Your search

In the heart of the North Island of New Zealand lies the mountainous territory ofTe Urewera, the spiritual homeland of the Tahoe people. Hidden away in the southern portion of Te Urewera is Waikaremoana - The Sea of Rippling Waters, a lake and a land with a history and tradition that are as fascinating as they are controversial. Waikaremoana is the footstool of the Ngati Ruapani section of Tahoe. This paper begins with a brief discussion of the landscape of Waikaremoana and its early tribal traditions. A systematic analysis ofthe social, political and economic effects of land alienation upon the tangata whenua of the Waikaremoana area is applied. The effects of Crown policies for Maori land, last century, and how the process was replicated throughout Aotearoa is assessed.

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.

Although there is no single meaning oftino rangatiratanga, self determination is the most frequently used English equivalent. Even then a variety ofmeanings can be assumed. Two particular aspects oftino rangatiratanga, however, are relevant to contemporaryMaori society: mana whenua and mana tangata. The first acknowledges the rights ofhapii and iwi in respect oftheir own tribal affairs while the second recognises the right of Maori people generally to organise according to a range ofsocial and political groupings. Tino rangatiratanga is essentially about Maori policy being developed by Maori and Maori assuming responsibility for Maori affairs at tribal and national levels. But the absence of a national Maori bodypolitic which can bring together all elements is a barrier to the realisation of tino rangatiratanga. There is in fact aconsiderable enthusiasm for a representative policy-making body and a number of models exist. Discussion about the relative advantages is needed so that a consensus about the most useful approach can emerge. Negotiation with the Govemmentto reconsiderNew Zealand's constitutional arrangements will then be able to occur on the basis ofa unifiedMaori approach. In that debate the appropriateness of the dogma of unitary Crown sovereignty in apost-colonial environment will almost certainly be challenged.

This brief paper questions the nature of biculturalism that has developed in Aotearoa/New Zealand, namely that contested around a dualistic and antagonistic politics of either Maori or Pakeha. This paper joins a growing call for a reconceptualisation of bicultural politics in Aotearoa/New Zealand that draws on an inclusionary and multifaceted identity politics (Reilly, 1996; McClean, 1997; Spoonley, 1997). What is required is a revised approach that accounts for Maori/Pakeha relations where there are multiple subject-positions, affinities and differences continually at play through ongoing interaction and exchange. The paper argues the need for this conceptualisation to take place in an alternative space that blurs the limitations of boundaries and engenders new possibilities. I examine Homi Bhabha's notions of hybridity and the third space. I offer some introductory comment as to what these concepts might offer for a project concerned with the redesign of laws and institutions for a bicultural Aotearoa/New Zealand.

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.

Maori Affairs policy has historically proven doubleedged in simultaneously advancing yet diminishing Maori aspirations. Recent emphasis on claims-making as a key policy component is shown to be fraught with contradiction and neo-colonisms, no more so than around the ambiguous benefits of 'throwing money' at a problem rather than working through the differences in a relationship. Proposed instead of a claims-making model of Maori Affairs is a constructive engagement approach that seeks to recalibrate Maori-Crown relations by advancing innovative patterns of belonging. A commitment to constructive engagement not only bolsters the chances of living together with our fundamental differences in a post -colonising Aotearoa. A focus on relations rather than restitution also enhances the principles and practices of tino rangatiratanga rights as a framework for establishing Maori models of self-determination over jurisdictions pertaining to land, identity, and political voice.

This paper explores the theoretical perspective of a Maori world view as it relates to power relations between men and women and the role of women in customary society. It is argued that insights regarding the nature of power relations may be gained from an analysis of the cosmological narratives. Such analysis provide theoretical understandings about the position, status and role of Maori women in customary society. The position of women as powerful, autonomous, independent beings and as bearers of knowledge are recurring themes that continue to have relevance today. Definitions of mana wahine and mana whenua are discussed drawing extensively on an analysis of the cosmological narratives. This provides the basis for a discussion on the development of Maori Women's theories. It is concluded that mana wahine expresses what counts as feminism for Maori women and that western feminisms do not adequately address the needs of Maori women. Finally, some comparative perspectives with indigenous women from Australia and North America are outlined.

The genesis of direct negotiation and the fiscal envelope, for the settlement of Maori land claims under the Treaty of Waitangi, is portended in the aim of the National Party's Manifesto for the 1990 election to settle all claims by the year 2,000. To meet that ten year time-line, the National Government decided to set aside a fixed sum for the settlement of all claims. This fiscal cap was signalled in the (Sealords) Deed of Settlement for the Maori Fisheries Claim as the Treaty of Waitangi Settlement Fund. Under this clause, the signatories to the Deed agreed that the Crown had fiscal constraints which restricted its ability to settle other claims. In a memorandum dated 17 March 1992, Doug Graham, Minister in charge of Treaty Claims, recommended to the Cabinet Strategy Committee the policy direct negotiation to settle Maori claims that were well founded. This policy of 'chiefs talking with chiefs' obviates the need for claimants to go through the drawn out process of hearings with the Waitangi Tribunal. It is a seductive scenario which assumes a level playing field between the Crown and tribal negotiators. But it is hardly that as the Whakatahea negotiators discovered after the settlement of the Tainui Claim in 1995.