiculous. Māori knew what they were signing

• The three principles in Seymour’s Bill perfectly align with the Treaty.

• Activists, and the church Leaders, believe Māori have superior rights, contrary to the Treaty. Both believe Māori are partners with the Crown. Britain would not have set this up

• Apirana Ngata (1922) confirms that Māori ceded sovereignty to the Queen in the Treaty

• Justice Willy confirms that no partnership was involved in TOW

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 4

Church Leaders agree with activist Treaty interpretation and Government legislation that favours Māori acquisition of land and contracts.

BULLET POINTS

• Land can be reclassified (RMA) and the owner has no right to object.

• Māori can declare land wahi tapu, so the owner sells cheap to Māori.

• Government can buy large blocks of land and give to Māori as a Treaty settlement. All such settlements are fraud (See John Robinson, Who Broke the Treaty?, 2024.) Media do not usually report such deals

• Example: Government signed off police station contracts to Māori businesses rather than receiving tenders.

• The Church Leaders support this corruption, apartheid, and separatism.

• TOW Art 2 Sentence 1: ‘possession is translated as ‘tino rangatira-tanga’. Activists say this means ‘unqualified exercise of chieftainship’. It just means ‘possession’. All Kiwis are chiefs over their possessions.

• ‘Taonga’ means ‘possession’ , rather than the late 20th Century meaning of ‘treasure’. All Kiwis have possessions which they treasure. The Bill aims to all NZers have ownership of their land and ‘treasure’.

• Art 2 was fine until it was amended. By activist bureaucrats.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 5

The Church Leaders promote the falsehood that the Treaty was a partnership between Crown and Māori without giving any evidence.

• No reason is given for Syemour’s Bill not supporting the Treaty

• CLs think Māori are partners with the Crown, but this is not in the Treaty

• CLs condemn the Bill without evidence. How does the Bill undermine the Treaty?

• Both courts and the Waitangi Tribunal are run by activists

• CLs say Bill distorts the Treaty without giving evidence

• CLs say Bill may destabilise and reduce cohesion without evidence

• The Cls’ version of is based on lies. Full and final Treaty settlements were made up until 1960.

• John Robinson says: “All Treaty settlements are based on the Crown having broken the Treaty. Since that is not so [i.e. the Crown have not broken the Treaty], all such settlements are a fraud. There is no justification for the continued existence of either settlements or the Waitangi Tribunal.” (Who Really Broke The Treaty? Tross Publishing. 2024, p.65.)

• Colonisation has brought huge benefits to Māori; brought from the guttermost to the uttermost.

• The problem arises from land seller remorse. Land bought for a penny per acre is now worth thousands due to inflation and improvements. Māori benefit from civic improvements

• CLs say the Treaty acts as a ‘moral and equitable compass for our democracy’. If one group (Māori) have superior rights over another (which is what CLs are promoting then we are not living in a democracy we are living in an apartheid state. Obviously the British did not intend to set up an apartheid state in 1840.

• The letter is bazar. The authors say the British set up an apartheid state. All the activists believe the same thing.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 6

Church Leaders agree with activist Treaty interpretation. While concerned with the BIll being divisive and spreading disinformation, they are spreading disinformation in the document. They give no evidence to back up arguments.

BULLET POINTS

Seymours’ original Principles: 1. The New Zealand Government has the right to govern all New Zealanders. 2. The New Zealand Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chieftainship of their land and all their property. 3. All New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and duties.

• Wellington bureaucrats changed Principle 2 so Māori have special rights–a fraudulent version of the Treaty (TOW) that maintains the corrupt status quo

• Church Leaders (CLs), activists, Luxon and Potaka are history ignorant.

• CLs say the Bill will lead to division, spread disinformation and hinder efforts at healing and reconciliation. This is spin and no evidence is given

• Aotearoa, pushed by activists, is an incorrect name for NZ; Nu tirani was used in TOW.

• Disinformation comes from activists which the CLs agree with i.e. The Treaty

o is a partnership

o mandated a 2 tier society

o mandated the formation of an apartheid state

o gave Māori special rights & privileges

o gave Māori the right to set up their own government

o allowed Māori to be appointed to governing roles (e.g. Māori wards)

o allowed Māori to be involved in the leadership of society, in all organisations, as of right.

o Is a sacred covenant. (God is not mentioned.) It is a secular document.

o Is a living document and therefore the meaning can change

o Can only be understood by Māori language experts.

• 440 Church Leaders endorse this misinformation. ‘Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.’ Isiah 5:20

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The 440 Church Leaders. Real Leaders Or Modern Day Pharisees? Pt 7

Church Leaders (CLs) oppose Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill because they are ignorant of the history of TOW and align with activist goals

BULLET POINTS

• Activist are in control of what the public knows about TOW and use it to fit their goal to take over the country by 2040

• Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill has the potential to completely derail the Māori activist plan

• Māori activists employ 18 strategies to keep the takeover on track

• CLs are complicit with Māori activists in perpetuating the lie that TOW is a ‘sacred covenant’, when it is not. (It is clearly a secular document.)

• CLs think they are in a direct line to the missionaries who helped draft the TOW. Any resemblance is like chalk and cheese. Henry Williams said: ’That the natives to whom I explained the nature of the Treaty understood the same I have no doubt.’ The chiefs knew there were many advantages for to Māori if Britain took control

• CLs say the chiefs did not sign up to British control.

• CLs are committed to brainwashing their congregations with a false understanding of the TOW. They want: their flocks to accept the activist understanding of TOW, not oppose the takeover of NZ and to join in with the Māori activist takeover of NZ.

• CLs want to pursue reconciliation, i.e. to keep cash and assets going to Māori activists and that NZ will flourish under Māori tribal rule. This will result in fake unity.

• Cl’s should know the metaphor of a ‘house built on sand’

• Cl’s, through ignorance, want MPs to oppose Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill

• Let the evidence speak for itself

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Civil War is Coming Pt 1

Jul 2024

Luke Orbell is an example of a young Māori who has been radicalised will have social consequences

QUIZ

1. What are the positive and negative consequences of colonisation on Māori?

2. Is Luke justified in blaming the government for his ancestors not passing on ‘his culture’.

3. Beside colonisation what else could account for of the present shortcomings of Māori culture?

4. Luke implies that Māori land was stolen. How true is this?

5. According to the TOW, is the Government responsible for ‘maintaining Māori culture and language?

BULLET POINTS

• Luke Orbell, angry young person speaking in parliament, playing victim card, says:

o Colonisation is bad (This is Critical Race Theory doctrine)

o Pepeha (tribal sayings, proverbs) have been stolen from me because my forefathers did not pass on my culture

o It is the government’s job to pass on my culture

o The shortcomings of Māori culture is due to colonisation

o In South Auckland children have to leave school to support their families

o The education system should be supporting Māori culture

o Seabed mining should be banned.

o Give back our land, give back our language and our culture

• Māori sold 92% of their land

• It is not the government’s job to maintain Māori culture & language. Other cultures do this themselves without government support

• Luke has been radicalised, is history ignorant and will spread toxicity

• There will be social consequences from such radicalisation such as anarchy and civil war

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Civil War is Coming Pt 2 Jul 2024 By appointing Potaka and through his lack of action against Māorification and cogovernance Luxon shows himself to be an activist who is helping move NZ towards civil war.

QUIZ

1.What did Luxon do for Air NZ that shows he has a soft spot for Māori culture?

2.What evidence do we have that Luxon as PM is continuing with Māorification?

3.Give examples of Luxon’s actions that are likely to fuel civil war?

4.In what ways has Luxon breached the Coalition Agreement.

5.Give two reasons that Luxon might use to justify him blocking Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill.

BULLET POINTS

• Many are angered that Luxon is taking the country further towards racism and apartheid. Radical Māori are angry; they want cash faster.

• Luxon is an activist and is fuelling civil war: 1. Despite the Coalition Agreement (CA) National is reluctant to stop co-governance and Māorification

2. Only 4 items are on the 90 day plan and He Puapua is still in progress

3. CA has 36 points to stop co-governance, without ACT this would be zero

4. He Māorified Air NZ

5. $800 of budget was given to Māori only

6. He is blocking Seymour’s Bill

7. He is furthering co-governance through FastTrack by involving iwi.

8. None of the items in the CA have been actioned.

9. He says nothing against Māorification in parliamentary debates

10. He picked Potaka who is a Māori activist who holds a high position and refuses to answer questions.

11. National has done nothing to stop tikanga

12. He has done nothing to stop the Marine and Coastal Act

• Luxon does not want to lose Māori votes, upset Māori activists, may be ignorant of Māori takeover, may be following UN UNDRIP agenda.

• Luxon has breached the CA

• Luxon is a stealth activist and is moving NZ to civil war.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET

Civil War is Coming Pt 3

Jul 2024

Chris Luxon is ignorant of NZ history and the Treaty. He has parallel beliefs to activist Rawiri Waititi & so is an activist by stealth

QUIZ

1. Does Luxon believe that Māori ceded sovereignty?

2. How does Waititi think colonisation traumatised Māori?

3. How can flora and fauna be considered intellectual property since the organisms were present before Māori arrived?

4. What was the 1840 meaning of kāwatanga’?

5. Is it fair that the Waitangi Tribunal can accept claims based on stories rather than more historically reliable evidence?

POINTS

• Chris Luxon and Rawiri Waititi believe the following:

• Māori did not cede sovereignty, TOW permitted government only of settlers, Māori have the right to retain NZ resources, Māori can have a parallel government, Māori are indigenous, government should pay legal fees for Māori to sue government, colonisation traumatised Māori, Māori should receive special government funding, Māori must be appeased, poor Māori performance is society’s fault, Māori need special treatment (undemocratic), ‘taonga’ means ‘treasure’, Māori intellectual property includes flora and fauna, Māori land was stolen, democracy must be tweaked to fund Māori, government should fund preservation of Te Reo, TOW supports ‘partnership’, ‘kāwatanga’ means ‘government’ rather than ‘sovereignty’, ‘rangatiratanga’ means ‘absolute authority’ rather than ‘ownership’ or ‘possession’, co-governance between Māori and Crown must be progressed by stealth rather than transparency, Māori do not have to use their own funds ($70 billion) for their growth and development, the Waitangi Tribunal (WT) must only hear Māori grievances against the government & not settler grievances against Māori, WT must accept claims based on stories etc rather than facts, only WT can say what the TOW means

• National Party: can advance co-governance and Māorification without campaigning for it, believes co-governance has worked well so should continue

• Luxon: thinks tribal rule is as good as democracy, works against equality (as per TOW Art 3) e.g. Fast Track Bill and $800 million to Māori in Budget, Te Reo is special, tikanga is consistent with law, it is fine for media to continue pushing activist propaganda, is Treaty and history ignorant,

• Luxon and Waititi have similar beliefs. Luxon is an activist by stealth

• Majority of NZers are angry about the transfer of funds and assets to Māori activists. Civil war is a possibility

• Activists want more funds and power. Their appetite is insatiable

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymours Treaty Principle’s Bill. Now We Know Why Luxon Is Not Supporting It Nov 2024

Luxon is a closet Activist and believes in the Māori activist cause, partnership, co-governance and that Māori were tricked out of their land. This is counter to the beliefs of the voters.

QUIZ

1. Why does Luxon believe in cogovernance and partnership?

2. What was the reason that Luxon stopped Three Waters and Māori Health?

3. Do we know why Luxon will not support the Treaty Principles Bill?

4. Luxon believes Māori land was stolen. What evidence proves this is untrue?

5. What evidence is there that Luxon is a activist for Māori causes?

BULLET POINTS

• 11 Nov 2024 PM Press Conference, Sean Plunket

• Luxon is a closet ‘Māori’ Activist who believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs:

1. Supporting the cause of activist Māori

2. There is a partnership between the Crown and Māori

3. Co-governance between Crown and Māori is a wonderful thing

4. In 1840 Māori were diddled out of their land and Luxon is on a personal crusade to put things straight.

• Luxon cannot express these beliefs openly.

• Cracks in Luxons’ façade began to show.

• Pre-election Luxon said he wanted to do the best for all NZers. Once in office it was obvious he wanted to build a robust economy based on the Big Four. Stopping Three Waters and Māori Health was for economic rather than ideological reasons.

• Sean Plunket stated and approved of the three principles in the bill. He asked Luxon which principles he liked or disliked.

• Luxon dislikes all 3 principles; ‘too simple to support’. He believes the Treaty has enabled Crown and Māori to work together and that it involves ‘difficult and complex’ issues.

• Luxon would prefer to support the 2024 hikoi rather than support the Bill.

• Luxon supports the activist goals: dual government, special privileges for Māori and special status for Māori (two-tier society).

• Plunket concludes that Luxon is happy with the status quo. Voters are unhappy with the status quo.

• Luxon is unable to justify his reasons for opposing the BIll.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Gore – The Guinea Pig for the rest of us

Oct 2024

Gore District Council’s to underhandedly declare the area of land to contain locations of cultural significance to Māori. Groundswell is developing opposition to the move.

QUIZ

1. How large was the culturally significant area around Gore?

2. What features can be designated culturally significant?

3. What happens to the land value when a site is decaled significant to Māori?

4. What legislation can be used to challenge iwi declaring private land culturally significant?

5. Is it fair that iwi can change the status of private land by declaring it culturally significant?

BULLET POINTS

• Laurie Paterson of Groundswell, NZ

• Gore District Council for its long term plan has proclaimed 12,000 sq km of land around Gore to contains sites of cultural significance to Māori e.g. land, water features and marae.

• Groundswell has developed a pledge for locals to sign to oppose this

• Councils around NZ have been propagandised and brainwashed by Māori activists.

• National’s Potaka pushes this. He believes Māori in 1840 did not cede sovereignty.

• Gore is a test patch

• The community was not consulted. This is happening by stealth and TOW misinformation.

• Dr Michael Bassett has written an article ‘Iwi Bandits at Work’.

• Through the RMA and landscapes or features can be declared of significance to Māori. This reduces the land value and activists can buy the land cheaply. It is a giant scam.

• In the context of land designations, the term ‘appropriate considerations’ can be translated as ‘iwi will find ways to shaft you’.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Luxon’s Coming Crisis Pt 1

Aug 2024

To educate the NZ public about Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill we are saturating the country with business cards that connect to the Stop CoGovernance YouTube site via a QR code

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• NZ is at a fork in the road, whether to continue turning towards tribalism or take the better route towards improving our democracy

• This means supporting Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill.

• To educate NZers a massive distribution of business cards is to be used.

• The QR code on the card takes the viewer to the Stop Co-governance YouTube Channel.

• Aware of the issues the viewer will likely support the Bill and wish to distribute cards.

• Cards cost 3c each plus postage i.e. about $38 for 1000

• 70,000 cards went out in the first week with 21 people delivering to many places in NZ

• Our Goal:

o 2000 people delivering

o No limit to the number of people delivering

o A card can be delivered several times to a receiver

o Must cover all small towns

o Make a town or suburb ‘your patch’

o Remember you are fighting for your children or grandchildren

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Luxon’s Coming Crisis

Pt 2

Aug 2024

Luxon has said he will not support Seymour’s Treaty Bill beyond the first reading to maintain Māori activist support. If enough people support the Bill Luxon may have to change his mind.

QUIZ

1. What number of submissions to the Treaty Bill is significant and why?

2. What are the two political factions that Luxon is trying to appease?

3. In future NZ can take one of two roads. What are the two alternative routes?

4. What was the difference in the percentage votes in the 2023 election between National, ACT and NZFirst and the rest?

5. If Luxon openly supported the Treaty Principles Bill, which party support would he lose?

BULLET POINTS

• NZ is at a fork in the road, whether to continue turning towards tribalism or take the better route towards improving our democracy

• Luxon is terrified of Māori activists and will have to be resolute.

• Possible outcomes for Seymour’s Bill:

• Outcome 1: 300,000 plus public responses in support of the Bill mean that Luxon will have to change and support the Bill.

• Outcome 2: less than 300,000 plus public responses in support of the Bill means that Luxon will go with the Māori activists and tribal fraud will run rampant. However, he will have to deal with a large minority of 100,000+ angry voters.

• Calculation: Total votes in last election =2,851,211. National, NZ First and ACT received 52%. Greens, TPM and Labour 41%. The difference is 10.49% or c.300,000 voters.

• Luxon’s crises: (1) He rejects the bill and will be subject to the wrath of its supporter OR (2) He accepts the Bill and is subject to the wrath of Māori activists who will milk the crisis as an attack on Māori.

• Strategies: support the BIll, direct public to this website and distribute cards.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Mike Hosking on Our New race Based Justice System

Oct 2024

Solicitor General (SG) has released new Prosecution Guidelines that direct prosecutors to go soft on Māori crime.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• Solicitor General (SG) has released Prosecution Guidelines

• From 1975 until now activists have released new policies, each containing a hidden agenda to mask what they are up to.

• SG directs to think carefully when Māori are being prosecuted. This suggests a softening on dealing with Māori criminals which would result in more crime.

• This is race-based ideology proving that National is not keeping to the coalition agreement. i.e. Luxon and Potaka are full steam ahead with Māorification.

• The SG policy to make Māori crime statistics appear better.

• If this policy is not race-based, how can it be explained

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

MP Treaty

Ignorance Costs (1)

Aug 2024

MPs accept decisions and misinformation from courts and the TOW due to ignorance, controversy, lack of time and lobbying by Māori activists.

QUIZ

1. What is the nature of the relationship between the media and the Waitangi Tribunal and the Courts?

2. Some have proposed that tikanga is NZ’s first system of law. What are the possible shortcomings of following this assertion?

3. Who said the TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’ and in what year?

4. What does Luxon think the relationship is between Māori and the Crown based on TOW?

5. Why have politicians been the weak link between the Waitangi Tribunal and legislation?

BULLET POINTS

• Media treat Waitangi Tribunal (WT) and Courts as ‘gods’ whose judgements cannot be challenged. Both have been hijacked, often produce dogma rather than Truth & Justice.

• Both propose tikanga should be given the status as the first NZ law. Gary Judd disagrees.

• The courts are about to give the beaches to iwi. This is not what Parliament intended. Courts overstep their mark. Judgements are sometimes ambiguous

• Luxon believes in partnership–Māori have authority over their ‘treasure’ and their land. He has misunderstood what Justice Cooke said in 1987. Cooke said the TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’. Judge Willy said Cooke never intended ‘partnership’.

• Luxon wants to Māorify NZ as he did with AirNZ. Instead of studying the TOW he has cherry-picked a court ruling and misinterpreted

• Under Luxon, Māorification, separatism, apartheid, & racism are progressing at speed. Combining faulty & ambiguous court rulings with MP ignorance results in disaster and costly mistakes

• WT has been feeding MPs with misinformation e.g. ‘Māori did not cede sovereignty’. MPs should have TOW training so they can recognise when they are misled.

• In 1980s the TOW was reinterpreted. MPs: were ignorant, thought the topic too controversial so left it to the courts, were too busy, were lobbied by Māori activists to appoint activist judges to courts & the WT. Parliament chooses not overrule decisions through MP ignorance.

• Judges are political appointments

• Solution is to vote for a strong prime minister

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

MP Treaty

Ignorance Costs (2)

The National Government is pushing ahead with Te Mana o te Wai (Water Policy) as set up by Labour. Luxon and Potaka are forging ahead with cogovernance and Māorification for water management

QUIZ

1. Did voters want National to continue with Labour’s Māorification 00policy?

2. Who are the National Party’s main drivers of Māorification?

3. Why is it dangerous for iwi to have say in council decisions on water use?

4. Does TOW mandate Te Mana o te Wai?

5. What are the advantages to Māori of pushing the belief that ’water has mana’ ?

BULLET POINTS

• Peter Williams Letter

• National was voted in to eliminate cogovernance but is accelerating it

• For Te Mana o te Wai (TMOTW) (part of 3 Waters) the government is continuing down Labour’s path.

• Politicians can stop iwi being involved with fresh water and instruct bureaucrats to follow directions with a signature

• Luxon and Potaka are pushing co-governance and Māorification and telling bureaucrats to continue Labourer’s TMOTW policy.

• Māori think water is a spiritual being and only they understand it

• Courts have been infiltrated with activist judges and their decisions must be regarded with suspicion.

• All freshwater and runoff will be subject to TMOTW. Māori are making this up to harvest money the idea that water has mana is a modern invention. Iwi must give consent to change the race-based high water standards, which is what Labour wanted.

• Parliament is supreme and can reverse previous government statutes. However, Luxon and Potaka are overruling everything.

• David Parker’s statement allows Māori to be involved in decision making re freshwater values. This allows iwi to make up policy council to council. A scam. Māori will get their tentacles into all councils.

• Councils do not recognise how dangerous this government is, as iwi can overrule community needs and raise costs. Money could be better used for community projects. Rates increase and the community gets poorer.

• Judith Collins thinks TMOTW must go ahead due to the Treaty (TOW). This is wrong. She is TOW ignorant. All land, other than privately owned land, was given to Britain to govern. TOW guaranteed private property to all NZers.

• The letter does not use specific points in TOW to support arguments.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

MP Treaty Ignorance Costs (3)

Treaty misinformation abounds. Luxon and Potaka are forging ahead with co-governance and Māorification and controlling Judith Collins’ water management.

QUIZ

1. What ruse do activists use to confuse the public when they refer to the TOW?

2. Give some examples of misinformation activists spread about the TOW?

3. Where in the TOW does it say Crown must protect land, forest and fisheries for Māori?

4. Apart from the Waitangi Tribunal what other establishments are the source of TOW misinformation that uses Kawharu’s translation?

5. Which Article of the TOW is the best counter argument to Māori having the right to govern water resources?

BULLET POINTS

• Activists refer to TOW only generally and avoid specifics. Often this is to confuse the public

• EXAMPLES of TOW misinformation:

o Māori have special freshwater rights

o Crown must teach Māori culture in schools

o Crown is in partnership with Māori

o Crown must protect land, forest and fisheries for Māori. (Art 2 says the Government will protect land, dwelling and property.)

o Māori must have full participation in the running of the country.

• Public presumes what Māori activists say is true. Mostly it is not.

• Peter Williams Letter Prt 2

• Judith Collins is protecting Labour’s Mahuta’s co-governance policies. Probably due to Luxon’s direction as he is pro-co-governance

• Collins refuses to publicly release information about water management.

• Courts also often make up what the TOW says, sometimes using Kawharu’s revisionist meanings for Māori words.

• Because they ceded sovereignty Māori have no right to govern water resources.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 1

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori activist and is pushing 10,000+ settlement claims

QUIZ

1. Who is the Minister of Māori Development?

2. Who is responsible for checking the veracity of claims from the WT?

3. How many claims were unsettled by late in the 19th Century?

4. Approximately how many claims have yet to be settled as at 2024?

5. Which group is the most powerful in determining the meaning of the articles in the TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) interviewed by Scotty Morrison (‘Marae’).

• Potaka’s thesis is an activist manifesto.

• Paul Goldsmith is Minister for Treaty Negotiations.

• Waitangi Tribunal (WT) is corrupt and produces corrupt reports for government that are not fact checked for history. Mike Butler: (Twisting the Treaty) Activists undermine the TOW. Politicians are history ignorant or too busy to check veracity

• 10,000+ claims are still unsettled

• Bureaucrats in government are working with activists

• 1882: 9 claims to settle; 2009: 2,034 to settle; 2024: 10,000+ to settle (each multimillion $)

• Only the WT, stacked with activists, is allowed to say what the TOW means.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 2

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori activist and is pushing 10,000+ settlement claims.

QUIZ

1. Who is the Minister of Māori Development?

2. For the years 19892019 what was the total sum of TOW settlements in billions of $?

3. If the sum paid per claimant is $30 million. What would be the total for the current 10,000 claimants?

4. NZ’s GDP is about S550 Billion. IN the next few years is bankruptcy a likely outcome for NZ?

5. Who is ultimately responsible for checking the veracity of WT claims but seldom do?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) interviewed Scotty Morrison (Marae)

• Total Govt Treaty pay outs 1989-2019 = $4.3 billion. This is $30 million per claimant

• For 10,000 claimants the total is $300billion. This is 75% of NZ GDP in 2023 of $405billion. Eventually this will cause bankruptcy

• The Waitangi Tribunal (WT) claims are not fact checked, it is a racket. The WT must be closed

• WT is a gigantic racket since the T accepts stories, memories etc as facts. David Round (Canterbury University) says WT has to stop.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 3 Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori activist and is pushing 10,000+ settlement claims

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Scotty Morrison (Marae)

• The government is to transfer the whole of the conservation estate to Tribal Authorities, so visitors will have to pay a fee

• After the Tūhoe Urewera Settlement (2014) Tūhoe burned down the huts.

• Privately zoned land can be made Wahi Tūpuna and given to iwi

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 4

Jun 2024 Potaka is a Māori activist and is pushing 10,000+ settlement claims

QUIZ

1. Why does the Māori Crown Relations Office have to be informed of land that is up for sale?

2. Who is the Minister of Māori Development?

3. Who buys the land that is put into the NZ Land Bank?

4. Approximately how many properties are currently in the NZ Land Bank?

5. What is the ultimate fate of land that has been put in the land Bank?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) interviewed Scotty Morrison (Marae)

• Settlements involve Department of Conservation and LINZ

• According to the Treaty Settlements Landbank and the Māori Protection Mechanism the Māori Crown Relations Office has to be informed of surplus land and it is land banked for Māori.

• Much money is paid by government for land banking. This land belonged to New Zealanders but is used by government to give to Māori for settlements

• There are 900 properties in the land bank on the LINZ website which is managed by Toitū Te Whenua

• Māori can apply to the Waitangi Tribunal (WT) and this is approved by Potaka’s Crown Relations Office

• In this way taxpayers pay for these properties to be given to Māori.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 5 Jun 2024 Potaka is a Māori activist and is pushing 10,000+ settlement claims

QUIZ

1. Who is currently supervising the movement of cash and assets to Māori?

2. What two Government organisation are actively involved in land dealing to achieve TOW settlements?

3. Rather than appeasement of Māori activists, what approach should politicians take to WT claims?

4.In what year were full and final settlements paid out under the Sim Commission ruling?

5. How will non-activist New Zealanders react when they find they have lost the beaches and DOC land?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Scotty Morrison (Marae)

• Potaka is secretly supervising the movement of cash and assets to Māori

• 10,000+ Settlements involve Department of Conservation and LINZ

• Generous settlements have not stopped Māori activist protests which continue. This is a pot of gold. Appeasement only encourages more settlements. (Mike Butler)

• Settlements were supposed to promote racial reconciliation, but racial ill feeling is now at boiling point.

• Treaty settlements have rewritten history as the claims are based on anecdotes and stories in place of facts. Waitangi Tribunal spins history.

• Most grievances were settled by 1960 through the Judge Sim Commission. Full and final payments were then paid out.

• There are 10,000+ claims to go

• Meanwhile we are losing beaches and Department of Conservation land

• History Ignorant MPS + Corrupt Waitangi Tribunal (WT) = Disaster

• The WT should be closed down. (Michael Bassett in 2004!) This involves all New Zealanders and there should be an open public debate.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 6

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori activist and is pushing 10,000+ settlement claims

QUIZ

1. In the TOW of what four things did the Government promise Māori?

2. Tino rangatiratanga appears in Art. 2 of the TOW. What did that mean in 1840?

3. What is the twisted late 20th Century meaning of tino rangatira-tanga?

4. Which article of the TOW contradicts the modern meaning of tino rangatira-tanga?

5. What is the percentage of land that Māori have sold?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Scotty Morrison (Marae)

• Activists believe that the Treaty (TOW) justifies going beyond settlements over time. i.e. there is no end to restitutions. This is a lie

• In the TOW Britain promised Māori:

o A government if sovereignty was ceded

o Ownership of their own land & property

o That the government would buy their land

o British citizenship

• After final settlement a series of governments have been sucked in to give ‘top ups’ or inflation adjustments which are not in the TOW

• These are justified by mistranslation or twisting of words in the TOW.

• E.g. ‘Possession’ or ‘ownership’ was given in the TOW as tino rangatira-tanga. The term was twisted to mean ‘unqualified exercise of chieftainship’ i.e. Māori did not cede sovereignty

• 540 chiefs ceded sovereignty in TOW, yet activists say ‘Honour the Treaty’.

• Potama is basing his ideas on a falsehood; Māori sold 92% of their land and thus lost sovereignty of their individual land as well.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 7

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori activist and is pushing 10,000+ settlement claims including those for land Māori sold.

QUIZ

1. Use the second sentence of Art. 2 of the TOW to explain what the Government wanted to avoid when Māori sold their land?

2. Immigrants wanted land. Why were Māori so keen to sell their land?

3. What did Judge Sim say about the grievance settlements in 1960?

4. How much more money has been paid to Māori claimants since 1960 because they claim their land was stolen?

5. In the claim process chain: Iwi > Waitangi Tribunal > Politicians > Parliament, which appears to be the least effective link in breaking the chain?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Scotty Morrison (Marae)

• TOW Art 2: Government protects Māori ownership of their land until they sold their land.

• Activists say the Government promised Māori land whether they sold it or not, forever. This is a lie and ridiculous. When land is sold, ownership is transferred to the purchaser.

• Politicians, in ignorance, agreed with activists.

• ‘Māori were as keen to sell [land] as settlers were to buy.’ (Bain Attwood (2022))

• Māori sold 92% of their land (Mike Butler. Land sold, not ‘lost’. BreakingViews.co.nz. 19 November 2023)

• Politicians since 1975 have been sucked in by activists. Billions of dollars have been given away based on lies.

• Judge Sim Royal Commission 19271960 achieved full and final settlements by 1960.

• Nearly $5 billion in compensation has been paid out since 1960 for land Māori sold.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Potaka 8

Jun 2024

Potaka is a Māori activist and is supports settlement claims and eventually a complete takeover of NZ

QUIZ

1. What Māori term do activists use to justify Māori having ‘unqualified chieftainship’ over all NZ?

2. Why is this belief inconsistent with Art.1?

3. Māori activists believe precolonial NZ was a Māori paradise. What facts exist to show that this belief is false?

4. From the media and other organisations, such as schools, what local propaganda and Māorification have you noticed?

5. Māori claim they are indigenous. How do beliefs about canoes and death indicate they were colonists?

BULLET POINTS

• Tama Potaka (Minister of Māori Devel.) interviewed Scotty Morrison (Marae)

• Potaka thinks Māori have tino rangatiratanga over all NZ and that TOW guaranteed tino rangatira-tanga over NZ for ever

• Māori activist propaganda campaigns have infiltrated many institutions since 1975. People have been taught that colonists stole land and created emotional damage to Māori resulting in obesity, criminality, drug abuse, violence etc

• Māori activists believe precolonial NZ was a Māori paradise. There is no historical evidence for such; the opposite was in fact true

• Māori activists aim to capture parliament & therefore NZ.

• Example of propaganda in NZ schools: comic Te Tiriti O Waitangi.

• Māori activists are using 18 psychological strategies. Refer book: The Psychological Takeover of NZ available at stopcogovernance.kiwi

• Māori activists claim Māori are indigenous but there is evidence they were not the first settlers

• Pre-1840 Britain acknowledged that NZ was a sovereign state and that Māori had sovereignty.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Seymour’s Bill: Does It Create Division or Not?

Sep 2024

Due to historical ignorance protestors think Seymour’s Bill will create racial division. Māori activists aided by the Big Six have been pushing Māorification and co-governance since the 1960s.

QUIZ

1. By what year in the 20th Century were full and final TOW settlements thought to have been made?

2. What Act in what year changed the legal definition of Māori?

3. What was the consequence of incorporating the rogue James Freeman version of the TOW into the 1975 Waitangi Tribunal Act?

4. What documents in 2020 revealed Māori activists want to control NZ by 2040.

5. Who are the ‘Big Six’ and what has been their agenda?

BULLET POINTS

• Seymour at ACT meeting in Hastings

• Protestors believe Seymour is creating disharmony and is against the TOW. Security removed protestors while Police are inactive.

• Full and final Treaty settlements had been made by 1960.

• In 1940s-1960s NZ was peaceful. Disharmony has been developed over the decades since

• 1974 Māori Purposes Act changed the legal definition of Māori, sowing the first seeds of resentment against Māori

• 1975 Waitangi Tribunal Act. Rogue James Freeman English version allowed activists to say the TOW meant whatever they wanted. Treaty interpretations were unchallengeable

• 1975 Treaty Principles were introduced allowing more freedom of interpretation

• 1984 TOW claims were allowed back to 1840 which on-Māori saw as very unfair

• 1986 Kawharu made fraudulent TOW translations

• 2020 He Pua pua and Matike Mai Aotearoa revealed Māori want to control NZ by 2040

• The gravy train continued and racial division increased through the decades

• Māorification was driven by the Big Six: Māori Party, Māori academics, Māori MPs, the media, white woke bureaucrats and academics and history ignorant MPs. They fed NZ with misinformation to pit Māori against non-Māori

• Many ended up hating non-Māori for what they perceive non-Māori have done to Māori in the past. Non-Māori resent the Big Six for what they perceive they are doing to NZ.

• Is Seymour’s Bill creating division? No. It is the Big Six. MPs could have stopped this

• [Churchill Analogy]

• Protestors think Seymour is against the TOW, Act have no mandate and a referendum would be divisive

• Seymour’s Principles match TOW perfectly.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Madness of Te Mana O Te Wai

Aug 2024 Māori activists are working on controlling organisations in NZ in order to take over the country. To educate the public business cards are available for community distribution.

QUIZ

1. Name some entities or organisations that activist Māori now control or are working to control.

2. What is the justification for using the term ‘sophisticated tribal coup’ to describe how activist Māori took or are taking control of these organisations?

3. What is the role of MP Tama Potaka in the Coalition Government?

4. What are the TWO goals of the Stop cogovernance movement?

5. What will be the result if these goals are achieved?

BULLET POINTS

• Māori activists are attempting or have taken control of:

o Water (To Man O Te Wai)

o Parliament bureaucracy

o Beaches

o The Waitangi Tribunal

o Real Estate

o Medical Centres

o DOC estates

o Local Councils

o The RMA

o The Health System

o Immigration

o The Police

o The complicit and corrupt media

• This amounts to a sophisticated Tribal Coup under the watch of an activist PM and his activist Māori advisor Potaka

• Our Goals:

o To reach and activate NZers with the truth about the Treaty and to expose what activists are up to

o To stop co-governance and the Māorification of NZ

• The Result: The restoration of democracy and the end of apartheid, racism and separatism.

• Action: inundating your local communities with business cards which have a QR to link the Stop-Co-governance website. Here cards may be purchased for 3c each and may be left on car windscreens, letterboxes etc or given to people during casual meetings.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Making A Submission For The Treaty Principles Bill Made Easy

Nov 2024

How to make a submission

QUIZ NA

• Steps in making a submission on the Principles Bill

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 1

Jul 2024

At least half of NZers do not understand what is involved in the Treaty Principles Bill. PM Ardern exhibits ignorance of TOW although she uses it to promote her socialist agenda.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• About 50% of voters say do not understand the Treaty Principles Bill (TPB), particularly in Canterbury. The Green and Māori Parties believe they understand the TPB well

• The so-called principles have been decided in secret so that the general public has remained ignorant of the matter

• When asked PM Ardern was unable to recite the Articles of the Treaty (TOW) without prompting.

• Ardern used the TOW as a Trojan Horse, to promote her communist ideas. For this deviousness she was known as ‘The Witch’.

• Ardern believes that school pupils are being well educated in the TOW. Evidence is that they are being brainwashed with TOW activism

• Media collaborate with Māori activists to spread TOW misinformation.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 2

Jul 2024

Activists say that Māori deserve compensation for the effects of colonisation. They oppose all New Zealanders being treated equally and want Matarangi Māori to be in the science curriculum

QUIZ

1. Does Art. 3 of the TOW provide special status for Māori?

2. Why is Māori culture inappropriate as part of a science curriculum?

3. What is the difference between Sir Apirana Ngata’s and Rawiri Waititi’s understanding of the effect of colonisation on Māori?

4. What social indicators prove that Māori society is not flourishing?

5. What is the reaction of non-Māori when Māori are observed receiving large Government handouts for perceived historical wrongs?

BULLET POINTS

• Māori think they are special, but Art 3 of TOW affirms that all NZ citizens have equal status. This is what 540 chiefs wanted when they signed the TOW

• Rawiri Waititi (Te Pāti Māori MP) complains that Māori are not getting enough funding from the Government for Health and education.

• There has been a push to have Matarangi Māori (a modern word for Māori culture, myths etc) taught in NZ Science classes. This is based on a misunderstanding of the nature of Science. Truths in Science are global, not local.

• Sir Apirana Ngata would have disagreed with the current activist account: ‘Let me acknowledge first that, in the whole of the world I doubt whether any native race has been so well treated by a European people as the Maori’.”

• Waititi uses all the advantages of colonisation but thinks Māori have been traumatised by the advantages they have received.

• Social indicators show Māori are not flourishing although Waititi also thinks Māori need no help.

• Māori continue to complain to receive compensation for past perceived wrongs

• Funding Māori culture and not others leads to resentment and division

• For Māori activists the end game is not partnership; it is the takeover of New Zealand.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 3

Jul 2024

Māori activists feart the Treaty Principles Bill (TPB) because Māori language and culture will be attacked and their takeover of NZ will be stalled. The public can be educated about this via brochures and fliers

QUIZ

1. What Dis-functional African country has been cited as a possible model for a future NZ?

2. Explain why Māori activists dislike the TP Bill when it ensures all NZers will be treated equally by the law?

3. Thomas Sowell said: ‘When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.’ How does this apply to Māori activists?

4. What effect might the TP Bill have on the Māori activist plan to take over NZ by 2040?

5. Where does the idea that ‘Māori are special and should receive special treatment’ originate?

BULLET POINTS

• Without acceptance of the Treaty Principles Bill (TPB) NZ will be like Zimbawe.

• Defeating corrupt information from the Waitangi tribunal and Māori activists counterinformation can be spread to the general public via brochures and fliers

• Māori activists say the TPB breaches the TOW and will hurt Māori. ACT says everyone should be treated equally in a democracy as per the TOW.

• There is no point in consulting with Māori radicals as their understanding is a long way off from what the TOW intended

• Māori today think they are superior . Sir Apirana Ngata said: ’It was the first article of the Treaty which transferred the chiefly authority of your ancestors, affecting you and future generations forever’. The Treaty ‘made one law for the Māori and Pākehā. I you think these things are wrong and bad then blame our ancestors who gave away their rights in the days when they were powerful.’

• Why are Māori so angry about having a clearer idea of what the TOW means? They think their culture is under attack because they may lose funds that are not given to other cultural groups. Other groups gain little government support to promote their language etc.

• Thomas Sowell: ‘When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.’

• Activists think that to review the TOW would curtail the Māori language.

• The real issue is that Māori do not want the Māorification of NZ to stall as the takeover of NZ would also stall.

• A corrupt interpretation of the TOW spreads the idea that Māori are special and therefore should receive special treatment.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 4

Jul 2024

Tame’s programme is taxpayer funded to push TOW misinformation. Māori activists and protestors do not understand Seymour’s Bill. Luxon aligns with the Māori activists.

QUIZ

1. How much funding was paid out by the PIJ Fund in the last round?

2. Give two examples of lies that have been spread about the TOW by the media?

3. What evidence is there that John Tamahiri believes the TP Bill will rewrite the TOW?

4. What ability do Māori lack according to Alan Duff?

5. What two ideas does Luxon hold that align him with Māori activists?

• Jack Tame‘s interview with David Seymour

• Tame’s programme is financed by the Public Interest Journalist Fund (i.e.a bribe). This cost the taxpayers $834,000 in the last round. To receive this money you were required to support co-governance and Māorification and spread the lie that Māori did not cede sovereignty in the TOW. It is obvious Jack is a faithful activist.

• Video of protestors & John Tamahiri: ‘We will not be erased’, ‘It will put Māori back to the dark ages’, ‘First protest is being Māori’, ‘Māori’ will not sit idly by while the TOW is meddled with’.

• These comments show Māori do not understand the Bill and ignore that the WT has been twisting the treaty for decades. The government has treated Māori well over the years, as Sir Apirana Ngata has said.

• It is time for Māori to clean up their own life style deficiencies. Alan Duff says: Māori lack the ability to self-evaluate. They cannot contemplate Pākehā success in positive terms because that would force them to selfevaluate themselves.

• Winston Peters: We now have Māori overrepresentation in parliament. Why protest?

• Luxon says the TOW is not being changed. He aligns with the activists, being in favour of cogovernance and Māorification.

• Such comments are designed to give the impression that the majority, rather than a minority, is against Seymour. Opponents aim to isolate and discredit him.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 5

Jul 2024

Derivations of Principles from the TOW are confused because there are two extant English versions (Littlewood & Freeman) and Kawharu’s ahistorical retranslations.

QUIZ

1. What is the name for and date of the final English draft of TOW that was translated into Māori?

2. Who were the two translators of the TOW into Māori on the 4th Feb 1840?

3. What did the Government promise to do in each of the TOW articles?

4. Which English version of the TOW has been falsely used to match to the Māori version?

5. In 1986 Kawharu changed the meaning of three words in the TOW. What were thethree words and what were the changes in the English meanings?

BULLET POINTS

• 9 copies of the TOW survive that were signed

• 8 Māori versions signed by 540 chiefs

• 1 English version signed by only 42 chiefs

• The English version is the rogue James Freeman version, cobbled together from notes after Waitangi by a clerk.

• The authentic English version (kept n secret at Archives NZ) is the Littlewood Draft This was translated into Māori by Henry and Edward Williams on the evening of 4 Feb 1840

• Principles from the TOW are:

o Māori ceded sovereignty so the British could set up a democratic government. (No parallel Māori government was intended.)

o Government would protect all peoples’ land and chattels

o Māori were granted British citizenship without special rights.

• Any consideration about the meaning of the TOW should include the Preamble and Affirmation.

• Modern translations are suspect because:

o They use the rogue Freeman English version instead of the authentic Littlewood English version

o In 1986, WT claimant Hugh Kawharu changed the 1840 meaning of:

▪ kāwanatanga from ‘sovereignty’ to ‘governorship’

▪ tino rangatira-tanga from ‘ownership’ to ‘unqualified exercise of chieftainship’

▪ Taonga from ‘property procured by the spear’ to ‘treasures’

• Māori activist claim that only Māori translators (e.g. Melanie Nelson), who lack historical knowledge, understand the TOW.

• Seymour’s Principles are an accurate summary of TOW, faithful to its true meaning and intent.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 6

Jul 2024

The final draft of the TOW and the Māori translation were completed on 4 Feb. 1840. Next day discussion followed with the signing on 6 Feb. By Sep. 1840 more than 500 chiefs’ signatures had been collected from 50 NZ sites.

QUIZ

1. Who were the two men who translated the English TOW into Māori.

2. Who was present and what happened at TiTi Marae in the afternoon of 5th February?

3. How many chiefs signed the TOW on 6 Feb. 1840?

4. What was the effect of the TOW on the document signed by the Confederation of Chiefs?

5. Between Feb. and Sep. 1840, how many Treaty signing locations were visited and how many signatures were collected?

BULLET POINTS

• Jack Tame states the fiction of the different English and Māori versions of TOW

• 29 Jan 1840 Hobson arrived.

• A team had drafted the Busby signed English version of the Treaty by 4pm on 4th Feb.

• That evening Henry Williams translated the draft into Māori. He had arrived in 1823 and was accomplished in Māori and produced the first Māori dictionary. His son Edward who was a first rank Māori speaker, helped.

• The Māori version was then transferred to dog skin. This was discussed with chiefs at TiTi Marae. They understood clearly what they were signing. Williams said: ’There can be no doubt’.

• 6 February 52 chiefs signed TOW, 26 six had previously joined the Confederation. The TOW cancelled the Confederation document.

• 17 Feb 1840 Colenso printed 200 copies of the Māori version. There were 50 signing locations around the coast of NZ. From Feb to Sep 1840 500+ signatures were collected.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 7

Jul 2024

The Busby English and Māori versions of the TOW mirror each other. The chiefs knew that they were ceding sovereignty and that Britain would protect them from the French.

QUIZ

1. What TWO features differed between the final English draft and the Māori translation?

2. Which European country did the Māori chiefs believe the British could prevent invading NZ?

3. What opinion did Rev. Samuel Warren have about the understanding of the chiefs at Waitangi?

4. What evidence is there from the British Parliament that Māori ceded sovereignty?

5. Why is it not possible to run a democracy when Māori activists do not believe their ancestors ceded sovereignty in 1840?

BULLET POINTS

• TOW

• 4 Feb final English draft was completed and translated to Māori version. The difference between the versions was the date and the insertion of the word ‘Māori’ in Article 3 before the word ‘people’.

• Rev. Samuel Warren was at Waitangi for the signing. In 1863 he wrote: ’My impression at the time was that the natives perfectly understood that, by signing the treaty, they became British subjects … and justly thought they had done a pretty good stroke of business when they placed the British lion between themselves and the French eagle.’

• Did Māori cede sovereignty? According to historian Bain Attwood who has studied British parliamentary records ‘all persons [in NZ] lay within the British Crown.’ (Lord Stanley 1843).

• Māori activists are lying when they say Māori did not cede sovereignty. Britain established democracy, not apartheid.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 8

Aug 2024 English and Māori versions of the TOW are identical. The issue is confused by the rogue James Freeman English version (JFRV). Activists use the JFRV for personal gain.

QUIZ

1. Why should the rogue James Freeman version of the TOW not be used in legislation?

2. Why was a copy of the JFRV used to collect signatures at Waikato Head?

3. Why was Lieutenant Governor Hobson unable to supervise all the Treaty signings?

4. What advantages are there for Māori activists in using the JFRV?

5. Why do activists criticise the translation abilities of Henry and Edward Williams?

BULLET POINTS

• English and Māori versions of the TOW on 6 Feb 1840 were mirror images

• 1 Mar Hobson had a stroke. The original English draft was lost.

• Third class clerk, James Freeman (secretary) ‘played up’ and invented his own flowery version of the TOW using discarded notes. Why this happened it not clear. His version (JFRV) did not match the original English draft.

• Rev. Maunsell used both Colenso’s printed version of the Māori Treaty to read to the chiefs when he was collecting signatures at Waikato Head. Maunsell had to use the JFRV for the overflow of chief signatures. Chiefs believed they were signing the Māori version.

• The two versions were pinned together. The JFRV from Waikato Head was signed by Hobson who was very sick at the time.

• The JFRV should have been destroyed and only the Māori version used.

• Hobson said that the TOW was the Māori document signed on 6 Feb 1840 which was what all chief agreed to. Therefore the JFRV is irrelevant.

• The Māori activists pounced on the JFRV as the English version because it mentions forests and fisheries, so there is more for Māori claimants to gain.

• The Waitangi Tribunal uses the JFRV to prove that Henry and Edward Williams were incompetent translators which is fraud.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 9

Aug 2024

The evidence shows that the Littlewood English Draft of the TOW is genuine. It should replace the rogue James Freeman version which makes the current Waitangi Tribunal Act 1975 illegitimate.

QUIZ

1. Where did the Littlewood Treaty reappear in 1989?

2. What work was lawyer Henry Littlewood engaged in in Waitangi in 1840?

3. What is the connection between the Littlewood Treaty and US diplomat James Clendon?

4. Why did the discovery of the Littlewood document cause panic among Māori activists and politicians?

5. What evidence is there that the Littlewood Treaty is genuine?

BULLET POINTS

• Littlewood draft (Pt 1)

• Went missing for 148 years

• In 1989 the Littlewoods (Pukekoe) found an old envelop in a sideboard. It contained a handwritten copy of the TOW in English.

• It was in James Busby’s writing. Busby had said he wrote the final draft of the TOW.

• The connection is that in 1840 Henry Littlewood, lawyer, was doing conveyancing work for US diplomat James Clendon who was based in Waitangi.

• The discovery of the document caused panic among Māori activists and alarm among politicians who did their best to play down the discovery.

• However, after the signing of the TOW copies of Busby’s English draft were sent by Clendon back to the USA. So other copies exist.

• The Littlewood Treaty is genuine because:

o It is in Busby’s handwriting

o It mirrors the Māori version

o It is dated 4 February 1840 which is too early for a back translation from the Māori version.

o The paper is watermarked W. Tucker 1833. This is a USA manufacturer, so the paper was probably supplied by diplomat James Clendon

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt

10

Also incorrectly labelled as

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 9

Aug 2024

The Treaty was carefully constructed following instructions from the British Government. The rogue English version the TOW has spread confusion and enabled activists to manipulate politicians. The discovery of the true final English draft in 1989 was ignored by the WT and Māori activists.

QUIZ

1. Name the men involved in drafting the TOW?

2. Who wrote the final English version of the TOW?

3. What two reasons made the Māori activists focus on the JFRV as being the English version of the TOW for the 1975 TOW Act?

4. When was Busby’s 4 Feb 1840 English version of the TOW rediscovered and by what name is it now known?

5. Where is the Littlewood English Draft now kept and why is it so little publicised?

BULLET POINTS

• Littlewood draft (Pt 2): Timeliine:

• Wed 29 Jan 1840 Hobson arrived

• Thu 30 Jan –1 Feb. Treaty Drafting Team: Hobson, Busby, Clendon, Freeman and missionaries who followed Lord Normanby’s brief.

• Mon 3 Feb: Hobson wants ‘land, estates, forests, fisheries’ excluded from Art 2 and ‘all people of NZ ‘ included in Art 2.

• Tue 4 Feb: Busby writes the final English draft. At night Henry & Edward Williams translate the English draft into Māori.

• Wed 5 Feb: treaty was read in English and Māori to chiefs and discussed all night.

• Thu 6 Feb: Chiefs signed TOW

• There are two English versions of the TOW

o 4 Feb (Hobson’s Choice) went missing in NZ

o 3 Feb James Freeman Rogue Version (JFRV) was invented from 12 pages of notes

• Māori activists (and Bill Rowling) grabbed JFRV so they could say 1840 translators were poor and activists would receive more benefits.

• Māori activists ignored the T.E. Young Government back translation of 1869 because it was so close to the Māori version and they would receive no real benefits

• 1989 the 4 Feb Busby Final English Draft was rediscovered (Littlewood Treaty). This has been kept out of sight in Archives NZ.

• Activists have distorted the TOW. Vague TOW principles give activists more wriggle room.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 11? What Luxon Must Do Before Its Too Late

Nov 2024

Luxon is a closet Māori activist and believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs. For the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill Luxon was absent and Paul Goldsmith stated National’s erroneous TOW beliefs QUIZ

1. What are Luxon’s Big Four Driving beliefs?

2. What two beliefs do John Key and Luxon both hold about the TOW?

3. Where in the TOW does the word ‘partnership’ appear?

4. Is the TOW a ‘contract’, an ‘agreement’ or a partnership’?

5. How closely are Seymour’s 3 Treaty Principles aligned with the 3 Articles in the Littlewood English Draft of the TOW?

• Luxon is a closet ‘Māori’ Activist who believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs:

1. Supporting the cause of activist Māori

2. There is a partnership between the Crown and Māori

3. Co-governance between Crown and Māori is a wonderful thing

4. In 1840 Māori were diddled out of their land and Luxon is on a personal crusade to put things straight.

• Luxon’s TOW silence before the election was a red flag. He met with a Māori advisor weekly. On Monday he let out his true beliefs.

• For the first reading of the Bill, Paul Goldsmith had to smooth the waters.

• Parroting Luxon, he said since the 1970s the principles have not been defined. Partnership has gained acceptance with time.

• Both John Key and Luxon believe that the TOW is a partnership. The TOW is an agreement, not a contract and the word ‘partnership’ does not appear in TOW. To say that TOW is a partnership is a lie and as such will not stand.

• Goldsmith said it was appropriate to discuss the TOW’s meaning today and in the future.

• The TOW must be read using the 1840 meanings of the words, not the meanings given by the activists in the late 20th Century.

• Did Great Britain intend to set up a dual system of government in NZ in 1840? Definitely not.

• The National Party need to say clearly what the TOW meant in 1840.

• The 3 TOW articles become Seymour’s 3 Treaty Principles:

o The New Zealand Government has the right to govern all New Zealanders.

o The New Zealand Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chieftainship of their land and all their property.

o All New Zealanders are equal under the law with the same rights and duties.

• If ignored, the situation will deteriorate and the problem will be harder to fix in future.

• By supporting Seymour’s Bill Luxon would be honouring the TOW.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 12? Luxon, We Demand a Referendum

Nov 2024

Paul Goldsmith’s Speech on the Treaty Principles Bill. He says the meanings should be debated although he is concerned that the process is unsuited to the ‘delicate nature’ of the issues.

QUIZ

1. What is the difference between Luxon’s and Goldsmith’s attitude towards discussing the TP Bill?

2. What is the attitude of Luxon and Keys towards Māori activists?

3. How can Luxon’s not wanting to discuss the Bill be explained?

4. Why does Goldsmith not want to hold a referendum?

5. If Parliament does not write the defined principles into law, who will decide what the meanings of the principles are, and will there be consistency?

BULLET POINTS

• Paul Goldsmith’s Speech 14 Nov 2024

• Said: Waitangi Tribunal (WT) TOW definitions for principles are not gospel i.e. can be debated. This conflicts with Luxon not wanting a discussion.

• Luxon is hypocritical in not giving the NZ people a say. He was put in power by NZers to act on the TOW principles

• Luxon believes in the Big Four Driving Beliefs:

1. Supporting the cause of activist Māori

2. There is a partnership between the Crown and Māori

3. Co-governance between Crown and Māori is a wonderful thing

4. In 1840 Māori were diddled out of their land and Luxon is on a personal crusade to put things straight.

• Luxon is afraid of Māori activists (‘Hikois from Hell), just like John Keys (who mentors him). Key fuelled the Māori activist cause by saying this. Luxon is similarly afraid of Māori extremist activists.

• Luxon supports Māori partnership and so dislikes the Bill

• Goldsmith has concerns about the process of determining the principles of the TOW and the holding of a referendum. ‘Issues are too delicate.’

• In contrast to Goldsmith most people want an open discussion, submissions and a referendum. Hopefully NZers will make hundreds of thousands of submissions.

• MPs should do the will of the people; Luxon is not. The National Party may be unravelling. Luxon is unable to explain the Bill is divisive.

• Platform Interview with Ewen McQueen, author of ‘One Sun in the Sky’. Supporters of the Māori activists do not use historical facts, just bare assertions.

• It is the role of Parliament to decide the definitions of the principles of the TOW, not the WT or the courts.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 13? What The Hikoi is Really All about (Part 1)

Nov 2024

Reasons driving the Hikoi of Tue 19 Nov 2024. Much taxpayer money is helping to drive the hikoi.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• The activist Hikoi 19 Nov 2024 demonstrates:

1. Purpose is to bully and intimidate politicians.

2. It is a recruitment drive to get non-Māori to join the cult.

3. A move towards complete Māori takeover of NZ

4. TVNZ is a Māori Activist organisation

5. TVNZ has received millions to fund Māori takeover of NZ.

6. How NZ Police are joining with the activist movement.

7. That National & NZFirst are doing nothing to stop 1 to 6.

8. NZ First has not come up with any alternatives to Seymour’s Bill, so they must have an ulterior motive.

9. How weak politicians are letting bureaucrats rule the roost.

10. That National & NZFirst are encouraging the take over of NZ by not supporting Seymour’s Bill.

• TVNZ Coverage of the Hikoi is biased 7 emotional blackmail. Māori are poor due to colonisation (CRT) so non-Māori will join the cause.

• Tax Payer Union has exposed that Era KapaKingi, Hikoi Leader is on the Parliamentary Pay Roll. His comment ‘Beyond Parliament’ refers to 2040 goal to have a Māori Parliament with final veto. (Ref: Jphn Robinson, ‘He Puapua’)

• Hikoi at Masterton. A Māori assault a nonMāori with a NZ flag & dmadged the flag. A nearby policeman did nothing. (Two-tier policing.)

• TVNZ Coverage: ‘We will keep marching until we get ‘our sovereignty’.’ Woman crying = emotional blackmail. Māori have been radicalised by activists to become sad victims. These activists are unaccountable.

• Song: ‘Looking for Love in all the Wrong Places’.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 14? Will Winston Do Better? Pt1 Nov 2024

NZ First have been quiet on the Treaty Bill. They plan to remove all references to TOW from legislation.

QUIZ

1. What progress has been made by NZFirst to remove ‘principles’ from existing legislation?

2. In Article 2 of the TOW what did the Government promise to do for Māori?

3. John Robinson said: ‘the Crown did not break the Treaty’. What effect does this statement have on WT settlements?

4. What are the chances that a binding referendum will be held and, if held, would it succeed?

5. What weaknesses in people or processes have been exposed by discussions of Seymour’s Bill?

BULLET POINTS

• Winston Peters & Shane Jones have been ‘missing in action’ re Treaty Principles Bill

• NZFirst Plan: ‘All references to TOW will be removed from legislation.’

• ‘NZFirst will conduct a comprehensive review of all legislation (except when it is related to or substantive to existing and final Treaty settlements and includes “The principles of the TOW” and replace all such references with specific words relating to the relevance and application of the Treaty or repeal such references.’

• i.e. This will clarify what was meant or just dump the Treaty reference. Examples:

• Treaty Principle 1: Partnership: NZF has not said the TOW is not a partnership. This principle would have to be dumped. NZF lack historical knowledge.

• Treaty Principle 2: Protection: Whatever Māori were interested in, the Government had to protect. Rewrite: the Crown has a duty to protect Māori interests in the same way as all citizens, since Māori were given ownership of their land, dwellings and property (taonga).

• Treaty Principle 3: Redress: ‘All Treaty settlements are based on the Crown having broken the Treaty. Since all such settlements are a fraud. There is no justification for the settlements or the Waitangi Tribunal.’ (Ref: John Robinson, WhoReallyBroke TheTreaty?, 2024.)

• Seymour hoped his Bill would end in a binding referendum, which can only be undone if 75% of Parliament agrees.

• Seymour’s Bill has begun a discussion and exposed Luxon, Te Pati Māori, 2 tier policing and Brownlie’s lack of Parliamentary control.

• NZF changes can be reversed by the next Government.

• National will be stuck with the NZF Bill which National signed up for.

• Questions remain:

1. Do politicians have enough historical knowledge?

2. Does NZF understand what activists have been up to?

3. Can another Government undo NZF’s changes?

4. Why no mention of NZF’s Bill in the media?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty Principles Bill Pt 15? Will Winston Do Better? Pt 2

Nov 2024

NZ First have been quiet on the Treaty Bill. They plan to remove all references to TOW from legislation or do they?

QUIZ

1. What was NZFirst’s plan to deal with the confused situation concerning TOW principles?

2. What does Goldsmith believe is the better way to handle the BIll than to go with what the majority of new Zealanders want?

3. What legislation will be excluded from NZFirst’s purging of TOW Principles from existing legislation?

4. What is the likely outcome of not purging some of the legislation?

5. What group or groups of people can be blamed for producing the present situation concerning the TP Bill?

BULLET POINTS

• NZ First Plan: ‘All references to TOW will be removed from legislation.’

• ‘NZFirst will conduct a comprehensive review of all legislation (except when it is related to or substantive to existing and final Treaty settlements and includes “The principles of the TOW” and replace all such references with specific words relating to the relevance and application of the Treaty or repeal such references.’

• This sounds like a great purge but is not. National is continuing what Jacinda started.

• Ministry of Justice lead by Paul Goldsmith and Tama Potaka (Māori activist, so there is a conflict of interest).

• Goldsmith believes there is a wide variety of views on the Treaty. It may be better to follow the interests of the minority (Māori Acitivists ) to avoid conflict than going with what the majority of NZers want. Paul is terrified of Māori. He should be reminded that the present crisis is due to similar poor politician decision making in the past.

• Putting Goldsmith & Potama in charge will result in disaster.

• Some legislation will be excluded from the process: TOW Act, Public Finance Act, State Owned Enterprises Act.

• Questions for Winston to answer:

1. Why did you allow this?

2. We understood all legislation was going to be purged except where Treaty settlements were already in place. Why are three Acts so special?

3. What is being protected by excluding three Acts?

4. Why did you not support David’s Bill as it was more comprehensive? (This will result in a half-done job .)

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 1

Jun 2024

Prior to 1840 Māori culture was lawless and disagreements were settled violently. Tikanga is Māori lore. After experiencing peaceful British culture, some Māori leaders asked the British to introduce their system of law.

QUIZ

1.What does ‘tikanga’ mean?

2. How do we know from Māori behaviours prior to colonisation tahattikanga was a violent system?

3. Who recorded Māori had a ‘total lack of laws or system of law’?

4. Who recorded about Māori that ‘Their own rude law had been one of brute force’.

5. Plunder is an important aspect of tikanga. How can this be related to the development of a warrior class?

BULLET POINTS

• MYTH: Prior to 1840 Māori had a system of law. When the British introduced their system of law it clashed with the Māori system

• TRUTH:

• Captain Cook: Māori are ‘without any settled from of government’

• Samuel Marsden: Māori had a ‘total lack of laws or system of law’,. ‘Superstitions served them’, which was regarded with ‘awful sacredness’.

• Wirimu Hau asked Marsden: ‘Sir will you give us a law?’ Wirimu gave a series of situations and asks what should a person do lawfully in each situation.

• Rev James Buller: Re Māori: ‘Their own rude law had been one of brute force’. Great value was attached to possessions. Without law there was a temptation to plunder. ‘Every man as a natural consequence became a soldier

• Māori could see the benefits of laws that the British had, ‘but their hatred of restraint causes them practically to abhor and resist its full enforcement amongst themselves. F.E. Maning

• Māori needed a system of law

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 2

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore (not law). It was unsystematic and unwritten method for handling grievances based on emotion rather than historical precedent.

Quiz

1.There is a movement among retribalist activists to incorporate tikanga into NZ Law. What problems are likely to follow from this action?

2. How was property ownership decided using tikanga?

3. What did the Chiefs at the Kohimarama Conference say was one of the advantages of Christianity?

4. How were disputes handled before the introduction of British Law?

5. Muru means plunder, robbing, thievery or payback. How could these tikanga practices be incorporated into NZ Law?

BULLET POINTS

• Today Māori radicals are trying to inveigle aspects of tikanga in the NZ legal system.

• Since there is no system of tikanga common to all iwi this will be defined as it goes along. It will only be interpreted by Māori. It is a ruse.

• Captain Hobson (1837): It was ‘impossible to enact laws because the tribes were disunited’. They were out of control.

• Pre 1840 NZ was in a state of anarchy. Reintroducing tikanga will result in anarchy.

• Without common law there could not be property rights

• In traditional tikanga the response to a wrong was: revenge or a warlike challenge or continuing an argumentative dispute.

• Te Whero Whero: ‘New law will save us from killing and robbing (tikanga).

• Chiefs at the Kohimarama Conference (1860) said that Christianity had put an end to cannibalism. ‘The Law put an end to our evils.’ ‘The Governor came with him bringing laws.’

• Sir Apirana Ngata: There was no law pre-1840 to decide who was right. Māori did not have a system of government.

• Today we need to resist tikanga being forced onto all NZers. It is a trick. A ruse.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 3

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore (not law) involving extreme acts of violence e.g. cannibalism. Māori activists have revised traditional tikanga into something more harmless so it can be sneaked into the NZ legal system

QUIZ

1. How did early visitors to NZ describe the state of law among the Māori community?

2. Did the Māori tribes have a legal system prior to the establishment of the British legal system in NZ?

3. How did the Māori regard the peacefulness of the early British settlements?

4. Māori propagandists say pre-1840 Māori life under tikanga was wonderful. Does this idealisation fit with the early Māori practices of utu and cannibalism?

5. What have Maori revisionists done to tikanga practices so they might be inserted into a modern legal system?

BULLET POINTS

• Early visitors commented on the lack of lawfulness among Māori

• Charles Darwin (1835): ‘Proper laws are, of course, quite unknown’.

• Augustus Earle (1827): no ‘universal form of law’.

• Edward Jerningham Wakefield: The Māori ‘ regarded with admiration the peacefulness established by our habits of law and order, and displayed an almost unhoped for degree of good temper in yielding their assent to the new order of things, which forbade the infliction of summary punishment as vengeance by the offended party according to their former customs’.

• Quote from F.E. Maning [who has a tendency to exaggerate]

• It is utterly false to say that Māori had a legal system prior to 1840

• Currently activist Māori propaganda lies that tikanga is harmless and wonderful e.g. It is about: integrity, care & respect, family & relationships, excellence (Ref: Downer website). This is a lie compared to pre-1840 practice e.g. utu & cannibalism

• Bolger says that what was passed in parliament years ago has been changed by activists.

• Deception and trickery has been used in this transformation.

• Violent pre-1840 tikanga has been revised into something harmless for insertion into NZ law courts

• Today Māori radicals are trying to inveigle tikanga in the NZ legal system.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 4

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore(not law. Māori activists have revised traditional tikanga into something harmless so it can enter the NZ Law through Parliament

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• Tikanga = Māori lore, customs, religion, philosophy

• It is an error to try to introduce it into NZ Law

• Māori radicals, elitists &and retribalists try to make out it is innocent & innocuous and want to introduce it into Acts of Parliament which in time expand beyond the intention

• TOW Act 1975 was introduced for a few outstanding claims; The amended TOW Act 1986 allowed claims back to 1840 & claims grew to over 2000.

• Tikanga will probably be the same

• The Dormer company has been sucked in to believe tikanga is something it is not and never was [i.e. Revisionism]

• Duplicity and trickery will be used in this transformation into NZ Law

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 5

Jun 2024

Tikanga is the Māori system of lore (not law). Māori activists have revised traditional tikanga into something harmless so it can be sneaked into NZ Law. They believe tikanga was NZ’s first law despite it involving many illegal activities e.g. cannibalism

QUIZ:

1. What are the names of the four courts in the NZ legal system?

2. Why is it inaccurate to say that the Māori system of ‘tikanga was the first law of NZ’?

3. Why did the TOW replace tikanga?

4. What pre-1840 tribal tikanga practices would be considered illegal under NZ’s current legal system.

5. What organisational aspects of tribal tikanga make it incompatible with a modern legal system?

BULLET POINTS

• Tikanga = Māori lore, customs, religion, philosophy

• NZ Courts: District, High, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court (which, unfortunately, replaced the more independent Privy Council in London)

• Judges are appointed by the Governor General on the recommendation of the Attorney General. An activist at any stage can ensure Māori activist judges are appointed.

• Māori activist judge Susan Glazebrook says ‘tikanga was the first law of NZ.’ This is a silly lie as there was no legal system in NZ until after the TOW.

• Māori activist judge Joe Williams who served on the WT pushed the WAI 262 Report that insisted that NZ’s fauna & flora were the property of Māori which is racist. Williams also stated ‘tikanga was the first law of NZ.’

• Pre-TOW tikanga was dominated by utu (revenge), muru (plunder) & tapu (superstition). TOW pushed aside tikanga because it involved illegal activities

• TOW did not amalgamate tikanga with British Law; such was impossible because they were mutually exclusive. Tikanga had no courts, cases, precedents, clarity, consistency, written recording

• Tikanga differed between tribes and through time.

• Hongi Hika (1825) said tikanga stopped Māori giving up warfare.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 6

Jun 2024

Māori claim to have access to whalebone from stranded whales because of their religious beliefs about the role of whales in the sea. They share this access with DOC , unlike any other ethnic group.

QUIZ

1. How do Māori re-tribalists justify the special rights they claim over other ethnic groups?

2. If it was once part of their tribal religion, Is it reasonable for one ethnic group to have the right of possession to what the sea washes up?

3. Other mammalian bones can be used for carving so why should Māori restrict their requirements to whale bone?

4. Why Is it inappropriate to use the word taonga to describe washed up whales?

5. What government Department is responsible for dealing with washed up whales?

BULLET POINTS

• MISSING JAWBONE OF STRANDED SPERM WHALE IN SOUTHLAND UPSETS IWI

• What has a whale got to do with iwi? We seem to have a dual government, one half being iwi.

• DOC maintains removing parts of mammals contravenes Mammals Protection Act 1978

• According to Māori religion whales are the ‘chiefs of the sea’ and interacting with them requires religious protocols: Prayers, karakia and a farewell address.

• Iwi carve whale bone and sell carvings on the internet.

• Māori interest in whalebone seems to be more commercial than sacred or religious.

• Whalebone can be referred to as a ‘taonga’ (‘property acquired by the spear’) which is is/was not. In 1989 Hugh Kawharu changed the meaning of ‘taonga’ to mean ‘treasure’ which is misleading.

• Māori, along with DOC, are given special dispensation to have access to stranded or deceased whales which is racist and divisive.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 7

Jul 2024

Radical Māori Activist

Senior Judges are trying to incorporate tikanga into NZ Law

QUIZ

1. Into which NZ legal case did activist judges introduce tikanga?

2. What were the names of the two judges?

3. What is wrong with judges making up the law as they go along?

4. What was the result of Judge Peter Churchman ignoring and overruling parliament in the Edwards Case.

5. Why have the Waitangi Tribunal attempted to introduce tikanga into the grievance process?

BULLET POINTS

• Radical Judges Joe Williams and Susan Glazebrook have made the false assertion that tikanga was a system of law and introduced it into the Peter Ellis case.

• Robert Jones observed that this move was ‘the greatest disgrace in NZ’s legal history’.

• Waitangi tribunal has also attempted to introduce tikanga into grievance claims.

• ACT lawyer Stephen Franks stated without mandate from people judges now intend to rule and assume the right to make law.

• This is really a coup, challenging the government.

• Tikanga was not a pre-1840 system of law.

• In the Edwards Case on the foreshore (Marine And Coastal Act), Judge Peter Churchman ignored and overruled Parliament by introducing tikanga resulting in 600 more claims being lodged.

• Māori are given $485,000 from the taxpayers to pursue each claim. Media ignore this.

• Brochures are available to hand out from stopcogovernance.kiwi

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 8

Jul 2024 Activist Senior Judges try to incorporate tikanga into NZ Law by going against the laws set up by parliament.

QUIZ

1. What is tikanga?

2. Is tikanga ‘a system of law’ akin to Western Law? Why?

3. What is problems might occur if judges rather Parliament making up the law?

4. How has Judge Peter Churchman overruled parliament?

5. What might be the result from introducing tikanga into the grievance process?

BULLET POINTS

• Edwards claim for the foreshore (Marine And Coastal Act) under Judge Peter Churchman.

• Claimants had to prove they had previously fished a site continuously since 1840 to be able to claim.

• Edwards falsely asserted that tikanga was ‘a system of law’, which it is not.

• Tribes were unable to prove they used a fishing site continuously. Edwards overruled Parliament by ignoring Western Law and using tikanga.

• Churchman had been advised by two Māori whether he should award the claim according to tikanga. Māori ‘experts’ invariably have an interest in the outcomes of such cases.

• Adding tikanga to common law opens up the legal system to corruption since tikanga has no written record and is inconsistent between iwi.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 9

Jul 2024 Activist Senior Judges try to incorporate tikanga into NZ Law by going against the laws set up by parliament.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• Activist judges sympathetic to Māori sit on the NZ Supreme Court: Joe Williams, Chief Justice Helen Winkle man, Susan Glazebrook.

• Biased Judge Grant Powell is an ex-lawyer for the Waitangi Tribunal. He ignored the MACA law and applied tikanga, allowing a lower threshold than the common law. He believes he should favour indigenous people, contrary to the Act.

• The introduction of tikanga into NZ Law moves the country closer to what is proposed by He Puapua.

• Why are NZers so keen to hand over the government of the country to Māori activists?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tikanga Pt 10 v2

Jul 2024

Activist Senior Judges have incorporate tikanga into NZ Law. The Law Commission and Gary Judd have spoken out against this unlawful move.

QUIZ

1. What is tikanga?

2. Is tikanga a real or imagined challenge for law schools?

3. Which legal expert opposes tikanga being taught in Law Schools?

4. In which modern law case was tikanga introduced and declared as the first law of NZ?

5. What is the Law Commission’s view of tikanga?

BULLET POINTS

• Roger Partridge: The Tikanga Challenge for Law Schools, the rule of law and Parliament.

• Bringing tikanga (Māori tribal lore) into NZ law is similar to incorporating voodoo. This threatens to turn NZ into a malfunctional state like Zimbabwe.

• Gary Judd opposes tikanga being taught in Law Schools.

• Winston Peters says that tikanga is ‘woke’

• Tikanga is a belief system, not a system of rule [law].

• Tikanga was used in the Peter Ellis case where tikanga was declared as the first law of NZ.

• This is a massive shift in our legal system.

• NZ is racing toward third world status.

• Gary Judd says: ‘A fluid system should not be treated as law.’

• The Law Commission warns against using tikanga.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi For

Newbies Article 1 Part1

Aug 2024

Significance of the Confederation of Tribes and He Whakaputanga (1835)

QUIZ

1. What was the object of the Confederation of Tribes’ Declaration of Independence (He Whakaputanga)?

2. Who instigated the Confederation of Tribes and the Declaration of Independence?

3. What is the opinion of historians on the significance of He Whakaputanga?

4. How do we know the Treaty of Waitangi superseded the status of He Whakaputanga?

5. What was the ultimate fate of the organisation called the Confederation of Tribes?

BULLET POINTS

• Seymour’s Bill is at a fork in the road: NZ must choose Tribal Rule or Democracy

• Which road is mandated by the Treaty and which honours the Treaty?

• The English Article 1 mirrors the Māori version.

• Busby invented the Confederation of Tribes & the Declaration of Independence (DI) in 1835 to stave off French interests in NZ

• Busby had 39 Northland chiefs sign the DI or He Whakaputanga (HW)

• Busby hoped this very local HW made NZ a sovereign nation under Britain

• Historians B. Attwood and M. King conclude HW was insignificant

• Edward Gibbon Wakefield noted ‘no further meeting [of the Confederation] took place’

• Chiefs who signed HW also later signed the Treaty

• Thus the Treaty supersedes HW which is therefore redundant

• Some Māori activists think HW is valid

• Promoting HW dishonours the TOW

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art1 Pt 2

Aug 2024

Evidence that Māori ceded sovereignty to the British as per Article one of the Treaty

QUIZ

1. Define the words ‘cede’ and ‘sovereignty’?

2. Why are ‘partnership’ and ‘sovereignty’ mutually exclusive concepts?

3. Where in the TOW does it say Māori can have their own government?

4. What facts prove that that Māori ceded sovereignty to Queen Victoria?

5. How well do David Seymour’s principles match the three Articles of the TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• Fork in the road: Tribal Rule or Democracy

• Which road is mandated in the Treaty, which honours the Treaty, does Seymour’s Bill honour the Treaty?

• Chiefs ceded sovereignty to the British.

• Cede means to give up or give someone absolute control

• Sovereignty means supreme authority

• Sovereignty and partnership are mutually exclusive

• Art 1 does not say: Māori can have their own government, or the Queen was in partnership with Māori or Māori can control resources other than what they owned or Māori only gave the British permission to rule over settlers.

• Humanitarian colonisation: the Queen did not want to seize NZ

• Normanby instructed Hobson to obtain free and intelligent consent from Māori, else British would leave NZ to the French

• 3 Proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty: (1) Britain continued colonising NZ after 1840, (2) Speeches of Chiefs on 5 Feb 1840 show they understood, (3) D. Lange, W. Peters, Judge A. Willi all confirm sovereignty was ceded

• Seymour’s 3 Principles matches & honour TOW Art 1.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for

Newbies Art 1 Pt 3

Sep 2024

Proof 3 that Māori ceded sovereignty: the Kohimarama Conference.

QUIZ

1. When was the Kohimarama Conference held and how many chiefs attended?

2. What did the Kohimarama Conference unanimously state about the TOW?

3. What twisted reading of the TOW allows NZ Media and Māori activists to deny Māori ceded sovereignty.

4. What myth do Māori activists promote about land ownership and what % of land did Māori ultimately sell?

5. What myth do Māori activists promote concerning self-determination and how does it conflict with the statements of Sir Apirana Ngata concerning Article 1?

BULLET POINTS

• Kohimarama Conference was held over a month in 1860

• 112 (at the start) chiefs attended, most of whom had signed the TOW 20 years earlier

• The Conference unanimously moved that: Māori had ceded sovereignty, the two races were united and that Māori would not break the TOW.

• Activists (e.g. Margaret Mutu, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, Waititi & Willi Jackson) say that the TOW only gave the British sovereignty over the settlers and not Māori.

• NZ media collaborate with Māori activists to say sovereignty was not ceded, while ignoring those who disagree such as Don Brash and 1Law4All.

• Activist Myth 1: NZ resources belong to Māori. In fact all NZers own NZ’s resources. Māori sold 92% of their land. Apirana Ngata: land was confiscated to punish some Māori for breaking laws. The Crown never broke the TOW, rebellious Māori did. (John Robinson, ‘Who Really Broke the Treaty’, 2024).

• Activist Myth 2: Māori have a right to self-determination and their own Government. However, Sir Apirana Ngata: explains that Article 1 records ‘the transfer by the Māori Chiefs to the Queen of England for ever the Government of all their lands.’ (1922, p3).

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 1 Pt 4

Sep 2024

What if Māori did not cede sovereignty? Proof 4 that they did.

QUIZ

1. What advantages would Māori receive if their ancestors did not cede sovereignty in 1840?

2. What disadvantages should all New Zealanders receive because the Māori Chiefs ceded sovereignty in 1840?

3. How are MPs eroding the concept of sovereignty being ceded in the TOW?

4. Does Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill honour the TOW?

5. What are 5 proofs that the Māori chiefs ceded sovereignty in the 1840 TOW?

BULLET POINTS

• Māori radicals say Māori did not cede sovereignty in 1840.

• If Māori did not cede sovereignty:

1. NZ resources (fisheries, forests etc) belong to Māori

2. Māori the right to rule and reign NZ

3. All non-Māori are guests and overstayers

4. Tribal rule replaces democracy

5. Māori are superior to the rest

6. Māori have special rights and privileges

7. British stole NZ from Māori

8. Te Reo should be the main language

• If Māori ceded sovereignty:

1. NZ resources belong to all

2. Māori have no right to be in control

3. Māori have no right to set up a parallel government

4. Māori are equal before the law

5. Māori must abide by democratic principles

6. Māori are not entitled to special rights and privileges

7. Māori legally handed over NZ to be managed by Britain

8. English will be the main language of NZ

9. Māori wards, partnership, customary rights etc are breaches of the Treaty

• Sovereignty is of crucial importance but is being eroded by MPs

• We must oppose the ‘reversalists’ because its honours the TOW and the ancestors who signed it

• Proofs of ceding sovereignty:

1. Normanby’s instructions to Hobson

2. Speeches of chiefs on 4 Feb 1840

3. 540 chiefs signed TOW

4. Kohimarama Conference 1860

5. Records held by the British Parliament (See: Bain Attwood)

• Seymour’s 3 Principles honour TOW Art 1.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 1

Pt 5

Sep 2024

Reversalists deny that Māori ceded sovereignty and Proofs 5 and 6 (of 9) that they did.

QUIZ

1. What two processes does Luxon push concerning relationships between Māori activists and the rest of the population?

2. What is the reason Margaret Mutu believes Māori did not cede sovereignty?

3. How does Mutu’s belief demonstrate a lack of historical knowledge?

4. Why have Māori activists used the rogue James Freeman version of the TOW?

5. What proofs do Tamati Waka Nene & Apirana Ngata provide for Māori ceding sovereignty?

• Reversalists want to reverse the fact that Māori ceded sovereignty. They are not interested in truth but taking over NZ.

• Chris Luxon is not a reversalist but believes in Māorifcation and co-governance

• Chris Hipkins is a denialist

• Prof. Margaret Mutu believes Māori did not cede sovereignty because they outnumbered Pākehā. (‘Māori were in complete control of every corner of the country.’)

• Māori ceded sovereignty because they: were afraid of the French, were self-annihilating through intertribal warfare and wanted British goods and trade to improve their lives.

• The TOW is the Māori text

• The TOW Tribunal Act 1975 uses the illegitimate rogue James Freeman English version. The final English version of TOW of 4 Feb 1840, known as the Littlewood Draft, is kept in Archives NZ.

• Activists in 1975 used the Freeman version so they could say it did not match the Māori version so that only Māori could back translate the TOW to say what it meant.

• Henry Williams ensured that on 5th Feb, 1840 the chiefs understood what kāwanatanga etc meant. The Treaty was read in both English and Māori.

• PROOF 5: High chief Tamati Waka Nene’s 1871 headstone records he was ‘The first to welcome the Queen’s sovereignty in New Zealand’.

• PROOF 6: Sir Apirana Ngata wrote: Article 1 records ‘the transfer by the Māori Chiefs to the Queen of England for ever the Government of all their lands.’ (1922, p3).

• Previously mentioned PROOFS of Māori ceding sovereignty:

1.Normanby’s instructions to Hobson

2. Speeches of chiefs on 4 Feb 1840

3. 540 chiefs signed TOW

4. Kohimarama Conference 1860

5. Records held by the British Parliament (See: Bain Attwood)

• Seymour’s 3 Principles honour TOW Art 1.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for Dummies Art 1 Pt 6

Sep 2024

Māori ceded sovereignty: Proof 7

Rev Samuel Warren

QUIZ

1. What does the 1863 Diary of Samuel Warren inform us about Māori understanding of the TOW?

2. Were pre-colonial Māori horticulturalists or hunter gatherers?

3. What percentage of land have Māori sold?

4. What does tino rangatira-tanga mean in the TOW compared to the activist Māori interpretation?

5. In which years were Maori and non-Māori first given the vote?

BULLET POINTS

• PROOF 7: Rev. Samuel Warren 1863 Diary

• Present at Waitangi and later at Hokianga

• ‘Great deal of talk by the natives, principally on the subject of securing their proprietary right to the land, and their personal liberty’… ‘Everything else they were only too happy to yield to the Queen’

• ‘They knew they could only be saved from the rule of other nations by sitting under the shadow of the Queen of England. In my hearing they frequently remarked, “Let us be one people. We had the gospel from England, let us have the law from England.”‘

• ‘The ‘natives perfectly understood that, by signing the treaty, they became British subjects.’ … ‘The natives were at the time in mortal fear of the French, and justly thought they had done a pretty good stroke of business when they placed the British lion between themselves and the French eagle.’

• Prof. Parsonson ex. OU: Māori were hunter-gatherers in the early contact period. They owned no land.

• Māori became interested in land when they were able to sell it. They sold 92%. (Mike Butler. Land sold, not ‘lost 2024’ )

• Tino rangatira-tanga means that Māori have authority over their property and land, not all NZ resources.

• Māori were given voting in 1867, 11 years before Pākehā (1878).

• Māori activist spin today tells us:

o What they imagine happened

o Māori did not sign sovereignty

o Māori were peaceful and united and could easily have protected themselves from the British

o NZ in 1840 was the Shangri-La of the South Pacific

o Land was stolen

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 1

Pt 7

Oct 2024

Potaka (Minister of Māori Development) wants to say that Māori did not cede sovereignty but knows that this will conflict with Luxon. Ten proofs show Māori ceded sovereignty in the TOW.

QUIZ

Potama was asked ‘Did Māori cede sovereignty and when?’

1. What will be the political consequences if he answers ‘Yes’?

2. What will be the political consequences if he answers ‘No’?

3. What are some of the ploys Potama uses to avoid answering the question?

4. & 5. What are the proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty?

BULLET POINTS

• Interview of Tama Potaka Minister of Māori Development

• Tama avoids answering the questions: Did Māori cede sovereignty? When did Māori cede sovereignty?

• Potaka is living in a paradoxical world: If he says Māori ceded sovereignty he is agreeing with Luxon and will upset his activist friends. If he says Māori did not cede sovereignty he is disagreeing with Luxon and but appeasing his activist friends.

• To avoid answering the questions Potaka uses a range of ploys:

o ‘It’s a debate that’s been going on for several decades.’

o ‘I’m not engaging in that debate the Crown is sovereign.’

o ‘I will support the PM.’

o ‘Tino Rangatiratanga will be upheld.’

o ‘There are a number of different views on that. A number of discussions on that.’

o ‘That’s a long conversation.’

o Mentions He Whakaputanga but this was superceded by TOW.

o Changes the subject to Māori Housing.

• Summary: 10 proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty at Waitangi on 6 Feb 1840.

1. Existence of the Treaty.

2. Speeches of chiefs on 4 Feb 1840.

3. Kohimarama Conference 1860.

4. Records held by the British Parliament (See: Bain Attwood)

5. Headstone of Tamati Waka Nene.

6. The opinion of Sir Apirana Ngata.

7. Eye witness accounts of settlers living with Māori

8. Plaque at Waitangi: ‘On this spot … The Treaty of Waitangi under which New Zealand became part of the British Empire.

9. 16 Nov 1840 NZ became a Crown Colony separate from NSW

10. 1852 NZ Constitution Act passed by British Government.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for

Newbies Art 2

Pt 1

Oct 2024

Art 2 begins by guaranteeing protection of land and possessions. To make the system work land had to be surveyed and land titles issued.

QUIZ

1. From what English document was Te Tiriti translated into Māori?

2. What are the two differences between Busby’s Final English draft and the Māori version of the TOW?

3. In Article 2, first sentence, what did the Queen of England guarantee ‘to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand’?

4. When chiefs sold their land to the Government what happened to the Government guarantee of protection of that land?

5. Why was surveying the land of such a high priority for the British?

BULLET POINTS

• The Māori version fo the TOW was translated from the Littlewood Draft

• There are two differences between them:

1. English Draft dated 4 Feb 1840 was translated by H. Williams to Māori and was dated 6 Feb 1840

2. The word māori was added to the Māori version on 5 Feb into Art 3.

Art 2, First Sentence: ‘The Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property.’

• Hobson acted on the full authority of the Queen

• British thought Māori owned all the land, except that which they had sold prior to the TOW

• Britain promised to protect the ownership of their land and anything on it. The proviso was that if the chiefs sold their land the guarantee would pass on to the new owner.

• With say 540 chiefs, without surveying the land, establishing boundaries and issuing titles Britain could not protect each chief’s land.

• Surveying land was a high British priority. The practice of surveying land and issuing titles was described by Hobson’s superior, Lord Normanby, as ‘that system of sale in the anticipation of buying land from Māori, which experience has proven the wisdom, and the disregard of which has been so fatal to the prosperity of other British Settlements’.

• So important was surveying the land and issuing titles that Hobson took the Surveyor General, Mathew Fulton to NZ, to set up the new colony.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for

Newbies Art 2

Pt 2

Oct 2024

Art 2 is confused because of the differences between RJFV the Māori version. The Busby final draft, which matches the Māori translation has been ignored. Activists deny sovereignty was ceded, but evidence proves the opposite.

QUIZ

1. What historical importunity caused the origin of Te Tiriti being a bad translation?

2. Why was the discovery of the Littlewood Draft in 1989 ignored by Treatyists?

3. How much land had been sold by Māori (i) by 1840, (ii) by c.2020?

4. What source indicates how much land Māori had sold by 1840?

5. In Art 2, sentence 1, of the TOW, the Government offered to guarantee protection of what three things?

BULLET POINTS

• A major problem with any Treaty discussion is that the Rogue James Freeman Version (RJFV) is being used by the Māori activists since 1975. This allows activists to spread the ‘bad translation’ lie.

• In 1989 The TOW final English draft by Busby (called ‘Littlewood’) was found but ignored by Treatyists as it did not match their agenda.

• 1840 Māori sovereignty of NZ was undisputed by Lord Normanby. However, Māori did not run NZ as a coordinated state.

• By 1840 Māori had sold about one third of their land. (See Turton Land Records.) Eventually 92% of NZ was sold by Māori.

• Māori relinquished sovereignty

o By the TOW

o By selling land

• Māori activists make use of the fake sovereignty claims of ‘tino rangatira-tanga’ and ‘mana motuhake’

• PM Luxon reluctantly states: ‘Māori ceded sovereignty in 1840’.

• Chiefs were anxious not to lose more land.

• Art 2, first sentence: ‘… all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property’. This meant everyone, both Māori and settlers. British settlers already had British citizenship.

• The Government offered to guarantee Māori protection of their land, dwellings and property.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treaty of Waitangi for

Newbies Art 2

Pt 3

Oct 2024

The TOW promised all NZers the possession of their lands, dwellings and property. In Common Law beaches etc are for all citizens to use. The WT gave Māori special rights to NZ’s water resources.

QUIZ

1. What resources determined the area of land that a tribe owned?

2. Why did Māori tribes carefully mark out their fishing spots?

3. How far out to sea did Māori fish?

4. What resources in the rogue James Freeman version were pounced upon?

5. According to the British Law Of Commons, who do the beaches belong to?

BULLET POINTS

• Review: Littlewood English Draft is crucial. Māori activists use the RJFV so they can say Henry Williams was a poor translator.

• Art 2 Sentence 1: ‘The Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property.’

• The British surveyed the land each of 540 chiefs owned their 1 cm2 squares on a map of NZ.

• If a chief’s land had a coastal element, Māori could still fish those waters and gather their seafood. (Prof Gordon S. Parsonson)

• Each tribe had carefully marked out fishing spots that were 'no go' areas for other tribes.

• However, Maori did not 'own' the beach or coastline on the boarder of their land.

• No mention of fishing areas extending kilometres out to seas in Art 2. The rogue James Freeman version promises ‘full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries’ which is what the WT uses.

• According to The British law of The Law Of Commons, the beaches belonged to all the citizens of the country.

• And since Maori had ceded sovereignty (Article 1) and become British citizens (Article 3), this law applied to them as well.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 2 Pt 5

Oct 2024

Māori were keen to sell their land. From 1840-3 Māori could only sell to the Government.

In response to Māori violating legal authority Government confiscated Māori land

QUIZ

1. Who could Māori sell land to after the TOW?

2. What TWO problems slowed Māori land sales to Government?

3. Why were Māori so keen to sell land?

4. How much land had Māori sold by 1840?

5. From what year were Māori able to sell their land to people other than Government agents?

• Art 2 Sentence 2: ‘ The chiefs of the Confederation and the other chiefs grant to the Queen the exclusive right of purchasing such land as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to sell at such prices as shall be agreed upon between them and the persons appointed by the Queen to purchase from them.’

• 3 Activist Myths:

o Māori were tricked out of their land

o Māori were forced to sell their land

o Land was unlawfully confiscated

• Prior to 1840 Māori vigorously sold their land. Records show Māori sold at least one third of their land (H.H.Turton). Māori sold land several times on the same day.

• Māori could only sell land to the government; they had to want to sell land and could not be bullied. (Normanby’s instructions to Hobson.) George Clarke was appointed Protector of Aborigines to supervise land sales. Government made money from reselling land to settlers.

• Māori complained the Government was too slow to buy land. Due to pressure by 1843 Māori could sell to anyone. Communal ownership slowed sales. Conquered land had to be held for 10 years before selling.

• Māori were keen to sell so they buy European goods & stock etc as status symbols. They produced flax and potatoes for trade.

• Land confiscations. ‘The Government placed in the hands of the Queen of England, the sovereignty and the authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority. War arose from this and blood was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in payment This itself is a Maori custom revenge, plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their own chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty. (Sir Apirana Ngata, p.15-16)

• Ref. J. Robinson, ’Who Really Broke The Treaty?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi for Newbies Art 2

Pt 4

Oct 2024

In 1989 Hugh Kawharu changed the meaning of the original Māori words in the TOW. This resulted in confusion e.g. partnership and an explosion in TOW fraud.

QUIZ

1. Legally, why was the 1835 Declaration of Independence superseded by the TOW?

2. What is the simple version of Art. 2 Sentence 1?

3. What was the 1831 meaning of ‘taonga’?

4. What was the modern meaning of ‘toanga’ that was invented by Kawharu in 1989?

5. Māori activists claim the Seabed and Foreshore due to the RJFV of the TOW. What British Law does Māori Seabed and Foreshore ownership breach?

• Review: see previous video

• Art 2 Sentence 1

• The Declaration of Independence 1835 was superceded by TOW because the 39 chiefs involved signed both (Dr Matthew Wright

• Williams translated ‘property’ in TOW as ‘taonga’. 1820 Maori dictionary gives ‘taonga’ as ‘property procured by the spear – tao’. In 1831 ‘taonga’ meant ‘possessions’. i.e. chattles

• Simple version of sentence 1: ‘The Queen guarantees to protect … Māori land, houses, and contents.’

• Kawharu 1989: TOW guaranteed Māori the right to be chiefs over all New Zealand forever However, Māori sold 92% of their land. Also, ‘Property meant ‘treasures’ and included material and non-material aspects of a tribe’s estate e.g. customs and folklore.

• Treaty fraud exploded and activists pushed nonTOW concepts: Māori did not cede sovereignty, business partnership between Māori & Crown. Result: confusion

• Partnership & democracy are mutually exclusive

• Tuku Morgan believes TOW is a partnership. All NZers are not equal which is based on racism

• Māori received part of 5G spectrum band and $57million. TOW does not promise to promote Māori language. Seabed and Foreshore under British Law of Commons belong to all NZ citizens

• Māori can preserve their language and customs (as 159 NZ cultures do) with the exception of: human sacrifice, cannibalism infanticide and slavery.

• Art 2 Sentence 1: means: ‘We’ll protect your ownership of your land, dwellings, and property, but the beaches belong to everyone.’

• David Seymour’s original draft of TOW Principles Bill is a perfect match for Article 2

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Treaty of Waitangi For Newbies

Preamble

Aug 2024

A discussion of the TOW Preamble and the reasons Māori wanted Britain to set up a government.

QUIZ

1. What three groups in 1840 had interests in the TOW?

2. In the TOW Preamble did the British say the would forcibly take Māori land?

3. What are the reasons that Māori wanted the British to set up a lawful government?

4. Activists & academics say that Māori did not cede sovereignty because Māori outnumbered the British in 1840. What is wrong with this argument?

5. What did the British intend to do if the Māori did not cede sovereignty?

• The Treaty consists of five parts: Preamble, Articles 1,2 and 3 and Affirmation

• PREAMBLE

o Hobson has been sent by the Queen and is writing on her behalf as the governor of NZ

o Three groups have interest in the Treaty: nonMāori settlers, Māori chiefs and tribes and the Queen (representing the British Government)

o What applies to Māori applies to all people in NZ

o The Queen acknowledged that Māori own land in NZ and that the British will not forcibly take their land

• Māori needed the British to set up a lawful government because Māori

o were drunk with warfare and their population was falling

o lore of tikanga was inadequate to serve the changing and diverse culture

o were in mortal fear of the French returning o wanted the benefits of trade to move from poverty to prosperity

• Question asked by activists and some academics: Why would thousands of Māori given away their country to a small group of recent arrivals? This is deliberate spin, lies or possibly the result of historical ignorance.

• Māori told the British they wanted peace and order in NZ. They wanted protection from bad European elements e.g. convicts, as well as from tribes. Some Māori attacked settlers

• Many British settlers had arrived and they needed a democratic government

• Democracy means: 1 vote per person, all votes are equal, voting gives MPs right to govern

• Hobson was appointed to NZ, to install a democracy and to install a government with infrastructure. To do this The British needed the permission of the Māori, otherwise they would leave.

• Which road is mandated by the Treaty and which honours the Treaty? Both do.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treason Pt 1

Jul 2024

Rawiri Waititi makes exorbitant claims for more money to be paid to Māōri and Māori selfgovernment

QUIZ

1. What year was the definition of ‘Māori’ changed to ‘any descendant’?

2. What did David Lange mean by: ‘Democracy and indigenous sovereignty cannot co-exist’?

3. What explains why 52% of the prison population is Māori?

4. What financial advantages do Māori have in NZ?

5. Why is the call for a separate Māori government treason?

BULLET POINTS

• Rawiri Waititi in parliament says:

o There’s no mention of Māori [in the Budget]

o One in five are Māori (exaggeration)

o Wants $80 billion per year for Māori

o 52% of the prison population is Māori, thus Māori should get that % of the Budget

o Our land was stolen (lie)

• Māori are going to act independently

• NZ Asian population is now greater than Māori population

• 1974 Act: Any descendant of a Māori can be self-designated Māori to increase numbers. Iwi leaders should not be involved in Census statistics

• Democracy and indigenous sovereignty cannot co-exist David Lange

• Māori have not offered solutions for the high prison numbers and for the high number of Māori children in state care, except more cash

• Welfare paid to Māori exceeds tax paid by Māori

• Māori pay 17% corporate tax, only some Māōri pay rates

• Māori sold 92% of their land

• The call for a separate government is treason.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Treason Pt 2

Jul 2024

Rawiri Waititi makes exorbitant claims for more money to be paid to Māōri and that Māori were traumatised by colonisation without evidence.

QUIZ

1. What advantages did colonisation bring for Māori?

2. Why do Māori not show gratitude for the grievance settlements?

3. Why should Mataurangi Māori not be introduced into NZ Science curriculums?

Clue: Science is global.

4. What change occurred to Māori life expectancy after 1840?

5. What USA academic theory says ‘colonisation always produces trauma for indigenous people’?

BULLET POINTS

• Rawiri Waititi in parliament says:

o There’s no mention of Māori [in the Budget]

o No mention of Māori in Health and Education [in the Budget]

o $15million is not enough for Matatini (Māori dance festival)

o Māori have been traumatised by colonisation

• Mataurangi Māori is being pushed for NZ Science programmes rather than Religious Studies. Richard Dawkins disagrees as Science is universal.

• Colonisation brought many advances (listed) to Māori e.g. life expectancy increased from mid-twenties in 1840 to mid-seventies in late 20th century

• Colonial trauma of Māori is a myth; no evidence. [This concept is derived from dubious USA Critical Race ‘Theory’]

• Social indications show that despite huge handouts Māori are not flourishing.

• Māori activist use complaining as a weapon

• Māori show no gratitude for handouts.

• Endgame is complete dominance.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 1

Oct 2024

How NZ is inching towards tribal rule evidenced by numerous examples of Māori privilege.

QUIZ

1. What examples of legislation show that NZ is a ‘two tier nation’?

2. What is the target year for Māori tribal control of NZ?

3. In what ways are Māori favoured within Education?

4. In what ways are Māori favoured within Land and Conservation Law?

5. In what ways are Māori favoured within National & Local Government?

• NZ is a two tier nation due to the extent of Māori privilege that started in the 1970 to atone for supposed injustices.

• The injustices are not supported by historical evidence. (Ref: John Robinson “Who Really Stole

The Treaty’, 2024, Tross Publishing)

• 2040 is the target for Māori tribal control of NZ

• Māori privileges result in reverse apartheid/racism

so many want Māori privileges to be eradicated.

Thus David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill.

• Ref: NZCPR Blog, Geoff Parker, 11 April 2024

• Lists of Māori privileges follow:

• EDUCATION:

o Māori Schools, propaganda enters home

o Promotion of Māorification in the school curriculum (Te Ao Vision) e.g. Te Tiriti comic

o Compulsory Treaty/Language courses for all first year students at A.U. from 2025

o Special travel grants for Māori & Pasifika researchers

o Special Māori & Pasifika study areas at uni.

• HEALTH:

o Māori only health initiatives & expenditure

o Percentage of medical university places reserved for Māori

o Priority access to care based on race (2024 Coalition changed this to ‘based on need’).

• HOUSING/WELFARE (159 cultures miss out)

o Māori-only housing projects

o Māori-only welfare programmes

• LAW & JUSTICE SYSTEM

o Supreme court approval for wider use of Tikanga (Māori tribal lore) as Law and equal in status to the Common Law

o Tikanga compulsory subject in Law Schools

o Waitangi Tribunal (advisory status) must have a Māori majority

o Māori Law Society (restricted membership)

o Treaty settlements to extend to Hapu as well as Iwi (e.g. 2024 Nga Puhi negotiations)

o Māori-only prisoner programmes

o Attempt by Solicitor-General to give special treatment to Māori offenders in public prosecution guideline (withdrawal ordered by Attorney General Collins)

o Lenient policing & sentencing for Māori offenders

• PUBLIC SERVICE

o Māori-only employment/consultants in government agencies

o Continued priority of Māori names for ministries despite coalition law to use English

• LAND & CONSERVATION

o Māori-only consultation under the RMA & Fast Track Approvals Bill currently progressing through parliament

o Māori-only judges appointed to the Māori Land Court

o Māori-only co-management/control of National Parks, rivers, lakes, coastline

o Māori-only claims to the country’s harbours, estuaries, foreshore, seabed and territorial waters (& the air above) with obligatory taxpayer funding for associated legal & research costs

o Māori-only fishing areas in the Hauraki Gulf

• TAX & BANKING

o A special Māori Authority tax code of 17.5%

o A special Māori-only exemption to allow blood relations to benefit from a business’s tax-free charitable status

o Diversity appointment policy for the Reserve Bank Board

• NATONAL & LOCAL GOVERNMENT

o Māori-only seats on local councils

o Māori-only appointments to powerful local government committees

o Māori-only regional Statuary Boards

o Māori-only seats in parliament

o Local council designation of all land as Māori cultural sites without ratepayer approval (e.g. Gore District Council 2024)

o A percentage of Government & Council suppliers to be Māori only

• LANUAGAGE, MEDIA , ARTS

o Māori language funding

o Public funding for Māori radio/TV & Māori journalist training

o Extensive funding for Māori artists/writers in the performing arts

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than

You Think Pt 2

Oct 2024 NZ came closer to a 2 tier nation through the 1974 Māori Affairs

Amendment Bill

QUIZ NA

• Matiu Rata ws responsible for the 1974 Māori Affairs Amendment Bill

• This provided new principles and benefits for Māori

• Māori status was changed legally from 50% or more Māori blood to ‘a person of the Māori race or a descendant of the race

• This increased the number of people who identified themselves as Māori resulting in:

o More Māori seats in parliament

o More funds for Māori

o Target education etc for Māori

• This Māori recruitment was very successful and draws NZ closer to a Māori takeover.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 3

Oct 2024 NZ came closer to a 2 tier nation through the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act which opened the way for a cascade of Māori privileges.

QUIZ

1. Why can confiscations of Māori land not be objected to because of the TOW?

2. Which MP was responsible for the 1975 TOW Act?

3. What evidence indicates that the Waitangi Tribunal has indulged in fraud?

4. How many million dollars does the WT cost each year?

5. What types of evidence is allowed by the Waitangi Tribunal?

• TOW records that the Chiefs ceded sovereignty to the Queen. In return the new government would protect Māori possessions. They could only sell their land to the government. All people would have the rights and responsibilities of British citizens. Chiefs understood this.

• Early in the 20th century some Māori complained about their land loss. Apirana Ngata said: The chiefs place in the hands of the Queen of England the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Māori people violated that authority. War arose from this and blood was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in payment. This itself is a Māori custom revenge, plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their own chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the treaty.1

• Māori activists looked for ways to cancel the decisions of their ancestors including the sale of 92% of their land. They plotted & planned to exploit MP weaknesses.

• Matiu Rata was responsible for the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act (TOW Act) which was set up to invite corruption and fraud:

1. The legislation mention ‘principles’ but these are undefined leading to corruption

2. The Act used the Freeman English version. It was imputed that the translation was faulty and only Māori could say what the true meaning was.

3. Claims took the form of old stories, memories & verbal accounts, the veracity of which was not allowed to be challenged. In 2014 the WT said the chiefs did not cede sovereignty

4. Meanings of words could be given 20th century translations to suit claimants.

• Waitangi Tribunal cost NZ taxpayers $21 million per year. Many people were involved in producing huge reports that used Māori words to confuse history-ignorant politicians.

• The TOW Act caused Māori privileges to bloom.

• Lack of opposition from Non-Māori allows Māori to continue asking for TOW Act handouts.

1 A.T. Ngata, Te Tiriti o Waitangi: an Explanation, 1922, p.12.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 4

Nov 2024 TOW Amendment Act (1975) 1984 allowed claims back to 1840 and over 2000 claims were made. In 2024 the number of claims had risen to 10,000.

QUIZ

1. It what year was the TOW Amendment Act passed that allowed claims back to 1840?

2. How does the number of claims to the WT exemplify the ‘Camel in the Tent’ fable?

3. Does the TOW support the claims being made to the WT?

4. What is the overall role of the 60 people who work at the WT?

5. What are the possible reasons that politicians prefer to appease Māori claims?

• NZ is a 2 tier apartheid state

• The Government sanctions this by paying Māori activists to sue the Government. Government legislation is pushed by Māori activists.

• Earlier videos covered: Māori Affairs Amendment Act 1974 (Video 2), Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 (Video 3)

• TOW AMENDMENT ACT (1975) 1984 allowed claims back to 1840

• About control

• Camel in the Tent Classic Fable small harmless acts can result in huge repercussions i.e. takeover by stealth or gradualism

o TOW Act 1975 = nose in the tent, 5 Treaty claims

o TOW Amendment Act 1984 = head & neck in the tent, 2034 Treaty claims

o 2024 = body in the tent, 10,000 Treaty claims registered according to Potaka

• TOW does not support any of these claims. These late 20th century claims should not have been passed.

• If this claiming process continues all NZ will belong top Māori activists according to He Puapua.

• 60 people work at the Waitangi Tribunal, costing the taxpayer $21 million per year. Their role is to transfer cash/assets/land from public to Māori ownership.

• When complete the camel will be in the tent, i.e. Māori will have taken over and the rest will be outside the tent.

• Māori activists put pressure on politicians who appease Māori and the process continues.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Tribal Rule Is Closer Than You Think Pt 5

Nov 2024

State Owned Enterprises Case of 1987 invented the concept that the TOW was a partnership between Queen Victoria & Māori. Local Councils are giving funds to iwi without making the transactions visible.

QUIZ

1. What is the relevance of the State Owned Enterprises Case 1987 to the Treaty Principles Bill?

2. What did Chief Judge Robin Cooke say in a 77 page report that further clouded the meaning of the TOW?

3. Who said that ‘there is no legal basis for the idea that the TOW is a partnership’?

4. Which politicians still believe that the TOW is a partnership?

5. Why is Michael Lawes’ concerned about the millions of dollars being paid to Ngai Tahu by the Otago Regional Council?

BULLET POINTS

• THE STATE OWNED ENTERPRISES CASE OF 1987

• Between the National Māori Council and the NZ Government.

• The 5 judges had to decide what principles can be drawn from the TOW that are relevant to race relations today.

• They produced a 77 page report. Chief Judge Robin Cooke said that ‘ the treaty is an enduring relationship of a fiduciary nature akin to a partnership, each party accepting a positive duty to act in good faith, fairly and reasonably, and honourably towards the other.’ Each judge gave an opinion on what the principles should be.

• Justice Anthony Willy observed that none of the judges said the TOW was a partnership between Queen Victoria and the Māori inhabitants of NZ. There is no legal basis for the idea; it is nonsense.

• Māori activists are delusional to believe the partnership concept, but it explains why they and politicians (Erica Stanford, Chris Luxon) think that NZ’s resources need to be shared out 50:50. MPs feel obliged to appease Māori activists.

• Note: In a partnership both partners are obliged to pay the costs of running the enterprise. Māori, if they were true partners , would pay half.

• MICHAEL LAWES IVESTIGATION: REGIONAL COUNCILS AND THE MĀORI PARTNERSHIP

• Councils give funds to local iwi because they believe the TOW mandates they are in a partnership. This is incorrect. These funds are not recorded in budgets or plans.

• Otago Regional Council gives funds to Ngai Tahu (a commercial entity). This council has paid $3.5. million for contracts plus $1.8 million for the last financial year. Exorbitant koha. No records exist.

• Michael is finding out what is happening in other councils.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

What’s So Very Wrong

With Tuku Morgan

Sep 2024

Tuku Morgan misunderstands Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill and considers that Government handed to Māori are ‘Māori achievements’.

QUIZ

1. Does the Treaty Principles Bill take away Māori rights, language, identity and right to selfdetermination?

2. Tuku thinks ‘ACT policy will homogenise us all into one culture.’ How likely is this to happen?

3. Why does Tuku want more Māori on the Māori Roll?

4. Is it fair to blame the Government for ‘Māori underachievement, poor health and poor prison statistics’?

5. Thomas Sowell said: ‘When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.’ How does this statement apply to the Māori reaction to the TP Bill?

• Tuku Morgan (T) shouts that Seymour wants to remove TOW and take away ‘our’ rights

• Apirana Ngata: Art 1 Māori ceded sovereignty

• 1840 Māori celebrated TOW

• T: Seymour is taking away our rights, language, identity and right to self-determination. Refers to Don Brash as a dog as he is alerting the public. Jim Bolger lit the fires of appeasement, Helen Clarke did not.

• T: ‘We can celebrate an ‘enduring partnership’ (which the TOW is not). Judge Cooke said TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’. It is oxymoronic to say the TOW is a partnership.

• T: TOW should be honoured. Chiefs know ‘Hobson’s’ word was his bond. Māori, not government, broke the TOW. (See Robinson, ‘Who Really Broke The Treaty?’, 2024.)

• T: Government is a wrecking ball as it has dismantled everything meaningful to Māori such as Tamariki Section 7AA, Māori Health Authority, Te Reo signage, Three Waters, (MACA) Seabed and Foreshore. [None of these changes exclude Māori participation.]

• T: ‘We thought there was honour in the Crown.’ ‘ACT policy will homogenise us all into one culture.’

• Fact: Seymour wants to: honour TOW, make people equal, have one standard of citizenship, treat all cultures equally and preserve democracy.

• T believes there are 1 million with Māori ancestry.

• Fact: Brainwashing in schools; e.g. history syllabus, comic Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

• T: ‘Government have thrown Māori under the bus, then run over them.

• T: ‘you’ve got to consult Māori. Iwi have to unite. Have to get more people on Māori Roll, so we can determine the nature of the next government. We want less government and more Māori control. We must settle grievances and move on. Ministries have done a poor job.’ T liked the Labour Government.

• T blames government for Māori underachievement, poor health and poor prison

statistics. Support and help has been rare and infrequent.’

• ‘When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.’ Thomas Sowell

• T: ‘This is a watershed moment for us. The government has a long way to go to restore faith and honour between the Crown and iwi. Twenty nine years ago we started the journey of recovery, 23% of the total land that was taken from Waikato, 1.2 million acres at the hand of a gun. [Lie] We’re a billion dollar corporation. We don’t need your money. We need you to listen to us because fighting for our people is serious business.’

• Summary: In his rant Tuku: catastrophises, plays the victim card (blames others), lied, spun, misinformed, uses guilt and shame, shouted, intimidated, asks for more funds, wants Māori to control parliament, wants more Māori on the electoral roll, believes Māori achievement will be controlling the country. In this speech T dishonours the TOW and the elders who signed, reinforces that Māori are victims and dependant on others which reinforces a culture of grievance.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Whats right and whats wrong with the Treaty

Principle’s Bill

Nov 2024

Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill originally reflected the Treaty closely. Luxon’s modifications reflect the WT approach to preserve the status quo.

Quiz

1. How well do Seymour’s original principles reflect the TOW?

2. Does the second revised sentence of Principle 2 give Māori special privileges?

3. Does the second revised sentence of Principle 2 set any boundaries on what privileges can be given to Māori?

4. Is there a contradiction between Principle 2 and Principle 3?

5. Does the revised Principle 2 support the original TOW or the post-1975 status quo?

BULLET POINTS

• David Seymour is calling the country back to the original intention and meaning of the Treaty. His original 3 principles:

o NZ Government has the right to govern all NZers;

o NZ Government will honour all New Zealanders in the chieftainship of their land and all their property;

o NZers are equal under the law with the same rights and duties.

• Seymour was forced by Luxon to change these. These are the Revised Principles:

• Principle 1: acknowledges that in 1840 the Maori chiefs ceded sovereignty to the British. All land, rivers, lakes, mountains etc i.e. common land was to be managed by the Government. (Ref: Hugh Barr) Māori owned land was protected until they sold it, as were pegged fishing sites. Māori sold 92% of their land

• Principle 2: The Crown respects and protects the rights that hapū and iwi had when they signed the Treaty.

• Principle 2, sentence 2 says “However; if those rights differ from the rights of everyone, sub-clause (1) applies only if those rights are agreed in the settlement of a historical treaty claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975."

• This does this mean that if the Waitangi Tribunal advises the government to grant Maori some special privilege the government can reject or accept it.

• Up until now, Maori have been able to claim many rights, "as of right”, via the Treaty. This Bill would end special Maori rights "as of right.”

• However, Māori can still be given special privileges and rights.

• Principle 3: "Everyone is equal before the law. Everyone is entitled, without discrimination, to (a) the equal protection and equal benefit of the law; and (b) the equal enjoyment of the same fundamentalhumanrights."

• This contradicts Principle 2 because Luxon wants to please everyone.

• The Bill contains contradictions and continues the status quo.

• Responses: make submissions; trigger a citizens’ initiated referendum.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymours Treaty Principle’s Bill. What the Hikoi Has to Tell Us.

29 Nov 2024

A hikoi against the Treaty Principles Bill ended outside Parliament. The reasons for the event are discussed.

QUIZ

1. What organisation organised the hikoi?

2. What appears to have been a hidden agenda for the hikoi?

3. How many people attended the hikoi?

4. Did people on the hikoi understand its purpose?

5. Who was the organiser of the Hikoi employed by?

BULLET POINTS

• Hikoi was organised as a Te Pati Māori fundraiser, by a man on the Parliamentary payroll who worked for Te Pati Māori.

• The hikoi purpose was to harvest more Māori onto the Māori Electoral Roll to increase Māori representation in Parliament. Currently most Māori are on the General Electoral Roll.

• MP Winston Peters said: It was more of a carpoi to make profits for an incorporated company. The organisers did not ask any MPs to speak at it. It was a stunt. Participants had various reasons to attend the hikoi.

• Independent reporter Sean Plunket of The Platform said: About 40,000 to 50,000 marchers attended. Most people were there under false pretences as they had been lied to about the Bill. Te Pati Māori had carefully crafted political theatre.

• NZ has been subject to serious radicalisation, including young school children.

• Labour is collaborating with Te Pati Māori.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymours Treaty Principle’s Bill. What’s So Very Wrong With Jack Tame and Jim Bolger?

2 Dec 2024

Jim Bolger gave away 90% of the South Island in 1998. Records show Māori sold most of the Island by 1864.

QUIZ NA

BULLET POINTS

• TVNZ Interview: Jack Tame & David Seymour

• Revealed that in the Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 Jim Bolger gave ‘chiefly authority’ [rangatiratanga] 90% of the South Island to Ngai Tahu.

• David Seymour said his Bill would not interfere with the settlement.

• Historical records show Ngai Tahu virtually all the South Island by 1864:

o Ōtākou Block sold for £2,400, 1844-64.

o Kemp Purchase (Otago, Canterbury, Westland) sold for £2,000.

o Port Cooper & Port Levi: £200 & £300.

o Murihiku (Southland): £2,600.

o Disputed Claim in Nelson area 1856: Sorted by Justice Sim in Breaches of the Treaty Royal Commission, Justice Sim.

o North Canterbury: £500.

o Kaikoura Coast: £300.

o West Coast: £300.

o Rakiura (Stewart Is): £6,000.

• Why did Jim Bolger give away 90% of the South Island in 1998 when it had been sold by 1864?

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymour’s Treaty Principle’s Bill. What’s So Very Wrong With Jack Tame?

5 Dec 2024

Jack Tame holds an activist understanding of the TOW and has been misleading New Zealanders.

QUIZ

1. What does Jack Tame ‘tinorangatiratanga’ means?

2. How are activists able to maintain that Rev. William Williams was a poor translator?

3. Did the British promise in the TOW to protect all New Zealand for Māori or just the land that Māōri occupied?

4. How much of New Zealand did Māori eventually sell?

5. Why was William Spain appointed Land Commissioner in 1840?

BULLET POINTS

• TVNZ Interview: Jack Tame & David Seymour

• Is Jack Tame deceiving or is he history ignorant?

• David says his Bill does not interfere with any previous claims.

• Tame thinks tino-rangatiratanga means ‘sovereignty’.

• The Final English Draft of the Treaty (4 Feb 1940), known as the Littlewood draft tells us the British intended tino-rangatiratanga to mean ‘possession’ or ‘ownership’.

• Activists use the rogue James Freeman Version which is very different to the Māori version. This allowed activists to say that Rev. William Williams was an incompetent translator, so activists use their ‘improved’ back translation.

• The Littlewood Draft Art 2 S1 says: ‘The Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property.’ So tino-rangatiratanga means ‘possession’. i.e. The British promised to protect Māori land with their house and chattels. This did not include all the land in NZ.

• Following 1840, Māori went on to sell 92% of their land (Ref: Mike Butler).

• Prior to the Treaty Māori had sold about 33% of the land to settlers. (Ref: H.H. Turton).

• Following the TOW William Spain was appointed Land Commissioner to investigate pre-1840 land sales. Some sales were disqualified. Some settlers lost money. Māori could sell a piece of land more than once.

• When land is sold sovereignty is transferred from the seller to the buyer.

• How could Bolger give sovereignty of 90% of the South Island to Ngai Tahu? Is Tame being ignorant or deceitful?

• Why did Seymour not pick Tame up? Seymour is history ignorant as are all MPs. Tame holds an activist understanding of the TOW so has been misleading New Zealanders.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

David Seymour’s Treaty Principle’s Bill. What’s So Very Wrong With Jack Tame? (Part Two)

10 Dec 2024

David Seymour is Treaty ignorant. Jack Tame is an activist and has been misleading New Zealanders re the TWO. Māori reversalists have visited Cuban communists and activists overseas. Luxon goes with the Māori flow.

QUIZ QUESTIONS

1. Why is the TOW an agreement and not a contract?

2. Name two proofs that Māori ceded sovereignty in the TOW.

3. Which Article of the TOW makes Māori British Citizens?

4. What is a Māori reversalist?

5. What strategies have Māori reversalists used to accomplish the takeover of NZ?

BULLET POINTS

• TVNZ Interview Sat 23 Nov: Jack Tame & David Seymour

• David confuses the Treaty with a contract.

• Jack thinks TOW was a binding agreement between the Crown and iwi. [It was an agreement between ‘Queen Victoria’ (not a Crown corporation) and the chiefs and tribes and ‘all the people of New Zealand’.]

• Māori ceded sovereignty i.e. gave up complete power to govern to the British, so Jack’s premise is false.

• Government has every right to interpret the Treaty because of Article 1. Citizens can vote & protest if they object.

• Sir Apirana Ngata said the Treaty ‘made one law for the Māori and Pākehā. If you think these things are wrong and bad then blame our ancestors who gave away their rights in the days when they were powerful.’

• Is Jack Tame history ignorant or is he trying to mislead?

• Māori did cede sovereignty. (See 10 proofs.) Ref: Bain Attwood ‘incontrovertible that all of NZ & all persons lay within the power of the crown.’

• Art. 3. Māori were made British citizens. They were made equal before the law. If Māori are given privileges that breaks Art. 3.

• Muriel Newman: In 1979 Māori reversalists visited Cuba & collaborated with the Palestine Liberation Front about how to take over NZ.2 Ripeka Evans, Deputy Chair TVNZ was on the Cuban Trip.

• Māori reversalists used (1) biculturalism to prioritise Māori language & culture in institutions & (2) embed activists in government service. Reversalists pushed ‘partnership’ and ‘co-governance’.

• Luxon will not confront breaches of TOW. He is TOW ignorant, history ignorant, afraid of Māori and pushes Māorification and co-governance.

• Government needs to set up a Settler tribunal.

2 Muriel Newman, Capturing a Country, nzcpr.com, 1 Dec 2024.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Reverse The MACA. Are you Aware?

We are about to lose our beaches

11 Dec 2024

The Rogue James Freeman Version of TOW was used in the 1975 Act and allows Māori to take over the coasts.

QUIZ

1. What is the difference in Māori fishing rights between the Freeman and Busby versions of TOW?

2. Which Treaty version was incorporated into the 1975 Waitangi Tribunal Act?

3. Which politician blocked Māori having customary fishing rights in 2004?

4. Which politicians allowed Māori fishing rights?

5. What are some of the disadvantages for non-Māori NZers when Māori own large sections of the coast.

BULLET POINTS

• Rogue James Freeman Version (RJFV) of TOW: ‘Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand and to the respective families and individuals thereof the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession …’

• The James Busby English Version (JBEV) says: ‘The Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and tribes and to all the people of New Zealand the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their properly.’ i.e. coastline belongs to all NZers. Same in Māori version. No beaches.

• 1975 the RJFV was inserted into the Waitangi Tribunal Act.

• 2004 Māori wanted customary fishing rights, but Helen Clark refused.

• History ignorant MPs Chris Finlayson, John Key & Turiana Turia allowed fishing rights as long as they were continuous and exclusive.

• This was thought to only apply to <10% of the coast but activist judges used a low bar and there were 100s of claims.

• Tribal coastline owners can issue fines up to $5000 to trespassers, lease coast to mining interests, block resource consent etc.

• E.g. Meridian paid South Island iwi $180 million for hydro resource consent.

• Each claimant can be given up to $458,000 to file a claim in court. We are paying for Māori to take over coast.

• ACTION: Inform MPs that tikanga must be outlawed and that we must return to the 2004 Act.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Co-governance

Video Made In 2002 about What was Coming To New Zealand in 2023

2002

A fictional but predictive vision from 2002 of New Zealand in 2050.

• Audio refers to a failed referendum re a separate Māori parliament and 0.5 million in a street protest, Māori will make billions over fisheries etc., firebomb etc. Tribal land becomes exclusive zones.

• 2050: NZ a republic of Aotearoa. Maori have absolute sovereignty. One upper house, two houses of representatives Māori & Pākehā. Māori have separate Health, Welfare, Education & Justice services with separate tax systems.

• Population is 20% Maori, 30% Polynesian, & 50% Asian & Pākehā.

• Famiies are mixed race & bilingual.

• Māori have self-determination (tinorangatiratanga).

• Tribes would further subdivide the country into tribal controlled areas and control tourist movement with fees.

• 2050 Māori only 20% population.

• If farmer’s land is threatened they will take up land as in Zimbabwe.

• Māori need access to money and resources.

• Fishing will involve fees, catch confiscation..

• Two or three systems would involve more bureaucracy and cost more.

• Could be intertribal rugby competitions. [A combination of tribal and colonial culture.]

• National anthem [actually a hymn] sung in Te Reo.

• Bilingual Nation. [Tribal languages are very limited.] Māori companies will be bilingual.

• Pacific Island attack on iwi headquarters.NZ is multicultural.

• Positive discrimination. Māori will have no university fees. Education will be can be on a race basis.

• Privileging a group based race is dangerous.

• Regional revitalisation due to local Māori input.

• Separatism will help improve the status of Māori.

• Māori think that poor health statistics etc have been inflicted on them.

• Need to act now to prevent conflict.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Letter of The Maoris to King Charles. What is it really all about?

17 Dec 2024

Māori activists have a sent a letter to King Charles. He has no power to act. Eight complaints are all assertions without any evidence and all are easy to rebut.

QUIZ

1. What power does King Charles have to intervene in NZ political affairs?

2. Why is it better for the Government to define Treaty principles rather than the courts and WT?

3. Where in the TOW are Māori given exclusive rights to NZ’s mineral and energy resources?

4. Do the revised principles reduce Māori access to political positions?

5. What facts does the letter quote to justify the assertions?

BULLET POINTS

• King Charles III is only a ceremonial head of NZ; same for governor-general.

• Aim of the letter is to shame and embarrass the Government. Like children telling tales.

• Luxon will react by appeasing activists.

• COMPLAINTS:

1. Government is attacking Māori rights in the TOW. Māori have no special rights in the TOW [apart from being able to sell land to the Govt]. Activists want a dual government which is treason.

2. Govt is redefining the TOW principles. These have neve been defined by government but need to be. Current principles from courts and WT do not reflect the TOW.

3. Careless mining of land and seabed. Māori play at conservation but the historic record shows 35 species when extinct prior to Europeans arrived.

4. Denial of property and resource rights minerals, geothermal and water. TOW protected what Māori owned in 1840. TOW does not give Māori rights to all resources.

5. Government has power to take abused children from families. 88% of children in state care are Māori. Māori are twice as likely to be abused in Māori homes. Māori children were put in state care because of child abuse.

6. Changes will make it more difficult for Māori to enter professions. 30% of admissions to Medical School are reserved for Māori & Pasifika students.

7. Government is preventing Te Reo use. There is no law against Te Reo. It is being used to groom non-Māori to accept Māori take over.

8. Reducing Māori access to local/central Government. Not true. Māori want the pay & say without the effort of getting elected.

• SUMMARY: No facts, just assertions & opinions in the letter. Luxon will appease Māori as a result.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Our New Zealand Nurses. How They Are Being Targeted For Indoctrination

19 Dec 2024

Updated Registered Nurse Standards of Competence (RNSC) critiques by American scientist Jerry Coyne. QUIZ

1. What is meant by ‘cultural safety’?

2. What ‘power imbalances’ exist in the NZ health system that might affect Māori?

3. Does the insertion of Māori terms within the English text (called Manglish) improve communication?

4. Do the terms ‘hospitality’ and ‘respect’ have different meanings in Pāakehā and Māori culture?

5. What is the long term reason behind introducing Māori concepts into Western Medicine?

BULLET POINTS

• USA Biologist JERRY COYNE: “The latest from the asylum”: New Zealand nurses directed to foster, accept, and prioritize indigenous culture, including specious “ways of healing”

• Registered Nurse Standards of Competence (RNSC). Updated.

• This has come from a mental asylum as Māori are a minority will sow seeds of apartheid.

• Requires nurses to demonstrate kawa whakaruruhau (Māori cultural safety) by addressing power imbalances in healthcare Nurses have to work towards equitable health outcomes for Māori

• Māori have access to the same health care so there are no power imbalances. Māori health outcomes depend on lifestyle as well.

• Nurses ‘must also recognise the importance of whanaungatanga (building relationships) and manaakitanga (hospitality and respect) in fostering collective wellbeing.’ Nurses have always done this. Māori terms are used for control. Pre1840 Māori controlled slaves.

• Nurses must incorporating cultural, spiritual, physical, and mental health into whakapapacentred care (focused on family and ancestors). This recruits nurses into Māori religion with prayers and chants. Ancestral connections with the dead is very tribal.

• Nurses need to ‘describe the impact of colonisation and social determinants on health and wellbeing.’ A Very negative approach.

• None of this is mandated in TOW.

• Nurses must say no because this is: indoctrination in Māori religion, brainwashing, about control and domination, being told what to think, threatening to job security, making nurses responsible for health outcomes.

• This is another step in the long march to put Māori in full control of NZ by 2040.

• Luxon is an activist and refuses to stop this.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

4 Reasons Why Maori Think They Deserve Special Rights

29 Dec 2024

Māori incorrectly believe: they are indigenous, did not cede sovereignty, are in a partnership and that the Treaty mandates partnership.

QUIZ:

1. What does the acronym SIPP mean?

2. What evidence do we have that Māori were colonists and are not indigenous to NZ?

3. What proofs exist that Māori ceded sovereignty in the TOW?

4. Why do Māori activists believe that the TOW was a partnership?

5. Why did David Lange say that ‘Queen Victoria was not that sort of person’?

POINTS

• Tuku Morgan think Māori, among 160 cultures within NZ, have special rights.

• The ‘special rights’ delusion has 4 foundational beliefs:

1. INDIGENUITY:

• Māori activists believe they are indigenous. i.e. ‘inhabiting or existing in a land from earliest times’. They are not indigenous.

• Activists have corrupted the meaning of the word by adding ‘or from before the arrival of colonists’. [Māori came from other Paciifc Islands & are themselves colonists.] Ref: John Aldworth: Evidence of an earlier culture living in New Zealand

2. DID NOT CEDE SOVEREIGNTY IN TOW

• Māori chiefs did cede sovereignty. (Art.1) See: 12 Proofs that Māori ceded Sovereignty

• In TOW Māori handed over to the British the right to manage & govern NZ’s resources.

• The government agreed to protect Māori ‘land, dwellings and property’. (Art. 2)

• Māori activists say that: they have the right to govern NZ, that NZ was stolen, the resources belong to Māori and they want NZ back.

3. TOW IS A PARTNERSHIP

• Not true, but Luxon believes this. Justice Cooke in 1987 said the TOW was ‘akin to a partnership’. Judge Anthony Willy has checked the 77 page document as says that the partnership concept is invalid.

• A partnership concept conflicts with Art 1.

4. TOW MANDATES SPECIAL RIGHTS FOR MĀORI

• In 1840 ‘tino rangitiratanga’ meant ‘possession’. After TOW all Māori, including slaves, could own possessions. (Art2.)

• Hugh Kawharu mistranslated it as ‘unqualified exercise of chieftainship’ in 1989.

• Activists believe Māori own the resources and land of NZ and want them back and that they have the right to be chiefs over all of NZ.

• David Lange said you can either have a democratic government or indigenous sovereignty but not both.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Great Lie Maori Activists

Use To Try And Fool

The Public

2 Jan 2025

Two Māori activists state the Great Lie which attempts to back up the Māori did not cede sovereignty argument. Ten facts are discussed disproving the Great Lie hypothesis. QUIZ

1. What is the Great Lie?

2. Why do Māori activists put so much emphasis on the Great Lie?

3. What characteristics of British Culture appealed to Māori?

4. What do Māori activists believe life was like for Māori prior to the TOW?

5. What British technology prior to the TOW did Māori Chiefs value highest?

BULLET POINTS

• The Great Lie: It was illogical for 100,000 Māori to give up NZ in 1840 to 2,000 settlers from the other side of the world and did not speak their language. i.e. Māori did not cede sovereignty.

• VIDEO: Two Māori activists state the Great Lie: Hemut Modik, and Margaret Mutu.

• Activists believe Māori in 1840 were united, had their own government and were peaceful and flourishing as a nation. The British interrupted the idyllic lifestyle. If this were true, ceding sovereignty would obviously seem ridiculous

• FACTS: Māori chiefs wanted the British to take over because Māori wanted:

1. British power and they recognised King William as a great chief. They had witnessed British ships and technologies.

2. Trade with the British. More settlers meant more trade.

3. British technology & goods. Māori valued sheep, cattle, horses, iron tools, medical equipment, clothing & textiles, ploughs, wheels, muskets etc

4. A pathway from poverty. Aligning with Britain could raise Māori to a better lifestyle without warfare.

5. Christianity was better than tikanga (revenge & plunder). The church could improve literacy, health & sanitary practice.

6. British Law and Justice to replace violent tikanga.

7. Protection from the French following the Du Fresne incident.

8. Protection from the Portuguese, Spanish and Americans looking for new colonies.

9. Preservation of their land from invading tribes. The TOW meant the Government could protect all land ownership and maintain British civil law.

10. To end self-annihilation. About 50,000 Māori were killed by Māori in the Musket Wars.

• Eight of these FACTS occur in the 1831 letter to King William from 13 Nga Puhi chiefs.

• Activists who say ceding sovereignty is illogical show ignorance of Māori and British history before 1840 or are intentionally lying. READ: ‘What is the solution for Māori’.

How Equity For Maori Is Causing Apartheid, Racism, And Racial Division

4 Jan 2025

Discussion about equality and equity within the NZ Health Ministry prompted by a Waikato Heath Authority Office notice to Māori patients.

QUIZ

1. What is the difference between equity and equality?

2. What factors, other than racism, can affect how successful people are in life?

3. Other than genetics, what is the major factor affecting people’s health?

4. What is an argument against racism being the cause of Māori in remote parts having poorer health care?

5. Why is equity the thief of human potential?

• Waikato Heath Authority Office notice favours Māori patients over other ethnicities.

• Māori are not the victims in the NZ health system; Non-Māori are.

• Equity means equality of outcome. Equality means equal opportunity.

• If person A is lazy they tend to have a bad outcome, while a hardworking person B tends to have a better outcome in life.

• According to Critical Race Theory (CRT) different outcomes in life are due to racism.

• A poor lifestyle tends to result in poor health outcomes, while activists say the bad results are due to injustice and colonialism (i.e. CRT).

• The call for equity cuts out competition and promotes victim mentality which is cruel.

• According to CRT lack of equity is when people do not achieve the same desirable outcomes.

• Māori can achieve the same standard of health care as anyone else.

• All people who live in remote areas have more difficulty accessing health care, not just Māori. No racism is involved. [All rural people can apply for travel assistance.]

• USA philosopher Thomas Sowell said: ‘Equity is the thief of human potential.’ People are told society is fixed, so why try to improve.

• Medical School entry reserves 30% for Māori & Pasifika. Non-Māori are thus limited.

• Māori corporation pay less tax, so other taxpayers pay for Māori privilege.

• Equality means a level playng field for all.

• Luxon & Peters agreed to eliminate different rights for different ethnicities but have not followed through.

• Health Minister Shane Reti has lost control.

• Dr Laurie Knight believes life style has a major effect on Māori health, rather than colonisation.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Very Dark Side of Maori Calls For Equity

7 Jan 2025

The advantages of equality of opportunity and disadvantages of equity are explained across Māori and nonMāori cultures.

Quiz

1. What is the difference between equality and equity?

2. Where in the TOW is ‘equity’ mandated?

3. What are the disadvantages of ‘equity’?

4. Why do activist Māori push the communist concept of ‘equity’.

5. TOW Art. 3 says ‘all people’… ‘are granted the rights and privileges of British subjects’. Is this a statement about equity or equality?

BULLET POINTS

• This image is used in an activist video:

It shows three boys sneaking a look at the game.

• Activist asserts: government has been undermining Māori since European arrival. Also asserts ‘equality is bad and the TOW mandates equity’.

• Kiwis are kind and will help those who need a hand up. i.e. a rich person must give to a poor person.

• Equality: equality of opportunity. In the image all people have opportunity of going to see the game. It is democratic.

• Equity: equality of outcome. The short boy is given a short box so he can see as well as the others.

• Activists say equity is good i.e. perks must be given to Māori.

• Equity: justifies separation & apartheid, destroys talent & ability, results in victim mentality.

• Activists say equality is bad because not all receive the same beneficial outcome.

• Equality is in the TOW, while equity is not.

• Equity is a communist ideal, where no one owns property.

• TOW Art. 3 says ‘all people’… are granted the rights and privileges of British subjects.

• VIDEO: Māori opposing Seymour’s treaty Principles Bill; Mike Peno says there needs to be one law for all.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

The Treaty principles Submissions. How we’ve all been stitched up.

13 Jan 2025

The process of collection submissions for Treaty Principles Bill appears to have been corrupt. There is a suspicion that this was planned so submissions would favour rejecting the Bill.

QUIZ:

1. What is a ‘real person’ verification?

2. How could a person using multiple email addresses subvert the submission process?

3. What is a bot and what could it do to the submission process?*

4. What methods could have been used to ensure the submission process was fair?

5. In the case of this Bill, to whose advantage would it likely be to have a biased submission process?

BULLET POINTS

• 300,000+ submissions caused the Parliamentary computer system crashed on the last day. The deadline was extended to a week later.

• It was relatively easy for a person to make multiple submissions.

• Alias email addresses are easy to make.

• There was no ‘real person’ verification, thus bots could make submissions. Rik Roberts: There is a high chance that many submissions were from bots which could have overloaded the parliamentary website.

• Recommendations: Submission

• Could have been restricted to those on the electoral roll.

• Could have been verified by river’s licence or passport.

• Names should not have been published as this precluded those who feared losing their job by submitting, e.g. doctors.

• It appears that the submission process was engineered against the Bill.

• Debbie Ngarewa-Packer (MP), pushed Māori submissions against the Bill.

• Māori health organised 20,000 submissions.

• The select committee will publish numbers for and against: if ‘against’ wins, Luxon will be happy to have Māori on his side, if ‘for’ wins, Luxon will have non-Māori on his side.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS

Why the Treaty Principles Select Committee Process was engineered to Favour Luxon (Part2)

AKA Jordan Peterson. How New Zealand Is Headed For Civil War

15 Jan 2025

Peterson says identity politics leads to tribalism which leads to separatism and violence. A shared identity leads to democracy. Luxon favouring ‘a partnership’ is pushing NZ towards civil war.

QUIZ

1. What does Peterson believe is endangering western civilisation?

2. What is needed for a people to have peace?

3. In a word, what does Luxon think is the nature of the relationship in the TOW?

4. Give some examples of how the government is pushing separatism and therefore tribalism?

5. What positive government democratic action could possibly avoid civil war?

BULLET POINTS

• Submission has sparked discussion on the TOW & how a referendum is needed.

• The longer this is delayed the more separatism and tribalism develops so we inch towards civil war.

• Jordan Peterson: identity politics is endangering civilisation in the west.

• Māori demanding self-determination, autonomy and self-government is identity politics.

• Regression from democracy to tribalism inevitably results in violence.

• Peace results from a people having a shared identity.

• Prior to 1840 Māori were divided into tribes of diminishing size resulting in continuous warfare.

• Civil war is certain. NZ is in crisis.

• Luxon and National thinks the TOW is a partnership which fuels tribalism leading to civil war.

• Luxon: TOW made a relationship between Crown [actually Queen Victoria, not a corporate entity] and iwi. It was a partnership [incorrect] with obligations. Challenge is good.

• Anthony Willy: TOW is not a partnership.

• Luxon is strengthening tribalism e.g. $800 million to Māori in last budget.

• Hamilton Health Centre, fishing areas, Māori wards, Māori seats. Waitangi Tribunal, all feed the movement towards civil war.

• Alternative to tribalism is a shared identity, or democracy. Seymour’s Bill does this.

• Need to hold a referendum where the words have been decided by Seymour.

• Cards, booklets, brochures, bumper stickers are available from stopcogovernance.kiwi

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Three Reasons

Why David Seymour Has Not Caved In AKA

What Seymour And Jordan Peterson Have In Common

18 Jan 2025

Seymour’s determined stance on his Bill is admirable. He understands who opposes him, including Luxon. An activist submitting to the parliamentary committee exposes several tactics typical of tribalism as outlined by Peterson and in the booklet 19

Strategies Māori Activists are Using.

QUIZ

1. What are the two groups of people opposing Seymour’s Bill?

2. Why should voters admire Seymour’s stance in the face of opposition?

3. Why is the presence of the Māori Sovereignty flag an example pf the ‘Camel in the tent’ strategy?

4. What strategies did the submitter use to increase her power status?

5. What firm evidence is there that National is losing voter support?

• VIDEO: David Seymour being interviewed.

• David Seymour should be admired because he:

o Refuses to be intimidated.

o Knows the true meaning of the TOW.

o Knows that the meaning of the TOW has been manipulated and become a religious cause pushed by a small group of activists.

• Those who oppose the Bill are:

o Activist Māori

o Pākehā who begin their communications to David ‘As a Pākehā …’. These [woke] people see the Māori activist cause as a religious one & believe belonging to group is more important than the truth.

• The National government is supporting the Māori activist cause.

• VIDEO: Māori Woman making a submission.

• Breaks Parliamentary submission rules. She has a Māori flag emblem on her hat and jacket. i.e. has no respect for authority, treasonous. Refers to Crimes Act 1961 concerning ‘obtaining by deception’ (irony?). Distracted with humour. Member of Committee raise point that she is not under Parliamentary privilege and could be sued for allegations she made. Submitter argues that she needs more time, but has wasted much. (Māori Sovereignty flag in the background in Parliament! An e.g. of ‘Camel in the Tent’ from 19 Strategies Māori Activists are Using to Take Over the Country [SCG Booklet].) Submitter ‘I love you all ‘ at the end. Submitter uses bullying & manipulation techniques.

• Jordan Peterson says these techniques exhibit tribalism.

• National supports Māori activism. Letter a once national supporter says he is shifting to ACT next election. ‘Relook at your stance’ on the Bill.

• Taxpayers Union says National is tanking in the polls. [Polls show 2/3s National, 2/3s ACT, 2/3s NZ First and 2/3s Labour voters support the Bill.]

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Why Wanganui Is In Big Trouble And Why Your Town Could Be Next

25 Jan 2025

Bell Curve of awareness of NZers of cogovernance. Why Māori Wards in Wanganui is undemocratic.

QUIZ

1. What percentage of New Zealanders are oblivious to the Māori takeover of NZ?

2. Which politician made Māori Wards compulsory for councils, bypassing the need for referenda?

3. Why is having Māori Wards undemocratic and unfair to nonMāori council candidates?

4. Why is the general population upset about the way Luxon, Goldsmith and Potaka are handling the Wanganui Council situation.

5. Why does the outlook for National in the 2026 election appear bleak?

• A bell curve describes the percentages of NZers who are: unconvertable, converted, on the way to being converted, on the way to being radicalised, 60% oblivious to the Māori takeover.

• A Māori Ward represents Māori (Māori Electoral Roll) on a local council. Set up by Helen Clarke in 2002. Needed a referendum to initiate. Only 3 /24 councils established them.

• 2020 Manaia Mahuta forced councils to have a Māori Ward. Māori Wards need fewer votes than main electoral roll councillors.

• They are not in the TOW. Māori privilege annoys non-Māori. Why are they needed?

• Simeon Brown reintroduced the idea of a referendum, but National have reversed this.

• Māori settlements are continuing out of sight. Currently Potaka says 10,000 settlement claims are still outstanding.

• One settlement is with Wanganui Māori and is organised in secret by the duplicitous Luxon, Goldsmith and Potaka.

• When asked repeatedly when Māori ceded sovereignty Potaka refused to answer! In Parliament Luxon had to admit Māori ceded sovereignty.

• National are deceitful and non-transparent. They did not campaign on co-governance and Māorification.

• Luxon will please no one and be voted out

• Wanganui Group chairman, Ken Mair, thinks the British stole Māori land.

• The Wanganui deal uses the deceitful ‘Camel in the Tent’ strategy. This strategy was used in the 1975 TOW Act which allowed claims from 1975. After 9 claims were registered in 1984, the Act was amended to allow claims back to 1840 and 2034 claims appeared.

• Prediction is that all positions on the Wanganui Council will be Māori. Mayor Tripe, a disgrace and ‘woke’, has been set up by Luxon, Goldsmith and Potaka.

• The Māori activists have created a monster with tentacles in all NZ institutions.

• HE PUA PUA REPORT: (Breaking the political and societal norms.) Written in secret. Exposed in 2021. This says ‘no’ to one government, ‘no’ to property rights, ‘no’ to equality. Māori believe all land was stolen. They sold 92%. Māori can place Wahi Tūpuna on any land (R.M.A.). This was allowed by Māori-loving bureaucrats and MPs out of touch with reality. Proposes a separate Māori parliament and a Māori veto on all legislation. Power must go to Māori by 2040.

• MAITIKI AOTEAROA: Māori want 3/4 power. This is a coup. This explains why Māori activists are upset by the TP Bill. Their response to the Bill lacks clarity and is irrational.

• Māori activist oral submissions lack reason and rationality. If the gravy train ends then there is no money for a coup. This explains why they are against three basic rights. Since 1975 politicians have not realised what Māori are actually doing.

VIDEO NAME SYNOPSIS BULLET POINTS

Now We Know The Real Reason Maori Oppose Seymour’s Bill (Part 2)

1 Feb 2025

Māori oppose the Bill because they want to be the Government, want loose property rights and special treatment to continue.

QUIZ

1. By what year do Māori activists want to take over NZ? Why that year?

2. Seymour says ‘the Government has the right to govern’ but activists object. Why?

3. The Office of Treaty Settlements engages in ‘land banking’. Explain the significance of this?

4. What do the acronyms RMA and SASM mean?

5. How many grievance claims are still in the pipeline according to Potaka?

Each Principle from Seymour’s Bill is discussed. PRINCIPLE 1. The government has the right to govern.

• Māori activists want to take over the government of the country by 2040.

• Evidence for this: He Pua Pua and Matiki Mai

• The Matiki Mai website has a countdown clock.

• Māori want to be the government. ‘We will keep marching until we get our sovereignty’.

PRINCIPLE 2. The government will honour all New Zealanders and the chieftainship of their land and their property.

• Māori do not want land rights to be tightened. They want land and assets to continue to flow to them.

• While they claim land was taken from them, 92% of it was sold legitimately by the chiefs.

• Through the Regional Management Act 1991 Māori can claim rights to any land by declaring it Wahi Tūpuna.

• Through Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori (SASM) can be claimed by Māori. The Gore area was recently declared an SASM. (Ref: Groundswell)

• Government buys up land, holds it (land banking) until it can be used in a later settlement. Ditto for surplus land.

• Grievance settlements allow government to transfer assets and land to Māori.

• Office of Treaty Settlements buys the land.

• WT (Waitangi Tribunal) contrive grievances and history ignorant politicians take advice of activist bureaucrats to sign off settlements.

• MPs are oblivious or complicit e.g. Luxon, Potaka and Goldsmith should be in charge.

• Problem is huge. Crown portfolio has over 10,000 claims in the pipeline.

• Settlements are not really settlements at all because they continue into the future.

• Michael Bassett says: Radical Māori have gotten away with murder over the last 2o years they have made up what the WT is supposed to do, even though it is clearly explained in law.