National’s use of the dog whistle and its hatred of UN conventions

Written By: - Date published: 9:22 am, May 10th, 2021 - 52 comments
Categories: International, Judith Collins, national, racism, same old national, treaty settlements, United Nations - Tags:

Who would be leader of the opposition?

It is quite a unique position in New Zealand politics.

You are handed a bull horn.  Comments are sought from you daily about all sorts of positions and the media convention is that agreement with the proposal will get you nowhere.  You have to have an opposition statement ready.  Otherwise you are not newsworthy.

And after an election spanking you have to repair your party and talk to the base.

Whether Wellington likes it or not it is the rank and file members of a party that hold it together.  Without them the party will fade into irrelevancy.

And so there is a tendency for parties to talk to their base and respect their views early on in the election cycle.

For the Labour Party this is fine.  Our base is interested in solving child poverty, doing something about climate change, creating a better, more inclusive education system, and redressing attacks on the Trade Union movement that have contributed so significantly to poverty.

For National different issues arise.  They do not like ethnic diversity, they have always thought the Treaty of Waitangi was a hindrance to good farming practices and they have a hatred of the United Nations.

Their MPs buy into this quite often.

There was a startling example two years ago when National set up a petition against the UN Global Compact on Migration.

Three months later the Christchurch Mosque massacre happened.  One of the motivations for the killer was an intense hatred of migrants.  Shortly after it happened an emotional junior staffer took the petition down.  Clearly he had a conscience.  But National tried to manufacture a false narrative that it had already taken the petition down but to their embarrassment this was quickly disproven.

And more recently Judith Collins has used the bull horn of the opposition leader’s office to amplify a well honed dog whistle.  There was her effort a week ago to try and claim that te Tiriti o Waitangi was nothing more than a restatement of National’s pro business principles.

Yesterday she responded to trenchant criticism by repeating the same racist trype.  Judith really believes in giving back double.

Her speech to the Lower North Island Regional Conference contained these gems all apparently because of the He Puapua report:

  • “The Government plans to give the separate Māori Health Authority the power of veto over the national health system.”
  • “The Government’s freshwater reforms have embedded Te Mana o te Wai as a ‘fundamental concept’.”
  • “The Government is consulting on a New Zealand history curriculum for students aged five to 15. The proposed curriculum is shaped around the study of the consequences of colonisation and the effects of power.”
  • “The Government has, without consultation and against official advice, passed a law allowing councils to urgently create Māori wards for the 2022 local government elections.”
  • “The Prime Minister and David Parker met with five iwi organisations and the Labour Māori Caucus in December, and at this meeting a commitment was made for the Government to work with iwi on freshwater and resource management reform.”
  • “The Waitangi Tribunal has, in just in the past few weeks, made a decision that we must have a separate child welfare service for Māori in order to comply with Article 2 of the Treaty. Kelvin Davis is now considering this.”
  • “The Department of Conservation is currently undertaking a review of how it can give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. DOC is having hui with iwi on draft recommendations.”

What is this He Puapua report?

It is a report setting out a panel’s view of what is required to implement the UN convention on the Rights of Indigenous People.

When did New Zealand sign up to this clearly communist inspired takeover of the Western world?

April 2010.

This is where it gets really interesting.  The fifth Labour Government did not want to sign the treaty.  In 2007 then Minister of Maori Affairs Parekura Horomia said this:

There are four provisions we have problems with, which make the declaration fundamentally incompatible with New Zealand’s constitutional and legal arrangements.” Article 26 in particular, he said, “appears to require recognition of rights to lands now lawfully owned by other citizens, both indigenous and non-indigenous. This ignores contemporary reality and would be impossible to implement.”

But National reversed the decision and supported the convention.  At the UN Maori Party leader and part of Government Pita Sharples said this:

New Zealand’s support for the Declaration represents an opportunity to acknowledge and restate the special cultural and historical position of Maori as the original inhabitants – the tangata whenua – of New Zealand. It reflects our continuing endeavours to work together to find solutions and underlines the importance of the relationship between Maori and the Crown under the Treaty of Waitangi. Its affirmation of longstanding rights supports and safeguards that ongoing relationship and its proclamation of new aspirations gives us all encouragement and inspiration for the future.

I sense a pattern here.  In 2016 National agreed to the precursor of the UN Global Compact on Migration.  Then when it saw a political opportunity to engage in racist grandstanding it did so.  The same with the He Puapua report.  Except even more strongly so.

The bull horn of the opposition leader’s office should be used carefully and respectfully.  Judith shows no inclination of doing either.

52 comments on “National’s use of the dog whistle and its hatred of UN conventions ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Foreign Waka 1
    10 May 2021 at 9:30 am

    There is obviously something to hide otherwise we would have been told about this report. To implement anything in a democracy, you need to put this to the wider public. The more open and transparent….The UN has not got a mandate to interfere into NZ. Did they interfere into the question of Chinas Muslim community? no. You could get the same answer in many instances. So perhaps its time to have an honest discussion. I don’t think there is a hatred of the UN convention but there is certainly some clandestine going on’s that never make good reading if you use transparency on your banner. We all just heard about his because Judith Collins made it public.

    • WeTheBleeple 1.1
      10 May 2021 at 9:46 am

      I've had since 2007 to read UNDRIP I'd hardly call it a bolt from the blue, or stealth, or a surprise. NZ signed up in 2010. Twelve years to read a report.

      Plenty of angry ACTers in the social media landscape today. Apparently they're all being undermined by socialist agendas. Apparently National are commies too.

      Perhaps next time a heads up of fifty years, give them a chance to polish their reading glasses and sharpen their pitchforks.

      • Tricledrown 1.1.1
        10 May 2021 at 12:16 pm

        ACT could have vetoed National in 2010.

        Trumpism is Nationals desperate attempts to gain traction in the poles.

        Quoting Collins on Simon Bridges and Michael Woodhouse's covid lies."why keep digging yourself into hole.

        Looks like Collins can't help herself.

    • lprent 1.2
      10 May 2021 at 9:56 am

      We all just heard about his because Judith Collins made it public

      I guess you have been living under a rock with the other arthropods since 2007.

      Bigots- just as stupid in their myth-making as ever

      • alwyn 1.2.1
        10 May 2021 at 10:17 am

        When did you first see the Te Puapua report?

        It appears to have been produced, and provided to the Government, in 2019. I first saw it just recently when it was released under OIA requirements. Were you on the inside and got shown it back around 2019? Given the implications of the proposals shouldn't the rest of us have also been told about it then?

        • David 1.2.1.1
          10 May 2021 at 10:24 am

          I think that’s the most remarkable thing. This report has secretly been sitting with the government for nearly two years. Meanwhile a growing list of recommendations in the report are finding their way into Government policy with absolutely zero public consultation. Why?

      • RedLogix 1.2.2
        10 May 2021 at 10:22 am

        It would help if you drew a distinction between signing onto the broad principles of a UN Convention and this Cabinet Document purporting to give it detailed effect. While obviously related, they do seem to be two different things.

      • Foreign Waka 1.2.3
        10 May 2021 at 10:24 am

        lprent – I was just waiting for that response. Yes, we all read policy papers all day long because we have nothing else to do, especially to those papers not really available to the ordinary folk. Unless your profession demands this of you, the paper is actual news to MOST NZlanders. But hey, not important. The unwashed do not need any explanations. We just work like there is no tomorrow to make ends meet and follow the leader without any questions.

        As for calling people bigots, I think you don't know me and hence I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Suffice to say using offensive language does not justify a stance that does not let any room for discussions. Democracy does not work like that, where you just shut people up by calling them a name. Have a good day.

        • WeTheBleeple 1.2.3.1
          10 May 2021 at 10:41 am

          15 years is still long enough for hard working souls, concerned about all this 'sudden and unexpected' commitment to historical commitments, to read a document.

          Now we have a new document, looking at local scenarios under the umbrella of UNDRIP. This will take some time to be read and understood. Unlike the dog-whistling, which took no time at all.

          Seems some people don't want to read, they just want to shout at things.

          • Foreign Waka 1.2.3.1.1
            10 May 2021 at 10:57 am

            So the wider public knows more than that paper that sits with government since 2 years, never to be discussed or made public. And rest assured, there are plenty of people on the right, left, middle etc. who feel railroaded and blindsided. No one has voted the last time to sign off anything. But hey, lets have this play out. Shall we.

            And by the way, my leaning is left at any time. But shenanigans like that will make me a protest voter.

            • WeTheBleeple 1.2.3.1.1.1
              10 May 2021 at 12:43 pm

              RL has a good point above (1.2.2). I don't know that this has all been so secret squirrel as you try to make it out to be. Sure, we could all do with reading both documents now so much shit is being talked about this. If there is scumfuckery bring it to light.

              What is new that we haven't signed up for? What is signed up on?

              I don't see people feeling blindsided in social media, except certain pages that have always been a bit rabid. They go from 0-10 in a sound bite because that and being beaten with a switch are the only things that get them hard.

              My friends are talking about the comedy festival, their breakfasts, their Mothers day. Only in no-facts land is the sky indeed falling.

        • mickysavage 1.2.3.2
          11 May 2021 at 7:41 am

          Ever read article 2 of the treaty and wonder what it means? Blaming a discussion paper for treaty inspired changes is somewhat strange.

          • Gosman 1.2.3.2.1
            11 May 2021 at 7:42 am

            Ever read Article 3 and wonder how Maori could become British Subjects while not being subject to the British Sovereign?

            • mickysavage 1.2.3.2.1.1
              11 May 2021 at 7:45 am

              Article 3 is subservient to article 2. And besides when did becoming a British Citizen require all your possessions and things of value being ripped off?

              • Gosman …
                11 May 2021 at 7:55 am

                There is no reason to think Article 3 is subservient to Article 2. On what basis do you make that claim?

                • mickysavage …
                  11 May 2021 at 8:41 am

                  “In consideration thereof Her Majesty the Queen of England extends to the Natives of New Zealand Her royal protection and imparts to them all the Rights and Privileges of British Subjects”.

                  Clearly Maori became citizens on the basis they ceded governance of Aotearoa to the Crown but still kept their taonga.

                  • Gosman …
                    11 May 2021 at 8:47 am

                    There was no way that Maori could become British Subjects without ceding sovereignty. The name Subject itself is evidence to this. Someone is subject to something else. In this case it is the British Monarch or Crown. Unless you are trying to argue that the Treaty set up something that was unique at the time and that the British never repeated anywhere else in their entire empire in which they gave away British Subject status but did not acquire sovereignty. Hobson had no authority to create such a new legal status such as this and neither would his superiors in London have allowed him to do so if that was what he was aiming for.

                    • Tricledrown …
                      12 May 2021 at 3:47 pm

                      Gosman since Cromwell invaded Ireland Britain now the UK did what it pleased they took a different approach in each colony war ,treaties rarely enforced,buying off the opposition.all three options were used in NZ .land wars buying off on tribe to fight another.

                      Ireland was used as template to find out what worked for colonization to be successful.disposess indegeonous people of their land by fair means or fowl. Take away their culture and language ,feed them their colonial religion to turn the other cheek so they give every thing up without a fight ,cheaper than paying soldiers to maintain peace.buy some of the leaders off and give them some of the confiscated land and wealth to help suppress any uprising!

                  • Gosman …
                    11 May 2021 at 11:10 am

                    In consideration of the fact the Maori had ceded sovereignty over the country (Article 1) not in consideration of Article 2 which was a guarantee the Crown gave to protect the rights of Maori. You don't offer something in return for your promise to look after someone's rights. It would be like offering another gift because you just gave someone a gift.

                    • mickysavage …
                      11 May 2021 at 9:55 pm

                      They did not cede sovereignty. Read any one of multiple articles on the matter.

              • Gosman …
                11 May 2021 at 7:56 am

                Being subject to the Crown means you are subject to the Crown’s law which can very well include losing wealth. That is the basis of taxation.

                • mickysavage …
                  11 May 2021 at 8:44 am

                  Call me old fashioned but I think if the Crown sign up to a contract it should stick to the terms of that contract.

                  • Gosman …
                    11 May 2021 at 9:11 am

                    Unfortunately for us all the Crown can change the nature of it's relationship with any of us with little regard to our own personal feelings or even reference to it's previous agreements with us. That is the nature of our form of government. This impacts Maori and non-Maori alike.

                    • Incognito …
                      11 May 2021 at 9:56 am

                      According to the deterministic worldview, everything is fixed in and by nature. In other words, what is done cannot be undone. What is destined to happen will happen. Everything is fixed and follows a prescribed pattern of logic and order, natural order. Many share this worldview. In other words, you are in ‘good’ company of like-minded brethren and, of course, you feel very comfortable with your thoughts and beliefs. Nothing shall you cause you doubt. You will defend your beliefs with vengeance and till death. Resistance is futile; this is how it is and shall be, forever.

                      In a nutshell …

                • Tricledrown …
                  12 May 2021 at 11:04 am

                  Gosman stealing Maori land illegaly has nothing to do with taxes.

                  The treaty guaranteed the rights of British citizens including Maori ,But Maori were denied access to proper legal representation, the colonisers new this fact and exploited this fully.

                  Now Maori have access to legal redress racists don't like it.

                  • Gosman …
                    12 May 2021 at 11:26 am

                    Where is you evidence Maori were denied access to proper legal representation?

                    • Tricledrown …
                      12 May 2021 at 4:34 pm

                      Sir Apirana Ngata was the first Maori to get a degree in 1897 ,57 years after the TOW.

                      It happened to be a degree in law.

                      Maori were deliberately kept ignorant of their rights and by many different mechanisms of dehumanizing belittling of Maori making Maori out as inferior human beings .Gosman you are part of the disenfranchisement of Maori.Racism is a learnt behaviour that is hard to change from.Just following Cromwells machievalian processes which are part of breaking down resistance of the idigegenous population.

          • Gosman 1.2.3.2.2
            11 May 2021 at 8:05 am

            I've looked in to this. There are no legal principles I can find which state in interpreting a Treaty (or even statute) one sub section or article is deemed subservient to another based on the fact that it is displayed numerically after it. You are a lawyer. You should know this.

            • mickysavage 1.2.3.2.2.1
              11 May 2021 at 8:47 am

              See above.

            • Tricledrown 1.2.3.2.2.2
              12 May 2021 at 12:11 pm

              Gosman maybe time for you to read the history of NewZealand Belich,Sinclair etc I have read all literature on NZ history and all NZ's economic history including all economic data kept by stats NZ going back to their beginning.

              Luckily I am a speed reader and can read vast volumes as I have read the economic history of mankind going back to the beginnings of records and prior to what archeology has revealed about the beginning of civilization

    • Michael who failed Civics 1.3
      10 May 2021 at 12:44 pm

      Your paranoia is showing. He Puapua is just one of many reports the govt commissions. The Nats signed the UN Convention; one of many successive gots agree to all the time. NZ signs international legal conventions because it believes in the value of rules-based international order (now under serious strain). FWIW, I hope the govt implements every one of He Puapua's recommendations, not only because doing so will improve the shameful poisiton of tangata whenua, but because it will make racist rednecks like you froth and rant. And you sound ridiculous when you do that.

      [Please ditch the unhelpful attack labels that are misplaced and do nothing but flame and create other hostile comments, thanks – Incognito]

      • Incognito 1.3.1
        10 May 2021 at 1:28 pm

        See my Moderation note @ 12:44 pm.

      • Foreign Waka 1.3.2
        10 May 2021 at 1:44 pm

        I think you make assumptions that really shows that some just want to have their agenda pushed through. Democracy is not a convenient proposition, it is hard work and demands honesty and forthright showing of hands from everybody involved. I am certain everybody agrees that something needs to be done to lift ALL people regardless of race, gender, age etc. out of the health problems, poverty, homelessness and sometimes outright deprivation that besets this country.

        I want to tell you that this is the truly shameful side in NZ that needs addressing. It hasn't been done for the longest time and this government has not shown that they will make any progress either. Separating the funding to create another set of nose in the trough layer will not get the funds to where they are needed. Or do you honestly suggest that Maori are immune to this tendency? You find those who invent agendas to suck the money out of the system everywhere. And whilst we are talking about funds…who is going to pay for all of this? NZ is is in deficit with billions of dollars. This is as much a question of principle as it is of funding.

        To call me a redneck is just uncalled for as you assume on my race/gender/skin color. At no time are you applying reason and honesty to the conversation. I will not pay back in kind because I am open to be convinced otherwise. But the argument has to stick. This is the challenge, instead of having emotive name calling.

        I say this full knowing what the reaction will be. So if you can eliminate the concerns of Mr. and Mrs. NZlander up and down the country without blinkers and some honesty to the situation at hand please do.

  2. RedLogix 2
    10 May 2021 at 10:47 am

    I guess the question that arises here is, does this Labour govt endorse this notion of 'separate development' for Maori? Given their policy actions so far the answer appears to be yes.

    And if so – who is going to fund this?

  3. Enough is Enough 3
    10 May 2021 at 10:51 am

    Its a debate that needs to be had. There is absolutley nothing wrong with talking about the points that Judith has raised.

    New Zealand as a nation has moved on from the days of Brash. We can and should be telling Judith where she is 100% wrong.

    • tc 3.1
      10 May 2021 at 11:35 am

      The electorate will tell them again in 2023 like it did in 2020 IMO

      Especially if Judith 'Empathy' Collins is still there reminding everyone what national really stand for.

  4. gsays 4
    10 May 2021 at 11:21 am

    Despite being Leader of the Opposition, 'Crushed' Collins us doing a great job of highlighting the progress the government has made.

    Go Judith.

    What is good for Maori is good for all of us.

  5. Stuart Munro 5
    10 May 2021 at 11:32 am

    The issue might be, that many citizens have their own political concerns and priorities. When a raft of new measures are introduced, that clearly serve some other agenda, they are inclined to wonder when or if those concerns will ever be addressed, and, by what process these ones in particular secured priority.

    So, if this is indeed the product of an agreement signed twelve years ago, and a panel report produced a year ago, that, together with the recommendations, needs to be out there for discussion. Presumably panel recommendations will be somewhat pragmatic attempts to meet obligations and will mostly withstand public scrutiny on their merits.

  6. Ad 6
    10 May 2021 at 2:07 pm

    +100 good conclusion

  7. Poission 7
    10 May 2021 at 2:33 pm

    For National different issues arise. They do not like ethnic diversity, they have always thought the Treaty of Waitangi was a hindrance to good farming practices and they have a hatred of the United Nations.

    Very Strangelove if you luv the UNHRC.

    https://twitter.com/MaxAbrahms/status/1389428680779354113

    • Macro 7.1
      10 May 2021 at 3:26 pm

      Your tweet above gives a very selective and distorted view of UN Human Rights Council.

      The Council consists of 47 members, elected yearly by the General Assembly for staggered three-year terms. Members are selected via the basis of equitable geographic rotation using the United Nations regional grouping system. Members are eligible for re-election for one additional term, after which they must relinquish their seat.[18]

      The seats are distributed along the following lines:[11]

      • 13 for the African Group
      • 13 for the Asia-Pacific Group
      • 6 for the Eastern European Group
      • 8 for the Latin American and Caribbean Group
      • 7 for the Western European and Others Group

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Human_Rights_Council
      The current 47 members of the UNHRC are given below the above quote

  8. Jackel 8
    10 May 2021 at 7:31 pm

    I really don't see what the problem is with the ToW. I would think only good things could come from it.

  9. Mark Thiele 9
    11 May 2021 at 6:34 pm

    National's only mistake was signing up to the convention on indigenous peoples in the first place and giving indigenous rights any credence

    • Tricledrown 9.1
      12 May 2021 at 3:59 pm

      The National Party had the Maori Party in their wider coalition when John Key was their leader.Given the Maori Party have 2 MPs and could end up with more you would think National would be trying to court partners in an MMP environment.

      Collins is not anywhere near the same league as John Key .Collins the wicked witch of the west while John Key was well liked because he was pragmatic .

      [spurious letter removed from user name]