When I left New Zealand 13 years ago I recall a certain level of animosity between some Maori groups and other New Zealanders concerning claims made to the Waitangi Tribunal, a forum where Maori representatives present alleged grievances to the Crown. The Tribunal decides whether the Crown should make reparations for "broken promises" made to New Zealand's indigenous population since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. The Treaty broadly aimed to secure New Zealand as a British colony and preserve Maori governorship. As these things usually are, it was botched with differing English and Maori translations. Interpretation aside, there have been understandable grievances concerning the confiscation of tribal (iwi) land, some of which has already been returned to Maori ownership or stewardship. But there have also been claims citing the Treaty that are frankly ridiculous.
The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840, in Waitangi, in the Bay of Islands. The actual document hasn't faired well over the years, an unfortunate reflection upon how well it has faired in spirit as the nation's founding document:
Click thumbnail to enlarge image
The Treaty of Waitangi. Crown copyright.
I recall being outright astounded to hear that a Maori group was claiming exclusive rights to certain radio frequencies under the Treaty. There have been other similarly ridiculous demands, such as the right to charge for the use of airspace over Lake Taupo, exclusive Maori access to the foreshore and seabed, and Maori control over all of the country's flora and fauna.
The latest claim to catch my attention is an attempt to trademark the All Blacks rugby team haka by the descendants of the author of Ka Mate (Te Rauparaha, who died in 1847).
Download Ka Mate (.mp3, approx 800 KB). Source unknown.
What's this—a "genealogical intellectual property claim"? Bugger me! A spokesman for the Ngati Toa, Mr Parai, when challenged over the right of another organization to represent the iwi, is quoted in the New Zealand Herald as saying the name in which the application was lodged was immaterial as:
We are one and the same people.
Indeed we are Mr Parai; we're all New Zealanders. Let's stop this financially-motivated bickering and try to get along. How many generations does it take before the children of the dead-and-buried loose their entitlement to grieve and such calls for reparation can finally be laid to rest? The NZ Government has set a time-limit; a sensible step when you consider, for example, the ongoing milking of German guilt in relation to WWII reparations. While some no doubt stand to benefit from short-term financial gain, an open-ended free-for-all on reparations is potentially socially damaging in the longer term, via the creation of a "handout culture". Why work for economic equality when you can hold out your hand and demand it?
Those caught in the rut of the "grievance industry" should stop looking back, and think more about their future as New Zealanders enjoying equal rights and responsibilities. So-called "positive discrimination" is little more than a recipe for resentment and laziness that neither respects the past nor ensures an truly equitable future.
Update 04.07.06: Here we go again. According to the NZ Herald, "A Maori trust is threatening to take the UK Government to the International Court of Justice to get Maori the same rights as British citizens under the Treaty of Waitangi." If successful (no chance!) this would give Maori—but not other New Zealanders—the right to live and work (and claim benefits) in any EU country.
Update 10.02.07: It goes on. According to the NZ Herald, "A Maori group has lodged a claim for the commercial rights to three varieties of kumara... The group says the Crown breached the Treaty by failing to preserve pre-European kumara varieties, and deliberately allowed the last remaining stocks to be lost to overseas collections."
0 responses to Kiwi or iwi: a claim too far?