CENTERING COOK

In June, I wrote about the upcoming commemoration of the arrival of Captain James Cook in Aotearoa and how Ngāti Kahu had been targeted by the Police for an intelligence risk assessment with regard to it.

Since then, we’ve been approached by the Cook Commemoration / Tuia 250 organisers directly to deny they had any involvement in the Police operation and state that they were shocked to hear about it.  Why they would be shocked is not clear, given the legacy and culture of the man at the centre of the commemorations they are organising and supporting. 

Hei aha (whatever).  We have now advised Tuia 250  that the three mana whenua marae over Mangōnui harbour (Aputerewa, Kēnana and Waiaua) oppose their flotilla coming into the harbour and that the vast majority of mana whenua Marae around Tokerau  (Doubtless Bay) oppose the flotilla coming into the Bay at all.

It is neither necessary nor tika for Ngāti Kahu to connect our facts with the coloniser’s fiction.  To do so would be to centre the coloniser’s comforting positions that:

•             We were discovered;

•             Our colonial experience is historical and not contemporary;

•             Our colonial experience was benevolent and non-violent;

•             Our colonial experience was invited by us; and,

•             Our colonial experience has been overall beneficial for us.

We refuse to allow our histories to be used to centre these fictions just because Cook was an able navigator, in European terms.

We note that we would not be so crass as to ask or expect the Bosnians, Croatians or Kosovians to commemorate and centre Slobodan Milosevic’s undoubted political skills to showcase and tell their own stories. Nor would we ask the families of Ted Bundy’s victims to centre and commemorate him for his undoubted expertise as a psychology major in order to highlight the many and varied skills of those he kidnapped, raped and murdered.

Using government funds and agencies to commemorate the perpetrators of atrocities and then expecting their victims' whānau and descendants to be OK with that is not right at any price. In fact, it is plain rude, especially when the official government position is to not teach the full, untarnished facts about the perpetrators as part of the core curriculum. 

 

We expect Tuia 250, under tikanga, to remove the rohe moana of Ngāti Kahu, (including Tokerau/Doubtless Bay, Mangōnui harbour and Rangaunu harbour) from its itinerary. 

Should Tuia 250 ignore the mana whenua position because, say, it has the support of private individuals and groups with connections to some Ngāti Kahu hapū, then that rudeness will again be consistent with the culture and legacy of the man at the centre of the commemorations they are supporting and organising.  And again, hei aha.  The Tuia 250 organisers and supporters should NOT be surprised when our response is neither pleased nor pleasing.