21st November 2022 Ardern promises Bill to lower voting age to 16years old after a discrimination ruling., follows the judges ruling that the existing age of 18yrs old breaches young peoples human rights. Ardern said that NZ Govt will draft legislation to lower the voting age to 16years old, after a landmark supreme court ruling.  “It is our view that this is an issue best placed to parliament for everyone to have their say,”. But the people of New Zealand , the general public have no say. If there is any opposition in parliament the cards are stacked against them by the numbers of tf the Labour coalition.

The Supreme Court hearing marked the conclusion of a 2yr case that young people should be able to vote on issues such as climate change. (After Ardern’s Government has been  indoctrinating young people on Climate Alarmism and promoting strike for climate change, workshops to make placards to promote Ardern’s Zero Carbon emissions through the school education  system. Yes the young people have already been manipulated and politicized in a Marxist Socialist Ideology of Eco Socialism

The Supreme Court ruling does not automatically guarantee the right to  vote will be extended, that can only be done by parliament… but now we have the wedge in the door that will be used with brute force and enforced by this socialist  Marxist regime of eco-socialism The legal, clear message of human rights’.  Human Rights for some but not for others obviously. Changes to the electoral law in NZ required 75% support in Parliament, so this would require support from National Party to become law. So far the National Party say they have no compelling case to lower the voting age.

The Green Party, Maori Party indicate they support it and Act oppose the lowering of the voting age to 16 yrears. However there is a thorn in the backside here for National and Act as opposing the lowering the voting age and that is ‘Will the legislation be decided upon with a Party Vote or a Conscience Vote?

Climate Action  has certainly been Labours tool of actions, Climate Action School Strikes. Brazil, Cuba, Austria, Malta have voting ages of 16years and up. 16 yr olds can vote in Scottish parliamentary elections not the UK Elections though. And the insanity goes on.. David Runciman a prominent academic from the UK agued that the voting age be lowered to 6yrs old, saying that ageing populations meant now young populations are massively  outnumbered thus causing a democratic crisis and an inbuilt bias against govts that plan the future.  If the age of 16 years is discrimination, then let me point out so is ageism discrimination, and to set it straight going on the ruling of discrimination and human rights that can mean any age.. including infants.

Green Party  statement as a response to the supreme court ruling is “We are calling on the government to come to the table with a plan to change the law to extend the voting age. “Young people deserve to have a say in the decisions that affect them, both now and in the future.”. Yep and older people have the right to come to the table to say what effects them too, and a young person of 16 years old does not fit the picture, do you really think they will care about the elderly.? But the elderly care about the young, their grandchildren and the world they will be raised in. The attorney general must now formerly notify the House Of Representatives that their legislation is inconsistent with NZs Bill Of Rights 1990. This must be actively considered by legislators and the minister in charge must respond.

SAGE Journals article “Are there any prima facie reasons that democracies might have for disenfranchising older citizens? Older persons are being targeted and politically scrutinized referencing political equality and logics of complaint. Namely equal opportunity of political influence and the disenfranchising of older citizens.

The proposals for reducing political influence of older citizens via age weighted voting. Older citizens could be deprived of their right to vote In 2019 the New York Times “Older people today hold disproportionate power because they have the numbers.

If disenfranchising older citizens ever came to play this would be very undemocratic, ageism, discrimination, loss of  basic human rights. However the come back may be Political equality. Ardern may well apply “equal opportunity of political influence by the number of those in the older age group of the general population.  But then again everyone should have equal opportunity, but we should add to this ‘Fit for Purpose.. Benefits outweigh the Risks… and the people decide.

Nancy Polosi on the subject of lowering the voting age said “Its important to capture kids, by lowering the voting age to 16. Capture them in high school, when they are interested in all of this, when they are learning about the govt” Says it all don’t you think.

My personal view is that -16 year olds are not informed enough about a households basic living expenses, about decriminalization of abortion up to birth, what do they know about assisted suicide Act and its very dangerous concepts. They do not pay the grocery, electric and gas bills.  They do not possess the wisdom, maturity that comes from a number of life’s challenges, hardships and threats.

Some have argued that disenfranchising the elderly from voting would allow younger people to make the decisions. Referencing Christopher Buckleys novel ‘Boomsday’, a Generation X Blogger, and emerging PR star suggests to deal with economic, social strain of a larger Boomer population, the govt should offer people incentives to commit suicide by the age of 70 yrs. To be offered perks like free Botox, no estate fee’s, for those who opt to voluntary transition to death after retirement are to be treated as patriots and heroes on par with veterans. The novel is provoking as to what should democracies do when the interests of the elderly appear to be at odds with the interests  of the younger generations?

One proposal that has been mooted in philosophical circles is to disenfranchise the elderly- eliminate the right to vote at age 70, once citizens reach a certain age they will be less concerned with our social, political and economic future.  “WRONG  I SAY, MOST OF US ARE MUCH MORE CONCERNED THAN EVER BEFORE.”

Its been said in some circles that,  elderly people should not bear the long term consequences of political decisions and policies. Their votes are to be discounted, eliminated. Because grandma will vote against carbon taxes, so take away their right to vote. Grandma believes in traditional farming, will support the farmers, eliminate her vote.

But how about the Moral and Political equality given to All Citizens.  Older people have paid their taxes, older people have fought in wars for their country, older people have gone to war and fought for the freedoms of their country what now are they deemed, or doomed to be worthless. Ageism is discrimination and against basic human rights, only it appears in this post modernised world only some have human rights and many  others do not.

Now its up to Act and National Party to justify keeping the voting age at 18yrs. As the Conversation writes ‘The court has accepted inconsistency has not been justified, that does not mean the age limit can be justified, it just means that legislation can be found to be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights. The opposition must now provide the justification for setting the age of voting at 18 yrs old. It is said good habits start young, but so do bad habits also.

Labour, Green Party pitch is a ‘Greening of the World’ a Gaia Paganism, worshippers of the Mother Earth ‘Gaia’ accompanied by tribal feudalism. Promoting students to take time away from their education to take part in climate strikes for schools. Ardern’s too with her Zero Carbons.  Yes these students have opinions and know how to strike, and know how to get their voices heard, their minds have been indoctrinated within the education system to be eco-socialists, that does not give them the right to vote. Education has been seriously  dumbed down in New Zealand.

16 Year olds do not have the experience where they have to hold down jobs to pay for mortgages or high rent payments.  They are not paying the power bill. Schools need to teach the young how to contribute to a civilized society, not to dismantle one. Under COVID more than half of the country’s school students failed to attend school regularly, with only 46% of students nationwide meeting the benchmark for school attendance, Wellington 47%, Christchurch 49.7% all failing to get half their students to class regularly

RNZ Reported 10th Nov 2022. Low school attendance further proof of decline of NZ education system. As an example, in maths the knowledge of a 15-year-old New Zealand student equated to a student aged 13 and a half 20 years ago. There are similar problems with writing and literacy. The Education System is in decline. The dumbing down of education. Head of the offices ‘Education Evaluation Centre Ruth Shinoda told ‘Morning Report’ “ even before the pandemic only 3 in 5 children were regularly attending school “We are not prioritising school enough” she said. Four in ten parents appear to be comfortable with their child missing a week or more of school per term, which adds up to missing up to a year of school by the child reaches 16yrs old

Education in New Zealand is being dumbed down that surely enough reason to say “ Young people in a dumbed down education system are not fit for purpose to vote in the genera; elections or the local elections, the risks are much  higher than the benefits, there are no benefits only to those that have politically indoctrinated the young through NZ’s education system into a Eco Socialist Ideology of placard bearing Zero screaming kids that have never bothered to really do their own research.

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/478445/low-school-attendance-further-proof-of-decline-of-nz-education-system-critic

Protecting Children Petition

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/kate-hawkesby-no-the-voting-age-should-not-be-lowered-to16/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/21/voting-age-of-18-is-discriminatory-new-zealand-supreme-court-rules

An article was posted on September 8^th 2012 authored by Professor Elizabeth Rata of the School of Critical Studies in Education at Auckland University. She is known for her work and research in the area of ‘effects of ethnic politics on educational change’. She stated that “Iwi have been extremely successful in pursuing their demands for public resources and political power. The intriguing question being – is how to explain such total success given that many New Zealanders, both Maori and Non-Maori are increasingly concerned by the run away juggernaut of Iwi ambitions. Elizabeth Rata described Iwi success is based on unquestioned belief that there is direct continuity between the traditional tribe and contemporary Iwi. Thus using this to justify Iwi claims for the inheritance of resources and various levels of governance, she said that the ‘ Treaty is promoted as a document of ‘Inheritance’. But Iwi Corporations are they the same entities as the tribes of the past, and therefore entitled to inherit the past’

Should this be challenged, and why is it not being challenged.?  It is that not ‘walking on broken glass’ fear of the repercussions, that those that have the power and voice to speak out, do not do so because they may have the words ‘racist, white supremacists, far right being rammed down their throat. How cowardly is that. Its time for public debates without government intrusion as to what majority of New Zealanders want for their country. Do you really believe that Iwi have the right to claim our public resources, to manage private lands that are freehold owned by NZ Citizens?

As Elizabeth Rata states- “ALL traditional societies are based on kinship social relations and on ones birth status in the kin group. You are born into the group, defining your identity and how you lived your life. Modern societies are based on the ‘social contract’. Social groups, even those with long traditions like religions, as associations of individuals” Members are free to join, leave, decide how strongly they wish to identify with the group”. A shift from status to contract is at the heart of the great tradition-modern divide. This shift has changed all social groups fundamentally, and this includes Iwi in NZ today.(The changed relationship between individual and society)

Traditional groupings are non-divisible, present day Iwi like all modern groups are associations of individuals. This means that contemporary Iwi have the same rights and responsibilities as other groups in society, neither more nor less. Traditional societies do not have separation between economic and political spheres. Modern democratic societies like NZ do, this is to ensure that ALL individuals according to their status as citizens and regardless of their unequal economic position have an equal say in politics.

Contemporary Iwi are ‘private Economic Corporations’ claiming public-political status. An economic corporation claiming political rights eats at the heart of the political-economical separation. This Iwi political- economic separation in undemocratic. Democracy does not exist in New Zealand. I myself,  believe this Iwi Corporation should not inherit from what is becoming a tribal feudalism fuelled by the Iwi Elite and those political cronies in the cesspit of Wellington. As Elizabeth Rata pointed out “All of us living today are descended from traditional people, we all retain and maintain a number of values, beliefs, practices that come from the past.

This she explains is a ‘Superficial Continuity’ that the fundamental difference is a ‘Structural’ one. Modern society is based on the individual as the bearer of political rights and on the separation of the political sphere from the economic sphere. The skill of the Iwi case lies in the use of two extremely successful strategies. For example ‘the creation of a new interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi as NZ’s founding document, and as a partnership between the Govt and Iwi. Also the appeal to Common Law. The re-interpretation of  the Treaty as a ‘partnership’ between two political entities dates back to the Court Of Appeal decision in the late 1980’s, where it was stated that the Treaty established a relationship ‘akin to a partnership’. That many people do not question and believe it is true, either out of self interests or have been indoctrinated, brainwashed to believe so. There is ‘No Partnership’ mentioned, documented in the Treaty document’ What is being published by mainstream media and govt is a legal fiction. ‘THEY ARE LYING”

Elizabeth Rata refers to David Round’s comment about Treaty partnership “If there were to be a partnership of Maori and the Crown, then by definition Maori could not be subjects of the Crown. One cannot be a partner and a subject at the same time” (David Round 2011). The idea that the Treaty is NZs founding document is premature. A nations founding document is of great symbolic importance to NZ. It requires widespread ongoing  discussion possibly over several generations. Elizabeth Rata states “whether a single document is selected for this symbolic honour or whether a number of historical documents and events are regarded as significant and given special status is in itself an historic task. Its one that is made difficult by the removal of specific history topics from the national curriculum. That in order to decide what is historically significant one must know NZs history and what choices are possible.

Ardern announced NZ history will be taught in schools and kura by 2022 as part of the schools curriculum 12^th September 2019 Beehive announcement by Ardern and Hipkins. The history curriculum to include The Arrival Of Maori to NZ. First encounters, early colonial history of NZ, Treaty Of Waitangi and history, Colonisation of NZ, immigration to NZ, including the NZ Wars. Evolving national identity of NZ in the late 19^th and early 20^th Century. NZ’s role in the Pacific, Aotearoa NZ in the late 20^th century and evolution of national identity with cultural plurity.Hipkins said “The Ministry will call on historical and curriculum experts, Iwi and Mana Whenua, pacific communities, students, whanau and other strong interest groups.

This includes schools working in partnership with their local iwi communities and mana whenua. The changes will cover the whole breadth of the national curriculum. Tikanga a Iwi to be compulsory from year 1 – 10. From Year 11 schools can choose which subjects their students are required to take. RNZ reported 24 May 2021 ‘Moriori fear their history will be left out of the new school curriculum. The Hokotehi Moriori Trust said the draft Aotearoa New Zealand Histories Curriculum mentioned Moriori only once. The Trusts cultural and science projects coordinator Susan Thorpe said it was a serious omission especially as the Crown had acknowledged the school system had spread misinformation that Moriori are  still battling. She said “Failure to tell history hurts more that its telling” Maui Solomon blamed Pakeha historians for badly blighting Moiriori history. However thats not what the NZ Government National archives have published.

The Moriori philosophy of non-violence was especially important and deserved wider recognition, Morris said. Grant Morris of Victoria University. Moriori – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand From NZ Govt Archives I researched how there was a horrific slaughtering, enslavement of Moriori by two Maori warring tribes that visited to Chatham Islands. Yet some managed to survive. (The horrific story of this horrible tragic event is told within the NZ Govt archives). The Government has adopted a strategy that mana whenua, iwi tell the story of the history of NZ.as they see it. There has been no wider public debate about what should be taught to children in schools. The Government have become the custodians of our children’s lives.

There has to my knowledge been no public debate without government / Iwi Elite interruption as to the founding document. Iwi elite and self interested parties use the Treaty as a document of Inheritance, its not about the symbolic value to the whole nation of NZ. The Treaty is a document of inheritance for the government/ Iwi Elite own strategic reasons. As Elizabeth Rata states ‘ The Treaty symbolises the idea of continuity between the tradition world and the modern world. The new interpretation of the Treaty is also supported by the Iwi focus on Article 2. About ‘Resource Possession’, driving the meaning of the 1^st and 3^rd Articles of the Treaty. (With the effect of the isolated method of interpretation, is to lose the integrated meaning of the articles.) The concepts of ‘sovereignty’ in Article 1, of resource possession in Article 1. And of Resource possession in Article 2, and ‘Citizenship’ in Article 3, they tend to be in totality. Hence meaning that one Article being dependent upon the meaning of the others. Enabling Article two to achieve an undeserved dominance.

Another strategy for Iwi success, has proved very valuable to them and highly effective is the ‘use of legal language and procedures’ This has served to embed the idea that Iwi ambitions are true and just. Makes good use of New Zealanders right and proper respect for law. Elizabeth Rata states “This has a less healthy side, it can produce an uncritical acceptance of ideas that use the weight of legalese. Some words gaining an unearned respect, their use can stop people identifying and criticizing the political interests that are promoted in legal arguments, by using these words ‘Common Law’. Customary Law and English Common Law these are often used by Iwi for this reason. It pulls the wool over our eyes. Therefore Common Law of ‘Do No Harm’ can be used, abused to do harm. Iwi are in a long tradition of elites, they use their legal antiquity strategy for their own political ends. Elizabeth Rata refers to 18^th Century Edmond Burke who referred to Iwi ‘ the powerful prepossession towards antiquity, in the minds of lawyers and legislators and all the people whom they wish to influence” (Burke, cited in Hampsher-Monk 1992 Page 267)

This argument accepts Common Law as a given but disputes to whom it applies. F W Maitland a 19^th Century legal historian stated that “the foundational group or tribe, or clan is not, has never been past of the English Constitution, even in Anglo Saxon times. He found that ‘individualism, not foundational grouping was the distinguishing characteristic of Anglo Saxon legal, economic and political relations. Thus meaning that Common Law did not apply to foundational groups. He said not all civilizations had started in the world where individuals were embedded in the community, where contract was entirely subordinate to status, where hierarchy and ;patriarchy were universal.(Macfarlande 2002 P83)

Elizabeth Rata published that ‘Individuals and associations of individuals were recognised in various forms of contract at the beginning of the development of English Common Law. It is the individual, in these various forms of contractual trusts and associations, not the indivisible kinship group which is the basis of Common Law. ‘Iwi want the 1970’s interpretation of the Treaty Of Waitangi to be included in a new NZ Constitution. The interpretation to be promoted as true, a legal fiction that uses constant references to laws, government  legislations. This is a political strategy built on a legal fiction. Legal does not mean lawful. This is unlawful. This is how Govt and Iwi Elite wants history to be remembered and flouted by one big lie. That serves the interests of those who promote the lies..

Within the political cesspit of Wellington and publicly outside that political toilet bowl the criticism for the lies that New Zealanders have been told, and have had to have rammed down their throats, taught to our children in schools is never criticised publicly by these political  toilet sitters. They must be criticized, we must urge open public debate. Democracy is being able to participate in open public debate without being harassed, character assassinated by political entities Iwi elite as busy cloaking themselves in legal justification.

As Elizabeth Rata states in her article of 2012 “whatever the law might say about the meaning of the Treaty, the final decision about its place in our society is a political one. The Treaty’s usefulness to NZ must therefore be decided in the political sphere, not in the courts and by lawyers but  by us, the people of NZ. Its usefulness to New Zealand must therefore be decided in the political sphere, not in courts by judges and lawyers, but by us, the people. She refers to  Corporations, businesses, Iwi Corporations, to give political power to these to subvert the basic conditions of democracy, where economic is put under control of political, they should be under separate spheres.

In 2012 Elizabeth Rata said “The rapidly growing practice by successive governments of giving public resources to private corporations is bizarre and bewildering. In New Zealand it has happened and is a testament to the political skill of Iwi and to the failure of New Zealanders to say ‘NO’. We need to recognise that if we believe and act as if  traditional kinship as the same entity as a modern social group it subverts the basic condition of democracy. The principle of contractual social relations and the political status of the individual as is a New Zealand citizen, regardless of that persons racial origin and cultural affiliation.

Iwi have been extremely successful in pursuing their demands for public resources and political power. The intriguing question being – is how to explain such total success given that many New Zealanders, both Maori and Non-Maori are increasingly concerned by the run away juggernaut of Iwi ambitions. Elizabeth Rata described Iwi success is based on unquestioned belief that there is direct continuity between the traditional tribe and contemporary Iwi. Thus using this to justify Iwi claims for the inheritance of resources and various levels of governance. The Treaty is promoted as a document of ‘Inheritance’. But Iwi Corporations are they the same entities as the tribes of the past, and therefore entitled to inherit the past?

As Elizabeth Rata states- “ALL traditional societies are based on kinship social relations and on ones birth status in the kin group. You are born into the group, defining your identity and how you lived your life. Modern societies are based on the ‘social contract’. Social groups, even those with long traditions like religions, as associations of individuals” Members are free to join, leave, decide how strongly they wish to identify with the group. A shift from status to contract is at the heart of the great tradition-modern divide. This shift has changed all social groups fundamentally, and this includes Iwi in NZ today.(The changed relationship between individual and society). Traditional groupings are non-divisible, present day Iwi like all modern groups are associations of individuals. This means that contemporary Iwi have the same rights and responsibilities as other groups in society, neither more nor less.

Traditional societies do not have separation between economic and political spheres. Modern democratic societies like NZ do, this is to ensure that ALL individuals according to their status as citizens and regardless of their unequal economic position have an equal say in politics. Contemporary Iwi are ‘private Economic Corporations’ claiming public-political status. An economic corporation claiming political rights eats at the heart of the political-economical separation. This Iwi political- economic separation in undemocratic. Democracy does not exist in New Zealand. As Elizabeth Rata pointed out “All of us living today are descended from traditional people, we all retain and maintain a number of values, beliefs, practices that come from the past. This she explains is a ‘Superficial Continuity’ that the fundamental difference is a ‘Structural’ one. Modern society is based on the individual as the bearer of political rights and on the separation of the political sphere from the economic sphere. The skill of the iwi case lies in the use of two extremely successful strategies. 1)Is the creation of a new interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi as NZ’s founding document, and as a partnership between the Govt and Iwi and  (2) The appeal to Common Law.

The re-interpretation of  the Treaty as a ‘partnership’ between two political entities dates back to the Colurt Of Appeal decision in the late 1980’s, where it was stated that the Treaty established a relationship ‘akin to a partnership’. That many people do not question and believe it is true, either out of self interests or have been indoctrinated, brainwashed to believe so. There is ‘No Partnership’ mentioned, documented in the Treaty document’ What is being published by mainstream media and govt is a legal fiction. ‘THEY ARE LYING”

Elizabeth Rata refers to David Round’s comment about Treaty partnership “If there were to be a partnership of Maori and the Crown, then by definition Maori could not be subjects of the Crown. One cannot be a partner and a subject at the same time” (David Round 2011). The idea that the Treaty is NZs founding document is premature. A nations founding document is of great symbolic importance to NZ. It requires widespread ongoing  discussion possibly over several generations. Elizabeth Rata states “whether a single document is selected for this symbolic honour or whether a number of historical documents and events are regarded as significant and given special status is in itself an historic task. Its one that is made difficult by the removal of specific history topics from the national curriculum. That in order to decide what is historically significant one must know NZs history and what choices are possible.

Ardern announced NZ history will be taught in schools and kura by 2022 as part of the schools curriculum 12^th September 2019 Beehive announcement by Ardern and Hipkins. The history curriculum to include The Arrival Of Maori to NZ. First encounters, early colonial history of NZ, Treaty Of Waitangi and history, Colonisation of NZ, immigration to NZ, including the NZ Wars. Evolving national identity of NZ in the late 19^th and early 20^th Century. NZ’s role in the Pacific, Aotearoa NZ in the late 20^th century and evolution of national identity with cultural plurity. Hipkins said “The Ministry will call on historical and curriculum experts, Iwi and Mana Whenua, pacific communities, students, whanau and other strong interest groups. This includes schools working in partnership with their local iwi communities and mana whenua. The changes will cover the whole breadth of the national curriculum. Tikanga a Iwi to be compulsory from year 1 – 10. From Year 11 schools can choose which subjects their students are required to take.

RNZ reported 24 May 2021 ‘Moriori fear their history will be left out of the new school curriculum. The Hokotehi Moriori Trust said the draft Aotearoa New Zealand Histories Curriculum mentioned Moriori only once. The Trusts cultural and science projects coordinator Susan Thorpe said it was a serious omission especially as the Crown had acknowledged the school system had spread misinformation that Moriori are  still battling. She said “Failure to tell history hurts more that its telling” Maui Solomon blamed Pakeha historians for badly blighting Moiriori history. The Moriori philosophy of non-violence was especially important and deserved wider recognition, Morris said. Grant Morris of Victoria University. Moriori – Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand From NZ Govt Archives I researched how there was a horrific slaughtering, enslavement of Moriori by two Maori warring tribes that visited to Chatham Islands. Yet some managed to survive. (The horrific story of this horrible tragic event is told within the NZ Govt archives)

The Government has adopted a strategy that mana whenua, iwi tell the story of the history of NZ.as they see it. There has been no wider public debate about what should be taught to children in schools. The Government have become the custodians of our children’s lives. There has to my knowledge been no public debate without government / Iwi Elite interruption as to the founding document. Iwi elite and self interested parties use the Treaty as a document of Inheritance, its not about the symbolic value to the whole nation of NZ.

The Treaty is a document of inheritance for the government/ Iwi Elite own strategic reasons. As Elizabeth Rata states ‘ The Treaty symbolises the idea of continuity between the tradition world and the modern world. The new interpretation of the Treaty is also supported by the Iwi focus on Article 2. About ‘Resource Possession’, driving the meaning of the 1^st and 3^rd Articles of the Treaty. (With the effect of the isolated method of interpretation, is to lose the integrated meaning of the articles.) The concepts of ‘sovereignty’ in Article 1, of resource possession in Article 1. , and of Resource possession in Article 2, and ‘Citizenship’ in Article 3, they tend to be in totality. Hence meaning that one Article being dependent upon the meaning of the others. Enabling Article two to achieve an undeserved dominance.

Another strategy for Iwi success, has proved very valuable to them and highly effective is the ‘use of legal language and procedures’ This has served to embed the idea that Iwi ambitions are true and just. Makes good use of New Zealanders right and proper respect for law. Elizabeth Rata states “This has a less healthy side, it can produce an uncritical acceptance of ideas that use the weight of legalese. Some words gaining an unearned respect, their use can stop people identifying and criticizing the political interests that are promoted in legal arguments, by using these words ‘Common Law’. Customary Law and English Common Law these are often used by Iwi for this reason. It pulls the wool over our eyes. Therefore Common Law of ‘Do No Harm’ can be used, abused to do harm. Iwi are in a long tradition of elites, they use their legal antiquity strategy for their own political ends. Elizabeth Rata refers to 18^th Century Edmond Burke who referred to Iwi ‘ the powerful prepossession towards antiquity, in the minds of lawyers and legislators and all the people whom they wish to influence” (Burke, cited in Hampsher-Monk 1992 Page 267)

This argument accepts Common Law as a given but disputes to whom it applies. F W Maitland a 19^th Century legal historian stated that “the foundational group or tribe, or clan is not, has never been past of the English Constitution, even in Anglo Saxon times. He found that ‘individualism, not foundational grouping was the distinguishing characteristic of Anglo Saxon legal, economic and political relations. Thus meaning that Common Law did not apply to foundational groups. He said not all civilizations had started in the world where individuals were embedded in the community, where contract was entirely subordinate to status, where hierarchy and ;patriarchy were universal.(Macfarlande 2002 P83). Elizabeth Rata published that ‘Individuals and associations of individuals were recognised in various forms of contract at the beginning of the development of English Common Law. It is the individual, in these various forms of contractual trusts and associations, not the indivisible kinship group which is the basis of Common Law.

‘Iwi want the 1970’s interpretation of the Treaty Of Waitangi to be included in a new NZ Constitution. The interpretation to be promoted as true, a legal fiction that uses constant references to laws, government  legislations. This is a political strategy built on a legal fiction. Legal does not mean lawful. This is unlawful. This is how Govt and Iwi Elite wants history to be remembered and flouted by one big lie. That serves the interests of those who promote the lies.. Within the political cesspit of Wellington and publicly outside that political toilet bowl the criticism for the lies that New Zealanders have been told, and have had to have rammed down their throats, taught to our children in schools is never criticised publicly by these political  toilet sitters. They must be criticized, we must urge open public debate. Democracy is being able to participate in open public debate without being harassed, character assassinated by political entities Iwi elite as busy cloaking themselves in legal justification. Nanaia Mahuta is running a three day workshop on this 21st Nov 2022-23rd Nov 2022 Auckland University, guest speakers from overseas and local Iwi. The plan is to entrench New Zealand society, economy with the UN Declaration for Indigenous Peoples. (UNDRIP)

As Elizabeth Rata states in her article of 2012 “whatever the law might say about the meaning of the Treaty, the final decision about its place in our society is a political one. The Treaty’s usefulness to NZ must therefore be decided in the political sphere, not in the courts and by lawyers but  by us, the people of NZ. Its usefulness to New Zealand must therefore be decided in the political sphere, not in courts by judges and lawyers, but by us, the people. Referring to Corporations, businesses, Iwi Corporations, to give political power to these to subvert the basic conditions of democracy, where economic is put under control of political, they should be under separate spheres. In 2012 Elizabeth Rata said “The rapidly growing practice by successive governments of giving public resources to private corporations is bizarre and bewildering. In New Zealand it has happened and is a testament to the political skill of Iwi and to the failure of New Zealanders to say ‘NO’

We need to recognise that if we believe and act as if  traditional kinship as the same entity as a modern social group it subverts the basic condition of democracy. The principle of contractual social relations and the political status of the individual as is a New Zealand citizen, regardless of that persons racial origin and cultural affiliation.

I believe Iwi Corporations, self interested Iwi activists should not inherit from what is becoming a tribal feudalism fuelled by the Iwi Elite and those political cronies in the cesspit of WellingtonI believe this Iwi Corporation should not inherit from what is becoming a tribal feudalism fuelled by the Iwi Elite and those political cronies in the cesspit of Wellington. Should this be challenged, and why is it not being challenged. It is that not ‘walking on broken glass’ fear of the repercussions, that those that have the power and voice to speak out, do not do so because they may have the words ‘racist, white supremacists, far right being rammed down their throat. How cowardly is that. Its time for public debates without government intrusion as to what majority of New Zealanders want for their country. Do you really believe that Iwi have the right to claim our public resources, to manage private lands that are freehold owned by NZ Citizens?

Iwi have been exceptionally effective in obtaining considerable public resources and political recognition, and enough is never enough and now its Nanaia Mahuta and her ‘The Iwi-Crown Constitution and beyond’ for Indigenous peoples interests’. The entrenchment of the UNDRIP into the whole of NZ Society. Ardern has named Iwi as the leaders of NZ. We must use positive public criticism, we must openly scrutinize without feeling we are walking on broken glass. We must rise up, and speak up publicly. Find that moral courage to do so. We must put a stop to the robbing of public resources and the increasing institutionalised apartheid- identity politics of NZ.

We must use positive public criticism, we must openly scrutinize without feeling we are walking on broken glass. We must rise up, and speak up publicly. Find that moral courage to do so. We must put a stop to the robbing of public resources and the increasing institutionalised apartheid- identity politics of NZ. We must stand in Unity. As All One People. He Iwi Tahi Tatou. I raise my voice to encourage Moral Courage intertwined with  Christian Belief’s, Values and Morals.

nzcpr.com/an-argument-against-iwi-claims-to-constitutional-recognition-and-public-resources/

CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION: BBC News reported 26^th December 2018 ‘Jeremy Corban orders review into Christians plight’. The British Foreign Secretary was joined by the Archbishop of Canterbury and some of the survivors of Christian persecution. The review looked at the governments efforts to help some of the 215 million Christians whom faced discrimination and violence the previous year, said the Foreign Office spokesperson. Saying violence against Christians is rising dramatically with an average of 250 being murdered every month. The intervention came after the outcry over the treatment of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman who faced death threats after being acquitted of blasphemy in Pakistan. She spent 8 years on death row, her conviction was eventually squashed by Pakistan’s Supreme Court. UK PM Theresa May defended herself in Parliament after being asked whether she had intervened to stop the UK Govt offering Bibi asylum. Theresa May told a Conservative MP “he should not necessarily believe everything he reads in the newspapers”

The BBC reported that Christians have been targeted in other parts of the world. China had a surge of police action against churches, the CCP getting tougher on unsanctioned Christian activity. Christians in Egypt faced a series of attacks by extremists including that of ISIS-Islamic State.

Where is the call for action against Christian Persecution world wide.. 360 millions Christians.  The BBC reported 2013 100,000 Christians are killed every year because of their faith. 3rd May 2019 BBC -Christian Persecution ‘at near genocidal levels’. Back in 2013 BB C News reported one in three Christians are being persecuted. Christians are the most pursued religious groups in the world. Jeremy Hunt said that ‘Political Correctness’ had played a part in the issue as not being confronted. The Interim Report stated the main impact of ‘genocidal acts against Christians is exodus’, that Christians are being wiped out from parts of the Middle East. In Iraq before 2003 there were 1.5 million Christians at the time of BBC report there was less than 120,000 Christians.

BBC reported that the evidence showed that there is a geographic spread of anti-Christian persecution, but also its increasing in severity”. In some regions of the world coming close to genocidal, meeting the international definition of Genocide according to that adopted by the UN. Jeremy Corbyn Review was commissioned on Boxing Day 2018. “Evidence shows not only the geographic spread of anti-Christian persecution, but also its increasing severity,” the Bishop wrote..”In some regions, the level and nature of persecution is arguably coming close to meeting the international definition of genocide, according to that adopted by the UN.” The foreign secretary commissioned the review on Boxing Day 2018 amid an outcry over the treatment of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman who faced death threats after being acquitted of blasphemy in Pakistan. Noted were the Sri Lanka Attacks on Christians. More than 250 people had been killed and more than 500 injured in attacks at hotels, churches in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday.

Jeremy Hunt said that “Governments had been asleep over the persecution of Christians, he spoke about the atmosphere of political correctness’ saying “What we have forgotten in the atmosphere of political correctness is actually Christians that are being persecuted are mostly  the poorest people on the planet. Responding to the BBC-Jeremy Corbyn’s Review on Christian Persecution the president of British Jews said “Jews had often been targets of persecution and felt for Christians who were discriminated against on the basis of their faith” Saying “Whether its authoritarian regimes, or bigotry masked remind us that there are many places in which Christians face appalling levels of violence, abuse and harassment,”

BBC reported in 2019 “the persecution of Christians at near genocidal levels”   BBC Reports 11^th June 2022 Attacks on Christians in Nigeria on the rise”. The recent killings of Christian worshippers at a Catholic Church. Church attacks sharly on the rise. Schools attacked and children kidnapped. Vigilante Islamic Militant groups have targeted Christians for many years. Christian groups in Nigeria have blamed the government policies for increasing the targeting of Christians.

Persecution against Christians rises as people refused aid in COVID crisis- reported the Guardian News 13^th January 2021 .Since the pandemic  persecution against Christians around the world has increased, where Christians have been refused aid in many countries, authoritarian govts stepping up surveillance, Islamic extremists exploiting the crisis, was reported. More than 340 million Christians, one in eight face high levels of persecution and discrimination because of their faith, according to World Watch 2021. A 60% increase over previous years in the number of Christians murdered because of their Christian faith. In China there is the ever increasing surveillance via facial recognition installed in churches in some area’s and online services are monitored. Crucifixes and Christian Imagery have been replaced with  pictures of President Xi Jinping and national flags. And communist oficials select church leaders.

In India, the Hindu Govt have fostered a climate of attacks and harassment of Christians . Foreign funding of Christian run hospitals, schools, church organizations has been blocked,  across the sub-Saharan Africa Christians have faced 30% higher levels of violence at the hands of Islamic Militant groups who have taken advantage of COVID lockdowns. In Nigeria the number of Christians murdered has tripled to 3,800 in 2021

The year 2020, the reporting of  a global pandemic, hospitalising and killing millions. But there is another story to be told about the Covid crisis – and that is the way the virus is being used against the persecuted church. In some countries there has been There’s also been a rise in the kidnapping, forcible conversion and forced marriages of women and girls. Christians have even been accused of causing the virus. In Colombia (30), the traditional animist beliefs held by some indigenous communities means they believe that converts to Christianity are the source of all plagues and diseases. Leaders of such groups believe that expelling Christian converts from their communities will help to put an end to the coronavirus. This has increased persecution, in some cases leading to Christians being imprisoned as way of expelling them from the community.

It’s a similar story in Somalia, where the violent Islamist group al-Shabaab said coronavirus was spread ‘by the crusader forces who have invaded the country and disbelieving countries that support them’. There have also been cases of Christian health workers facing discrimination in the distribution of protective equipment (PPE). Thankfully, your support has stepped in to provide this essential equipment. In Sri Lanka, coronavirus was the pretext for police to visit Christians’ homes to investigate church members and activities.

In an interview with BBC Radio 4, Open Doors UK and Ireland CEO Henrietta Blyth summarised how the pandemic had exacerbated persecution against Christians: “Covid, in effect, has put another weapon into the hands of persecutors, so it has made life infinitely more difficult for Christians suffering already.

Kiwi Pastors pen letter urging Brian Tamaki’s prison release, saying this is a warning sign for Christians. 22/1/2022 Newshub. The letter, addressed to New Zealand, is signed by five pastors: three from Grace Churches – one each in Gisborne, Tauranga and Rotorua – and the other two from Auckland’s Covenant Church and South City Reformed Baptist Church. “Yet, we felt compelled to write the following as a show of solidarity with his current plight. Our aim here is not to air our disagreements with Mr Tamaki. Rather we stand in solidarity with a religious minister who has been imprisoned, right here in Aotearoa.”

It goes on to suggest Tamaki has been “systematically silenced” and that New Zealand is “faced with a diseased democracy at best; and at worst, tyranny”. The pastors then call on Tamaki to be able to go about his life, quoting scripture. “Mr Tamaki may have touched the painted line of his bail conditions, but is jail really the suitable answer for handling political differences (while gangs in NZ face far lesser penalties for public disorder) “We write in solidarity with a man who dared to speak a point of view not approved by the State.” Christianity is also being persecuted in New Zealand.

Ardern’s Ministry Of Disinformation will not share this factual information. But the WakeUpNZ ‘Ministry Of Truth’ will.

The Truth must be spoken. The Truth is out there. The Truth is evidence based, not  based on the political tyranny of government funded academics.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2022/01/kiwi-pastors-pen-letter-urging-brian-tamaki-s-prison-release-say-his-arrest-is-warning-sign-for-christians.html

BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48146305

https://www.opendoorsuk.org/news/latest-news/covid-persecution-worse/

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46682411

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/13/christian-persecution-rises-as-people-refused-aid-in-covid-crisis-report

‘Fonterra had cleared the cows from 16 farms to use these farmlands to dispose of waste water The waste water was odorless, colorless but it was definitely a pollutant that Fonterra was leaching into private water supplies (This story was first published by RNZ) It was. Come 2017 most of the stock had vanished completely from two farms. Neville Ross first noticed that cows were slowly decreasing from local farms in his area In 2017 most of the stock had vanished from two farms in the area. In 2018 stock had also disappeared from a third Cambridge farm.

Neville was a Detective in the NZ Police Force for 40 plus years not a Farmer, at this time Neville’s wife noticed her husbands  health declining he had been unwell, sadly Neville had a brain tumour. In 2018 it was noticed that three farms in Cambridge had now become stock free. Fonterra’s ‘Buxton’ farm which is one of the farms in the area where Neville and his wife lived which was owned by Fonterra, although it was stock free the sign ‘ Dairy Is Life’ and ‘Wandering Stock’ remained on the farm gate. The farm looked smart but it was described as a tip.

The Fonterra Hautapu Milk Processing Plant described in the news article had been dumping it’s wastewater onto a farm near where Neville and his wife lived. At peak production times Fonterra’s Hautapu plant processes approximately 150 tanker loads of milk, uses between 6,000 to 8,000 cubic metres of fresh water daily. Some of the water is fresh water and other water that is piped and irrigated onto Fonterra owned farms is waste water  that they use to clean out their factory tanks and pipes that contains cleaning products, its this water that’s piped onto and then irrigates Fonterra owned farms.

According to Fonterra these farms are a well managed and a  good circular model for nutrient management, that the wastewater helps to grow the grass on these farms that then is fed to cows. (Source of information-RNZ and Otago Daily Times). Fonterra’s wastewater from their factories contains nitrogen from the cleaning products they use to clean pipes and vats, if you add nitrogen from the wastewater to nitrogen from the cows urine this then become a high nitrogen level. This higher load of nitrogen starts seeping into the ground water and then pollutes beyond the Fonterra owned farm fence. Because the cows have been removed from the equation more wastewater spreads on the land.

The grass from these Fonterra owned farms which are often called ‘Ghost Farms’ is cut, carted elsewhere and used to feed cows, this is called ‘cut and carry, Fonterra prefers to name these farms as ‘Nutrient Management Farming’. Fonterra has been reported as saying they have consent for their 16 farms which they say are used for ‘Nutrient Management’ (It is reported that Fonterra own 29 of these ‘Ghost Farms’ in New Zealand)

Neville and his wife Denise had no idea that the wastewater on the Buxton Farm was used to soak up the local dairy plants wastewater, it was only discovered in 2020 after the local community decided to fight Fonterra’s proposal to build a wastewater treatment plant on the property. The community was most unhappy at the prospect of an industrial plant with huge ponds in their rural setting they felt that this should be in an industrial zoned area. Since this Fonterra started investigating other locations for the plant. Fonterra’s original proposal however drew the local community to the testing of bores close to the farm to see what condition their water was in, it was only then that Neville and Denise realised there could be problems with their water.

Neville and Denise had purchased their piece of land in 2010 and while Neville was building the house, both he and Denise drank the bore water, when construction of the house was finished Denise chose to drink rainwater however Neville thought the bore water tasted better, so he drank that.  Fonterra tested some of the local communities bore water however there had been an 18month wait for the final results to be sent to them Fonterra never offered to test Denise and Nevilles wastewater. Fonterra reported that they did not do this because the ground water flow from Buxton Farm went north and Neville and Denise’s  property is to the west.

Fonterra had been testing the bore water of some locals, although there had been an 18-month wait to have results sent to them. The company never offered to test Denise and Neville’s water because Fonterra thought the flow of ground water from Buxton Farm went north and the Ross’s farm lay to the west. It was 10 years after they moved onto their property that the couple got their first test results which was found to be really high, however they did not know what the test result meant.

You can’t see nitrate-nitrogen in the water because its colourless, odourless and tasteless and nitrogen cannot be boiled away, boiling concentrates the levels of nitrates. The amount of nitrogen allowed in New Zealand’s drinking water is 11.3 milligrams per litre, this is the level suggested by the World Health Organization as reported to avoid what they call ‘Blue Baby Syndrome’ which is a fatal condition caused by consuming too much nitrate during pregnancy or via bottle feeding.

The amount allowed in drinking water in New Zealand is 11.3 milligrams per litre (mg/L). It’s a level suggested by the World Health Organisation to avoid ‘blue baby syndrome’, a fatal condition caused by consuming too much nitrate during pregnancy, or via bottle feeding. The nitrate is reported to reduce the ability of the red blood cells to release oxygen to tissues which can suffocate a baby thus turning the baby blue. Only one fatal incidence of this has been recorded in New Zealand. However other studies have showed the connection with nitrates in drinking water and colorectal cancer.

This news article also reports although there is evidence, its not strong evidence that shows a possible association between nitrate in drinking water with bladder and breast cancer, thyroid disease and birth defects. (This news article does not go into details of the source of information of these studies, where and when, by whom)  Other evidence, although not as strong, shows a possible association between nitrate in drinking water with bladder and breast cancer, thyroid disease and birth defects. It was when Neville’s wife was at a gathering in the local community hall of local community that were concerned about the Fonterra  wastewater plant proposal when she found out about the nitrates and the association with cancer. It had been two years earlier that Neville had been diagnosed with a  terminal brain tumour.

The results of their bore water tests were above New Zealand’s standards and well above those levels associated with colorectal cancer, therefore she had reason to think that this was part of the reason her husband is so sick, this was extremely upsetting for her. At the time this article was reported sadly Neville was extremely sick, had been in remission. Although Denise and Neville were not dairy farmers, they are not anti-dairy farmers and not anti Fonterra either, they saw both as being an important part of New Zealand’s economy. Denise said that Fonterra had been helpful since the quality of their water was discovered however Neville’s response was as to Fonterra’s wastewater being dumped next door  “is a bit untidy in regards to human beings” as he wondered if there is a better solution.

Although Denise says , in recent times there have been deaths in the area due to cancer  however there is no suggestion its due to Fonterra’s Ghost Farms, but has left Denise wondering. This has left Neville and his wife worrying about the rest of the neighbourhood too. Fonterra supplied Neville and Denise with a filtration system to remove the nitrate from the water, they supplied 38 water filter systems to other properties near the Hautapu factory because of groundwater contamination.  Fonterra now has another option for dealing with its waste water from the Hautapu factory, this project would see the wastewater from the Hautapu wastewater managed by the municipal system. Waikato District Council reported that Fonterra had bailed out of the project because of the cost impact to Fonterra and the uncertainty of cost, commercial arrangement and delivery times.

Cambridge is not the only area in New Zealand that Fonterra has supplied water filters to because of their plant’s wastewater spreading. People in the dairy intensive Canterbury area have also been given new filters by Fonterra, like Denise and Neville had no idea they were living close to Fonterra’s ‘ghost farms’, where Fonterra and other smaller dairy companies do just as Fonterra do with their wastewater. Often these farms are irrigated with wastewater for decades and also hold resource consents just as Fonterra do.

It is noted that these consents allow the amount of nitrogen in wastewater to be far higher than the new freshwater rules that they allow farmers on grazed land as fertilizer (190kg per hectare per year of synthetic nitrogen). Unless the wastewater is more than 5 percent nitrogen it’s not considered fertiliser.  Because these wastewater farms hold resource consent for disposal of waste water products they are able to sidestep the new rule and continue to spread their heavy nitrate waste water because their consents allow them to.

Because the wastewater farms hold resource consents for disposal of waste products, they will be able to sidestep the new rule which comes into play in July and continue to spread as much as their consent permits. Fonterra have been reported to saying “ they work between the guidelines of councils”. Fonterra have reported they have major plans over the next 10 years, with $400 million earmarked for upgrades to wastewater plants at their  Edgecumbe, Whareroa, Maungaturoto, Te Awamutu, Longburn, Reporoa, Kapuni, Clandeboye and Hautapu factories and aims to reduce the nitrogen in the water before it reaches other farms.

The Otago Times article reports “In some cases the differences between the new synthetic nitrogen cap for fertiliser and the amount of nitrogen for dairy companies in which they are allowed to spread waste water on these ghost farms is eye watering” It has been reported that the current highest consent amount is in Canterbury. The Clandeboye plant is allowed to spread up to 600kg of nitrogen per hectare per year. Environment Canterbury’s 2020 nitrate risk map links past wastewater irrigation with high levels of nitrate-nitrogen in the area. One survey describes a “contamination plume” and notes 53 wells, mostly near the Clandeboye dairy factory and Seadown fertiliser storage facility, exceed drinking water standards for nitrate-nitrogen. Fonterra has supplied two Canterbury homes with water systems because of nitrate in the ground water, and another house with a UV filter.

In the Waikato, Fonterra’s Hautapu plant has a resource consent to spread up to 500kg per hectare per year on Bruntwood farm and 400kg on Buxton and Bardowie farms. Maximum results from monitored bores show a reading of 17.80mg/L for Bruntwood farm, 18mg/L for Buxton farm and 26.8mg/L for a bore on Bardowie farm.

In Reporoa, wastewater has been spread for decades and at one point up to 800kg of nitrate-nitrogen was allowed, this has dropped to 420kg. The highest average reading from the 2017/18 fiscal year from a bore in the area is 18.7mg/L. RNZ’s efforts to gather resource consents and monitoring results from wastewater farms nationwide found some consents don’t require monitoring. For those that do, most show levels of concern in some, but not all the bores monitored for many of the farms where water is spread. Even if monitoring is a condition of resource consents, most don’t require a reduction in the amount of wastewater spread if the ground water is affected.

One must question the  “cumulative regulatory failure” of councils, and what about the Resource Management Act (RMA). Obviously the Governments whipping boy is the New Zealand farmer, where is the accountability and responsibly here? Oh, that’s right its always the farmers fault, thrown them under their tractors. One rule for the companies and another for the farmers. Get rid of cows, after all the International Biannual Parliamentary Gatherings (IPU) and the annual Global Convention of mayors are obsessed with their plan namely ‘The Global New Green Deal’, cull the cows, get of the cars off the roads, build at least 500km of cycleways across New Zealand and plant small urban forests in namely Human Habitats. Rural migration to Urban City highly populated and controlled area’s of surveillance. Whoever owns the land, controls the food hence controls the people. Farmers worldwide report land and water grabs. Severe restriction imposed on them so that they sell of their farms at cheap prices. Or authorities demand they give up their farms as they are doing in parts of Africa.

Note: The NZ Local Government Act 2002, just after  the Act was introduced Crown Law found a major loophole as to Trade Waste Water, this  has allowed NZ Companies to leach contaminants, chemicals, high level of nitrates into drains, hence leaching into water ways and some washed out to sea. It has been reported that  some treatment plants have been unable to deal with this. Twenty year have gone by the Act has never been amended although often bought to the Govts attention, as it has been bought to Nanaia Mahuta’s attention more recently. No prosecutions, no fines the government use an educative approach and the contamination continues. Ammonia in some of this contaminated water has eaten into under ground pipes hence they have been eaten away by the ammonia. These pipes cost rate payers approx.., $5,000 per metre to replace.  This my dear friends is the ‘New Global Green Deal’ scam. Nanaia Mahuta reports as to the Three Waters Reform that  the wastewater system will have to wait a couple of years before they deal with this. The massive plan to rob rate payers continues.  Wake Up New Zealand, the governments transparency is Zilch.

Share, share, share this information.  Please visit my website for further ‘Wake Up NZ’ information.

Carol Sakey https://wakeupnz.org