The sisters running Auckland’s first authentic Polynesian show for tourists say it’s not just for visitors, but also to help uplift Pacific people.

Louisa Tipene Opetaia and Ama Mosese’s Glorious Tours was pooled as one of 10 new “Treasures of Tāmaki Makaurau”: a go-to guide by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) for local Māori tourism.

Their tour tells the story of how Auckland became the biggest Polynesian city in the world, and often starts with a drop in at a Pacific or Māori-owned cafe, a guided hīkoi up the Māngere mountain, hangi lunch, a haka show at the museum, then end with a kava-drinking experience.

The tour, which has been running for a year, aims to give visitors an Auckland experience through local eyes, with Māori-led journeys and dining events.

Opetaia said before they started their tour, tourists were travelling to Rotorua for a Pacific cultural experience.

The only other regular Polynesian show for tourists in Auckland was at Auckland Museum, where there was a daily haka show.

“We have rich culture gold in south Auckland,” she said.

“All tourists fly here, in our backyard and we wanted to offer them something right here.”

The sisters, who are of Māori and Samoan heritage, call themselves “cultural connectors”.

‘The space was lacking’
“We’ve been working for these other companies for some time, some of them not even New Zealand-owned. And we felt we were the face of these companies but behind the scenes it wasn’t a local or Māori or indigenous business.

“We decided to step into this space that we saw was lacking, and offer authentic indigenous cultural experiences here in Tāmaki Makaurau — the biggest Polynesian city in the world.”

Glorious Tours is based out of Naumi Hotel, near the Auckland Airport in Māngere.

“We tailor it to what they want, so if they like shopping we take them to places where they can buy authentic Pacific goods, or we take them to our local gallery in Māngere.

This month, the sisters will launch a Polynesian dinner and dance show in Māngere, featuring local schools.

“It’s not just for the tourists, it’s for our own people. Our kaupapa is to uplift our local people, especially our rangatahi.”

TAU director of Māori outcomes Helen Te Hira said Treasures of Tāmaki Makaurau plays a vital role in ensuring Māori culture, businesses and leadership are central to the way Tāmaki Makaurau is experienced by visitors.

“Every business on this platform brings something unique — a sense of purpose, cultural depth and creative excellence.”

LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a partner.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

More than 35,000 people today gathered as Aotearoa New Zealand’s Hīkoi mō te Tiriti overflowed from Parliament’s grounds and onto nearby streets in the capital Wellington Pōneke.

Eru Kapa-Kingi told the crowd “Māori nation has been born” today and that “Te Tiriti is forever”.

ACT leader David Seymour was met with chants of “Kill the bill, kill the bill” when he walked out of the Beehive for a brief appearance at Parliament’s forecourt, before waving to the crowd and returning into the building.

The Hikoi at Parliament today. Video: RNZ News

The Treaty Principles Bill architect, Seymour, said he supported the right to protest, but thought participants were misguided and had a range of different grievances.

Interviewed earlier before Question Time, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said it was up to Parliament’s justice committee to decide whether the select committee process on the Treaty Principles Bill should be shortened.

The select committee will receive public submissions until January 7, and intends to complete hearings by the end of February.

Waitangi Day uncertainty
It means the Prime Minister will head to Waitangi while submissions on the bill are still happening.

Luxon was asked whether he would prefer if the bill was disposed of before Waitangi Day commemorations on February 6

“It’ll be what it will be.

“Let’s be clear — there is a strong depth of emotion on all sides of this debate.

“Yes, [the bill] is not something I like or support, but we have come to a compromise.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Collectiveness at it most potent has been called asabiyya by macrohistorian and cliodynamicist Peter Turchin. At its least potent, collectiveness is a recipe for social division, top-heaviness, escalating inequality, and societal breakdown.

The present ‘debates’ in Aotearoa New Zealand – ostensibly about Te Tiriti, the Treaty of Waitangi – represent a case in point. Increased bipartisanship festers, with the two sides largely talking past each other.

Pre-contact indigenous culture in Aotearoa New Zealand can be characterised as on the collectivist side of the collective-individual spectrum, at least with respect to tribal Iwi; whereas anglo-celtic culture was and is much more individualist. The protagonists on the Māori side of our present governance-wars are rhetorically harking back to the more collectivist worldview of their ancestral predecessors. And they are indulging in forms of co-sovereignty rhetoric that border on separate governance, without much explanation of what that means for individual Aotearoans.

One aspect of the more collectivist conceptual apparatus is the language, Te Reo. There is no explicit plural form. The word Māori covers Māori as a collective (or as a set of tribal collectives) and Māori as a set of individuals. While non-Māori used to refer to Māori as ‘Maoris’, this is simply not done in polite circles anymore. (I remember in 1984, how the leader of the “New Zelland Party” used to refer to “the Marries”.) Yet I do it here, as a way to emphasise my differentiation of collective Māori from individual ‘Maoris’.

In addition to pre-contact cultural differences in relation to the collective-individual spectrum, the established political Left and the established political Right (at least as we understand those terms in Aotearoa New Zealand; the United States has muddied those waters) define themselves through that spectrum. So Māori on the Left of politics have two predispositions towards collectivism. (Here we must note that the present ‘sovereignty debate’ is at least as much a debate within Māori as between Māori and non-Māori; the principal antagonists as well as the principal protagonists are conspicuously Māori. Twenty-first century Māori culture is by no means as collectivist as the rhetoric of the protagonists conveys; the divisions are Left versus Right, with a cultural overlay.)

Vertical Equity and ‘Targeting’; trickle-down or micro-management

Vertical equity is not a liberal concept (refer to my To be (a) liberal). Whereas horizontal equity means ‘treating equals equally’ – a concept central to (individualist) liberalism – vertical equity means ‘treating unequals unequally’. Discrimination. The liberals of the political Right, who emphasise the targeting of social services and public income distribution, square this illiberal circle by emphasising policies which solely target ‘need’; not race nor religion, not sex nor gender.

The political ‘progressives’ of the Left emphasise a collective form of targeting, but cannot (or refuse to) individualise this. Thus they may advocate more resources for Māori (and often tag-on Pasifika) and more resources for women; but they avoid any korero about individual discrimination.

At Budget-time, we have routinely heard the claim that there is not enough provision in the Budget – the government’s annual fiscal statement – for Māori. Perhaps less so from 2018 to 2022. But what does that mean? Resources for Māori? Or for ‘Maoris’?

The collectivist approach mandates that discrimination happens at the top-level of political society; at the governance level. Thus bureaucracies are created or extended – including governmental ‘entities’, and indeed ‘non-governmental’ entities (which nevertheless depend on government mandates) – which are openly discriminatory in their intent.

Discrimination in favour of an allegedly disadvantaged identity is justified through a process of leverage. Statistics are gathered from individuals and coded according to attributes – especially ethnicity, sex or gender, and health status; age and religion are less fashionable at present. The never unexpected results are then presented to justify forms of collective discrimination in the political process. Predictably, the incomes of ‘Maoris’ are lower on average than the incomes of ‘non-Maoris’, and female incomes are lower on average than male incomes.

The aim of this political process is not to remove these statistical differences. Rather it is to justify and extend identity bureaucracies – indeed to create advocacy ‘industries’ around such statistical differences – in such a way that there is a large suite of highly-paid jobs available to highlight these inequalities of averages. Such political theatre typically generates much heat and very little actionable ‘light’.

Essentially, what is supposed to happen is that much resource goes into these funded governance structures, and it is meant to trickle-down to the leverage group of disadvantaged people. The result in practice is that Left governments consume large slices of the national income, while achieving very little for the disadvantaged groups ostensibly being served. Trickle-down never worked. Instead the result is too much political superstructure and too little ballast. Government becomes top-heavy.

(These same principles apply to the under-provision – and particularly the lack of maintenance – of physical infrastructure as well. Hence all the water leaks from neglected pipes, and potholes across the roading network; pipes are ballast, and potholes are examples of missing ballast. Gold-plated schemes are created and discarded.)

Policies which benefit ‘Maoris’

The disconnect between the Treaty Māori and the leaders of the present government, is that the present leaders have an individualist mindset which means the parties talk past each other. Chrisopher Luxon genuinely wants to improve life for ‘Maoris’. Problems arise because his philosophical approach of targeting the needy – disproportionately ‘Maoris’ – has its own bureaucratic short-comings; and because his understandings of public finance are medieval (in the better sense of that word), and because he is a mercantilist at heart. Mr Luxon equates national progress with ‘making money’, with the accrual of financial wealth.

Nevertheless, and despite his philosophical blindspots, Luxon is correct to emphasise that expanding discriminatory superstructure is part of the problem, rather than a solution, to the statistical disadvantages used to justify that superstructure. Christoper Luxon and David Seymour clearly understand that effective direct support for the disadvantaged will disproportionately assist ‘Maoris’, because Maoris are disproportionately disadvantaged. Further, direct assistance also provides support for disadvantaged ‘non-Maoris’, who are no more nor less deserving. Indeed – and given the practical Ministry of Health definition of who is a ‘Maori’ – there are more disadvantaged ‘non-Maoris’ in Aotearoa New Zealand than disadvantaged ‘Maoris’ (because ‘Maoris’ represent perhaps twenty percent of that database of individual Aoteroans).

Collectivism and Individualism

As Stephen Joyce noted in his recent book, collectivism has an individual dimension and individualism necessarily has a collectivist dimension. Both sides of the present ‘debate’ need to expand their fields of vision, and address these blindspots.

‘Trickle-down’ policies have wasted much of this nation’s income. The Left version of trickle-down is no better than the Right version (which includes ‘tax-cuts for the rich’) which the Left like to lampoon. And the Right indulge in much more collectivism – albeit private sector collectivism – than they would ever want to admit. (Proper macro-accounting, incorporating public equity, helps to reveal the over-distribution of resources to elite private interests.)

It is clear that Christopher Luxon and David Seymour would have preferred not to have Winston Peters and Shane Jones as lead rhetoricians for their government. The irony is that, with one small adjustment to National’s tax policies, National would probably have got at least five percent more votes, and we would have a two-party rather than a three party coalition today. The adjustment was to have an income tax policy which only gave tax cuts to people earning less than $180,000 a year. National’s rhetoric of tax cuts to “low and middle income earners” was hollow, because everyone knew that high income earners were also getting the maximum tax cut (not counting a contrived higher amount only envisaged for a few thousand families). All National had to do was to bring the top tax threshold down to about $160,000 (refer my Christopher Luxon is tone deaf, 14 Nov 2023); but it did not do this, on account of its own lack of imagination and unwillingness to seek or take advice from outsiders.

Māori are important to Aotearoa New Zealand, not because of their ‘race’ but because they were Aotearoa’s first boat people. The Tiriti is not about ethnicity – though it is about indigeneity – and people who want to continue discussing its principles are not racist. Separatist agendas based on distinguishing individual Aotearoans on the basis of their race – their ethnicity, their ancestry – are racist. Collectivism averts the racist problem of individual discrimination, but creates another problem; the growth of an expanded high-earning elite class which leverages off rather than practically addresses socio-economic problems which are there for all to see.

Christopher Luxon operates by a mercantilist metaphor that sees Aotearoa New Zealand as a ship that must “go forward”. While that metaphor represents both shallow politics and shallow economics, the prime minister does at least understand that superstructure sinks ships.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Last week, at the end of the long summer shutdown of Auckland’s train services, messages came through from AT about a limited restart on 15 January, though there would be no trains between Waitematā and Newmarket.

Waitematā? When I looked it up in Google maps the top entry was of course the Harbour; followed by the former DHB (now Te Whatu Ora, Waitematā) which covered North Auckland and West Auckland, but not Auckland Central. When I tried the AT app’s Journey Planner, there was a rugby club in Henderson; but no train station.

In yesterday’s service announcements that they referred to Waitematā Station (Britomart). Today there was an electronic signboard at the station with a red line through ‘Britomart’ and a notice that the station was now to be called Waitematā. However, the main, very large, signboard – showing train departures, still called the place ‘Britomart Train Station’. The announcements on board the train said ‘Britomart’. (And the train, which was running late, skipped Newmarket Station entirely, with no warning that I had detected, though I might not have been paying full attention; normally more people get out of the train at Newmarket than at the Downtown station, whatever the current name for Downtown Auckland is.)

Today I looked up Waitematā Station in the NZ Herald’s app. There’s a story from 9 August which mentions Waitematā/Britomart in passing. Then there was a 28 May story about Waitematā Police at a petrol station. Then I hit gold dust, a story from 16 March Britomart to be renamed as seven Auckland railway stations receive new names. It’s a story I have no memory of; I recall nothing at the time on the radio or television news networks. This is confirmed by checking RNZ’s news sites, though there was a cryptic story on 9 April New Zealand cities suffering crisis of identity – architect. This RNZ story includes this text: “Britomart Station which has thankfully been renamed Waitematā”. It mentions the names of the other stations although an “artist’s impression” of ‘Karanga-a-Hape’ still shows it as Karangahape. Mt Eden will be changed to Maungawhau, and the new Aotea Station has been renamed ‘Te Waihorotiu’ (which to me, having worked at Longburn while a student, has the resonance of a Hamilton freezing works with its outlet onto the ‘wai’ of the Waikato River).

I am a bit of a news junkie, though I pay particular attention to the mainstream media because I’m interested in the news that most people most readily get. As much as I like to know what is happening, I also like to know what people believe is happening; or not happening, as the case may be. I am pretty sure that most people in Auckland still have no idea about the renames of their stations.

While I believe the renaming of the Aotea Station will prove to be the most problematic – when people find out about it, that is – I have problems with the replacement of the name Britomart with Waitematā. Waitematā as a place name has historically always been associated with Auckland’s northwest. Tim Shadbolt’s first stint as a mayor was in Waitematā City, a composite place made up from Titirangi, Te Atatū, Lincoln and Waitākere. Before that, the name was most associated with Michael Bassett’s old electorate, an electoral district that from 1871 to 1978 referred to lands that would now mostly be in Upper Harbour and Te Atatū. Waitematā is at best a bland name for the Downtown station; a name that undermines the heritage of Waitematā as a name.

Further the name Britomart resonates with the early years of contact between British subjects and Aotearoans; the name Coromandel has a similar background. And will Britomart Place also be renamed; and Britomart Shopping Mall? Britomart is a name with a precise identity of place; Waitematā not so.

Name changes in New Zealand have been problematic, and also incomplete. The change of name from Mount Egmont to Mount Taranaki was widely supported, but the national park is still Egmont National Park. I was also strongly in favour of proposal to rename Victoria University of Wellington to The University of Wellington; I have a strong attachment to that august(ish) place of learning, yet others with similarly strong attachments couldn’t stomach the change, so it didn’t happen. I am not a fuddy-duddy conservative, unlike some people who resist name changes.

The biggest puzzle to me is why, back in March, the mainstream media organisations did not consider these name changes to be news. And they still don’t think the new names are news.

My sense is that a substantial number of Auckland’s transport users will resent these name changes, and will feel that they have been imposed on them without consultation, especially as it all seems to be part of the unpopular co-governance agenda which was rejected by the Aotearoan public in October. (The articles cited above certainly point to these name changes as being co-governance by stealth.) Yet the main blame – if that’s the right word – must go onto the mainstream media; not the former government, which has already faced the consequences of its arrogance. Surely the NZ Herald or RNZ or TVNZ or Newshub could have seen that this was a story?

I am reminded of the saga of the decimal coin designs in 1966 (see New Zealand adopts decimal currency), when the original secretly designed decimal coin motifs were leaked to the media by Robert Muldoon, and how the putting-right of that bureaucratic fiasco launched his subsequent political career. Once the public had input into the designs, the uncluttered James Berry set was chosen, and all agreed that his designs were a vast improvement on the originals.

Naming places and designing coin-faces might seems like small matters. But such small matters can prove to be our greatest tests of democracy.

When I returned home today, I caught a bus at a place named ‘Taha Whakararo o te Tiriti o Albert’. It looks to me with my imperfect knowledge of Te Reo that it was a reference to the thoughts of Prince Albert (Queen’s consort in 1840) about the Treaty of Waitangi (and Albert was a thinker). But, in translation, it turned out to be the ‘Lower Albert Street’ bus stop.

Some more whakaaro about place names

I find that the present promotion of Māori as New Zealand’s pre-eminent language of governance to be somewhat shallow. Take the ‘Aotearoa’ lobby. We hear the word ‘Aotearoa’ a lot in political theatre, but we almost never hear the demonym ‘Aotearoan’. (As a contrast, we hear the words ‘Australia’ and ‘Australian’ in near-equal measure.) I do my best to redress the imbalance, by using ‘Aotearoan’ more than I use ‘Aotearoa’; the promotion of ‘Aotearoan’ is a burden that I wish more others would share.

Next, my educative life took place in a major Aotearoan city, Papaioea. But the only time I ever hear the beautiful name of my home city is by weather forecasters during Māori Language Week. (Indeed, the suburb in which I lived, Hokowhitu, has most probably had more residents with PhD degrees than any other suburb in Aotearoa, at least between 1970 and 2020. I have cultural origins of science and learning of which I am proud, even if I didn’t quite manage to complete my own PhD!)

I also note that I presently live near to the former Crown Lynn site. A street there – Waikomiti Street – has the original name for my suburb. Indeed, I suspect that in my lifetime my suburb may revert to that name. I am settled in West Auckland, so I may indeed – many years from now – come to rest in peace in Waikomiti. My basic epitaph, of my places, may prove to be:

Ōtaki
Paekākāriki
Hokowhitu
Papaioea
Waikomiti

I belong here. I don’t need to have Māori ancestry to prove that. But, as Aotearoan as I am, I am first and foremost a citizen of the world. I do not believe in Aotearoan or any other kind of exceptionalism. I do not believe in looking inward, wishing that Aotearoa had remained undiscovered by non-Māori, as a response to the past and present arrogances of our unbalanced world. Names like Britomart and Coromandel remind us of Greece, India, and England.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Last year Joelle Holland invested all of the money she had saved for a home deposit and put it into a baby product business called Hawaiiki Pēpi.

The sole focus of Hawaiiki Pēpi is to teach Māori children to be proud of their culture and language.

Hawaiiki Pēpi has already reached more than $100,000 in sales, but most importantly for its owner, it has delivered on its promise to encourage and normalise all things Māori.

“I don’t have any experience in business at all. But what I do have is a passion for my culture and the revitalisation of our language,” she says.

“This venture was a way for me to express that and show people how beautiful Māori can be.”

Holland (Tainui, Tūhoe, Ngāti Whātua) came up with the idea after giving birth to her children Ivy-āio, three, and Ryda Hawaiiki, one.

The online business that Holland manages and runs from her home, creates Māori-designed products such as blankets for babies.

Proud to be Māori
“When my eldest child was in my puku, I was trying to find baby products that showed that we were proud to be Māori. There weren’t any at the time. That’s how the idea of Hawaiiki Pēpi came about,” she says.

With the support of her partner Tayllis, Holland decided to take a risk and enter the competitive baby industry.

To prepare for her very first start up, Holland took business courses, conducted her own research and did 18 months of development before launching Hawaiiki Pēpi at the end of last year.

“The aim is to enhance identity, te reo Māori and whakapapa. We are hoping to wrap our pēpi in their culture from birth so they can gain a sense of who they are, creating strong, confident and unapologetically proud Māori.”

Holland grew up in Auckland and went to kohanga reo and kura kaupapa before spending her high school years boarding at St Joseph’s Māori Girls College in Napier.

She says that language is the key connection to one’s culture. It was through learning te reo Māori from birth that instilled in her a strong sense of cultural identity. It has motivated her in all of the important life decisions that she has made.

‘Struggled through teenage years’
“I struggled throughout my teenage years. I was trying to find my purpose. I was searching for who I was, where I came from and where I belonged.

“I realised that the strong connection I had to my tupuna and my people was through the language. Everything has reverted back to te reo Māori and it has always been an anchor in my life.”

Holland went to Masey University to qualify to teach Māori in schools, juggling study, with taking care of two children under three, and starting a new business.

This year, she completed her degree in the Bachelor of Teaching and Learning Kura Kaupapa Māori programme. The qualification has allowed Holland to add another powerful tool in her life that nurtures Māoritanga in the younger generation and contributes to the revitalisation of te reo Māori.

“I loved my studies. Every aspect of the degree was immersed in te reo Māori, from our essays, presentations to our speeches. Although I grew up speaking Māori, I realised there is still so much more to learn,” she says.

For now, Holland will be focusing on growing her business and raising her children before embarking on a career as a teacher.

“My end goal is to encourage all tamariki to be proud of their Māoritanga, encourage them to speak their language and stand tall.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Christina Dawa Kutsmana Thomas is on a mission to save her indigenous language from extinction. There are only eight people from her reservation in the state of Nevada who are fluent in Numu Yadooana — Northern Paiute, and they’re aged 70+.

“I feel like I’m under immense pressure. If I don’t do this, then who will? My people have become assimilated into modern life and we have to face the harsh reality that few people speak our language,” she says.

“It’s harder for my people to have a language renaissance because there are so many different tribes in America — 574. That’s 574 completely different languages, cultures, and histories.”

Thomas has spent the last eight months in New Zealand as a US Fullbright Scholar, attending kohanga reo, kura kaupapa, and classes at the University of Auckland, to observe and understand how te reo is being taught.

It’s been an eye-opening experience compared to how indigenous languages are treated in the US, she says.

“It’s hard for people to find time to learn our language, it’s a struggle to get people to attend community classes or seek it out on their own. We also don’t have resources, books, or a strong curriculum that ensures fluency for new language speakers.

“I feel grounded being in Aotearoa because I can see the support and the love for te reo and Māori culture, and it gives me the reassurance that I can do this.”

Growing up not speaking
Thomas grew up on the Pyramid Lake Paiute Reservation in Wadsworth, Nevada. Although it was a close-knit community, their Native language was discouraged from being spoken at home.

“My grandmother’s first language was Paiute, but she didn’t speak it to her own children, and discouraged my great-grandma to teach it to my mom. I then in turn grew up not speaking.

“At this time, Native people in the US were discouraged to speak their language and were trying to blend in with society in order to save their children from ridicule and racist remarks.”

Thomas was in her 20s and attending the University of Nevada in Reno when she came across an elder from her tribe who was teaching Paiute language classes at the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony.

“I grew up on a reservation and I knew my tribal affiliations but I did not know my history or the language. I started going to language classes and caught on quickly.”

Driving force
She was encouraged to take one-on-one lessons and found a new passion. Thomas has since been a teacher of the Paiute language in public high schools, a language consultant, and instructor for her tribe. She was the driving force behind the Paiute language being established as the first Indigenous language course at the University of Nevada.

For the past decade, Thomas has also been involved in Native arts and language regeneration projects. She was set to study to become an orthodontist, but her passion for language revitalisation and her culture made her change careers.

She enrolled to study to earn a PhD in Native American Studies at the University of California in the city of Davis.

She spent two weeks in New Zealand in 2018 as an undergraduate student conducting research on te reo, visiting language nests, primary, secondary, and tertiary schools.

In 2019, Christina returned to present her research at the University of Waikato for the Native American Indigenous Studies Association yearly international conference. She vowed then that she would be back for an extended period to focus and observe further about language regeneration.

Thomas returned to Aotearoa in February 2023 and will be flying home at the end of this month.

“New Zealand is known for its revitalisation of the te reo Māori. I had previously made connections here, so I knew that whānau would be able to help place me into schools and spaces for me to observe and learn.”

20 percent “native speakers”
Until World War II, most Māori spoke their te reo as their first language. But by the 1980s, fewer than 20 percent of Māori spoke the language well enough to be classed as native speakers.

In response, Māori leaders initiated Māori language recovery-programs such as the kōhanga reo movement, which started in 1982 and immersed infants in Māori from infancy to school age.

In 1989, official support was given for kura kaupapa Māori-primary and secondary Māori-language immersion schools.

The Māori Language Act 1987 was passed as a response to the Waitangi Tribunal finding that the Māori language was a taonga, a treasure or valued possession, under the Treaty of Waitangi and the Act gave te reo Māori official language status.

“I’d love to see everything that has been accomplished here in Aotearoa happen back home in my community,” Thomas says.

“My dream after I complete my PhD is to go home and open our very own kohanga reo.”

Thomas says what she has observed in New Zealand has been invaluable and will carry with her for the rest of her life.

“I’ve seen how teachers and kura are working towards Māori-based learning, by, with and for Māori.”

Trans-indigenous connection
“There’s a trans-indigenous connection. Our language is connected to our land and our ancestors by our songs, languages and stories. The beliefs we have as Indigenous people are connected and similar in so many ways.”

Throughout this journey, Thomas has brought her seven-year-old son, Jace Naki’e, along for the experience.

“I was really excited for him to be able to go to school here and have this experience. He loves kapa haka and learning about Māori culture. He’s also been able to share his culture in return.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

On the 35th anniversary of te reo Māori becoming an official language, the Māori Language Commission is warning more work is needed to ensure its survival.

In 1987, a bill introduced by Koro Wetere was passed after years of campaigning — including the Māori language petition, the land marches and Ngā Tamatoa movements.

Until the late 1960s, the language was officially discouraged and tamariki faced corporal punishment for speaking their native tongue.

Broadcaster and educator Dr Haare Williams — on an RNZ panel about the language bill broadcast in 1986 — said it was crucial for the country that it survive.

“We should never underestimate the emotive power of the Māori language. The danger of loss is irretrievable and like the plague the danger is contagious,” Williams said.

“Should we lose the Māori language in this country, both Māori and Pākehā will be the losers and both will be guilty of allowing it to die.”

Thirty-five years later, Te Taura Whiri i te reo Māori chief executive Ngahiwi Apanui is celebrating where te reo is at but also taking stock.

Demand for courses high
While demand for courses is through the roof and about 30 percent of people today consider themselves proficient in te reo Māori, it would still be classified as endangered.

Apanui said the goal of one million reo speakers by 2040 was still a long way off.

“Only 3000 teachers today to satisfy demand for kids going into Māori medium and for English medium, they need 30,000 teachers. So that kind of gives you an idea of the problem or the issue that we face,” Apanui said.

“The good thing is there’s unprecedented demand for te reo but the issue is what is the production line.”

That was evident in the disparities faced by the very language nests that are meant to help the reo flourish.

Kohanga and Kura Kaupapa were set up in the same wave in which Parliament acknowledged te reo Māori. But since their inception they have had to fight for funding, resources and acknowledgment.

Te Rūnanganui of Ngā Kura Kaupapa chair Rawiri Wright said if they were better resourced, successive governments would be closer to their own reo goals.

“There were more than 800 kōhanga reo, there are now 480 there or thereabouts and if Kura Kaupapa Māori had been properly and equitably resourced … we currently have 6500 students in kaupapa Māori but there should be closer to 10,000.”

inequities over the language
Wright said teaching the language runs deeper than just understanding what was being spoken.

“It’s not just about reo Māori, it’s about mātauranga Māori, tikangi Māori, Māori worldview, Māori face, belief, essence and just being Māori,” he said.

Ngahiwi Apanui said there were still inequities in accessing the language, and mainstream schools were important to addressing that.

“Not all Māori are in Māori medium … and often it’s socioeconomically related, if you look through South Auckland, for instance, you won’t find as many children coming out of families speaking te reo Māori as you would if you looked at the middle working class sector of society in Wellington,” Apanui said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Today’s Matariki celebrations signal the maturing of Aotearoa New Zealand, says Māori leader Sir Pou Temara.

A ceremony attended by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and other dignitaries was held in Wellington to mark the first national public holiday in New Zealand for Matariki.

On a still Wellington morning at Te Papa, the hautapu ceremony was led by Sir Pou Temara and an array of tohunga.

“Today is a moment in time. This is a moment that future generations will look upon and say this is when we came of age,” Sir Pou said.

Matariki is the start of the Māori New Year Matariki – a time for celebration, remembrance, growth and renewal and events to acknowledge this have been organised across the country.

RNZ is marking Matariki with special programming throughout the day with highlights including a live broadcast of the celebrations from Te Papa hosted by Julian Wilcox and Māni Dunlop and an interview with renowned Māori astronomer Professor Rangi Mātāmua.

Celebrating Matariki. Video: RNZ News

‘Unites us under the stars’
Prime Minister Ardern recalled announcing the holiday in Rotorua in September 2020 and the joy that greeted the news, especially among young people.

She said she had witnessed several special moments this week, as people prepared for Matariki, including during her visit yesterday to Wainouimata Intermediate School to watch tamariki stage a performance of the many stories of Matariki.

The prime minister said the public holiday should not divide us by Māori ancestry or other, rather “it unites us under the stars of Aotearoa”.

“Matariki provides us with a chance to reflect; to think of those we have lost and to prepare and share a sense of hope and optimism for the future.

“I can’t think of a better moment in time for us to take up what Matariki has to offer us as individuals but also as a nation.”

Matariki offered “a space where there is room for us all,” she said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Aotearoa New Zealand will enjoy a new official public holiday on June 24, with the country marking Matariki — the start of the Māori New Year. But with it comes the temptation for businesses to use the day to drive sales.

Some Māori have already expressed concern that businesses were positioning themselves to market Matariki as a shopping event.

On the back of those concerns, Skye Kimura, chief executive of Māori cultural marketing and communications agency Tātou, launched a campaign called “Matariki is not for sale”.

“No one wants to see a Matariki Big Mac,” she argued.

But those trying to defend Matariki from mass commercialisation could be fighting a difficult battle.

Few public holidays, either in New Zealand and elsewhere, have been immune to commercial interests. In the United States, for example, businesses are facing criticism for attempting to make money from Juneteenth, a holiday to celebrate the emancipation of slaves.

Human tendency to mark the change
One of the difficulties facing critics of the commercialisation of public holidays is that they may be fighting deep habits born out of capitalism and human nature.

A lot of our special occasions are structured around various parts of the year and changes in the pattern of life. The earliest pagan rituals were about the change in seasons and to mark what was different from one period of life to the next.

From a social and possibly evolutionary perspective, we are already primed to do something different from our day-to-day activities to mark the significant changes we see around us.

When we have these seasonal celebrations, it doesn’t take much of a nudge for retailers to say, hey, people are looking to mark the change and shopping is a really good way to enact that transition between two phases — an “out with old, in with the new” message.

Shopping to celebrate is what we do
Each year is already punctuated with several cultural celebrations that have, over time, become shopping events. The most classic example is the commercialisation of Christmas.

Even though there is the Christian tradition of the three wise men giving gifts at the birth of Christ, establishing the ritual of gift giving, the three months leading up to December 25 have become about sales and opportunities to spend.

Easter, Valentine’s Day, Queen’s Birthday weekend and even Labour Day have all become sales events for retailers.

Matariki also lands in a quiet time of the year for retail — right in the middle of winter and between the big shopping weekends of Queen’s Birthday and Labour Day.

Potential for blowback against retailers
But when businesses commercialise anything there is always the question of whether they have the legitimacy to do so, or whether they’re bastardising the event for commercial gain.

There is the potential for significant blowback for businesses looking to cash in on Matariki. And they only need to look at Anzac Day as an example of commemoration that remains off limits to blatant commercialisation.

Yes, it’s fine to sell poppies or to have a donation box at your point of sale. It’s even okay to advertise with a “thank you for your service” banner. But if a business tries obviously to make money on the back of Anzac Day, people start to get a little upset.

That doesn’t mean businesses don’t try to get around public sentiment. Every year there is an element of “Anzac washing”, where companies try to make it look like they’re supportive of veterans, even if they have otherwise done nothing to support former and current military personnel.

It is likely that how we handle Anzac Day will provide a baseline for critics assessing businesses that try to use Matariki as a way to drive sales.

Businesses could be judged by whether or not they have Matariki sales, or whether there is some sort of attempt to “Matariki-wash” their other commercial offerings.

Businesses should tread carefully
It is an area full of potential landmines, with little clear benefit at this stage.

Not only is there the commercialisation of a public holiday, which some people find annoying already, but there’s also the debate about cultural appropriation versus cultural appreciation.

Companies need to realise the potential for blowback and controversy is multiplied above other, more established public holidays. There are those who are annoyed about another public holiday adding labour costs for businesses. And there even are those objecting to the supposed “wokeness” of celebrating Matariki.

At a bare minimum, then, businesses determined to use Matariki as part of their sales pitch need to understand what the celebration is really about and its significance within the community.

It will be interesting to see if any are willing to risk the minefield for the sake of sales that come from an extra three-day weekend, or whether they’ll wait and see what happens to those who take the risk first.

Dr Mike Lee is associate professor of marketing, University of Auckland. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

If there’s one thing Matthew Tukaki thought he and the protesters at Parliament might agree on, it’s the right to free speech. But after starting a campaign to end the occupation, he discovered that wasn’t quite the case.

“I started a campaign on Sunday, which kind of went viral, called #endtheprotest, via social media,” the Wellington-based chair of the National Māori Authority said.

The hashtag is now one of the top trending topics for New Zealand Twitter users and has been shared by close to 60,0000 people on Facebook, hitting a reach of 2.3 million accounts.

Tutaki said the backlash, which had included physical threats and racial abuse, was initially just online but it quickly escalated once protesters realised he was behind the campaign.

“I came out of a hotel on Sunday and someone recognised me, they grabbed me by the arm, and the force was so great, they ripped the sleeve off my anorak and left a bruise,” he said.

Never one to let a single incident perturb him, Tukaki passed the protests on his way to lunch a few days later.

“I was down there on my way to get some sushi and a group of about eight of them piled in, shouting verbal abuse and trying to physically intimidate me. One of them was about to lunge and if it wasn’t for the police, it could have turned into something much more brutal.”

No self-respect
He said the protesters seemed to have no self-respect, either for their own space or the environment they were occupying, given the amount of human waste that was swirling around Parliament grounds.

“It’s like someone has turned up at your house, put a tent in your lounge, and then shat in your sink. It’s another level of disrespect out there and these people have no respect for the whenua.”

Having attended many protests over his life as well as having many friends and family involved in different types of activism, he said the difference in how a Māori-led campaign operated was stark.

“Ihumātao was totally different, hīkoi to parliament are different,” he said. “With Māori, when we have a protest, our people will go down to Wellington, we prosecute our kaupapa, present our petition and members of parliament will often come out to greet you.

“It’s always well-organised, and it’s safe and then we clean up after ourselves and we continue to prosecute the kaupapa back home from our marae.

“This is completely different. It’s violent, it’s aggressive and they have no respect for the whenua.”

He noted that even after protesters sent out a press release welcoming visitors, “a reporter from Wellington Live went down there, and was beaten up”.

Māori culture appropriated
He said it was particularly concerning to see both Māori culture and New Zealand’s wartime history being appropriated.

“Unfortunately our Māori whānau are being used as clickbait by those in the alternative right, who are pushing messages from the United States,” he said.

“We’re being used, our symbols are being appropriated. Our tino rangatiraranga flag is flying next to the Trump flag, next to where a Nazi swastika symbol was painted on a war memorial.”

He said the prime minister had made the right call not engaging and he felt some blame could be laid at the feet of politicians who had helped stoke racist conspiracies.

“Many politicians have used Māori issues as a political football over the last 12 months,” he said.

“What they have done is they have set free the sorts of racist attitudes that have been hiding in dark corners, and look at what those same politicians have done now — blame the government for it all.”

Peddling of racist ideas ‘normalised’
This wasn’t the first time Tukaki had received abuse, given his role with the National Māori Authority, which advocated for iwi and Māori business and community service organisations around New Zealand, but he was concerned by how normalised the peddling of racist ideas was becoming.

“I was getting racist and threatening messages before the protest, but what this has taught me is the issue of racism is out there more, because people are now emboldened to show their names and faces.

“And to be frank, people like [David] Seymour and [Judith] Collins, [Winston] Peters and Matt King all need to take responsibility for the beast in the cave they have conveniently let loose.”

Justin Latif is a Local Democracy Reporting project journalist. Read more of his stories here. Asia Pacific Report is a community partner.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The co-leader of New Zealand’s minority Māori Party has launched a blistering attack on white privilege and the opposition National Party which it accuses of “igniting racism” in the framing of a debate about radical political change.

In a provocative introduction to her weekly column in The New Zealand Herald today, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer asks: “Hey coloniser, so let me get this right, you want to lead a debate about indigenous rights that you helped to destroy?”

She writes in her media message to Pākehā colonisers: “You dishonour Te Tiriti [1840 Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand’s founding political partnership document] and promote continuing to do so.

“You stole our land and our language. You denounce our history, preferring to educate on anything but us. And you have done nothing to reverse this, instead preferring to ignore the problems.

“We are in an inherently white system that you designed, yet you feel oppressed that Māori want to stop the pain of inequities. Your systemic racism continues to perpetuate intergenerational trauma, which you refuse to accept.”

While acknowledging that National Party leader Judith Collins claimed that New Zealanders “find racism abhorrent”, she added that “in my opinion she is igniting racism through a carefully deployed campaign — apparently with the help of former leader Don Brash”.

Ngarewa-Packer says New Zealanders are entitled to a conversation about radical change, but they are not “counteracting with alternative solutions”, preferring to focus on what she saw as the “misery of struggling Māori whānau”.

‘White hypocrisy’
Criticising what she describes as “white hypocrisy”, Ngarewa-Packer called instead for a “debate about the coloniser’s entitlements”.

“And rather than start on a timeline plucked out to help lift right-wing leaders’ dying polls, let’s start at the beginning: 181 years ago, and discuss the rights of tangata whenua and the radical change needed in Aotearoa to see those rights fulfilled,” she said.

“And yes, I hear you. Why should you pay for your ancestors’ mistakes? But why should we, either?

“No one can give our language, lives, and land (actually this is possible) back. There is no true price for our tāonga. But we must at least stop the lying and stop making a mockery of tangata whenua with this pathetic dog-whistling.”

Ngarewa-Packer says a debate was needed on how New Zealand economy had been built off the “displacement of tangata whenua”.

“How tangata whenua are the largest benefactors to this nation, having accepted settlements worth 1 per cent loss of whenua stolen, in a process determined by the Crown!”

Disparity in the economy
Among examples Ngarewa-Packer gave of the disparity between the Pākehā and Māori share of the economy, were the NZ$1.9m funding for Te Matatini, the “largest kapa haka event on the planet, versus $16.9m for the NZ Symphony Orchestra”.

She also cited the $250m spent on the America’s Cup this year.

Ngarewa-Packer has also called for less hypocrisy about “crackdowns needed to stop crime”

“Let’s turn our gaze to white-collar crime, which has seen an estimated $2 billion to $4 billion loss to Aotearoa, through tax avoidance and evasion.”

She added that Māori sought to “drive our own tino rangatiratanga [self-determination]”.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

“Welfare dependent”, “inferior”, “savages”, “natives”…

Walking through Parliament, I head to my office in the press gallery, passing gilded portraits of reporters who came before, and I recall that the people who adorn these walls were the same people who published some of the most racist rhetoric that has ever been printed, rhetoric that has shaped our society and the way the public perceives my people.

That’s how I feel every day walking into my office and, while there are days I feel numb to it, there definitely are days when it shakes me and makes me feel alone — because not only does the space not look like me or represent me, it also celebrates those who oppressed the very thought that someone like me could exist.

A good friend of mine often reminds me that “growth and comfort cannot coexist,” and, ultimately, that’s why I continue to put myself in this uncomfortable environment because I know my people deserve to have their perspectives represented.

I know growth exists here because, for me, comfort sure as hell doesn’t.

However, the discomfort level has felt even more oppressive than usual over the past couple of weeks as Māori have been the centre of attention in parliamentary debates, with Māori-focused health initiatives being called separatist.

Attempts by Māori to claim tino rangatiratanga, the right of self-determination as promised in te Tiriti o Waitangi, are scoffed at.

High-level political banter follows that basically amounts to: “Shut up, Māori. You’re not special. You’re lucky to have us managing you so just try to conform. Try to be a Pākehā like us and your life will be much better.”

It’s about me and my whānau
While some New Zealanders probably see this debate as robust and necessary, I don’t believe they understand the overwhelming effect it has on Māori personally.

This is because while non-Māori may hear phrases like, “Māori are more likely to be diagnosed with type-2 diabetes than non-Māori counterparts,” what I hear is that I am more likely to be diagnosed with type-2 diabetes.

When you hear that Māori are twice as likely to die from cancer as the average New Zealander due to inequities in the health system, what I hear is that my siblings are more likely to die of cancer.

When you hear that Māori will probably die seven years younger than other nationalities, what I hear is that my parents will probably die seven years younger than my friends’ parents.

To non-Māori, these are just statistics. But for Māori, it is literally a case of life and death.

So why wouldn’t Māori want to see more money and energy put into Māori health? Why wouldn’t Māori want a health system created and managed by Māori?

The very existence of disparities is racist. It makes sense that we would want to pull away from a system where it seems that just being Māori is a deficit.

Stop the rhetoric
This is the reality we know and understand too well. This is also why hearing non-Māori debate what is good for Māori and whether it’s a viable option for New Zealand is sickening. It’s painful and once again it’s uncomfortable.

While my years in journalism have taught me to avoid making assumptions, I often think that parliamentarians must know how their words influence and affect the country, resulting in discomfort at best and outright racial discrimination at worst.

Hearing the echo of their own words in hate speech on the streets must be enough for them to take care with how they speak about Māori.

If people dying directly from the outcomes of racial discrimination is not enough to stop the rhetoric, what will?

These thoughts are my reality, the reason I make that lonely walk through the press gallery every day.

Because the fact of the matter is that while the majority of our national leaders talk about how Māori can be better, I have to live it and be one of the bridges between the political world and the public and ensure that te iwi Māori is informed on the issues that affect us all.

I don’t get to hang my Māori hat up at the end of the day. Walking away would be the easy option.

But when that thought rears its head, and when unseen voices whisper at me that it’d be easier to just give up and try to fit in with the Pākehā instead, I remember the wise words of another Māori who challenged the rhetoric of what a Māori should be, and I get on with the job:

“It is preposterous that any Māori should aspire to become a poor Pākehā, when their true destiny, prescribed by the creator, is to become a great Māori.” – Tā James Himi Hēnare

Rukuwai Tīpene-Allan is a journalist for Te Ao Māori News. She has also worked on Te Kaea, Kawekōrero and Rereātea. This article first appeared on Māori Television’s website and has been republished on Asia Pacific Report with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Māori Party co-leader Rawiri Waititi has been ejected from New Zealand’s Parliament for doing a haka in protest against questions by the Opposition about race-based policy.

Opposition conservative National Party leader Judith Collins was asking Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern about her views of the He Puapua report, which provides recommendations to the government about how it can give effect to Māori self-sovereignty under the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi.

Waititi called on the Speaker of the House Trevor Mallard to intervene on what he called “racist propaganda” against Māori in the House.

Mallard ruled the views expressed in the House did not reach an inappropriate standard.

He warned Waititi when he raised another point of order that relitigation would put him at risk of expulsion from the House.

Waititi said views on indigenous rights should only be determined by the indigenous tangata whenua – which he followed up with a haka.

He was expelled from the House.

Green MPs Marama Davidson (co-leader) and Ricardo Menéndez backed Waititi’s action with Davidson tweeting support for the “calling out [of] the absolute ongoing racist comments” by Collins.

Kia ora @packer_deb and @Rawiri_Waititi for calling out the absolute ongoing racist comments from Judith Collins in the House just now. This House absolutely deserves better than a narrative that harms tangata whenua communities and damages a pathway for true Tiriti justice.

— Marama Davidson MP (@MaramaDavidson) May 12, 2021

Solidarity with @packer_deb & @Rawiri_Waititi for challenging racism in the House and reminding us that how we discuss policy can result in real harm to the communities we serve.

Thankful to @MaramaDavidson + @jamespeshaw for challenging these racist narratives on our behalf.

— Ricardo Menéndez (@RMarchNZ) May 12, 2021

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

New Zealand’s parliamentary Speaker has offered an olive branch to Māori Party co-leader Rawiri Waititi over his refusal to wear a tie in the debating chamber yesterday.

Speaker Trevor Mallard’s office has confirmed he has encouraged the party to submit to the Standing Orders Committee asking that hei-tiki be allowed instead of a tie.

Waititi speaks to RNZ Morning Report‘s Corin Dann:

Waititi was booted out of Parliament’s debating chamber after refusing to wear a tie, in contravention of the rules.

Speaker Trevor Mallard last year announced he would reconsider the requirement, saying he himself believed the tie rule to be outdated.

He ultimately ruled however that the dress standard would remain as that was the will of the majority of MPs.

On the first sitting day of 2021 today, Waititi arrived without a tie. He argued that he was wearing Māori business attire with a taonga around his neck, but Mallard said he was not convinced by that argument.

Mallard notes no party response
“I am therefore going to indicate to the leader of Te Pati Māori that I will not be calling him while he is not wearing a tie and he is not to enter the house again not wearing a tie,” Mallard said.

Mallard noted the Māori Party did not respond to the review of the dress code.

Waititi made several attempts to speak in the debating chamber, despite Mallard’s order, and was ejected from the house.

‘My taonga is my tie,’ says Waititi. Video: RNZ

After being removed from the debating chamber, Waititi said not being able to wear a taonga around his neck instead of a tie was a breach of the rights of indigenous people.

“That is not part of my culture, ties, and it’s forcing the indigenous peoples into wearing what I describe as a colonial noose,” Waititi said.

When asked if he would wear a tie at Parliament tomorrow [Wednesday], Waititi said “you’ll have to wait until tomorrow”.

“Our people have worn these types of ties for generations, thousands of years. And it’s time that Parliament, which was consented by my ancestors through Te Tiriti o Waitangi, recognised our right and freedom to express our own cultural identity, in a place that’s supposed to be a place for democracy,” Waititi told Checkpoint.

‘I dressed … quite smart’
“If you see the way I was dressed it wasn’t disrespectful, it was actually I think quite smart. I own to two consultancy businesses, and also our farming business on our family farm. And I never wear a tie,” he said.

“I will wear a tie when I want to wear a tie. But I will not be forced to wear it.

“I will not be forced to be wearing anything that I shouldn’t be wearing… Why are Pākehā making Māori dress like they want us to dress?”

The enforced dress code is hypocritical and an example colonial ways that suppress tangata whenua, he said.

“Parliament should be a place where we could freely practice our democracy and represent the people that voted us in.

“The majority of the people that voted me in are not business attire people… Let’s cut the myth that everybody must wear ties. I’ve been overseas and met with corporate people all over the world. None of them wear ties, they’re open-collared suit-wearing people, because ties are now outdated.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Media Watch Newsdesk

Three years ago, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern campaigned on kindness and transformation.

As New Zealand heads to the voting booths this month, Te Ao host Moana Maniapoto on Māori Television sat down with the Leader of the Labour Party and asked her about the big issues facing Māori.

Te Ao editors: “We reached out to the leaders of both Labour and National but Judith Collins was unavailable.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz