The events upon which Adam's recent NZ Listener Takahue article (the
following posting was kindly adapted by Adam) and the editorial also
posted below are based, have generated some controversy. These two pieces
touch upon concepts like Rangatiratanga and Decolonisation from a
perspective that some feel uncomfortable with. It has been argued that
responsibility for the shambles of Takahue should be sheeted firmly home
to the NZ Government which refused to put a stop to sales of Surplus Crown
Lands, or to sufficiently fund the Waitangi Tribunal, or to put into effect
the bulk of the recommendions already made by the Tribunal. Takahue was a
symptom of frustration with the Crown. Most people here in Aotearoa agree
on one thing however, that the entire business ended in a very unfortunate
manner for all concerned, and in this respect it is something of a
cautionary and salutary tale for us all.
Christene deRaadt.
This article draws on one published in The New Zealand Listener October
14-21, plus other observations.
Adam Gifford is the editor of nga korero o te wa, a monthly digest on Maori
news. He has worked for 10 years reporting on Maori issues for mainstream
newspapers and radio.
Article:
FIRES AT TAKAHUE: THE CORRUPTION OF THE OCCUPATION STRATEGY
By Adam Gifford <adamg@iprolink.co.nz>
On September 21 shortly before 7am police moved in to evict occupiers from
a former schoolhouse at Takahue, a small farming community 18km southwest
of Kaitaia.
The occupiers, who called themselves Te Paatu after a nearby haapu
(subtribe), knew the police was coming. Through the night they worked
making preparations. As the lines of police, dressed in riot gear, ran
single file through the school gates, children with flaming torches came
from around back of the school and set alight tyres scattered across the
playground. As the first arrests were made, black smoke started billowing
from the school.
Despite warnings the police hadn't brought the fire service with them. Even
if a fire tender had been there, police say they would not have allowed it
to start work until the occupiers were cleared. When the firefughters did
arrive, they found the large water tank at the school had been drained. By
the time the occupiers were in police vehicles on their way back to Kaitaia
for charging, the 108 year old building was a charred pile of rubble.
Outside the gates, members of the valley's community stood and wept.
Takahue occupiers first used the fiery end to their protest as a warning
the search for Maori sovereignty was in a new phase. But, as if recognising
the seriousness of arson (no charges have yet been laid relating to the
fire), they started putting out the story witnesses (some said children)
saw police drag burning tyres into the school. Some filed insurance claims
for gear supposedly lost in the fire, although reporters camped outside the
gate overnight say the occupiers were busy all night emptying the building
and spreading tyres.
So what was the protest about? Did it achieve its aims? How did it differ
from previous occupations? Is it likely to happen elsewhere?
Takahue is a chocolate box-pretty, sheltered valley populated by
established families. About half are Maori, the rest Pakeha (White). People
work together and play together: the area is known for its parties,
especially the big New Years Eve bash at Takahue hall.
On March 27, 1995 its former schoolhouse was occupied by a group claiming
Maori sovereignty over the 108-year-old building and its two hectare
grounds.The school closed in 1973, and until 1992 the building was used by
the army for camps and courses. In 1993, after it was declared surplus, the
school property was put in a landbank for use in the settlement of claims
brought by the five far north tribes, acting under the umbrella of Te
Runanga o Muriwhenua.(Muriwhenua tribal council).
The Takahue community had sought to have the building turned into a
community facility. The runanga agreed, as long as it was within a Maori
framework. Jim Rickit, a firewood contractor and chairman of the Takahue
Community Marae Committee, says as the community reported on the slow
progress it was making towards its objectives, reports started coming back
that radicals intended to occupy the school.
On March 23 he and another Takahue Maori, "Chief" Murray, were asked to a
meeting in Pamapuria, the next settlement towards Kaitaia, at the house of
Ben Clarke, also known as Rupene Karaka. Also at the meeting were Ben's
brothers Selwyn and Harley, and Bill Perry, a Vietnam veteran and teacher
who recently moved into the area. The Clarkes are members of Te Paatu hapu
of Ngati Kahu, based round Pamapuria. Perry is from the East Coast Te
Aitanga a Mahaaki tribe, but his wife Tina was originally from Takahue.
Rickit says it was clear from the meeting Takahue's views weren't
considered important. Any action would be made in the name of Te Paatu.
After the meeting Rickit and Murray rang around their neighbours, warning
an occupation could be imminent.
"On the Wednesday morning, about 5am I heard these cars go past. I thought
shit, they're here. So I got dressed and headed up to the school," says
Rickit. "By the time we got up there they'd already broken into the school.
The lights were on, the jug was on and Hone Harawira was standing at the
gate."
Harawira is the spokesperson and main idealogue for Kawariki, a ginger
group of far north activists which grew out of the Waitangi Action
Committee. After Kawariki protests forced the abandonment of Waitangi Day
commemorations in February, Harawira promised there would be further
protests in the north to promote its no-compromise and hard line Maori
sovereignty views. Without the strong Kawariki influence and the type of
sovereignty education work it's done in the north, it's difficult to see
occupations in other parts of the country taking a similar course.
The group had left the occupation camp at Moutoa Gardens in Wanganui the
previous night and driven straight through, stopping only to alert a
television news crew in Auckland. The next few days Takahue Maori and the
occupiers tried to reach common understanding. At one stage there was a
loose agreement to jointly seek a lease on the site, but eventually the
Takahue community (including Pakeha) sought the lease on its won, inluding
a condition for vacant posession; the Government had to clear the occupiers
before they would move in.
Rickit says the occupiers insisted "they were the true people here." And as
tangata whenua we weren't having any part of that, so there'd be a bit of a
rark up. The talks weren't going anywhere. They'd say, "we've here for our
sovereignty, we're here for our self-determination, move over Takahue and
wait your turn." It started off "we're here to support Takahue". Then,
"we're doing this for Te Paatu, and then we'll give it to Takahue". Finally
it was, "We're doing this for the families of the hapu of Te Paatu."
For several months there was a stand-off between the two groups. Residents
say they were harassed by occupiers, particularly during weekends when the
Clark and Perry families in occupation would be joined by supporters.
Elderly Pakeha neighbours say they became prisoners in their homes. An
89-year old woman, a former teacher at the school who'd retired across the
road, spent her last days alive barricaded into her home.
At three o'clock on the morning of September 13, a suspicious fire
destroyed the community hall across the road from the hall. Locals, knowing
an end to the occupation was imminent, started a watch outside the school.
The occupiers stockpiled tyres. Selwyn Clarke, a 69-year-old WWII veteran,
says it was to stop helicopters. On September 21 the occupiers were evicted
and the school razed.
The burning of the school marks a huge public relations loss for the
sovereignty movement. In his column in the Northland Age, Hone Harawira
sought to distance Kawariki from the fire, but reiterated its support for
the occupation. His wife Hilda Halkyard-Harawira, manager of radio station
Te Hiku o Te Ika, says it sets back 20 years of work. She wants an
independent investigation into the occupiers' claim police dragged burning
tyres into the school building. Senior sergeant Gordon Gunn from the
Kaitaia police says that story isn't even worthy of investigation.
The occupiers based their claim on previous occupation of the Takahue
district by Te Paatu. Pamupurua and Takahue are the same area says Selwyn
Clarke. He claims to have grown up and worked in the valley before joining
the army, aged 13, in 1942.
His contemporary, Takahue kaumatua (elder) Syd Murray has no memory of
Selwyn Clarke, or any of the Clarkes, living in the valley. Murray has a
claim to Takahue before the Waitangi Tribunal on behalf of Tahawai hapu of
Te Rarawa.He says Te Paatu, as part of Ngati Kahu, belong on the eastern
side of the Awanui and Victoria rivers. Te Rarawa has mana over the western
side.
That view is backed by Sir Graham Latimer, a senior member of Te Paatu. Sir
Graham says other members of Te Paatu are shocked and angry about what was
done in their name. "I told the Clarkes they had no business being down
there," says Sir Graham. The Clarkes have long been a headache for Te
Paatu. Sir Graham says Ben and Selwyn's father, Bill Clarke, was at one
stage thrown out of the settlement at Pamapuria for selling land, under a
system in which three owners of multiply-owned land could force a sale
without notifying other owners: those owners, including Sir Graham's
family, would find out when they got their cheque from the Maori Trustee.
Selwyn Clarke has confirmed his father sold much of the land in the area.
The official claim to the Takahue Block, and other far north lands, was
lodged 10 years ago by Te Runanga o Muriwhenua. Executive director Matiu
Rata says the occupation was a deliberate attempt by Hone Harawira and his
supporters to undermine the way the runanga handles the claims. The school
site is part of the 9762 hectare Takahue block, bought in 1875 for 2814
pounds.
Muriwhenua claims the cash paid for the kauri-forested block was only part
of the price. Matiu Rata says Maori expected to benefit from any subsequent
economic development of the area. They failed to do so because of Crown
policies and actions, which should be remedied now. Arguing about which
individuals owned particular blocks would be in effect an attempt to
relitigate the sort of battles waged in the Native Land Court last century,
and are likely to proove just as futile.
If the tribunal rules in Muriwhenua's favour and compensation is negotiated,
the runanga intends to spend two years sorting out how land-bank properties
and other compensation is divided. That's the appropriate time to argue
which hapu has rights over land such as the school site, or what is the best
use for such land.
The occupiers say the occupation was "to reassert the traditional
sovereignty and authority of Te Paatu". It's a seductive argument, but
leaves huge questions unanswered. Indeed, as Jim Rickit points out, if the
action was about Te Paatu, why was the initial meeting in Ben Clarke's home,
and not at Te Paatu Marae, where the haapu could have had some say in
things.
This die-in-a-ditch attitude to some ill-defined "sovereignty" or "tino
rangatiratanga" marks this and other recent occupations out from past such
events. They are also marked by a lack of discipline by many of the
participants, as marked by the harrassment of neighbours and the
despoliation of the surrounding environment.
Occupation as a protest strategy has been used effectively to prevent
imminent action by government which would prejudice Maori claims. The Ngati
Whatua occupation of Takaparawha/Bastion Point in the Auckland suburb of
Orakei in 1977 prevented the state Housing Corporation developing the land
for up-market houses. Despite the occupiers being cleared by police and
army 506 days later, Ngati Whatua maintained its moral authority, and
eventually won back the land through the Waitangi Tribunal process.
When Eva Rickard occupied Raglan Golf Course, she did so because the land,
taken from Tainui Awhiro during the war for defence purposes, hadn't been
returned as required under the Public Works Act. That land too was
eventually returned.
Ngati Paoa briefly occupied a farm on Waiheke Island near Auckland because
they were passed over when the land was leased out by Maori Affairs.
Eventually they got the land back through the Waitangi Tribunal process,
not because of a particular attachment to the block, but because the
tribunal found the Crown had bought up so much of the tribe's land it had
become landless, a breach of the principles underlying the Treaty of
Waitangi. The Government therefore had an obligation to use land in the
area to re-establish a tribal estate.
At Takahue, the land was already identified for return to Maori through the
landbank process. But because it had power and hot water, it was a
convenient place to make a politial stand. The only acceptable response
from Government was capitulation. The concerns or rights of the community,
or even the tribal organisations in the area, was not important.
In a similar way the occupation of Pakaitore/Moutoa Gardens in Whanganui
used the rhetoric of sovereignty over any clear sense of outcome. The
occupation was undertaken without proper research into the site.
Compromises offered by the local council, which could have given Maori de
facto control of the area, were brushed aside in what seemed to be an
attempt to inflict some David-like humiliation on the Government Goliath.
The sovereignty movement has turned the corner from being one calling for a
fresh look at Aoteara/New Zealand's past, this time including Maori history
and contemporary reality, to one which requires adherents to accept as
articles of faith a version of history. A search for justice has turned
into a jihad.
There are many explanations why this has happened: The continued
powerlessness of Maori within the institutions of the state, the
indifference and ignorance of the Tory government to what's happening, and
the arrogance and incompetence of the officials involved have contributed.
But there has also been a period of mythologising and mischievousness by
many in Maori circles: rather than looking honestly at Maori social
institutions and reality, they try to recreate an idealised past. If
nothing else, the fires of Takahue are a call for a reality check.
Adam Gifford
P.O.Box 68-400, Newton, Auckland
09-378 6881
adamg@iprolink.co.nz
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
****************************************************************************
Christene: Here's the editorial from October's nga korero, plus some of the
other items which seem to add to the soveriegnty debate. I've pulled them
out for John Tovey's Ngaa Kaiwhakanekeneke, but they might help you as
well.
****************************************************************************
***** The following is from nga korero o te wa, a monthly digest of Maori
news published by Adam Gifford at Palimpsest Publications, P.O.Box 68-400,
Newton, Auckland. Email: adamg@iprolink.co.nz. nga korero o te wa is the
most comprehensive summary of Maori news available, offering an overview of
what's been reported over the month along with informed comment on
important issues.
EDITORIAL
E nga mata a waka o te motu, tena koutou katoa.
The torching of Takahue school and hall must cause the Maori sovereignty
movement to re-assess where its jihad is taking Aotearoa. Visiting first
the Hirangi Hui and then Takahue the week after the fire, it was clear tino
rangatiratanga was an article of faith, its meaning indefinable, but its
achievement a state of grace.
Tied to this was the notion of decolonisation. There can be no dispute
knowledge of this country's historical past is vital to understanding
today's realities, and provides pointers for future action. The danger
comes when past events are edited into a litany of injustice, conflicting
evidence and contextual material are excluded, and any analysis must arrive
at a "correct" answer.
Decolonisation rests on a notion of sin. But the actions of our ancestors,
like our actions today, were based on assumptions, prejudices, limited
information, ego, altruism, ambition, cultural and religious conditioning,
and circumstances of the time. Failure to recognise that is to deny them
their humanity. That is the risk in saying people with different ideas need
decolonising. There is no room for debate, for open exchange of ideas, for
growth. Their reality is denied. Their mana is denied. And who is to say
when a person's thinking is suitably "decolonised"?
At Takahue, the Maori who lived in that gentle community didn't count,
because they didn't mouth the right shibboleths. The buildings which had
been so much a part of their lives were to the occupiers merely wood for
burning, or worse, places colonialism was taught. The charred remains of
Rangiatea Church show any fool can light a fire. -- Adam Gifford
[ Please see the response to this editorial by Aroha Mead at the end of
this article. --Gary ]
ARTS AND CULTURE
Auckland University Press published Nga Iwi o Tainui: The traditional
history of the Tainui people by the late Pei Te Hurinui Jones, with
translations by Bruce Biggs. A grant from Tainui Maori Trust Board kept
the price of this handsomely produced book at $49.95. It's a reminder this
year's raupatu settlement didn't happen because of today's politicians, but
because Tainui people like Pei Jones devoted a large part of their lives to
keeping alive the traditional knowledge and reality of their tribe. Jones'
Maori text, drawn from talks with elders starting in the 1920s, is matched
page by page by Professor Biggs' translation.The stories end about 1800,
leaving other scholars the challenge to collect histories of the colonial
period. The 67 stories mark important points in the net which wove Tainui
together over the centuries. They represent an alternate way to view our
rich history.
Auckland City Art Gallery opened its $5.5m NEW Gallery of contemporary art
September 30 with an exhibition of contemporary Maori art, Korurangi,
curated by George Hubbard assisted by William McAloon. The gallery is still
struggling with the concept of biculturalism: breakfast failed to arrive
after the dawn opening ceremony conducted by Tainui elders. Auckland City
Council arts committee chair Gray Bartlett refused to sing a waiata after
his woefully short speech. And a work in a neighbouring gallery, by
expatriate Julia Morison, was taken down the day before after artist Emily
Karaka complained at the use of blood and human faeces in the work. The
gallery later apologised to all parties, but stood by both shows. Morison's
work was re-hung and opened separately later.
BUSINESS
A Gisborne-based Maori-owned company has become the largest distributor of
NZ kiwifruit to China. Sino Pacific Export Corporation also distributes
apples and other fruit, operates coolstores, a packhouse and marketing arm
for Chinese growers, and is involved in orcharding, agriculture and
horticulture. Its largest shareholder is Mahaki Enterprises, commercial arm
of Mangatu Blocks, Tahora 2C2 and Wi Pere Trust. Directors include Mangatu
chairman Alan Haronga, chief executive Gary Alexander, management committee
member Pene Brown.
CULTURAL SAFETY
Parliament's Education and Science Select Committee postponed its planned
investigation into the cultural safety component of polytechnic nursing
courses, to give the Nursing Council a chance to implement changes
recommended in a review by Human Rights Commissioner Dr Erihapeti Murchie
and Massey University sociologist Dr Paul Spoonley. The review said
cultural safety should be retained in nursing studies, but its curriculum
should be developed and its presentation improved. Dr Murchie: "Cultural
safety first focusses on the cultural experience of students, so by self
analysis they acknowledge culture as a significant component of a patient's
well-being."
EDUCATION
Only 4.4% of Maori school leavers in 1994 had university bursary, compared
with an average 19%. 62.9% of Asian school leavers got a seventh form award
compared with European 42.3%, Pacific Island 25.1% and Maori 16%. 34.6% of
Maori school leavers had no qualification, more than double the 16.3%
average and up 1.1% from 1993.
In a letter to The Dominion October 6, JT Asher of Turangi suggested
non-Maori be taught Maori in schools so they stop naming their children,
pets, racehorses, boats, homes and farms names which are inappropriate,
incorrect, indelicate or otherwise likely to cause mirth among speakers of
Maori.
TREATY
The protection mechanism for land claims came under increased scrutiny,
with the revelation more than half the surplus Crown land advertised by
the Department of Survey and Land Information had been cleared for sale.
Since the Government unilaterally scrapped the Crown-Congress joint working
party model in 1993, DoSLI has advertised 1220 properties, cleared 611 for
sale, put protection orders on 134 and is still considering 475. A study of
the paperwork shows the process involves officials in several departments
ticking forms, without any consultative or tribunal process involved.
In his Dominion column October 2, Environment Minister Simon Upton said Sir
Hepi Te Heuheu's comment Government continues to treat Maori unjustly was a
"play to his gallery", knowing such attacks are "a pretty safe line on both
the paepae and TV news". Sir Hepi's claim of injustice "cannot avoid being
a claim against the people of NZ as a whole. For years the symbol of the
Crown has shielded Maori and NZers at large from this reality ... that
constitutional fiction is starting to wear thin." It's easier to claim
against an abstract entity the Crown rather than the taxpayers and citizens
behind. Regarding Sir Hepi's call for constitutional change, Mr Upton said
any such change must be negotiated: "That negotiation is not between Maori
and the Crown: it's between Maori and every other NZer." But is it? Yet
again, a senior member of the National Government (and one who actually
bothers to think about these issues) has made the assumption the Crown
means white people. Does not the treaty create a constitution in which
Maori are guaranteed a significant part? As long as politicians assume they
are elected to act for "all NZers" (read "white people") Maori will
continue to be excluded. Mr Upton warned the acquiescence of the silent
majority is vital to settling treaty claims. Governments implement
unpopular measures every year, even create new injustices, and sell them to
the electorate as the only option. It's marketing.
In a Press column September 27, Canterbury University Maori lecturer
Lyndsay Head argued scrapping Waitangi Day commemorations at the Bay of
Islands would be a step back to neo-colonialism. The Treaty of Waitangi Act
1975 was "a seminal moment of change. After 135 years, the relationship
between Maori and Pakeha stopped being defined by the reality the British
brought here, and we backed ourselves to live by our own." The treaty has
moral authority as long as justice was equal for Maori and Pakeha. Dr Head
said that idea of equal justice needs public expression, which can be done
at Waitangi. "We need to render the soul of the nation visible, by
connecting it with reality in space and time." She said this year's
Waitangi Day programme showed the Government doesn't understand the
occasion, and at Waitangi "the Government acts like a foreigner on Maori
soil".
Te Ahi Kaa's Ken Mair told a Corso forum in Palmerston North Maori
reclaiming sovereignty must start by re-establishing cultural values before
defining tino rangatiratanga. "If we rush towards tino rangatiratanga
models prematurely, they may well be based in competition, individualism
and money values and we might end up where we are today, having nothing.
The only way we can recover our mana is to retrieve these old values."
Maori nationalist Mike Smith told Christchurch Polytechnic broadcasting
students October 3 Pakeha should prepare for constitutional change by
learning more about the Maori world and the language. He rejected
separatism; "Polynesian principles of collectivity will underpin a Maori
agenda. At the end of the day Maori people have a custodial responsibility
to protect the integrity of this country, economically, socially and
politically, guaranteed under the treaty."=20
Adam Gifford, 1995
Adam Gifford
P.O.Box 68-400, Newton, Auckland
09-378 6881
adamg@iprolink.co.nz
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A response from Aroha Mead to Adam Gifford's editorial:
> From aroham@nzonline.ac.nz Thu Oct 19 08:39:24 1995
It occurs to me that E/Mail Services need to provide a 'Mission Statement'
for subscribers as to the philosophical base of their news and analysis.
Adam Gifford's news service is a classic liberalist analysis centred on 'the
individual' as if individuals have full control or are fully responsible for
their actions and those of their ancestors and descendants. I guess there
is an interest in that viewpoint - doesn't happen to be held by me. A
liberalist view uses terms such as 'shame', 'sin', 'right, 'wrong' because
these all presuppose a choice and an individual responsibility. Adam's view
that DECOLONISATION IS BASED ON A NOTION OF SIN is outrageous.
DeColonisation is a specific area of international law, recognised within
the UN System as necessary to secure peacefully the independence of
colonised peoples. The UN De Colonisation Committee (also known as the
Committee of 24) is mandated by an international Treaty and outlines a
process of peaceful independence. Adam (and others) are confusing the term
'de-colonisation' as used by scholars such as Paulo Freire to explore a
process of de-colonisation of the mind. One needs to be clear which
'de-colonisation' one is actually using.
Aroha Te Pareake Mead
P.O. Box 13-177
Johnsonville, Wellington
AOTEAROA (NEW ZEALAND)
Tel:Fax: +64-4-479-7781
Email: aroham@nzonline.ac.nz