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.

poor taste joker

Poor taste jokes aren't funny especially when they are loaded with all sorts of cultural superioity taints - hey it was just a joke - ha ha, what are you getting offended by - ha ha. The reality is that the joke teller is just reinforcing their prejudice - like this one from DPF


Kiwiblog

"I understand that for the first time ever, the Crown has filed a Treaty of Waitangi claim against an Iwi.

The Government is claiming that Ngai Tahu sold them dud land in Christchurch and they want Ngai Tahi to buy the land back "

Yeah that is a big joke alright - sold them land - ripped them off and treated them like they didn't exist is truer 

Treaty 2 U

Before 1840, Ngāi Tahu held rights over much of Te Wai Pounamu (the South Island). But within decades, the government obtained vast tracts of Ngāi Tahu lands, paying a fraction of their worth and failing to deliver promised benefits of the purchases.

Go and have a read about Te Kerēme (The Claim) and how hard Ngāi Tahu have had to work to get any recognition of the grievance.

- and if you want to see why DPF posts this crap - read the comments - his gallery is baying.

that tongue is forked

So John Key, the Prime Minister of this country, at the opening of the Rugby World Cup, chose not to say kia ora and acknowledge tangata whenua. He has admitted he just decided not to, even though, for the most generally part he does, and he is sure that most people know he can. He didn't think it was important or necessary. 

Stuff

"I could have of course, and for the most part I generally do, but I decided not to on that occasion." 

The occasion was his big showpiece of this country - if that isn't an appropriate occasion then what is? But he most parts generally does so what are we to take from all this. He could have but didn't and for no good reason. He just doesn't give a shit? he doesn't have much between the ears? or he astucually wanted to make a point - that tangata whenua should be happy to allow our culture to be used as window dressing for the grand illusion and when the dust has all settled it will be back to business, back to pretending to care about Mäori whilst dismantling everything Mäori care about.

This going round sums it up

"Miss half a game of rugby because a train breaks down: personal apology from John Key and compensation up for discussion.

Have your doors kicked in, automatic rifles pointed at your kids, and four years of your life stolen because of police incompetence. Apology and compensation immediately ruled out."

The charges have been dropped but the hurt is still there, not just for those free but for the four still facing charges and for the Tuhoe people. The police came for terror and terror is what they created just as they planned but their plans have finally been just about stopped and the truth, while smothered in supression orders, will come out eventually. Thank you to all concerned who have helped and fought for the truth and thank to to all who continue that struggle. A great post from Joshua called Reflections on the invasion of Te Urewera.

dying to save them

I just don't understand why keas have to die to test whether 1080 baits are attractive to them or not. Can we not test these baits first or is that too hard. I know the arguments around 1080, the improvements in the forest and native species, the birdsong and the flowers - but I cannot reconcile throwing poison into the environment to kill them - it just seems like more hubris from people rather than looking, listening and learning from Mother Nature. After all, stoats were brought here deliberately by the colonists to help sort the rabbits out, which were brought here deliberately - the solution created more problems than the original problem and that's because nature wasn't considered at all - it was just a thing that could be managed, manipulated and mangled to achieve man's ends. That worldview is destructive to our environment and society - it distances us from ourselves and our heritage as living organisms within the total ecosystem. That worldview considers us seperate from nature and is in opposition to indigenous worldviews where the holistic nature of reality is endorsed.


ODT

Department of Conservation has reported the deaths of seven keas following a recent 1080 pest control operation on the West Coast that was designed to prevent the birds eating poison baits. They follow seven kea deaths reported in the Franz Josef and Fox Glacier area in 2008, with the possum-killing 1080 poison pinpointed then as the most likely cause of death.

So sad that these beautiful unique birds have died. I hope we sort this out soon.

edge to edge

To be upfront - I don't rate John Tamihere and that doesn't mean I don't appreciate the good he has done for Māori - I just feel the negatives outweigh the positives - Tamihere doesn't speak for me. Which is what he says about Professor Mutu and that is why he entitled his post "Mutu doesn't speak for me". Tamihere calls Professor Mutu a reverse racist and I don't care about that because as I have mentioned, racism = prejudice + power and if you think a Māori woman within academia has power you would be incorrect. So the worst that anyone can say about Professor Mutu is that she is prejudiced and I have no issue with that. Tamihere makes this statement

Sunday News

no one can tell me that my mother, a Pakeha third-generation Kiwi, is a guest in this country. There is an acknowledged rule throughout the Pacific and in Maori. That rule asserts if you can retain occupation of land for three generations or more, you have rights to assert mana whenua. In effect, you become tangata whenua. To make out that we have special rights above all others into the future, solely on the basis of ethnic supremacy, is wrong from a Maori cultural perspective.

So what are you saying john - that everyone is tangata whenua now - if they have lived on their land for 3 generations, because if you are - you are wrong. We are all guests in this country at times - if you visit a new marae you are a guest, if you travel to another area you are a guest - guest isn't a swear word it is a term of honour because of the reciprocity of obligation and responsibility attached to it. This term 'ethnic supremacy' is also inflammatory and incorrect - it is not about supremacy it is about equality and any Māori who frames it incorrectly is treated with suspicion by me.

Tamihere disqualified himself from any credibility back in 2005, when he crudely described women as 'frontbums'

"I don't mind front-bums being promoted, but just because they're (women) shouldn't be the issue, they've won that war,"

he also said in that investigate interview that

that while he was revolted by the Holocaust, he was sick of hearing about Jews being gassed and killed in order to make him feel guilty.

That argument is used against Māori as in, "stop talking about the past colonisation to make us feel guilty".

He continues to diminish himself when in a recent post he said

It is true oil will run out and it is true it produces everything from plastic to tarseal and drives all economies. It is true we must seek alternative energy. But on the way to this happy little world, we had better start using our resources on the way.

So for tamihere drilling and descecrating Papatūānuku for oil and gas is okay because it is all going to run out anyway - what a disgusting, selfish, exploitative attitude - the same mentality that has got us into this hole we are in now.

So John Tamihere you definately don't speak for me - you are not a deep thinker,  your conclusions are wrong and incomplete - based on prejudice and your opinions are inconsequential but you are part of the Māori Nation just like Professor Mutu.

I'll listen to Professor Mutu not to you.

power and racism

Professor Mutu is continuing to agitate some people with statements like this,

Stuff

She said Maori could not be racist against New Zealand European as Maori were not in a position of power.

This is a very interesting point - the power aspect and on The Standard dave brown from redave made this comment which sums up my view beautifully.

A pretty dim post actually. Just because Mutu makes over-sweeping generalisations that actually have historic truth on her side, dimpost comes along with a more crude set of generalisations and lowers the level of debate which others accept with alacrity, except for uke.

You cannot be a racist unless you impose your views by means of power. Thinking that other people, tribes or family members are different and inferior is not racism unless you can define the ‘other’ in such as way as to gain by it long term. Historically racism as we know it was invented by European colonisers to classify non-Euros as subhuman to justify ripping off their riches and impose white supremacist rule. The Catholic church had a huge upheaval before it recognised Native Americans as humans capable of ‘salvation’. It took a couple of centuries for black Africans to achieve this select status.

When this colonial rule was overturned lots of white racists retreated to countries where they attitudes where not challenged. The British in India went ‘home’. NZ was already colonised by a majority of racists who while professing equal citizenship took away the land and self-rule. In the 20th century NZ copped a big flow of ‘kith and kin’ from Africa and Britain and here their attitudes were not usually challenged because they were accepted as normal. So there is some truth to what Mutu says. In many cases racists don’t recognise they are racists because racism has been ‘institutionalised’ and made respectable as ‘bicultural’ or ‘multicultural’ by the dominant ‘culture’. As RWC says lets haka as one people.

On the other hand, reverse racism, or reciprocal racism is not really racism since it can’t be imposed. If it could be then Maori would be running the country and whites would be complaining about being at the bottom of the heap. So-called reverse racism is no more than the expression of historic grievance of the colonial past being reproduced today as Maori marginalised off their land in the underclass. White racists hide their racism by trying to claim that this reverse resentment is equally pervasive and potent as Euro racism. Historic amnesia.

Some Maori gains have been made, especially by iwi middle class, but only by begging the state to redress past wrongs and playing by the rules of capitalism – that even Brash can agree with. Begging is hardly the action of racists. But if the begging begins to look like ‘special treatment’ then the racists come rushing out to cry ‘one law for all’.

In the final analysis NZ remains a racist country and the evidence for that is the majority support for the NACT regime that continues to plunder NZ’s land and resources and deny any possibility of Maori emerging from marginalisation into economic self-sufficiency.

And I cannot see any good arguments against that. I realise that dave's analysis is broad but we must understand the big picture to really see what is before us. There are many subtle aspects of racism, bigotry and discrimination and these absurd worldviews didn't arrive out of thin air - they were created and they can be uncreated - by us.

Meanwhile on Kiwipolitico Pablo has vented his spleen at his former workmate Professor Mutu.

encumberances begone

Professor Margaret Mutu is entitled to give her opinions about matters she deems important and that is part of her role. Sure the language is polarising but the issue is serious and has to be discussed.

Professor Mutu responded to a Department of Labour report which found Māori are more likely to express anti-immigration sentiment than Pākehā or any other ethnic group and from Stuff,

Mutu agreed with the findings and called on the Government to restrict the number of white migrants arriving from countries such as South Africa, England and the United States as they brought attitudes destructive to Maori.

"They do bring with them, as much as they deny it, an attitude of white supremacy, and that is fostered by the country," she said.

I don't like the way that is stated because it obscures the issue. Māori do feel overwhelmed but the migrant aspect is secondary to the inherent overwhelming of Māori by our society. If migrants arrived here to a country where Māori and the Crown were equals then their supremacy views would be quickly dispelled or else they would leave - or perhaps not decide to come here at all.

Professor Mutu also said

she was happy to welcome white immigrants who understood issues of racism against Maori. "They are in a minority just like Pakeha in this country. You have a minority of Pakeha who are very good, they recognise the racism, they object to it and speak out strongly against it."

To my way of thinking, part of being able to immigrate here should be a history lesson and an outline of Māori culture, beliefs and values. Of course I'd start with the people already here, so that the new immigrants, with their appreciation of the unique value of tangata whenua, would fit in.

The University has said

"The Education Act protects the right of academics, within the law, to question and test received wisdom, to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions. That is an important right in a free society."

Paul Spoonley has said

his research showed while other ethnic groups' attitudes toward migrants had been approving, Maori perception had become increasingly negative. Anti-immigration sentiment was fed by Maori fears that multicultural policies were diminishing policies concerning Maori.

I say that framing the arguement around skin colour and country of origin obscures the very real issue that has to be addressed. The discussion centres around the controversial words and does not get to the real concerns or the solutions needed.

For those who feel offended because they identify as 'white' - think about it - if you are not racist Professor Mutu is not talking about you. We can't deny that our society is structured so that certain groups have advantage over others and those inequalities create privilege and are based on skin colour, ethnicity, gender, age, sexuality and ability. If you are male you have inherent privilege, if 'white' you have inherent privilege, if you are hetrosexual you have inherent privileges. Breaking this structure down is the goal and sometimes sharp weapons must be used. I am a male and paleish and hetrosexual and I enjoy inherent privileges because of that and every day, like you, I work and strive to create equality - so that I can be free of these encumberances and be seen as me, and so I can see you as you.

underreported struggles 53

Ahni at Intercontinental Cry has some very important underreported struggles this month.

Two Shipibo communities in the Peruvian Amazon broke off negotiations with Maple Gas Corporation, over the health and environmental impacts of six oil spills on their territory over the past three years. The move comes just one month after 32 Shipibo were forced to clean up one of the spills with their bare hands.

Shell and BP are mere steps away from drilling exploratory wells off the Coast of Alaska and Russia, a region that everyone's playfully referring to as the "final frontier" for petroleum development. The notion of the Arctic being "undeveloped" or "undiscovered" probably couldn't be more insulting to the Inupiat, Saami and other Indigenous Peoples whose cultures and subsistence ways of life evolved over centuries of living in the region.

The Pechanga Band of Luiseño Peoples are speaking out against a planned quarry project that threatens a key religious and cultural area. The company, Granite Construction is seeking an agreement that would allow it to mine the quarry for 75 years. Tribal officials, however, insist that they been telling county officials about the property's spiritual importance for years. They consider the land to be the site of creation. 

Heavily armed drug traffickers from Peru are believed to be hunting isolated indigenous peoples in the Brazilian state of Acre on the border with Peru, in order to make way for coca-growing operations. According to latest reports, the Ministry of Defense has organized a "permanent occupation" until the crisis is contained.  

The Indigenous Telengit Peoples in the Altai Republic are turning to the international community to help stop a new gas pipeline that would cut through their sacred lands and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Cultural Survival has responded to the Telengit's call by starting a letter-writing campaign on their behalf. 

And many more - please visit Intercontinental Cry and read about these struggles.

no laughs here

LudditeJourno at The Hand Mirror has said everything I want to and have struggled to say about this abuse case, so I have reprinted her post.

I am a father and I don't think any of this is funny. Child abuse isn't funny.

Trigger warning – please be careful with this post – it is deliberately provocative.
Imagine this. You’re a woman. You live with your partner and your daughter. One night, your partner has gone out to a Christmas party by himself. When he comes home, it’s late, he’s drunk, he fancies a shag, you don’t.
You say “no, thanks” and go to sleep.
In the wee hours of the morning, you wake up. Something’s not quite right. You open your eyes properly and look around. Your beautiful little girl, all of four years old, has jumped into bed with you.
Your partner has pulled down her pyjama pants. He was removed her night-time nappy. He has his mouth where her tiny, four year old genitals are.
You probably shout or scream. You probably grab your daughter and pull her away from him. You probably can’t quite believe what you’ve just seen, and desperately wish you hadn’t. You probably try to control what you want to say and do to him, because you have a little, confused girl in your arms who needs a cuddle, who needs help to put her nappy and pyjamas back on properly.
He says “I was confused, I thought it was you.”
You don’t believe this. You don’t wear nappies to bed. And you had already told him, that night, that you didn’t want to have sex.
Who knows how much you talk about it that night – but you decide you have to report this to the Police. You’re not sure why your partner would lie about trying to do adult sexual things with your daughter, but you don’t want her to be at risk. You don’t know what to believe. Could this happen again? Has he done this before? You don’t know. But you can’t risk your little four year old girl. You talk to people. No one else wants to believe it either.
When you tell the Police, he is furious. He made a mistake, he was drunk, it could happen to anyone. Don’t you care about him? What about his career, he’s a comedian, he makes people laugh, this will ruin everything. He just wants a chance to show you and your daughter how much he loves you. But he has to get a lawyer, because the Police investigate.
It’s in the papers. He tells people that whoever told the Police did it out of spite, to get back at him. It was a genuine mistake, and the report to the Police was malicious, but he’s distancing himself from that bad person now.
The case drags on and on. Even though the court tells reporters they can’t say who you are, who your daughter is, you know everyone knows. Everyone in your lives. They all have opinions about what you should do. Most of them don’t think it’s that big a deal. You don’t want to tell them the details of what you saw, and anyway, you’re not supposed to talk about it.
You might never want to see him again, or you might beg him to go talk to someone professional. Your daughter is behaving differently, crying at night and being very clingy. She doesn’t want to take off her nappy. She wants to see her dad, but she doesn’t want to be alone with him.
You see, over and over again, what you woke up to that night. Flashbacks, other people call it. You feel like you’re there.
The trial is called off for now, because they say they can find no evidence. You don’t understand, doesn’t what you saw count? Doesn’t what your daughter says count?
He tries again. So does his family. Why do we have to do this? Come on now, let’s just forget it and things can get back to normal. Stop making a fuss. He loves you. He loves your daughter. He will never do anything like that again.
You stay strong. Your lawyers stay strong. The trial goes ahead, fifteen months later. The lawyers talk. He doesn’t want to go to prison, and he knows he will if the court believes you and your daughter, if you get to tell them what happened that night.
Your lawyers do a deal. He says he did it, he did try to do sexual adult things with your four year old daughter. He says he is guilty. You don’t have to talk in court after all.
You go back for sentencing. The judge says your partner needs to get back to making people laugh as soon as possible. She said what happened wasn’t so bad, and he had suffered enough, and anyway it wasn’t like real child abuse, because that happens in secret. He doesn’t have to go to prison, or have counselling, or do community work. He is free.
Your life has changed forever. So has your daughter’s. None of this was funny.

The child and mother are the victims and they have my support for the henious abuse of trust that they have to endure. Kia kaha.

Hat tip - The Hand Mirror

thoughts on Māori centred research

I have been busy writing an essay on Māori centred approaches to research and it has been fascinating. It is an area I hadn’t really considered too deeply before – just taken it for granted - but after studying it, I realise how out of touch I have been. These are just some random, slightly muddled thoughts on the topic that are running around in my head. I realise that research today is more aware of the issues, but I still think we have a wee way to go to get there.

Māori have criticised much past research and for good reason – mostly research has been done by non-Māori with reputations built and maintained by being the expert – on Māori. The research has been developed and implemented with very little consideration of Māori people or culture. It is amazing to consider the arrogance of believing you can study a culture without recognising and incorporating the cultural values of the group being studied. It is disturbing to think about how disempowered Māori have been in this area and we are talking about research about Māori, so surely Māori should have a say in the research – it seems a minimum requirement to me. But others are the gatekeepers, they set the parameters of the research and they determine the methodologies, and they do the research, evaluate it and present it.

This research structure does not fit within a Māori worldview and is valueless for Māori and therefore our society. Research which describes what Māori already know is worthless and research too often does that and also focuses on comparing Māori with others. This comparing seems to me to be a subtle assimilation tactic because it accentuates the ‘otherness’ of Māori, often in a negative way. The gaps, always the gaps – which show Māori below others but what actually does this research, this measuring do? Sadly as I mentioned above – it does nothing. The next question should be - how can we create something that does make a difference? The answer is there, within Te Āo Māori.

Various models to create Māori centred approaches to research have been developed and they have some attributes in common. The lessons from the past show that knowledge must be actively attained and it must be for the collective good. Research is valuable when it enhances the lives of the people, when it makes a positive difference. Consultation with, and accountability to, the group are explicit within the histories of Tane and Maui and they are the models to follow. This can only occur when Māori values are incorporated within the research structure from top to bottom. Part of this is the defining the purposes of research which should relate to gains for Māori, as Māori. And part is the practise of research - how the research is conducted, the accountability and responsibilities, the ownership and analysis of the research as well as the way Māori interact and participate in the research. As Durie says “Māori people are seeking to control research processes that directly affect them.”

There is ongoing debate around the role of researcher. For many, that person should be Māori - a qualified Māori researcher able to navigate competencies in research and Māori knowledge whilst operating within Māori society. The exchange culture of Māori realises obligation, reciprocity and responsibility as intrinsic for all participants of a research project. Spiritual aspects of tapu, wairua and mana are embedded within the transmission of knowledge: it is sacred and closely guarded and must be deserved. This is in contrast to the western academic view where knowledge is apparently available to all, as of right.

A Māori centred approach to research puts Māori at the centre and is empowering because it allows Māori to be Māori and benefits accrue to Māori people. It provides an integration of the holistic Māori view of everything and highlights the multiple interconnections that influence all aspects of wellbeing. Māori control over research is Mana Māori and repositions Māori from passive researched into active, empowered participants.

To move forward in true partnership between Māori and the Crown requires an acceptance and recognition of a different way of looking at things. We will have to revise the dominant euro-centric approach and realise that other cultures have something to offer. Māori do not accept that they are objects to study - Māori insist on empowerment, on control, and to my mind it is not an outrageous request – it is basic human rights.

open sore

The West Coast Regional Council has granted consent for Perth-based Bathurst Resources to mine 200 hectares in the Mt Rochfort Conservation Area on the Denniston Plateau, northeast of Westport via a open cast coal mine, that will be the 2nd biggest here. This decision is so shortsighted. Coal!?! Open cast mine!?! Conservation Area!?! - all for the fake short-term benefit of economic gain - what a crock. You are destroying this world and our children's future and you don't even care.

NZH

The three hearing commissioners granted the consent, "but not without some considerable reservations and anguish," they said. "The most and almost overwhelming factor that we had to consider is the enormous financial benefit that the mine will bring to the Buller district and the West Coast region."

Three fools - you have shown where you stand.

Fairdown/Whareatea Residents Association spokesman David Orchard said "The impact is absolutely appalling, the impact on health is bound to be considerable."

Coal Action Network said "Burning coal is the dirtiest fossil fuel activity on the planet and there are huge reserves of coal left worldwide. If we allow them to be burnt, we have no chance of avoiding a climate catastrophe," said spokeswoman Frances Mountier.

West Coast Environment Network said "The commissioners' decision had clearly been compromised by Department of Conservation (DOC) withholding detailed scientific evidence it had gathered on the impacts of the proposed mine", and "Any short-term economic benefit will be outweighed by the long-term impacts on communities and ecosystems of adapting to climatic change if large-scale coal mining continues."

A shocking decision that leads us down the road to ruin. And not the last shocking decsion that we will have to fight or accept as the gnats start selling everything off and digging everything up.

watching backs

When I heard the news that the maori party had selected Waihoroi Shortland to represent them not their unsuccessful Tai Tokerau byelection candidate Solomon Tipene I thought we may have some fallout.


We have had some fallout.


Solomon Tipene says

"Watch your back, lest it be bitten by the Maori Party dogs. I'm referring to the leaders - they did that to me and Hone Harawira."

Stong language and strong views from experience, from knowledge. Maori Party president Pem Bird doesn't get it

Mr Bird said he was disappointed by Mr Tipene's "inexcusable" outburst, given the time and resources the party had put into his campaign.

Ummm that was the point of his statement - fake support and buckling under pressure - just like the maori party have done with the gnats and their party agreement. It does not look good for the maori party although prime minister key has tossed out that he will have coalition party negotiations with his mates no matter how many votes they get. But how many will they get? Solomon Tipene has just echoed what Hone has said - this dysfunction within the maori party is systemic and is detremental to Māori self determination aspirations. Time for the sea anchor to be cut.

Hat tip The Standard

mad, bad and sad

Evidence can be a terrible thing. We know that Māori and pasifika peoples are more likely to come to the attention of the police and now we also know that they get tazered by the police a lot more than others - how much more?

NZH

ETHNICITIES
During the 11 months to August 9, police tasered 88 people including:
* Maori: 35
* Pacific Islanders: 16
* Europeans: 35
* Asians: 1

The introduction of Tasers was bitterly opposed by the Maori Party and the Greens with the Maori Party's Hone Harawira and the Greens' Mr Locke both raising concerns their use would reflect police "racism". Mr Locke yesterday said the latest statistics raised a number of issues about the weapons. "Certainly they're being fired disproportionately at Maori. The reasons for that are something we should look into."Mr Locke was also concerned that police were too quick to use Tasers on people with mental health issues - 58 during the 11-month period.

Mana Party spokeswoman Annette Sykes said that despite Mr Harawira's warning "there has been this disproportionate outcome for Maori and Polynesian individuals which is a sad indictment on us".

But police and their minister, Judith Collins, say the figures merely reflect the "sad fact" that Maori are over-represented in crime statistics.

Yes it is a 'sad fact' but what does that fact mean and where does it come from. For collins it means add more police, more weapons, more jails and more arrests but those responses do not address the issue. There is fundamental institutional racism at play here - and if you know that there is an issue and you choose to ignore it then you are actually supporting it. Governments know about this issue, highlighted by these tazer statistics, and have not addressed it because it does not suit their agenda to. They prefer this situation and you may wonder why - blame is one reason, it is always good to have a group to blame for things and the distorted history of this country offers the indigenous people as an established blameworthy group, as happens in many colonised countries. It is not us, it is them - it is those 'others'. To fix this situation requires more than a band aid.

I am sick to death of our people getting tazered and arrested, fingerprinted even though they have no conviction, and put in prison. I am sick to death of this institutional racism and the compounding effects of the Crowns continuted ignorance of their role as a true partner to Māori. We need to change some things and change them fast. Politically I am putting my faith in Mana - they will put a stick in the spokes to stop this and create opportunities to work on solutions. And I see constituitonal change as being essential.

you have are and will always be bad

Good work by Rahui Katene, Maori Party MP for Te Tai Tonga in voicing good opposition to the secret Bill that fixes - that since 2008 it has been unlawful for police to retain identifying particulars of children and young people who have been through the youth justice system and subjected to a penalty less than conviction. This is not just about fixing that loophole. The secrecy apparently was so that no young person could take the Government to court. Labour did the deal with the gnats and The Maori Party, Chris Carter and The Greens opposed it today.

We know that Māori youth are arrested more and that part of this is due to racial profiling. Below-conviction-threshold options like family group conferences and restorative justice are there because they work and provide alternatives for rehabilitation. These young people have made mistakes but they have not breached the conviction threshold and therefore should not have their fingerprints and photos taken and stored in some database. 

Rahui is speaking strongly here

Our focus – in raising the questions we have – is to bring to the House the opportunity to talk about youth wellbeing rather than simply promoting yet another forum for politicians to talk about the perils of youth; and the need to hold the fingerprints of youth who have been admonished by a judge.

I would really recommend that Members look carefully at sections 283 (a) to (n) of the Children, Young Persons and their families Act. These provisions – for children to be admonished; for young parents to attend a parenting programme; for young people to attend a mentoring programme – are now provisions for which the fingerprints and photographs of these young people are kept.

And I would suggest in particular that Mr Hipkins looks at this detail – that these orders from a very good piece of legislation were always intended to focus on child and youth wellbeing – not fodder for this Policing Bill.

I have been greatly disappointed by the nature of the debate today which has tried to close down discussion on the impacts for youth and instead focus on the mistakes of the statute.

This Bill may appear to just be about a tidy up of some legislation but it really is about how we treat our youth, particularly Māori youth. You can see why many feel let down and alienated. This personal identifying information is kept even though they have not received a conviction – this is just wrong. I mean, what next? - just take the information at birth - you know, for the greater good. It doesn’t take much to connect the dots from this type of harassment to the high Māori youth suicide rate. The issues have to be faced up to instead of degrading the debate and focusing it on the technicalities. 

Our youth deserve more than platitudes and empty words. We have real issues because of how this society is constructed - this materialistic, individualistic approach based on capitalism is empty and dry - if you add in colonisation and patriarchy it can barely sustain life. It is our job to create the world for our children, not their job - blaming youth is pointless, stigmatising them is vindictive and counterproductive. We can make it better for our youth - it takes community and people, it takes culture and aroha. It takes listening.

Good on The Greens, Chris Carter, and The Maori Party (and I assume Mana as Hone’s proxy is still with the Greens I think) for opposing this and shame on Labour. The gnats have shown that money is their big driver yet again.

a country lesson

130 years a house was taken from its home and people, on 17 September 2011 the house comes home. Ngāti Awa and the Mātaatua confederation of tribes will celebrate the return and reopen 'the house that came home.' The story of the long journey of Mātaatua Wharenui is compelling, it encapsulates the truth of who we are and what has happened here. It is a story of loss, of hope, of disrespect, of redress, of mana, of honour, of people. It is our story and it is time we learned it.

Built as a symbol of the unity, strength and resilience of Ngāti Awa - a people who had suffered severely at the hands of colonisation and resulting land confiscation, the impressive Mātaatua Wharenui was originally opened in Whakatane in 1875.

Five years later, the intricately carved Māori house was uplifted by the New Zealand Government to represent the country at some of the most respected anthropological exhibitions of the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

For well over a century, Mātaatua, the travelling house, would be lost to the people who needed it most. Despite calls by successive Ngāti Awa leaders to have the house returned to Whakatane, Mātaatua would remain alone, without its people and miles from home.

A 1996 Waitangi Tribunal Special Deed of Settlement finally saw Mātaatua returned to Ngāti Awa. The past 15 years have been dedicated to restoring Mātaatua to its original magnificence.

Tears well in my eyes - I am so happy this is happening. This is the way forward - I only wish the country would celebrate this too - it is a significant event that is bringing us together. 

Hat tip - Introducing Maori Lifestyles

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.

you look like trouble

The use of Māori Wardens to target drunk Māori during the Rugby World Cup is racist and wrong and for reasons that are as obvious as the colour of your skin.

TV3

Wellington bar owners say drunk Maori will be specifically targeted during the World Cup, by a 50-year-old law that has been pulled from the archives by police and the city council.

The law allows Maori wardens to enter bars and remove drunk or violent Maori.

Many bar owners say it is a shameful, racist law and the Government now wants to take a look at it.

Bill in the comments on The Standard hits the nail on the head

Bill 10 August 2011 at 9:52 am

Since NZ doesn’t have identity cards; and since being Maori is not predicated on ‘how much Maori blood you have in you’, like in the U. States for example, where to ‘be’ or ‘designated’ or ‘recognised’ as Cherokee or whichever indigenous culture requires 25% (or whatever) ‘Cherokee blood’, then the whole thing would be impossible to implement.

A pale skinned red head person can be as Maori as the dark skinned, dark haired person next to them. Maybe even more so. Being Maori is largely about self identification, or culture here. Not appearance.

Which means attempts to enact the law would impact on all (young?) brown skinned people; not Maori.

This isn't about Māori - it is about brown skin and that is why it is racist and unacceptable.

underreported struggles 52

Ahni at Intercontinental Cry has some very important underreported struggles this month.

In recent months many Bangladeshi indigenous people have taken the streets holding meetings, human chains and rallies, demanding constitutional recognition of their population. The ongoing demand stems from an ‘indigenous' debate, in which many government representatives have denied that any Indigenous People are in the country. An illuminating talk by a Bengali citizen puts the debate into perspective.

The Ramu landowners in Papua New Guinea were shocked to learn a Judge decided to approve the controversial deep sea waste disposal plan for the Chinese-owned Ramu Nickel mine. The approval came only after the judge acknowledge the risk of irreversible harm to marine resources. The landowners say they are going to appeal against the court decision.

Chile's Aysén Environmental Review Commission approved the environmental assessment of a five dam proposal on two rivers. The approval, however, is marred in controversy and has set off protests in many cities, including Santiago. Critics say the series of dams will destroy a largely untouched region of Patagonia. Protests hit Coyhaique, the city where the vote occurred, with over 1,000 people marching. Clashes with police resulted in water canons and tear gas being used on protestors. Reportedly protestors were throwing rocks at commissioners' cars. Dozens were arrested. Similar clashes occurred in Santiago.

The Algonquins of Barriere Lake are celebrating a recent decision by Cartier Resources Inc. to suspend its mining exploration activities in the Algonquin community's traditional territory in northwestern Quebec. The decision sets an important precedent in Canada concerning the Right of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) as defined by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

After struggling for more than 30 years to protect the Koongarra region from the threat of uranium mining, Kakadu Traditional owners can breathe a welcomed sigh of relief. The World Heritage Committee recently announced that it would redraw the borders of the Kakadu National Park to include Koongarra.

And many more - please visit Intercontinental Cry and read about these struggles.

reviewing what

I agree with Annette Sykes on the so called 'constitutional review' that it is actually an 'institutional review'. We can't deal with the issues unless we actually look at them and the terms of reference directs the panel in certain directions (even though they argue that this hasn't happened) - they may come up with great recommendations  but under this government, as evidence has shown, that will be it. Meanwhile our situation gets worse - how bad? Check this out.

Anyway back to Annette Sykes

"The only issues that will be explored by this panel will be what the term of office should be for the Government, the size of the electorates and whether or not there should be more Treaty provisions within future legislation. The parameters of the review stipulate that rather than recognising the Treaty of Waitangi as this country's constitution, the Crown would much rather tinker with what already exists, a system that was forced upon our people and gives Maori no voice as was envisaged under the Treaty. Our people will have certain expectations that will not be met due to the 'institutional' nature of the review".

The voices will be heard but will they be listened to - they certainly weren't when they changed the Foreshore and Seabed Act. It will be difficult for the members of the review to hear all the input, offer their recommendations - to see them fall by the wayside as the Government continues on it's merry way. 

Mr English says he hopes many Maori who have strong constitutional views take the opportunity to air them because often those types of discussions are held between the Crown and Maori.

That is a good point - that these discussions are held between the Crown and Māori - but which Māori, and do they represent the wide variety of views that Māori have. Luckily there is also another process occuring where the people can really give their views and have them heard, as Annette explains

"I would much rather our people engage with the Independent Constitutional Working Group - Aotearoa Matike Mai, being led by the most prominent Maori expert on constitutional matters, Moana Jackson. That process is Maori-led and will be able to fully explore the true potential of the Treaty of Waitangi as our country's constitution. MANA will encourage people to participate in hui that will be held around the country by the Independent Constitutional Working Group, rather than being disappointed because of the limitations of the Crown's process".

O'Sullivan (2003) in 'Beyond Biculturalism: The politics of an indigenous minority' sums it up well for me

"The absence of self determination is the foundational cause of resource alienation and collective political and economic marginalisation."... "Self determination challenges the systemic and ideological foundation of post-colonial notions of sovereignty and government. It aims to decolonise the indigenous relational status to the nation state. it seeks an equality that can only be achieved by the recognition of group rights and it requires the withdrawal of the state from domains in which it would prefer to intrude."

We need a constitutional review and we need it to be focus on the real issues. The maori party may claim another win for them in getting the review underway but it is a hollow victory and they know it.

protect it all

I am pleased that the Nature Heritage Fund has created two scenic reserves totalling 189 hectares at Whanganui Inlet near Kaihoka in Golden Bay. They paid the owners half a million. There is a proposal that all rural land on Golden Bay's northwest coast be given protection as an "outstanding natural landscape" but the owners of this sold land disagree with that because they say that, "Outstanding landscape is because of outstanding management" and they require compensation because they have maintained the outstanding landscape by not subdividing it, planting pine trees or neglecting it - I think they have the cart before the horse - the landscape is outstanding because it is outstanding, not because of some temporary owners activities. Neglecting the land, as in not commercialising it, may have been the best thing for it and has certainly helped other blocks that were too inaccessible or too hard to develop.

Nelson Mail

The purchase includes 12ha of unique, northern cedar forest on stabilised dunes adjoining the Kaihoka Lakes Scenic Reserve. The 177ha block to the north has a sequence of indigenous vegetation spanning lowland through to coastal vegetation on a variety of landforms. The larger block has a diverse array of regionally rare plant communities, including salt turfs on coastal cliffs, and others found on low-fertility conglomerate. The salt turfs are nationally rare and contain four plant species that are either nationally threatened or at risk, including native orchids. They also host wildlife like the South Island fernbird and Nelson green gecko.

 If we have to pay then let's pay and get these ecosystems protected.