Our nation signed up to a United Nation edict about the rights of indigenous peoples. Changing the status quo is fraught with the possibility of friction and that has happened in this country of ours. There are radicals on both sides and while some want abosolute co-governance and duplication, the other side want the status quo. A level of understanding is requires, so because I've experience a few things in my life, politians, if they take heeed might learn something.
Minister
Unfortunately, something like this can’t be left to brevity, so I hope you will bear with me, but I have my doubts. I wish to present to you something about the Treaty of Waitangi, ACC funding Tohanga, language and handouts but before I do, as is the necessary these days, I have to show that my what I say is based on experience, rather than anything else.
I volunteered in Tanzania East Africa for seven years; it was supposed to be a two-year assignment, but the organisation I was working with, a Lutheran organisation, kept wanting me to extend. I was in no way working in a religious capacity, my official title was environmental coordinator. We lived rurally and working with rural schools and villages so my experience was of living amongst the Maasai, Meru, Arusha and Chugga peoples with a bit of Pare thrown in. While the beliefs I point out are serious, it shouldn’t be assumed that I didn’t enjoy my time with them.
Having trained as a forest manager and a forest tree nursery manager, it was easy to pick up a level of understanding the human psyche and my work with African people taught me that cultures might vary widely, but we are all basically the same. Especially Maasai have traits similar to my experience with Māori, and it was bemusing to find that each tribe knew exactly the traits of the others, which is unerringly accurate. The Massai preferred tradition and had a reputation of being warrior-like, the Meru prefer money over life, the Arusha also prefer tradition but want their girls to be educated, the Chugga are good business people and the Pare I didn’t work with but had personal contact; they are a stubborn lot, and a bit money oriented. The Maasai were targeted as unintelligent and dirty for their traditional ways, by the other tribes but it’s far from the truth.
All of the tribes and there are 250 of them, have their own language, and obviously take great joy in their own, speaking it whenever they have the opportunity. But they are united by the national language, Swahili, which I learned. During meetings, all the tribes had the same attitude, ‘It is manners to speak the language the mzungu understands.’ There was no offence intended by using the word, mzungu… white man, indeed they used the colour of their own skin to identify their own people when they didn’t know their names. Some of the remote Maasai didn’t know Swahili well, but my coworker was Maasai and he helped me a lot with cultural aspects and village politics.
With that in mind, I have no idea how Te Reo usage will progress in New Zealand, but three things are apparent right now. The attempted rollout by the previous administration was hurried, lacked competence and was unannounced to the populace beforehand. The vowel sounds are different, the same as Swahili, which is why many Kiwis don’t get their tongue around the pronunciation or ears around the sounds. The longevity of Te Reo, depends on those whose language it is and use it… not the non-speaker. It’s difficult to see how it benefits Māori, should a non-speaker greet someone in Te Reo, when they know the other person understands English perfectly well, and should they greet a Māori person using Te Reo, that person could rightly expect that they can converse in Te Reo. And frankly, the aggressive use of Te Reo in parliament is a disincentive to learn it for many. Having said that, learning another language is good for the brain, and those who want to should not be dissuaded. I valued Swahili, so took the time to learn it, but I have no practical use for Te Reo. I know the effort it takes to learn a different language, and suspect it’s unlikely non-speakers are willing to take the time to learn it, which is why people have no idea what government departments, organisations and the different policies that have been renamed in Te Reo are about. Anyway, who says we must? And, here’s the thing, English is the sacred language of many and used by most, and like Māori wanting Te Reo to be pronounced properly, the nation risks reverting to pidgin by mixing Te Reo words in English sentences. And… if you understand the difference between a sparrow and a tui, or a radiata pine and a rimu, you should understand that humans did not evolve here in New Zealand. Less than a thousand years ago, humans arrived here, found it to their liking and colonised, just like possums did. If a simple word like ‘indigenous’ is misunderstood, and misused, how can we rely on what is ‘meant’ in the treaty document? Also, every species on the planet utilises their environment to the maximum for their longevity, it’s simple natural law.
My first assignment in Tanzania was with an outfit called African Heritage, who were given MFAT funding for the project I was to run, but they misused the money by building a bar/restaurant and supplying it. So, we had to live in their house, with them, partitioned off, and found no problem with that, but I had to raise funds for the project. The Lutheran district accountant, a German guy told me if you want a million dollars to go to the people, ten must be given. At the time, Tanzania was the third poorest nation in the world, and the village people would criticise those who ‘eat money’ meant for a given project, but give them the chance and they do the same… which is a typical human trait. As well as our environmental programmes, we built schools and water projects, so applied for funds from Europe, USA and New Zealand, we always sent reports and financial statements… they all thanked us, and told us ours were the only reports they received. Handing out aid money seldom produces the outcomes promised, yes, nations do it as an obligation, but doing so supports corruption and I’ve seen, how governments and organisations hand money out but don’t do a follow-up check on how it is spent. The reason is, if there is fault, what can be done about it? It seems to me that the Treaty of Waitangi settlements mirror this sort of thing. The Gaza situation is another example, disregarding the politics involved there; for decades aid money has poured in from the UN, various nations and aid organisations, yet the Gazans remain poor while the Hamas leaders are living in luxury in Qatar firing orders.
When Julius Nyerere took over after independence in 1964, he took away the power of all tribal chiefs, forced the nomads to settle (villagisation) and created wards with elected officials, the villages (about the size of our council districts) had their own elected governments; it was a fundamental change for the whole country. The wards also had an mtendaje, a village executive officer, who is a local person (stalwart of the party) appointed by central government who implements government regulations and collects taxes (and the odd bribe). Most people attend formal religion, various Christian or Islam (50/50) and traditional. My boss had a holistic approach, so my work did not discriminate. I found the populus have their own tribal and even village lore… not law, lore, as do Māori and all other cultures around the world… something that is not well-recognised. Some lore is good and some not so. Tanzanians of any rank fear the wachawi (singular mchawi), who can cause misfortune, or death without touching… hexing. A bit like Tohanga but wachawi don’t attempt healing, however, a hex can sometimes be lifted through ‘hard’ prayer. Babu is the word for grandfather, but the ‘village babu’ carries out traditional medicine… some good some not so, which might be a better description of Tohanga. On market days there is always and old woman selling potions, a good many of them for nefarious intent. Then there are the jini who can fly on winnowing basket… the daughter who lived in our house told us she saw a jini at the river. She had to cross the river on the way to school using two no.8 wires, one to stand on, one to hold. She drew a picture of the jini, which roughly resembled a man; anyway, next day, a wire broke and a girl died. Of course, this is superstition and mind manipulation but it is lore. Maasai and Arusha wear an amulet or talisman on the back of their neck; a tiny leather pouch with a lizard bone of something to guard against evil spirits – they believe they can face any danger but are protected from what they can’t see. Greenstone has similar mythical properties; protection and luck for Māori.
Reading Papers Past Tohanga were trying to cure illness by driving out bad spirits, and in 1906 an act of parliament forbade such practices, but the act has since been repealed. Associated with that, it is clear that religious soothsayers and prophets have long used natural hallucinogens as a way of ‘communicating with spirits’, making predictions, as well as controlling people and raising some revenue. Tanzanian bee keepers used puffballs from old pit latrines, to quieten bees, but care has to be taken because they have the same hallucinogenic properties, as datura. I set up a village water project at a spring close to where ‘the best cannabis in Africa’ was grown… don’t worry I’m an observer not a user, but modern-day soothsayers use cannabis too. Indoctrination is another powerful tool and is often used in tribal culture; and today, it appears, students at schools and universities in New Zealand and the West have been exposed to a couple of decades of climate alarmism, with the media confirming it, so naturally enough we have children and young adults fearing for their future… which I might add is morally corrupt. Belief systems become ingrained in society… humans fall for all sorts of oddities. So, what do Māori want regarding ‘keeping their traditions (lore) alive’? Doubtless the mind plays a big part in healing and trust in modern medicine does that for most, but… I had the only vehicle in our village, and found myself transporting people to hospital or clinics, many after traditional treatments had failed and arguably made the condition worse. Belief is tied to mental health and logic becomes lost, but I’ll leave it to others to sort out if Tohanga are appropriate or not. Change only comes from experience. Even if government passed an act banning Tohanga, they will never go away while people either believe in them or distrust the alternative. Remember that young woman drowned in a bath during an exorcism? Mchawi will sometimes promise a benefit of some kind if someone is killed, usually a relative. I didn’t know anyone in Tanzania who didn’t believe in all of this… even my boss a religious leader. Offence taking, jealousy, envy and revenge were the main drivers of these practices. As for Tohanga and the Accident Compensation commission… chiropractors and acupuncturists were deemed quacks in the past, but are now accepted.
I ask myself what was the logic behind the Treaty of Waitangi being signed? First, we have to understand what this country was like at the time, instead of seeing it through modern and often romantic eyes. Prior to European influence, there was no unification of Māori, they were known by their tribal canoes, they hadn’t made pottery and used stone and wooden weapons. There was no written language and were referred to as natives and the Europeans as settlers by English authorities. Around 1840 there were the missionaries… who are likely to have had their own agenda, but no doubt the Tohanga irked them of diluting their power. Despite traits and lore, people are people, the good, the bad and the ugly. The Maōri vs Māori musket wars had reduced the Māori population by about 20 000, the whalers and sealers were an unruly lot mixed with escapees from the Australian penal colony. Also, the French were hovering around. Maybe a Māori chief or two petitioned the missionaries, or the missionaries by their own volition petitioned Westminster to bring a semblance of law and order, which was sorely needed, and which would have been the logical thing to do. Westminster couldn’t just dip into their coffers without some form of authority, and someone, the missionaries or Westminster suggested a treaty, so it was done. Once law and order were instituted the document’s usefulness seemed over, which is why we see it in tatters today… if it was valued, it would have been cared for better. And why can’t an English copy of the treaty be found? Hobson would have dispatched a copy to his bosses and the English were very good record-keepers. Anyway, what was signed up to seems fair, but this translation is through modern eyes:
Establish a democratic government.
Protect Māori ownership of land and property.
Purchase Māori land fairly.
Grant Māori British citizenship.
Establish democratic government? The Reform Act of 1832 allowed 7% of the English population to vote, and my ancestors were members of the Chartist movement which opposed only landed gentry being able to stand for parliament (and demanded other rights). Obviously, the missionaries nor Hobson had any idea what modern democratic government was, so how could Māori understand it… a translation into Te Reo be possible? Ownership of land and property? Buying and selling was by trade or conquest, so how could Māori understand the concept thoroughly, and how could it be translated adequately? The granting of British citizenship was important, but no doubt misunderstood. Under English law, in 1215 King John signed the Magda Carta (unwillingly perhaps), which basically put the rule of law above the king and his government and granted individuals personal sovereignty (to men) with rights and responsibilities under common law. Gradually changes came about, but personal sovereignty remains, meaning, when Māori were granted citizenship, they also gained personal sovereignty, which is manifest nowadays in the one person one vote system that we have. Nobody, has the right to take away Māori lore, as long as it is within the law, and nobody can take personal sovereignty from Māori.’, or indeed any citizen… but really, did Māori understand those concepts? I’m not sure they do today.
The Treaty of Waitangi Tribunal Act is a concern; in particular, Section 8, The Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to Consider Proposed Legislation:
The Tribunal shall examine any proposed legislation referred to it under Section 2 (itself) and shall report whether in its opinion, the provisions of the legislation or any of them are contrary to the principles of the Treaty. There is no word ‘advisory’ in the legislation and it could be interpreted, and has been, that the unelected Tribunal has power over an elected government. Rather than ‘jurisdiction’, ‘right to consult might be better’. It is a bone of contention.
As with what happens to aid money, I’m not convinced that monetary handouts are a useful tool for reparations. Doubtless Māori have been disadvantaged in many ways, which is historically typical of humanity against humanity; not at all humane, honest or fair. Therefore, productive ways to reconcile and move forward are needed, which comes down to negotiation. Instead of handouts, hands up would be better. If I was a negotiator in discussing settlements, I would be dubious about the authenticity of oral history. Remember the game of Chinese whispers? And how are we sure that there aren’t cases of making-it-up-as-we-go-along… a case in point; traditionally Māori women were forbidden to perform haka, but nowadays it is common practice. People are people, if free money is going, they’ll take it and who can blame anyone for embellishments? Stories and rules are easily twisted to fit a purpose… spin. The Māori Party claimed there was nothing in the budget for them, but there is, $800million plus another lot just announced, which just shows, the cup is never full. There’s a lot of clipping the ticket going on and the ordinary punter doesn’t know if its justified or not. As for the reparations, the crown is footing the bill, but we know the crown doesn’t have its own money, it’s the taxpayers who forks out… and paying reparations means other issues aren’t addressed. My ancestors didn’t defraud or embezzle any Māori, so why should I pay reparation? As we saw with the last administration, governments like spending other people’s money and the handouts do seem to be free and easy. There is currently controversy over the Public Works Act; over the years I’ve had three bits of land taken and two bits acquired from me, I know what’s it’s like, including dealing with ‘unfriendly’ bureaucrats, where satisfaction is pretty much impossible.
The taxpayer covers the cost of the legalities and research for iwi claims averaging $16million a pop and each claim is around $30million, and apparently there are 10 000 claims pending. As a small-economy country, we can’t afford that! It will simply break the bank. Granted, it’s a daunting task to undo some of the stuff that needs undoing? The previous administration managed to cause a level of resentment against Māori that will take a while to undo… anyway personally I have no problem with Māori lore that fits within our legal system, as with any other ethnicity. Successive governments have created a rod for all our backs which will be an uphill struggle to untangle, and they will see payments and advantages to Māori as an easy opinion, if so, the simple request I have is to explain on what basis are our tax dollars are being used in this way. The party-political system seems to make the situation worse by not taking the whole nation along, which creates further divide.
If you reached here, sorry that it took so many pages, thank you for your time… and are we any further ahead?
