by Catherine Delahunty
The Act Party’s sole MP John Banks was moaning in the House this week about the “terrible” protests at Waitangi. The last time he visited Waitangi on Waitangi Day was in 1990 when someone dared to throw a T-shirt at the Queen. Apparently, that makes him an expert. I have been going to Waitangi every year but one since 2001, and I always learn something important about this nation.
There weren’t as many people this year. Some were feisty but unlike the Rugby Sevens, there were not multiple arrests. No one was drunk or rude to no purpose, and there was a level of debate on many political issues which I am yet to hear in Parliament.
For me the most inspiring part of Waitangi this year was a roopu reporting back to the people about their work on constitutional transformation. This roopu consists of some of the most dedicated, experienced and wise leaders of the tino rangatiratanga movement in Aotearoa.
The first speaker Huirangi Waikerepuru, a kaumatua from Taranaki, is a beloved taonga for iwi katoa. He was also the wood work teacher at my high school and we had no idea then of his mana and knowledge. He spoke about the deeper foundations of Maori tikanga and kawa that’s essential for any discussion of Te Tiriti-based transformation.
Professor Makere Mutu spoke about Te Hakaputanga o Nu Tireni and Te Tiriti o Waitangi to set the scene for the constitutional discussion. She brought alive the wisdom of her tipuna in asserting their requirements for the relationships with the manuhiri.
Moana Jackson spoke with his classical eloquence, precision and power about the meaning of lore/law and constitutions and the plan to extend the kawa of the marae to a kawa for the nation through flaxroots korero on questions about “how should we be governed?”. The challenge for Pakeha and tauiwi katoa is what grassroots parallel-process are we capable of running
Mereana Pitman made us laugh but also brought home to us the jewels and gems that come from asking people in the hapu and marae what kind of governance arrangements they believe would benefit themselves and also Aotearoa.
Annette Sykes, whose analysis is of legendary sharpness, brought the focus onto the need to properly resource the process of dialogue with flaxroots people who don’t get to stay in flash hotels.
Veronica Tawhai who is a younger academic/activist inspired me when she spoke about the work on a Waitangi claim about loss of political decision making which was rejected as an issue the Waitangi Tribunal could usefully address.
I was inspired by the oil and mining protestors, the work of Mike Smith and the calm resolute aura of Tame Iti who faces down the court in the next two weeks for supposed “criminal gang” activity.
I was left with a challenge – how will Tangata Te Tiriti respond? How will we contribute to these issues in right relationship with tangata whenua? Te Tiriti belongs to all of us and as Kingi Taurua said, “not to celebrate or to commemorate but to honour”.
Published in Environment & Resource Management by Catherine Delahunty on Thu, February 9th, 2012
More posts by Catherine Delahunty | more about Catherine Delahunty
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Loading...
Banks is hoha.
Like or Dislike:
1 
4 (-3)
No amount of rhetoric and talking amongst ones peers is going to change the 80% of New Zealanders who dont give a toss about the treaty.
Connecting with them and what relevance it may have in their lives is much more important IF you want to progress the treaty in a constitutional document.
Demographically the guilty race is diminshing in numbers and pretty soon the treaty lobby will have to concern themselves in “selling” the treaty to a largely disinterested populace made up of Asain, India, African, etc. people.
Like or Dislike:
12 
2 (+10)
chris trotter wrote on the last issue you refer to..
..and i think it is his best work for a long time..
..and in fact would go further in saying he has produced a timely/important document..
..one that puts what we face into historical context/clear focus..
..and the way forward/what to do to stop the rot…
..and for that he deserves kudos..
http://whoar.co.nz/2012/bowalley-road-a-new-alliance-to-reclaim-aotearoa/
phil@whoar.
Like or Dislike:
1 
8 (-7)
Good one, Catherine! LOL!
Like or Dislike:
16 
6 (+10)
The future of New Zealand is a republic, and a republic should have a constitution, and I cant see the treaty being part of a future constitution, especially a constitution based on superlaw.
Thus the time is coming to put the Treaty behind us. But that can only happen when Maori want it to happen. That is actually the challenge that lies ahead. We have to have a New Zealand where Maori are not (and do not feel) disadvantaged without the presence of the Treaty. And the answer to that isn’t as simple as turning the clock back.
Like or Dislike:
8 
4 (+4)
go and read the trotter piece..buckley and mc…
yr questions will be answered..
..and mc..sykes would monster you..
..even i can monster you..
phil@whoar.
Like or Dislike:
0 
9 (-9)
I did read the Trotter piece. I’ve read it three times now. The core suggestion is that the Treaty is the answer to the changing face of New Zealand. It isn’t.
I’ve more time for the suggestion that the Mana Party is a party with prospects, as I agreed in the run-up to the election. If the Mana Party were to purge themselves of their Maori leanings, and were to become a left wing party with broad appeal they might do very well. But as it stands, the problem Mana face is (to mis-quote Trotter) “As Mana sloughs off the ideological camouflage of its first term, and its second term’s pro-Maori-anti-everyone-else programme acquires a sharper focus…”.
Thus chance of broad support (and thus electibility) must be slim. Which, if you’re a left winger, must be frustrating, as there isn’t a lot of decent left wing choice at the moment.
Like or Dislike:
6 
5 (+1)
I think the ‘Waitangi wisdom’ (to me) is that the day highlights that Aotearoa IS a nation divided, both economically & idealogically.
Some see the treaty as being divisive & being used by one group as a way to get advantage ahead of the rest of society. BUT none can avoid the reality that Maori were in this Whenua before Pakeha (or other racial groups currently here ) & that FACT can not really be disputed ! It has to be accepted by all & actively addressed.
We are all ‘kiwis’ but we, are NOT all the same.
Its easy to smile & wave & throw about “happy Waitangi ” as at least one MP has suggested.. but as long as these issues are being swept aside.. Waitangi Day is likely to remain as a day of protest to the Dispossessed & those who feel Down-trodden in society..
Kia-ora
Like or Dislike:
5 
8 (-3)
no buckley..the core suggestion is that non-elite maori and non-elite pakeha have to work/join together…
..and together they will stop the asset sales..
..and much much more..
..how could you have read it three times..
..and miss that..?
phil@whoar.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
You are not facing reality. 80% of people dont give a toss who was here first. Yes Maori tribes settled here first but again it is meaningless in todays society.
You advocating a system of apartheid in having some Kiwis to be different based on ethnic composition??
Good one selling that to the 80% who dont give a toss in the first place.
And the Greens want more equality but maybe not in ethnic qualifications in citizenship?
“ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL, BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.”
Ring a bell??
Like or Dislike:
12 
4 (+8)
What an excellent suggestion. Lets put the Treaty behind us, and get on with it.
Nah. I’ve written on this already. The country had their chance to stop asset sales, and chose not to. The asset sales are going to happen. Just get used to it. Rather than flogging a dead horse, find some other area of policy that is less set in concrete.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1 (+6)
@Gerrit
The 80% you claim dont ‘give a toss’ possibly dont, because it doesn’t effect them..
BUT many ‘kiwis’ are concerned about China buying the Crafer farms & other assets sales/profits going ‘off-shore’.
Its all about your own point of perspective.. I Guess ?
Kia-ora
Like or Dislike:
2 
6 (-4)
The Protests are the Highlight of Whaitangi day for me – the only time I attended – all I saw were packs of whiteys eating and drinking ‘el grosse’.
Bore-f-ing!
Like or Dislike:
0 
4 (-4)
Catherine, if you don’t understand that the vast majority of Kiwi’s DON’T CARE, then you are out of touch. The relevance of the Treaty needs to be understood in our modern society. If you want relevance, then you need to connect but it has to be done without people like the Popata thugs, Sykes and Hone’s mob who have chip’s on both shoulders. The treaty will never be more than a shambles as it stands today.
Time to get real….
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
“80% of people dont give a toss who was here first. Yes Maori tribes settled here first but again it is meaningless in todays society.”
“meaningless”? That’s very much school bully logic. “I took your skateboard and I’m bigger than you, so it’s my skateboard now” similarly “We came over and took your land, set up our government, and imposed our culture, and we’re a lot bigger than you, so how it happened doesn’t really matter does it?”
Like or Dislike:
1 
5 (-4)
Sam,
Bluntly
NO
School bully logic?
No again, just reality.
Go down the street and ask people what the treaty means to them. Zip, Zero, Nada, Nothing will be the reply in 80% of the cases.
Go on try!
People dont give a toss, and being no doubt so labelled racist, they give even less of a toss.
Like or Dislike:
3 
1 (+2)
“School bully logic?
No again, just reality.”
School bully logic is deeply grounded in reality. The reality of power.
I don’t disagree that a lot of people don’t give a toss about the treaty, but then a lot of people want a new SUV and cheap and plentiful consumer gadgets and don’t give a toss about the environment or the people who work 14 hour days for a pittance to supply cheap gadgets. The fact that a lot of people are hypocrites doesn’t make it right.
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
Sam,
Why is it hypocritical for people not to care one iota about a treaty?
Where is the tie in with new SUV’s and the treaty?
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
Well, they aren’t hypocrites if they would be OK about another country moving in to New Zealand tomorrow, taking over and imposing their language, culture and laws, and scooping up most of the land. If they object to that sort of thing, then they are hypocrites for not giving a toss about how New Zealand was colonised.
The point about SUVs was just that because a lot of people don’t give a toss about the environment, doesn’t make that an acceptable attitude, nor does the fact that a lot of people don’t give a toss about colonisation make this OK.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Sam,
Colonisation in the 21st century is not by countries but individuals.
Perhaps the treaty cannot be utilised anymore as the re-colonisation has already happened, not by any country but a huge variety of individuals with differing outlooks, expectations, skills, etc.
The treaty tries to deal with Tangata Te Tiriti but fails completely as it it does not take into account the asperations of the individual colonisers.
The treaty is beween two states, colonisation today is individual, way outside ever considered by the treaty.
Moari are still trying to foist the idea of Te Ao Māori and self determination, typically as outlined here.
http://www.dingdots.com/mich2011/tangata-whenua-declaration/
But the new colonisers just dont care about that sort of declaration. Seperatism is not something they immigrated (colonised) here for.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1 (+1)
“The treaty is beween two states, colonisation today is individual, way outside ever considered by the treaty.”
Sorry but that’s rubbish. Our legal system isn’t merely a sum of the beliefs of individuals, but a system imported wholesale from elsewhere by the state. As is much of our education system, form of government and institutionalisation of English as the predominant language.
“Moari are still trying to foist the idea of Te Ao Māori and self determination”
So how come you see colonisation as being something perpetuated by individuals, yet refer here to ‘Maori’ as a collective pushing their particular agenda. Bit of a double standard isn’t it?
“Seperatism is not something they immigrated (colonised) here for.”
Actually it’s exactly what many people colonised the country for; had it been clear that coming to New Zealand involved integrating yourself into the existing culture, language and laws, rather than remaining in Te Ao Pakeha, there would have been considerably fewer takers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
1 (-1)
Colonisation in the 21st century is not by countries but individuals.
You have heard of the West Bank, right Gerrit?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“You have heard of the West Bank”
Or Tibet, East Turkestan, Diego Garcia, Aceh, Rapanui, etc.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)