Your search

  • The UN declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is a deeply significant document. In 2007, then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described its signing as an "historic moment when UN Member States and indigenous peoples reconciled with their painful histories and resolved to move forward together on the path of human rights, justice and development for all". This book reflects on the tenth anniversary of the UN General Assembly's adoption of the Declaration and examines its relevance in New Zealand. It shows the strong alignment between the Treaty of Waitangi and the Declaration, and examines how the Declaration assists the interpretation and application of Treaty principles of partnership, protection and participation. Starting from a range of viewpoints and disciplines, the authors agree that in Aotearoa New Zealand the journey to full implementation is now well underway, but warn that greater political leadership, willpower, resources and a stronger government commitment is needed.

  • Governments in New Zealand have legislated a large number of settlements extinguishing many hundreds of claims taken by Māori against the Crown for breaches of the country’s founding document, Te Tiriti o Waitangi. They portray settlements as a great success for Māori and the Crown. Māori disagree. Settlements are government-determined and imposed on Māori using a smoke and mirrors approach that masks successive governments’ true intentions: to claw back Māori legal rights; to extinguish all claims; and to maintain White control over Māori. In short, to uphold the Doctrine of Discovery in further breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Māori claimants and negotiators report being enticed into the process by false promises only to become traumatised and disenchanted. Yet many take a pragmatic stance and sign settlements, making the best they can out of a bad deal that goes nowhere near compensating for their actual loss. They know that despite what legislation may say, the settlements are not full, not fair and not final and that, like all previous settlements, they will be revisited. They also know that unless fundamental changes are made to the constitutional makeup of the country, there is no prospect of justice and reconciliation for Māori.

  • 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 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

Last update from database: 10/23/26, 4:11 AM (UTC)