Results | MPolBib

Sullivan, A. (2016). The politics of reconciliation in New Zealand. Political Science, 68(2), 124–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032318716676290

Reconciliation in New Zealand involves recognition, reparations and an apology for past injustices relating to breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. In 1840, Māori and the British Crown signed a treaty that promised a beneficial relationship to both signatories. Almost immediately after the Treaty was signed and continuing through to today, promises inherent in the principles of the Treaty have been breached. However, in 1975, a government-appointed permanent commission of inquiry was established to investigate actions or omissions of the Crown that breach the promises made in the Treaty of Waitangi. The Waitangi Tribunal and the Ministry of Justice provide the institutional mechanisms used in New Zealand to foster reconciliation. This article will discuss how the state has moved iwi from being in Treaty ‘grievance mode’ to one of tino rangatiratanga/Māori self-determination and demonstrates how reconciliation has integrated Treaty settlement iwi into the mainstream New Zealand economy.

View on doi.org

Sullivan, A. (2017). Politics, Indigenous Rights and Resource Ownership: Māori Customary Rights to the Foreshore, Seabed and Fresh Water in New Zealand. Studies in Arts and Humanities, 3(2), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.18193/sah.v3i2.105

Māori customary rights to natural resources are a contentious issue between Māori and the New Zealand government and between Maori and non-Māori. The values and principles inherent in a treaty signed in 1840 between Māori and the British Crown have been undermined by the government’s refusal to allow Māori the right to go to the courts to determine proprietary rights to the foreshore, seabed and fresh water. Discriminatory Crown actions highlight the argument that when an injustice occurs then reparations should be made. The United Nations has chided the New Zealand government for its discriminatory behaviour and failure to provide guaranteed redress but it has had little effect.

Read document

Sullivan, A. (2012). Effecting Change Through Electoral Politics: Cutlural Identity and the Māori Franchise. Journal of the Polynesian Society, 112(3), 219–237.

Sullivan, A. (2008). The Maori Party and the Media: Representations in Mainstream Print Leading to the 2005 Election. Pacific Journalism Review, 14(1), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.171361157684696

This article investigates the 2005 pre-election print media coverage of the Maori Party and its candidates. It shows that while the reporters and journalists generally represented the Maori Party in a fair and unbiased manner, at times their reporting was undermined by unbalanced or biased editing or subediting.

View on search.informit.org

Sullivan, A. (2015). Chapter Five – Māori Representation and Participation in National and Local Government Politics. In M. Berg-Nordlie, J. Saglie, & A. Sullivan, Indigenous politics: institutions, representation, mobilisation (pp. 134–154). ECPR Press.

Sullivan, A., & Margaritis, D. (2000). Public sector reform and indigenous entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 6(5), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1108/13552550010357639

This paper considers the implications of the liberalization of the New Zealand economy for entrepreneurial development by indigenous New Zealand Maori tribal organizations. Since 1984 the economic objective of the State has been to create a modern market economy free of price distortions, bureaucratic management and government protectionism. One of the State’s responses to enabling tribal organizations to provide for increased self‐determination and to lessen Maori State dependency was to seriously address the issue of compensation to Maori of resources that had been expropriated or confiscated during the past 150 years. While there have been difficulties in reaching agreement on appropriate or adequate allocations of Crown‐owned resources or compensation, the transferal of resources to private (but collective) Maori ownership is now providing a substantial economic base to build corporate and other entrepreneurial activities. It is argued that such willingness and commitment to transfer resources from the State back to the original owners was a manifest outcome of government’s adoption of liberal economic policies.

Read document

Sullivan, A. (2003). Māori Representation in Local Government. In Janine. Hayward (Ed.), Local government and the Treaty of Waitangi. Oxford University Press.

Sullivan, A. (2003). Māori Affairs and Public Policy. In R. Miller (Ed.), New Zealand government and politics (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Margaritis, D., & Sullivan, A. (2005). Ethnic Diversity in a Global Economy: A Case - Study of Māori Self Determination. The International Journal of the Humanities: Annual Review, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9508/CGP/v01/58115

Sullivan, A., & Toki, V. (2012). It’s Not about Race, It’s about Rights. Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, 57, 1–30. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/slps57&i=11

In February 1840, Maori co-signed the Treaty of Waitangi with the British Crown. Partnership, protection, and participation are the fundamental principles provided in the Treaty. In April 2010, the New Zealand government endorsed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. These two instruments provide indigenous peoples with the right to participate fully in decision-making that will affect their legal, social, economic, cultural, and political rights. Having endorsed the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the New Zealand government is morally obliged to comply with the intent of the Declaration. The focus of this chapter is on the right of Maori to participate and be represented on the governing councils of local government. It will be demonstrated that the refusal by the New Zealand government in 2010 to provide dedicated Maori wards on the Auckland Council is contrary to the intent of the Declaration. The principles of the Treaty of Waitangi require the government to act with integrity toward the indigenous people of New Zealand. It will be argued that the failure of local government to utilize electoral options that will enhance Maori representation in local government breach obligations inherent in both the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Treaty of Waitangi.

Read document

Sullivan, A. (2006). Māori Policy and Politics. In R. Miller (Ed.), New Zealand government & politics (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Sullivan, A., & Margaritis, D. (2002). Coming Home? Māori Voting in 1999. In J. Vowles, P. Aimer, J. Karp, S. Banducci, R. Miller, & A. Sullivan (Eds.), Proportional representation on trial. Auckland University Press.

Sullivan, A. (2005). Chapter 7: The Treaty of Waitangi and Social Well-being: Justice, Representation, and Participation. In M. Belgrave, M. Kawharu, D. V. Williams, & I. H. Kawharu (Eds.), Waitangi Revisited: Perspectives on the Treaty of Waitangi (2nd ed., pp. 123–135). Oxford University Press.

Vowles, J., Aimer, P., Karp, J., Banducci, S., Miller, R., & Sullivan, A. (Eds.). (2002). Proportional representation on trial. Auckland University Press.