Maori Seats

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Maori Seats

1 | ... | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1828501 24-Jul-2017 15:35

Wiggum:
I'm amazed actually. Not one of you shows any remorse for this tragedy. Instead the excuses fly. Disgusting to say the least.

That is an extrapolation that is absurd. There were many Wars in Aotearoa as in many territories around the World. Was the tribal war terrible of course is was as was WW1, WW2, War of the Roses, Batlle of Hastings..... and so on.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1828512 24-Jul-2017 15:45

MikeB4:
Wiggum:

I'm amazed actually. Not one of you shows any remorse for this tragedy. Instead the excuses fly. Disgusting to say the least.

That is an extrapolation that is absurd. There were many Wars in Aotearoa as in many territories around the World. Was the tribal war terrible of course is was as was WW1, WW2, War of the Roses, Batlle of Hastings..... and so on.

Just hot air and more excuses.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1828516 24-Jul-2017 15:53

MikeB4:

That is an extrapolation that is absurd. There were many Wars in Aotearoa as in many territories around the World. Was the tribal war terrible of course is was as was WW1, WW2, War of the Roses, Batlle of Hastings..... and so on.

Why do you keep taking him seriously? He is just clamouring for attention.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1828521 24-Jul-2017 16:11

Rikkitic:

MikeB4:

That is an extrapolation that is absurd. There were many Wars in Aotearoa as in many territories around the World. Was the tribal war terrible of course is was as was WW1, WW2, War of the Roses, Batlle of Hastings..... and so on.

Why do you keep taking him seriously? He is just clamouring for attention.

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt however I agree with you he is just trolling and should not be feed any further.

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1828529 24-Jul-2017 16:21

Wiggum:

I'm amazed actually. Not one of you shows any remorse for this tragedy. Instead the excuses fly. Disgusting to say the least.

I'm sorry it happened but I wasn't involved, so no cause for remorse.

Mike

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1828532 24-Jul-2017 16:27

MikeAqua:

Wiggum:

I'm amazed actually. Not one of you shows any remorse for this tragedy. Instead the excuses fly. Disgusting to say the least.

I'm sorry it happened but I wasn't involved, so no cause for remorse.

Very well said. I apply the same line of thinking to both Maori and the Moriori people.

I'm sorry it happened but I wasn't involved, so no cause for remorse.

Unlike some of the other posters here who feel remorseful only for Maori.

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1828541 24-Jul-2017 16:37

Pumpedd:

Most Maori I know also want NZ to move on, it seems to be a outspoken minority that want to have it all.

Maybe a minority of Maori want to have it all. But guess what! A minority of Pakeha want to have it all too. And that minority already has most of it. The irony is breath-taking!

If you want social justice, then you're far better off looking at corporate tax dodges and family trusts and the like than at the Maori seats.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1828542 24-Jul-2017 16:38

Wiggum:

Very well said. I apply the same line of thinking to both Maori and the Moriori people.

I'm sorry it happened but I wasn't involved, so no cause for remorse.

Unlike some of the other posters here who feel remorseful only for Maori.

To quote a comedian I heard recently 'saying "save the rain-forest" doesn't mean F all other trees'.

Mike

frankv

5680 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1828558 24-Jul-2017 17:07

Wiggum:

frankv:

Wiggum:

Batman:

If you get seats and 51%, you get 51% of the seats.

Thats incorrect. We only know about overhangs and how many seats there will be after results are in.

So 51% of votes, can result in less than 50% of seats.

How?

http://www.otago.ac.nz/law/research/journals/otago036316.pdf

Jump to pg16, see the overhang. Lots of other related info in there too. Very interesting.

Note that is from a few years back.

In 2008, the Maori Party won five electorate seats. However, their party vote of 2.39 per cent would have entitled the Party to only three seats. Hence, the present parliamentary overhang of two has increased Parliament‟s size to 122 members. This means in order to form a government, the number of votes needed is 62. The latest ONE News Colmar Brunton poll has the National Party on 49 per cent. Assuming the Maori Party‟s electorate seats are held at the next election, National, if they received 50 per cent (or slightly more) of the party vote, would not have requisite numbers to form a single party government. This outcome woulld be completely undemocratic and fundamentally contrary to the expressed will of the New Zealand public

Read it.

Firstly, there's no mention of 51%... as you quoted, it says "50 per cent (or slightly more)", which I take to mean 50.1% or 50.2% or thereabouts... the rounding error involved in the calculations. Can you please give me an example of how 51% of votes can result in less than 50% of seats.

Secondly,it wouldn't be "fundamentally contrary to the expressed will of the New Zealand public". The "expressed will" is that (e.g.) National is marginally better than all the rest put together. The nonsense about the Maori Party (or any other minor party) being king-maker is ridiculous. At most, they get to choose between the two major parties, both of which a large minority of NZers have voted for. The reality is that the minor party would bargain for some minor (more or less in proportion to their size) alteration in Government policy that is important to them, and the rest of the policy would be what that large minority wanted.

Thirdly, this is an Honours project paper. It's not published, let alone peer-reviewed. It's just one student's (now an inconsequential lawyer) thoughts and opinions. A pretty weak basis for any kind of argument; I did an Honours project too (back in the 80s).

tdgeek

29751 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1828572 24-Jul-2017 17:35

Wiggum:

I'm amazed actually. Not one of you shows any remorse for this tragedy. Instead the excuses fly. Disgusting to say the least.

You should not imply that posters comments are disgusting. As Mike says

"The Chatham plus other Islands in the forties were not part of NZ at the time of the Treaty negotiations and signing."

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1828620 24-Jul-2017 18:50

tdgeek:

You should not imply that posters comments are disgusting. As Mike says

"The Chatham plus other Islands in the forties were not part of NZ at the time of the Treaty negotiations and signing."

You might want to refrain from quoting uninformed GZ commentators...

What the Treaty actually states is thus: (referring to the role of Governor Hobson)

...kai wakarite ki nga tanaga Maori o Nu Tirani Kia whakaaetia e nga Rangatira Maori te Kawanatanga o te Kuini ki nga wahi katoa o te wenua hei me nga motu.

Which literally translates to:

"...to be a person to arrange with the native men of New Zealand that the Governorship of the Queen may be assented to by the native chiefs in all places of the land and the islands."

There is a lot of misinformation being peddled in this thread! It makes me question the motivations of some...

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1828625 24-Jul-2017 18:59

6FIEND:
tdgeek:

You should not imply that posters comments are disgusting. As Mike says

"The Chatham plus other Islands in the forties were not part of NZ at the time of the Treaty negotiations and signing."

You might want to refrain from quoting uninformed GZ commentators...

What the Treaty actually states is thus: (referring to the role of Governor Hobson)

...kai wakarite ki nga tanaga Maori o Nu Tirani Kia whakaaetia e nga Rangatira Maori te Kawanatanga o te Kuini ki nga wahi katoa o te wenua hei me nga motu.

Which literally translates to:

"...to be a person to arrange with the native men of New Zealand that the Governorship of the Queen may be assented to by the native chiefs in all places of the land and the islands."

There is a lot of misinformation being peddled in this thread! It makes me question the motivations of some...

Okay, Treaty signed 1840, Chatham Island annexed 1842. Chatham were not part of NZ at the signing

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1828626 24-Jul-2017 19:03

Thank you Mike. I stand corrected on the Chathams. My apologies.

(and I am very aware of the irony! :-)

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1828694 24-Jul-2017 20:58

frankv:

Read it.

Firstly, there's no mention of 51%... as you quoted, it says "50 per cent (or slightly more)", which I take to mean 50.1% or 50.2% or thereabouts... the rounding error involved in the calculations. Can you please give me an example of how 51% of votes can result in less than 50% of seats.

The document I shared was what I found was helpful to understand how it all works. It was not meant to be proof of the statement I made previously. If you want proof, you don't need a document, or any study to confirm it. Do the math

Lets say National gets 50.83% of votes, that's 61 out of 120 seats in the house.

Now add 5 seats (MMP overhang).

National still has 61 seats, but 61 out of 125 = 48.8%.

Thats how I understand it works. Happy to be proved wrong as I am just trying to understand this whole thing myself. I did come across this fancy calculator online which I found interesting. It will be good to punch in the numbers and have a play with it.

http://www.elections.org.nz/voting-system/mmp-voting-system/mmp-seat-allocation-calculator

There have been lots of politicians over the years blabbering the above.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/vote-08/issues/678783/Maori-seats-distort-MMP-Dunne

"The continued existence of the Maori seats has long since gone past the bumper sticker slogans of race-based representation by opponents of the seats, or preserving the special place of Maori in the electoral system by supporters of the seats," he said.

"It is now an issue about totally distorting MMP and potentially perverting the will of the voters."

Mr Dunne said if current polling was an accurate reflection of voter intentions, the Maori Party was on track to win six, if not all seven, of the Maori electorate seats.

But the party was only polling between 2 percent and 3 percent of the party vote, which would entitle it to two or three seats.

"If this plays out at the ballot box, Parliament would have to grow by either four or five seats from 120 to 125 seats," he said.

"This overhang would result in either of the major parties having to cobble together a total of 63 rather than 61 seats to form a majority to govern."

Mr Dunne said if National's current polling became reality and it won 51 percent of the party vote it would have 61 or 62 seats in Parliament.

There are other examples of the same blabbering by other politicians too. Winston is another.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1828700 24-Jul-2017 21:11

tdgeek:

"The Chatham plus other Islands in the forties were not part of NZ at the time of the Treaty negotiations and signing."

I know that. The point I am trying to make here is that the Europeans were not nearly as bad to Maori as what Maori were to Moriori.

Chatham Islands being part of NZ at that time is not the point. Who committed those horrendous crimes in the Chatham Islands just 5 years before the treaty was signed? And more to the point, would the Chatham Islands be part of NZ today if the genocide of 1835 did not happen?

http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-BucTheC-t1-g1-t1-body1-d3-d4.html

1 | ... | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22