I have never really concerned myself with the "Maori issue". However, I have an academic paper, from Adelaide and Massey universities, that more or less expresses my point of view. I can scan it and send it to you, if you would like to read it. It's not new. It's from the late 1990s, and was written, I think, in response to the contemporaneous discussion of the place of conquered indigenous peoples, and of the Australian Aborigines in particular, in Western society. At that time, there was a political party - the One New Zealand Party - which was partly modeled on the Australian One Nation party of Pauline Hanson. It didn't get anywhere in the polls, and was deregistered in 2006. I never supported it.
I don't think "Hobson's pledge" carried any weight, even if it was sincere (which I doubt). It was just a nice thing to say at the signing of the treaty, which the Maori signatories almost certainly didn't fully understand. Anyway, the colonial government subsequently went to war against the Maori, and seized more vast tracts of land from them. At the end of the century, the expectation was that the Maori would simply disappear, as a result of destitution, disease and demoralization. "A race sick unto death," was how they were described.
The Anglos are still up to their old tricks in the Middle East, smashing up country after country, seizing their resources, and reducing their populations to penury, while claiming to be bringing civilization and democracy. The only thing they aren't doing - except in the case of Israel - is supplanting the indigenous peoples with settlers.