FEEDING FRENZY

 

In an election year any hint of Māori gaining an advantage is blood in the water to a number of political sharks who can be relied upon to go into a feeding frenzy over it. 

Generally it’s Winston Peters who takes the first and choicest chunk.  But on the issue of Cultural Impact Assessments by Māori on resource consent applications, Winatana’s been beaten to the bite this year by Labour’s Shane Jones who is quoted as saying, “As someone who was involved in the core group which wrote the Resource Management Act in 1988-1989 never in our wildest dreams did we imagine it would lead to 19 new consent authorities over the Tamaki Makaurau area.” 

No.  I don’t suppose he did.  Nor do I suppose his tūpuna dreamed that their signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi would lead to one unitary authority over the same area, let alone one whare nui over the entire country.  Such are the ironies of the law of unintended consequences.

But back to the actual issue currently exciting media attention – what the New Zealand Herald calls the Māori veto on water.  Here are the facts.

Under laws passed by Parliament, not Māori, resource consent applicants must have approval from one or more local authorities.  Since 1991, in order to get through the red tape involved, applicants have had to provide two kinds of assessments; an assessment of environmental effects (AEE), and a cultural impact assessment (CIA). 

For more than three decades consultant planners, surveyors, architects, lawyers, arbourists, landscapers, etc, have been successfully selling their skills to applicants as consultant.  You name the AEE mahi needed and there will be a consultant willing and able to do it for you - for a price.  

Makes sense.  If you don’t know how to do what’s legally required, then you pay someone who does know, and they do it for you. 

For the same length of time that all these AEE consultants have been doing their thing, whānau hapū and iwi consultants have been carrying out CIAs for applicants.  

Makes sense.  They are the rangatira with mana whenua who kaitiaki in their rohe.  If you don’t know what’s where, and why and how it all inter-relates, then you pay those who know to do it for you.    

On the face of it there should be little difference between the consultants working on AEEs and those working on CIAs.  However there is a difference and it’s not a little one.  It centres on payment for services.  

Since 1991, Ngāti Kahu hapū have done literally thousands of CIAs for various applicants.  Until recently they would provide applicants with their schedule of very modest fees, and then send them an account after the CIA had been produced.  Yet in three decades, while AEE consultants have been minting it with nary a murmur from applicants, media or politicians, Ngāti Kahu hapū and iwi have collectively received less than $1000 in payment between them for all their CIA mahi.  

How about getting into a frenzy over that rort Shane?

SPIRITUAL HALF-CASTES

When I read the headline, ‘Kaumatua driven from his home,’ I thought to myself, the only winner here is the Crown.  How could it not be when the settlement of Ngāti Kuri’s claims was achieved under Crown rules, processes, timeframes and terms? 

Could this all have been avoided?  To answer that I turn to a time in history when males ruled the world and race was worked out in fractions of blood.  At that time, my father and his siblings were raised as half-castes but were legally classed in all official records as Māori.  And yet their half-caste first cousins were classed as Pākehā.  The reason for this difference was that one family had a Māori father, while the other had a Pākehā one, and under Crown rules at that time, your father’s race determined yours.  Crazy I know, but that is the nature of racism.

Besides this classification of ‘half-caste’ Māori and ‘half-caste’ Pākehā, there were many other signs of racist craziness at that time.  These included the fact that the Native (later Māori) Land Court was still blatantly overseeing the unjust transfer of huge chunks of land from Māori into Pākehā hands, and banks were openly refusing to lend Māori the capital needed to develop our land.  Additionally pubs refused to serve us, landlords refused to rent to us, and schools punished us for speaking te reo.  And to this day, police stop and question Māori more readily than Pākehā for the same behaviours, while the criminal courts punish us more severely than Pākehā for the same crimes.

Today, it’s hard to imagine the impact all this had on our parents and their cousins.  After all, their two sets of parents got on well enough, and their descendants are all either proud to be Māori, or to have Māori whānau.  But it was a bad thing then, and it still is today.  At times our two cultures can seem to be at total odds with each other.  But under tikanga, regardless of our differences, we can be reconciled through tika, pono and aroha.

I turn back now to Ngāti Kuri where my whanaunga are the only losers in this latest tragedy.  How could they not be?  Regardless of whether they support or oppose it, they know the settlement was a Crown process without tikanga.  One only has to look at the faces of the negotiators to see that.

Yes, all this could have been avoided, but it wasn’t.  And now that it’s done, the choice is clearer than ever for all of us; either learn and live our tikanga and be wholly human, or become spiritual half-castes forever defined, divided and ruled by Crown processes. 

Aue! E koutou, e ngā mea ataahua, nā te aha i ahei i a koutou te kōtiti kē atu i ngā huarahi a te tikanga!

FAST TRACK TPPA

At Waitangi on 5^th March, the Iwi Chairs Forum put a number of questions to John Key on a range of issues they are all dealing with; specifically oil and minerals, Whānau Ora, climate change, freshwater, education, Treaty claims, E Tuu Whānau, housing, and constitutional change. 

When it came time to answer, Key deferred all issues to a relevant Minister, except for two questions put to him by Professor Margaret Mutu; “Will the detailed content of the TPPA [Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement] be made available to the public, before it is signed by the National government?” and “Will the National government insist on an exit clause in the TPPA which does not require the approval of any other parties to the agreement?”

Essentially Key’s  answer was that his government would never sign the agreement before it had been released ... to Parliament. 

Although typically quick, confident and vague, the very fact that it was he who answered the questions showed that John Key is the lead man on the TPPA negotiations, and not Tim Groser, nominal Minister of Trade.  So what Key has to say on it is, pardon the pun, key.

Last Friday, speaking in Parliament, Key claimed that the consultation processes undertaken on TPP by his government were amongst the most extensive undertaken by any New Zealand government for any trade negotiation.  “Public comment for the TPP was first sought in 2008 and has been invited since,” he said.  I must have blinked, because I never saw the pānui asking for public comment.  Did you?

Key also claimed that TPP negotiators had conducted a proactive consultation process, including “… regular meetings with business groups, local councils, the health sector and other representatives, Unions and other NGOs, and other individuals and academics [and] opposition parties ...” 

Good golly, how did I miss all that consultation?  Does that mean I can catch up on all things TPP if I call on the Kaitaia Chamber of Commerce, or local representatives on the Far North District Council, Northland Regional Council, and Northland District Health Board?  Does anyone have Toss Kitchen’s phone number?

Starting yesterday and ending this Friday, TPP negotiators are meeting in Singapore.  That will be followed by a meeting of TPP Trade Ministers next week on February 22-23, where the US administration hopes to finish the deal. 

The TPP is far more than a trade agreement.  It will give foreign corporates the same rights as humans and put the right of those corporates to make a profit above human rights, as well as above government responsibilities to make and pass laws that protect their human citizens. 

New Zealanders cannot rely on John Key to protect them under the TPP.  Ironically their main hope lies in the US itself, where Obama’s push to ‘fast track’ the TPP through Congress, has seen public pressure against it go through the roof.  And where the US goes, Key and co will follow – on the fast track.

WAITANGI WEEK

Whether we’re on the annual Hikoi to Waitangi or on Te Tii marae, at the Iwi Chairs Forum or inside the Forum Tent, out on the road or inside any of the numerous stalls, the week leading up to Waitangi Day in Waitangi has its own unique stress points and release mechanisms. 

For decades the stress points were generated by a relatively straightforward clash between pro-colonists (generally Pākehā privileged by being part of the majority colonising race) and anti-colonists (mostly Māori credited as part of the indigenous minority colonised race). 

However in recent years the line between these two camps has blurred as more Pākehā have shifted to the anti-side, and more Māori have settled on the pro-side.  But the facts are that most Pākehā protestors haven’t been able to shake off their majority privileges or claim minority cred, while most Māori settlers haven’t been able to keep their minority cred or claim majority privileges.

Two examples from this year’s Waitangi Week illustrate the difficulty.  First, the way the government swanned into the Iwi Chairs Forum without any real threat of getting staunched into tears showed that even the most powerful collective of Māori leaders in 2014, most of whom have settled, has less influence and power on the leaders of the majority race than one aging Māori matriarch had in 1998. 

Second, the misunderstandings in the Forum Tent between a few Pākehā presenters and a number of Māori listeners showed that, regardless of how much the state may have smashed them over or how worthy their cause may be, unless they’ve paid lifetime dues like John Minto, and even he has to tread carefully, by and large Pākehā protestors have yet to gain the trust of their Māori counterparts.

Added to this mix is the phenomenon of minority amplification in which any change in an already imbalanced relationship always hits the minority more than the majority, thus ramping up the imbalances.  An example of this is the way Crown settlement policies divide whānau, hapū and iwi. 

It should be clear by now that, unless we want to leave a legacy of discord, we must find and provide a lasting release mechanism from the growing stresses between us all.  Whatever that mechanism turns out to be, education will be the vehicle, the will of the people will be the key, political will must provide the fuel, and a sense of tikanga must provide the spark.  Let us pray for it to come sooner than later.

Until then, for most New Zealanders who have never been taught about the relationship between the signatories to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the causes of the imbalances in that relationship, Waitangi Day is just that, a single day off.  But for those inside an iwi, it’s a Waitangi Week in which we get to stir the Crown up to remembrance of its duty to us all.  

MESSAGE IN A BOTTLE

The first political red herring in this election year has been floated with a tentative proposal to change the national flag.  This is a classic bait-and-switch tactic in which a relatively minor political change (the bait) is introduced to the public in order to try and smooth the passage of a vastly more controversial and major change (the switch). In this case a changed flag is the bait, but the ultimate objective is the signing and passing into law of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement [TPPA].  

If the New Zealand public falls for this switch, then they may as well also change the national anthem; at which point I will nominate Sting’s Message in A Bottle for their consideration.

Just a castaway, an island lost at sea
Another lonely day, with no one here but me
More loneliness than any man could bear
Rescue me before I fall into despair

That’s what happens to those who fall for red herrings – kua ngaro rātou ki roto i te whare miere – they go pōrangi with bees in their bonnets. 

Meanwhile i te ao taiao, the whānau hapū iwi of Ngāti Kahu are just getting on with the mahi of supporting Papātūānuku to deal to the corrupt politicians (including some of our own) who pimp her to various corporates.  These are the ones  who commodify and muck up her freshwaters and fisheries, deny and do nothing about climate change, and water down the laws meant to protect her.  

At the same time, te take pāpori for Ngāti Kahu hapū is their health, housing, education, work and language.  And as always, their bedrock remains te Whakapono (their faith), He Hakaputanga o Te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni (the 1835 declaration of sovereignty), Te Tiriti o Waitangi (1840), and the principle of Mana Motuhake.  In 2014 that will see them focus on constitutional transformation.

We are about to commemorate the 174th year since the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which is not the same as the fraudulent Treaty of Waitangi.  That’s 174 years of broken Crown promises and atrocities against them.  Yet most of Ngāti Kahu seem to have survived with an unbroken and undeterred spirit. 

Well, they are going to need every bit of that spirit shortly, because they are about to come under huge pressure to sign a settlement this year, and join the other iwi corporates who have already ceded their sovereignty. 

But Ngāti Kahu also know that the biggest threat of all, the one ring that  binds all other threats to the environment, wellbeing and sovereignty of all New Zealanders, and not just Ngāti Kahu, is the TPPA. 

Wake up.  Wise up.  Rise up.  Resist.  That is the message. 

Walked out this morning, don't believe what I saw
A hundred billion bottles washed up on the shore
Seems I'm not alone at being alone
A hundred billion castaways looking for a home

WHAT DO THEY KNOW?

“It's Christmas time, there's no need to be afraid.  At Christmas time we let in light and we banish shade.”

These are the opening lines to the song Do They Know It’s Christmas written by Bob Geldof and recorded by the supergroup Band Aid just before Christmas 1984 to raise money for famine hit Ethiopia.  With its saccharine lyrics and stellar lineup (including Geldof, Bono, Sting, Boy George, Paul McCartney and Michael Jackson) it went the 1984 equivalent of viral. 

Since then it’s become a Christmas anthem, and at this time of year you’re guaranteed to hear it many times over. 

Apparently Sir Bob, as he has since become, now says it is the worst song ever written and that it ruined his life.  May all his problems be so small.  Because the gloomy truth is that for a very large number of the world’s children, life is indeed a “world of dreaded fear, where the only water flowing is a bitter sting of tears.”

Here in New Zealand that has just been borne out by a report released on Monday 9^th December 2013 on child poverty in this country.  Written by Childrens Commissioner, Dr Russell Wills, the Child Poverty Monitor confirms that indicators like childhood illnesses are all on the rise, and one in four New Zealand children are now living in poverty.

This should not come as a surprise when read in the context of other recent studies such as the 2010 report, Comparative Child Well-being across the OECD which found that, out of 30 OECD countries, New Zealand was the 21^st lowest when it came to the material wellbeing of our children, and the 29^th lowest in terms of their health and safety.  On the up side, we had the fifth highest teen pregnancy rate and the highest youth suicide rate.  Additionally we were the 24^th highest in terms of risk behaviours, but the 21^st lowest in terms of average incomes.  And finally we had the 20^th highest infant mortality rates.

“And the Christmas bells that ring there are the clanging chimes of doom.  Well tonight, thank God, it's them instead of you.”

The Child Poverty Monitor confirms these trends have all worsened in our country, and yet John Key was on air immediately after it was released denying its findings and talking up what his government had done to reduce childhood poverty. 

Given that the report comes from his own appointed Childrens Commissioner, his denial is startlingly hollow.  Especially when measured against the reality of our own lived experiences in the Far North, where food banks cannot keep up with demand, and annual Christmas Tree appeals cannot meet the need.

“And in our world of plenty we can spread a smile of joy,
Throw your arms around the world at Christmastime.
But say a prayer to pray for the other ones,
At Christmastime.

Here's to you, raise your glass for everyone. 

Here's to them underneath that burning sun.

Do they know it's Christmas time at all?" 

IWI CHAIRS FORUM

Last week the Iwi Chairs Forum met at Te Poho o Rāwiri marae in Gisborne with a large attendance of iwi chairs and observers.  Ngāti Kahu’s chair, Professor Margaret Mutu, has provided a summary report of proceedings at the two day hui as follows.

The first day was entirely taken up with various presentations from Crown and other agencies.  As a result, reporting back from the Forum’s own Working Groups was restricted to the morning of the second day.  This drew some criticism. 

The Climate Change group reported a major dispute between the government and iwi who have settled claims to forestry lands. Because the government allowed cheap Emissions Trading Units from Europe to flood the market here, their value has dropped from about $30 to about $2. That has created a substantial loss for many iwi. They have referred the argument to the Prime Minister and have put forward a case for the value of Emissions Trading Units to have a minimum value of $15.

The Freshwater group reported that they have made some progress on ensuring the hapū have input into the management of water. However they are experiencing major difficulties with trying to get the government to talk to them about Māori rights and interests (ownership) of water.

The Whānau Ora group reported that Te Puni Kōkiri had rejected the North Island iwi bid to be the commissioning agency for Te Whānau Ora but had accepted the South Island iwi bid. The North Island one appears to have gone to National Urban Māori Authorities. North Island iwi resolved to meet with the Minister of Māori Affairs and the Minister of Whānau Ora to have that decision revisited.

The Housing group reported that Housing New Zealand is looking to iwi to buy up their housing stocks as part of their settlements.

The Mātauranga (Education) group came in for some criticism for laying the blame for Māori children not succeeding in Pākehā schools with the parents and whānau. Research has repeatedly shown that Māori children are marginalized in Pākehā schools and that teacher attitudes are the main cause. The hui identified racism as the main barrier for Māori children succeeding. The group was reminded that making te reo compulsory in all schools was key to improving the position of Māori.

The Constitutional group reported that they have completed 200 hui and will be presenting a draft model for a constitution to the February hui of the Forum (and at the Forum tent at Te Tii marae, Waitangi on 6 February).

The Iwi Collective is looking at purchasing as many of the properties landbanked for settlements prior to settlements. Ngāti Kahu has asked that properties in our area be excluded until we have pursued legal avenues in respect of our claims.

HOW COME?

Now that the truth of Allan Titford’s nasty life has come out, the Minister of Local Government is asking how come he was able to stand for election while facing serious criminal charges. 

But there are far more important questions to answer than that, not least being how come he ever came to prominence in this country in the first place? 

It started in 1992 when the Waitangi Tribunal recommended that the Crown return to Te Roroa all the land which it should have set aside for them from purchases it made in the 1870s at Maunganui, Waipoua, Waimamaku and Wairau.  Included in those lands were two reserves totalling 36 hectares on a farm owned by Allan Titford. 

What Titford did next almost beggars belief, until you read the evidence and hear the broken-hearted testimony of the wife and children he enslaved, isolated and terrorised for more than two decades. 

Having burnt down his own home and damaged his own property, Titford lied and blamed Te Roroa for that arson and damage, as well as for ‘rustling his stock.’ 

The resultant outcry from the anti-Treaty brigade saw the Crown pay him $3.25 million compensation for the $600,000 farm he’d bought nine years earlier.  

Fast forward to 2010 when Titford, minus his millions and plus a new wife, turned up in Te Hiku o Te Ika claiming an island in Rangaunu Harbour.  However both he and his claim seemed to vanish without discernible trace other than a few local mutterings.  In fact little more was heard of Titford until his name appeared as a Mayoral candidate on the voting papers for this year’s Far North District elections. 

Now here are the important questions: Titford never turned up at a single public meeting, didn’t put out one flyer, didn’t put up any hoardings, and never produced a skerrick of policy throughout the election period.  And yet he got more than 400 votes.  How come?

Meanwhile, Rueben Taipari (a loving husband and doting father) tirelessly turned up at every public meeting going, ran his tiny budget ragged, and consistently walked his policy talk.  And yet he got just over 800 votes.  How come?

What is it about this country that sees a wife raping, child beating bully like Titford rewarded with almost half as many votes as a good man like Taipari? 

Even though the facts of Titford’s brutishness were not publicly known until after the election, in this country where voter apathy is the norm, he did extraordinarily well as a first time candidate. 

So please, if you are amongst the 414 who bothered to vote for him, sight unseen and unheard, enlighten me; how come?

I also note that the websites for the One New Zealand Foundation, and the Centre for Political Research still uncritically promote Titford’s lies.  How come?

TO BE FREE

During the recent hui on oil exploration at Ahipara we heard several speakers use the terms the strawman and the freeman.  These terms are key concepts in various international movements such as sovereign citizen, tax protestor, freeman on the land, and the redemption movement.

Here in Aotearoa, particularly in Tai Tokerau since the 1990s, an increasing number of whānau and hapū have embraced and used these concepts to reclaim, strengthen and practice their rangatiratanga and mana whenua.

 

Central to the beliefs and practices of these whānau and hapū are the thesis of rangatiratanga, and the antithesis of colonisation.  But, unlike those who have either given up or genuinely accepted the Crown as their sovereign, these whānau and hapū hold to the synthesis that they remain sovereign. 

I have been a spectator to this movement for some time and, because some of its followers were definitely crackpots and scammers, I was initially inclined to dismiss it out of hand.  However, a number of respected, reputable kaumātua and kuia are also part of it, and their participation has motivated me to explore it more.  But even more compelling a motivation is my personal belief that we are always on the verge of a significant paradigm shift in governing systems.

Currently all nations operate under manmade, fear-based governing systems that claim to be lawful, logical and enlightened.  But they aren’t the most of them.  Meanwhile, at heart every human longs for higher, love-based governing systems that are genuinely full of law, logic and light.  Even though we may doubt it could happen in our lifetime, we still hope for it.  But our hope also holds a dilemma.

Unless we are personally transformed to being full of law, logic, light and love ourselves, we will not be able to experience or enjoy any higher system of government, and for us all things will rapidly revert to being fear-based. 

In one of her last interviews, Saana Murray sang a brief pao then recited her poem, My Identity.  She captured both the dilemma and solution so beautifully.

Te pūtake, hoe i tere, i herea i te aroha.  He puawai korari, kaki te wai te maringi. Huri ana te moana te haerenga te wairua.

What will become of me if my rivals claim the victory?

Laws with claws like parasites, devouring my human rights.

Anyway, who wants authority and eternal conflict?

I’ll regain my own identity,

though I’m landless in my own country.

The open skies and glimmering seas are still mine and, they’re all free.

Free.  Free.