nah, the children stay with us

These proposed changes are the next step in the attempted obliteration of Māori culture

Scoop

Dame Tariana has spoken at a number of hui recently about her concerns regarding the Children, Young Persons and their families (Oranga Tamariki) legislation currently before Parliament.She is concerned the proposed amendments give Children, Young Persons and their Families (CYPFS) the legal power to determine who will raise tamariki Māori who have been uplifted from whānau. Under current legislation CYPFS must look to the extended whānau and hapū to place these tamariki. She says that will change under the new proposals.At the New Zealand Māori Council’s Waitangi Rua Rautau Annual Forum held recently said the devil is in the detail and concerned with amended Section 5 which includes the qualifier “wherever possible”.

Yep never mind that ANYONE has to be checked and ensured that they are safe to take the children - and that includes all caregivers. The facts are that this legislation is very, very bad for Māori.

Some background from "Hands off our tamariki Ōtaki hui, held 12 October at Te Wānanga o Raukawa and published widely including on He Hōaka

On Wednesday, October 12, a hui in Ōtaki discussed the changes Anne Tolley has proposed to the Children, Young Persons and their Families Act, removing the clauses that consider the effects of decisions on whānau, and that prioritise placing a child within their hapū or iwi. 
Those clauses came out of the 1988 report Puao-te-ata-tu. After extensive research around the nation, Puao-te-ata-tu found that ‘institutional racism’ was at the root of Māori social welfare problems, and predicted that the Crown would continue to fail Māori unless this was fixed. The report found that Māori succeed when rangatiratanga is recognised and supported, and recommended that Māori should be resourced to solve the problems Māori are facing...

Removing the clauses from legislation is simply another colonising act of control. The proposed changes are inconsistent with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to which New Zealand is a signatory. In particular, the changes are inconsistent with article 7.2 which recognises “the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.” 

This issue is still there, is still hot.
Scoop

Dame Tariana said the legislation cannot be allowed to proceed and if need be she would march.“If we can walk for our land, (and) if we can walk for our foreshore, we can certainly act for our tamariki”.She is devastated with less than three weeks out from submissions closing the new legislation severely affecting the aspirations and ambitions for all tamariki and mokopuna have barely raised a mention in the media. The Bill has been referred to select committee and the deadline for submissions on the Bill is 15 February. 

The time has come - we cannot stay silent or still anymore - we will march and we will fight for our culture and we will win - WE WILL WIN!!!

a glance

As we approach Waitangi Day I'm going to put some of my poems up - they relate to this day, they relate to me and they relate to today's world.

Waitangi day night

A queen sent emissaries

as I checked the rat trap

for a licker lover of

peanut butter inside the

ceiling of my whare

on Waitangi day night

That wasp stung me inside

my ear, I heard the vibrating

wings notch up but too

late my instinctual alarm

bell rang, too late for me

on Waitangi day night

Their paper home has grown

and my ear has swollen so i

cannot hear their voices

entreating the benefits of

a queen constantly begetting

on Waitangi day night

I huddle inside a fern now,

my old whare adorned with

photos of a queen, a tidal

current I see, head-high as

sweeping so clean, me

on Waitangi day night

a step closer

As we approach Waitangi Day I'm going to put some of my poems up - they relate to this day, they relate to me and they relate to today's world.

at waitangi once,

when Rangatira didn't

say go! wildeyed,

they wanted their land.

the good had gone,

dead, shot, sick or

sobbing. Breath to

breath they looked

at them, and they

walked away hungry.

approaching the trap

As we approach Waitangi Day I'm going to put some of my poems up - they relate to this day, they relate to me and they relate to today's world.

Sci fi colonisation

the first one arrived all

sun-spill and screaming

like a God. Somewhere

a parchment of pixels

was signed and they don't

talk to us anymore.

What have we loved?

To make ours into

theirs they came in numbers.

anything is not better than nothing

Differing viewpoints are valuable. Hone Harawira has a view on the flag debate

“The NZ flag is the one flown by every government since the 1860s that has ever stolen our land, laughed at our Treaty rights, destroyed our spirituality, stomped on our culture, imprisoned our people, and tried to kill off our language.” 

“It’s the flag of colonialism, given to us and every other colony by the Poms back in the 1800s. 80% have since dumped it; only the colonial urchins like Aussie, the Cooks, Tuvalu and us still fly that ugly little Union Jack that represents the country that called us to war when they needed help and dumped us when they wanted to join the European Union.

That is all very true and this is the truth of the situation. The Union Jack represents so much suffering for Māori, so much lost and destroyed. It is the best representation of that imo because it directly relates to those times and connects us visually and internationally as a colonised country. The Union Jack must go - of that there is no doubt.

The question then is what will replace it - and the poor attempt and rigged selections are not the answer to that. The cost, the vanity project of the PM, the lack of consultation and real discussion, the celebrities, the endorsements, the play on emotions, the contrived nature of the whole process including the final design say that NO this is not the correct or even near desired alternative. It simply is not good enough for anything.

As I said on another post

I'm pleased that I have voted for our current flag against the other one put up by key and his supporters. For me the tino rangatiratanga flag is my flag. The union jack has so many connotations relating to the colonisation of this country and I cannot get enthusiastic about it at all - I don't like it. But until we as a country are ready to embrace our past and move forward in partnership, as promised by The Treaty, then I will vote for the flag that actually represents us the way we are - warts and all. And there are lots of warts indeed. There is much work to be done to pave the way to allow a true flag for this country to come forth - I'll be working towards that.

and it is worth noting that Hone are in 100% agreement on a few things

“I’ve already chosen the flag that fits best with my heart, my soul, my life – the Maori flag. It’s the one that we designed, it carries the colours of my world, and it speaks of our history, our place in the cosmos, and the possibilities that lie ahead of us all.” 

“And it was the flag that Maori people overwhelmingly chose when we ran our own flag referendum (government spent $28.57 on the whole shebang).

and sometimes not 100%

“And don’t buy the drivel about us losing the Treaty if we change the flag. We lose the Treaty the day we lose the balls to stand up and fight for our rights, not because somebody wants to change the NZ flag.” 

“Changing the flag is a conscious decision to say goodbye to our colonial past and say hello to a brighter future. Maori people have already done it. Might be time for the rest of New Zealand to follow suit”

Changing the flag imo will make it harder to implement The Treaty. It will be another blocker that those who don't want true partnership will use to delay and disrupt that implementation. Sure they will do that anyway but why give them another tool to use.

Difference of opinion is valuable - it helps to see and hear other views. It is healthy and necessary. I feel good within myself about my decision - I want to change the flag so, so much but until we have a proper flag that truly represents us I will stay with the one we have.

the moment has passed

I feel good. I'm pleased that I have voted for our current flag against the other one put up by key and his supporters. For me the tino rangatiratanga flag is my flag. The union jack has so many connotations relating to the colonisation of this country and I cannot get enthusiastic about it at all - I don't like it. But until we as a country are ready to embrace our past and move forward in partnership, as promised by The Treaty, then I will vote for the flag that actually represents us the way we are - warts and all. And there are lots of warts indeed. There is much work to be done to pave the way to allow a true flag for this country to come forth - I'll be working towards that.

Politically John Key will suffer from the loss of his pet project - as much as he has tried to distance himself now, he is linked hook, line and sinker to this and he won't get off. Of course Key is the master at sliding away, so any negative effects will be quickly forgotten by the anonymous middle - that fertile ground for centre right and left parties.

I've been biking to work and that has really helped me. I feel that I am contributing, in a small way, to the betterment of the world. I am doing it not just talking about it. These small steps are important - they give a sense of hope, they lock us into the 'now' whilst reinforcing the past and the future. Every small step, where we make a decision and then do it, is significant and necessary - without the small step there is no big step.

I work with mindfulness and what a gift that is. Being in the moment and practicing that daily. Once again it opens up the past and the future - which can be surprising when mindfulness is about the moment, about allowing, about non-judging, about accepting. This accepting is also reinforced by being aware of the dialetic (a method of examining and discussing opposing ideas in order to find the truth) and this can be done internally. I accept the way things are AND I want to improve them. It is amazing the power of accepting AND wanting to improve. Within the two ideas I find infinity. And believe it or not that is once again a place where the past and future can be found.

The past and future are linked to this moment. The past and future are linked to us.

whose left?

The dust is settling. Mana took a body blow by losing Hone from Parliament but the Mana Movement is still intact, and still fighting against inequality and imo will rise again, better, stronger and more politically astute. The kaupapa has not changed, the will to make change has not wilted nor will it because Mana activists live the reality of inequality every day along with the people.

Mana contested Northland and Rueben Taipari Porter didn't get many votes as expected but by fielding a candidate Mana showed they are still alive and kicking - and still have a great sense of humour - go here to read Rueben's thoughts.

With my stunning result of 55 votes, beaten even by the LegalizeCannab1s party, you would think that I would crawl under a rock andhide…But after studying the result figures I didn’t do too bad. FocusNorthland and the other candidates chose to vote strategically whileNational and Labour candidates got thrashed! Actually as the firstMana candidate to ever stand in any Northland General Election, Inever lost any majority so actually I came in 2nd to HonourableWinston Peters (haha that’s hilarious, but reality is what you make ofit ps phone calls are still coming in so who knows what goodies I canget for us aye?) and my trophy wall is filling up… butcongratulations to Winston, he ran an amazing campaign, it was aprivilege to participate in that historical election and watch himwork. I was watching very closely…

The win by Winston affects Mana but really only indirectly. The Mana Movement and NZF are after different voters and that is very good. The win by Winston does affect Labour and the Greens in the way I described in the last two posts and that affects the left including the Mana Movement. It is going to be interesting watching the developments. Winston has already said 

Winston Peters says he would support mining in Northland if the region benefited from at least 25% of the royalties.

sadly he is old school, focused on money and economics - I tend to agree with Haami on this one too

"He’s been a constant critic of Maori issues and of Maori communities and Maori organisations for decades now, so I wouldn't put him in the Maori MP category, he may have Maori ancestry. And also his party is the party that tried to introduce legislation to remove all references to the Treaty of Waitangi from New Zealand legislation so I don't think it's true to say he represents in any shape or form a Maori perspective," he says.

 Yep the Mana Movement and NZF are polls apart in so many ways.

remembering Steve Biko

This is a revised repost from the blog but on this day, 36 years after Steve was murdered, I thought it timely to update and  post again.

One of the most influencial people in my life was a man called Steve Biko. I found this book when I was young and it affected me greatly. Then along came the tour and I carried a handmade sign saying, 'Remember Steve Biko' throughout all the protest marches.

This is a quote from a paragragh of an article Steve Biko wrote in 1970

"Does this mean I am against intergration? If by integration you understand a breakthrough into white society by blacks, an assimilation and acceptance of blacks into an already established set of norms and code of behaviour set up and maintained by whites, then YES I am against it. I am against the superior-inferior white-black stratification that makes the white a perpetual teacher and the black a perpetual pupil (and a poor one at that). I am against the intellectual arrogance of white people that makes them believe that white leadership is a sine qua non in this country and that whites are the divinely appointed pace-setters in progress. I am against the fact that a settler minority should impose an entire system of values on an indigenous people".

That was written in a different time, place and context I agree, but once you get over the fact that we are not black south africans, and allow your mind to slide over the black/white terminology, the message still resonates.

We must do things our way.

What does that mean for Māori? Many still have an inferiority complex. Many still believe that the consumerist, western model is our model. Many think they are right and we are wrong. Colonisation is insidious, it is designed to make people change their values, it erodes a peoples confidence in themselves so that they believe the lies that they cannot do it, or that they don't have the skills or that the pursuit of money is the be all and end all. It's all rubbish.

As more and more people suffer under this government and their exploitative philosophy, more and more people are looking for values and truth that can provide a base to move into the future. We must walk backwards to the future. We must listen to the lessons from our past because that is where the answers for the future lie. The time to reconnect to this land and the heritage we all have is now because that is the best, and imo only, way to safeguard our future, and the future for our children. How do we do it? One step at a time, one sentence at a time, one feeling at a time. Each step is worthwhile and each step is essential - take your step.

Perhaps another quote from Steve Biko

"The blacks are tired of standing at the touchlines to witness a game that they should be playing. They want to do things for themselves and all by themselves."

Letter to SRC Presidents, I Write What I Like, 1978.

Steve Biko died on the floor of a empty Pretoria Central Prison cell on 12 September 1977, aged 30.

let them walk

I saw the headline, "The Treaty of Waitangi on the move" and I thought great, the treaty is being moved around this country and maybe discussions on the treaty and tangata whenua and how we sort out the foundational problem of this country, where the treaty has not been honoured, could be facilitated. I imagined events and community involvement when the treaty comes to town, as people use the opportunity to create connections. I thought about the debates we could have that would not be adversorial but cooperative, the insights we would gleen, the maturity as a nation we could attain. And then I read the article about moving the documents to another building to preserve them. It reminded me of when I went below Te Papa and saw the cloaks of our ancestors - the kahu kurī , kahu kiwi, and korowai. Can we really understand without wearing? The feel, the smell, the weight - these cannot be understood while the taonga is lying in a draw. Why not take them out to the people - let them experience the power. And in the same way take the treaty out of its museum and let it walk among the people.

the real threat

The consultation hui on the sell off of state assets are almost complete and Bill English the Deputy Prime Minister says that

Radio NZ

there has been general acceptance at consultation hui that the Government will proceed with the partial sale of four state-owned enterprises, but will protect Maori interests.

so Māori recognise that the sale will go ahead whatever the people say. Somehow Māori interests will be protected. Let's not forget this is the man who says the proceeds of the sale are a guess and not even the best guess and this is the person who deliberately tried to divide Māori on Waitangi Day.

I don't believe english or his guesses and this one regarding the hui is is wildest yet.

English, his position and attitudes are a bigger threat to Māori than Paul Holmes and his racist rant. Anyone who knows anything about this country knows that holmes was expressing a view held by many, often in subtle and hidden ways. Business as usual in other words for those of us fighting for equality.

the shame of blame

National have now said what they are going to do about welfare and as expected they will treat people on benefits poorly. Their belief is that it is the fault of those people, they haven't tried hard enough and the gnats will incentivise them to get out there and find the non-existant jobs. The gnats say


Stuff

National yesterday said it would scrap the benefit system and replace it with three new benefits. Under the policy, the majority of beneficiaries would go on to the Jobseeker benefit and be expected to work, at least part-time unless they are found to be temporarily exempt.

The Supported Living Payment would replace the invalid's benefit for those who are permanently and severely disabled, severely mentally ill or terminally ill, while those currently on a sickness benefit would be classed as jobseekers. Solo parents whose youngest child is under 14 would go on Sole Parent Support, while those whose youngest child is older than five would be expected to work part-time.

The catch comes for those beneficiaries who had a subsequent child while on a benefit. They would be required to look for work once their youngest child was 12 months old, if their previous children were over five.

Yes you read it right - look for work after 12 months! I totally oppose these ideas - they are nasty, idiotic and will be devestating for many Māori.

RadioNZ

The Maori Party is refusing to say whether the National's welfare policy would be a deal-breaker if the two parties were to form a coalition after the election.

That isn't good enough for me - that is weak and part of the reason The Mana Party has formed - and why I support them.


If you cannot support and protect the members of our society that need it most then you have no place in the people's hearts.

Lower the Māori retirement age

This post will outline the point of my latest essay.

There are some stark facts that jump out at when you investigate how retirement and Māori interact. These facts show inequity for Māori at every level of the debate and retirement reality. Let’s just lay them out:

Non-Māori males life expectancy at birth is around 79.0 years, and for male Māori, 70.4 years. Female non-Māori 83.0 years compared to female Māori of 75.1 years. So Māori can expect on average to live shorter lives than non-Māori – that’s a fact, and although life expectancy is increasing for everyone, the gain for Māori was less than for non-Māori when compared between, 1985 – 1987 and 2005 – 2007.

Okay what about leading up to retirement – what’s the story there?

Māori on average earn less than non-Māori and even when the qualifications were similar, the median incomes were still lower for Māori.

The are a number of measures of Māori participation in employment and the current information shows that the labour force participation rate for all people, in the year ending June 2011, was 68.3% compared to 66.1% for Māori. The unemployment rate for the same period for all people was 6.5% against 13.5% for Māori. They are facts, Māori earn less and a higher number are unemployed and that means disadvantage in the ability to save for retirement but other factors also need to be mentioned.

Māori are also a younger population, with higher birth rates, more dependants and less disposable income. Any surplus is often directed towards the younger generation which reduces again, the opportunities to save.

All of these facts result in a higher percentage of Māori indicating NZSuper as their sole income. The crucial years of saving from around 50 upwards, for many of the population, is when the mortgage is paid off, the kids have left home. But the facts show that 67% of Māori have achieved home ownership, with or without a mortgage, by the age of 65, which contrasts with non-Māori at 81%.

Every part of the retirement debate ignores the cultural interactions and responsibilities that come for many older Māori and these often begin well before retirement and they incur a financial cost for older Māori. A cost that is not applicable to non-Māori, and after retirement the inequality is just as apparent, and not just in longevity.

The ‘Living standards of older Māori’ study (2002 reported that 15% of older Māori, compared with 10% of non-Māori, face some financial difficulties with a further 20% of older Māori facing severe difficulties, in stark contrast to a further 6% for the older population generally. Added to this is the knowledge that single older Māori tend to be in a worse situation financially, often the death of a spouse is a major contributor to this, with older Māori women being particularly vulnerable.

Within a whānau, older Māori support, and are supported, with 78% of respondents providing care for their whānau and most saying they received care from whānau. (Waldon, 2004). I am not going to go into iwi initiatives to support and help older Māori because I’m looking at the structural inequalities and as the facts show there is no equality for Māori.

I blame the Government and their abuse of Māori in not actualising the Treaty of Waitangi, specifically Article 2 and 3. Even today scant regard is paid to tangata whenua and their specific circumstances. It is not good enough to treat Māori as a sub-group of the general population, the facts burn the eyes, yet the powers that be, refuse to see. They prefer Māori to be disadvantaged, it is deliberate. The facts are known, they are the Governments own facts FFS.

There are other aspects I could describe like the relationship between financial literacy, self determination and the management of iwi pūtea – the management outsourced for most, to non-iwi members.

These inequities are wrong and shameful for this country and our Government yesterday, and today, and show one of the reasons tino rangatiratanga is needed – there is no alternative. Māori should have fairness and equality throughout life and that all needs to be fixed. One small but significant step that Government could do to really help Māori today, is that the payment for NZSuper should kick in earlier for Māori, the retirement age for Māori should be lowered.

There should be an equal partnership between the Crown and Māori, and the role of older Māori, as kaumātua and custodians of knowledge should be exalted. Not all Māori wish to or are able to fulfil that role, but many are involved with their whānau and knowledge is being imparted. Reducing the retirement age for kaumātua would allow them to fulfil their cultural function and responsibilities without the current financial cost, and dismantling that barrier to participation for older Māori could create an upsurge in marae activity and show an honest movement from the Government towards equality for Māori. This would actualise the treaty and the partnership inherent within that document.

This aligns with tino rangatiratanga and provides even more opportunities and responsibilities culturally for older Māori, leading to richer more rewarding lives. in later life for them, including better health outcomes.

Reducing the retirement age for Māori would alleviate some of the stressors for older Māori and add real benefits for the individual retirees, their whānau, hapū and iwi, the Māori Nation and the country as a whole.

Māori representation and tino rangatiratanga

Phew! I have finished 2 essays and 1 research project over recent days and one of the best aspects of writing essays is it really gets you thinking.

One essay I entitled “The Mana Party and self determination: a journey and a destination.” As you might expect I am quite keen on The Mana Party and I wanted to assess how the party moves tino rangatiratanga forward.

To do that required a bit of analysis of Effective Māori Representation (EMR) and whether the Māori Party had achieved that, because as we know the Mana Party has formed out of that party. This post offers my view of that area.

Supporters of The Māori Party believe that being in Government and therefore in power, is the best way to achieve incremental gains for Māori self determination and this view ties into EMR, described by the Electoral System report (1986) as, “effective and fair representation of Māori and Māori views”, and represented within the MMP system by the number of Māori MP’s, their political leverage in terms of advancing Māori self determination, the cultural improvements to parliament itself by having more Māori MP’s, and the actual ability of Māori MP’s to influence and lead improvements for Māori.

There can be no doubt that the Māori Party have sat at the table but the key term within EMR is representation and when we look at the flagship policy of the Māori Party, namely repeal of the Foreshore and Seabed Act we can see that they did not represent the views of the vast majority of Māori who submitted in opposition to their solution, the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act (2011).

Foucault analysed the relationships between power, rights and truth and how the discourses generated hide the true intention of the dominant partner in the relationship, which is to reinforce the dominance. Foucault’s idea of a ‘right’ is that it is given by those in power seemingly as a positive development but actually reaffirming the power dynamic of the dominant relationship. (Foucault, 1976)

The National Government has bestowed a ‘right’ to Māori by repealing the Foreshore and Seabed Act, and on one level it was fulfilling its obligation to its coalition partner the Māori Party, but at a deeper level it was reinforcing authority and the ability to bestow ‘rights’. The idea of a truth from Foucault is a discourse from those with power that supports the normalising of the dominance, which is similar to Gramsci’s idea of ‘common sense’ where the discourse is designed to normalise the dominant relationship and behaviours.

The Māori Party have created a discourse where their ‘truth’ is that they have achieved the goal of repeal and that is what they promised. Certainly the repeal was the impetus for the formation of the Māori Party and it has been completed, but the gains for Māori self determination are non-evident. The National Government have described the repeal and new Act as “recognising the rights of all New Zealanders in the common marine and coastal area” and this view is not consistent with tino rangatiratanga.

The Māori Party discourses have allied with the National Government discourses and their truths are presented as ‘common sense’ and this legitimises the declared truths supporting the continued dominance. The repeal and new Act have reinforced the unequal power relationship between Māori and the Government and offers no advances to Māori self determination.

The Mana Party and its supporters reject these discourses and oppose the power relationship where the Government is dominant. Gramsci’s analysis suggests that the way to overcome the common sense discourses from the dominators is to develop counter discourses that take away the dominant groups spiritual prestige and power. The Mana Party dismisses the hegemony of the dominating group and instead forms part of a counter hegemony where the right of Māori to self determination is accepted as normal.

Obviously the essay has a bit more to it than this précis, for instance I looked at the aspect of silencing.

The attempted silencing of Hone Harawira by the Māori Party suggests aspects of Freire’s ‘culture of silence’ concept where a dependent/object society (Māori) is silent in the face of the metropolis/director society (NZ) and often echos the dominant society, because as Freire notes, “The silence of the object society in relation to the director society is repeated in the relationships within the object society itself. Its power elites, silent in the face of the metropolis, silence there own people in turn.”

So my conclusion was clear, EMR has not occurred from the Māori Party, which is why the Mana Party has formed. There have been some discussions recently on The Mana party and what it is all about and my final word is dedicated to that.

The Mana Party has momentum, and the potential to advance Māori self determination because everything within The Mana Party endorses tino rangatiratanga and it is a perquisite for membership. You cannot support The Mana Party and oppose tino rangatiratanga and when equality is welded to social justice issues, which negatively affect many Māori, you have a potent force for change. This force for change is inclusive and The Mana Party offers representation to Māori and non-Māori.

I’ll post about my other essay soon because it relates to this essay and was all about Māori and retirement and the inequity facing Māori throughout their working life, as they get close to retirement and after retirement. This inequity manifests in income, employment, and longevity and offers good evidence for lowering the retirement age for Māori to create equality.

bad NZ Food Bill

The NZ Food Bill is a serious attack on everyones rights and it is a direct attack on Māori. The opposition to the Bill is wide and varied and Māori are leading because, as Dr Jessica Hutchings says, "This Bill is another example of the Crown eroding Māori rights and extending its reach of ownership into the fundamentals of life, that being food and seed”. Te Waka Kai Ora (the National Māori Organics Authority) state that

Scoop

the law change will increase costs, bureaucracy and government control over our food taonga (treasures) and will ultimately undermine our tino rangatiratanga (self-determination).

Furthermore, the move is irresponsible in light of the obesity and diabetes epidemic facing Māori. The Food Bill will add further costs to food production system and may have flow on effects to the availability and price of healthy kai, and therefore health outcomes for Māori. There are also concerns around the inclusion of rongoa (medicines) within the definition of food, and this is of significant concern to the many Māori practitioners and communities that use natural remedies.

“Seed is sacred and it is to be nurtured, cared for, and then passed to future generations to ensure the survival of communities, we must be responsible for saving and caring for our seeds and as indigenous peoples this is our role”, concludes Dr Hutchings.

It cannot be denyed that this Bill is a specific threat to Māori. Of course everyone else who lives here is under threat too. This is another fundamental issue like the environment and drilling for oil and it cuts across all people in our society. And just like those issues, the lead must be, and is being, taken by tangata whenua as kaitiaki of the taonga. You cannot get a sharper point to the spear in our country and with everyone leaning in and doing our bit - we will penetrate and cause them to wonder if it is really worth it. This comment below sums up the concerns well

Comment by Afewknowthetruth on The Standard

this Bill would put an end to a basic right: that of freely sharing our food, seeds, and natural remedies… anyone selling their own produce would be required to gain legal authorisation to do so, at a cost of course, and heres the clincher : small growers and sellers at say, farmers markets, will be hit with increased costs of compliance, that would of course push up food prices hurting the growers, sellers, and buyers of produce.

Not being legally allowed to share seeds without authorisation will discourage diversity of seeds, pushing heirloom varietys already rare into the too expensive basket, thus encouraging homogenisation of seed stock. This of course will provide massive market advantage? to multinational seed corporations such as Monsanto who not only can afford the costs of compliance but whose aims include narrowing and controlling the plants grown for consumption through Genetic Engineering, and controlling available seed stock by supplying seed for plants that will not self seed, thus enforcing our dependence on them.

NZ Food Security has a great breakdown of the Bill and its ramifications.

Petition opposing the bill here

One of the features of this world is that much is topsy turvy - organic food should be half as cheap as non organic not twice as expensive. Heirloom seeds and diversity should be cherished not blown away by monoculture and profit. It doesn’t get more fundamental than this and the Bill is almost ready to become law – all so that we can comply with agreements signed with the WTO. We must oppose this any way we can and the first place to start is to talk about it with others.  

I hope the rights guaranteed under the Treaty to Māori will provide the solution but we will continue to face these threats until the crown accepts the partnership and stops opposing tino rangatiratanga.

i wish you weren't so dull

How do ideas form traction and embed themselves in society so much that they are almost invisible? Perhaps by repeating poor taste jokes like DPF or maybe sending racist emails, such as the one sent by a Dunedin businessman to a school because they flew the tino rangatiratanga flag. I believe this is a similar or the same email that i have seen but I can't confirm yet - certainly the phases are the same as those reported. The email I've seen is reproduced below because it is subtle and gross, full of mistruths and bias - but members of our society believe it, they believe the lies and denigration inherent within the writing.

I wish I was a Maori.........
I have been wondering about why only Whites are racists, but no other race is...... so I got to thinking Maori call me a ‘Pakeha’, [Pa = village, keha = flea, vermin ] 'Whitey’,  ‘Honky’ and ‘Redneck’ and that's OK, but if I call you Hori, you call me a racist. (I was told "Pakeha" as an entire word means "stranger"!Not white man). You have a race based Maori Political party, special Maori only  parliamentary seats and Maori can stand as a candidate in any parliamentary electorate in New Zealand but white people cannot stand for a Maori seat or be on the Maori roll or a member of the Maori Party. You have ‘3 bites at the same electoral cherry’. White people have only one and yet you still say you are dis-advantaged. If I complain you call me a red neck racist. You have a race based Maori caucus in parliament which includes the Maori members from all parties. It concerns itself with protecting and advancing Maori values, not party political values. If whites or any other ethnic group had a multi party parliamentary caucus that dealt with the advancement of its own race or for whites only, and not politics we would be called racist. You also want to appoint your own representation on Local bodies and demand the granting of special seats or privilege. If not granted you scream racism. Yet Maori can be elected just the same as any person from any race. If there were seats on any local body that were just for whites only there would be great cries of racism. You have a flag of your own, which you insist be recognised and flown alongside the flag of our country. This illustrates your separateness and division from the rest of New Zealanders. If a white person flew and demanded recognition of a competitive flag for New Zealand, it would be tantamount to Treason. There are a number of openly proclaimed Maori schools and Colleges in New Zealand. Maori colleges and high schools specifically for Maori students. Yet if there were 'Whites Only colleges', they would be racist colleges. If whites had scholarships, college funds and Trusts that only gave white students  Scholarships, you know they’d be racists. You expect whites and other New Zealanders to ignore your special tax payer funded educational institutions and when we complain or say you should teach your language and culture in the home as other races do you call us racists. Who pays for the running of Maori colleges? If whites objected to their taxes going to pay for them they would be called racist. If white people had their own schools and colleges they would be called elitist racists You have  Government funded race based Kohango Reo’s [pre-schools] to teach your race your own language and even have transport to pick the children up. If any other race asked for the taxpayer to fund the teaching of only their own language, or transport to take their children to pre-school they would be laughed at and called racist. You have Maori Health Services. Special organisations within the taxpayer funded public health system which are run by Maori for only Maori. If whites asked for such special and separatist privileges from the health services they would be racists. You have a Maori TV channel funded by the New Zealander taxpayer. If there was a Whites only TV or if whites said Maori should fund their own TV, they would be called racists. You also have your own Te Reo TV channel which broadcasts solely in Maori. Of the 14 free to air Freeview TV channels Maori have two of them and yet there are also Maori language programs and news on the main network channels such as TV One and TVNZ 7. If we consider that an over representation of a language that the rest of us don’t want to learn, we are called racists. If we had any organisations, schools, trusts, and governmental groups TV stations, etc for whites only to advance OUR lives, we'd be racists. A white woman cannot be Maori sportswoman of the year, but any race can be New Zealand sportswoman of the year. A white person cannot be in the Maori All blacks or any Maori sporting team, but any colour can be in the All Blacks or any New Zealand sports team. This separatism is decidedly racist but if a white person comments on it they are labelled racist... The fact that we have a Maori Allblack team is as racist as is any race based sports team can be but if there was a whites only Allblack team or any other whites only sports team it would be considered blatantly racist. You say the whites commit as much violence as you do. So why are the Maori parts of town the most dangerous places to live? Why are the jails so full of Maori? Why are so many children killed and bashed by Maori. But when I say that Maori are a violent people you call me a racist. You rob us, convert our cars, rape our women and bash our elderly. But, if a white police officer shoots a  Maori or a Maori gang member, or assaults a Maori criminal running from the law and posing a threat to society, you scream racism. You are proud to be Maori and you're not afraid to announce it, even though you may not be full Maori, but part Maori, or even only ‘trace element’ Maori, but when we announce our white pride, you call us racists. Why is it that only whites can be racists? There is nothing improper about this e-mail. It’s all true and illustrates that it’s time we started to pressure all politicians to eliminate special race based privilege and  parliamentary seats based on race. Stop giving Maori special privilege and treat them the same as any white person, Chinese, Asian, Indian or Pacific Islander.. There are many races that live in New Zealand, all were alien initially, now there are many minorities and if we don’t learn to stand up and stop privilege being accorded to any one particular group, the next group to start wanting separatist rules, favouritism and privilege will be alien religious groups. The great gravy train, a.k.a the Waitangi grievance Industry, has hopefully nearly finished it's work of judging events of 160 years ago through today’s eyes and making compensation awards in today’s money so now is the time to stop and ask:   Do we want a privileged group enjoying special favour for no rational reason, or do we want racial equality in New Zealand with fairness and equal privilege for all. There is nothing improper about this e-mail......... so let's see which of you care enough to send it on. Think about this ... If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone – THEN YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! It's not a crime to be white YET.. but it's getting very close!

Whew!!! a lot of bleating there - some sort of hybrid kyle chapman/john ansell/don brash mashed up nightmare. The dull tome speaks for itself so I'm not going to break it down, sentence by sentence, lie by lie but rather leave it there in its glory to be contemplated.

stop pretending

I have been pretty busy with a couple of interesting assignments which has dampened my ability to blog. One of the assignments assessed Durie’s five point plan for Māori self determination. The five steps are forward planning, recognition of the Treaty of Waitangi, Māori Governance of Māori resources, the development of a Māori Assembly, and constitutional change. Another assignment has been on the policy cycle and understanding how issues get on the political agenda, get responded to, get decided upon, implemented via legislation and then eventually evaluated. My thoughts have been percolating around these areas and I have found that I have reached the same place for both assignments.

Constitutional change is where we need to direct energy.

“Over the years Māori have made plans, created assemblies, petitioned the Crown and protested for their right for self determination. This right can only be achieved with constitutional change that elevates the relationship into a true partnership, until then we will continue to see piecemeal, inadequate and illusory gains for Māori, as the Crown continues to pretend to accept their responsibilities to Māori as their Treaty partner.”

“Māori are not constitutionally recognised as partners to the Crown so Cabinet decides on Māori development based on many reasons, most of which are not related to Māori improvement but are politically pragmatic.”

“The political system, including the process and steps to forming policy, is designed for the advantage of the dominant cultural forces of colonisation, capitalism and globalisation. Minority indigenous cultures face extraordinary difficulties in influencing the political process because their successful development exposes the inequity of total system.”

I’ve also been having a discussion with vto here on similar themes.

marty mars …

13 August 2011 at 4:09 pm

It is sad that you don’t believe that people have the right to self determination – it isn’t seperatism as I have pointed out previously to you. Why are you so scared of empowering basic human rights – is it because of what you think you will lose. This “oh what about the muslims” leads me to wonder about you. Why can’t you argue your point honestly. Are muslims the indigenous people of this land? nah – didn’t think so. Got another group to analyse? push them up, it won’t take long. And that is the nub of the issue right there vto. Māori are not just another minority group shat on by the system, Māori are tangata whenua and for that and that reason alone Māori should have the opportunity to be true partners to the Crown, as agreed to in the Treaty, and add a unique voice to the solutions we need. That is not looking backwards, it is looking forward. It is not handout or grievance mode it is honestly dealing with the facts. The sooner you can just get over the fact that Māori are not going anywhere and that they are the partners with the Crown, the sooner we can all get on and build a country and society to be proud of.

I just see self determination as equality not separatism.

Wai 262 - kaitiakitanga - some thoughts

Reading the fact sheets associated with the Wai 262 report has been great but also raised some questions for me. It isn't my job to microexamine the report and point out flaws but on the other hand I can't let somehing go when I think it needs said. The term kaitiakitanga is used and given some activation through the recommendations, but how can the role be fulfilled if the power and authority of the role isn’t there. I am taking the report as a starting point for discussion which I think is in the spirit of he report.

Kaitiakitanga is a term that has no equivalent English meaning. It encompasses conservation in the western sense of protection and guardianship but also is measured by the strength of the mauri of the area, demonstrated by the abundance and variety of the resources available.

Kaitiakitanga means interaction and exemplifies the Māori world view where everything is connected because of whakapapa to Rangi and Papa. This holistic view realises that we are part of the environment, we are nature too and this is in contrast to the dominant current worldview where we are the ‘other’, alien and distant from nature.

There is no such concept as ‘own’ in regards to resources – it is ‘right to use’, within the Māori worldview. That ‘right to use’ is tempered with communal thinking and social structure based on tapu and mana, whakapapa and tikanga.

Exercising kaitiakitanga is exercising mana and it reflects the mana of the people and their leaders. Rangatira couldn’t lead without having the people supporting them and they reflected the mana of their people. The traditional attributes of leaders included the ability to fulfil kaitiakitanga responsibilities. These could only be fulfilled with the power and ability of mana derived from the Gods, ancestors, the whenua, the people and personal actions. This is a circular relationship where each part supports and strengthens the other parts.

The key is that there was absolute authority - derived and supported by mana. You cannot fulfil the responsibilities of kaitiakitanga without having the authority and power over those responsibilities.

The Wai 262 report says anumber of things on kaitiakitanga. My views are just my own – others will disagree with me.

The interests of kaitiaki in their taonga are entitled to protection, but that does not mean that kaitiaki are entitled to a veto over uses of IP in taonga works in all cases. Rather, kaitiaki interests must be fairly and transparently balanced alongside other interests, such as (a) the interests of those who own IP rights, such as authors or film-makers whose work may depict taonga works or related knowledge, or business owners whose trade marks are based on taonga works, and (b) the interests of the wider community in the information and artistic and cultural works available in the public domain.

If you do not have the authority and power to enact kaitiaki responsibilities then you cannot fulfil your duties – you don’t have the power to.

‘Taonga species’ is a term the Tribunal has used to refer to species of flora and fauna that are significant to the culture or identity of Māori iwi or hapū. The exercise of kaitiaki responsibilities towards those species is a fundamental aspect of Māori culture, and kaitiaki relationships are important sources of identity.

The Treaty allows the Crown to put in place laws and policies relating to research into and commercialisation of the genetic and biological resources in flora and fauna. This includes IP laws, and laws controlling aspects of the research process such as bioprospecting and genetic modification. But in doing so the Crown must to the greatest extent practicable protect the authority of iwi and hapū in relation to their taonga species, so that they can fulfil their obligations as kaitiaki.

How can it be ‘significant to the culture or identity of Māori’ and ‘kaitiakitanga is a fundamental aspect of being Māori’, and then expect Māori to filfil their obligations when the Crown has control and power over those very things that are considered taonga?

The Treaty entitles kaitiaki relationships with taonga species to a reasonable degree of protection. It also entitles Māori to a reasonable degree of control over traditional knowledge relating to taonga species and how that knowledge is used. But it does not entitle kaitiaki to ownership of taonga species, and nor does it mean that kaitiaki are entitled to a veto over uses of IP in those species in all cases.

Rather, kaitiaki interests must be fairly and transparently balanced alongside other interests. Those include the interests of those who conduct research and hold IP rights, the public interest in research and development, and of course the interests of the species themselves.

Reasonable what the hell is that word! I absolutely disagree with their conclusion – it does entitle Māori ownership and a veto over uses of IP in all cases.

How can this report imply that Māori kaitiakitanga wouldn’t naturally include considerations of all aspects including research and the taonga species.

The Treaty entitles kaitiaki to fulfil their obligations to protect and care for taonga in the environment. But, while Māori interests and kaitiaki relationships are important, this does not mean that iwi and hapū should have a generally applicable veto. In a modern resource management context, other interests should also be considered, including the health of the environment, and the interests of property owners, resource users, those affected by resource use, and the wider community.

I ask again why wouldn’t Māori kaitiakaitanga also include aspects of the health of the environment, owner rights, resource users and the wider community?

Relationships with the environment are fundamental to Māori culture. Every iwi and hapū sees itself as related through whakapapa to the landforms, waterways, flora, fauna and other parts of the environment within their tribal areas. These parts of the environment are taonga, for which iwi and hapū are obliged to act as kaitiaki. They have inherited knowledge relating to these taonga, explaining their whakapapa relationship and their kaitiaki obligations. Kaitiakitanga is a form of law, controlling relationships between people and the environment.

How can this be reconciled, when the power and authority to enact and perform the duties and responsibilities of the kaitiakitanga role, are not there. The role cannot be fulfilled because the Crown has power and authority over the role.

The report is significant because it is setting the agenda for Crown/Māori relationships and their vision is one of partnership. But partnership must be real if it is to have any meaning. I think Māori have had enough of tokenism, we want real change and equality and that means self determination. I am sure that that can be structured to keep everyone relatively happy. It is entirely correct that Māori should be recognised as kaitiaki of their taonga and given rights and protection to enable them to fulfil their duties, based upon the Māori world view.

catch up

This is a catch up post on a few issues that have caught my eye.

I support the call for all teachers to learn te reo Māori. I am glad that principals are coming out in support too.

Stuff

Compulsory teacher training in Maori language and culture is a move welcomed by college principals in Marlborough.

Some history...

In the 1986 Te Reo Report the Waitangi Tribunal stated equivocally that te reo Māori is a taonga. Within Article 2 of te Tiriti, Rangatira are assured of tino rangatiratanga over taonga [ō rātou taonga katoa (all their valued customs and possessions] and this is also 'guaranteed' [“confirms and guarantees the full exclusive and undisturbed possessions of their lands… for as long as they wish to retain them”], in Article 2 of the English version. The Crown's use of this word 'guarantee' indicates active protection not the inadequate and dismissive attention that the Government has achieved to date. It wasn’t until the Wai 11 Te Reo Claim in 1986 that te reo Māori and te Tiriti received legal attention, and the Māori language Act 1987 came into force. This Act recognised Te reo Māori as an Offical language of this country. 

It really is time for this country to grow up about te reo Māori. It is up to all of us to do our bit and save our language - OUR language. Me ako ngā tamariki o Aotearoa i te reo Māori ka tika, nē rā?

The latest poll showing labour's Kelvin Davis 1 point behind Hone is not a concern for me. I don't really care how Hone wins as long as he wins, and if he doesn't - so be it. I'm more concerned with Hone and Destiny and his endorsement albeit tacit, of their discriminatory position on gender and sexuality. Their views make me sick and I will not support them or a party that supports them. 

The controversy regarding the Taniwha Horotiu has been enlightening. Carwyn has linked to a really good article by Kepa Morgan on this and Mr Trotter has written a very good piece for the Press. Morgan has got rightly upset about the insulting framing of the debate and I agree with him. As for me - I don't consider Taniwha as metaphors. Where I live there are many Taniwha - believe it or not - I don't care and neither do they. 

Sorry about all the font issues - I can't seem to sort it at the moment.

deaker darkness

Murray Deaker is a racist plain and simple. On his Sky TV show he described someone as "working like a nigger" - yep that is what he said. The excuses from Sky TV are offensive - apparently "that's a phrase that's widely used" they say, and you know what? It may be a term widely used in some circles - the fearful, hateful circles of racists but it is not right - it is very wrong and must be dealt to every time it happens. In the last few weeks i have been told of at least 5 anti-Māori texts, jokes and emails doing the rounds.  Sure it would be easy to put the racists on some antarctic island but that will not fix it really. It is ingrained because of the crooked foundation that this country is built upon. Lies and illusion, fear and privilege. The only real solution is to fix the foundations and actualise tino rangatiratanga. Believe it or not, it will make things better not worse. The racists will still be racists although some may change, but the difference will be that they will not be expousing their bile from a state of ascendency.


Another aspect of the report is the story told by Willie Lose

About six years ago Lose was playing golf with Deaker, alongside boxer David Tua and former rugby and league star Inga Tuigamala, when the broadcaster made several inflammatory comments regarding people with darkened skin. Shortly after the game, Deaker sought help for a mental illness. "He was in la-la land," Lose said.

There is a whole horrible industry dedicated to blaming everything on mental illness, from rape, murder, violence - whatever doesn't really matter - the blame has been sorted. Racism is being added to that list but Deaker made his statement simply because he is a racist. No one in our society is unaware of the offense of the word and the connotations. Deaker should go, he needs help.


Hat tip No Right Turn

ever decreasing circles

The plastic waka controversy - it seems a non-issue - if local tangata whenua want to do it - then they can, they have negotiated a good deal. but there are some real issues around this waka. Personally I'd rather they actually carved a waka in front of people - show the skills and abilities and for me a plastic waka is meaningless.

 A real issue is that this is the only promotion of Māori culture to the supposed hordes coming for the rugby. That is it, apparently, although this post notes another. If true it gives tokenism a bad name. Some people wonder what tino rangatiratanga is, well in my view it is the opposite of what we have with this situation. The rugby world cup is marginalising maori by presenting a false face, and behind the illusion we are creating is real suffering, real issues that need addressing. You cannot hold a people down and expect there to be no consequences - they are there in every statistic. Nothing will be fixed without self determination, it is the beginning, middle and end. Nothing will be fixed while we hide from our truth, which we will have to confront at some point. The whole paradox of it is, that when that happens, we will all be better off.

Another issue is this murk around the fact that sharples, the elected MP, without tender, gave the contract to a group that are his constituents. This could turn out really bad for Pita, I'm afraid. At the least, it gives his opponents ammunition but whatever happens the cloud has been cast and many will find it slightly distasteful, even if all the rules were followed.

To me the whole controversy reinforces why we need strong representation in parliment, why we need Hone to get this new Left Māori Party underway so that we can all hop on the waka and get to paddling. Self determination is a basic, essential human right - it is not based on colour or ethnicity - everyone, from any background can support that right. Tino rangatiratanga is not something to be afraid of, it is something to welcome. The truth will set us all free.

Hat tip - No Right Turn and Roarprawn