Naida Glavish

Ta Moko cartoon: Whaleoil reader is offended [guest post]


I’m seriously offended, and as offence can only be taken, not given, I decided to sit and think about it.

I’m offended over the reaction from the Ta Moko cartoons depicting a little Maori boy beaten with visible bruising. Not the cartoon itself, it?s quite factual, and I maintain if it was depicting a little Pakeha boy, or an Asian boy, or even a Jewish boy, it would be okay, or those communities would accept it and move on even though statistically, they are 4 times less to be the subject of family violence than a Maori, or 3 times less than a PI child.

Naida Glavish is a prominent Maori woman, and holds a lot of Mana within Maori, she COULD be an effective change agent, if she stood up and championed change instead of taking offence. Or, could she be offended mainly as she has been the subject of things in Whaleoil previously? My belief is she really needs to sit down and look at the real problem, that the main group of people or communities committing these violent offences are still in DENIAL, and instead of accepting there is an issue and doing something about it, she and many like her run out and decide to take a fence. Surround themselves with a shield, ignore, bury their heads and claim there is nothing wrong, and don?t you dare single out my community/culture, that?s racist. I wonder how many of the abused children, the ones who were killed, do they think its racist, was their abuse and murder racist? ??

I?m also offended by the Human Rights (Wrongs) commission, they are simply adding fuel to the fire, instead of coming out with the truth the rest of NZers already know and understand, and what is a massive thorn in NZ?s side on the international stage, they often side with the offended, and give them another reason to ignore the stats, the violence and the abuse of children. By siding with the perpetually offended, they are enabling the very abuse and violence that is so deeply rooted in those communities and cultures. ???

When you break it down, the role of the Human Rights Commission is to set and to keep standards for ALL Kiwis, all means ALL, not just the leaders or the offended from certain communities or cultures, so I ask the Human Rights Commission, who stood up for the following children?s human rights, and who will stand up for the other kids who are being violently abused, murdered, deprived, and so on, who will stand up for their human rights, as currently, their parents and caregivers and collective communities are not, they seem to have adopted a silence on domestic violence, and especially of violence against children: Read more »

Maori party reacts to Hone and his “waharoa tiamana”

The Maori party president Naida Glavish has issued a stinging press release telling Hone Harawira just exctly why he is wrong in entertaining Kim Dotcom and his vanity political party.

?The Maori Party has every right to ?butt in? when Hone Harawira talks about playing a confidence trick on Te Tai Tokerau voters to use their Maori seat as a ?waharoa tiamana? (a German gateway) to get Kim Dotcom’s Internet Party into Parliament,? says the Maori Party?s president, Rangimarie Naida Glavish. She was responding to Hone Harawira?s call for the Maori Party to ?butt out? of his Mana Party?s invitation to Kim Dotcom to speak to the Mana annual general meeting in Rotorua this weekend.

?At a time when the Maori Party has had to work hard for the billion dollars of Whanau Ora and other benefits for te iwi Maori, Dotcom has no kaupapa other than dodging extradition to the United States. The Maori Party will not butt out of its responsibility to point out that Dotcom offers nothing to our people,? said Ms Glavish.? Read more »

Do people like this have a place in politics?

A high-profile political figure has won the right to keep details of his divorce secret after a judge ruled he was a “vulnerable person”.

His messy divorce case included allegations of espionage, infidelity, dognapping, theft, the involvement of three Queen’s Counsel, and a disputed allegation the man grabbed or touched his wife’s neck, tried to kick in the door of their home and shouted abuse at her.

The couple were involved in a protracted legal battle through the Family Court. The ex-wife has sought the right to speak publicly and to her friends about the break-up, but the husband has fought to keep the dispute secret.

How can anyone be a high profile political figure and at the same time “vulnerable”.

If you enter politics, you get to make judgements about other people. ?You get to influence policy. ?You get to make decisions over the careers, lives and families. ?This person, at the very least, should have no say or influence over many political policy areas.

But how can we make sure someone that kicks in the door and “grabbed or touched” his wife’s neck is kept well away? ?Why the code of silence?

It seems to be an upside-down situation to have someone who has alleged involvement in espionage and theft in a high profile position in a political party be protected from public scrutiny and the public’s judgement as to this person’s suitability. ? Read more »

No chance, animosity remains in maori politics

Maori politics remains broken, with the disaffected, indigent and bludger class following Hone Harawira and the reasonable?following?the Maori party, there appears no chance of reconciliation between the factions.

The chances of any union between the Maori Party and Mana Party appear remote, despite changes in leadership and calls for talks from several party members at the Maori Party’s annual conference.

At its largest conference in years, about 300 members gathered for the conference in Whakatane at which MP Te Ururoa Flavell was elected unopposed as the new male co-leader and Naida Glavish was chosen as the party’s President over George Ngatai.

The presidency battle was partly a choice on the issue of the Mana Party after George Ngatai spoke in favour of talks, saying it was clear there was not room for two Maori parties. “At least we can say we tried.”

There were many nods of approval among the audience. ? Read more »

Stop talking and organise a referendum

Len Brown talked big during his campaign about maori representation for Auckland, but now he is in the office he sought, all he is talking about is talking about it.

He can’t even front Maori in Auckland on the issue, instead he went to Porirua to talk to about it.

Auckland Mayor Len Brown has given an undertaking to the influential Iwi Leadership Group to talk to the new Auckland Council about dedicated Maori seats on the council. But no quick decisions are expected to be taken.

Mr Brown attended the group’s hui at Takapuwahia Marae in Porirua on Saturday as a guest.

Maori Affairs Minister Pita Sharples asked Mr Brown to attend the hui with him.

The request to discuss Maori representation on the council was put by Tainui leader Tukoroirangi Morgan and Ngati Whatua leader Naida Glavish.

Mr Morgan said last night that Mr Brown gave an undertaking to discuss the issue with his new council which has only just been sworn in.

He had said it was a serious issue and it would be discussed comprehensively.

We don’t need a discussion, we need a referendum. Len Brown was elected by a massive majority, this was one of his key policy planks, surely he would want to take it to the people at the ballot box and score another big win?

For the centre-right I believe that they too would want a referendum. A change as massive as implementing comprehensive maori representation, to the exclusion of all other ethnicities, would be something that should be put to the ratepayers of Auckland and not decided by a secret group of liberal elite and Maori?bro-ristocracy.

NZ faces BrObesity epidemic

Parekura beat anorexiaCactus Kate has coined the phrase and it is one that has some truth in it. BrObesity. Kiwi’s are supposedly the third fattest in the world. I bet though if they confined the survey to South Auckland we’d be the fattest by a country mile. That is why it should be called BrObesity.

The one thing I object to is it being called an epidemic. That implies that, like Swine Flu, it is an illness that has a medical solution.

The reality is that fatties get that way because they stuff their faces with literally thousands of calories and then fail to utilise those calories allowing their bodies to store them up in some sort of bizarre capacity management experiment.

It is a well known fact that if you use more calories than you put in to your body then you will lose weight. As Maurice Williamson famously put it, there were no fatties in Belsen.

So the solution to the so called epidemic is for people to get Off the Couch and to stop stuffing their faces.

People need to own their own shit. Instead of a fat tax on foods apply the fat tax to the fatties. Insurance companies do, so why notht eh government.

Cactus of course goes a step further and looks at applying a fat tax to tribal organisation so they can fund hospitals and not hotels. This I must add is the first time I have ever seen Cactus propose a new tax!

Lucky to be alive

This is a particularly egregious case of Silly First Name Syndrome. It isn’t any wonder that he was distracted with the large amount of bad karma travelling with him in the same vehicle. I’m not surprised at all. It almost sounds like he trying to hit the train.

A man accused of the manslaughter of his four-year-old son after allegedly driving around a barrier arm and into the path of an 800-tonne goods train told police he was “distracted”, a court as heard.

Alan Stephens, 39, unemployed of Runsiman [sic], south of Auckland, appeared in Pukekohe District Court today charged with reckless driving causing manslaughter and three charges of reckless driving causing injury.

Crown prosecutor Kevin Glubb said in his opening statement that Stephens had left home in his Silver Mitsubishi Mirage mid-afternoon on February 20 with his three children – Shannyne, 6, Tray, 4 and Holly, 2 – and his niece Nakita, 12.

All except Nakita were wearing seat belts.

When Stephens approached the railway intersection at Paerata, near Pukekohe, he did not stop at the barrier arms but drove around them, he said.

“That took his vehicle directly into the path of the oncoming freight train,” Mr Glubb said.

Still the slaughter and the injuries continue and no one except this blog does anything about it.

Are they quite mad?

Unlike the pinko DPF I think the Auckland Transitional Authority are stark, raving bonkers having Laila Harre as the cat in charge of the canaries. It isn’t a smart move it is in fact dumb.

Perhaps Rodney Hide might like to consider his speech in 2000 when Labour and the Alliance were foisted the Employment Relations Act upon us all.

Taken from Hansard

RODNEY HIDE (ACT NZ): I do have some questions and the Chairman knows that I have been seeking the call every time with Mr Willie Jackson.

I have been a bit disappointed that the Labour Government members have not been prepared to take the call and speak, particularly the members, and we have had only Willie Jackson. I hope that Willie Jackson will take a call. He made the point that when he was a union leader, so-called, when workers went out on strike he would take no pay.

My question to Willie Jackson is when workers go out on strike now because of this legislation, will he, as an MP, take no pay? Would he be prepared to live his principles while he is a parliamentarian? What we are seeing with Part 8 is the return of the strike as a lethal weapon into industrial relations in New Zealand. I think it is fitting that the Associate Minister of Labour, Laila Harré, should be in the chair because we well know her views. This is the woman who said to the Labour Party in 1987 that Joseph Stalin achieved more in 20 years than the West achieved in 200 years. This woman has never recanted from that view — not once. She has never said that what she thought of Stalin achieving in 20 years what the West achieved in 200 years was wrong. She still believes it to this day, and here she is seeing this legislation, inspired by Karl Marx, as I said in my earlier speech, being inflicted —

(The Chairman follows)

RODNEY HIDE: I am sure, and I certainly did not. I was just reporting that Laila Harré said that Stalin achieved in 20 years what it took the West 200 years to achieve. It is in the Evening Post. I can bring down her quotation, she has never denied it, and I have brought it up in question time before. I was also pointing out, and I said it in my speech, that this whole idea of bargaining and inequality comes from Karl Marx. The Chairman can read the books and he will understand. There is nothing unparliamentary about being a wee bit historical about where these crazy, mad ideas are coming from that this Government is inflicting on New Zealanders.


They would have learnt because that was 150 years ago. What we are having here is the return of the lethal strike to the New Zealand workplace. The ACT party is again having a mini-caucus and I am very interested in the comments made by Sue Kedgley on her amendment. I am hoping that Sue Kedgley will take a call to help us and explain the full ramification of her amendment that she has proposed here today because she read out that it covers a mammal, a bird, and essential services. I think that Ms Kedgley said that 3 days’ notice has to be given if it will affect essential services. What we are concerned with here is a mammal; a bird; a reptile; an amphibian; for those on the Government side, that means frogs; a fish, bony or cartilaginous; any octopus, squid, crab, lobster, or crayfish. The member asked what about cockroaches.

Hon. Maurice Williamson: What about Labour Party members?

RODNEY HIDE: I do not know about the Labour Party members. It means any other member of the animal kingdom that is declared from time to time by the Governor-General by Order in Council to be an animal for the purposes of this Act. So I guess that it would be up to the Governor-General to pick up cockroaches.

That’s right….Laila Harre thinks that Stalin achieved more in 20 years than the West took 200 years to achieve. She said that in 1987 in the Evening Post. And to my knowledge she has never resiled from that position.

This is going to end in tears, and Mark Ford will be the one we can blame for this silliness.

Are Waikato Police a bunch of poofs?

Did anyone else see the news about the ridiculous situation that unfolded in Hamilton yesterday where a bunch of pussy, limp wristed, politically correct, hemp suit wearing, latte supping police officers had to call for a Taser (from Auckland, delivered in a helicopter) to dislodge an unarmed (well he did have some sticks), half naked twat from the river bank. Hell, I though police carried batons….seems like they just like sticking them into pissed, naked sheilas.

FFS why didn’t they set the dogs on him? If he fell into the river and they had chosen to rescue him there was a boat on standby.The cold dunk in the Waikato would have cooled his anger in about 1 second and diminished his strength by about 60% real fast.

Oh hell, they should have just Tasered him and been done with.

Crusher Collins needs to leap on the gonads of those present.

Rudman may not be a blogger but he is getting the language

Brian Rudman: Referendum calls distract us from creating true democratic governance

Brian Rudman provides a refreshing view of the silly calls for a referendum on the Super City.

Every time I hear someone advocating a referendum I cringe. Surely the $9 million anti-smacking charade is evidence enough that asking the great unwashed to say yes or no to a complex, many-faceted conundrum is a dumb way to go.

In recent weeks we’ve had Labour leader Phil Goff demanding a referendum on the Auckland Super City, and now Labour’s Auckland issues spokesman, Phil Twyford, is introducing legislation requiring a referendum before any publicly owned community assets are sold. But, oddly, only when Auckland assets are at risk.

Well precisely. But Rudman goes further.

Perhaps I’ve been snoozing of late, but the only Aucklanders I’m aware of who worry themselves to sleep about such things are professionals hand-wringers like intrepid water rights campaigner Penny Bright and a few old-style lefties who keep Roger Douglas voodoo dolls on their mantelpieces to remind them of the bad old days.

Heh, Rudman is clearly going to get bombarded with those angry italicised and bolded emails with every ‘S’ turned into ‘$’ from Mad Penny. Could be worse he could get the angry little unwashed man who reckons he hasn’t paid rates for 10 years screaming in his face what a c**t he is and how given half a chance he’d bash him. The same little smelly loser who probably rents given his thread-bare clothing didn’t take up my offer to give it a go and see how he gets on.

Rudman then points out some inconvenient facts for the rent-an-outrage mob;

I know it won’t reassure the worry-warts, but four years ago the tide actually turned when publicly owned Auckland Regional Holdings, headed by Act supporter Judith Bassett, bought the 20 per cent of Ports of Auckland shares in private hands, returning the port company to full public ownership. A few weeks ago, when port company chairman Gary Judd refloated the idea of privatisation, he was unceremoniously sacked. Even more recently, the right-dominated Auckland City Council endorsed a 10-year city plan with a commitment not to sell its airport shares.

Despite this, some are still convinced that the Super City revolution is just a smokescreen, covering up a dastardly grand plan to privatise the remaining community-owned assets. The grand-daddy of the conspiracies is that Mark Ford, former chief executive of publicly owned bulk water supplier Watercare and now chairman of the Auckland Transition Authority, is a tool of the forces of evil, integrating Watercare and the local retail water companies into one, in preparation for handing Auckland’s water system over to a private international water mogul.

Even Rudman sees through the mad emails and letters that keep arriving about Mark Ford.

Mr Twyford’s bill will also outlaw the sale of parks, swimming pools, libraries, halls and public housing without referendum support.

The bill seems fuelled by the more extreme planks of the Act Party’s election manifesto restricting local government to “core” business. Act leader Rodney Hide is the Minister of Local Government but he’s a minister outside Cabinet, with little real sway. All he has is his toothless ideological bark. The left, instead of wetting themselves every time he yapped, would be smarter to pat him on the head, and walk on.

OMG! Did Rudman just tell the left to stop wetting their pants and to pat Rodney on the head….he did. Wise advice.

Referendums are expensive, and easily manipulated. In his Super City poll, what question is Mr Goff proposing? How do you decide such crucial details as the powers of the local boards by referendum? The issue of asset sales is slightly more complicated than a simple yes or no.

Precisely. It is simply ridiculous to even suggest it yet that is what Phil Goff increasingly sounds like as each day passes. Ridiculous.

Back in 2007, I saw nothing wrong with selling Auckland City’s 12.75 per cent of airport shares, as long as the cash was spent on new infrastructure, something like the restoration of the St James Theatre, or repairs to the Aotea underground carpark. But I backed full public ownership of the port because I saw that as a way of ensuring future waterfront developments would be done for the good of all Aucklanders.

It’s impossible to reflect these kinds of nuances in a referendum. What we need to concentrate on is creating a truly democratic, ward-based model of governance, in which every Aucklander feels represented. That way the perception that referendums were a good thing would fade away.

Finally Rudman comes clean. I can’t find too much to find fault with that article. One of Rudman’s finest. Pity the left wing will now card him as a Tory Turncoat.