Your search

In December 2002 a new Local Government Act was passed into statute. Much of the literature, submissions, articles and commentaries leading up to the passing of the Act indicated that a new Act had to clarify the relationships and obligations between local government, the Crown, Maori and the Treaty of Waitangi. In this paper I argue that the new Act has not adequately clarified these relationships and obligations, and that there are particular reasons and consequences arising from this situation. The reasons surround denials from local government that they are the Crown and central government's vested interest in allowing slippage to continue. If we examine the example of the General Agreement on Trade in Services we can see that a failure to clarify the relationships may have detrimental consequences for Maori to protect their rights.

The Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 caused many New Zealanders grave concern. In this article I suggest that a number of the Government's actions since the passing of the Foreshore and Seabed Act bring into question several of its central claims for legislating and the subsequent overriding of Tiriti o Waitangi and human rights laws. As a result, I argue that the inadequacy in our constitutional arrangements requires a change of approach—a new game plan: constitutional change. The second part of the article examines the work of the Maori Party. Its actions in encouraging an increasing level of Maori politicisation away from expression outside the State and towards the electoral process, arising out of opposition to the Foreshore and Seabed Act, constitute another changing of game plans. The article concludes by emphasising how the Foreshore and Seabed Act has encouraged us to take a longer term vision in order to foster more positive relations, a vision that encompasses the need for genuine constitutional change based on respect for human rights and Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

In this article, I outline the existing legislative options available and rationale for Māori representation in local government. I suggest that the arguments and rationale against Māori representation have been exacerbated by a lack of clarity around local government's duties and obligations stemming from the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. In the second part of this article, I explore more recent arguments by Māori for representation and involvement in local government decision-making on the basis of being mana whenua, which means to have territorial authority and power associated with the possession and occupation of tribal land. This argument foregrounds specific iwi (tribes) as holding territorial authority and therefore rights to representation and involvement in decision-making sourced in tikanga Māori (Māori law), over and above other Māori who live in that area. I examine in detail the Rotorua District Council's establishment of the Te Arawa Partnership Board in 2015 and argue that this Board and its first election results provide unique insights into the relationship between Te Arawa people living in and outside the district and has implications for broader conversations about the rights of Māori living away from their tribal areas.

Research suggests that teaching ‘about’ Māori politics and histories occurs in some schools, but it is extremely limited in terms of quality and quantity (Manning, 2017a, b). The 2001 New Zealand History Teachers Survey indicated Treaty topics were taught by only 3% of teachers nationally (Delahunty, 2010). Today Māori politics or histories are commonly taught only in passing as part of a larger focus on the British inspired political institutions created after the Treaty of Waitangi (Sheehan, Epstein & Harcourt, 2017). The literature which does cover the Treaty usually examines the three Treaty Articles in English and very generally the differences between versions (Orange, 1987; Māori Affairs Select Committee, 2018). The most significant limitation is that what is taught generally fails to acknowledge the existence of Māori political institutions, laws and structures prior to 1840, or to link the Treaty and its legacy, and Treaty principles and obligations within contemporary political and economic contexts.

The election of Evo Morales as the first indigenous President of Bolivia in 2005 is widely credited to the Cochamba Water War (Spronk 2007: 8). The Cochamba Water War progressed from an indigenous movement and a specific issue to the creation of an indigenous political party and election of the first indigenous President. The Bolivian water war, the Puebla Panama Plan in Mexico, the Mackenzie Valley pipeline in Canada (Altamirano‐Jiménez 2004) and Māori resistance to the neoliberal agenda from 1984 onwards (Bargh 2007: 26) inspired much theorising about indigenous people successfully contesting neoliberalism (AltamiranoJiménez 2004, Bargh 2007, Spronk 2007: 8, Postero 2007). Bargh and others, for example, documented not only ‘overt Māori resistance to neoliberal policies, but also more subtle stories of activities, which The neoliberal state, recognition and indigenous rights implicitly challenge neoliberal practices and assumptions by their support for other ways of living’ (Bargh 2007: 1). Scholars make visible the persistence of the colonial in the concrete and material conditions of everyday neoliberal governance and life (Howard-Wagner & Kelly 2011: 103). As Bargh (2007), Altamirano-Jiménez (2013), Howard-Wagner (2010b, 2015) and others note, indigenous categorisations of neoliberal practices as a form of colonisation relate to a concern that neoliberalism in its multiple forms poses a threat to indigenous ways of life. This scholarship also critically reflects on the reshaping of the relationship between the state and indigenous peoples under neoliberalism (Altamirano-Jiménez 2004, Bargh 2007, Howard-Wagner 2009). For example, it draws attention to the increasing intervention in the lives of indigenous peoples (Howard-Wagner 2007, 2009, 2010a, 2010b) and the dispossession of indigenous people through privatisation (Wolfe 2006, Howard-Wagner 2012, Altamirano-Jiménez 2013, Coulthard 2014). It does not, however, preclude agency, resistance and decolonisation. Interpretive micro-studies about indigenous peoples’ engagement with neoliberalism provide particular value. They tell us about actually existing neoliberalism in the context of intervention in the everyday lives of indigenous peoples, contests over rights, contests over policy and the complex decisions indigenous people are making about how to protect their rights and navigate diverse economies involving neoliberal policies and practices.

This paper identifies three discourses that are prominent in contemporary Treaty of Waitangi policy debate, each with significantly different implications for Maori political status within the modern nation-state. At one extreme the Treaty's significance is exaggerated by overemphasis on partnership as an implicit Treaty principle. At another extreme the Treaty's significance is understated by an assimilationist position that denies the Treaty's relevance to Indigenous rights which, in turn, imposes serious constraint on the extent to which partnership can actually develop into comprehensive policy practice. An alternative position is one that sees the Treaty, which is supported in international law, as affirming a twofold conception of citizenship as the basis of both individual and collective Maori rights.

Reconciliation brings together Christological and anthropological dimensions of human thought to illustrate the nexus between religious principles and political means. For the state reconciliation is concerned with social cohesion and political stability. For the church, it extends the sacramental notion of reconciliation between God and penitent to public relationships. This article examines Roman Catholic contributions to secular reconciliation debates. It shows how religious precepts create moral imperatives to engagement with secular discourses as a necessary element of Christian mission. It also argues that the church’s role in the disruption of indigenous societies creates an additional moral imperative to engage in reconciliation as mission and to articulate a Christian vision of indigenous rights.

Māori knowledge, memory and cultural strength will only enhance New Zealand’s economic recovery planning – if they are listened to.

Waitangi Day, New Zealand’s official national day, is often claimed as contentious by commentators and academics. However, research analysing the wider population’s opinions about Waitangi Day are lacking. We address this with two studies using national probability data from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study. Most participants supported (51%), rather than opposed (8%), Waitangi Day as a national celebration of biculturalism. Study one indicated that, on average, Pākehā (N = 12390) who opposed Waitangi Day as a bicultural celebration expressed warmer attitudes towards Pākehā but colder attitudes towards Māori. Conversely, support for Waitangi Day as a bicultural celebration among Māori (N = 1928) was, on average, related to warmth towards Māori but uncorrelated with warmth towards Pākehā. Study two assessed whether socio-political attitudes changed in the weeks leading up to, during, and immediately following Waitangi Day in 2015. Contrary to narratives of divisiveness, we failed to detect reliable change in the attitudes of Māori (N = 556) and Pākehā (N = 3203) around Waitangi Day. These findings are inconsistent with anecdotal claims that Waitangi Day may be divisive.

This is a collection of papers that examine the current place of the Treaty of Waitangi in core public policy areas. The authors analyse the tensions and dynamics in the relationship between Maori and the Crown in their areas of expertise, detail the key challenges being faced, and provide insights on how these can be overcome. The policy areas covered in the collection span the environment, Maori and social development, health, broadcasting, the Maori language, prison and the courts, local government, research, science and technology, culture and heritage, foreign affairs, women's issues, labour, youth, education, economics, housing and the electoral system.

Weeping Waters is a must read for anyone who wants to be informed about the current debate regarding the Treaty of Waitangi and a constitution for Aotearoa New Zealand. The book features essays from eighteen well-known and respected Maori figures including Professor Margaret Mutu, Bishop Muru Walters, Judge Caren Fox and lawyer Moana Jackson. This is the first book in recent years to offer a Māori opinion on the subject of constitutional change. It shows how Māori views have been ignored by successive governments and the courts and how Māori have attempted to address constitutional issues in the past. The book also provides suggestions for a pathway forward if the Treaty of Waitangi is to be fully acknowledged as the foundation for a constitution for Aotearoa New Zealand.

The idea of dignity is often taken to be a foundation for principles of justice and democracy. In the West it has numerous formulations and conceptualisations. Within the capabilities approach to justice theorists have expanded the concept of dignity to encompass animals and ecological communities. In this article I rework the idea of dignity to include the Māori philosophical concepts of mauri, tapu and mana – something I argue is necessary if the capabilities approach is to decolonise in the Aotearoa context. Furthermore, the article links the nation's recognition of three extensive geographical regions – Te Awa Tupua, Te Urewera and Mt Taranaki – as legal persons to Mātauranga Māori and nonhuman dignity. In doing so, I identify the potential that this understanding of dignity and these legal moves have to decolonise democracy within the settler state.

This article examines why and how scholars should acknowledge and name each of the diverse political actors and institutions that typically are objectified as ‘indigenous peoples’ on the global stage, or ‘Māori’ in New Zealand. For instance, rather than suggesting a political relationship or conflict exists between ‘Māori and the Crown’, political scientists and theorists should name the political actors and political institutions for which Māori is a shorthand, for example, ‘Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (the corporate entity of the Ngai Tahu whanui) and the Committee of Tuahiwi Marae disagreed with the Crown’. A variety of reasons are discussed as to why this objectification of Māori (and any other indigenous population) as a single political actor has occurred, the problems are pointed out, and a range of examples are given. Not every use of the terms ‘Māori’, ‘indigenous peoples’ or similar descriptors in political science stands in for a specific political actor (e.g. sometimes, it is suggesting a cleavage or a group at whom a policy is directed), but where scholars are describing or suggesting political action, they should be careful in their use of ethnic labels. I suggest that it would be more productive to study the specific contexts, intentions and actions of individuals and institutions that might consider indigeneity as being part of their identity.

In this situation report I highlight how Te Tiriti o Waitangi is relevant to state and Mäori regulation related to the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting also that it was somewhat ignored by Aotearoa New Zealand’s state institutions during the country’s initial response. Focusing on the te reo text of Te Tiriti as the constitutionally and legally primary text of the Treaty of Waitangi, I argue, first, that Te Tiriti requires joint Mäori and state regulation over the territories and peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand, including with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic. Second, Te Tiriti requires state government to regulate equitably and, third, it requires state government not to interfere unreasonably with taonga Mäori and our culture. The government needs to do more in its COVID-19 regulatory response to comply with Te Tiriti, and therefore to act constitutionally and with legitimacy.

The Covid-19 lockdown over March to May 2020 meant households became their own “bubbles”, with residents physically interacting only with those in their household and staying close to home. Māori leaders recognised the potential of the lockdown to exacerbate whānau vulnerability due to confinement, financial hardship and, depending on their household, issues of crowding or isolation. Steps were quickly taken to support households with care packages, health care and social connectivity. This paper describes these initiatives as mahi aroha and argues that housing is a foundation from which Māori go out into the world and add meaning and quality to the lives of others. If the mahi aroha of Māori during a lockdown or other crisis is to be sustained into the future, then access to quality, affordable housing must be ensured for Māori essential workers.

This report is the result of 252 hui between 2012 and 2015. The Working Group was established at a meeting of the Iwi Chairs’ Forum in 2010 with Terms of Reference: “To develop and implement a model for an inclusive Constitution for Aotearoa based on tikanga and kawa, He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Niu

In this article I examine some of the challenges for Māori and Local Government on the path to Treaty-based Local Government relationships. I suggest significant challenges exist in three core areas. The first relates to the attitudes towards the ideas of Treaty-based Local Government and evident in common terminology which has a narrow focus on the identity of Māori as ‘representatives' rather than ‘Treaty partners’. The second area of challenge is in having Māori wards/constituencies established which, when they are established, are symbolically the beginnings of an acknowledgment of Treaty obligations and relationships. The third challenge is the lack of good data which limits understandings of Māori involvement in Local Government. In the second part of the article I ask whether any specific challenges can be seen that might impact on Treaty-based relationships in regard to Māori involvement as candidates and voters in Local Government elections.

The Crown Minerals Act 1991 (CMA) was introduced "to promote prospecting for, exploration for, and mining of Crown owned minerals for the benefit of New Zealand". A series of fundamental questions has emerged as to whether the Act undermines the ability of the Crown and tangata whenua, anchored in Te Tiriti o Waitangi, to operate in a true sense of partnership. Carl Billington takes a closer look.

Environmental Politics and Policy in Aotearoa New Zealand is a comprehensive introduction to confronting some of today's most urgent challenges. Global warming, threats to biodiversity, contamination of waterways and other environmental issues confront today's citizens with critical challenges that are fundamentally political. Power, authority and state action enable current practices - and through politics and policy that power can be harnessed to create a more ecologically sustainable planet. In this book, leading scholars from around Aotearoa introduce students to environmental politics and policy based in this country's unique institutional, cultural and resource context. The text focuses on the key importance of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the characteristics of the natural environment in Aotearoa and the role of gender dynamics in the distribution of power, before turning to how this unique setting informs and is, in turn, informed by the global context of environmental politics. The authors take a systemic view of environmental politics and governance in New Zealand, addressing the philosophical and ideational debates about who and what matters (both human and non-human), the political institutions that embed and enact these ideas, and how these ideas then manifest in particular arenas - from climate and freshwater to energy and farming. Practical tips - how to make a submission, organise a protest, write a policy brief or a press release - are woven throughout.