Book: Healing Our History

Healing Our History  – the challenge of the treaty of Waitangi, by Robert and Joanna Consedine
ISBN: 9780143567691

Chapter 2: Fragments of History

The Role of Colonisation

Pg 42

The colonial era began towards the end of the fifteenth century with the rise of European powers built on the spoils of conquest of America, Asia and Africa. The exploitation of resources and the extraction of wealth from these continents paved the way for colonisation to progress, and capitalism developed as a world system. Says J.M. Blaut: ‘Capitalism became concentrated in Europe because colonialism gave Europeans the power both to develop their own society and to prevent development from occurring elsewhere’.

pg 43

…Colonisation opened up abundant resources, new markets and trade opportunities. The colonies also offered a destination for surplus populations.

Capitalism was not the only driving force, however. Colonisation was also inspired by a belief that European civilisation was genuinely superior and that progress resulted from its diffusion throughout the rest of the world.

While Ireland, Canada and Australia are all colonised countries, the process of colonisation has been different in each.

pg 47

Racism played a pivotal role in the colonisation of Ireland. The Irish were portrayed in newspapers as having ape-like features, being lazy, drunkards and less than human. They were seen as a race apart, inferior in every way. “Where the English were portrayed as honest, the Irish were liars, where the English worked and prospered, the Irish idled in poverty … English industriousness … contrasted with Irish disorder … Manly Protestantism [confronted] a cowardly and corrupt Catholicism”. Similar racial stereotypes were developed in countries such as Australian, Canada and New Zealand against the Irish as well as the indigenous peoples. This enabled the colonisers to justify taking control of the resources.

Pg 48

The Creation of Northern Ireland

A treaty between Ireland and Britain in 1921 set up an irish Free State as a self-governing dominion of the British Emprie, with the same constitutional status as Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. A representative of the Crown was to be appointed in the same way as a dominion governor-general, and the members of the Irish Parliament were to take an oath of allegiance to the constitution and the Irish Free State, which pledge them to “be faithful to His Majesty King George V, his heirs and successors.”

The terms of the treaty divided the country and resulted in a bloody civil war.

Pg 48

On the surface the Irish Troubles are always presented as a religious issue but in fact they are an economic issue.

pg 52

Early European Contact [Canada]

A recurring pattern of colonialism soon began to develop. Traders, settlers, trappers, adventurers and hunters drifted into canada, the home of First Nationals (indigenous Canadian) peoples. Missionaries arrived to evangelise the ‘natives’ and service the needs of the increasing numbers of European settlers, brining with them a Christian gospel infused with the values and assumptions of the Empires.

Relationships were relatively peaceful and some mutual benefits emerged between the new settlers and the indigenous peoples, such as the exchange of new ideas, technology and opportunities for trade. Yet new settlers and missionaries began to see that their own interest would be further secured by the intervention of the ‘mother’ country. They called for lw and order, stable governance and medical assistance for the ‘natives’ as European diseases were fast affecting the functioning of indigenous systems.

Pg 57

Australia: Conquest by Declaration of Terra Nullius

The fiction of terra nullius, adopted in 1788, was based on the notion that Australia belongs to no one. It was ’empty land’. European power reasoned that legitimate possession could be taken of any country that did not have political organisation and recognisable systems of authority. When convicts and jailers arrived as part of the First Fleet on 7 February 1788 at Sydney Cove, official raised the British flag, declaring sovereignty over New South Wales…

Pg 59

Genocide

Historian Dr Colin Tatz at the Centre for Comparative Genocide Studies at Macquarie University in Sydney comments that historians tend to avoid using the word genocide. Instead, when writing Aboriginal history, they use words such as ‘pacifying, killing, cleansing, excluding, exterminating, starving, poisoning, shooting, beheading, sterilising, exiling and removing’.

Pg 60

In a keynote address at the Mabo Conference Hal Wootten QC, head of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody… in 1800 the average Aborigine was probably as well off as the average European… Two hundred years later Aboriginal peoples are an underclass on the margins of European society as an inevitable outcome of the destruction of their society under colonisation.

Here are some of the contemporary consequences:

• Aboriginal peoples were not first counted as citizens until 1971
• In 2006, 517174 people identified as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islanders comprising 2.5% of the population 32% live in major cities; 10% live in remote areas and 16% in very remote areas
• As of 2004/2005 Aboriginal peoples had drastically higher rates of communicable diseases than non-aboriginals…
• Aboriginal peoples live 17 years less than the general population and in recent years have fallen significantly behind indigenous peoples in other countries
• Aboriginal peoples earn 62% less than non-aboriginal Australians, although education has improved
• In 2008 Aboriginal peoples were 13 times… more likely to be imprisoned than other Australians. With juveniles, it was even more stark – aboriginal 44 per 1000; Europeans 3 per 1000.

Conclusion

Pg 62

…many indigenous cultures survived colonisation. Yet, inevitably, the damage inflicted on their social, economic and political systems prevented many from developing modern structures. Now, in the twenty-first century, indigenous peoples in their ceaseless struggle against historical and contemporary injustices are confronting governments with demands that they honour treaty promises, recognise indigenous common-law rights and uphold the right of self-determination.

No country benefits from having a permanently marginalised population.

Pg 63

Chapter 3: Missionary Conquest: Christianity and Colonisation

pg 67

Although the Catholic Church believed it had a role in protecting the ‘natives’ in any particular country, the goals of evangelisation became subordinated to the colonisation process The papal policy was pragmatic: papal support was given to European powers to convert “the natives “to Christianity…

pg 68

The papal policy of supporting colonisers to invade new territories in exchange for the right to convert indigenous populations did not go unchallenged. The most formidable and famous opponent was FAther Bartolomé de La Casas (1474 – 1566), who argued passionately for the rights of all people, including aboriginal peoples. He too, was committed to conquering aboriginal peoples, but hoped to do it less violently.

…Pope Paul III (1534 – 49) wrote a key document called Sublimis Deus in 1537. … Apboritinal peoples … were human beings, capable of understanding the Catholic faith. … Aboriginal religions were subsequently disregarded as vague and useless, and no serious impediment to conversion to Christianity. The interest of the church and colonising powers remained paramount.

Over the next 400 years, church missionaries and colonisers worked hand in hand conquering new lands and extending their empires.

Pg 70

In New Zealand the 1907 Suppression of Tohunga Act outlawed Maori traditional healers and religion. Although designed and promoted by Maori politicians it was passed amid controversy. Some Maori supported it as by the early twentieth century they were deeply concerned at the inability of tohunga to heal the new western diseases using traditional methods. The Act was aimed at:

Every person who gaher Maoris around him by practising on their superstition or credulity, or who misleads or attemps to mislead any Maori by professing to pretending to possess supernatual powers in the treatment or curre of any disease, or in the foretelling of future events’

…The Act also had the effect of outlawing Maori methodology and undermining the legitimacy of Maori knowledge in respect of healing, the environment, the arts and the links between the spiritual and the secular. The act was repealed in 1962.

Pg 77

The Pope, during a visit to Latin America in 2007, stated: “that Catholicism had purified indigenous populations”.

Pg 71

A New Direction in Catholic Thought

Change in the Catholic thinking on the rights of indigenous peoples came with the election of Pope John XXIII in 1958, who gave papal support to the political sovereignty and self-determination of indigenous peoples. Under his leadership the second Vatican Council, held in the early 1960s, recognised for the first time in Christian history the right to religious freedom for all people.s It was only after this period that the right to maintain one’s culture was explicitly recognised by the Catholic Church.

Pg 72

In the decades following Vatican II theology of inculturation received increasing acceptance among liberation theologians and received increasing acceptance among liberation theologians and missionaries within the Catholic Church. Inculturation is the process of understanding the message of Christ within the framework of a particular culture. The purpose of inculturation is to defend human and cosmic life, and to affirm the presence of the spirit precisely where the colonisation process denied it: in the Indian, the African slave, the woman, the body and in nature.

---

Chapter 4: Shattering The Myths

PG 78

Waitangi, 6 February 1990

It was the 150th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi.

pg 79

Queen Elizabeth II and the government representatives finally arrived by boat. As the official party made its way to the Treaty grounds someone threw a wet T-shirt at the Queen and the police moved in.

One of the official speakers, the Right Reverend Whakahuihui Vercoe, stood and publicly accused the Crown of marginalising Maori people. It was an extraordinary moment. After all the planning by the protesters for the Waitangi Day celebrations, a member of the official party had made a direct accusation against the Crown: the large crowd cheered but the officials sat stony-faced.

1990 was an important year in the history of New Zealand. In commemorating the 150th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty the government spent $30 million on various Treaty-related projects. For many Pakeha, Waitangi Day 1990 symbolised the beginnings of an awareness of the history of their country, in particular of the fact that promises made in the Treaty had not been kept by successive governments. The anger in the Maori community was very visible, symbolised powerfully in speeches and protest.

…

since the signing of the Treaty, every generation of Maori has engaged in protest against the colonisation of their country. The protest has taken many forms, including letters and delegations to queens and kings in London; petitions to Parliament; direct challenges to the authority and legitimacy of the government; armed resistance in the Land Wars; passive resistance at Parihaka; a

pg 80

variety of religious and political movements; court cases; appeals to the Privy Council; the formation of Maori political parties; the occupation of buildings and land; marches, pickets, blocking roads and bridges; the creative development of Maori systems (often started voluntarily) in language, education, justice, health and the news media. And the message has remained the same: Honour the Treaty.

Early European Contact

The Dutch explorer Abel Tasman sighted the Southern Alps of New Zealand on 13 December 1642. After naming it Staten Landt he sailed north, past Cape Foulwind to Farewell Spit, where Tasman and his crew became the first known Europeans to encounter New Zealand Maori. An early encounter resulted in a long boat off the Heemskerck being rammed by a canoe. Three crew were killed and another mortally wounded and exaggerated reports of the incident later circulated through Europe. Maori were described as murderers and New Zealand was seen as a dangerous place-impressions that influenced the perceptions and conduct of future exploration

pg 81

From the late 1700s the most significant group of Europeans to roam around the shores of New Zealand were whalers and sealers, who interacted with Maori, coming and going at will. Long-term settlers began to arrive around 1800, along with timber workers and traders.

At this point European relationships with Maori were mainly cordial and the contact mutually beneficial. Maori were still in control and could enforce their own custom. Early settlers were amazed at Maori fishing exploits

pg 82

The Arrival of Protestant Missionaries

The arrival of the Reverend Samuel Marsden in the Bay of Islands marked the start of formal contact with British missionaries. Conventional belief holds that in 1814 Marsden became the first missionary to lead a Christian service in New Zealand. In fact the first service had been held 45 years earlier on Christmas Day 1769.

In the period leading up to the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 Protestant missionaries engaged in the usual missionary activities. They built churches and schools, preaching and teaching in the Maori language. It was English Protestant missionary policy to be fluent in the Maori language to increase their effectiveness. Around 1820 onwards they began to record the Maori language, and by the 1830s a Maori-language version of the Bible was Widely dispersed in Maori communities.

The Protestant missionary promotion of the Treaty of Waitangi also needs to be seen in the light of their rapacious land acquisition before 1840. Prior to the Land Claims Commission hearing in 1841, Anglican missionaries initially claimed they had fairly purchased 240,000 hectares from Maori. They subsequently reduced their claim to 87,800 hectares and the commission approved 27 ,000 hectares Tens of thousands of hectares were also claimed by other settlers and land speculators. However, the commission was ineffective and no land was returned to the Maori owners, as wasteland was now deemed to be Crown land.

83

The Civil Wars

In 1820 Nga Puhi chief Hongi Hika went to England as a guest of missionary Thomas Kendall, where he obtained a small arsenal of muskets. The civil wars between hapu, which had started earlier, intensified following Hongi Hika’s return. Lawyer R. D. Crosby estimates that between 50,000 and 60,000 Maori were killed, enslaved or forced to migrate from 1810-1840.14 However, demographer Ian Pool, on whom Crosby partly draws, points out that ‘100,000 persons could have been expected to have died over this thirty year period in the “normal course of events” with or without wars’.J5 Historian James Belich postulates a mortality rate of about 20,000.

Nonetheless, casualties of constant raiding eventually became unendurable, causing many hapu to look for safer territories. This new type of warfare made it difficult for tribes to unite. Weaker tribes suffered terribly and later may have been more inclined to look to external mechanisms such as the Treaty of Waitangi for protection.

85

New Zealand had two potential colonisers, the French and the English. The French landed in two or three different parts of New Zealand in the early 1830s and began to negotiate with Maori for land and sovereignty. By the late 1830s they had a definite plan for the colonisation of New Zealand and had drafted a deed of purchase for the South Island.

Britain Stakes a Claim

The British response in 1833 was to extend the laws of New South Wales to cover New Zealand and to appoint James Busby as British Resident. In 1834 Busby presented northern Maori chiefs with a flag to enable them to trade internationally. A year later, without any support from the Colonial Office, he was instrumental in forming what became known as the Confederation of United Tribes of New Zealand, an assembly of 34 leaders of northern hapu, whom he persuaded to sign a document he had prepared entitled ‘A Declaration of the Independence of New Zealand’

86

Mason Durie notes that ‘the intention in 1835 was to create a Maori nation state, a departure from the exclusively tribal orientation which prevailed, and the introduction of a confederated approach to governance’.

The Declaration of the Independence of New Zealand, witnessed by the Crown resident, is an international declaration, which acknowledges the sovereignty of the independent tribes of New Zealand.

87

Meanwhile Captain William Hobson, another representative of the governor of New South Wales, had come up with a plan for New Zealand, similar to the ‘factory plan’ implemented in colonial India.3o

Meanwhile the New Zealand Company was promoting its own plan for colonising New Zealand, supported by an abundance of British capital and talk of cheap land, plentiful raw materials and unlimited trading opportunities i’n a distant paradise. Britain was in a state of domestic crisis, and a population excess, coupled with pressing poverty, were other factors influencing prospective settlers.

It was close to 1840 before the Colonial Office finally decided to appoint Hobson, as a consul representing the Crown, to return to New Zealand to negotiate a treaty with the Maori people. Maori had requested intervention to deal with the lawlessness of British settlers.

88

Sovereignty or Governance? The Treaty of Waitangi

On 3 February Hobson drafted a treaty in English, assisted by Freeman, his secretary, and Busby. The English text acknowledged that the chiefs had collective sovereignty over New Zealand, which they agreed to cede to the British Crown and in return were promised undisturbed possession of their lands and estates, forests and fisheries, yielding an exclusive right of pre-emption to the Crown over such lands as the chiefs wished to alienate at prices agreed upon by both parties. Maori were also granted all the rights and privileges of British subjects.

Overnight the Anglican missionary Reverend Henry Williams and his son Edward then translated this English version into a dialect of the Maori language. But there were important differences between , the two versions, rendering the Maori text more saleable.36 In the Maori text of the Treaty, the Maori signatories gave the Crown kawanatanga (governance) over their land and the Crown promised to protect the tino rangatiratanga (the unqualified exercise of authority) of the chiefs over their lands and villages ‘and all their treasures’. The Crown also promised to protect Maori peoples and extended to them the same rights and duties of citizenship as the people of England.

90

On the other side of the coin, Maori chiefs were not in a position to cede sovereignty to the British Crown. The very notion of sovereignty was located in a European legal and political framework, which was based on entirely different premises from a Maori world view. While the chiefs at Waitangi may have represented their respective communities, they did not have the authority to give away what the Europeans understood as sovereignty. Says Paul Moon: ‘No chief, however high his [or her] rank, could dispose of a single acre without the concurrence of his [hapu].

It is likely that those Maori who signed the Treaty expected a new relationship with Britain based on shared authority. Maori understood that the Crown would govern the settlers and that Maori would continue to control their own affairs, exercising full authority over their own communities, lands and other treasures.

For Maori the Treaty was not only a written document but also a spoken agreement. All that was discussed at Waitangi was integral to the spirit and intent of the new relationship.

91

One chief present at Waitangi later returned his gift of blankets to Hobson ‘with a letter signed by fifty of his tribe. He wanted his name removed from the Treaty. Hobson was highly annoyed and would not listen.’

The Maori text was eventually signed by 512 Maori throughout New Zealand over a seven-month period, including five Maori women. Most did not see or sign the English Treaty at Waitangi. At Waikato Heads the names of 33 Maori were appended to an English text and at Manukau another six names were added.

In May 1840 Hobson proclaimed British sovereignty over the North Island by right of cession, and in June over the South Island by right of discovery, even though some South Island chiefs had signed the Treaty. Inevitably both sides had different understandings; they were operating from different texts and different world views.

91

Honoured in the Breach

A serious attempt was made by the second colonial governor, Robert fitzRoy (1843-45), to respect the promises made to Maori in the English text of the Treaty. FitzRoy, although convinced of his own cultural superiority, was a proponent of the humanitarian PG 91 idealism that had earlier championed Maori rights. Soon after assuming his post, however, he found himself in an impossible situation, charged with developing a colony without adequate financial resources. On the one hand he believed in the honour of the Crown and upholding Treaty promises made to Maori, and on the other he faced the increasing expectations of settlers and a growing financial crisis exacerbated by the enormous pressure exerted by the New Zealand Company.

His recall to London after two years, engineered by the New Zealand Company, was a bitter blow for the missionaries and humanitarians. The company was determined to pursue its goals for systematic colonisation with little regard for the Crown’s Treaty obligations or Maori as a sovereign people. 50 George Grey, who was anti-missionary and more sympathetic to the New Zealand Company, replaced
fitzRoy.

The new governor soon restored the right of Crown pre-emption with the Native Land Purchase Act of 1846, which directly overrode the provisions of the Treaty. This Act also made Maori land ownership uneconomic by outlawing leases and restricting trade in timber and flax, which put pressure on Maori ow.n. ers to sell.

93

In 1848 the Crown purchased 8 million hectares (almost a third of the country’s land area) in the South Island from Ngai Tahu for £2000 on the condition that the tribe would retain their villages and homes, their gardens and natural food resources, as well as substantial additional lands. Not only were these conditions never honoured but the Crown also manipulated the sale to obtain further land without the knowledge or consent of Ngai Tahu.

In 1852 the New Zealand Constitution Act created the first New Zealand Parliament. Voting was based on individual title to land, which had the effect of excluding Maori from political power because Maori land was communally owned. Despite the fact that Section 71 of this Act allowed for Maori authority over certain areas of the country (by establishing Native Districts where Maori rules would apply), successive settler governments refused to implement it.

In 1858 the King Movement emerged within the Tainui Confederation of Tribes, proposing a parallel parliament based on shared sovereignty and seeking to stop all further land sales.

A series of events starting at Waitara in 1860, where the Crown attempted to take land that Maori leadership refused to sell, quickly led to a period known as the Land Wars, also referred to by New Zealand historian Claudia Orange as Wars of Sovereignty

The 1863 New Zealand Settlements Act enabled the Crown to confiscate land and property from any Maori who were believed to be in rebellion, whether the land belonged to the ‘rebels’ or not. Some 1.3 million hectares were confiscated under this Act, with the assistance of 28,000 imperial troops brought to New Zealand from 1856 by Governor Grey to subdue Maori. The Settlements Act was underpinned by the 1863 Suppression of Rebellion Act (direct from Ireland), which suspended basic rights for those found to be in rebellion against the Crown, carrying a penalty of confiscation and death. The main beneficiaries of these acts were the Crown and land speculators.

97

Maori were becoming strangers in their own land, seen as useful only for entertainment, tourism, sport, the armed services, and for marketing New Zealand as a South Pacific paradise with the best race relations in the world.

Later, near the close of the 1860s, ‘Native Schools’ aimed to ‘civilise’ Maori children and prepare them for manual or labouring work, emphasising order, discipline, respect for the British Empire and the development of practical skills, with little regard for Maori cultural values. ‘Their goal was not to extend the pupils intellectually but rather to provide them with sufficient schooling to become law abiding citizens.’64 English was the medium of instruction and many Maori children were physically punished for speaking their own language in the classroom and playground, a practice that was to continue well into the next century. These practices served to discourage many Maori from maintaining their language-the lifeblood of any culture.

99

By the 1890s Maori were seen by the settlers as a disappearing race. The Maori population, possibly as high as 200,000 at the beginning of the century, was by its end a mere 45,000, while the European population had climbed to 770,000.70 Most Maori lived in appalling conditions. Living in makeshift camps without sanitation, they suffered a high infant mortality rate and succumbed easily to infectious diseases. There

Dr Alfred Newman, an influential physician and businessman, maintained at the time that the ‘disappearance of the race is scarcely a subject for much regret. They are dying out in a quick, easy way, and are being supplanted by a superior race.’ His opportunistic arrogance reflected widely held beliefs at the time, with Victorian racism pervading Pakeha colonial culture, including science.

100

Until 1960, for example, responsibility for Maori children was usually shared between the extended Maori family and the community. A policy of integration required that from 1962 adoptions be conducted under the Adoption Act 1955, supplanting the role of the extended Maori family. ‘The Act was based on the concept that the adoptive parents should completely replace the birth parents … and all records of the baby’s origin were sealed for ever.

101

Ngai Tahu made their first complaint in 1849.

Some examples: Tainui lost vast areas of land because of confiscation; the government attack on Waitara was unprovoked; and Ngati Whatua were rendered landless. Maori common-law rights were guaranteed and not upheld. The challenge is how to make reparation for that, decades after the event.

102

Today, 172 years after the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, Maori freehold land comprises a little over 1.4 million hectares comprising approximately 5.5 per cent of New Zealand’s land mass. 82 This can be compared with about 27 million hectares originally.

---

Pg 103

Chapter 5: Confronting the Myths

…Corso, New Zealand’s leading nongovernmental international aid and development agency.

Our focus was overseas development assistance and emergency relief, and we were also committed to developing consciousness-raising projects aimed at educating New Zealanders about poverty in developing countries.

Pg 104

… Maori activist Dun Mihaka appeared on the scene, more than once. His challenge to Corso supporters was direct: how can you focus on injustice in the Third World and ignore the plight of Maori people in New Zealand? It was the first time since the activities of Nga Tamatoa at Auckland University and the Auckland Committee on Racism and Discrimination that I was forced to think about New Zealand history.

The Beginnings of Public Awareness

In the late 1960s the challenge facing Maori must have seemed overwhelming: how to raise awareness in a majority population that had almost no knowledge of New Zealand’s colonial history and was largely in denial about domestic racism.

pg 105

The political activities of Nga Tamatoa, the great land march of 1975, the occupation of Bastion Point and the work of the Waitangi Action Committee dramatically increased the visibility of Maori protest. Highlighted and often misrepresented in the media, these activities contributed to significant social change in New Zealand.

They helped promote a growing Pakeha awareness of New Zealand’s colonial history…

Many Pakeha began to better understand the highly contested debate on the constitutional status of Te Tirito o Waitangi and the tangata whenua status of Maori peoples in New Zealand society.

At the heart of Maori protest was the loss of land, taken by destructive legislation passed as recently as 1967

Pg 106

1975 Land March – Te Roopu o te Matakite (The People with Foresight)

The land march Te Roopus o te Matakite, formed by Syd Jackson, Whina Cooper and others began on 13 September 1975 at Spirits Bay in the far north of New Zealand. In legend the spirit of the Maori dead pause here before beginning the long journey to Hawaiiki, resting place of the ancestors [Really? I thought Hawaiiki was the literal birthplace of the ancestors, not a place in the afterlife?, research more]

Media coverage ensured the month-long march was noticed by tens of thousands of New Zealanders, who lived in transcendent ignorance about the colonial history of New Zealand.

Pg 107

The marchers converged on Wellington and Parliament on 13 October with their demand: control of Maori land in perpetuity. It was a momentous intervention – the beginning of a process of putting the Treaty back on the contemporary political agenda.

1976-78 Bastion Point: Stepping Outside the Law

… a government plan to subdivide 24 hectares of Crown land at Bastion point triggered an extended and high-profile occupation of the site. The genesis of this protest lay in a land grievance dating back nearly 140 years.

Auckland…was once a fishing village on the shores of the Waitemata Harbour owned by the Ngati Whatua o Orakei. In 1840 the Crown, using its power as sole land agent and setting a pattern for future land dealings, bought the Auckland isthmus – 1215 hectares- for £241 and withing nine months Hobson had onsold 17 hectares for £24,274. Ngati Whatua were naturally aggrieved and determined to retain the remaining 285 hectares they still held for their own livelihood. Until 1976, their continued protest had always been lawful.

The protest was led by Joe Hawke, who as a boy had witnessed the burning of the papakainga (ancestral village) Okahu Bay in 1951.

On 25 May 1978, after 506 days of occupation, 600 police officers, supported by the New Zealand army, arrested 222 protesters for wilful trespass on Crown land.

Waitangi Action Committee

… 1979 the committee initiated a “raiding party ” against a group of engineering students at the University of Auckland who were parodying a haka, as they had done for years. … failed to convince the students that their actions were culturally offensive. During the ‘raid ‘, hake skirts were ripped off the students.

An anti-Maori media misrepresented the raid as a gang rampage.

Ranginui Walker observes that “the He Taua [the avengers] attack on the engineers ‘haka party effectively exposed the raw nerve of racism in New Zealand society, which for so long had been concealed by the ideology of Maori and Pakeha as one people living in harmony.

Pg 109

During this period increasing numbers of Maori around the country were becoming involved in protests actions against local governments They protested against the confiscation of Maori land because of unpaid rates, zoning restrictions that prevented Maori communities from building on their own land, and attempts to claim coastal land and reserves for open space.

A highly visible example was the struggle of Tainui Awhiro, led by Eva Rikard, to reclaim ownership of land at Te Kopua Whaigaroa (Raglan). … traditional burial plots were used as greens. [Ora was involved with this one?]

The 1981 South African Springbok Tour

…another point of awakening for many Pakeha. Twenty years earlier the 1960 “No Maoris, No Tour “campaign had captured media interest and aroused public attention in its attempt to halt New Zealand’s collaboration with the racist South African sporting administration, which required the exclusion of Maori from the All Blacks

The anti-apartheid, anti-tour campaign gave rise to a period of civil action and law-breaking…

Pg 110

In this climate of political protest, two major official reports signalled a growing concern about race relations. Racial Harmony in New Zealand prepared by the Human Rights Commission in 1979, and Race Against Time produced by the Race Relations Conciliator two years later, indicated that New Zealand race relations were at a turning point. “The myth of New Zealand as a multicultural utopia is foundering on reality … We are now seeing the conflict of culture in very real form”.

A New Direction: The Waitangi Tribunal

Ratification of the Treaty of Waitangi became a new focus for Maori demands.

Matiu Rata, Minister of Maori Affairs, sponsored the Treaty of Waitangi Act, which was passed into law by the Labour government in 1975…

Historian Marcia Stenson notes that from a number of tribunal decisions – spread over 20 years – a series of common core principles can be found

• The essential bargain was the exchange of the right to make laws for the obligation to protect Maori interests
• Te Treaty implies a partnership, with mutual obligations to act towards each other in good faith
• The Treaty is able to be adapted to meet new situations
• Compromise is needed on both sides, so the needs of both Maori and Pakeha can be met
• The principle of redress for Treaty breaches flows from the Crown’s duty to act reasonably and in good faith as a Treaty partner.

… during that first 10 years the tribunal made some significant recommendations that had practical outcomes ultimately benefiting all New Zealanders.

The 1983 Motunui claim focused on the contamination of traditional fishing grounds and reefs by industrial waste and sewage.

The 1984 Kaituna claim responded to a proposal by the Rotorua City Corporation to divert treated sewage into the Kaituna River, affecting the quality of fisheries.

… the tribunal’s recommendations were mild and conciliatory, aimed at effecting a practical solution that both parties would accept.

The Waitangi Tribunal’s Te Reo Maori (Maori language) report in 1986 was another peg in the ground It detailed active attempts by previous governments to stamp out Te Reo Maori, the threatened state of the language, and persistent efforts by Maori communities to retain and cultivate their language. In the respot Te Reo Maori was interpreted as a taonga (treasure) essential to Maori culture and protected under the Treaty of Waitangi.

Tribunals Powers Expanded

Page 114

• Treaty settlements should not create further injustices
• The Crown has a duty to act in the best interests of all New Zealanders
• As settlements are to be durable, they must be fair and equitable with all claimant groups
• Settlements do not affect Maori entitlements as New Zeland citizens nor do they affect their ongoing rights arising out of the Treaty or under the law, and
• Settlements will take into account fiscal and economic constraints and the ability of the Crown to pay compensations

Most historical Treaty claims involve one or more of the following types of land loss:

• Pre-1865 land transactions, including pre-Treaty purchases, later investigated and validated ( “Old Land Claims”), Crown purchases, and post-Treaty private purchases made during the Crown’s waiver of its pre-emptive right to purchase Maori land
• Confiscation of Maori land by the Crown under the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863, and/or
• Transactions after 1865 under the various native/Maori land laws

Pg 115

Another benefit is the production of tribunal reports which document large sections of New Zealand’s colonial history, often for the first time. The tribunal’s reports are remarkable comprehensive, well indexed and quite outstanding in terms of layout, narrative and details. They will provide valuable material for generations to come and have already served to encourage public debate on the Treaty…

Pg 117

In defining and interpreting Treaty principles the Witangi ribunal draws not only from the two Treaty texts but also from historical documents that shed light on the intentions and understandings of the original signatories and the hisotrical context in which the Treaty was signed, as well as contemporary legal interpretations.

Pg 119

The Effect of a Market Economy

Some Maori leaders and many Pakeha viewed Labour’s economic policies as being in direct conflict with the Treaty of WAitangi Amendement Act (1985). On the one hand Maori were being encoraged to work with the Crown to settle Teaty grievances. On the other hand, state-owned enterprises had the authority to sell all surplus state assets to the hightest bidder, including foreign owners, which means there would be little left for Maori to claim.

The policy of privatisation was concretised in the Sate Owned Enterprises Act in 1986. …One in private title, the land could not be subject to a claim under the Waitangi Tribunal.

Pg 120

The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi

The Court of Appeal in 1987 stated:

• The Treaty provides for the acquisition of Sovereignty in exchange for the protection of rangatiratanga
• The Treaty requires a partnership and the duty to act reasonably and in good faither
• The Treaty provides for the freedom of the Crown to Govern
• The Treaty bestows on the Crown a duty of active protection of Maori people in the use of their lands and waters to the fullest extent practiable
• The Crown has a duty to remedy past breaches of the Treaty
• The Treaty provides for Maori to retain Chieftainship (rangatiratanga) over their resources and taonga and to have all the rights and privleges of citizenship
• The Treaty bestows on Maori a duty of reasonable co-operation

Pg 121

The Labour government defined the principles in 1989, and these were then modified in 1990 by the National government as:

• Principle of government (kawanatanga)
• Principle of self-management (rangatiratanga)
• Principle of equality
• Principle of reasonable co-operation between iwi and government
• Principle of redress

It should be noted these are the government-redefined principles of the Treaty. They are not the terms of the original Treaty of Waitangi. Maori were not consulted… here is the New Zealand Maori Council’s version of the principles:

• The duty to make good past breaches of the Treaty
• The duty to return land for land
• That the Maori way of life would be protected
• The duty to consult Maori
• That the parties would be of equal status
• That priority would be given to Maori values with regard to taonga

The principles are constantly evolving. An excellent guide to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, as expressed by both the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal, was published by Te Puni Kokiri in 2011.

Pg 125

Crown Policy and the Fiscal Envelope

Considerable confusion remains among the public about the purpose of Treaty settlements. Many New Zealanders see the Crown’s Treaty settlement policy as the Crown giving taxpayers ‘ money to Maori as a form of special assistance, failing to realise that the settlements represent token redress for past grievances. What recipients of settlements do with the money is for them to decide. It is their money. If the Crown were to decide this for them it would be committing another breach of the Treacy, as Maori were promised full authority over their property and other resources.

Pg 126

Te Kohanga Reo

• Total immersion in Te Reo Maori and Tikanga Maori
• Management and decision-making by whanau
• Accountability to the creator, the mokopuna.. the Kohanga Reo movement, whanau, hapu, iwi and the government
• Commitment to the health and well-being of the mokopuna and the whanau

Following the Hunn Report in 1961, the proposal to establish a Maori Education Foundation was quickly enacted. Hunn had argued that “if a Maori Education Foundation could be established it would transform the scene within ten years”. PG 127 The foundation was charged with the tast of “lifeting Maori education standards to a level equal to that of the Pakeha “. One of the first areas the foundation worked in was early-childhood education.

PG 127

Tikoki Black et al. note the following factors as illuminating why the kohanga reo movement has been so successful. Te Kohanga Reo:

• Were a dream of kaumatua
• Were developed with Matauranga whanau/hapu/iwi Maori as their core; had immersion in the Maori language, culture and whanau development as their central aims
• Were designed with a long-term aim of preparing Maori children for a life of learning, including participation in formal schooling programmes as well as those based in the Maori education system

The kohanga reo model for the revitalisation of ancestral language and culture if flexible and portable across cultures. It has global significance well beyond the South Pacific.

Pg 128

Te Kohanga Reo has pioneered:

• A model of education that is global in its relevance and impact
• Improved participation rates in early-childhood education for Maori
• Learning Te Reo Maori through immersion
• Whanau development
• The creation of a unique, intergenerational learning environment

pg 129

Te Wanaga

… Walker notes, “Maori were required to participate in an education sector controlled by past policies of assimilation, integration, multiculturalism and bilingualism, which for Maori has been a process of humiliation and shame. “

pg 130

Towards the New Millennium

Race relations remain a hot topic in the media and Maori claims over resources not specified in the Treaty (such as minerals, new technology and radio spectrum) continue to fuel outrage amoung may Pakeha over what they perceive as a “Treaty grievance industry”.

…The text of the Treaty have never been incorporated into or protected by legislation.

pg 131

The Crown still operates on the basis that sovereingnty was ceded in the Treaty, while many Maori disput this claim, continuing to demand that barriers to tino rangatiratanga be removed.

At the turn of the new century the Crown accepts the Treaty as the founding document of the country and as the basis for consitutional government.

Pg 132

Chapter Six: Why Didn’t We Know?

Pg 133

The director [of the People’s Institute for Survival and Beyond – anti-racism trainers] explained that the North American school systems had historically programmed people not to think, not to question authority, not to challenge the status quo – simply to memorise.

This explanation challenged me to think about parallels with the education system in New Zealand. Was this the reason so many New Zealanders were ignorant of the colonial history of their country?

Pg 134

In a book published a year earlier he [Joe Barndt] explained:

Institutional racism is practised in two ways, which we will call ‘direct ‘and ‘indirect ‘. Direct institutional racism, as the name suggests, is always conscious and intentional: it is openly and publicly practised without apology or shame. It has also been, until recently, quite legal. Indirect institutional racism may be intentional or unintentional. When it is intentional, indirect racism is deliberately disguised or hidden so that the public will be unaware of it. When unintentional, indirect racism is far more completely. It can exist as though it has a life of its own and is extremely difficult to eradicate.

He argued that institutional racism starts out as being intentionally racist and overt (visible), moves to being intentionally racist and covert (hidden), and later becomes unintentionally racist and covert.

Pg 135

Was Barndt’s definition applicable to the education system in New Zealand? In colonial times a range of mechanisms were used in schools to reinforce Pakeha privilege and values, including rigid time periods, European symbols around the room, and the exclusion of Maori language. … Was it compulsory anywhere in the primary or secondary curricula to learn about New Zealand’s colonial history and the Treaty of Waitangi? If so, whose knowledge, world view and values were being taught?

Pg 135

Examining New Zealand School Texts

In examining some of the texts I knew I was applying twentieth-century knowledge. Nevertheless, my findings were illuminating. Up until as late as 1960 a policy of assimilation dominated in New Zealand. [pg 136] This system was underpinned by ‘conscious and intentional ‘institutional racism at every level. The notion of assimilation as a social policy developed out of the nineteenth-century European belief that the races of the world were arranged hierarchically from ‘savage ‘races through to civilised races.

Pg 136

The policy of assimilation was directed at absorbing Maori into the Pakeha way of life…

Pg 137

Colonial Texts: “Intentionally Racist and Overt “

Pg 138

The New Zealand Graphic Reader Sixth Book (Circa 1900) includes “Lesson 20. The Treaty of Waitangi”. This lesson, based on the English translation of the Treaty of Waitangi, concluded that:

Although the Maoris have many times since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi waged fierce wars against the colonial government, it must nevertheless be remembered that Britain’s authority in New Zealand was peacefully acquired, and was in the main established in response to the voluntary request of the natives. Generally speaking too, the rights of the natives under the Treaty have been respected, and they themselves do not complain that any of its provisions have been unduly strained or arbitrarily set-aside.

Pg 139

New Zealand HIstory More Evident

… 1928… this new syllabus listed such topics as “The coming of the Maoris”, “How the Maoris lived”, “First settlements by white men – whalers, sealers, missionaries, “, “Able Tasman and Captain Cook:, “Famous missionaries”, “The Treaty of Waitangi”, “Famous Governors”, “Early arrangements for governing New Zealand”, “The New Zealand Association”, and “Progress of settlement in North and South Islands compared”.

Pg 140

One explicit aim for form one students was to learn “how England became a great colonising nation”.

Pg 141 School children were assured that “the bond between the white New Zealanders and the brown is a very strong one”. Our Nations Story thus promoted the philosophy of assimilation, where Pakeha and Maori were seen as one, and where national identity overrode any differences in cultural identity.

Pg 142

1960s: Slow Progress

In the 1960s New Zealand’s economy was booming. “We have the best race relations in the world”, “Maori are just like us” and “we are all New Zealanders” the world was told.

Pg 143

The 1971 Index, for example, contained some additional information for teachers about Wakefield’s scheme, stating: “We must not be too quick to say that the Maoris were robbed of their land. One-tenth of all the lang bought was set aside for the use of the Maori people and that tenth after the white man had settled became more valuable than the whole lot beforehand.”

Te Tiriti o Waitangi, written by Ruth Toss in 1958, was the only resource listed in the 1971 and 1978 index that had reference to the Treaty in the title. Ross’s article was progressive for its time. The story focused on the Treaty-signing process at Mangungu, a Wesleyan mission station of the [pg 144] Hokianga, a few days after the Treaty was signed at Waitangi. …The differences between the English and Maori texts of the Treaty are evident in the story, and the hurried nature of the signing process and the regret of some of the Maori chiefs about signing was referred to also. Near the end of the story Mr Hobbs that missionary says: “How can one explain in Maori the meaning of sovereignty?…Why, I”m not sure I know myself all that sovereignty implies”. This statement is symbolic of how confused the Treaty debate has always been.

Pg 145

1980s and 1990s: Time for Change

Pg 146

…how were the teachers who were themselves educated under an earlier curriculum able to teach issues relating to the Treaty of Waitangi, cultural diversity and racism adequately?

Pg 147

Where do teachers explore their own racism and how their own values, attitudes and world view may be affecting what and how they teach?

The Syllabus Today

…for young people: who will work to create an Aotearoa New Zealand in which Maori and Pakeha recognise each other as full Treaty partners and in which all cultures are valued for the contributions they bring.

Pg 148

The Treaty of Waitangi is one of the eight principles stated as:

The curriculum acknowledges the principles of the Treat of Waitangi and the bicultural foundations of Aotearoa New Zealand. All students have the opportunity to acquire knowledge of te reo Maori me ona tikanga.

Pg 153

Chapter 7: Getting Involved

Pg 156

Much of what I read and learned shocked me. It occurred to me that much of what had happened to Maori as a result of colonisation paralleled what had happened to my ancestors in Ireland. Making this connection enabled me to understand that healing history involved connecting my own ancestral story with the journey of my country. It also enabled me to stand alongside Maori and honour their struggle, while considering what this history meant to me as a Pakeha New Zealander.

Making a Response

Pg 157

Public opinion was vehemently opposed ot any issues related to Treaty rights for Maori, and at the outset many Pakeha approached the idea of doing Treaty education with reluctance. They did not see the point: knowing about the Treaty 150 years after its signing seemed irrelevant.

Any suggestion of racism invariably resulted in an instant denial. Many were puzzled that a group of Pakeha were teaching the Treaty of Waitangi – did we have Maori ancestry? The idea that Pakeha would take responsibility for learning and teaching Treaty commitments mystified them.

Pg 158

We also had the support of a network of local iwi…and a growing network of Maori from Cape Reinga to Bluff. … The philosophy of Pakeha taking responsibility for learning about the Treaty of Waitangi and colonialism received their unconditional support…Pakeha taking responsibility for their learning freed Maori to focus on their own issues.

…Confrontation is not appropriate as an educational method for Treaty education, because it is designed to engender guilt and to make people feel negative about their own cultural identity. This kind of workshop process does not treat people as individuals, but as representatives of an historical and contemporary system.

Pg 161

Confrontation does have a role in social change. The courage of political activities and those the media labels as “Maori radicals “ensures that the Treaty of Waitangi and its implications remain at the top of New Zealand’s political agenda.

Pg 162

… Paulo Freire’s idea was to ground all education in the experiences of individual participants and develop a continual shared investigation.

Pg 163

Here is a list of typical questoins that arise in this session of a Treaty workshop

• What are the major issues that Maori people have with Pakeha people?
• What is in the Treaty of Waitangi? How many versions are there? Which one do we believe?
• Was the mistranslation of the Treaty deliberate or unintentional?
• Surely all treaties are broken? Can’t we just forget about it?
• Is the Treaty struggle taking place overseas or just here in New Zealand?
• How will implementing the Treaty help Maori today?
• Who are the “real” Maori leaders? Which ones do we listen to?
• Surely Maori benefited from the Pakeha settlement?
• When are Maori going to stop moaning and work like the rest of us?
• Everyone has equal opportunity. Why can’t Maori take advantage?
• What defines a Maori?
• What is an indigenous person?
• Why can’t Maori own their Pakeha side?
• Maori seem to have a lot of unused land. Why are they claiming more?
• What has “being Maori ” got to do with health?
• Our schools are open to everyone. Why can’t Maori just fit in?
• I don’t believe Pakeha people have a culture. Aren’t we all New Zealanders?
• Is it true that Maori get all these privileges such as scholarships?
• Why should we go back 150 years to solve problems?
• Maori traditional took over land by force. Surely Pakeha people just did the same?
• What about the Maori taking over the Moriori? Who was here first?
• Why should Maori have preferential treatment at law school and medical school?
• What do Maori expect from health professionals?
• Maori are claiming the airwaves. There were no airwaves in 1840. What’s next?
• Should I learn the Maori language?
• How can Maori claim mineral resources they did not know about in 1840?
• Who will benefit from Maori land claims?
• I’ve heard the Maori are now claiming private land. Is this true?
• This is about Maori. What about other cultures in New Zealand?
• I’ve heard that the word Pakeha is an insult. What does it mean?
• What do Maori see as the role of Pakeha in New Zealand today?
• How are these issues being dealt with in Australia and Canada?
• Are there any Australian and Canadian examples of successful solutions?

Sociodrama: Learning by Doing

Pg 165

Integration involves building on what is already there in order to take the next step. IN the firm belief that experiential learning is the key, I employ the tool of sociodrama. This approach invites participants to integrate their thinking and analysis while participating in a fun learning experience that fully engages their emotions and senses.

In order to get people to look at the Treaty and racism in a different way I knew I needed to get the group thinking in different ways. … To this end I invited people to enact historical roles, such as being an early settler, Queen Victoria, a colonial clerk, a Treaty negotiator, a Crown representative, a drunken convict, a prostitute, a governor, an indigenous chief or a member of a tribe. I wanted them to be their ancestor of 200 years ago. This could mean a Scottish clan chief, a starving Irish peasant, an English aristocrat, a mother of 17 children, a landless peasant, a craftsperson, a smuggler, a missionary, an escaped convict.

Given this opportunity to use their imaginations to enact centra figures in history, the participants would be able to experience the pressures and understand the constraints under which an historical figure or group operated. They could explore how this person would have thought, and experience emotions such as powerlessness, anger, fear, paralysis, rejection and invisibility. They would, through this process, gain insights into a wide range of issues, including how the dominant culture has the power to exclude.

pg 166

Information v Propaganda

In Treaty education, as in any other type, it is important not to replace one set of myths with another.

While it is appropriate, for example, for New Zealanders and Australians to commemorate Gallipoli, El Alamein and Cassino, why is it that in New Zealand we do not commemorate the domestic wars of sovereignty fought in our country in the 1860s? Invasions against peoples within colonial countries have traditionally been excluded in the teaching of colonial history. As a result of this ignorance, there is often an overwhelming desire to protect, minimise and excuse the behaviour of European settlers when new information about colonial history is presented.

Pg 169

I despise the media for making us afriad

Healing history clearly requires challenging the internalised stereotypes and assumptions we hold about Maori. With rare exceptions, the media has fuelled Pakeha fear and ignorance around the Treaty debate. Maori are portrayed in exteme positions.

---

Pg 173

Chapter 8: Honouring Our Stories

Pg 175

Being Grounded

I define “being grounds “as making connections that enable a feeling of belonging. We possess the connections intrinsically, but many of us are unaware of them. The challenge is to “make “the connections. There is no formula for being grounded It means different things to different people, but it usually involves a feeling of safety to be and express who we are. For some people it involves a concept of connection to the land, whether it be rural, suburban or inner-city; for others, there may be a connection to the mountains, bush or rivers of a particular country. Others may find grounding in an ancestral homeland, or simply in knowing where their ancestors are from. Some may feel grounded in the presence of family and friends, or in the place called home.

People often find that they only realise where they feel grounded when they live elsewhere, and/or when their own culture, values, world view or way of life come into question.

Valuing Your Own Story

…knowing your own story and feeling grounded in your own story and feeling grounded in your own identity is the starting point for exploring New Zealand’s colonial history and understanding its current impact.

pg 176

New information about colonial history can invoke pain and discomfort in participants.

…the stories Pakeha have of their ancestors – where they came from, why they left their homeland, what happened when they arrive here – are pivotal.

As participants [of the workshops[ explore the process of colonisations, they realise that many of the laws that drove their European ancestors from their homelands were subsequently adapted and imposed on indigenous peoples in colonised countries such as New Zealand. This knowledge enables them to make connections between their counties of ancestral origin and New Zealand.

Understanding our own story gives us some clues on how to align ourselves with people of other cultures and the universal story. When we see the commonality in the human struggle, what to do with the new information becomes the next challenge.

Stories Bring History Alive

pg 177

The Importance of Story

Listening to stories from history is one part of the healing process for counties facing their colonial past.

Stories enable us to acknowledge, honour and remember the past, and to begin to determine what is needed in the future to create more peaceful relationships within and between individuals, communities and nations.

However, every storyteller must retain the right to tell their stories to whomever they choose and in their own time. It is, after all, their story. Pakeha do not have the right to know the stories of Maori unless Maori choose to tell them. While a power imbalance remains in the relationship between Maori and Pakeha, there can be no equal relationship between the colonised and the colonisers. Yet, when storytelling is greeted with deep listening, healing can begin for the colonised and understanding is awakened in the coloniser.

pg 178

Stories of a country’s colonial past have the most impact when delivered in a learning environment that enables listeners to place the new information in an historical framework. People can then explore their reactions and discuss what is being presented. Careful timing in the delivery of particular stories can enable people to accept views that may be different from their own.

When we have a firm sense of identity, connection and belonging, we are less likely to become daunted and personally threatened by the new information communicated through stories. Our fears are less likely to dominate our responses and we are more open to hearing what others are saying.

pg 181

When racism and racial inferiority are perpetrated against people, sooner or later it is likely they will internalise the values of the racist. The outcome is often a hatred of self and a hatred of your own kind. If you are told something often and in a situation in which you are vulnerable, you are more likely to end up believing it.

Pg 182

Taking Personal Responsibility

In understanding my own story and learning about the history of colonisation as a systemic process, I was able to maintain my integrity and not b manipulated by guilt that might be imposed on me by others. I am not responsible for what my ancestors did. I am also not responsible for what I was not taught in my formal education. However, as a Pakeha, I undoubtedly benefited from the actions of my ancestors and from the forces of colonisation. [thoughts: how do pakeha who are struggling to live currently develop an understanding of how they have benefited from colonisation? Particularly for those who are new to the country, perhaps first-generation English. Does this become a conversation for tauiwi/non-maori&non-pakeha should be involved in or one they should stay out of? Is this only applicable thinking for New Zealanders, or should this be something that someone moving to new zealand should be working on for their own ancestral colonisation (e.g. French -> New Caledonia, Spain – Latin America, China -> Taiwan))

The Treaty of Waitangi enabled European settlers to settle in this country peacefully. Hapu who signed the Treaty of Waitangi with the British Crown granted settlers this right. The Treaty, therefore, legitimatises the presence of all other cultures in New Zealand. Pakeha people have a right to be here, but that right carries an obligation to honour the promises that enabled settlement to occur. The historical fact is, however, that by the time the settlers become the majority all promises to Maori had been discarded. The failure to keep this agreement, regarded by Maori as a sacred covenant, and the subsequent imposition of a colonial system, lies at the heart of the contemporary Treaty debate.

Guilt has no place in the Treaty debate.

We cannot act on what we do not know. We can and need to take responsibility for our own learning about it.

Pg 184

Overcoming Amnesia

In the past, majority cultures have denied or ignored the terrible damage inflicted on indigenous peoples. Imposing solutions compounded the damage. If indigenous peoples are going to develop on their own terms, majority cultures have to change. This is our challenge. It is not about guilt – it is about responsibility. In New Zealand, some Maori call it “creating the space”.

---

Pg 185

Chapter 9: Respecting Identities: A Parallel Approach

Years of experience in Treaty education have taught me that cultural mixe workshops at an introductory level do not work. The lessons are clear. Introductory workshops for Pakeha led by Maori are ineffective and de-colonisation workshops led by Pakeha for Maori are inappropriate. They fail to provide a cultural safe environment for either Maori or Pakeha to begin exploring issues. All New Zealanders need a safe space in a non-confrontational environment to reflect on their own identity issues and, from that basis, begin the process of understanding colonisation.

---

Pg 198

Chapter 10: White Privilege: The Hidden Benefits

Koukourarat (Port Levy), Banks Peninsula, 2003

Pg 199

Banks Peninsula had been ‘purchased ‘ by the Crown in three blocks. Between 1849 and 1856 negotiations occurred at Port Cooper, Port Levey and Akaroa. Commitments were made about Maori reserves and natural resources. Most of these promises, however, were not kept, and as a result of these Crown acts, most of Ngai Tahu of Banks Peninsula were driven off the land and lost their turangawaewae.

…I became increasingly aware of the many privileges I enjoyed as a white middle-class male…

…I could worry about racism without being seen as “self-interested”. I could express alternative views and not be seen as speaking for all Pakeha; did not have to educate my children to be aware of how systemic racism may impact on their lives; was not singled out as a failure of a success because of multure; and had always been free to criticise the government of the day without being seen as a demanding Pakeha seeking more benefits for my own people. I could have an argument with a colleague, or be late for a meeting, without these “failures “being attributed to my culture. Never once did I have to carry the cultural stereotypes of laziness, violence, trouble-making, poor parenting and living by “Maori time”.

Pg 200

What is White Privilege

White privilege is based on a set of assumptions about what is regarded as neutral, normal and universally available.

[Read article: The Invisible Knapsack by Peggy McIntosh]

Pg 201

… colonial society as “a society organised on the basis of the segmentation of land and other natural resources under private, heritable individual titles, [underpinned by] b corresponding set of laws and customs, acted out under the directions of the ruling class”. This society [independent scholar, Theodore] Allen argues, “brings under its colonial authority people of societies organised on principles of collective, tribal tenure of land and other natural resources, and having their respective corresponding sets of laws and customs”.

In 1840 all land and resources were recognised by the Crown as being owned by Maori hapu, under Maori customary tenure. There had been pre-Treaty “sales”, but these were thoroughly investigated.

Pg 202

The “Chief Protector of Aboriginies”, Geoge Clarke, who had been appointed on 6 April 1840, returned some land to the Crown – but not to the Maori owners. Because Clarke was also responsible for purchasing Maori land on behalf of the Crown he had a clear conflict of interest.

Fraudulent land deals had started well before the Native Land Courts were set up in the 1860s.

The “Right of Pre-emption”, which made the Crown the sole land agent, was included in the Treaty in order that the Crown could protect Maori from land sharks. Maori were not allowed to sell directly to settlers.

… the Crown became the biggest land shark of all.

…transactions by the Crown in the following examples are still considered legal sale, so the land involved cannot be reclaimed:

• In 1840, the centre of Auckland city (3000 acres) was bought from local Maori for cash and goods for £341. Within nine months a mere 44 acres was resold for £24,275.
• In 1845, 16,000 acres of Ngati Whatua land were retained by the Crown without compensation.
• In 1850, in suburban Auckland, 700 acres, “after prolonged and wearisome interviews “were bought for £5000 and one-third of this was then sold immediately for £32,000. The whole block eventually realised £100,000.
• From 1844 through to the 1860s, 34 million acres of land passed from Ngai Tahu to the Crown for a total of £8750. In effect the Crown paid six one-hundredths of one penny for each acre purchased.
• In North Canterbury, “two years prior to concluding the purchase of 1,140,000 acres from Ngai Tahu for $500, the government actually sold a block of land containing 30,000 for £15,000, which on a per-acre equivalent was 1142 times more than Ngai Tahu was paid two years later. It was also more than the Crown paid for all Ngai Tahu’s 34.5 million acres.

Pg 204

When Ngai Tahu accepted $170 million in 1998 as a full and final settlement of their claim, their chief negotiator, Sir Tipene O’Regan stated that the full value of their South Island claim as about $16 billion. O’Readn observed that “this level of generosity for Pakeha society has never been acknowledged.

Native Land Courts

The Native Land Acts, which created the Native Land Courts of the early 1860s, were supposed to “acknowledge Maori rights as British subjects by recognising their legal right to all their land and allowing them to do what they chose with it, including getting full market value if they sold it”.

There were in some legislative mechanisms put in place to protect Maori, but in practice, the courts had enormous power over Maori in respect of their property rights. Argues Alan Ward, “If the court failed to interpret custom correctly, and found for the wrong claimants, or for insufficient claimants, some Maori would be disposed. ” The notorious 10-owner rule required hapu to name 10 owners for blocks of land of less than 5000 acres. This rule…became the source of all manner of difficulties for Maori, since those 10 owners were legally required to be absolute owners, not trustees for the tribe.

The entire process naturally undermined the Maori communal lifestyle and established tribal structures.

Pg 205

Government Policies: White Privilege the Outcome

Although downstream economic benefits to Pakeha were obviously not evenly spread, new settlers arrived in a country that was governed by, and for the benefit of, primarily Anglo-Celtic immigrants.

It was an English, largely male landowning Parliament that spanned New Zealand’s criminal justice system, land courts, education and health systems.

Hundreds of laws were passed without any reference to a Maori view, let alone Maori authority.

The idea of power-sharing with Maori, as guaranteed in the Treaty of Waitangi, was anathema to most settlers.

Pg 206

Pg 207

World War I and World War II

After World War I Pakeha soldiers went into a ballot for land for resettlement, but returned Maori soldiers did not. Apirana Ngata thought it might be seen as “improper [for] the Crown to earmark land for Maori soldiers when it was popularly supposed that Mori had sufficient land of their own”.

Pag 209

White Privilege ‘Normalised ‘

Every institutional aspect of the new society was supported and implanted, and the wealth owned by Maori was systemically transferred to the new settlers. White privilege was further reinforced through a long-term policy to ensure that only “suitable” British and other European immigrants, with a few exceptions, immigrated to New Zealand until the early 1970s.

The full impact of these major policies has taken generations to emerge and intensify. The 1907 Suppression of Tohunga Act and assimilation policies that required Maroi to abandon their culture and become English were other examples of polices that discriminated against Maori.

Although some individual settlers had mutually beneficial relationships with Maori, most people’s attitudes were shaped by the practices as superior and “normal”. Maori were expected to learn the Pakeha way of life; Pakeha certainly did not expet to learn the Maori way of life. Curltural misunderstanding was naturally rife.

Maori had no word for sale and differences in understanding were endemic.

---

Chapter 11: Healing Our History

225

Healing History

History cannot be changed, but sometimes it can be healed. History must be healed if humankind is to survive.

Maori and other indigenous peoples all over the world are confronting governments in colonial societies to force them to honour treaties. As the new millennium evolves, the challenge is to expand and deepen our understanding of what is required to heal our history. Nothing will change until historical grievances are recognised and confronted. Equally challenging is the need to honour the original agreements made with indigenous peoples, which in New Zealand means honouring the power-sharing agreement guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi.

226

Acknowledging the Pain of History

Healing needs to occur at many levels. The start of the process is to acknowledge the history, damage and pain caused by colonisation. To recognise at an official level that what happened actually happened. Official acknowledgement is vital and its impact cannot be underestimated. It means that the histories of indigenous people are recognised. Their experience is taken seriously.

227

Offering a Genuine Apology

After acknowledgement, a genuine apology is the next step in accepting personal or collective responsibility for wrongdoing. A genuine apology is an expression of remorse and regret. It implies a commitment to change, ensuring that the wrongdoing does not occur again.

228

Apologies without changed behaviour lack credibility and become another political tool, which risks devaluing their meaning.

New Zealand-Apologies

In 1996 in New Zealand Queen Elizabeth became the first British monarch to make an official apology. In the presence of the Maori Queen, Te Arikinui Dame Te Atairangikaahu, she signed into New Zealand law a bill in which the Crown apologised to Tainui, the people of Waikato, for sending imperial forces into their land in the 1860s and for the subsequent devastation and injustice. Since then an official apology from the Crown has accompanied all settlements with Maori, totalling 15 by September 2003.

229

…

These apologies are important as they formally acknowledge our history of discrimination and signal a seismic change in the behaviour and attitude of the Crown.

Making Reparation

Reparation must follow apology.

Reparations can deepen the power of an apology, by showing sincerity of remorse and a desire to make things different in the future . . . apologies are most believable when they’re accompanied by reparations, and reparations are least offensive when they really are about apology

Jeremiah Creedon, ‘To Hell and Back’ in Utne Reader, p.59

In New Zealand various of forms of reparation to Maori are possible, including cultural redress, for example enhanced status and responsibilities for kaitiaki of resources, dual place names and mahinga kai, financial compensation, restoration of land, and provision for representation on local decision-making b~dies critical to tribal interest.

230

The Ngai T ahu claim offers an example of the settlement process at work in New Zealand. Ngai Tahu registered their claim with the Waitangi Tribunal in 1987, giving rise to investigation by the Crown and the claimants. The tribunal, representing a cross-section of New Zealand society, heard the claim and subsequently reported its findings and recommendations. The Crown publicly acknowledged the history in the proposed deed of settlement and agreed to offer an official apology to Ngai Tahu. It further proposed a settlement package amounting to $170 million, including land, name changes to mountains, rivers and lakes, and representation on various government boards within the Ngai Tahu rohe.

The settlement was signed in 1998, 150 years and 19 commissions of inquiry after Ngai T ahu first lodged a claim with the Crown. Whether or not this represents a full and final settlement is a matter for future generations.

237

New Zealand: Restoring Right Relationships

In 1992 the Crown settled a Treaty claim relating to fisheries, which came to be known as the Sealord deal. The Crown bought a half share in Sealords Products, a major commercial fishing company owning 26 per cent of all fishing quota, for $150 million, and gave it to Maori. Brierley Investments Ltd purchased the other half share.

238

In addition, the Crown agreed to give Maori 20 per cent of each new species of fish brought into the quota scheme. Maori in return agreed to cease litigation in respect of commercial fisheries, which meant the Waitangi Tribunal no longer had jurisdiction over any Treaty claims made in respect of fishing or fisheries. 43 Although Maori negotiators appeared to favour the Sealord deal many Maori had reservations. At a number of hui held throughout the country in September 1992, concern was expressed that abandoning Treaty claims was more than any deal was worth. But the negotiators, recognising that the government held all the cards, took all that was on offer, subsequently enabling many Maori to take up commercial fishing and a wide range of educational opportunities. By 1996 Te Ohu Kaimoana (the Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission) had become the major stakeholder in New Zealand’s fishing industry with assets totalling $507.4 million. Sealord had 630 employees, and 50 iwi were operating their own fishing businesses, including in some cases processing and marketing their own products. 44

The Sealord deal was significant because it overrode Treaty rights. Article Two of the Treaty of Waitangi guarantees Maori tina rangatiratanga over and undisturbed possession of their fisheries and at no time in the previous 160 years had Maori negotiated away any let alone all of their fishing rights.

240

A thirteen-year study of indigenous nations in the United States has found economic success is closely linked to the power to make decisions. The research has yet to find one single case of sustained economic activity on indigenous lands in which some Government body other than the indigenous nation itself is making decisions about government structure, natural resource use, internal chill affairs and development strategies. 49

Committing to a New Relationship

Around the world, a need for restoration and healing is becoming increasingly apparent as all cultures deepen their understanding of history. How to achieve collective ways of functioning that benefit all cultures living alongside each other remains a challenge. Humankind is in a constant state of creation. The journey is the key. That and a willingness to commit to what Saul Alinksy called a ‘blurred vision as to what the outcome might mean’. History cannot be changed, yet it can be healed over time and provide lessons for future generations. Everyone will benefit as we rediscover the richness that exists in a society that honours the agreements made by its ancestors, and respects the cultural diversity of all its citizens.

---

Pg 242

Chapter 12: The Paradox of Hope

A Growing Awareness

The entrenched relationship beween Maori and the govertnment has historically been played out according to set roles developed and refined over generations.

Pg 244

Investigative journalist John Pilger warns us not to think in terms of living in an information age. Rather, he says, we live in a media age in which information is repetitive, safe and limited by invisable boundaries. …A critically aware population needs to continually be reading between the lines.

There is a growing awarenesws and consensus amoung some of New Zealand’s leading public figures – Maori and Pakeha – about the sequence and meaning of what actually happened in 1840.

The core of the debate, as outlined by Ranginui Walker, is that the 512 Maori who signed the Maori text of the Treaty at Waitangi understood, in Article Two, that they were confirming their own soverign rights – their rangitirantanga – in return for limited cession of governance (kawanatanga). Walker futher writes that the chiefs undersood kawanatanga, in Article One, to mean “the establisment of a system of government to provide laws that would control British settlers and bring peace amoung warring tribes. Kawanatanga is a subordinate power to rangatiratanga.

Pg 24

British colonisation of New Zealand is a legal fact, but it lacks legitimacy. As the clams process develops, the New Zealand government and people will have to respond to the legitimate reassertion of Maori authority because Maori will never give up their fundamental human, common-law and Treaty right to live as Maori.

Pg 246

The Complication of Globalisation

The debate is taking place in a country undergoing rapid social, economic and political change, while trying to maintain itself in an increasingly globalised world.

It is clear that New Zealand’s economic reforms in the 1980s were disastrous for many New Zealanders. Offical data confirm that the lowest income groups suffered real loss of spending power between 1984 and 1996, while the top 10 per cent captured all the gains from the reforms. It is also clear that Maori were disproportionately affected because many of the low-skilled manufacturing jobs that disappeared during the reforms were held by Maori workers.

Pg 248

The “selling ” of New Zealand assets to domestic and wealthy overseas investors was “theft ” from the working people of New Zealand, who had paid for them over generations. It was a programme completely bereft of imagination and original thinking by governments slavishly following the International Monetary Fund prescription.

Racism Endemic

The crunch issue for the Crown-Maori relationship is this. Special programmes to assist Maori, however well intentioned, are no substitute for effective power-sharing.

Pg 251

Whatarangi Winiata notes that:

A huge amount of money is spend on Maori evey year… the Maori partner has little to say about how much the appropriations should be, what the policies should be, how policies are to be implimented and how policies and their managers are to evaluated… but this partner [Maori] gets the blame for poor perfomance.

He believes that the only “long-term relief” for Maori from the present circulmstances will not come from more Pakeha-inspired policies but from consitutional change which ensures that the two partners can grow within their respective cultures and value systems and can make decisions together as full partners mindful of each other’s concerns and preferences.

It is in this climate of economic uncertainty that all New Zealanders will need to come to terms with the implications of the Treaty relationship.

What Does Power-sharing Mean?

Pg 253

New Zealaners have nothing to fear from the Treaty debate. Most maori do not seek to engender guilt or lay blame for historical injustices at the feet of Pakeha living today. Instead, Maori seek justice and want to participate fully in a unified nation. This search for justice and inclusion is in the interest of all New Zealanders, the nation as a whole and our economy. New Zealand cannot move forward without the full participation of all its citizens.

Pg 254

Honouring the Treaty Will Benefit All New Zealanders

When we fail to fulfill our obligation and deny other people their legitimate human rights we diminish our own humanity. Historically, it is unlikley that many slave owners saw benefits in liberating slaves, or men the benefits of women getting the vote, or European Americans in the Unite States supporting the full civil rights for African Americans, or Protestants in the north of Ireland granting full civil rights to Catholics. Many people did not believe that society would benefit by changing the status quo.

Pg 255

Encouraging Informed Public Debate

Building an inclusive, unifed and prosperous nation that honours its historical commitments requires a well-informed public. There is a danger that the Treaty debate in New Zealand may remain the exclusive domain of some government officials and politicians, academics and community educations, and some Maori.

Any significant power-sharing and changes to the constitutional arrangements in this country need the broad support of the population.

pg 256

A distinct national identity grounded in partnership honours and respects the sepcial identity and status of Maori as tangata whenua as well as valuing the rich cultural diversity of Pakeha and other New Zealanders. A partnership approach is required to ensure the full participation of Maori and other citizens in New Zealand’s society and economy.

The Treaty partnership has the potential to develop a unique national identity in an increasingly diverse and complex world.

Pg 257

Conclusion

New Zealand novelist Patricia Grace of Ngati Toa, Ngati Raukawa and Te Ati Awa presents a compelling vision:

The Treaty allows for tolerance of different ways of operating, different ways of sovereignty. It allows the setting up of another system alongside its own system. It is a document that had eerything in it that we need of whih to base our modern society, a two-system society … it is a Treaty of allowance and tolerance that allows all of us to be here together. I think we need to understand the Treaty and embrace it, not be afraid of it, not get paranoid about a Maori rugby team having pride in a tino rangatiratanga flag, not be afraid of a dual system where there needs to be common sense more than anything else. We must be educated about our ture history. We must understand as we stand at the beginning of this stony, rocky, mountainous, tangled path that gaps and discrepancies, in education, health, work and social status will not lessen until the yawning chasm in understanding of the Treaty is breached, until racism in all its forms is [ended] and the effects of colonisation are realised.