this post was submitted on 14 May 2025
156 points (99.4% liked)

NZ Politics

651 readers
53 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

 

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Race relations are cooked. Its only going to get worse from here. Thanks national.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago

NACT was itching to start a race war and they did.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 days ago (41 children)

That's fucked up. A haka should be taken very seriously. She used a haka to make the statement specifically to utilize the most powerful tool available to convey the message. It's a traditional form of communication of the people she represents. She was doing her job in the best way possible. They clearly missed the entire point, since they are treating it the same as "yelling", as if it was a childish reactionary response, instead of a carefully considered and measured response.

load more comments (41 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

We'll have no nonsense from those uppity natives while government tries to retroactively rewrite history with legislation.

-- Speaker of the House, Chair of the Privileges Committee (probably)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

In this case the Speaker is actually pushing back against the committee's recommendations. There's a really good write up from RNZ here: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/561329/the-house-parliamentary-privileges-race-as-an-aggravating-factor

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Damn I hope that doesn't pass

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It didn't. Not even close. It failed 121-11

Those 11 were members of the party that proposed it, and every other party voted against it unanimously.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The beauty of it all is that the actual step back for the treaty happened in the resource management act changes, while everyone was focused on the treaty principles bill.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Agreed. This was the sad part.

load more comments
view more: next ›