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 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 22

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 953

Lifetime subscriber

#1824252 18-Jul-2017 10:57

shk292:

Provided the average number of voters per seat is the same regardless of the type of seat, does it really matter that there are race-based seats? Each person's vote is worth the same representation in Parliament.

That's exactly how it should be, but MMP still has a non-linearity - the overhang created by electorate seats and the underhang created by the 5% threshold. In 2008 the Maori Party took 5 Maori electorate seats, their parliamentary presence of 5/121 4% seats was well ahead of their popular vote of 2.4%. That year WinstonFirst polled 4% for zero seats. I find that undemocratic. Something similar for the Dunne and ACT parties. But at least they weren't race based qualifying votes.

MMP allows directly for Maori representation. No need for race based seats anymore. It's nothing but condescending paternalism.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1824253 18-Jul-2017 10:58

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

What would be gained from becoming a republic?

What would be lost?

I can see many gains, A New Zealander as head of state, getting rid of the treaty, A New Zealand for all New Zealanders, most importantly INDEPENDENCE.

Unilaterally dumping the Treaty of Waitangi would mean this nation no longer exists and sovereignty of Aotearoa would revert to the United Tribes.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1041

Trusted

Vocus

#1824255 18-Jul-2017 10:59

Wiggum:

Its not actually about who is disadvantaged anyway

But it actually is, in fact, that's the entire point.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1824256 18-Jul-2017 11:01

Every time this comes up, I wonder where the Maori voices are. Isn't this just a bunch of Pākehā once again pontificating on what is best for Maori?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1824258 18-Jul-2017 11:03

MikeB4:

Unilaterally dumping the Treaty of Waitangi would mean this nation no longer exists and sovereignty of Aotearoa would revert to the United Tribes.

The treaty is a contract between maori and the Crown. Not Maori and pakeha (everybody else in NZ).

If we dump the Crown, we dump the treaty.

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 953

Lifetime subscriber

#1824259 18-Jul-2017 11:03

I think you are overextending just a little bit there, Mike. There are a few tribal authorities that agree with you but I'd like to see your legislative basis, perhaps starting with the NZ Constitution Act 1986.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1824260 18-Jul-2017 11:05

Wiggum:

Oh lets not do this again please. Its not actually about who is disadvantaged anyway, its about segregation or discrimination on grounds of race.

Pakhea are discriminated against in NZ. In parliament, in scholarships for kids, and even in the Maori All black team :-)

And Maori are not discriminated against? In jobs, in housing, in the justice system, in society at large? Just asking.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1824263 18-Jul-2017 11:08

kryptonjohn:

I think you are overextending just a little bit there, Mike. There are a few tribal authorities that agree with you but I'd like to see your legislative basis, perhaps starting with the NZ Constitution Act 1986.

The Treaty ceded sovereignty to the Crown with guarantees to Maori. If the Treaty is dumped then the Sovereignty would no longer rest with the Crown and thus revert to the other party of the treaty being the United Tribes of Aotearoa.

Sir Geoffrey Palmer on the matter.... "Sir Geoffrey Palmer QC is a constitutional law expert, a former Prime Minister, Minister of Justice and AttorneyGeneral. He believes the Treaty of Waitangi is an important part of New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements and that organised government in New Zealand stems from the Treaty"

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1824264 18-Jul-2017 11:09

Rikkitic:

Wiggum:

Oh lets not do this again please. Its not actually about who is disadvantaged anyway, its about segregation or discrimination on grounds of race.

Pakhea are discriminated against in NZ. In parliament, in scholarships for kids, and even in the Maori All black team :-)

And Maori are not discriminated against? In jobs, in housing, in the justice system, in society at large? Just asking.

The law in NZ does not discriminate against Maori.

There are many examples where its legally OK (thanks to the treaty) to discriminate against Pakeha.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1824265 18-Jul-2017 11:09

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Unilaterally dumping the Treaty of Waitangi would mean this nation no longer exists and sovereignty of Aotearoa would revert to the United Tribes.

The treaty is a contract between maori and the Crown. Not Maori and pakeha (everybody else in NZ).

If we dump the Crown, we dump the treaty.

That's just nonsense

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1824266 18-Jul-2017 11:10

MikeB4:

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Unilaterally dumping the Treaty of Waitangi would mean this nation no longer exists and sovereignty of Aotearoa would revert to the United Tribes.

The treaty is a contract between maori and the Crown. Not Maori and pakeha (everybody else in NZ).

If we dump the Crown, we dump the treaty.

That's just nonsense

Give it some serious though.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1824267 18-Jul-2017 11:11

Rikkitic:

Every time this comes up, I wonder where the Maori voices are. Isn't this just a bunch of Pākehā once again pontificating on what is best for Maori?

Presumably what is best for all New Zealanders? Or do you mean we should have special race-based treatment?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1824269 18-Jul-2017 11:14

Wiggum:

The law in NZ does not discriminate against Maori.

There are many examples where its legally OK (thanks to the treaty) to discriminate against Pakeha.

And this makes you suffer ... how?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16318

Lifetime subscriber

#1824270 18-Jul-2017 11:16

Geektastic:

Rikkitic:

Every time this comes up, I wonder where the Maori voices are. Isn't this just a bunch of Pākehā once again pontificating on what is best for Maori?

Presumably what is best for all New Zealanders? Or do you mean we should have special race-based treatment?

I mean if you are going to talk about what is best for all New Zealanders, then shouldn't all New Zealanders be part of the conversation?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1824271 18-Jul-2017 11:18

Rikkitic:

Wiggum:

The law in NZ does not discriminate against Maori.

There are many examples where its legally OK (thanks to the treaty) to discriminate against Pakeha.

And this makes you suffer ... how?

Thats not the point. Discrimination is discrimination, and you seem to agree with it, when it suits.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 22