PEACE WITHIN OURSELVES

Under the current constitutional arrangements in this country, sovereign Maori cannot work for the government and be at peace within ourselves, because inevitably we will be forced to do things that uphold and apply racist policies designed to do our people over. 

There has to be an internal conflict for Maori enforcing such laws and policies against their own whanaunga who are tūturu Rangatira Maori (real about being sovereign). 

If they are tūturu, Far North District Council’s rating department employees are conflicted when they see another block of Maori-owned land go up for rating sale.  They know that more often than not these are blocks of land which have been rendered unusable or unused by past racist policies and laws on rating. 

If they are tūturu, Maori Land Court staff are conflicted when they must process the FNDC’s applications for charging orders against Maori land.  They know that, regardless of its own culpability in forcing Maori off their lands in the past, these charging orders enable the FNDC to forcibly sell those same lands to the highest or any other tenderer in the future. 

If they are tūturu, Maori who work for the New Zealand Police are conflicted when they are required to forcibly remove their own people from their own lands and charge us with trespass.  The same goes for Maori who work in Corrections and have to process, transport, deliver and store their own people who refuse to comply with these racist laws?

If they are tūturu, Maori teachers at mainstream schools are conflicted when they see Maori children marginalised for being tūturu within a system that in their hearts they know is not teaching the truth about our history let alone about our present and future.

So what are Maori who work for government agencies to do? 

They could do ‘plausible deniability’ as in, I didn’t know the truth about what was happening, so I can’t be blamed for it.  They could do justification as in, at least I am a familiar face doing this to my whanaunga.  They could do cession of sovereignty altogether as in, I accept the Magna Carta over-rides He Wakaputanga and the Crown is sovereign in this country.  Or they could do repentance and quit, as in Ross Meurant.

Conflict happens when our talk does not match our walk, as in when our government agency boss declares that what is being done to our whanaunga within the agency we work for is not actually ‘racism’, it’s just ‘unconscious bias’.

Peace happens when our external rules and actions match our internal sense of right and wrong.  

In the case of a nation, these rules are codified within a written constitution which outlaws racism, stops governments from watering down those laws that protect all human rights, and supports us all to be at peace within ourselves.

FINDING OURSELVES

Mokopuna Rapaere Karu Kamira spent 45 years finding and helping our people in Australia move from a state of ngoikore (weakness) to one of toiora (wellbeing).

In 1995 he came home to ask advice from his kuia and kaumātua, and deliver a warning: the number of Māori turning up in Australian prisons, he said, was rising.  What could the whānau, hapū and iwi at home do to help change the emerging pattern?  Implicit in his question was the knowledge that Māori were losing their identity in Australia. 

This pattern was first seen during the so-called urban drift of Maori from our rural kāinga (settlements) after World War II.  Its warp was woven when Maori who migrated with hope ended up becoming just another minority lost in transit. 

But at the same time a matching weft pattern was woven by those Rangatira Maori who saw the holes appearing in our social fabric, and worked hard to stitch and mend it. 

Although written from the perspective of one such kāinga, Melissa Matutina Williams’ recently published book, Panguru and the City: Kainga Tahi, Kainga Rua: An Urban Migration History, captures the warp and weft of that migration pattern with clarity and compassion.

By 1995, Moko’s kuia and kaumatua had seen and lived through several such migrations.  So their advice to him was simple: teach te reo me ona tikanga to our people in Australia so that they may remember who they are and where they come from.

Although still relatively young at the time, Moko was like a living Ark filled with the mita o te reo me ona tikanga (the rhythm, intonation, pronunciation and sound of our language, and the customary system of values and practices developed over time and deeply embedded in our social context). 

As a former film stuntman he also had a showman’s charm and cheek, but tempered with morals and mana.  In short, he had what it takes to do what his kuia and kaumātua advised him to do. 

Although he worked fulltime as a Funeral Director, Moko never stopped helping Māori who had become lost in Australia to find their identity.  He was not the only one. 

To this day, others like him are teaching and strengthening Māori identities within the social fabric of Australia.  But as recent developments have revealed, since 2001 they have been really up against it.   

This facebook post captures some of that:  “Australians are more upset that their cricket players didn't shake some Black Caps hand than they are that their government is shaking down thousands of kiwi taxpayers.  Advance Australia Fair?  Yeah right.”

Twenty years after he first put his question to them, Moko and most of his kuia and kaumātua are dead.  Yet the question he asked in 1995 remains the same:  What can we do to help?  So too does the answer: te reo me ona tikanga.

Without them, we are likely to become or remain ngoikore.  With them, we can achieve toiora.  And it all begins and ends with finding ourselves. 

ASSIMILATION BY AGREEMENT

The assimilation of New Zealand is just about complete.  

Trekkies will remember “The Borg”; that fictional race of aliens that moved throughout the Galaxy sucking dry every planet in their path.  

Every species they came across were transformed into cybernetic organisms to become drones in a hive mind called the Collective.  
Long after the series ended, The Borg continued as a cultural archetype when describing the futility of resisting a juggernaut – which brings us to the TPPA.

New Zealand's government is highly unlikely to vote against signing this agreement since it has been the one pushing it from the start. 

The TPPA was built on the framework of the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement, or P4 agreement between Brunei, Chile, Singapore and New Zealand completed in 2005.  That agreement was an expansion of the P3 (Pacific Three Closer Economic Partnership) begun by Helen Clark during the 2002 APEC meeting at Los Cabos.  And P3 was simply an expansion of the 2001 trade agreement between New Zealand and Singapore. 

The road to TPPA is just the latest in a series of political scrums, rucks and mauls in which New Zealand governments have played the role of number 8.  In this age of manufactured consent and delivered constituencies, the current government is very unlikely to change sides one meter from touch. 

Negotiated in secret, this agreement, more than six thousand pages long (and that’s without the supporting documents), has implications for all New Zealanders that will resonate far beyond what might be expected in a trade deal.  And we, the people, will not be given the opportunity to vote on it.  Instead we will be given “Bread and Circuses”.

Taken from the Latin: panem et circenses, ‘bread and circuses’ is a metaphor for superficially satisfying people with diversions, in order to distract them from the big issues of their day. 

In politics, the phrase is used to describe how governments generate public approval and acceptance, not through excellent services or policies, but through diverting us with ‘bread’ and distracting us with ‘circuses’. 

So in typical ‘Bread and Circuses’ fashion the Key government is diverting us with the illusion of choice by mailing out the first in a series of referenda about our flag.   

It beggars belief that we can be so easily distracted by the symbols of our culture, while its unique substance is traded for a global identity that threatens our very existence.

On November 5^th 2015 (Guy Fawkes Day) the full text of the TPPA was finally released simultaneously in the nations of all the signatories.  It reminded me of Star Trek and the collective audio message that the fictional Borgs always sent simultaneously to every nation on each planet just before their conquest and assimilation: 

“We are the Borg.  Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own.  Resistance is futile.”  

NGATI KAHU LEADERS

Last Saturday, at the Hui-a-Tau (AGM) of Te Rūnanga-ā-Iwi ō Ngāti Kahu, Professor Margaret Mutu (Te Whānau Moana Te Rorohuri) was returned as Chair, and Tania Thomas (Ngāti Taranga) was returned as Secretary, while Rose Vazey-Roberts (Patu Kōraha) was elected to fill the office of Treasurer.  All three were elected unopposed.

With regard to the portfolios, the following people were elected unopposed. 

The Taumata Kaumātua Portfolio continues to be led by Ven Timoti Flavell (Te Whānau Moana Te Rorohuri).  Timoti also chairs Te Taumata Kaumātua o Ngāti Kahu which sits alongside the Rūnanga.  Their tikanga guidance locally, regionally, nationally and internationally in behalf and support of Ngāti Kahu is invaluable.

Reremoana Rēnata (Matarahurahu / Ngāti Ruaiti) continues to convene the Education portfolio.  Reremoana continues a lifetime commitment to the education of our people in this role, as well as in her role as Kaiako of the Taipā Kohanga Reo.

Zarrah Pineaha and Renee Murray (Tahaawai) were appointed to the Health Portfolio.  It was proposed that this Portfolio be combined with that of Whānau Ora.  They will work closely with the Social Services Portfolio Convenor, whose appointment was deferred to the Rūnanga’s December hui-a-marama to allow time for feedback from Te Iwi o Ngāti Kahu Trust in Auckland.

Arthur Tukariri (Matarahurahu) was appointed to convene the Environmental Resource Management Portfolio.  As the mandated iwi organisation, we UNDERSTAND and KNOW government legislation, but ADVOCATE and UPHOLD Ngāti Kahu tikanga. 

The Rangatahi Portfolio is led by Wīkatana and John Popata Jnr (Ngāi Tohianga). To ensure the ongoing ability to express our rangatiratanga and mana, Ngāti Kahu take our rangatahi with us everywhere we go and involve them in everything we do. 

And finally, the Communications Portfolio is led by Lisa McNabb (Te Paatu ki Pāmapuria).  Lisa is also Ngāti Kahu’s representative to Te Reo Irirangi o Te Hiku o Te Ika Trust.

Te Rūnanga-a-Iwi o Ngāti Kahu is an expression of the mana of Ngāti Kahu hapū.  Collectively their appointed delegates are the mandated iwi authority of Ngati Kahu.  Their job is to strategise for the wellbeing of the descendants of Kahutianui and Te Parata, while at the same time maintaining the mana motuhake (the paramount authority) of Ngāti Kahu that has come down to this generation, and will be passed on to successive ones. 

Nineteen years after the ratification of the first Rūnanga Trust Deed, like their predecessors, this generation of leaders continues to do the job and, on Saturday, the mandate for Te Runanga-a-Iwi o Ngati Kahu as the iwi authority of Ngati Kahu was reconfirmed unanimously. 

The current Executive Officers and Portfolio Convenors bring a wide range of ages, skills, life experiences and governance expertise to the table.  I feel humble and grateful for the opportunity to work alongside of these leaders and to oversee the operationalisation of their strategies.

No reira, tātou mā, ngā tāngata whai pānga ki ngā marae maha o Ngāti Kahu.  Mā te waahi ngaro tātou katoa e arataki ki te oranga tinana, ki te oranga wairua i roto i te ao hōu.

HARD WORK AND THRIFT

China's accumulation of foreign currency is a hotly debated topic amongst economists who blame the ongoing economic instability in the world on this accumulation of foreign currency in China’s hands.  

Given the arrival of increasing numbers of Chinese people and enterprises in our rohe, this is an issue I have taken pains to consider and understand how it impacts on us.  What I have found is that it all pivots on two practices that New Zealanders embraced religiously in the past, but today, not so much; i.e. hard work combined with thrift.

This is not a popular message, but it is true nevertheless.  For decades New Zealanders have been living way beyond our means at a terrible cost to our future, and to do so we’ve been borrowing.  

In 2011, our borrowing hit $380 million per week, the highest rate ever recorded.  By June this year that was down to $200 million per week.  But that just includes government debt. Add in household and corporate debt and your eyes will begin to water.

Most of that borrowed money comes from the United States private banker, the Federal Reserve.  So, allowing for inflation, the $billion question is, where does the Federal Reserve get the money from originally? 

There are a range of mechanisms that explain how the Federal Reserve creates money.  But when you tease those mechanisms apart to see where the money we borrow comes from originally, whereas in the past you would have found a mix of sources, today you will find China.

Not less than a decade ago, China was an economic mess.  Now it’s the fastest growing economy in the world, and the United States third largest trading partner, behind Canada and Mexico.  

This turnaround was achieved on the back of two very Chinese practices; hard work and thrift.  It was also boosted by the west’s addiction to spending more than we earn. 

As a result China built a savings record and balance of payments which Winston Peters could only dream about, and it became the biggest lender to the United States.  

However, because the Federal Reserve continued printing money like it was going out of fashion, the value of the US greenback got more and more flakey. So in order to turn the rapidly devaluing American currency it held into things that would hold their value, the Chinese began buying solid assets wherever they could, including in our rohe. 

The current United States Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner, recently accused China of "currency manipulation."  Read Barry Ritzholt’s Bailout Nation and you’ll see what a hypocrite Mr Geithner is.  

From the 1980s onwards, western bankers like John Key and Timothy Geithner, shamelessly manipulated currencies around the world.

At the same time we happily spent trillions of dollars on cheap Chinese goods and services. 

This created employment in China, and the Chinese worked hard and saved.  Then they lent their savings to us so we could buy more goods and services.

As Charles Dickens may have put it, China ate a small cup of gruel in a cold dark room to save money. 

So, now that China is spending some of its foreign currency internationally, including in our rohe, will Chinese people continue to embrace hard work and thrift?  

More critically, for the sake of our future, will we again embrace those values ourselves?  

DELIVERING CONSTITUENCIES

Under the current constitutional arrangements in this country, or lack thereof, the governing party in Parliament can pretty much do what it wants to engineer the society that best promotes its interests.  Even the voting system supports that.

Under MMP, the government of the day can bypass the voter and hand pick much of the legislature and Cabinet.  The government appoint the judges, so if their legislative decisions run contrary to the judicial view, they rewrite the legislation.  If a caucus becomes argumentative, the PM can shuffle Cabinet and play his constituent MPs off against his list members. 

Yes, at the macro level, a government in power in New Zealand today can now pretty much do what it wants. And by and large the Pākeha majority will let them do it.

However, things become less clear in their dealings with Māori.  The Māori world is complex to many Māori; imagine how frightening it must be to Pākeha with little or no knowledge of things Māori.   In response to these fears from its voter base, government deals with Māori from a risk management perspective.  And to help them manage that risk they use two methods; advisory and mandatory.

The advisory method involves setting up and resourcing Māori to fill committees and positions that government can then call upon to advise them on how to manage and neutralise, if not solve, a particular Māori risk. 

The mandatory method involves mandating and resourcing Māori negotiators that the government can then call upon to deliver a constituency of other Māori into its hands, again neutralising, if not solving, particular Māori risks.

The success of both methods hinges upon the appointed Māori advisors and mandated Māori negotiators playing the game by the government’s rules and giving the government what it wants. 

With regard to Māori negotiators, what government want is to be forgiven the massive financial liability it carries over the numerous, well-founded claims that Māori have against it for breaching Te Tiriti o Waitangi.  And it wants to do so for as little as one cent in the dollar. 

It had aimed to complete this exercise of self-determined forgiveness by 2014.  It has now quietly changed that deadline to 2017, but its methodology remains the same. 

It mandates a group of negotiators who originally got their people’s support with stirring rhetoric such as, “100 percent and not an acre less.”  

It then isolates those negotiators from their people through confidentiality requirements, refuses to discuss anything outside its settlement policy, and threatens to send them to the ‘back of the settlement queue’ if they don’t toe the line.

Finally it resources them to take its cheapo offer back to their people and manufacture their consent by telling them, "Take the deal.  It’s the best we can do.”  And it watches the resultant backlash against those negotiators or their supporters with calm detachment because it too is playing the same game, but on the international scene; i.e. manufacturing our consent to deliver the New Zealand constituency into the hands of multinational corporates.

MANUFACTURING CONSENT

In this age of manufactured consent, the current government has shown a willingness to take extraordinary steps in using the media as a tool to shape political outcomes. 

Nicky Hager’s books, The Hollow Men and Dirty Politics, laid out in detail how the current politicians in power, from the PM’s Office down, manufacture consent by using the media to leak sensitive information about opponents, to attack them, and to then dictate talking points about them to mainstream media figures through bloggers and those they call Opinion Makers. 

Use of the media is not in itself unethical.  However when the user is the Government and the Media is Māori, the resultant imbalance for those they attack is hugely amplified, coming as it does on top of the Mainstream media either leading or joining the attack. 

Having seen how real investigative journalists in this country are uniformly attacked by Government and most Media, we can take it as a given that any Māori who oppose or stand in the Government’s way will be treated just as badly, if not worse.

An example is that of Minister of Treaty Negotiations, Chris Finlayson, who last week announced his recently conceived concerns over Tūhoronuku, the Ngāpuhi entity which he has for the past four years either defended or championed as the body with his mandate to settle all of Ngāpuhi’s claims. 

However, in spite of Finlayson’s support, Tūhoronuku failed to deliver its constituency to him, and in last Thursday’s Northland Age (Questions over Tūhoronuku’s mandate) he listed “an array of issues” he now has about Tuhoronuku, including its relationship with hapū and its financial status. 

Poor Tūhoronuku. It seems Finlayson may now be looking elsewhere for a cooperative body to deliver Ngāpuhi to him and to settle according to his and the government’s dictates, just like other iwi entities in the Far North have already done.

Curiously though, a Māori media reporter recently ran an ambush piece from a kūpapa airing the same kinds of criticisms about Te Rūnanga-a-Iwi o Ngāti Kahu as those now coming from Finlayson about Tūhoronuku.

Although the reporter’s producer apologised on air the very next day for her failure to check the kūpapa’s criticisms for accuracy and her failure to contact the Rūnanga for its views in order to ensure she ran a fair and balanced story, that same reporter again contacted Ngāti Kahu Chairperson Margaret Mutu late Sunday night for comment on an interview that she just happened to have done with Mr Finlayson in which he had stated “… that a pair of fresh eyes needs to look over Ngāti Kahu Treaty claims and the Rūnanga mandate ‘doesn’t last forever’.”

Poor Mr Finlayson seems to have forgotten that it was he who walked away from negotiations with Ngāti Kahu, and that it is his warrant that won’t last forever, while Ngāti Kahu’s rangatiratanga will.

In any event the Rūnanga don’t need his mandate to do what their people have already mandated them to do.   

Mr Finlayson’s forgetfulness aside, what is clearly at play here for both Ngāpuhi and Ngāti Kahu is the ongoing efforts of Government, supported by a compliant Media, to obtain an outcome by manufacturing our consent.

SIGNED, SEALED AND SECOND CLASS

“All this criticism by left wing activists before the details were even released.  Pathetic,” wrote a New Zealand Herald reader last week about opposition to the TPPA.  

But isn’t that the precise point of the criticism?  Not only were the details not released, even the broad outlines were treated as classified secrets.  Even now neither we nor our parliamentarians know exactly what’s in it.  That’s a problem the world’s biggest corporations don’t have because, unlike us, they got VIP access to it from day one, and had abundant influence in its drafting and on its negotiations. 

Thanks to Wikileaks, we did learn prior to its signing that the TPPA had less to do with mutual lowering of tariffs, and more to do with enshrining the rights of United States corporates to operate in New Zealand with less regulations and controls than our domestic companies. 

That has huge implications for almost every critical issue from health, education, environment and privacy, through to access to medicines and public services. 

In July, John Key admitted the cost of our medicines would rise, but assured us that would be offset by the increased exports resulting from the deal.  Last week, his Trade Minister Tim Groser confirmed that tariff-free access for our dairy produce into US, Canadian and Japanese markets had been denied. 

It has also been confirmed that the agreement contains the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) which is a secretive international tribunal that allows corporations to sue states over virtually anything that affects their profits.  As a result, US corporations not only get to lock in their power, the TPPA makes it impossible for future governments to reduce or remove that power. 

If a protest affects their profits, a law reduces their profits, or a new regulation impacts what they can do with their profits; they can invoke the ISDS and sue.

Previous ISDS lawsuits include Swedish company Vatenfell suing the German state for $3.7 billion for phasing out nuclear energy; British American Tobacco (BAT) sued Australia for passing a law limiting cigarettes advertising; and the French company Veolia sued Egypt for raising the minimum wage.

Bear in mind that ISDS is available to foreign corporations alone.  Citizens, domestic firms and governments have no access to it.  Based on ISDS history, our sovereignty and democracy are at serious risk.  What, after all, is sovereign or democratic about an enormous imposition of power on this country when we, its citizens and parliamentarians, had no way of debating it or influencing governmental decisions on it? 

The history of these agreements shows that they’re very difficult to change unless people can see what’s in them, and that’s precisely why they’re kept secret until they've been signed and sealed.   

 We can now expect continued PR spin from the foreign corporates and lobbyists while, as Gerard Otto, another Herald reader wrote. "The New Zealand citizen still waits in line. Second Class. Relegated."

TIP OF THE ICEBERG

One of the biggest issues that will impact on all who live inside an iwi is the TPPA, which first came to my notice in 2010 through the Jane Kelsey-edited book No Ordinary Deal: Unmasking the Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement. 

Although the TPPA is currently exciting this country’s opposition MP’s, it is just one of three trade deals being secretively brokered right now by the United States.  The other two are the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA). Together with the TPP, they are known as the 3 Big T’s. 

In these three agreements, the US is rewriting the rules of the global economy for everybody.  Once signed they will cement a key part of the US plan to create a new global bloc that will ensure the dominance of its largest companies.  To understand why the US is pushing these agreements, we need to go back to the 1950s.

After the Second World War the United States accounted for half the world’s economy.  Because its influence was unmatched by any country, it was able to write the early rules of international trade to its advantage.

The World Trade Organisation was created in this context.  But as economies like China and India joined the WTO, it became a more democratised arena and eventually the US lost control.  Needing a new strategy to maintain its global dominance, in the classic American style, it went big. 

Bypassing the WTO, the US is negotiating the biggest international agreements the world has ever seen.  But when you look across all three deals, you see that Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) are all excluded.  Why?  Because those are the emerging economies which lead the threat to US dominance. 

The ultimate goal of these trade agreements is not the normal one of getting member states to mutually lower tariffs between them; the goal is getting ultimate control over everything.

In that context, the TPP, TTIP and TiSA can be seen as part of a new geopolitical war taking place between the United States and the emerging economies, especially China. 

Having moved to militarily encircle China through the Pivot to Asia, the US is now moving to economically encircle it and its fellow BRICS members by constructing a kind of reversed circle that very pointedly leaves them out. 

By integrating Latin America away from Brazil, Western Europe away from Russia and Eurasia as a whole, Southeast Asia away from India and China, and the African nations away from South Africa – the US intends to reorient those geopolitical blocs towards itself. 

To understand why and how this will impact every area of life that you care about, Jane Kelsey’s book is a good place to start.  But be prepared to delve deeper, because what was revealed in 2010 has since turned out to be just the tip of the iceberg.

A CAUTIONARY TALE

In the aftermath of the Crown’s recent Te Hiku settlement, the following adaptation of a cautionary tale, first told to the Waitangi Tribunal in September 2012, illustrates why it’s settled nothing.

Mr Trusting has a car. His wife has an interest in it.  He leases the car to Mr Crown for a certain price and on certain conditions. 

After a while Mr Crown decides not to return the car.  Instead he sells the wheels to Mr Crown Jr and gives the door panels to Ms Crown.

He then sells the engine to Ms Opportunist subject to return in case the police say it must be returned.  But he holds on to the internal workings, fittings, windows and chassis.

Mr Trusting complains to the police who say, “You have an obligation to fix this issue, Mr Crown.”

Mr Crown says to Mr Trusting, “I know I've done you wrong, but I need to provide parts of your car to other people I've also stolen from, so I’ll give you some money instead.  And because I don’t have much, if you still want parts of your car back, then I’ll have to deduct their value from the money I give you.”

Mr Trusting is the kind of guy who is happy to accept anything that comes his way, so he says, “OK, I’ll have the two front seats and perhaps the rear view mirror so that I can see what I used to have.”

Mr Crown provides the rear view mirror, front seats and windows, but nothing to wind the windows down with because it’s restricted by legislation.  So Mr Trusting can’t control the windows.

Mr Trusting’s wife says, “Not good enough,” and complains to the police.  In the meantime Mr Crown has also given the chassis and the petrol tank of the car to someone else.

The police say, “Mr Crown, you must return the engine, chassis and petrol tank, because the Trustings need them to drive the car.”

Ms Trusting also wants compensation for the rest of the car but Mr Crown replies, “I've offered you the front seats, rear view mirror and windows, and I think that’s fair. Mr Trusting is willing to accept them, and so is everyone else I’ve stolen from.  You should as well.”

That is the end of the analogy.  To keep the benefits from his theft of their car, Mr Crown elevated Mr Trusting and undermined Ms Trusting in the settlement negotiations.  When Ms Trusting insisted on getting the car and compensation, Mr Crown walked away and blamed her for the breakdown of negotiations.

In the last years of her life, my mother was supported by Ms Trustings.  Few Mr Trustings and no Mr Crowns visited her.  On the eve of Te Rarawa’s settlement, one man made a rare visit to ask her to attend.  Graciously, she did. 

But for anyone to infer that meant she supported Mr Crown and opposed Ms Trusting?  That would be just another cautionary tale.

A WORLD OF CONFUSION

Whāia te mātauranga hei oranga mō koutou; seek after wisdom for the sake of your wellbeing. This whakatauki (saying) teaches that in a world full of noise and confusion, wisdom and wellbeing will come when we ask questions with a genuine desire to understand the answers. 

However, another whakatauki says, hanga te oko tahanga te haruru nui; the empty vessel makes the most noise.  This teaches that if we don’t really want to understand or even hear the answers, our questions will only add to the sense of noisy confusion and contention already in the world. 

All cultures and religions advance wisdom and understanding as virtues, while confusion and contention are universally seen as vices. 

For example, the Bible teaches, “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding.”  And in the Koran we read, “God grants Wisdom to whom He pleases … But none remember except men of understanding.” 

On the other hand the great Chinese philosophers taught, “Settle a small conflict quickly, and you will keep a hundred others at bay,” while the Bible teaches, “God is not the author of confusion, but of peace.”

Whenever our status quo is disturbed, our natural impulse is to ask questions about it.  Whether those questions contribute to wisdom and wellbeing in ourselves and our world, or generate more confusion and contention, depends a lot on our inner state of being and on our motives for asking the questions in the first place.

To illustrate on the large scale; faced with the refugee crisis in Europe, some have asked, “Whose fault is this?” or, “What about our own homeless people?” with the intent of justifying why they choose not to help. 

On the other hand others have asked, “What caused this?” with the intent of working out how they can best help both here at home and in the world at large. 

On a smaller scale, faced with the direct action of Ngāi Tohianga and Patu Kōraha hapū at Kaitaia airport, a few have asked, “Why can’t those blankety-blanks just be New Zealanders?” with the intent of dismissing them and their cause out of hand. 

But many others have asked “What is behind this action?” without fear that the answer may discomfort them.

While we all have the potential to be vessels of confusion or seekers of wisdom from time to time, it is always better to be wise than confused.

So instead of imagining what might go wrong in the future while ignoring past wrongs, the wise acknowledge past wrongs while working to build a better future.  

And rather than attacking the personalities and downplaying the principles involved, they address both with respect. 

But most importantly, the wise mahia nga mahi ki runga i te tika, pono me te aroha, (they work in the spirit of truth, faith and love) to live in and at the same time transcend a world of confusion.