Your search

‘There is a need for a mindset shift away from the pervasive assumption that the Crown is Pākehā, English-speaking, and distinct from Māori’, wrote the permanent commission of inquiry investigating breaches of New Zealand’s founding document, the Treaty of Waitangi. ‘Increasingly, in the twenty-first century, the Crown is also Māori.’ This paper argues that ‘the Crown in right of New Zealand’ is in need of redefining. In the 19th and parts of the 20th century Māori leaders and institutions were often understood as separate from the Crown. But that understanding is shifting, and this paper argues the shift is leading to a new understanding of the Crown in right of New Zealand.

I argue environmental disasters are an inevitable outcome of the underdevelopment of Western philosophy. Human induced environmental disasters are unfortunate, an unintended consequence of focusing on economic maximization in a culture without comprehensive, clearly accepted, and operationalized frameworks for environmental and intergenerational justice. However, they are of no surprise to Indigenous Peoples relegated to margins of political influence. Grounding this claim, I examine the New Zealand High Court case Greenpeace and Te Whanau-ā-Apanui vs the Minister for Energy. Case documents afford comparisons between the complex philosophic, legal, and cultural framework of Māori, that protect human and nonhuman from human-induced environmental disaster, and the dominant Anglo framings. I observe a philosophical deficit underpinning the legal and political system of Aotearoa that impedes environmental intergenerational justice. These philosophic foundations, intentionally or not, promote environmental disaster and – nationally and internationally – claim a dominant position over Indigenous systems.

A television news bulletin tells us, in effect, what we should think about and the preferred way in which we should think about it. Analyses of New Zealand media have consistently shown that news about Māori is both relatively rare and that it prioritises violence and criminality. Researchers conclude this encourages New Zealanders to see Māori as threatening the social order and burdening our society. We examined the few Māori stories broadcast in a large representative sample of English-language television news bulletins and found the same negativity. As our sample included Māori-language news bulletins from the same days we know there were other Māori news stories available, so we conclude that the prioritising of negative stories about Māori in English-language media is a matter of choice. Focus groups with Māori and non-Māori media consumers demonstrate the impact of the relentlessly negative portrayals of Māori in New Zealand media.

This chapter explores how Maori developmental aspirations require a multidimensional view of economy linked to Maori identity, landscape and worldview. It aims to reframe the Maori, and, by extension, wider concepts of Indigenous economy to one that has meaning to Maori communities, and thus more holistically appreciates the true notion of ‘value’. The chapter presents Maori business case studies that illustrate distinctive elements of connection between Maori worldview, forms of organization and economy. It offers insight into how we might realize meaningful development for Indigenous communities more broadly. Non-economic variables such as relationships, reciprocity and connection are privileged, and matauranga Maori, identity, tikanga Maori, whanaungatanga, whakapapa, and manaakitanga guide Maori business structure, governance and practice. Whai take represents a broader conceptualization of Maori economy that more meaningfully engages the multifaceted nature of Maori socio-economic activity.

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.

Resistance: An Indigenous Response to Neoliberalism is a collection of papers from Maori academics, activists and leaders on the connection between global practices of neoliberalism and the diverse forms of Maori resistance that aim to destablize them.Aotearoa is one of the world leaders of neoliberalism. Successive New Zealand governments since 1984 have pursued neoliberal policies with a faith, vehemence and confidence in their success that few other governments appear to possess. At a time when 'capital flows across borders as it has never done before, and multinational companies have bigger budgets than many states have ever had', this book encourages people to look more closely at Maori views as integral and inspiring in a globalizing world.

New Zealand is at a watershed in its constitutional and political arrangements. There are three events looming in the short term which suggest that the status of Māori in Parliament is in for significant challenge. The first is the impending review of constitutional issues and the Māori seats as part of the National Party–Māori Party ‘Relationship and Confidence and Supply Agreement’. Secondly, the proposed referendum on the future of the mixed member proportional system (MMP) could also have significant implications for Māori. Finally, the longer term question of whether New Zealand should become a republic continues to haunt New Zealand’s political imagination, and would also necessitate lengthy debates about the place of New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements in relation to Māori rights and Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Māori and Parliament provides a comprehensive and enlightening context for understanding both the historical and contemporary relationship between Māori and Parliament and highlights many of the issues which would arise in any discussion of New Zealand constitutional reform. Māori and Parliament is a collection of nineteen presentations and papers from twenty-one academics, political commentators and current and former parliamentarians and is the result of the Māori and Parliament conference held at Parliament in May 2009.

When considering how Maori political rhetoric fits within the New Zealand political landscape it is necessary to ask what makes such rhetoric distinctive and important. In this paper I examine three areas of distinctly Maori political rhetoric; the unique locations of Maori politics, the formalities to be observed by speakers and the use of particular rhetorical devices by Maori speakers, including the use of Maori language and waiata (song). Given the ways that the distinctive nature of Maori political rhetoric is often undervalued, misinterpreted of misrepresented by many non-Maori, the questions which underlie the discussion here must be around what the implications of this situation are for Maori and non-Maori.

The predominant forms of foreign policy discussed these days are underpinned by an assumption of Crown sovereignty in Aotearoa New Zealand. However, the first diplomatic relations and foreign policy in this country were conducted by hapū and iwi Māori.1 Prior to the 1800s, Māori had a long history of interaction in the Pacific and with other nations. Such interactions were governed by specific legal and political practices and institutions. A number of the concepts upon which these practices and institutions were based included whakapapa (genealogy), utu (balance), mana (respect) and koha (reciprocity).

This article examines what might be included in a definition of Māori political participation that moves beyond a predominant focus on voting in New Zealand general elections. I suggest that the proliferation of Māori governance organisations in recent years means that Māori participation within these organisations must also be considered as part of wider political participation. In addition, I argue that Māori engagement with local authorities deserves further close examination to explore the multiple ways in which political participation occurs. Using a broader definition of Māori political participation and highlighting its many facets indicate that Māori engage in more varied ways in New Zealand politics than previously recognised

When racism is promulgated on a number of fronts, including the media, it becomes a powerful and pervasive force in society, detrimentally impacting on the lives of those who are its object. This paper analyses Mäori focus group interviews that traversed a wide range of sites where racism occurred, including print and broadcast media. We utilised a framework for understanding racism that is in line with key racism theorists and identifies four primary levels through which it operates: internal, interpersonal, institutional and societal. The core themes to emerge in the findings reinforce this framework and have been grouped accordingly: Internalised Racism, Interpersonal Racism, Institutional Racism and Societal Racism. Negative effects on health and wellbeing were articulated by participants as was the call for transformative, counter hegemonic representations of Mäori.

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.

Colonial praxis has been imposed on the culture, epistemologies and praxis of indigenous Maori in Aotearoa, entrenching the settler cultural project that ensures the continuation of the colonial state, producing damaging disparities. This article theorises ways in which settler privilege works at multiple levels supporting settler interests, aspirations and sensibilities. In institutions, myriad mundane processes operate through commerce, law, media, education, health services, environment, religion and international relations constituting settler culture, values and norms. Among individuals, settler discursive/ideological frameworks are hegemonic, powerfully influencing interactions with Maori to produce outcomes that routinely suit settlers. In the internalised domain, there is a symbiotic sense of belonging, rightness, entitlement and confidence that the established social hierarchies will serve settler interests. This structure of privilege works together with overt and implicit acts of racism to reproduce a collective sense of superiority. It requires progressive de-mobilising together with anti-racism efforts to enable our society to move toward social justice.