The claim asserted that te reo Maori was a taonga that needed to be nurtured. The tribunal’s recommendations, released in 1986, were far-reaching. They led to legislative and policy changes that assisted in the resurgence of te reo Maori from the later 20th century.

Staking a Claim
The Maori language claim to the Waitangi Tribunal grew out of mounting concern among Maori about the state of the language. There were major initiatives to strengthen the language, such as the establishment of kohanga reo (Maori language pre-schools) in 1982, but only about 50,000 fluent Maori speakers remained, most of them elderly. Action was needed, and soon: ‘Ka ngaro te reo, ka ngaro tāua, pērā i te ngaro o te moa.’ (If the language be lost, man will be lost, as dead as the moa.) The moa was gone, but if it was worthwhile saving endangered birds such as the takahe, was it also not worthwhile to save a language and the culture it supported, Maori asked? This was not only for Maori, as Minister of Maori Affairs Koro Wetere told Parliament in 1987, but ‘for the whole nation’.

Retention and protection of Maori language map
The Treaty of Waitangi, signed between Maori chiefs and the Crown in 1840, obliged the Crown to protect te reo Maori. It was claimed that the Crown had failed to do this and was therefore in breach of the Treaty. The claimants asked that the Crown officially recognise te reo Maori, particularly in the areas of broadcasting, education, health and the public service.

During the tribunal hearings in 1985 many Maori spoke of the demise of the language. Some recalled punishments they received for speaking te reo at school. Others argued that a culture could scarcely survive, let alone flourish, without its language. Kohanga reo had grown rapidly in number in three years, and even though there were more than 400 in 1985, youngsters soon lost their fluency when they entered English-only primary schools.

One land, two languages?
The tribunal noted that ‘no Maori may use his language in the Courts of New Zealand if he can speak English’. This was the result of a 1979 case involving Te Ringa (Dun) Mihaka. When the District Court refused to let him address the court in te reo Maori, he appealed to the High Court and then the Court of Appeal. Acting for himself, Mihaka relied on the Treaty of Waitangi for his case. The Court of Appeal agreed that ‘the use of the Maori language in New Zealand is a matter of public importance’; the Treaty had no legal bearing on the matter. The court based its decision on the English common law that applied in New Zealand after 1840.

The statute governing the use of English in the courts was ancient, dating back to 1362. Maori claimants noted that it was ‘ironical that over six centuries later the same statute should be invoked to protect the language of government against the indigenous language of New Zealand’.

Secretary of Justice Stanley James Callaghan acknowledged that denying Maori the right to use te reo Maori in the courts ‘may give rise to such a deep-seated sense of injustice as to prejudice the standing of the courts in some Maori eyes’. The legal situation was, he concluded, ‘at odds with our bicultural foundation at Waitangi in 1840′.

The Waitangi Tribunal agreed. It found that the Treaty of Waitangi was ‘directed to ensuring a place for two peoples in this country’. It questioned whether the promise of the Treaty could be achieved ‘if there is not a recognised place for the language of one of the partners to the Treaty. In the Maori perspective, the place of the language in the life of the nation is indicative of the place of the people’.

The tribunal noted that ‘no fair-minded New Zealander would deny them what they ask for’, but it also examined various arguments against the claim: that official recognition was an empty gesture, that te reo could not adapt to the modern world, that it was not an international language, and that minority languages should not be imposed on the majority.

The tribunal saw te reo Maori as an adaptable language that included new words. The tribunal pointed out that with official recognition minority languages had survived and flourished elsewhere. Official recognition of both languages and cultures would encourage respect for their differences.

Paths into the future
The tribunal released its report on the claim in 1986. It recommended five ways for the government to remedy the breaches of the Treaty regarding te reo: pass laws allowing te reo Maori to be used in courts and dealings with local and central government; establish a statutory body to ’supervise and foster the use of the Maori language’; examine the teaching of te reo Maori and ‘ensure that all children who wish to learn Maori should be able to do so’; recognise and protect te reo in broadcasting; ensure that speaking both Maori and English be a necessary or desirable requirement for certain public service positions.

The Māori Language Act 1987 declared te reo Maori to be an official language of New Zealand and set up Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Maori (the Maori Language Commission) to promote the Maori language. The Education Amendment Act 1989 recognised and promoted kura kaupapa and whare wananga.

The sale of some state-owned broadcasting assets from 1990 onwards led to Maori legal action and further Treaty claims demanding a greater role for te reo Maori in the electronic media. As a result, there were further developments in Maori broadcasting, such as the reservation of radio frequencies for Maori. In 1993, Te Mangai Paho was established as a Crown entity. Its primary function is to promote Maori language and culture by making funds available for radio and television broadcasting, and the production of programmes to be broadcast.

Changes in television have been slower. In 1996 the government tested special purpose Maori television by piloting a television service in the Auckland region. Maori broadcasters saw it as a chance to make Maori television a reality, but it ceased operation in early 1997. Two years later, government approved funding and spectrum for the establishment of a nationwide Maori television channel; it launched in 2004.

- nzhistory.net.nz

A message from Māori Affairs Minister Dr Pita Sharples, as Māori Language Week begins for 2010:

“He maha ngā taonga a te iwi Māori i tākoha ki ngā iwi katoa kua heke mai ki Aotearoa nei. Ki au, ko tō tātou reo rangatira te tino taonga o ngā mea katoa,” hei tā Tākuta Sharples.

“Mā te rongo i tō tātou reo, ka rongo ai te tangata i te wairua, i te mana o ō tātou tīpuna, me te hōhonutanga, te whānuitanga, te teiteitanga hoki o ā tātou kōrero tuku iho,” hei tāna anō. “Ka mōhio ai te ao, ko wai tātou, nā wai tātou, nō hea tātou, ā, e ahu ana tātou ki hea. Tērā ka kīa, ko tō tātou reo Māori te tino tohu o tō tātou mana Māori motuhake.

“I te tīmatanga o te Wā o te Reo Māori i te tau 1972, ka kawa ngā whakaaro o ētahi mō te reo Māori. E whakapaetia ana, ka rāwa a tauiwi i te whāngaitia ki te reo Māori.

“Ināianei, kua kite te nuinga i te pai o te reo hei kaupapa whakakotahi i ngā iwi o te motu i runga i te whakaaro kotahi, he mea tākoha ki ngā tāngata e hiahia ana ki te ako.

“Nō reira kei te mihi au ki ngā tangata, ki ngā whānau, ngā iwi Māori hoki kua pūmau ki te reo rangatira o ō rātou tīpuna. Kei te mihi ki te arohanui o te Māori ki ētahi atu iwi, kei te mihi hoki ki ngā tāngata, iwi kua whakarangatira i te taonga a ō tātou tīpuna, hei reo motuhake o Aotearoa whānui, ‘hei tikitiki mo ō tātou māhunga’.”

“Māori have shared a great deal of their heritage with other peoples who have migrated to Aotearoa, and to me, the greatest of these gifts is our language,” said Dr Sharples.

“With understanding of our language, people can feel the spirit and mana of our ancestors, and the breadth, depth and richness of our traditions and histories,” he added. “The world can know who we are, what are our origins, and where we are heading. Our language can be seen as the key marker of our unique Māori identity.

“When Māori Language Week began in 1972, some people objected to our language being ‘forced down the throats’ of other people.

“Nowadays, more and more people see value in the language as a basis for uniting all the peoples of Aotearoa in shared understanding, and as a gift offered to those who want to learn.

“I salute all those individuals, whanau and iwi who have held fast to the noble language of their ancestors. I acknowledge the generosity of Māori towards other peoples, and I congratulate all the people of Aotearoa who have given appropriate status to the language of our ancestors, as a distinctive language of the nation, and as a symbol of our national pride.”

New Zealand: More to be done to improve indigenous people’s rights, says UN Expert

Auckland, 23 July 2010

The UN Special Rapporteur on indigenous people, James Anaya, called on the New Zealand Government to keep on moving forward to find adequate solutions to the challenges still faced by the Maori population.

“I have observed several positive aspects of New Zealand’s legal and policy landscape, as well as ongoing challenges, in relation to Maori issues,” Mr. Anaya said at the end of a follow-up visit to the country to monitor issues related to human rights of the Maori, including strategies to reduce inequalities between Maori and non-Maori.

“I cannot help but note the extreme disadvantage in the social and economic conditions of Maori people, which are dramatically manifested in the continued and persistent high levels of incarceration of Maori individuals,” the human rights expert stressed. “These troubling conditions undoubtedly result from the historical and ongoing denial of the human rights of Maori, which must continue to be addressed as a matter of upmost priority.”

Mr. Anaya welcomed New Zealand’s recent endorsement of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and described a number of initiatives underway in the country as “important steps” towards advancing its purpose and objectives. “This Declaration, far from affirming rights that place indigenous peoples in a privileged position, aims at repairing the ongoing consequences of the historical denial of the right to self-determination and other basic human rights”, he said.

The Special Rapporteur drew special attention to the process for settling historical and contemporary claims based on the Treaty of Waitangi of 1840, one of the country’s founding instruments. The principles of the Treaty provide a foundation for Maori self-determination based on a real partnership between Maori and the New Zealand State, within a framework of respect for cross cultural understanding and the human rights of all citizens.

“The treaty settlement process is clearly one of the most important examples in the world of an effort to address historical and ongoing grievances of indigenous peoples, and that settlements already achieved have provided significant benefits in several cases,” Mr. Anaya said.

“However, during my visit I have heard complaints about the treaty settlement process that are similar to those reported by my predecessor. These include complaints about the inherent lack of bargaining power on the part of Maori in the settlement negotiations, the resulting lack of settlement outcomes that provide full and adequate redress to Maori grievances, and policies that restrict the transference of lands back into Maori ownership or control,” the independent expert said.

Mr. Anaya also followed up on his predecessor’s recommendations regarding the Foreshore and Seabed Act of 2004. Noting the authorities’ efforts to repeal and reform this act, he called for an adequate dialogue with Maori people, as well as a new legislative arrangement that “avoids any discriminatory effects and establishes measures to recognize and protect rights of iwi over the foreshore and seabed.”

Finally, the UN Human Rights Council envoy urged the New Zealand Government to provide constitutional security to the principles enshrined in the Treaty of Waitangi and related internationally-protected human rights. “From what I have observed, the Treaty’s principles appear to be vulnerable to political discretion, resulting in their perpetual insecurity and instability.”

The 2005 report on New Zealand by Rodolfo Stavenhagen: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G06/118/36/PDF/G0611836.pdf?OpenElement

In 2004 artist Leilani Kake found herself standing on the roof of a bus filming protesters participating in the landmark foreshore and seabed hikoi. As multitudes of people marched by she spotted her father Richard Kake carrying her younger brother upon his shoulders. Seeing her family from behind the camera lens, Kake realised that she was not just an observer of this event – she was a part of the story.

She began documenting the socio-political activities of her father Richard Kake, a staunch advocate for his Northland iwi (Ngāpuhi), to create a historical record of the trials and tribulations of a modern day Rangatira (Māori leader).

A part of that story will be told at City Gallery Wellington from 3 April to 13 June, in Leilani Kake’s video tryptich Tino Rangatira Tanga. Filmed in first-person perspective, this gritty documentary-style video installation portrays the Māori process of Tā Moko and Tangihanga. The work explores how waiata, in its many forms, is used in the daily lives of Māori families.

The installation begins with Richard Kake receiving his Tā Moko (Māori facial tattoo) from renowned Tā Moko artist Gordon Toi Hadfield and ends at their Northland family Marae where Kake is laid to rest after his untimely death. The whole installation is set amidst a rich acoustic soundtrack of waiata and pop reggae demonstrating the dynamic role of song and music in Māori communities. Filmed entirely by hand-held camera, Tino Rangatira Tanga invites the viewer to witness these raw, emotional and momentous events.

More information

Do the western systems of diagnosis, classification and treatment of mental disorder adequately accommodate for culture: The Māori experience by Dr Rees Tapsell

All past seminars can be accessed here (require Silverlight to watch)

Employment Relations Amendment Bill
Hone Harawira: Spokesman on Employment
Maori Party Member of Parliament for Te Tai Tokerau
Thursday 11 December 2008; 2pm

“Eight years ago, Professor Jane Kelsey wrote a book called Reclaiming the Future in which she talked about what happened to Maori during the last recession of the late 80’s; a book which should be required reading for all Members of Parliament, as Aotearoa stares down the barrel of another recession.

And in that book, Jane Kelsey reminds us that until 1987, per head of population, there were actually more Maori working than non-Maori. And that’s just 21 years ago.

And yet the way the media paints it Maori have been basically unemployed, lazy, dole bludgers ever since Pakeha came to these shores.

Strange how much we are influenced by the media isn’t it?

But the fact remains, that just 21 years ago, there were more Maori working than Pakeha, our families were stable, our kids were healthy and crime was down.

And then of course, the crash hit, the world came crashing in on us, and in just six years, Maori unemployment went from 1% to 15%, nearly half of all 16-19 Maori ended up on the dole, and our whole world fell apart.

And now Mr Speaker, it seems we’re heading right down that same track, but that this time we’re starting from a place far worse than 21 years ago because Maori unemployment is already more than twice that of non-Maori, there are four times more Maori beneficiaries than non-Maori, and Maori society has still not fully overcome the devastating effects of the crash of 1987.

And even after nine years of great prosperity, the gaps between the rich and the poor were never closed because Labour chose to close the programme rather than close the gap.”

This week’s seen some exciting launches, like Google Māori going live this Thursday 24 July, allowing you to search for articles in Māori. There’s also “He Pātaka Kupu”, the world’s largest monolingual dictionary which was launched by Te Taura Whiri, available on www.koreromaori.co.nz

For more info on Te Wiki o te Reo Māori see www.korero.maori.nz/news/mlw

Try out a few Maori phrases this week. For tips on how to ask someone about themselves, hit on them, tell them they’re dodgy and heaps more, see below for some basic phrases pinched from www.korero.maori.nz. That’s it from me. And by the way, tō ātaahua hoki rā!

Kua kai anō koe? – Have you had something to eat?

He aha māu? – What would you like?

He wai ārani māku. – I would like an orange juice.

He wai noa iho māku. – Just water for me.

He aha tō mahi? – What do you do for a job?

Kei hea koe e mahi ana? – Where do you work?

He kaimahi ahau nā (place of work) – I work at (place of work)

He aha ō mahi i tēnei rā? – What did you do today?

I pēhea tō rā? – How was your day?

Piro rawa atu! – It sucked!

Pai mārika taku rā! – I had a great day!

Kei te aha koe ā te pō? – What are you doing tonight?

Kāhore kau. – Nothing.

He aha ai? – Why?

E mate kai ana koe? – Are you hungry?

Ka rawe! Tino pai kē! – Too much!

Tō ātaahua hoki rā. – You look good.

Kei ēnā tikanga hoki. – Hey, you’re a bit dodgy.

Ka nui tēnā māku.- That’s enough for me, I’ve had enough.

He aha te waiata pai ki a koe? – What kind of music do you like?

Me āta inu koe. – Go easy on the drinking.

E āta inu ana au. – I’m just taking it easy (i.e. drinking).

Ka rawe te kōrero Māori. – Man, speaking Maori is good fun.

Ka rawe. – Choice, awesome.

Ehara mai! – Awesome!

He aha pea he mahi mā tāua? – Shall we do something?

Kua haere au. – Okay, I’m off.

Ka kite anō. – See you later.

Peter Williams on National Radio this morning raised concerns about upholding the rule of law, in particular that the Dominion Post’s actions are contempt of court in light of the fact that the Solicitor General’s decision means most of this evidence is inadmissable. Certainly, we must be concerned about the ramifications of allowing the “public to judge” through the media lens, despite Ron Marks apparent enthusiasm for the idea.

However, here we are, and here is the affadavit. So what does it mean for the self-interested (again according to Ron Mark) critics of the police raids and the attempted use of the Terrorism Suppression Act?

Very few of the criticisms that I have read or have made myself fall over in the light of this affadavit.

At the outset, all have stated that if there are charges to be laid, the Crimes Act and the Firearms Act are sufficient pieces of legislation within which to make a prosecution. This is proving to be the case, as in depositions the court has agreed there are charges to answer. The extension of the powers towards a security state that is being sought today cannot be argued on the basis that there are holes in the law through which evil people are escaping prosecution.

All critics have stated that the raids were heavy-handed. Again this stands, as it is increasingly clear from the evidence today that the police were not searching for mysterious figures hidden in the Urewera, but specific individuals well-known to them, no doubt with home addresses, phone numbers, favourite cafes, and all the rest. So we are left scratching our head as to why a whole town and then unrelated individuals’ houses needed to be held hostage by the police – to ensure nobody tried to escape on horseback into the wild blue yonder, perhaps? I suggest it is still a case of testosterone and budgets gone wild in the total institution that is our nation’s violent arm of the state.

All critics have said that the insinuation that political activism is terrorist activity is mud that’ll stick, and an insidious use of the media, parliament and the police. The grab-bag of activists charged still suggests this, and the affadavit goes no way towards proving some violent revolutionary plot across activist groups. Indeed, even the selective reading we have been allowed through the filter of police and then media analysis suggests there was some unease within those involved and a range of views about aims and strategies. People were clearly speaking out against violence here, not just condoning it.

So were there more than empty words in the Urewera. I’m inclined to believe so. I shook my head this morning when I read the Dominion Post, and thought, in relation to those suspects in the affadavit, “you dumb a__es”.

But this is not to be taken as an argument for greater police powers, more intelligence, broader powers to gather communications. The powers of the police are sufficient, our intelligence agencies are as incompetent and conspiracy driven as always, and we don’t need more impositions on our lives. So perhaps the empty words are those ringing out from Wellington, and continue to require us to challenge and critique.

At a time when the parliament and executive have been so loose with labelling political activism as terrorism, when NZ First has again attempted to get parliament to wipe te Tiriti o Waitangi from the record, and the violent arm of the state has brutalised Ngai Tuhoe (again), Jones’ comments are questions of maturity and insight.

Put simply, she asks if Pakeha are willing to build a relationship with Maori yet. She suggests up until now:

“Pakeha have largely refused a relationship of positive, real, engagement, being busy instead with forms of colonisation, and with “being entertained” by, and “doing good things” for, Maori.”

This question is so pertinent because, frankly, as a descendent of te Pirirakau, Ngati Rangiwewehi and Ngati Hinerangi, I am one of a lot of pissed off tangata whenua. I don’t trust the police, the executive, and most of the parliament. I don’t want a bar of the New Zealand that Pakeha are creating for themselves. And as a result of the last month’s events, I’ve rapidly become more sympathetic to those who may have advocated violent struggle. I’ve even caught myself beginning to think in the excluding language that I used as a 19 year old: “those” Pakeha supported by “their” state with “their” kupapa, pet Maori in parliament.

I’d rather have some faith restored that we are building a social contract that seeks a just relationship based in te Tiriti and honours our collective role in building Aotearoa. So the question remains to one and all: are you ready yet?

“The UN General Assembly on Thursday adopted a non-binding declaration upholding the human, land and resources rights of the world’s 370 million indigenous people, brushing off opposition from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States.

The vote in the assembly was 143 in favor and four against. Eleven countries, including Russia and Colombia, abstained.

The declaration, capping more than 20 years of debate at the United Nations, also recognizes the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination and sets global human rights standards for them.

It states that native peoples have the right ”to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties“ concluded with states or their successors.” Click here for the full article

Helen Clark has said that what the UN agreement seeks is already present in our legal system – if that was the case, one would only assume there would be no harm in signing it!

New Zealand government apparently believes that the Declaration disadvantaged non-indigenous people and conflicts with the country’s laws. Well….erm…hello!…last time I looked the indigenous population were pretty damn well disadvantaged by the status quo. Seems to me that some major redressing of the balance is precisely what justice demands!

The real issue here would seem to be the apparent threat to the privilege of the majority. I’m not Maori – but I do know what it’s like to be marginalized and a minority in some ways – and I can’t help wonder how it must feel to reflect upon the time when Maori were the majority, how different it might have been….to have that freedom…that position…of what was lost…and what is sought. It makes me sick.

Seems to me this Government is hanging on by a thread, and while it thinks it needs to get the centre vote buy buying nurses and appealing to the moderate middle classes, the reality is that if it doesn’t get it’s act together and come up with some decent policies on public transport, child poverty reduction, and how it relates to Maori, to name but three that spring to mind, then it better be prepared for a spell out in the cold. It basically needs to shake off third term-itis, stop believing its own press, and wake up to reality for five minutes. It needs some imagination, and to be less enslaved by the systems it has created.

At this rate, John Key will smile his way to victory – because most voters perceive he has something to offer – and let’s face it, he does the cute thing quite well. Seems to me Key is seeking to give the Government just enough rope…

The Maori I speak with are really tired of this kind of inaction. We have a chance to make this a better and more just society…