Your search

The signficance of the Treaty of Waitangi lies in the unique relationship which it established between Maori and the Crown, a relationship represented by the rangatiratanga sovereignty equation. Trusteeship IS a key component of the equation and implies a willingness by the Crown to honour Treaty obligations and a capacity to do so. As well it has implications for tribes undertaking to act on behalf of Maori beneficiaries. In exercising those responsibilities, and despite changes which have substantially altered Maori society, the focus remains on tribes, iwi and hapil, as the continuing manifestations ofrangatiratanga. There is a revived trend towards whakapapa as a marker of identity and the consolidation of land interests as a counter to individualism and weakening of kinship ties. Consultation between Treaty partners is a key issue but has not always been handled well, either by the Crown or even by Maori bodies whose influence is at a national rather than tribal level. Ngati Whatua interest in surplus Crown properties is an example of confused and inadequate consultation. But the relationship between rangatiratanga and the Crown is also susceptible to market forces, democratic processes, local government and the force of Jaw. Despite that, both the Waitangi Tribunal and the Courts have demonstrated an ability to enforce the principle of partnership and hence to actively intervene in the rangatiratanga sovereignty equation.

Maori aspirations for self-determination are tied to Article Two of the Treaty ofWaitangi which guarantees the tribes "the full and exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands Forests Fisheries and other properties so long as it is their desire to do so". Article Two provides the base with which to exercise control over economic resources which then provides the means, politically, culturally, economically and socially to determine Maori affairs. To have limited self-determining authority, Maori tribes need not only an economic base, but also an improved standing socio-economically. This paper will assess whether preferential policies based on redistributive justice are an appropriate means to help overcome inequalities between Maori and non-Maori.

Within the indigenous paradigm lies a paradox over what constitutes legitimate Māori authority: Iwi structures are legitimated and recognised by the state, and traditional forms (for example, Hapū and Māori women), have had their authority diminished. Iwi authorities are colonial constructs that diminish the rights of Hapū and Māori women. The manner in which such constructs have come about generally has not involved tribewide debate over important issues in which Hapū and Māori women have an interest. For their legitimacy, emergent self-governing structures will need to be grounded in principles that ensure legitimate representation of Māori people and not socially constructed hybrids of a colonial past. Structures need to recognise Hapū and Māori women in the formulation, anything less than this will trigger a legitimation crisis.

There has been, and continues to be, considerable debate about the meaning and intent of different versions of the Treaty of Waitangi and about the extent of its relevance to contemporary New Zealand. It is in this context that a number of organisations and institutions in New Zealand, anxious to demonstrate their positive support for the creation of a just society, have attempted to restructure in ways that allow for a 'partnership' between M ori and P keh . With reference to three different case studies, I argue here that such restructuring, although generally very well intentioned and very welcome, should not be seen - as it frequently is - as an expression of the fulfilment of partnership obligations arising out of the Treaty of Waitangi. To treat organisational restructuring in this way, particularly where it does not provide both 'partners' with an equal right to determine the operational parameters and future direction of the organisation, is to misrepresent (often wholly unintentionally) the nature of the Treaty. Nevertheless, one way of resolving some of the debates concerning the meaning and intent of the Treaty of Waitangi might be to establish a principle of equal partnership in the governance and management of state institutions.

This practice-research based article explores the relationship between mana motuhake and white patriarchal sovereignty in Aotearoa New Zealand, focusing on Ngāti Tūwharetoa as a case study. It seeks to find the relevance of Aboriginal academic Aileen Moreton-Robinson’s white possessive doctrine to the Aotearoa New Zealand context. In particular, it highlights the racist nature of the law and planning systems and their inadequacies to provide for hapū and iwi. It provides a key theoretical analysis regarding the nature of white patriarchal sovereignty in Aotearoa and the need of the state to appear virtuous, to continue the legacy that started with the Treaty of Waitangi to maintain this whenua as a white possessive. Lastly, the piece questions the position of Britishness within Aotearoa New Zealand and asks key philosophical questions for all about the need to find common understandings or māramatanga about our collective future as a society.

"Since colonisation, New Zealand has been mythologised as a 'land of milk and honey' - a promised land of natural abundance and endless opportunity. In the twenty-first century, the country has become literally a land of milk and honey as agricultural exports from such commodities dominate the national economy. But does New Zealand live up to its promise? In this introductory textbook for first year sociology students, some of this country's leading social scientists help us to make sense of contemporary New Zealand. In 21 chapters, the authors examine New Zealand's political identity and constitution; our Māori, Pākehā, Pacific and Asian peoples; problems of class, poverty and inequality; gender and sexualities; and contemporary debates around ageing, incarceration and the environment. The authors find a complex society where thirty years of neoliberal economics and globalising politics have exacerbated inequalities that are differentially experienced by class, ethnicity, gender, sexuality and age. These social divides and problems are at the heart of this text. For sociology students and for a wider audience of New Zealanders, A Land of Milk and Honey? is a lively introduction to where we have come from, where we are now, and where New Zealand society might be headed."

The intense choreography of a nation’s identity is often exhibited through national days. In Aotearoa, New Zealand, national events such as Waitangi Day (6 February) and Anzac Day (25 April) provide affective public spaces that engage identity, belonging and inclusion while evoking dissent, reverence, unity and division. In this chapter, we analyse the choreography of affect and discourse related to Waitangi Day through media, observational video and focus group data. We explore affective–discursive positions related to Micheal Billig’s notion of banal nationalism, and expand on this through analysis of feelings, emotion, spirituality and the Māori concept, wairua. A social practice lens is used to study ways in which such affective labour contributes to a colonialist everyday nationalism. Findings offer important windows on how nationhood might be critiqued, challenged and diversified to more adequately represent the ongoing dynamics and tensions between Māori and Pākehā.