 With your help, we can continue to fight for freedom. This is not possible without your generosity. Join our quest for the truth and our freedom. Simply visit www.realitycheck.radio forward slash donate to make a difference today. Now it's time for Cams Buddies. This week we'll find out what they think about Waitangi Day, the Treaty of Waitangi and the so-called principles of the Treaty along with their views on Axe Treaty Principles Bill. My producer has them all lined up and ready to go. And let's go for the first Cams Buddies of the year and a little surprise for you all. Welcome to Cams Buddies, Lindley. And you are the first female buddy and you volunteered to come on the show. So welcome to Cams Buddies. Well, thanks, Cam. It's absolutely lovely. And I hope I get through this very first time. I'm a virgin buddy, you know? Get through this one piece, eh? Yeah, I think you will. You'll be just fine. So the topic that I want to talk about tonight is the Treaty of Waitangi and the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and David Seymour's bill to try and cement what these principles are. And I really appreciate your thoughts on that. Well, as you know, I've only had 24 hours to actually get all this together. But I am faintly familiar with the principles and the Treaty and various things. But I really would rather bring your attention to something else, which is prior to the principles, the bill with what David Seymour is trying to address, because what about principles themselves before we start arguing over the Treaty of Waitangi principles? Now, the biggest principle is respect. And I don't think that respect has been addressed at all in this whole scrap. And I listened to David's speech today at Waitangi and it was a perfect example of what I'm talking about because you can't set principles when you haven't even got respect to the starting point. Now, David Seymour's speech, I listened to that, and there was three points that I noticed. And one was, why in the middle of it did he ridicule Donald Trump for heaven's sake? And mentioning about him being reduced to an insect, I thought, no matter what you think of that man, that is extremely disrespectful. And then the members of the, you know, at Waitangi, they were all making noises and drowned him out. That was disrespectful. The elders who let that go, that was disrespectful. And I thought, well, if you can't even start with respect between one another, how on earth are you ever going to honour the principles of the Treaty? Those are very good points that you make there, Linley, and 100% agree with you. There needs to be respect in this discourse on both sides of the argument. And until we have that respect, we're just going to have a shouting match going backwards and forwards and end up with a complete mess. Exactly. And as you know, like begets like, and that is also in the emotional sense, not only the physical. And if you're going to go around being horrible and disrespectful, you're going to attract it back. Yeah, that's right. And it just goes to it for that. Yeah, people pick up what you're putting down. And if you're putting down insults, they'll be picking up insults. Exactly. So I just wanted to raise that point because I know that your other buddies will come in with all the detail of the people involved and all that sort of thing. And I just want to address it from this particular angle. I think it's a good angle. I think it's a really good angle, you know, that we need to have this mutual respect. The big issue that I have with the whole thing is that there's absolute outright misinformation or it might actually be disinformation deliberately wrong where people are claiming that David Seymour is wanting to rewrite the treaty and he's not. No. It's about defining the principles of the treaty which is only a line in a piece of law that no one's actually defined yet. And it seems to me that we should be having a discussion about this, a grown-up discussion, without insults, so that we can actually try and solve this problem so it's not a movable feast going into the future where the lawyers and the judges and the activists try and move the principles to something that were never intended by the treaty in the first place. Well, I totally agree with you. And I do think that David Seymour, that is his intent, I believe, but we'll see how he goes. But I've written down several principles that we all need to learn about and they're at the base of the treaty and they are respect, honesty, truth, peace, morality, and compassion. Now, my question is, have we as a species evolved to this point? No, we haven't. So, 2040, that's what the question was, you know, what was your vision? I would like a vision like that and because that's in the broader sense, we've never achieved it and we certainly never achieved it in politics of all places. And that's what I would like to see. I'd like to see humans evolve to that point and then worry about principles of their treaties and different things like that because the Treaty of Waitangi, after all, even for the most simple or uneducated person or the youngest person or the oldest person, it is so simple. Yes, three articles that define what we are to be as a nation and there's no principles in the treaty, there's just three articles. And we need to sort this out because some full politician decided that they would use the clause, principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation and leaving it open and up to judges and we all know what judges are like. I mean, they don't even sentence criminals to jail when they desperately deserve it. So, leaving that to the judges is the worst thing ever and it's poor legislation that was promulgated on New Zealand society back in 19, I think 1975, I think it was when the Waitangi Tribunal was created. Right. Well, you know, I absolutely agree with that but the problem is usually that treaty is so simple that there has to be, and usually is with anything like that when activists get in and want it changed, there's usually an agenda behind it and the agenda is almost always money and money in power. They're not really interested in making the treaty wording perfect at all, they just want to change it so that they can capitalise on it for their goal. That's my experience of people. People are greedy, they do want power, and they'll go for it and if they've got even an inkling of getting a foot in the door, they will push and go all the way. Yeah, totally. And that's what I see is happening and of course my life experience, you know, I go back a very long way and I lived in Malbra, now they had ructions there, they had a Maori murder of war atrocities there called the Wairau incident. Yeah. And that was a couple of years after the treaty was signed. So the treaty has really never been honoured in my book but living there and growing up there, I can say absolutely hand on heart cam, I have never ever heard anybody speak ill of Maori people in my early life, absolutely never. And we just lived alongside one another, I've worked with them right by their side, a lot of Maori people at the freezing works, sharing sheds, everything and you could not get better people to work with and they were very honourable and treated me really well and likewise. And now I come to probably the last 10 years it's really accelerated, I'm experiencing racism, I'm hearing people being very rude about Maori people and vice versa. So by trying to tear this treaty to pieces and add principles and all that sort of thing, they've only made matters worse. They've created division and separatism and even I, from my background, if I'm somewhere and I see, let's say, a couple of Maori's coming along and looking a bit in rough gear, I sort of tense up and worries me. Now I've never liked that before. I mean, I was born in Fiji and Fiji has had a separatist agenda for quite some time. I have. And it hasn't worked and it hasn't worked anywhere in the world where they have these types of things. We had terrible atrocities in Rwanda all on the basis of separatism and race. We've had the situation in Fiji with coup after coup after coup. And I was really hoping that they would have sorted it out with a new constitution and everyone born in Fiji is classed as a Fijian. But Rambuk has gone back to the Itaukai having primacy and it really concerns me. And I'm concerned to see that happening in New Zealand as well where we've had what I reckon is a pretty good race relations situation being exacerbated by foolish politicians who have not drawn up laws that are beneficial to all New Zealanders. And that was the whole idea of the treaty in the first place that we would all be New Zealanders, that we would all become British subjects. But somehow there's this heroic view now that Maori never ceded sovereignty but I'm unsure as to how you can become a British subject without ceding sovereignty. No, well, it's just got an agenda behind it. That's all, Cam. That's the truth of the matter. They seem to ignore the common sense ordinary New Zealander, people like yourself and the rest of my buddies. Yes, exactly. And they're not too scared now to pipe up and say anything. My friends are, they're all very guarded what they say, who they're sitting with before they say it and that sort of thing. It's very, very sad, because we actually had enormous respect for the Maori people. And when I think back to people like, is it Prince Tuiteka that got the Patea? Yeah, Patea Mariksla. Yeah. Look what they did when they weren't victimised. The freezing work shut down, they lost their incomes and they got together and came up with this absolutely marvellous group that I believe toured around the world, lifted everybody's spirits, got off their bums and did something. And so talking about respect, they got respect. I mean, there's huge respect in New Zealand for the efforts of the Maori battalion in World War II. You know, fantastic soldiers feared by the best German soldiers. The Afrika Korps were scared of the Maori battalion because of their capabilities. So we've got this fantastic culture, amalgam of cultures in New Zealand. And I agree with you. I think over the last 10 years, it's seriously been eroded. It's really dreadful. I don't think the politicians live in a glasshouse, really. I don't think they know how it has affected the mainstream people because they were like me. They lived without racism. They've come through that. The people in my age group. Which is exactly why ACT in New Zealand first are gaining support because they recognise what ordinary New Zealanders are saying. We've had enough of this nonsense. We want to go back to the way it was where everyone was living in peace and harmony and Jack was as good as his master. You know, these elitist politicians, and I've actually blamed the Labour Party and the National Party for this, have carried it on with an arrogance that they know best. Oh, absolutely. It's very, very sad. And like I just wrote down a little note here, which I'll just say, this is how I see it. Separatism is growing. Racism is growing. Greed is fueling it. 2040, there's a pot of gold at the end of that. Then what? Because we've got to look at what happens after that. We've got, if the Maori get their... What is it? He poo-a-poo-a thing in. What's going to happen after that? It'll be tribe against tribe. It'll be arguments over equity. It'll be, we want what you've got, but we don't want to work as hard to get it as you did. And then really, the next step is violence. And this is only 16 years away. Which is exactly what the Treaty was designed to prevent. The tribes, are we in New Zealand signed the Treaty willingly because they wanted an end to the tribal warfare? That was the... That's exactly it. That was the primary driver for Iwi to sign the Treaty. And people seem to have forgotten their history. That is exactly right. That's exactly right. And they have... Well, I don't know that they've forgotten it. You've got the activists pushing it because they want that pot of gold out of it. But you've also got the media being complicit in it, in fueling ill-feeling and fear. And frankly, it's just fake news. It's absolutely correct to call it fake news. It's made up, a lot of it. And they push a narrative and they very cleverly groom the public with emotive words and things. They groom them on how they want them to think. And then they can dump a narrative on it and actually have them believe it. And I agree with you 100%, Lindley, and for your first call to Cams Buddies, I think you've done very, very well. And I'm sure that we'll have heaps of comments in the mailbox about just how well you did. And you're so welcome to come back on to Cams Buddies. And you can do it every week if you want because I think you are a voice of reason. Thank you very much. And I better go to the next caller now, Lindley. So thank you so much for your time. OK, Cam, take care. You're welcome. You too. Bye-bye. Well, that was pretty good, wasn't it, from Lindley there? She volunteered at the end of last year and has been in communication with my producer and we've got it working. So I hope she gets lots of feedback coming through. And it's time for me to take the next call. Good afternoon, Paul. Welcome to Cams Buddies. Good afternoon. And it's great to be back in 2024. Well, yeah, I've had a bit of a long break. But back at it now and loving being behind the sitting in the host chair and being behind the microphone. Right. So tonight's topic is about the Treaty of Waitangi and the so-called principles of the treaty. And David Seymour's attempt to codify what those principles are because nobody seems to know what they are. What are your thoughts on that? I think that's very sound. And if you were to ask 100 New Zealanders what are the principles of the treaty, I would suggest you 100 would know. And I think that David Seymour having sort of brought it down to three, being that the New Zealand government has the right to govern all New Zealanders. I think that's a good one. I think that was pretty much written in the treaty. People could see it there. It was pretty obvious that the Maori of the day gave the right to be governed in part of the treaty for protection, actually, from the Crown, from others that were trying to kill them. So they gave the right for the government of the day or the Crown to be able to govern them. I thought that was pretty good. And I think another one that he talked about is honour all New Zealanders' land and property rights. And I think that's another good one. I think if we don't honour the fact that when someone's bought some land, I mean, I know that there's been grievances in the past and there's been land was confiscated and all that sort of thing. And I've even had land taken for roads myself and they do it in the most interesting way and all that sort of thing. You don't feel good about the process. But the fact that we should be able to be able to, when we've got our land, it's ours and we can do pretty much with it as is reasonable under the law. I think that's another good right. And the fact that we're all equal, it really troubles me when some people have more stay than they should over things that I do and they get put in a place because they're a different nationality or ethnicity to me so that they now are able to, they get two votes, if you like, or they get put into jobs that I apply for and I can't be given that job because my ethnicity is incorrect. I find that very difficult to tolerate and if Maori have been tolerating that up until now because there's some racist scheme against them, I feel it's a terrible thing. And also I think we should be judged by our character or judged by our ability, judged by what we can actually achieve because we've proven we've got some skills, not by what the color of our skin is or what our heritage might be or where we were born. What are your thoughts on the claims by people like Raweri Waititi, by Hone Harawira, by Debbie Packer that Maori never ceded sovereignty? I mean, I really struggle with this concept because Article One of the Treaty clearly says, and in the preamble, as Don Brash mentioned earlier in the show, the preamble actually says that we're all gonna be one people under the sovereignty of the Crown and that we'll all become British subjects. And I'm not sure how you can say that you didn't cede sovereignty and aren't a British subject at the same time. Yeah, I agree with that. My understanding was that there was, the musket wars happened prior to the treaty and there was a lot of, I guess, people that felt unsafe and they were Maori people that felt unsafe. And I think they gave up their rights to govern themselves in behalf of the British government or the Crown to govern them so that they didn't get killed by other clubs that had muskets by recollection of what was occurring at that time. I wasn't there, of course, but when I've read back in history, I'm reading this and I'm thinking, there's a lot of that was ceded. The sovereignty, they were happy to give it up because it meant that they weren't gonna be attacked by other Maori or if they were, they'd be protected by the Crown. Yeah, Don Brash pointed out that 20 years after the treaty was signed, there was a meeting at Kauai Marama and the minutes in the written recording of those meetings at Kauai Marama were clear that Maori had indeed ceded sovereignty and indeed Professor Elizabeth Rata has also said that in 1852, there was a constitution act was passed in Parliament that established sovereignty of Britain over New Zealand and everybody who lived in New Zealand at that stage was born in New Zealand were British subjects. Yes, well, if such things exist, why aren't they taught in our schools and why is the media going on and on about, it's a problem. And they're saying, like they're all talking like David Seymour's trying to pass a bill into law that says, we'll take something from the Maori people of New Zealand. And what he's actually doing by the, when every time I listen to him, and you do have to listen to him to hear it, is he's saying, what are the principles? And these are the ones he recommends and if those aren't them, let's discuss it and see what they are. And see what else there is. No one knows what they are. Then it's much more difficult to say, we've given the authority to the Waitangi Tribunal, which isn't the highest authority in the land, the government is. So if the government says this is what it is, then this is what it is. They are higher than the Waitangi Tribunal, which they appointed. Exactly. Caller before you, Linley, suggested that the problem we've gotten this whole debate is a lack of respect on both sides. What's your thoughts on that? I think that's right. When I listen to people drowning out the speakers at Waitangi, regardless of what they're going to say, they just drown them out so that they don't hear what they're going to say, do folk think out there that by drowning out the opposition so it can't be heard, that it won't proceed? And I'm looking, I'm thinking, if you argue back with a good argument, not with stopping someone from talking, it's just like listening to David Seymour, the first half, he was being interrupted a few times and the latter part of it, they were singing over him so no one could hear what he was saying. What benefit is that? I mean, if I was David Seymour, I wouldn't be going back because there was so little respect for him. And he's Maori himself. I think his tribe is, he said it actually when I was there, I forget the one now, but it was tiny, it was something like that. It's his tribe. And I'm thinking, well, if he's actually a Maori and he's doing this, and then Winston came and talked. And again, everyone was arguing and trying to drown him out, not allowing him to speak. I think they also, when you don't let someone speak, they frustration builds up and things happen even more one-sided than if you could actually challenge the arguments with sensible sound logic. Well, you know, is the point you make about David Seymour's Iwi affiliations is that he's actually Ngāpui, which is from there. Ngāpui, that's it. So what it was was Ngāpui being rude to another Ngāpui. Yeah. Yeah, quite astonishing. And he's an out-of-the-pinion. Yeah, well, it's funny because it's like they consider David Seymour and Winston Peters and Shane Jones and Nicole McKee is the wrong sort of Maori that they don't subscribe to their views. So we need to halve them down, we need to shut them up. And our way is the highway. And that is an unacceptable practice in the democracy of New Zealand. I absolutely agree. And what happened is they're being baited into doing this by the likes of the media. Like I listened to Jack Payne talking to David Seymour and he was coming from a premise that had no logic, but he was saying one member of a treaty, if a treaty is a contract, if one side of the contract doesn't agree, the other side can't change it. And I'm saying, but if part of the contract said that one side can change it, then it's just part of the contract. We don't need agreement because if you've ceded sovereignty to the Crown and the Crown says we're doing this now, that's what ceded sovereignty means. Yeah, we cede sovereignty to the Crown. We have a democracy. Politicians create parties. They have policies. We elect the parties we want. The coalition's formed under MMP with the parties that can generate the most number of seats or a majority of the House. And then they set about introducing the legislative agenda. That's how democracy works. You don't like that. We'll get a better argument. See, better arguments win, not shouting someone down. And when we're talking about, because they were saying how big should the fiscal envelope be and all the grievances that have occurred, how much money should be paid to the folk that have had things taken from them, well, the real question is, whose money should be being paid to such people? And if it's the Crown's done things that are wrong and they're able to make or form redress, great, let's do it. And if it means that no one can afford to move on in the countries all over, well, our family lost a lot of land in China when the revolution happened there. We're not going back there saying, oh, come on, guys, you need to give us, we aren't going to try to give us all our money and our ships back and our land that we had. It's happened, it's done, we've moved on. Now, the fact that it's coming up in 2040, 200 years, lots of these things, the recipients of the benefit of them aren't around and their grandchildren aren't around. And so what they're saying is, let's make as best redress as we can. And the Waitangi Tribunal has come up with some numbers that they said were good and how they derived them in the day, I don't know, but the folk that received the money from the Tribunal seemed happy enough. Now, where did the money go? Eventually, did it have a trickle-down effect and all those folks that are benefiting under the tribes that have made an agreement, have they received a big gain in life? Well, the fact that 48% of New Zealand young people at 10 school and 52 don't, I think we're in for a whole lot more something because the lack of education will be a much more bitter pill to swallow. And the lack of education, the lack of housing and the lack of a reasonable health system, these are things that are much tougher than who owns what piece of land so that the few can get rich rather than, everybody gets educated and we could all head in the same direction as equal citizens having to go and make the great country that it is. Participating in a vibrant, robust economy that can sustain us all. Exactly. All right, thank you for your call, Paul. I appreciate those views and they largely echo what Lindley said earlier. So, that's a good first call back for Cam's Buddies from yourself and I look forward to hearing from you next week. Okay, take care and bye for now. Bye. Good afternoon, Jack. Welcome to Cam's Buddies. Hello, Cam, how are you? Fantastic. Good. I'm glad to be back behind the microphone and glad to have you back on Cam's Buddies. I thought you'd sacked me. No, I know. This is the first show of the year. You're definitely not sacked. You're an audience favorite. We get heaps of feedback about your wonderful comments. Whatever. Whatever. Whatever. So, Jack, the topic for tonight is about the Treaty of Waitangi and the so-called Treaty Principles and what David Seymour is trying to do with the Treaty Principles Bill and what your thoughts are on that and the annual shenanigans at Waitangi. Well, the way that it was explained to me when I was a young man, by a very knowledgeable person. What was his name, Noah? Murray could have been. He was the chief engineer. We young engineers were gathered every morning for a lecture and he would often talk about Murray and he said the first thing you guys should know is that Murray are not one race of people. They're several races, but actually to put it in kind of a simplistic way, there are warmongering Marys and then there are the sort of serfs, the ones that are enslaved, raped, pillaged and then eaten. And what happened was around, I don't know, before 1840, Murray saw what was happening, as rough as it was, but the British way of doing things actually had a bit of sense to it. So they approached the governor and they said, hey, we'd like to come under your protection. And that's how it all started. From there it's grown into something, that's just the gravy chain. And I'm right behind David Seymour, I can tell you, he's actually nailed it. They've, I think they've had about four events or over the period there where they've asked or had tribunals to decide what should be given. Another full and final settlement. So we've had four, I'll stand corrected on this, but I think we've had four full and final settlements, which is rather interesting. So that's my thought on it. What about the claims by various different politicians that Murray never ceded sovereignty? That's not true. And when they say that there's an agreement or they had an agreement, Britain's never had an agreement with anyone that they've conquered. They conquered New Zealand, put it bluntly. And they said, yeah, you can be one of us, you can be one of our citizens and you can abide by our laws and we'll look after you. They've never had a partnership as such and they've never had the separatism type approach. I don't know where that all came from. Well, I think it started in 1975 when the Waitangi Tribunal was established and the law said that the tribunal would establish what the principles of the treaty are. And then over the ensuing 40-odd years, the various different judges and vested interests of Iwi have created this movable feast of principles that were never intended in the wording of the treaty, which is actually very simple. Three articles and a bit of a preamble at the start. And somehow we've ended up with this thing where the principles are, what the principles are decided on at any given time. And a country can't operate like that. We have to have laws. We have to have rules. I've never been a Republican, but maybe we should be. Then we could just say to the Murray, right, we're free of England now. You can go back and talk to them. Your deal was with them, not us. Well, yeah, exactly. But, you know, I wasn't even... The other way would be that we all become Murray because some wise Murray said, was asked what do you have to be to be a Murray? And he said, you just want to be a Murray. So why don't we all be Murray? And then the problem goes away. All of us. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's an interesting concept. We'll see how that flies. Yeah, exactly. All right, Jack. They're not achieving anything by themselves? No, they're not. Okay. They're not achieving anything by shouting down people either. Ideas should be debated. We shouldn't be stifling debate. And unfortunately, what we're seeing is a stifling of debate. People had asked for respect for that. People had asked for respect. Should first give it. That's a good start. It's a wise saying there. That's something my grandmother would have said. Yeah, I'm probably old enough to be your grandmother. Grandfather. He's not looking too good right now. No. I'm sorry to hear that. Thank you for your comments and we'll talk next week. See you, Cam. Bye. See you, bye. Good afternoon. Welcome to Cam's Buddies. Good afternoon, Cam. How are you this afternoon? Fantastic. As usual. Excellent. It's good to be back. Yeah, we're back. First show back in the Cam's Buddies. We had a new buddy, Linley Calden, who is from the South Island. And she had some wonderful things to say. Excellent. I'm pleased to hear that. Today's topic is the Treaty of Waitangi, the so-called Treaty Principles. And David Seymour's Treaty Principles Bill. And I'd like to know what your thoughts are on that. Well, perhaps I can start by hoping everyone had a good Waitangi Day. I did. I spent it doing my thing in the sun. We were helping to find a wild bull, and it was really good. And I know that a lot of people went to the beach. But I returned to David Seymour. I saw it reported that David Seymour was flashed a penis during the welcome. And I thought to myself, good Lord, this is a welcome of someone of some high office worthy of respect, no matter what. And here we have this kind of what I would call despicable behavior. And the reality is that I think a lot of Maori and a lot of Maori elders would have been shaking their heads in horror and disbelief. It's some idiot making a dick of himself. Well, that's the thing, isn't it? You've got one individual who has basically smeared everybody else participating because of their carry-on. And I think that David Seymour has a right to be welcomed on to the marae with some civility. And I think that the way forward is a logical discussion. And that's one of the reasons why I'm looking forward to hearing more about the Treaty Principles Bill that he's proposing. Certainly, I think, back to my schooling. And the treaty has but three articles. And it seems to me that there's no principles. And that seems to be a modern labor construct with legislation they passed in a past government. And I'm kind of bemused at how the principles have ballooned into a massive gravy train. Yeah, it's quite amazing, really. It's just a single line and a single piece of legislation that mentions the principles of the treaty when there are no principles. And so the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal have taken it upon themselves to write what these principles are. And it seems that they change at the drop of a hat, depending on who's got their hand out at the time. And I think that to do New Zealanders' credit, I think the vast majority, whether they be Māori or Pākehā, are sick of a few winters going to town. And people are beginning to notice the lack of productivity where government departments have hidden their true function and meaning through Te Reo names. And I'm really bemused at why we can't have a constructive discussion in this country about what has been literally forced on us. And I actually applaud David Seymour and Winston Peters for standing up at Waitangi and laying down the law. And I think that Luxem deserves some credit too. However, I think the people that really are showing the true colours of the media, my goodness, how much longer can the mainstream media go on? And actually, they are the cause of the problem in many cases. Absolutely. And they're fomenting mischief, happy mischief in their regards. They'd like nothing better than to see Biffo buttocks presented, penises presented, yelling, shouting down of various speakers. You mentioned about the welcome of David Seymour onto the marae. Well, it's a Ngāpui marae. David Seymour is a member of the Ngāpui iwi. So there was Ngāpui insulting Ngāpui. And clearly, the media and those who oppose David Seymour and indeed Winston Peters and Shane Jones think they're the wrong sort of man. Yeah. And, you know, that's all this divisiveness needs to stop. I, for one, am heartily sick of it. And I know that there are many people out there who feel the same way. And, you know, if we can't have a discussion about this and we can't have a constructive debate over what part the treaty plays in our history, now, I think I have some opinions. But I would really like to hear what David Seymour has got to say in his bill. And knowing Seymour, I think that his bill will be well thought out. I think that his bill will have some controversial aspects. But one of the things I feel very sure about is during the select committee process, I think that we will get the opportunity to make some changes. And this aspect of the legislation or the making of legislation was wholly ignored in the last six years by the Labour government. The select committee process was merely a sideshow. And most of the legislation, if not all of it, was rammed through on ideological grounds with the select committee just being a sham. Well, it seems that people have forgotten how a democracy works. We have elections. And then at the end of the election, if there's no one party that can form a majority, we various different parties get together and see if they can work out a coalition and a legislative agenda that they can all agree on. They then create themselves a majority by joining together. And then they form a government. And that government then proceeds to initiate the legislative agenda. And it seems that the media and indeed the loser parties have got a very poor habit of assuming that the government is not legitimate or they do stupid things like when Ardern was the prime minister, people would say, she's not my prime minister and have these fanciful constructs that deny how a democracy works. I had people talking to me about if we didn't get rid of Ardern this time or Labour this time, then they'd be there forever. And I've been around politics for a long time and I know that generally, in fact, 99.99% of the time, no government lasts past three terms. And in New Zealand, we've got a fine heritage of peaceful transition from one government to the next. And people seem to have forgotten that and they're trying to undermine the democratically elected government of New Zealand with these fanciful claims. That's somehow the illegitimate policy and these sort of agendas that they're pushing through. I think the most illuminating and enlightening fact of all of this is that the elites that are feeding at the trough of the Waitangi principles and don't want any change, they are exposing themselves more and more. And the media are unwittingly... It's not unwittingly, they're deliberately doing it. Yeah, and they're exposing all these... And it's laughable. I think it's getting to the stage where people can see that the emperor has no clothes and they're actually saying it. They're actually saying it in the streets and I think David Seymour's bill will have a hell of a lot more support than he possibly imagines. And I think it would be very dangerous of Luxon and National to go against it. And I mean, in my humble opinion, there's a lot to be gained for clearly defining expectations. And I think David Seymour is to be congratulated for trying to do that. Well, that's the thing is what David Seymour is saying is let's have some legislation. Let's have a select committee process. Let's get feedback from the public. Let's then change that legislation in line with the feedback from the public. And let's finally, once and for all, establish what these principles are and set them down in law so that the courts can't tinker with them. And I think that's an admirable goal. Sadly, I think that he won't succeed and he won't succeed because I think that the National Party is squishy on this and they keep saying they're not going to support this past the first reading. And that makes me wonder why we're even bothering to have this argument. I mean, I can see some logical conclusions that will come from that, but none of them mean nicely. We want a level playing field. Let's be quite honest. You, me, thousands, indeed most New Zealanders want a level playing field. We don't want one particular group considered above others. We want to have people considered on merit. We want to have help based on the need. We want all this. It's the level playing field effect. Luxon and National would be very foolish to ignore this basic fact about New Zealanders. And if Luxon walks away from supporting the bill, I think his popularity will be tarnished. I think that he needs to man up. I think he needs to look at what David Seymour's saying. I think he actually needs to measure the pulse of the public. He needs to get an idea of what's happening in the room and he needs to actually put his foot down and say, hey, guys, I stand for a level playing field. We want everyone to be treated equally. And if there are principles of the treaty of Waitangi that need to be defined, well, these are the definitions that we have come to from public consultation. And if that's the case, I'm happy, you're happy, we're happy. The only people that are not happy are the people who want the definitions to maintain their nebulous current form so that they can extract more cash from the taxpayer. Well, I think that's what it's all about. It's all about money and power. And Linley said that, our first caller on Camus Buddies. Linley said that it was all about money and power and there's no respect in the debate at all from either side. And you know what I tend to agree with there on that. Yeah, I think that it's a sad day when money and power trumps the democratic right of people to be treated fairly. Yeah, 100%. All right, Miles, that's enough from you today. We'll talk next week. Fantastic, Cam, it's great to be back and it's good to welcome all the listeners back after a long break. Yeah, thanks, Miles. Appreciate your call. See you, bye. Goodbye. Good afternoon, Jimmy. Welcome to Camus Buddies. Good afternoon, Cameron. Welcome back. Yeah, first show of the year. I've been missing it and I've been missing your dulcet tones. Oh, well, it's good to be back. There's a lot happening, right? What about the topic tonight? Well, the topic tonight is Treaty of Waitangi, the white principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and David Seymour's principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill and what your thoughts are on that? Oh, I love it. I think it's clearly a good thing because all the people who politically I disagree with hate it the most. So it must be good. Seriously, all the communists hate it and it's because they've been using the Treaty to advance their communism and Seymour wants to put it into it with some principles. I can't see it. If we can't have a debate, then, you know, how come we can't talk about the Treaty? Well, we should be able to talk about the Treaty. That's the thing we need to have a debate because there are no principles in the Treaty. It is three articles and a preamble and that's it. The principles is some legal construct left as a landmine by an activist government in 1975. And since then, the courts in the Waitangi Tribunal have said about creating principles that were never envisaged by the signing of the Treaty or by either party on the Treaty. And so I think we do need to have a grown-up discussion around this. We need to hear what people think. And then we've got a parliamentary process where they put a bill up. It goes to select committee. You then take public submissions and then you alter and amend the law to suit and get something that most people are happy with other than you pass that law. That's how democracy works. And it seems that there's a group of people in New Zealand that don't want democracy to work that way. They want to sharp down people who have alternate views or differing views. And that's not how democracy works. And they need to be reminded of that. Well, I completely agree. And the thing is they keep saying that they've, you know, not consulting Māori. Well, here's Māori. What Māori do you want us to consult? He is Māori. He talks to himself. He's consulted. I know, but which Māori do they want them to consult? The ones they agree with? Well, here's the thing, right? Do I free-draw Māori? No, they're not consulted. Yeah, but let's look at it, right? Nine of the cabinet, over a third of the cabinet, are Māori. So if the cabinet gets around the cabinet table and has a discussion about the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, then there's nine participants in that cabinet who are Māori who have been consulted. So you're right. Which Māori? Which Māori? It's almost like they're saying it's the wrong kind of Māori. They just want to agree with consultants. Yeah, that's the problem. We've talked about this before. They just want the Māoris they agree with consulted, not. But what is a Māori? I mean, Willie Jackson, who makes the most outrageous racist statements. Easy to hear. Well, he's more Ashkenazi Jew and more Chinese than he is Māori. This is just the never-ending sick, what New Zealand do. And then you've got Kelvin Davis, who's at Waitangi calling people white spiders. And he's got the brightest, reddest sunburn of anybody at Waitangi on the day. Yeah, it's just ludicrous. I know, I know, it's just, it's just bizarre. And they, yeah, it's just so bizarre. There's such big problems we've got and we're just fighting over such bizarre stuff like this. So, yeah, I think it's a great thing, mate. I think Seymour's found something to gain votes over the next 10 months. And the more Ashkenazi tries to pretend he's not interested in it, he's not going to do it to appease the woke who never vote from anyway. It's just quite bizarre. Well, that was going to ask you the next thing. I can see great profit for David Seymour and New Zealand First in opposing the woke Wombles and the racists. And Luxon sitting there trying to be woke as woke as the woke and trying not to appear to be racist is actually alienating him in the National Party from where a large percentage of the population believes and sits where they believe that will be. And that will be with the ACT Party and the New Zealand First Party. And you could see a decline in nationals vote and a huge growth in those two parties. And I just love to see that. That would just be hilarious to watch. Well, that's highly likely to happen. I don't really see how that's not going to happen. I mean, most people I know don't want to get rid of the treaty. Like, everyone understands, you know, the treaty is the treaty, right? It's not going to be changed. David Seymour is not changing the treaty. No. And you just can't have an open ended meaning to it that changes over time. Otherwise, it's just insane for a country. So I think that National is going to have to look at the opinion polls. And I think Luxon will probably make a point based on that is typical of national leaders. Yeah, I think that Seymour was smart enough to get it to the select committee to get it started. And he just backed his political notes that it would be popular. And that would trap Luxon. I think I think I think he has played a yeah, I think Luxon has been played here. And he's been totally a part of a Winston and David. You can see it, I don't think he's quite realised that yet, but once he gets the first polls of the year, which will be coming, there'll be one coming out shortly from the tax payers union. It's usually around this time of the beginning of the month. So, you know, it'll be interesting to see what that says. But he'll be getting his own polling as well. And I think he might get a bit of a fright. Well, I'm sure you'll let us know when you hear, mate. Absolutely. All right, Jimmy, thank you for your call on the first Cams buddies of the year. And we'll talk again next week. Yeah, I'm loving being back sitting, sitting behind the microphone again. Good work, mate. Thanks, guys. OK, mate, see you. My buddies were awesome. How about Lindley? Wasn't she awesome, too? I'm so blessed to have such a great bunch of mates and new buddies to share anything with. Tell us who you think was the best of Cams buddies and why by emailing inbox at realitycheck.radio or text to 2057. Thanks for tuning in to RCR, Reality Check Radio. Do you like what you're listening to or dislike what you're listening to? Either way, we want to hear from you. Get in touch with us now. You can text us with your message to 2057. That's 2057 or email us at inbox at realitycheck.radio. We'd love to hear from you, so connect with us today.