By TONY MOBILIFONITIS
A SHOCKING interview has emerged of New Zealand property owner Julian Batchelor who was violently attacked in 2018 and then threatened in 2022 with having his house burned down by a Maori activists who claimed his land as the sacred possession of their ancestors.
The personal attack and the threat came after the property, an old timber Victorian home turned into a tourist lodge, was attacked on New Year’s Eve 2015 and the occupants, three South African families, were terrorized by some 20 local Maori men performing a haka on the front lawn. They claimed the land was stolen, but historical records show it was lawfully sold by a Maori family in 1937 to a school teacher who had lived in the area for 17 years.
Batchelor was prompted by the incidents to write a book exposing the Maori land rights movement going back to the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, which had been twisted from the original 1840 Treaty into the recently implemented “co-governance” system which was now creating a very wealthy elite of Maori controlling natural assets which should belong to all New Zealanders.
The woman’s attack was caught on video and given to police who charged her with assault causing bodily harm. When the case went to court the apparently Ardern Labor Party-supporting magistrate dismissed it, apparently because courts were under orders to lower the Maori crime statistics.
The second case last year involving the threat to burn down the house by a woman was dismissed by police on the basis that she said “we” and not “I” will burn the house down. Batchelor has since been running meetings across the country against the co-governance system – a parallel of “the Voice” system planned for Australia and supported by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
Batchelor has been spared from further threats of violence from activists but his property is still walked across by people accessing burial ground near it. The interview was on the independent Reality Check Radio and picked up by Victorian United Australia Party Senator Ralph Babet.
Meanwhile on the environmental front, regional councils doubling as environmental enforcement agencies, are doing aerial surveillance of farms and threatening fines or even jail for the “crime” of allowing intensive winter dairy cow grazing on land sloping more than 10 degrees.
The NZ government is also imposing a system of declaring Significant Natural Areas from August, which is basically a land grab that undermines private property rights in similar manner to Maori land claims.
Batchelor’s first protest meeting in the North Island regional city of Whangarei illustrates how the new indigenous tyranny works. The meeting was “cancelled” by the venue owners Sports Northland, who claimed they were obliged under the co-governance treaty (Te Tiriti) between Maori and government to exclude anti-co-governance people from the building. It was only after an appeal to the Free Speech Union who found the ban breached the NZ Bill of Rights, that the ban was reversed.
Batchelor has been revelling in the challenges of the tour which he described as “massively stimulating” and winning widespread support. He and his supporters have printed 350,000 of his Co-Governance exposure books and they are available for 50c each, down from the original $2. He was recently given a $20,000 donation to cover the cost of a print run.
Asked who he thought was backing the entire co-governance system, Batchelor likened it to a “pre-1840 tribal raid”. “This is in the DNA of people at the top of Maoridom who have seen an opportunity and they are going for it – to take over the country.”
Pressed further on the question he said the Marxist/socialist former Prime Minister Jacinta Ardern wanted to redistribute wealth and became “the absolute queen of the elite Maori because she was able to open the chequebook and allow them free passage into the coffers of the government and basically gave them free passage to do what they wanted.”
Batchelor said Ardern worked with a network that included the Maori Caucus and Maori MPs inside the Labor Party along with others outside the parliament “who have seen an opportunity to have a go at taking New Zealand”.
In March the Human Rights Commission (HRC) received three complaints about the tour and Pera Paniora, the young Māori ward councillor from Kaipara District Council, said her complaints to the HRC and Attorney-General David Parker were backed by 3656 petition signatures. The petition accused Batchelor of inciting racial disharmony with his “misinformation, lies and insults towards Māori”. He opposes co-governance, criticises Māori MPs, Treaty of Waitangi rights for Māori and iwi organisations, and says “protesters are simply pawns in the elite Māori plan to take over New Zealand”.
A literal takeover of the country by UN backed environmentalists and indigenous activists is now not an extraordinary accusation to make when the disruptive effects of “co-governance” and environmental restrictions are combined. As Australian geologist Professor Ian Plimer says, it’s not about climate, it’s all about the power and the money.
In Southland, one of New Zealand’s prime dairying regions, news has emerged of farmers being ordered to immediately “cease and desist” winter grazing for their dairy herds after bureaucrats from the local regional council known simply as “Environment Southland” sent a surveillance plane over farms and decreed that national environmental standards for freshwater were being broken.
New Zealand is now literally ruled by 16 of these ratepayer-funded regional environmental dictatorships that impose regulations and restrictions on every imaginable activity such as, in this case, the action of cattle hooves on paddocks sloping more than 10 degrees or hoof pugging deeper than 10cm. The regions are divided into smaller district councils.
Concurrently, environmentalist groups like Greenpeace are openly attacking New Zealand’s dairy farms not only because they claim they are “contributing to the climate crisis” but because they are exporting large amounts of powdered milk and other dairy products. These delusional green extremists see this excess production as a crime against the environment.
But the record of the regional bureaucracies in protecting the environment was shown up as a dismal failure during the recent cyclones that swept across the country’s North Island. Pine plantations that produce mostly low-quality timber, and subsidised by carbon credits, have been allowed to run rampant on steep NZ hill country.
The left-over “slash” from harvesting was washed down hillsides, creating temporary dams on streams and rivers which eventually break and wash downstream in destructive surges. The trash also piled up against bridges until they collapsed under the increasing weight of water. The environmentalists, of course, blamed climate change.
Meanwhile the heavy hand of environment bureaucrats is coming down on farmers subjected to aerial surveillance. These alleged public servants graciously allow slopes of less than 10 degrees to be used for intensive winter grazing, but more sloping land requires and expensive, time-consuming “resource consent” or “certified freshwater farm plan”. Farmers who dare not comply with orders from the green gestapo risk hefty fines or even jail sentences for non-compliance.
By law, crops planted for winter grazing on farms that were given notice could not be eaten by cows. In June Environment Southland’s aerial surveillance resulted in 21 “farms of interest”. Of these five abatement and one infringement notices were issued. An abatement notice, given without warning, carries a demand for payment of $300 for alleged cost recovery.
The environment bureaucrats claim they do call farms identified for action, but it’s clear that non-compliance is not tolerated. Jason Herrick, a dairy farmer and spokesman for Federated Farmers, told media the regulations were “poor and turned good citizens into criminals”, but then defended the regional councils saying they were bound by a legal framework and “have to do what they’re doing.”
The abatement notices are received in the mail with no warning and demand a farmer stop grazing the paddock and become compliant with the rules. The notices must provide a time to act and recipients are advised that, if the time frame is impractical, they can contact the council to discuss an extension.
There is no fine with an abatement notice, only a cost recovery invoice, which covers time spent on the investigation. The council claims it tried to contact farmers to discuss their situation before abatement notices were issued and had talked to all of those affected.
Under the new “rules” farmers unable to undertake intensive winter grazing as a permitted activity are required to have either applied for a resource consent or deemed permitted activity. While the bureaucrats might well have tried to be polite, the powers are clearly the thin end of a wedge that threatens a short few steps to full eco-fascist tyranny.