How New Zealand's Treaty of Waitangi has played out over the years

Author Christopher Newman explains the Treaty of Waitangi and how it’s played out in recent years in New Zealand.
Mr Newman has written a book called, ‘Fraud, Plunder, Treason and our Treaty’.
“In New Zealand, billions of dollars have been transferred, that belong to the people of New Zealand, into the hands of what we call corporate iwi," he told Sky News Australia.
“Which is tribal leaders, lawyers, accountants, social workers, a whole range of people who feed off the body of the Commonwealth, of the people and they don’t have any mandate … there’s no approval.
“In fact when these things are put to the vote like your Voice, they collapse.”

[@harrysmith8515]

New Zealanders are taxed to the bone to compensate treaty claimants. Many New Zealanders live from pay to pay as tax is too high.

[@gregsmith2164]

rubbish

[@fumikoisadog3023]

Fark off, stop talking 💩

[@user-mc6js8or3r]

Institutionalized racism

[@berniefynn6623]

MAORI LAND TAKEN FROM MAORI AFTER REBELLIONS, NO WARS EVER IN THIS COUNTRY, ONE OF MANY LIES PERPETUATED,/.

[@berniefynn6623]

Confiscation of lands from rebellious tribes during and after the Maori Wars was a breach of the Treaty. In the words of Sir Apirana Ngata, the first Maori to graduate from a university and probably the greatest thinker that Maoridom has yet produced, “The chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority. War arose from this and blood was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in payment. This itself is a Maori custom revenge, plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their own chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations can not therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty.”

[@paulveenings6861]

Funny how it boils down to never be about tradition but about money and powers.

[@yolandascholten2012]

Always!

[@mwallace2922]

👍👍😎😎

[@speeddemon9555]

what tradition ?

[@fumikoisadog3023]

Funny how nothing said in this clip is factually correct. But it is Sky News au, so not surprised

[@paulveenings6861]

@@fumikoisadog3023 that’s why I call the Sly news, full of half truths.

[@wilburgraham6260]

61%-39%, well done Australians 😆

[@rapscallion9333]

It's disturbing 39% were willing to undermine our constitution.

[@clarehennessey3653]

The referendum vote is being ignored by the Marxist WEF puppet State premiers.

[@zippyTRG]

You did well Australia. The Voice was the thin edge of the wedge but it does highlight the need to meet the needs of certain parts of society through the current processes and channels. NZ is pretty much screwed as nothing will ever progress until "the Principles of the Treaty" are actually sorted out. The "Principles of the Treaty" can pretty much be redefined by the current Government in power without any consultation of the public unlike a Constitution which Australia has, but NZ does not. A fair bit of this comes down the general NZ population that has a massive "She'll be right" attitude which will bite them on the a$$ because one day, it won't be right... and they'll have no one but to blame but themselves as they don't want to have that conversation. NZ will get whats coming to it....

[@brentonlett3417]

Take a look at South Africa. Different but yet the same because the end result is the white South African wanted equality for all just like the white NZer. The biggest problem is the educated, both Maori and white know how the system works and both capitalise from knowledge which leaves the average person losing both Maori and white. All you need to do is create division between them and while they're arguing you get on with 'higher' business.

[@gregsmith2164]

ha, austraila is the worst country in the world for recognising the indigenous people. you have the problem mate, not us

[@berniefynn6623]

There are principles of the Treaty. No, the Treaty was a very simple document of only three Articles, none of which mentions “principles” or “partnership.” Since the Treaty gave equality for the first time to all the people of New Zealand, the grievance industry of the late twentieth century knew that they could not get special race based privileges from the Treaty itself and so, 150 years after the event, they invented for the first time the fictions of “principles” and “partnership” to give them what the Treaty does not

[@briansmaller7443]

Former PM Geoffrey Palmer was one of the people who rewrote the Treaty of Waitangi. Maori chiefs who signed it knew what they were signing. They were not stupid people. Now it is "a co-governance" thing which it never was.

[@davexb6595]

Exactly. There is nothing in the treaty about co-governance. In fact the treaty is the opposite. It confers the rights and privileges to Maori of British citizenship. It was exactly the British system of justice and governance which was sought after and the prize of Maori. British governance is what Maori won out of the deal.

[@fumikoisadog3023]

Go study some history 🤡 you’ve got no idea what you’re talking about

[@dominicgalante9753]

THANK GOODNESS WE VOTED NO TO THIS VOICE AND NO TO ALBANESE ..........LABOR IS FINISHED IN MY MIND I CAN NOT TAKE THEM ANY MORE

[@perrindabrowski824]

NZ wasn’t Māori land anyway, they ate the people who were there first.

[@yolandascholten2012]

They did indeed, that’s certainly one way to solve a possible future problem! LOL

[@brentonlett3417]

Thats not true that has been proven about 30 years ago. The first Moriori came to New Zealand from Eastern Polynesia around 1500, a couple of hundred years after Māori first arrived on the mainland. But you don't want to know that.

[@perrindabrowski824]

Definitely suits the propaganda well. You probably don’t want to know that I suppose

[@gregsmith2164]

wow, this is the dumbest thing i have heard in a while.

[@TrevorSachko]

@@brentonlett3417 Probably because that is not true... But you don't want to know that...

[@stretch4130]

Also to note when the cheifs signed the treaty not once was aotearoa used to reference new Zealandbthey referred to it as nu tereni It's another thing that's being forced down our throats to make the Maori activists feel better.

[@gregsmith2164]

triggered much ? do you feel small because you are frightened of maori ? seems so.

[@fumikoisadog3023]

Fark off to racist Aussie then.

[@arohawebby1149]

Maoi have had centuries of white power shoved down our throats. Now you know what its like and you're only getting a tiny pathetic amount compared to what Maori have endured Why don't you shut up, you ignorant fool

[@silverameba]

We had a taste of that in WA - demands of ransom is the only thing the citizens ever got from that garbage legislation.

[@mademoiselle....]

Interesting. The same investors who financed settlement in South Australia (the South Australia Company) in 1836 financed the settlement of New Zealand two years later. The SA Govt is using this fact - that the Maoris got a treaty, the SA aborigines did not - as the rationale for a modern-day treaty. How very sleight of hand.

[@Motivate_Nate]

MĀORI NEVER CEDED SOVEREIGNTY! Sky news Aus now why not invite a Māori on to the show now??

[@user-mc6js8or3r]

Sly Spews , , nothing but institutionalized racism

[@xpusostomos]

I'd like to hear more about this fake treaty situation

[@davexb6595]

The treaty of Waitangi is not fake and has not changed. It is a very simple document and we still have the original. What he is referring to is a long process of re-interpreting the Treaty to change it's meaning to whatever the activists of the day want it to mean. You would think that was difficult but the Treaty is in English and in Maori. The problem is that Maori had no written language and so activists jump on this to claim the transition is incorrect or that it really means something else. There is no end to this ever expanding re-interpretation so that now it is starting to be implemented in the opposite of what it actually says. All of which only benefits a small elite.

[@xpusostomos]

@davexb6595 I just did a quick google, some people are claiming that the true treaty is in Maori, this was the one signed, and it gives all New Zealanders dominion over the country. They claim the old English translation is a fake treaty because it says something different, that the Maori would have dominion over their lands. Apparently the English one was put into legislation and the Maori one was only added in 1985

[@user-mc6js8or3r]

Constitutional institutionalized racism

[@mikespike2099]

Most Anglo Kiwis I know are getting out of NZ while hey can! Let the Maori run the show and watch it fall to shite … like South Africa 😅😅😅

[@fractalnomics]

No, we are no South Africa, the elections show that. (point taken)

[@mwallace2922]

​@@fractalnomics😂🤣😂🤣😂

[@gregsmith2164]

hahahaha, you obviously know some classy people = white racists.

[@fumikoisadog3023]

Awesome news, you can all F off to racist Australia 👏👏

[@eddiehauraki6272]

Bugger off then and we will see if in fact the problem was the anglo kiwis in the first place

[@RoseWhite99]

Lucky Australia didn’t do that treaty things

[@haruchai]

'I was here before you'. Unless you are queuing at an icecream truck WTH difference does it make, it's a silly argument. As soon as they accepted benefits, utilities, assistance, technology from the new culture they gave up their old culture and started forging a new one. Grow up.

[@fisho2620]

so true

[@gregsmith2164]

"they" you mean them black fellas ? what a wanker

[@davexb6595]

Well this is the drawback of the Treaty. It is a fixed document which made a lot of sense 180 years ago. But things are not the same as they were 180 years ago and so the Treaty has turned from a positive to a negative for the country. But it's almost like a constitution and so virtually impossible to get rid of.

[@user-mc6js8or3r]

Forging ,forcing , or frauding???

[@arohawebby1149]

I can't begin to describe how clearly moronic your simplistic, ill informed statement really is. My guessing you work a reasonable job, you can pay your bills, go for holidays but you are so dumb you can't understand that this WONDERFUL capitalist society you benefit from actually screws you over too.

[@eddiehauraki6272]

Treaty compensation to date 2.4 billion dollars. 2 cents in the dollar to the value of the land that was confiscated by the crown.Deal with your own indigenous people fairly before you start throwing your holier than thou opinions across the Tasman. Hypocritical when I see the way you treat the aboriginal people. 60000 years they've been there 60000 years !!!

[@user-mc6js8or3r]

Honour the treaty

[@garys6135]

Aussies shouldn't have any opinions of TOW simply because they have nothing similar or near alike in there own country . Even though there principles may be the same as ours they are probably seen under a different light .

[@kawhia11]

The Treaty of Waitangi was entered into in good faith by both parties. And worked relatively well for 20 years. My own people of Ngati Apakura and other Tribes had farms ,flax and flour mills , and owned ships trading with Auckland , Sydney and as far afield as the gold fields of San Francisco. However the British reneged and violated the terms of the Treaty. Now we are in the position of creating another injustice that will only benefit a Maori Elite to try and fix the earlier injustices. The Tribes had largely embraced Christianity. Powerful Tribes like Nga Puhi and Tainui released their slaves from earlier conquests and the law of utu (revenge) was being replaced with the teachings of Jesus and there was peace amongst the Tribes. It is important to note the geo political tensions as the English harboured fears of French , Russian and other powers wanting to dominate. Its a very complex issue. I am a descendant of Te Kiwi of Ngati Mahuta who was a Tainui signatory of the Treaty.

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

Well stated. Thank you for your comment.

[@Gumpmachine1]

I’d say there were violations on both sides but as the enforcement arm the British should of stuck to the rules Pretty good take overall though

[@davethewave7248]

Refreshing to see such an enlightened opinion... like a fresh breeze through the sails, when most comments on this issue today have degenerating into bigotry. I would be interested to know how the British violated the treaty though. The Kingite movement grew, essentially a land league... while rejecting British sovereignty, and Taranaki was the spark that set it off [if not Taranaki, it would've been something else]. I wonder if the original treaty was too idealistic for the times. It certainly had the most honourable intentions.

[@berniefynn6623]

Treaty made maori subjects ONLY, NOT partnership.

[@gregsmith2164]

false

[@berniefynn6623]

@@gregsmith2164 The Maoris did not cede full sovereignty at Waitangi in 1840. This lie has recently been put out by the Waitangi Tribunal at the behest of part-Maori radicals. By Article One of the Treaty the chiefs ceded full sovereignty of these violent and anarchic islands to Queen Victoria forever as the speeches of Rewa, Te Kemara, Kawiti and other chiefs of the time show. Twenty years later at the Kohimarama (Auckland) conference, the largest gathering of chiefs in New Zealand history, they declared that full sovereignty had been ceded in 1840. If the chiefs did not cede sovereignty, they would have continued their cannibalism, which meant a lot to some of them.

[@Neff17]

False ​@@berniefynn6623

[@berniefynn6623]

There are principles of the Treaty. No, the Treaty was a very simple document of only three Articles, none of which mentions “principles” or “partnership.” Since the Treaty gave equality for the first time to all the people of New Zealand, the grievance industry of the late twentieth century knew that they could not get special race based privileges from the Treaty itself and so, 150 years after the event, they invented for the first time the fictions of “principles” and “partnership” to give them what the Treaty does not

[@davexb6595]

That was a ridiculously short time to try and cover a complex issue from inception to today. What was your producer thinking?

[@DW_Kiwi]

The Maori activist and radical leaders place great emphasis upon te tiriti but the English "draft" was the first document. The intent and conditions for the Crown for a treaty with Maori. Maori contend that there is miscommunication when it was translated. Well I don't think so. There is too much evidence that Maori "got it"

[@berniefynn6623]

Confiscation of lands from rebellious tribes during and after the Maori Wars was a breach of the Treaty. In the words of Sir Apirana Ngata, the first Maori to graduate from a university and probably the greatest thinker that Maoridom has yet produced, “The chiefs placed in the hands of the Queen of England the sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority. War arose from this and blood was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in payment. This itself is a Maori custom revenge, plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their own chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations can not therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty.”

[@davethewave7248]

Plus, some confiscation was required in order to provide securtity for nascent settlements... with soldiers settled on land to provide a buffer between those settlements and hostile tribes.

[@Xashe]

Just to be clear for an Australian audience, most of what this man is saying is untrue and his views are largely fringe in the mainstream here in NZ. Just a note, if you hear someone talking about cannibalism, European superiority (in this case the need for British Common Law) and blood quantum, usually it is brought up to discredit indigenous people. Treaty settlements have been largely successful in New Zealand to give economic power back to iwi and hapū who had their lands largely stripped off them.

[@Xashe]

British Common Law never ended inter-tribal conflict as much of this conflict had been resolved by 1840 (although some conflict continued until 1845), there was actually greater conflict among rangatira in the north and early settlers in Kororāreka (Russell) who did not acknowledge tikanga (Māori law) and the authority of the rangatira. If anything, British Common Law was brought in (via the establishment of the NZ Government 1852ish) to benefit the growing number of British settlers into the country. If you're still not convinced, just ask yourself why Māori worked so hard during the NZ Land Wars period (1845-1872) together against the powers of the Crown (represented by the NZ Government) in response to growing pressure on their authority and the ongoing confiscation of their lands - all without simply saying that all Māori are (or even were) backwards, unintelligent or savage, which is an inherently racist position.

[@lyndenmeier412]

COMMON LAW comes from GOD IN GOD WE TRUST. GOVERNMENT ORDINATES DEPARTMENT'S... NOT LAW THERE COMPANY POLICY...

[@HabitualFixation]

Treaty wasn't made to stop Maori wars lol! It was to set up resource for settlers and to stop unlawfullness with alcohol and fraud in all the settling ports etc

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

I must admit that was the first I have heard about the Treaty being to stop Maori fighting each other. It could well be true though. We had all better do some research.

[@peterpiper482]

@@scottlewisparsons9551 It is true.There were only a handfull of settlers. We learned at Primary School in the 50's (when we were allowed to be taught about it) that Hongi Hika started it by travelling to England and on the way back,in Sydney,he swapped his presents from the King and bought muskets.Thus began the Musket Wars that killed thousands. My ancestors on the Maori side were attacked at Kaiapoi and scattered by Te Rauparaha,another murderous man,in 1832.

[@rod-contracts1616]

If anyone in Australia doubts that Maori were, too many still inclined to be, prone to aggression, think about the haka before rugby matches, why our league team is called the "Warriors", why 40% of the prison population are Maori, and why they bash to death some of their infants, in one case putting a baby in a tumble laundry machine. Sad, but true, and not a reflection on all Maori.

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

@@rod-contracts1616 I am a fourth generation kiwi who moved to Sydney in 1988. What you say makes sense, I wasn’t sure of the timeline as to who and when the muskets were imported. Te Rauparaha was a lovely fellow who hijacked a sailing ship and took it to the South Island, near Akaroa, hid in the ship until after dark, went ashore and slaughtered everyone in the village. Did he continue his rampage to Kaiapoi after this?

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

@@rod-contracts1616 regarding the Haka. Didn’t Te Rauparaha “write” the Ka Mate haka? From what I was told by a Maori elder on a flight to Wellington, he came up with it while hiding in a potato pit when he was being chased!

[@a.hoctavius5848]

Talk about historical revisionism

[@YoCalmYaFarm]

😂 Stop this whole settler saviour complex. A treaty was signed (Pākeha ticket into the country) and it was not honoured, an Apartheid Government was set up that produced many racist laws. A huge lack of mana, loyalty, honour and integrity from generations of consecutive successive governments. I would question whether there is a treaty after the many breaches of it to date. For some reason this guy thinks the settlers who came here were somehow different to the rest of the British using divide and conquer tactics worldwide at this time in history. It’s laughable because it was the same people, just a different country. I trust the history from these Pākeha Historians in the videos below rather than an author with a clear biased view point. kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5TYnp1mZ5aBe5Isi=eH7Q5U1qhy9-pH-7 kzbin.info/www/bejne/n5CofHePmL1ohqMsi=WGBt_COWaUt6_Nql

[@davethewave7248]

Apartheid is exactly what didn't happen in this country. Our history is a hell of a lot better compared to the fate that fell for other countries.

[@makamak4992]

Can this guy translate the maori version of the treaty. The nz Waitangi tribunal have found maori did not cede sovereignty to the crown that means maori are not under British rule. Thats what there standing up for.

[@davethewave7248]

No-one before the 1970s thought that. It is a modern invention to re-interpret the treaty. 'Rangatiratanga' [chieftainship] is now supposed to be equated with sovereignty... when at the time chiefs had no notion whatsoever of a general abstract idea such as this. What they did understand though was 'Kawanatanga' Governorship, the head honcho, the new chief of chiefs that was in town.

[@makamak4992]

@@davethewave7248 yea but why? my father went to school and got strapped for speaking maori in the 1960s. So there was a generation where maori almost lost there language, bet there is a whole lot of other issues to. But now the maori are raising up the nz govt want to stop it. It has been found in he whakaputanga report that maori did not cede sovereignty to the crown aka British monarchy. Also the interpretation of the maori version is different to English version, te papa agrees with that.

[@davethewave7248]

@@makamak4992 Our country has seen a cultural revolution in this matter. Actually, it does not bother me too much. It is what it is, and political/ public life is what most want to believe and want it to be at the end of the day. What annoys me most is the dishonouring of our own history, where the new politics reads a new meaning into the past. Everyone is interested in justice, and justice is giving everything its due [the blindfolded lady with the set of scales in her hands]. There are two translations of the treaty, but not two versions. This has become the new dogma, but this is also actually very contentious. All the statesmen and all the chiefs were not complete idiots back in the day.

[@makamak4992]

@@davethewave7248 there's no new politics that read new meaning to the treaty its still the same treaty agreement just translated/worded wrong.

[@davethewave7248]

@@makamak4992 In the 1930s, all parties, politicians, and tribes celebrated the treaty on the Waitangi grounds being bequethed to the nation by Lord and Lady Bledisloe [the goveror general]. Mighty were the hakas and the feasts and the speeches. In 1960, with increased unrbanization of Maori, a radicalism appeared for the first time that called the 'treaty a fraud'. Then in 1970, the radicals learnt the slogan to 'honour the treaty' instead.... because they found a way to read general abstract ideas [trained as they were in the universities] back into the treaty. So as you can see varying views on the treaty by Maori over the decades. Historically, the chiefs had no notion of the general abstract idea of sovereignty. their view of the world was a lot earthier. They did understand power, and so they understand kawanatanga [governorship] as the head chief over the chiefs to bring law and order. They also understood chieftainship/ rangatiratanga, and signed on the basis that the chiefly rights of authority over their tribe and their land and possessions would be protected. The alchemy of the academics was to turn 'rangatiratanga' into sovereignty. Never has a single word been thought to mean so much... and in contradiction to actual history. ; )

[@graemekeeley4497]

New Zealand has a new Governmet led by Christopher Luxon, of the National Party He will need to form a Coalition with David Seymour, of the ACT New Zealand Party and Winston Peters, New Zealand First Party David Seymour has been talking about reducing the rights of Indigenous Maori people. All three parties are against any kind of Government program that seeks to redress past wrongs against the indigenous Māori by giving them some kind of separate service, like the Māori Health Authority.

[@Super_Mario128]

Corny Bill by Banjo Paterson

[@HabitualFixation]

Would be good to get a wider variety of opinions. What are this authors academic qualifications, and where are the sources of his information?

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

If you want to know do the research. I remember when this happened with Mat Rata. What we learned at school about the Treaty has been completely re written. These days it is all about power, money and corruption.

[@rod-contracts1616]

He's entirelycorrect. I've read a lot of the widely available reports, which have successfully been suppressed.

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

@@rod-contracts1616 thank you for clearing that up. I bet they have been suppressed. It would be an inconvenient truth! Without looking into it further at the moment, this probably lines up with what my father told me when I was very young and we were driving around Lake Taupo in the 1950s and discussing Maori history. Yeah, I was that kind of annoying kid! All the best from Sydney Australia 🇦🇺

[@HabitualFixation]

Not dissimilar to many current political race based meandering, those who feel their virtues, belief systems, and values are perpetrated come out with the usual cannibal and musket weaponised talk. True. Most Maori are not made up off full DNA from precolonial days that's obvious and worldwide with transglobal migration (war, work etc). But unlike many other ethnicities, you are and will be Maori if you identify as one through whakapapa even with a mere 1% blood in you. Aroha mai, aroha atu :)

[@scottlewisparsons9551]

@@HabitualFixation cannibalism and the musket wars did happen, that is history and cannot be denied. As far as identifying as a Maori with as little as 1% of Maori blood in you is ridiculous as far as I am concerned. I have a small amount, about 6% of French blood, and I would never consider myself as French. However, if we must talk about identifying as something I would identify as a New Zealander of European decent, having being “constructed” from English, Irish and Scottish settlers, the little bit of French snuck in there when a French woman was carried ashore somewhere in the South Island. Perhaps though, for the sake of a stronger country we should all just identify as kiwis or New Zealanders and forget about our background and learn from history without trying to cover it up or change it. But that’s just my opinion.

[@whiskeygamer9402]

RIP NZ you're all screwed for good. Lol

[@Prognosis__]

Hopefully the new government will improve things a bit

[@Heisthelightoftheworld]

Black Rock was given a stake by the previous socialist government.

[@hansjansen4372]

​@@Prognosis__ I think with this three-way circle jerk, NZ is gonna keep going backwards. MMP is a shit show. Chippy is riggt its a coalition of chaos... and Winston is a wet fart in a paper bag...

[@user-mc6js8or3r]

Been screwed since British colonization

[@craiggibson5398]

The Treaty policies and politics are by nature flawed, one certainly would question whether we'd want such a document to guide us in the 21st c. Let us remind Sky viewers that this man's views are not held by almost any conservative New Zealanders or mainstream right-leaning political parties. This book has not been endorsed by right-leaning New Zealand academics or intellectuals. Replete with errors that even the interviewers could correct. Could you find someone intelligent or informed to interview on this subject, not just some random self-publishing bloke?

[@peterwhareaitu]

?? Who the f is this cont

[@relaxedmuffin3666]

I thought it was called Aghhgagwooga gagagwoo!!!!!! Now not new Zealand 🤷‍♂️ Be respectful and use the traditional name.

[@andrewmearns2800]

Traditional name? Do you mean Aobloodytouristteatowel?

[@davexb6595]

As a Kiwi I would not object to the country being known by its Maori name. However personally I think one problem is that Aotearoa is difficult for most people to remember and pronounce, since it starts with two vowels. Which your comment highlights. It may have been New in 1642 but after 400 years the country is not really so new anymore, which is one reason I would not mind a name change.

[@danielthomas8507]

A failed race at best.

[@rihipaeahughes9831]

Bullshit

[@user-oh4yd5uh4e]

News from the Rotorua Daily Post: "Child, 2, dies after Rotorua driveway accident, family member steals from doctor trying to save child's life." As hospital staff tried to save the life of a 2-year-old boy run over in a Rotorua driveway, a family member swiped a doctor's two phones and a bank card and went on a spending spree. The child died a short time later but Melissa Herewini (A MAORI) had already taken the bank card to four stores in Rotorua and bought alcohol, food, petrol, phone credit and cigarettes

[@terryjkhn5725]

Its wrong to be talking about treaty an colonial oppression mess up with Israel an Palestine issue with colonialism an imperialism trauma bit cringe 😬 , Skynews doesn't really tell news for people it broadcast what sponsors want people to hear diluted news ,not being rude just obvious , but treaty aint a bad thing indigenous people still ain't recognised as Australians

[@yowten8994]

Maybe by you they are not recognised as Australian. We give them double what a non aboriginal gets with government help. They do not need a treaty but need to be treated like all Australians. Stop the racist gravy train.

[@terryjkhn5725]

@yowten8994 um 30 billion dollars lol what load of crap , the australian people don't give anything the government does after rorting they're soverign lands an sovereign minerals, $30 billion is spent on what an given to who , Contracts are given to whites which are majority of people work indigenous organisations , $30 billion slowly trickles back to economy, different flags different heritage different ancestors different cultures, from different places truth is truth ,when your bending the truth it's legal avenues to hold lies together , who ever relies on $30 billion as their main smoking gun / gravy train is really dumb, especially statistics show high percentage of indigenous peoples incarcerated , or homeless meaning those $30 billion mention is not really used by indigenous people it's used by white australians just looks good when united nations look at Australia

[@terryjkhn5725]

@yowten8994 if had culture you'd understand difference between australian an indigenous peoples

[@shanehansen3705]

yep indigenous south American's aren't recognized as Aussies unless they become citizens however indigenous Australians have been since 1967

[@terryjkhn5725]

@shanehansen3705 how 1967 voting classifies them as Australians , can explain why 1967 makes them fair dinkum Australians. Not being a smart ass it really is dumb to think that ,when they're not treated as so