Chris Finlayson, Michael Dreaver, Miriama Kamo, Sir Douglas Graham

Now we know why Miri got sniffy

Marae Investigates - Miriama Kamo v John Ansell with scroll - 21-10-12

You may remember my Marae Investigates appearance with Peter Meihana on the subject of Maori privilege.

I remember it mainly for the tart parting shot of TVNZ anchorperson Miriama Kamo.

I’d just pointed out — with the help of a wide scroll festooned with privileges  — that for at least 20 years we’ve been  paying the equivalent of a South Canterbury Finance bailout every year to Maori — $1.5 billion — simply for being Maori.

And yet the supposedly neutral Kamo had the cheek to snort, “Maori privilege is a ridiculous proposition!”

Now, thanks to Winston Peters and the Sunday Star-Times, we find that Kamo’s partner is far and away the biggest earner in the business of negotiating the surrender of New Zealand assets to Maori.

Since National came to power in late 2008, Michael Dreaver’s company The Policy Shop has earned $1.5 million from negotiating away your money to more than 20 iwi in the Auckland and Hauraki area.

Except that The Policy Shop is not just Michael Dreaver’s company.

mike dreaver and miriama kamo  at qantas media awards

Michael Dreaver and Miriama Kamo: riding First Class on the Treaty Gravy Train.

Finlayson's Top Treaty Negotiators' Fees 2008-13

According to the Companies Office, The Policy Shop Limited has one other director. You guessed her…

Policy Shop directors - Companies Office

So Miriama Kamo is making a tidy sum helping Chris Finlayson dispense Maori privilege.

(This includes the Treaty claimants’ privilege of not having to pay back one cent of their generous legal aid grants when they win the millions negotiated with her firm.)

She herself probably owes her job to Maori privilege, given her uneven facial feature, which I suspect would disqualify any non-Maori broadcaster from the role of television newsreader.

So for Kamo to deny the existence of Maori privilege after all that is breathtaking.

(Given her partner’s profession, I won’t write what I’m really thinking.)

Dreaver and Kamo, it seems, are go-betweens, not just for Appeaser-General Chris Finlayson, but also for Sir Douglas Graham.

Sir Douglas Graham in dockGraham was the National justice minister who surrendered $170 million worth of your assets to Ngai Tahu.

(Even though that tribe in 1840 had no more than 2,000 members scattered in pockets around the edge of the South Island, they still pocketed all the greenstone in the middle.)

Not content with ripping off the shareholders of New Zealand Inc., Graham, seen here in the dock, was also convicted of misleading shareholders in Lombard Finance, at a cost to the country of another $111 million.

Graham has himself earned $186, 901 doing Treaty deals for his successor — a minister who measures his success by how much of his country he can surrender in how little time.

Finlayson told the Star-Times the negotiators’ results spoke for themselves.

In Tamaki Makaurau, for example, there had been no settlements at all when Dreaver was appointed in 2008 and there were now seven agreements in principle and a signed deed of settlement with 12 groups around Auckland’s volcanic cones.

He described the 14 negotiators as “one of the top teams assembled in Government”.

In that chamber of Chamberlains that passes for our Parliament, he may well be right.

Chris Finlayson, Mike Butler, Ngai Tahu, Treatygate

Runaway gravy train: 11 claims by 1920, over 2000 now

The Dominion Post has published this excellent  letter from author and journalist Mike Butler.

Mike is one of a team of researchers who’ve been advising me on Treaty issues for the past year.

His file of all Treaty settlements since 1989 on Muriel Newman’s NZCPR site is the most comprehensive I’ve seen.

In supporting my Colourblind State referendum, Mike points out that

Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson calls Mr Ansell’s campaign “nuts”, but in his rush to get through a pile of settlements, he seems unaware that major claims were settled before 1960.

and that

With 2034 claims lodged by 2009 but only 11 claims brought to Parliament in 1920, it’s clear that now money is the motivator.

Ngai Tahu’s ongoing rort

  • 1867 — Ngai Tahu Full and Final Settlement 1
  • 1906 — Ngai Tahu Full and Final Settlement 2
  • 1944 — Ngai Tahu Full and Final Settlement 3
  • 1973 — Ngai Tahu Full and Final Settlement 4
  • 1998 — Ngai Tahu Full and Final Settlement 5
  • 2012 — Ngai Tahu Not So Full and Final 17% Top-up.

Thanks Mike for all your great work and support.

Chris Finlayson, John Key, John Robinson, Maorification, Ngati Toa, Te Rauparaha, Treaty of Waitangi, Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington

Appeaser-General to compensate cannibal's tribe for loss of South Island dining rights

Appeaser-General Chris Finlayson wants to pay the descendants of Te Rauparaha $10 million of your money for the loss of their right to capture, kill and cannibalise the Maori of the South Island.

In the words of Dr John Robinson in his book The Corruption of New Zealand Democracy — A Treaty Overview:

Mr Finlayson has made an offer for a Treaty settlement to Ngati Toa, which includes a payment of $40 million, plus $10 million in recognition of Ngati Toa’s former marine empire, $6.31 million for capacity building and an additional amount of $100,000 as claimant funding (the Government also promised to support applications for resourcing from the Crown Forestry Rental Trust).

Ah yes, the CFRT — the agency that refused to pay Robinson for his research on Maori depopulation until he’d reversed his conclusion to echo their politically-correct view of history. 

But how intriguing that Ngati Toa possessed a ‘marine empire’ — presumably patrolled by a blue-water navy. And not exactly for peacekeeping purposes, as we shall discover in a future post.

And how intriguing that the supposedly Honourable Chris Finlayson intends to give $10 million of your money to Ngati Toa for the loss of this marine empire?

I know Chris Finlayson. We were on good terms until I realised that he, along with John Key, were traitors intent upon giving my country back to its former owners, with no payment for improvements.

He is also a master lawyer and self-styled champion of plain English. He has the skills to say exactly what he means with deadly precision. When he wants to.

But this time — as with so many of his pronouncements on matters Maori — he doesn’t want to. So I’ll say it for him.

By ‘loss of Ngati Toa’s marine empire’, Finlayson means the loss of the right of these Taranaki invaders (who wiped out the tribe that had been here for centuries) to paddle across Cook Strait and slaughter, enslave and feast upon the South Island Maori.

Compensating the descendants of their chief cannibal, Te Rauparaha (whose depraved devourings earns him a separate post), for the loss of that right is going to cost you and me $10 million.

And that’s just the appetiser for a much larger Ngati Toa claim.

As part of the package developed to recognise Ngati Toa’s maritime empire, the Crown offers to explore the development of a redress instrument that recognises Ngati Toa’s role as Kaitiaki of Cook Strait and the coastal marine area in Port Underwood and Pelorus Sound… and supports Ngati Toa in developing a statutory plan articulating Ngati Toa’s values in relation to these areas.

While most of us cast our vote and make submissions, the Ngati Toa extended family will have the right to prepare management and planning documents — all because of the warfare of ancestors 190 years ago.

And not just warfare. Also the cruellest imaginable slavery and cannibalism — including the eating of women and children.

And for these despicable acts, plus wrongs done to them by the evil white man that Finlayson has yet to reveal (or should that be invent?) the tribe is to be rewarded. By you.

It is strange and indeed corrupt to make such a generous offer of taxpayers’ money without settling the grounds for the complaint.

As I wrote at the time to the Minister, “The situation as I understand it is in contradiction to common sense and logic. Surely there would be no consideration of a settlement in the absence of a clearly specified wrong.”

Surely not? Yet that’s exactly what’s happening. Finlayson wants to pay $10 million of your money to a tribe for no reason he is prepared to divulge.

Here the truth of what happened in a past century is not to be determined by historians in an open and public debate, but written by the aggrieved party, about to profit from a settlement based on a biased interpretation, behind closed doors and after the settlement is agreed.

Again in the words of Minister Finlayson, “The Ngati Toa historical account is being negotiated concurrently with the rest of the Ngati Toa settlement and will be agreed before the deed of settlement is signed… All settlement redress, including the historical account, is confidential while under negotiation.”

You read correctly. Your head lawyer is rewriting the tribe’s history with the tribe, behind closed doors, in order to concoct a reason to pay the tribe with your money for something your forefathers almost certainly did not do to their forefathers.

What kind of an idiot is Chris Finlayson? Answer: a ‘useful idiot’. 

But look at this next bit:

Even the very little information available shows that the basis of the settlement is wrong. The claimed maritime empire never existed. This was made clear by the Waitangi Tribunal:

“We consider the idea of a sustained ‘overlordship’ to have little basis in Maori customary thinking. … the idea of an overlordship is now seen as the legacy of an imperial rhetoric.”

So even the ridiculously pro-Maori Waitangi Tribunal does not agree with the Appeaser-General that Ngati Toa possessed a blue water navy.

The Maori had the great luck that the colonial power was 19th century Great Britain.

Damn right they did. Imagine if they’d run into the Spaniards. Or the Belgians.

Or, worse, if the tables had been turned and the Maoris had colonised Britain. Imagine that. Would they have treated with the inhabitants — or on them?

(Remember the Taranaki tribes’ discourteous response to being welcomed ashore by the peace-loving Moriori in the Chathams — to capture, enslave or exterminate all but a few of their hosts.)

The concept of citizenship developed through the Cromwell revolution, the Glorious Revolution, the French and American revolutions, and the calls to end slavery (which succeeded across the British Empire in 1833) had become accepted.

The British, like all races, had a bloodthirsty history. But by 1840, they’d put their piracy and slavery behind them.

British politicians and the Colonial Office wanted to work with other peoples and respect their rights. Article Three of the Treaty of Waitangi promises that equality.

That promise of equal rights by the then-greatest civilisation on earth to a population of Stone Age tribesmen was evidence that the British, far from being the bully boys of modern myth, were in fact the most compassionate of colonisers. 

But equality is nowhere near good enough for the Maori leaders of today. They quite sensibly prefer the reverse takeover model — especially as our leaders seem dumb enough to give it to them.

This should be the clear basis for constitutional reform if the country is to move forward together, 170 years later.

Instead there are continuing claims, and settlements, based on bloodthirsty conquest. The example of the fate of the Chatham Islanders is not unique.

The Moriori paid a high price for appeasing the Maori. As will we if the relentless Maorification of our institutions continues.

In the case that has interested me particularly here, concerning the south Wellington coast, we find that Ngati Toa showed no respect for Ngati Ira’s love of the land, customary title or wahi tapu.

They killed them, enslaved them, and drove them out.

Now their descendants demand the rights that were denied the former inhabitants of this land.

Words change their meaning. Culture, tikanga, changes with time as well as differing between tribes. Wahi tapu is said to refer to a few artefacts but is then called upon to justify control of the whole Kaipara Harbour.

And of course Kaipara Maori are using wahi tapu as an excuse to block the installation of power turbines on the harbour floor. No doubt greasing the iwi’s palm with the appropriate bribe will quiet the upset spirits.

Tangata whenua once was established by living in a place so that after just ten years in Wellington Te Atiawa could claim ownership and the right to sell that land.

Ngati Toa and Te Atiawa only arrived in Wellington two decades and one decade, respectively, before the settlers. And yet they demand compensation of many millions of dollars.

Now those who have lived their whole lives in a place, even for several generations, both Maori and non-Maori, are refused that status, which is claimed by descendants of the temporary residents of 1840, no matter where they now live.

Dr Robinson gets to the heart of the matter here:

The focus is no longer on a search for the truth. History is reinterpreted and reinvented to suit political aims. Historical accounts may even be omitted when making settlements, or written by the complainant behind closed doors, out of view of the public whose money and land are being handed over.

It’s time to expose the Maorification scammers, starting with the Appeaser-General who has made it all so very possible.

I’ll be blogging on this and more in due course.

You will read of the astonishing lengths to which Finlayson went to avoid saying the word ‘free’ when pressed by ACT’s David Garrett about public access to beaches during the Marine and Coastal Areas debate.

You will read gory evidence of what a depraved beast was Te Rauparaha,  for whose crimes against humanity you will soon be asked to compensate his great-great grandchildren. (That’s right, you will be paying them.)

You will read about the true history of the Treaty of Waitangi, including its fraudulent reinvention in the 1980s that kick-started the Maorification scam.

By the time I’ve finished, the Treaty conmen will be thoroughly exposed, with no big words to hide behind.

For now, I suggest you get a copy of The Corruption of New Zealand Democracy – A Treaty Overview by John Robinson.

Anthony Hubbard, Chris Finlayson, Constitutional Advisory Panel, Maorification, Michael Cullen, Pita Sharples, Sir Tipene O'Regan, Sunday Star-Times, Treaty of Waitangi

Maorification of Constitution begins as Sharples stacks advisory panel

This really stinks.

If you thought the Marine and Coastal Areas Act was a hijack of democracy, it’s nothing compared to what’s coming.

Next on the Maori-National government’s Maorification agenda is an all-out assault on the New Zealand Constitution itself.

Once they’ve had their way with that, New Zealand as we know it will be gone.

The Maorification of the Constitution began on Thursday with the naming of a wildly disproportionate Constitutional Advisory Panel.

In a country where 68% of the people are European and 15% are Maori, the committee is stacked 50-50.

A 50-50 split may be even. But it’s hardly fair.

The only New Zealand population it remotely resembles is our prison population. 

Pakeha capture

What is the smiling tiger Pita-Peter Sharples up to? No doubt he’s planted a tame Pakeha or two in the panel to give him the crucial majority?

Well, looking down the list above, I see two interesting names.

First, Michael Cullen — my ‘Wastemaster-General’ in the Taxathon TV ad of 2005.

This is the former finance minister  who so loved his country that he quite deliberately booby-trapped the economy with a decade of deficits — just to make life harder for the incoming government.

And how does the not-so-Honourable Michael make his living these days?

Why, partly as Principal Treaty Claims Negotiator for Tuwharetoa.

(The tribe to which,  as Treaty Negotiations Minister, he awarded over $100 million of your money in the 2008 ‘Treelords’ settlement.)

Doesn’t that smell a bit fishy to you?

If Cullen is not tame enough, one of the other Pakeha members is former National minister John Luxton.

The panel bio notes that Luxton has expertise in Crown-Maori relations, experience in co-management (as co-chair of the Waikato River Authority) and representing Maori interests.

But at least former ACT MP and investigative journalist Deborah Coddington ought to be a safe bet, right?

I don’t think so. See my UPDATE 3 below.

Hiding the agenda

The consitutional review is  a condition of John Key’s uniquely unnecessary coalition appeasement (sorry, agreement) with the Maori Party.

You know it’s going to be bad when Anthony Hubbard of the Socialist Star-Times tries to snow you that the newly-named panel is  “unlikely to be more than a Mad Hatter’s tea party of unanswerable riddles and pointless in-fighting”.

Yeah right.

The government’s  main agenda is obvious: to elevate the bogus version of the Treaty of Waitangi to the status of official sacred cash cow for their Maori con artist mates to plunder at will.

But look how this lefty journo does his best to keep that news from you.

(Actually you can’t look unless you’ve got the actual paper. His column’s not online.)

First Mr Hubbard diverts your attention to the republican issue.

He pretends that the real reason the committee won’t be looking at ditching the monarchy is that John Key doesn’t want to.

The real reason, of course, is that the Maori Party doesn’t want to. Replacing the Queen could kill the golden Treaty goose. And we can’t have that.

Then he tries to make you believe that the big issues for the panel will be the size of parliament, and the length of the parliamentary term.

And then, and only then — in column six of his six-column column — does he casually gloss over the real hidden agenda:

Some of the other subjects for the committee — the Treaty, Crown-Maori relationships and Maori representation — are contentious in theory but in practice many people find them boring most of the time. New Zealand voters tend to fall asleep when the word “constitution” is mentioned.

Yawn, yawn, nothing to see here, move on.

Boring you to sleep

No doubt the Star-Times, Sharples and Obfuscator-General Finlayson will be pumping out lots of big, boring words to try and keep you comatose for the duration of this constitutional stitch-up. 

But I plan to be doing the exact opposite — stripping their bloated word-carcasses of their fat, and distilling from the layers of putrid gobbledygook their true meaning and hitherto-hidden agenda.

You know where to come for the real truth.

Sharples apparently thinks his Constitutional Advisory Panel is a ‘good mix’.

 Course he does. He’s shamelessly stacked it with a quarter more Maori and a quarter fewer Europeans than their populations warrant.

Ngai Tahu leader Sir Tipene O’Regan and legal scholar John Burrows will lead a government appointed panel which is to lead public discussion on constitutional issues including the status of the Treaty of Waitangi.

Panellists like Sir Tipene (who a friend used to know as Steve “before he became a Maori”. and who told a friend of a friend that he is Tipene “only in certain circles”) will undoubtedly try to lead the public. 

And when he does, I hope by then the public will be savvy enough to push back.

80s Treaty tricks

I hope people like you will ask people like Sir Steve to show you proof that the Treaty is a ‘partnership’ that contains ‘principles’.

Because they won’t be able to.

Unless they’re written in invisible ink, there’s nothing whatsoever in the Treaty about partnerships or principles.

Why not? Because they were conjured up in the 1980s out of thin air.

They were the figments of the activist imaginations of a judge, Robin Cooke, and a prime minister, Geoffrey Palmer (who later regretted it, and who some say resigned because of the damage he knew he’d cause).

Once Cooke and Palmer had cooked up this fake Treaty of Waitangi, it became much easier for guys like Tipene-Steve to extort money from you and me.

There is only one place this panel will try to lead you: away from the truth.

Do not go there.

The real deal

The truth is that the Treaty was a simple deal done mainly because the northern Maori had been begging the Brits for ten years to protect them from three very real threats:

  • Vengeful Maori — tribes plotting utu for Ngapuhi’s musket massacres of the 1820s.
  • Vengeful Froggies — French would-be colonisers bent on avenging the massacre of Marion du Fresne and his crew in 1772.
  • Bad Brits — escaped convicts and other disreputables causing trouble in lawless Kororareka.

Without the Treaty, the tribal musketeer-slaver-cannibals would have slaughtered and eaten each other to extinction by 1860.

(I’m not making this up. Between 1825-40, Maori had already blasted, hacked, boiled and gnawed back their numbers from 120,000 to 50-60,000. That, Tariana Turia, was New Zealand’s true holocaust.)

The Treaty deal was that the British got the country, and the Maori got the same rights as the British.

That was pretty much it.

By any measure, it was an excellent deal for the times.  

I’m working on a series of posts that will spell out, point by crystal clear point, what happened before and after the signing of the Treaty — and how  various conmen have been distorting the truth ever since.

But back to this poisonous panel.

Who will speak for non-Maori?

 At least Dr Sharples, unlike Hubbard, is honest enough to admit the panel’s main purpose:

“An important part of the review process will be consultation with Maori, particularly on the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in our constitution,” Dr Sharples said. 

The most important part, I’m sure he meant to say.

“The members of this are well placed to seek out and understand the perspectives of Maori on these important issues.”

Indeed the five Maori members and one Maori employee certainly are.

My question is: who will speak for the 85% of New Zealanders who are not Maori?

And will their views count?

The panel will also consider electoral issues including the size of parliament, the length of the parliamentary term, and number and size of electorates and the status of Maori seats

And with the panel overloaded with Maori, guess what they’ll find?

It will also consider whether New Zealand should have a written constitution and Bill of Rights issues.
Dr Sharples said a Royal Commission was considered to carry out the work, “but just selecting people of mana and a range and setting them up under their own authority and giving a lengthy period would have the same effect”

Course it would. Rigging your own panel is much cleverer than expecting a judge to do your bidding.

(Mind you, our judges are biased enough, as we know from Lord Cooke, and the bench that overturned 160 years of settled law with the Ngati Apa decision on the foreshore and seabed in 2003.)

“These guys don’t actually set the kaupapa, it still comes back to parliament. A Royal Commission usually comes up with some golden recommendations and if you don’t take them people question you.”

Well, we can’t have people questioning us for ignoring expert recommendations (like the 2025 Taskforce), can we?

But with Prime Appeaser John Key and Activist-General/Obfuscator-General/Appeaser-General (you choose) Chris Finlayson driving the Maorification agenda, don’t expect critical  questions to be tolerated.

And if Finlayson’s arrogance over the Marine and Coastal Areas Act is any guide — not to mention chair Tau Henare’s rude put-downs of  submitters to the Maori Affairs Select Committee — don’t expect straight answers. 



One of my more abusive commenters has pointed out the difficulty of identifying by race, given that many of us are a mixture of two or more. Certainly, we know that all Maori are.

So here’s an idea: Since we’re such a multicultural lot, why don’t we drop this preoccupation with ethnicity, metaphorically rip off our skins and set up a colour-blind state — with one  law, and one electoral roll,  for us all.

Could work?


We now find that Sir Tipene/Steve O’Regan is being sued by the Financial Markets Authority for his role in the Hanover Finance collapse.

Is it OK for a man being sued by one government agency to preside over another government agency — especially one advising on matters at the very core of our national being?

No Prime Minister, it’s not OK.


I had puzzled at why the notoriously biased Sharples would include former ACT MP Deborah Coddington on his tame advisory panel.

Was it to give the appearance of balance? Or is Deborah really a wet in dry’s clothing?

(Or just a wet, full stop?)

This Herald article confirms that theory, where she happily parrots the views of tame Treaty industry historian Paul Moon:

“Yes, the English ripped off the Maori, too, when it came to getting them to sign the Treaty of Waitangi.
“Henry Williams deliberately mistranslated from Maori to English to protect his land holdings, and numerous other travesties were perpetrated.”

Then we have this ridiculously saccharine account of Deborah’s dinner with the Turias.

Note the priceless ending: “Leaving is like saying goodnight to kin, such is the warmth of Tariana and George Turia.”

And I’ve no doubt the Turias are very warm, hospitable and genuinely caring people, as are most Maori.

(And, for that matter, most humans.)

But Tariana is the leader of an openly racist political party. And Deborah is an investigative journalist. 

Does this totally uncritical restaurant review suggest to you that Ms Coddington can be trusted to fairly represent your wishes?

Chris Finlayson, Corruption of New Zealand Democracy, Crown Forestry Rental Trust, John Robinson, Maorification, Plain English, Treaty of Waitangi Research Unit, Victoria University

TREATY CORRUPTION CONFESSION: researcher forced to rewrite report to fit official anti-Pakeha myth

On Tuesday evening I witnessed an extraordinary confession.

It was at the launch of Dr John Robinson’s explosive new book Corruption of New Zealand Democracy — A Treaty Overview.

This book is a smoking musket that exposes how the New Zealand state is prepared to lie in order to con the public into believing that its Treaty guilt trip is real and the grievance gravy train justified.

Author Dr John Robinson, a socialist, confessed that, much to his shame, he once caved in to an ultimatum by his state agency clients to doctor his findings on the cause of Maori 19th century depopulation to fit the government’s politically-correct pro-Maori, anti-Pakeha, Brit-bashing myth.

If he did not comply, he would not be paid for his work.

If you’re pressed for time or hungry for the meat, zoom down to the paragraph just below the graph. 

Otherwise, let me tell you a bit about the author…

Dr John Robinson is no ordinary doctor. He earned his doctorate at MIT. (The one in Massachusetts, not Manakau.)

He’s got two Master of Science degrees — in mathematics and physics.

He’s lectured at several universities.

As an interdisciplinary research scientist, he’s penned reports for all manner of respected, if acronymically-challenged, outfits, from the DSIR and OECD to the UNEP, UNU and UNESCO.

He’s researched and written books and papers on social science, energy, agriculture, business, transport, capital, the future, and the history of Wellington’s south coast.

He’s become a sought-after expert on Maori history, most recently writing a book on the Battles of Tapu Te Ranga (the island in Island Bay).

Lest you suspect his European ancestry may prejudice him against Maori, the book is full of evidence that Dr Robinson is a committed lefty, with a history of what the Left smugly call ‘heart politics’.

An example:

As a student in Boston and a lecturer in Rhode Island I travelled to Washington to join in a massive civil rights demonstration… Back in New Zealand I joined in the struggle for equal pay for women.

Not the sort of backstory that suggests racism, I think you’ll agree.

In fact, he seems to me to be a dangerous apologist for Maori gangs, perhaps even worthy of Lenin’s ‘useful idiot’ tag, coined for those who cuddle up to evil in the vain hope of reforming it:

When in the 1980s I interviewed the leader of Black Power in Auckland, he described how they were working to keep their children from a similar way of life, by building a thriving set of businesses to provide useful employment.

I believe the current equivalents are called P labs, John.

The gang problem runs deep, and has been created by successive governments, which … have so demonised these groups of young people that they have increasingly turned to antisocial and criminal activities.

The poor wee things — victims of demonic democrats. Yeah right.

Anyone who believes bureaucrats and MPs are the root cause of these ‘young people’ becoming thugs and drug dealers is asking to be called all sorts of things. But anti-Maori surely isn’t one of them.

Yet this thug-hugging liberal does not mince words when describing life in pre-colonial Aotearoa:

Maori culture was not just dysfunctional but mad, criminally insane.

The consequences of those decades of killing, social disruption, destruction of crops, infanticide, fear and uncertainty was a society in shock.

There was widespread desolation and devastation among Maori communities.

I say it again: this was before 1840, not after 1984.

(Though the author also has much to say about the effect of what he calls ‘voodoo economics’ on Maori in recent times.)

But back to the good doctor’s CV.

Dr Robinson has been hired to research and report on matters Maori by the following:

  • the Faculty of Business Studies at Massey University
  • the Royal Commission on Social Policy
  • the Ministry of Maori Affairs
  • Te Puni Kokiri
  • the Wellington South Coast Historical Society
  • the Treaty of Waitangi Unit at the Department of Justice
  • the Treaty of Waitangi Research Unit at Victoria University
  • the Crown Forestry Rental Trust.

And it’s the last of these organisations that he’s referring to when he says:

I was ordered to emphasise a catastrophic social experience that was contrary to the data.

The Crown Forestry Rental Trust was the funder. The client was the Treaty of Waitangi Research Unit at Victoria University.

Dr Robinson picks up the story (extra paragraph spacing by me for ease of reading):

Considerable sums are spent on employing academics and researchers to write reports supporting claims before the Waitangi Tribunal.

The Crown Foresty Rental Trust assists Maori to prepare, present and negotiate claims against the Crown, including funding research that is required to support the claimant’s argument.

Total assistance from the Trust to claimants in 2010 was $34.5 million. This is seriously big money and has a considerable impact on the direction of research into Maori history…

…Such directed efforts have a decided effect on the development and viability of university departments, and on the vision of the past that is told to the public and taught at schools and universities.

The subsequent emphasis then influences political debate and the direction of common law in New Zealand

I have worked in that industry.

In 2000 I analysed Maori demographic and land information for the northern South Island.

The data told a simple story. There was no correlation between land holdings and demography.

In other words, contrary to what his state paymasters wanted him to pretend, the decline in Maori population in the late 1800s was not caused by Maori losing their land.

Neither, surprisingly, did introduced European diseases have a lot to do with it.

There is no evidence that disease was a main cause of that decline, although it no doubt contributed.

By far the major cause, says Dr Robinson, was the lack of breeding stock caused by the slaughter of tens of thousands of young Maori males in the Musket Wars of the 1820s and 30s.

So Tariana Turia was right: there was a holocaust in New Zealand. It wiped out around half the population. Its perpetrators made the Rwandan Tutsi-butchers look like conscientious objectors.

But those perpetrators were Maori, not Pakeha.

An interesting and tragic irony was that even after this worldbeating orgy of ethnic cleansing, the male population still outnumbered the female. How could this be?

Seems it was also the custom of Maori to slaughter their daughters — for meat.

They stopped when they found the settlers valued their daughters more highly than they did — as prostitutes. Maori adapted quickly to commerce.

Graph: John Robinson. Red captions: John Ansell.

But this next bit is what really made me sit up…

My report was emphatically rejected by the Crown Forestry Trust. They claimed that it would obscure the true nature of the supposed “cataclysm” which afflicted Te Tau iwi between 1850 and 1900.

However, the data showed that there had been no such cataclysm. In fact, a demographic recovery was evident…

…But before I was paid, I was required to rewrite my report, to argue a deleterious impact from land loss during that period; that message had to be written in.

Extraordinary. Not so much that state standover tactics occur. (I’m told it’s rampant.) But that Dr Robinson has been brave enough to admit his reluctant compliance, on the record, in print.

Needless to say, I am not proud of that work, when I adapted the analysis away from the facts to fit the client’s requirements.

I hope you’re proud of yourself now, Dr Robinson. Because your revelation will, like the Climategate emails, change the way we view our supposedly non-corrupt state.

Significantly, I was not instructed to look further at what the numbers had to say. I continue now with the analysis that would have been followed by anyone free to search for the truth.

And he goes on to detail not just the true cause of Maori depopulation, but a catalogue of the corruption of language, education, politics and the law by the relentless Maorification movement.

And that movement most certainly includes the present Key/Finlayson regime. I’ll be telling you much more about them in upcoming posts.

As a plain English crusader, I particularly appreciate Dr Robinson’s exposé of the state’s deliberate, reprehensible misuse of language:

a lack of clarity and unbiased research has hindered the development of suitable and adequate policy, and continues across what remains of science in current New Zealand.

(And not just New Zealand, if recent climate science skullduggery is any guide.)

I found this sentence about Chris Finlayson’s deliberate obfuscation particularly chilling:

The National-Maori government has rewritten the foreshore and seabed legislation. I wish to be thorough and so tried to understand the text. I failed.

Now bear in mind this is no high school dropout scratching his empty head over the muddle-headed meanderings of some cardigan-clad clerk.

This is a doctor from MIT speaking about legislation crafted by the supposedly Honourable Christopher Finlayson MP, an avowed champion of plain English law.

(So much so that he compered the last Writemark Plain English Awards. I know — I recommended him for the job. I was friends with him. I used to believe he cared about New Zealand, not just Aotearoa. I was wrong.)

So how is it that in Finlayson’s law, according to Dr Robinson:

key words have many meanings and the operative meanings will be defined later by claimants.

That’s right, folks, by claimants. How sneaky is that?

It shows that Finlayson is every bit as naive or as biased (almost certainly the latter) as that other notable white Maori separatist, Doug Graham.

Dr Robinson cites what Graham had to say about legal linguistic precision in his day:

Treaty legislation has long been deliberately unclear. Former Treaty Minister Doug Graham stated in 1997 that this lack of clarity was no accident or inadvertence on the part of Parliament. Parliament has handed over the task of writing law to the courts.

And so it remains fourteen years later. The judges make our laws, and entrench the Maorification of Everything.

To allow them to do so, the Activist-General, formerly known as the Attorney-General, creates the foggiest legislation he can get away with.

He does this so his fellow-activist judicial mates can have free reign when called upon to clarify the confusion.

We’re being conned by a confusion conspiracy, and it’s time it was blown wide open.

Dr Robinson sums up our predicament well:

Modern society is founded on the concept of equality before the law. That principle has been established through centuries of struggle. It is stated in Article 3 of the Treaty and brought freedom to Maori slaves after 1840.

He reminds us that the British did not just end British slavery in 1833. They also ended Maori slavery in 1840.

The advent of law and order also put an end to centuries of Maori cannibalism and decades of utu-based slaughter.

The Jews may have invented the saying ‘an eye for an eye’. But it took Maori chiefs — or should that be chefs? — to make it a culinary reality.

When a tribe had shot and hacked its way to victory over its neighbour, the triumphant chief would go cannibalistic. And it was his rival’s eyes that were the first items on the menu. 

But back to the book.

Final word to Dr Robinson:

But New Zealand is spinning wildly away from equality to race-based privilege and separate development. That terrible evolution must stop.

The book is called The Corruption of New Zealand Democracy — A Treaty Overview by John Robinson. It’s only $20 and you can read it in an evening.

Once you’ve read it, you’ll never believe the government spin on the Treaty and Maorification again.

My apologies for not getting this post done by yesterday, as I intended. Needed the time to get it right.