Settling Maori claims. Someone explain.

[peasea]

that's possibly true too; sealers and whalers may have been visiting NZ for 100+ years before the arrival of Cook. After all, Abel Tasman stumbled on NZ 130 years before Cook.

The other contentious issue is the archaeological remains in the East Cape supposedly showing European settlement 1000+ years ago: http://www.celticnz.co.nz/

Who knows, if Maori allowed scientists access to the sites it may disprove the Maori claim: I wonder why they don't get that access................maybe spending a few hundred million exploring those remains could save us billion$ down the track?

NAH! The Treaty is a legal document even if Maori are NOT the original inhabitants.
It might just mean the red haired Maori can claim off the black haired Maori.........

Exactly right. I've had a nosey around that website (and others such as onenzfoundation) and forgetting any race issues I think every avenue should be explored to find out the true history of this land; I find it all rather curious.

[davereid]

Exactly right. I've had a nosey around that website (and others such as onenzfoundation) and forgetting any race issues I think every avenue should be explored to find out the true history of this land; I find it all rather curious.

What I find most disturbing about the entire debate, is that it mostly focuses around arrival time. Its almost a case of "my flight number beats your flight number".

All New Zealanders are immigrants, without exception. Maori certainly didnt arrive in one boat, but rather in waves over several generations.

Should there then be a "cut off date" set as to who is tangata whenua ? Or should it be based on race ? (But where does that leave the pacific island immigrant ?)

IMHO we should diligently and honestly attemt to rectify, where practical land thefts and so on.

We should also diligently ignore race and flight number in determining how New Zealnds future evolves.

[short-circuit]

What I find most disturbing about the entire debate, is that it mostly focuses around arrival time. Its almost a case of "my flight number beats your flight number".

All New Zealanders are immigrants, without exception. Maori certainly didnt arrive in one boat, but rather in waves over several generations.

Should there then be a "cut off date" set as to who is tangata whenua ? Or should it be based on race ? (But where does that leave the pacific island immigrant ?)

IMHO we should diligently and honestly attemt to rectify, where practical land thefts and so on.

We should also diligently ignore race and flight number in determining how New Zealnds future evolves.

What about the small issues of colonization and oppression?

[short-circuit]

Like the morioris right?

Sure - no disputes there. No shifting responsibility though - that's a separate thread

[Bonez]

It's interesting there where some 1500 odd claims then all of a sudden it doubled prior to sept 2008.

[short-circuit]

It's interesting that proir to Sept 2008 there where some 1500 odd claims then all of a sudden it doubled though.

Wouldn't have something to do with the fact that NZ is nearing the cut off date for the claims process would it?

[Bonez]

Wouldn't have something to do with the fact that NZ is nearing the cut off date for the claims process would it?

Makes one wonder though doesn't it? Hopefully it'll be all wrapped up by the end of the next decade. Hope I'm around to see it.

[short-circuit]

Makes one wonder though doesn't it?

Makes perfect sense to me -

The thing I struggle with is that the party at fault has arbitrarily imposed a date, causing the claims process to be so condensed time-wise when the historical grievances took place over a long period of time.

[Bonez]

Makes perfect sense to me -

The thing I struggle with is that the party at fault has arbitrarily imposed a date, causing the claims process to be so condensed time-wise when the historical grievances took place over a long period of time.

It should be pointed out claims process has been going a few decades now.

[short-circuit]

It should be pointed out claims process has been going a few decades now.

Only two - not many in the scheme of things

[Bonez]

Only two - not many in the scheme of things

So you're saying 20 plus years to get your claims sorted and get the "I"s dotted and "T"s crossed is not enough time?

[short-circuit]

So 20 plus years to get your claims sorted and get the "I"s dotted and "T"s crossed is not enough time?

You try doing taking a government to court.

Then imagine that the crux your grievance occurred one hundred years ago.

[Bonez]

You try doing taking a government to court.

Then imagine that the crux your grievance occurred one hundred years ago.

There's still been plenty of time to submit them to the Waitangi Tribuneral one would imagine.

[short-circuit]

There's still been plenty of time to submit them to the Waitangi Tribuneral.

According to who? You? And?

[Bonez]

According to who? You? And?

So you're saying twenty years is not enough time to prepare a greivence? Just being devils advacate btw.

It's been quite an educational thread.