In loving tribute to our dear beloved sister Koreti Mavaega Tiumalu

We are honoured to have our sister Tuiloma Lina Samu pay tribute to the recent passing of Pacific Climate activist Koreti Mavaega Tiumalu. Lina and Koreti both personify the strength and love and service Indigenous women give to their families, communities and our wider region and the world.

 

12422062_10153244805033199_1346571410_o.jpg

 

In loving tribute to our dear beloved sister Koreti Mavaega Tiumalu who passed away on Sunday 2 July in Wellington.

Koreti was the Pacific Co-ordinator for 350.org and she  both  strong connections, networks. and lived experience of of the hard fought efforts already in existence around the Pacific . She inspired and  mentored a lot  of the work that is being done around the Pasifiki/ Moana/ Moana-nui-o-Kiva/ Pasefika/ Pasifika, humbly leading and guiding the Pacific climate justice movement amongst our Pacific nations and peoples.

I recall our friendship and professional support we gave each other over the years.

In 2012 I travelled  to the Rio +20 Conference in Rio de Janeiro sponsored by the Asian Indigenous Peoples’ Pact (AIPP) to represent Pasifika.

Before leaving I got a call from a woman named Koreti, was going and was trying to get a Pasifika community meeting up and running at St Anne’s Catholic community hall in Manurewa.

I was so thrilled that she’d made contact to ask me to come and speak at this fonotaga for Pasifika communities about 350.org and her new role as Pacific Co-ordinator – I said YES without hesitation!

When I realized that she was connected to me through marriage, I was even happier to support! Her niece Amataga Iuli and Amataga’s brothers who are connected to me through their father’s Sapunaoa, Falealili aiga (the nu’u where I get my suafa matai “Tuiloma” from) were there well before the start of that meeting in the Winter of 2012, to help their beloved Aunty set up the hall and the food before guests started arriving.

I  fondly recall Koreti at  PowerShift Youth Hui in Tamaki Makaurau in December 2012

At that fono I also remember the powerful speech that Koreti gave to the main session and the beautiful puletasi that she wore. She was so nervous, but I knew she’d be glorious as she was! I told her to have a little lotu before her speech and to have something with her, something from her aiga or her husband that would help to settle her so that she wouldn’t feel overwhelmed and/ or alone. She was magnificent! I hope that someone posts up her speech from that PowerShift December 2012 in Auckland!

In 2013 Koreti ran another Pasifika fonotaga this time at the Ellen Melville Hall in the CBD Auckland. She asked me to present at that fonotaga as well. In 2013 she was going real hard to build upon the exceptional networks of trust and love and loyalty that she built around the Pasifika region for 350.org.

I  had my reservations about t organisations and the resourcing of such important work in the Pasifika, often critical of Koreti doing so much on so very little – but holy shit did she do it !

With such grace, dignity, honesty, love and loyalty – everything that 350.org has in the Pacific – its reputation, its good name, its everything is owed to this beautiful strong sister Koreti Mavaega Tiumalu!  EVERYTHING!

She recently travelled to support our indigenous sisters and brothers in the Alberta who are continuing their ongoing struggles of protection against the wreckage and utter devastation that tar sands mining is having on their environment.

19059444_10154589841553199_521737515883904670_n

She was an innovator of the “Raise a Paddle” movement to bring about our standing in solidarity with everyone around the world especially first nations and indigenous people.

Fighting hard to bring to authorities in power to justice for allowing companies to destroy everything- to make them answerable and accountable for taking us without consequence to destruction and ruin of our natural resources:

drinking water, trees, land, air, oceans, food sovereignty, Mother Earth Papatuanuku herself for our present and future generations.

My last communication with Koreti was about getting out on the waka at Te Whare Waka in Wellington, to show our tautoko/ tapua’iga/ solidarity with our mana whenua aiga/ whanau during the warmer months in Whanganui -a-Tara Harbour.

I’m going to keep to that pact we made and organise a tribute maarunga i te waka. And every time I raise a paddle wherever I am in Aotearoa, Samoa, in the Moana nui a Kiwa/ Pacific and across the world – I will always remember Koreti and EVERYTHING she did to advance and enhance our Pasifika peoples’ profiles and viewpoints/ stance in the local, regional, nationwide and global work of climate change.

Fa’afetai tele atu mo au tautua malosi uso! Malolo mai i le filemu Ia manuia lava lau malaga uso Koreti Tofa! Tofa! Tofa!

Amuia lava le masina – e alu ma toe sau”. Blessed is the moon as it goes and returns – but not us, no not us.

 

19621015_10209455045149325_5492093605321280891_o.jpg

Tuiloma Lina Samu : Salelesi; Faleula; Sapunaoa, Falealili ma Pu’apu’a, Savai’i. Born, raised and schooled in Mangere. Mother to Jessica (26).

Sister and Aunty.

Educated at Nga Tapuwae, University of Auckland and about to complete a PhD (Health) through the Whariki Research Centre, School of Public Health, Massey University. Founder of the Whariki Whaiora & Family Whanau services for mental wellbeing.

Chairperson Kaiwhakahaere of He Waka Matauranga ki Tamaki Makaurau that specialises Literacy and numeracy for Pasifika and Maori families. Love Life Fono and sexuality diversity champion.

Tulafale-Ali’i orator matai from Sapunaoa, Falealili, Samoa. Proficiency in six languages including Samoan and Te Reo Maori dialects.

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Hone Harawira and the War on Drugs

On the Nation this weekend, Mana Party leader Hone Harawira raised the idea of executing Chinese drug dealers, imprisoning them for life or deporting them, as a response to the methamphetamine problem in his area. “We can pass a law to say any Chinese that brings meth or precursors into this country is either going to jail forever, is going to be sent back and never allowed here again, is going to get executed.” he says.

I felt sick to my guts when I watched this. Hone is deliberately targeting and scapegoating migrants while upping the ante for a punitive and violent war on drugs.

His ‘war on drugs’ rhetoric is political demagoguery, He is deliberately exploiting an important issue in our communities by fanning the flames of prejudice and ignorance and shutting down any reasoned deliberation about drug policy in NZ for short term political gain.

The most fundamental demagogic technique is scapegoating, and this is a deliberate tactic that Hone has used before in the media. It’s dog whistling politics of the lowest common denominator.

Hone is just jumping on the xenophobic bandwagon that is being created and exploited by all the major political parties this election. We need informed, reasoned debate about drug policy in this country, not populist media stunts and the dumbing down of issues.

Harawira’s chilling rhetoric reflects that of Duterte in the Phillipines where his violent war on drugs has resulted in the extra judicial murder of thousands. Hone’s rhetoric is one small step away from calling for all drug dealers and users to be executed. 

“ Since Duterte took office in June, Philippine national police and vigilante death squads have embarked on a campaign to slaughter drug users as well as drug dealers. “Hitler massacred three million Jews [sic], now, there’s three million drug addicts. I’d be happy to slaughter them,” he said in September. Last month, he told a group of jobless Filipinos that they should “kill all the drug addicts.” Police have killed over 7,000 people, devastated poor areas of Manila and other cities, and used the drug war as a pretext to murder government officials and community leaders.”

 

https://theintercept.com/2017/05/23/trump-called-rodrigo-duterte-to-congratulate-him-on-his-murderous-drug-war-you-are-doing-an-amazing-job/

 

The War on Drugs and the Mass Incarceration of Maori

 

Currently Māori are bearing the brunt of our current ‘war on drugs’ . Maori are four times more likely to get a drug conviction, we make up about 40 per cent of the prisoner population for drug offences.

Māori are more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested and convicted for minor drug offences than other New Zealanders. These laws are creating more harm for Māori than it prevents.

Meth (and other drugs) are causing harm in our communities but we don’t end harm by creating more harm. Using the criminal justice system as the intervention has not worked and, in fact has made it worse. It will do nothing to stop the devastation of drug abuse in our communities .

We have seen in America that the War on Drugs first promulgated by Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan has resulted as a war on people of colour and poor communities, directly resulting in the expansion of the prison industrial complex. We see the same failed policies replicated here in New Zealand.

We have seen world over punitive drug policies that cause the widespread violation of human rights, as well as unprecedented levels of incarceration.

Here, Michelle Alexander, Author of The New Jim Crow, speaks about the political strategy behind the War on Drugs and its connection to the mass incarceration of Black and Brown people in the United States.

 

 

What to do ?

 

There are many examples of researched and enlightened drug policies around the world that we can use as examples to counter the problems associated with drug abuse in our communities that does not cause harm or result in a boom in mass incarceration.

In 2001, Portugal decriminalised all illicit substances after a nasty war on drugs. Since then, the country’s drug use and overdose rates have fallen. Drug-related crime decreased and demand for health clinic and addiction services surged.

 

For 15 years Portugal has implemented a decriminalisation approach. As a result overdoses have decreased dramatically, people get the help they need, HIV & Hep C has decreased, and incarceration has decreased.

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE PORTUGUESE DECRIMINALIZATION OF ILLICIT DRUGS?

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/10635177.pdf

There is some amazing mahi being done by Māori working in the drug and alcohol field working on transformative anti oppressive kaupapa Māori change. Tuari Potiki (Ngai Tahu) presented a positive and inspiring speech at the UN General Assembly Special Session on the World Drug Problem last year.

“ Sometimes, when we are threatened, we go to war.

And sometimes, we go to war against the wrong people.

If we decide to wage a war against cancer. Would we do that by bombing the people who have cancer?

Many nations have joined up to wage a war against drugs. And have ended up attacking and harming people who really need our help and support.”

“I believe that if you are not a part of the solution then you are a part of the problem, and that the major part of the world drug problem is those countries that continue to block progress towards compassionate, proportionate and health focused responses to drug use and drug users.

So the first thing I call for in standing before you today – is to stop punishing people who are in need of our help. We must stop criminalising people who are in need of our help and support.”

“If there is a war to be fought, and I believe that there is, it should be a war on poverty, on disparity, on dispossession, on the multitude of political and historical factors that have left, and continue to leave, so many people vulnerable and in jeopardy.”


 

This is the type of courageous Māori leadership that we need, that is measured and intelligent and will provide real solutions to the issues our communities are facing with drugs. We need to be  weary of knee-jerk responses that stigmatise those already struggling with drugs who need tautoko,support and kaupapa Maori health based approaches, not rhetoric and vitriol.

Sina Brown-Davis

Te Uriohau, Te Roroa, Fale Ula, Va’vau

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Another Ugly Chapter in the Crowns History of State Imposed Abuse

This blog includes reflections on recent developments regarding Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Oranga Tamariki) Legislation Bill and includes part of the submission by Associate Professor Leonie Pihama on behalf of Te Kotahi Research Institute to the Social Services Select Committee.

Over the past months the collective #Handsoffourtamariki has been working to raise both awareness and opposition to the governments proposed restructuring of the current Child, Youth and Family Services (CYFS) to the Ministry of Vulnerable Children. The date for the new structure has been determined to be April 1st 2017, and with only a week until the launching of the new Ministry of Vulnerable Children there remain many critical issues yet to be fully engaged by the government let alone any meaningful process of resolution.

What is clear across all of the processes at play is the ongoing denial of the Crown to undertake a meaningful Treaty relationship with our people. In this case, and across all current government arrangements, there continues to be a denial of the fundamental rights of our people to care for our tamariki and mokopuna. Within all current arrangements the Crown assumes its right to remove tamariki from whānau without any involvement of the wider whānau, hapū, iwi and Māori organisations. This runs in direct contradiction to the agreements within Te Tiriti o Waitangi for we as hapū and iwi to assert our tino rangatiratanga over our lives and the lives of our whānau. Where many political players and commentators continue to deny this right, the Waitangi Tribunal report ‘He Whakaputanga me te Tiriti / The Declaration and the Treaty’ (WAI 1040) found that Māori did not cede sovereignty, and as such we never ceded the rights and authority over the wellbeing of our tamariki and whānau. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/63196127/Maori-did-not-give-up-sovereignty-Waitangi-Tribunal , https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/WT/reports.html)

Dame Tariana Turia has stated consistently that these actions are a further act of Institutional Racism. Evidence highlights that such State violence has been perpetuated upon generations of tamariki and mokopuna who have been removed and placed into State institutions. Both Māori experience and research in the field highlight that successive governments have been seriously remiss in fulfilling its obligations to our people.

In regards to the current legislative developments we have, as a collective, advocated strongly against the development of a Ministry that is based upon deficit approaches to tamariki in this country, and in particular to tamariki Māori and whānau. We have not been alone in such a position, which has been advocated by a range of organisations across the country including both the previous and current Commissioner for Children.

The Ministry of Vulnerable Children may launch as a new structure on April 1st however there is nothing new about how it will go about it’s business in fact there is more indication that it will re-entrench some very unhealthy and failed practices of the 1960’s era of adoptions where thousands of Māori children were denied their fundamental right to know who they are and where they come from.

Research undertaken on the ‘Vulnerable Childrens’ papers by Rihi Te Nana indicates that the limited engagement by government, suggests that this has been a deliberate move on the government’s part to maintain power and control over Iwi/Māori. Ms Te Nana highlighted:
“The Government continues to see Iwi/Māori as consultants who provide advice or provide services to whānau, and fail to undertake a meaningful Treaty relationship that would see our people exercise our right to being self-determining in regards to the wellbeing of our children.”

In her latest interview with e-Tangata, Paora Moyle makes the following statement:
“Anne Tolley has ignored multiple recommendations to establish strategic partnerships with iwi and Māori organisations. Instead her ministry consults and engages with and privileges organisations like Barnardos and Open Home Foundation.
It’s the same old policies of propping up white-is-right foster care organisations, but failing to support parents and whānau as the first and fundamental carers.”
(http://www.e-tangata.co.nz/news/it-sticks-like-a-knife-in-my-guts)

CYFs and associated Agencies have a history of disrespectful behavior towards whānau and of being dismissive of whānau input into the placement of tamariki.
Furthermore it has been well documented that Māori children are placed into contexts by the Government agencies where their needs remain largely unmet because the legislation, policies and interventions lack cultural context or appropriateness. The previous Children’s Commissioner provided clear evidence that CYFs does not provide for the needs of the children that they remove and that there is little evidence that supports the current, and proposed model is actually working as an intervention process. In providing a summary of the ‘State of Care’ report he writes:
We don’t know if children are better off as a result of state intervention
There is little reliable or easily accessible data available about the outcomes of children in the care system. In our view, Child, Youth and Family and MSD’s systems are not routinely measuring and recording the information that matters, and the integration of data between MSD and other government agencies is poor. Better collection and analysis of data is essential for Child, Youth and Family to improve its services and for the Government and the public to have confidence that Child, Youth and Family and other state agencies are improving outcomes for vulnerable children. We don’t have enough information to say conclusively whether children are better off as a result of state intervention, but the limited data we do have about health, education, and justice outcomes is concerning.”
(http://www.reimaginingsocialwork.nz/2015/08/the-state-of-care-report/)

Many Māori who have experienced State institutions and foster care experienced physical, psychological, spiritual and cultural abuse. Much of the abuse suffered by Māori in State ‘care’ has been perpetuated within State validated institutions. It is reported that
“Judge Carolyn Henwood, who headed the panel that has been hearing grievances since 2008, said: “Foster caregivers and extended families, social workers and staff, teachers, the clergy, cooks, gardeners, night watchmen, even other children and patients, all took part in abuse.
“We heard of people using their fists and their feet, as well as weapons and other instruments on occasion, to attack children,” she says in the report.
“When we asked people why they had come, they said they wanted to be heard, they wanted an apology and accountability, and they wanted to improve state care for children, for the next generation.
Even now, New Zealand had no official “duty of care” towards children written into its law, Henwood said.”
(http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/71388571/generation-of-children-brutalised-in-state-care-wont-get-public-apology)

The abuse as a result of State Intervention is noted in the Henwood report as follows:
“As many boys as girls were sexually abused. About 57% of the men we saw had been sexually abused and 57% of the women. The damage done sometimes seems to be irreparable. Many people reported that they felt helpless and enraged that there was no one to whom they could report it. Many of the children who had been abused in State care fell into anti-social and criminal behaviour and ended up in prison or psychiatric hospitals in later life. It is estimated that about 40% of prisoners grew up in state care. Their lives were set on a dangerous and damaging path during this time. There are many people who have been living on the edge ever since their experience of State care as children.” (p.12)

There has been increased comment made about the impact of the changes on Māori whānau. Emma Espiner writes a compelling piece titled ‘Closing an ugly chapter in our history’, opening with the following statement:
In a remarkable reversal by the government, Māori children taken from their families by the state may yet win back the right to be re-homed with whānau, hapū or iwi Māori. The priority to consider Māori whānau when rehoming Māori children uplifted from unsafe homes had been a central feature of Child, Youth and Family protocol for over 30 years.
This priority was dropped when the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Oranga Tamariki) Legislation Bill was presented to Parliament. As recently as Waitangi Day, Prime Minister Bill English was immovable on the issue, asserting he had no problem with the wording. But last week Social Development Minister Anne Tolley agreed she is open to reinstating this important right. Due to the unusual coverage of the issue in the media (Māori issues aren’t typically given prominence in non-Māori media unless there’s a crime or expensive Treaty claim involved) the topic came up in conversation frequently in the past few months.
“But Māori children are more likely to be abused when they’re put in Māori homes, aren’t they?”
“Why do Māori want to put kids in unsafe homes, just because they’re Māori?”
“Shouldn’t the safety of children be the most important consideration?”
(https://www.newsroom.co.nz/@politics/2017/03/23/16259?slug=an-ugly-chapter-in-our-history)

This blog speaks primarily to the impact of the proposed changes and some of the justifications for the changes. Looking at the questions raised by Emma Espiner in her article we can track that what in fact underpins these questions are statements from CYFS and the Minister which call into question the safety of whānau placements. Paora Moyle has highlighted that the Minster has perpetuated this view,
“Her justification all along has been that Māori children are more vulnerable than non-Maori when returned to their whānau because they are at high risk of being re-abused.
But what she failed to mention is that this was occurring most often as a result of the dump-and-run, patch-and-dispatch practices by social workers who don’t value the needs of Māori children as highly as non-Maori.”
(http://www.e-tangata.co.nz/news/it-sticks-like-a-knife-in-my-guts)

It is important that people understand that the statements that abuse is more likely to occur within whānau placements is in fact largely unsubstantiated and denies the clear evidence that the current system is highly abusive of Māori children and there is documented evidence that tamariki have experienced serious acts of physical and sexual abuse whilst in State ‘care’. The Henwood report alone highlights that for many tamariki Māori the abuse perpetuated by State Institutions exceeds that which is documented for tamariki returning in to ‘Kin’ care.

What underpins the governments push to remove the current Section 13 which gives priority placement within whānau is an Internal Report by the Ministry of Social Development (2012) ‘Outcomes for Children Discharged from CYF Care in 2010’ has provided some impetus for the proposed removal of Section.

This report is referenced also in the Expert Panel Report (MSD 2015). In reviewing the report it is essential that it be recognized that the report as a research document is flawed on multiple levels and should not be consider robust or be used to inform any changes or amendments in relation to the placement of tamariki Māori.

Key flaws in the Ministry of Social Development (2012) ‘Outcomes for Children Discharged from CYF Care in 2010’ Report include;
(i) lack of clear indications as to the what constitutes ‘kin’ care;
(ii) the inclusion of ‘friends of family’ in ‘kin’ care figures;
(iii) lack of information in regards to whānau included in figures;
(iv) no peer or external review of the document and the ways in which data is presented;
(v) no information as to how placements were determined;
(vi) no evidence or indication of any involvement of whānau, hapū , iwi or Māori organsational engagement in processes of placement;
(vii) no evidence of inclusive Family Group Conferences in regards to placement and return;
(viii) an assumption that CYFs itself devoid of any responsibility for determining how and where tamariki are placed and;
(ix) a deficit approach is taking throughout the report with the location of ‘blame’ on whānau and Māori more generally for repeat abuse when there is not indication that whānau, hapū or iwi had any decision making in any of the placement processes and with no meaningful or robust evidence to back that positioning.

As a Research Director these shortcomings and fundamental research flaws in regards to the Ministry of Social Development (2012) ‘Outcomes for Children Discharged from CYF Care in 2010’ report raise serious issues as to the validity of it’s findings and as such it should never have been used to inform any changes in regards to Section 13 of the Act.

The current proposed changes to the legislation is not only a fundamental breach of our Treaty rights to care for our people but it is also incredibly irresponsible and negligent on the part of the Ministry and the Crown.

The Children’s Commissioner (2015) provides clear evidence that CYFs does not provide for the needs of the children that they remove and that there is little evidence that supports the current, and proposed model is actually working as an intervention process. This has particular impact on tamariki Māori who make up a significant number of those in State Care. In providing a summary of the ‘State of Care’ report the Commissioner writes:
“We don’t know if children are better off as a result of state intervention. There is little reliable or easily accessible data available about the outcomes of children in the care system. In our view, Child, Youth and Family and MSD’s systems are not routinely measuring and recording the information that matters, and the integration of data between MSD and other government agencies is poor. Better collection and analysis of data is essential for Child, Youth and Family to improve its services and for the Government and the public to have confidence that Child, Youth and Family and other state agencies are improving outcomes for vulnerable children. We don’t have enough information to say conclusively whether children are better off as a result of state intervention, but the limited data we do have about health, education, and justice outcomes is concerning.” (my emphasis)

In this process the Ministry of Social Development has taken significant backward steps in regards to the wellbeing and care of tamariki and mokopuna Māori through the intended removal of clauses within the Act that provide for the cultural wellbeing and safety and the affirmation of whakapapa and whanaungatanga for our tamariki.

In doing so the Ministry of Vulnerable Children, increases the risk to Māori children through an increases ability to place them within non- Māori families disconnected from their identity and cultural ways of being. Positive identity through knowing and understanding one’s whakapapa is 
a foundation for success. Morehu (2005, p.46) stresses the link between whakapapa and nurturing children,
“children are our whakapapa, and whakapapa is our past, present and future. As whānau and wider community we have a responsibility to nurture our children so that they are provided with opportunities and are encouraged to reach their potential”. 


Cultural identity is framed through an understanding of whakapapa and locates us in relationship to each other with whānau, hapū and iwi. It also provides a way to understand our future through our connectedness to our past. As Pere (1982, p.61) states;
“if a child is to determine his or her own future or course of direction, then the assumption is made that the child will need to learn as much as possible about his or her “roots” in the past”. 


The significance that whakapapa has in ensuring identity and connectedness continues to be acknowledged today. Socially and educationally, whakapapa, connectedness and identity are important factors for the wellbeing of Māori children. Dr Melinda Webber (2012) reports,
“Positive racial-ethnic identity and cultural connectedness are essential ingredients in the educational success of Māori students. Positive racial-ethnic identity can shape Māori students’ dispositions, attitudes, engagement and connectedness to others in their racial-ethnic group. It can also influence their connectedness to school and learning.” (p. 26).

Traditional Māori childrearing practices were developed within a context where whakapapa, whānau and collectivity were central to the way in which society functioned (Joseph, 2007). Raising children was a collective effort shared amongst extended whānau. This form of childrearing alleviated stress on parents whilst providing children with an environment conducive to their development and wellbeing (Pere, 1982).

Whānau is the fundamental building block within Māori society. Anyone who works to support Māori communities recognise the primacy of whānau as a preferred relational system of the Māori, we are enabled to understand a basic framework of cultural imperatives.

Whānau is not the same as family. Within discussions related to the reforms  the dominant terms used are family and kin. These terms do not equate to whānau and they act to marginalise the extended nature of whānau. Whānau structures provide for a system of accountability and responsibility. It is a structure through which Māori societal and cultural norms may be reinforced and acts as a resource through which to obtain support, knowledge of the world and to receive necessary values and belief systems essential to both the individual and the society. In a comprehensive discussion of Māori concepts titled ‘Te Hinātore Ki Te Ao Māori: A Glimpse Into The Māori World’ (Ministry of Justice 2001) whānau is described as:
“The basic unit of Māori society into which an individual was born and socialised… a unit for ordinary social and economic affairs, and making basic day to day decisions. Its members had close personal, familial and reciprocal contacts and decision-making relationships with each other. (p.30).

It is within this context that tamariki and mokopuna are linked to hapū and iwi and secure their whakapapa links. The importance of maintaining links, of knowing one’s whakapapa, remaining connected to one’s identity and having a sense of belonging are essential elements to the wellbeing of children within the whānau context. It is through whakapapa that Cultural Identity and Connectedness is maintained and passed through intergenerationally.

International Indigenous Research related to Indigenous Peoples and the impact of Historical and Intergenerational Trauma highlights that culture and cultural connectedness is important to prevention and intervention of personal trauma (Walters et.al.2002). Research in the area of Historical and Intergenerational Trauma for Māori highlights that dominant approaches to the wellbeing of whānau, hapū and iwi do not recognize the significance of whānau and collective approaches to wellbeing, as such there remains a focus on individual approaches that fail to see the centrality of whānau for Māori wellbeing.

Dame Tariana Turia (2016) stated that these actions are a further act of 
Institutional Racism and Iwi should have statutory rights for the care of our tamariki and determine what is the best interests for tamariki Māori. Acts of Institutional Racism deny Māori our rights to live as Māori and to have control over our lives and the lives of our tamariki and mokopuna.

Research by Allan Cooke (2013) provides a significant overview of the legislative history related to the role of the Crown in providing for Māori children in the State care system, highlighting the consistent marginalization of whānau, hapū and iwi in regards to the wellbeing of tamariki Māori.

Paora Moyle (2016) has indicated an alarming rate at which Māori babies are being uplifted and placed into non-Māori environments. She states:
“In New Zealand, the statistics of newborns uplifted by the state are not made public; these requested through the Official Information Act process. In the 2012 – 2013 year, 13 new-born Māori, from a total of 26 were removed from the birthing table, and 80 Māori babies from a total of 157 were removed from their mother within 30 days of their birth. (Bernadette McKenzie, Deputy Chief Executive, Child Youth & Family, personal communication, June, 6, 2014) In the first instance, these infants are most often placed with state approved non-Māori caregivers until the concerns held can be addressed via an FGC. Māori make up 15% of the total New Zealand populations and the uplift of nearly 100 infants a year from their mothers, many of who are not returned, essentially wipes out future generations of Māori.” In 2015, the trafficking of these infants significantly increased, more than 60+% of those uplifted were Maori and these are the ones that were clearly Maori. The actual number is likely to be much higher as the primary ethnicity is recorded by the social worker and often this is discretionary…depending who that social worker decides the child may go to.” 


International Research highlights the opposite, that it is culture, language and cultural connectedness that enables Indigenous tamariki and mokopuna to overcome experiences of trauma, both Historical and Intergenerational (Duran & Duran 1995; Duran 2006; Walters et.al. 2002)

The current training processes for Social Workers within CYFS is inadequate. A focus on very basic cultural competency does not equip Social Workers within Agencies to work with whānau Māori. 
The Henwood report (2015) highlighted that many working with CYFS and associated Institutes hold flawed assumptions about Māori children and their whānau. There is a need for greater numbers of Māori working with tamariki, whānau, hapū and iwi, including in positions of greater decision making within the Ministry. 
A number of submissions to the Social Services Select committee highlight that mainstream social work training fails to provide adequate training for social workers to understand the context of colonization and its impact on Māori whānau, hapū and iwi, nor do they require social workers to develop a consciousness of either personal or institution racism and it’s impact on Māori, Pacific communities or other minority groups living within this country.

In order for tamariki, whānau, hapū and iwi to be served effectively all workers within CYFS and associated institutions need to undergo training with skilled Māori Providers to understand issues of Historical Trauma, Institutional and Personal Racism, Obligations in regards to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and fundamental understanding of te reo and Tikanga Māori. No Social Worker should do anywhere near tamariki and whānau Māori within this basic skill set. The legislation fails to provide adequate definition of what is required in this area. The preface of Pūao Te Ata Tū states, “At the heart of the issue is a profound misunderstanding or ignorance of the place of the child in Māori society and its relationship with whānau, hapū iwi structures.”

The current reforms will see a return to this position with the removal of any legislative ability for whānau, hapū and iwi to enact their rights under Te Tiriti o Waitangi to have rangatiratanga over the wellbeing of their tamariki and mokopuna.”

There is greater need for the Crown to give effect to a meaningful and equitable Treaty partnership and too ensure that whānau, hapū and iwi organisations are well resourced to take on the role as primary organisations working with tamariki and whānau Māori. The evidence is clear, the longer Māori remain in a position of having the lives of our tamariki and mokopuna being determined by the existing state systems, the more likely our life outcomes will continue to diminished.

References
Cameron, N., Pihama, L. Leatherby, R., Cameron, A. (2013) He Mokopuna He Tupuna: Investigating Māori Views of Childrearing Amongst Iwi in Taranaki. A Report by Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki Inc to the Lottery Community Sector Research Fund December 2013
Cooke, A., (2013) State Responsibility for Children in Care, Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Dunedin: University of Otago
Duran, E., & Duran, B. (1995). Native American postcolonial psychology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Duran, E. (2006). Healing the soul wound: Counseling with American Indians and other Native peoples. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Henwood, C. (2015) Some Memories Never Fade: Final Report ofThe Confidential Listening and Assistance Service, Wellington
Mead, H. M. (2003). Tikanga Māori: living by Māori values. Wellington, New Zealand: Huia Publishers.
Mikaere, A. (2005). Cultural invasion continued: the ongoing colonisation of tikanga Māori. Yearbook of New Zealand Jurisprudence Spcial Issue – Te Purenga, 8(2), 134 – 172. http://www.waikato.ac.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/32799/Yearbook- of-NZ-Jurisprudence-vol-8-issue-2-2005.pdf
Ministry of Social Development, (2012) White Paper For Vulnerable Children Volume 1, Wellington: New Zealand Government
Ministry of Social Development, (2015) Modernising Child Youth and Family: Expert Panel Interim Report, Wellington: New Zealand Government
Morehu, C. (2005). A Māori perspective of whānau and childrearing in the 21st century case study. (Master of Education), University of Waikato. Retrieved from http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/handle/10289/2321
Moyle, P (2016). (https://www.academia.edu/10578356/M%C4%81ori-Lived- Experiences_of_the_Family_Group_Conference_A_selection_of_findings )
Ministry of Justice (2001) He Hinātore ki te Ao Māori: A Glimpse Into the Māori World, March 2001, Wellington
New Zealand Ministerial Advisory Committee on a Māori Perspective for the Department of Social Welfare. (1988). Puao te atatu: Day break : the report of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on a Māori Perspective for the Department of Social Welfare. New Zealand: Department of Social Welfare.
Office of the Children’s Commissioner (2015) The State of Care Report, Wellington
Pere, R. R. (1982). Ako: concepts and learning in the Māori tradition. Wellington, New Zealand: Te Kōhanga Reo National Trust Board.
Turia, T (2016) http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/20 1797579/tariana-turia-says-cyf’s-racist-and-iwi-should-get-rights
Walters, K. L., Simoni, J. M., & Evans-Campbell, T. (2002). Substance use among American Indians and Alaska natives: Incorporating culture in an “indigenist” stress-coping paradigm. Public Health Reports, 117, 104-117.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki Oral submission Māori Affairs Select Committee – New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill 2016

Te Wharepora Hou In support of the Hapū and Iwi of Te Atiawa and the struggle for the return of the Pekapeka Block in Waitara share the following oral submission presented at the first Māori Select Committee meeting held in Ngamotu (New Plymouth) on Friday November 18th 2016.  We encourage people across Aotearoa and beyond to read the links provided and to support the online petition to support the reu

https://our.actionstation.org.nz/petitions/peace-for-pekapeka-return-waitara-lands

http://www.taranaki.gen.nz/pekapeka

http://www.taranaki.gen.nz/waitarasubmissions

screen-shot-2017-01-15-at-10-14-53-amKo te tuatahi, he mihi aroha ki ngā Tūpuna e mau tonu ana tenei kaupapa hohonu. Tena koutou katoa ngā ringa raupa o te Māori Affairs Select Committee, rau rangatira mā e haere mai nei ki te whakarongo ki te tautoko ngā kai kōrero i tenei wā, ki ngā kai kōrero i mua i ahau kei te mihi.  Ko Taranaki te maunga, ko Ngati Mutunga te iwi ko Raumati te whānau.

This oral submission adds context to the written submission and to our recommendations. I am a member of the NZ Association of Counsellors, a member of the Taranaki Māori Women’s Network (TmwN) and also the Director of Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki Inc. (TTW). The Taranaki Māori Women’s Network is a collective who hold in trust the wellbeing of Taranaki and whose purpose is to creatively respond to issues that impact on whānau, hapū and iwi by way of the contemporary application of tikanga Māori to ameliorate the effects of historical trauma on the collective.

The taonga tuku iho (non-negotiable treasures) handed on to us by our Tūpuna and the principles exemplified by Te Raukura encourage members to enact collective ownership, responsibility and accountability by strengthening whānau relationships, cultural practices and to actively pursue the reclamation and resurrection of protective hapū institutions.
Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki is a kaupapa Māori tangata whenua development and liberation organisation. The values that underpin it are tikanga Māori which is central to all service provision with the primary aim of empowering whānau, hapū and iwi to address historical and intergenerational trauma in the context of our lives today. The organisation has a responsibility to provide all whānau with an analysis of the socio-cultural, economic and political factors that impinge upon our lives and to maintain and promote; te wairua, te mana, te tapu, te ihi me ngā moemoea o ngā Mātua Tūpuna.

It is not helpful to forget our past. Whaitara has been earmarked by colonial imperialist history to be marginalised and to be fragmented, lost and confused culturally, socially and economically because our Tūpuna initiated a passive resistance movement – meaning resistance to government, law etc without violence by fasting, by demonstrating, and by refusing to cooperate. The passive resistance movement of Taranaki originated from Whaitara when Te Rangitake sent the women out to pull up the survey pegs. Thus began Te Pahua Tuatahi – Te Pahua o Whaitara – the plunder of Whaitara.

These days most people have some knowledge about Te Pahua o Parihaka – the plunder of Parihaka in 1881 but the first plunder was Te Pahua o Whaitara in 1865 one hundred and fifty one year’s eleven months and 9 days ago this fact has been relegated to the deep recesses of history and people’s minds because of te riri a te pakeha at the actions of our Tūpuna in challenging the authority of the Crown and its representatives – te puku riri remain, smouldering within them. But if we were to ask about this anger there would be denial that it even exists and responses would probably be ‘he iwi tahi tatou’, or about ownership and being able to freehold, having a roof over ones heads etc.

Our Tūpuna and subsequently their mokopuna have paid a great price for exercising their democratic right and responsibility in expressing their displeasure and disagreement with being rendered landless and turned into paupers in their own homelands. The debilitating colonial punishment, of a passive resistance movement, has left a corrosive soul wound which needs to heal and reminding the NPDC and general public about this injustice is to bring it back into the moral vision of the entire community.

The theft of Taranaki lands are a fact and create a shared history of one group being disposed and left destitute in their own lands and the other group wilfully benefiting from the spoils of thief, forced dispossession and war. The intergenerational fallout from this shared history has created disease in many forms. Some are easy to see and identify; such as family violence and diabetes but there are other diseases that are much more difficult to see or identify; such as greed, entitled and privileged behaviour that cultivates institutional racism and an unwillingness to return the spoils of stolen property. Behaviours that create dis-ease with oneself and in the company of others who are perceived as the ‘other’, therefore unknowable and possibility dangerous. How do we dare to speak our truth? Where is the safety, when the dominant political discourse comes from a position of wilful ignorance about history; and the drafters of this Bill have no concept of their privileged positions in it.

Poverty is not just about money or income. It is about unequal distribution of resources and the valuing of some interests over others; often those of a rich, well off and powerful minority over the interests of the disempowered. You have heard others this morning, including lease holders, describe that at a structural level this Bill involves the establishment of layers of new systems to determine how resources will not only be obtained, but how they will be distributed and to whom. These systems will again construct who will benefit and therefore who will be privileged and an institutional arrangement that is not appropriate for Māori is just inherently racist. This Bill will again set up structural conditions that perpetuate disadvantage for the dispossessed and will only serve to perpetuate advantage for those that have already benefited from the spoils of ill-gotten gain.

But the real issues of addressing privilege within the community and public arena are kept at bay often by the use of sanitising language; one example is the term endowment, which gets bandied about in relation to the Pekapeka like it was a gift bestowed upon our colonisers as a thank you pressie for rescuing us from ourselves.

But a gift is not a gift until it is freely offered. A gift is not a gift until it is freely given!

TTW brings a gift which is freely offered and originates from the work it does which originates from historical trauma and the legacy of colonial paternalistic ideologies of racial, gender and spiritual supremacy. We bring the gift of un-sanitised language, it is not intended to cause offense although it may do so because the real context of this almighty theft needs to be put in language that is understandable to everyone and there can be no uncertainty about what is being said.

Along with several others at TTW I am a family violence programme facillitator, educator and community researcher. We do group and individual programmes for women and children victims of violence and exposure to violence and also for male perpetrators of family violence. The three main areas of violence addressed are physical, psychological and sexual violation; the other areas that feed into those three are of course colonalisation and racism. Interestingly victim impact reports readily identify the areas of physical and psychological violation however sexual violation is not.

We enquire about context, and often the response is in line with “he just helps himself; or the biblical bit; comes like a thief in the night; – oh it can be day or night, it doesn’t matter – he just takes what he wants!” During the conversations that follow, reframing does occur and then also having to address the feelings of shame and feeling overwhelmed that this has happened to them.

In the men’s group, once they decide to stop playing the victim, physical and psychological violation is acknowledged but sexual violation is a clear no. Absolutely not no way. Rapists are considered the lowest of the low, they are scum, mongrels, and they are out there not in here.

We hear things like – “I work for what I get I’m really charming, I contribute to the family, I pay my way”. Great, economy based language. We are impressed – so you work hard, you do things together, make agreements, negotiate time etc; then we start to talk about sharing the good and bad times, together, making decisions together, asking permission, right of refusal, no really meaning no. As in, No, the complete sentence No!

Then it begins to dawn, understanding begins to unfold, that rapists aren’t really out there somewhere else that they are right here sitting next to them, actually, sitting on their seats. And possibly for the first time they begin to feel the impact that of some of their actions might have on other people.

Feelings of shame and understanding that by violating others you also violate yourself; their own whakapapa has been violated as well as their sense of belonging and connectedness to place.

The theft of the land is exactly the same. The land has been raped; therefore the people have been raped. We are one and the same! The feelings are the same; the effects are the same.

So how do we address violation? I’m sure you all know this but we will say it again anyway. It’s addressed by being accountable for our actions, by putting things right, by doing the right thing, by making a sincere apology and undertaking to NEVER behave in that manner again. However, ultimately, accountability needs to be internalised by the perpetrator on their journey of change behaviour; because nobody can make them accountable, they have to choose to be accountable, so, to place restraints around their behaviour and to tighten the web of accountability are important and legitimate actions, especially with a serial offender, this is to help reduce ongoing risk to the community.

Because a gift is not a gift until it is freely offered. A gift is not a gift until it is freely given!

Our tupuna gifted may tracks of land. For example land for mara, to grow kai on so people could survive, they even showed people how to live in their new environment, they gave land for educational institutions, land for institutions of worship to name a few.

But the Pekapeka was not gifted. It was stolen. It was not a gift it was stolen. And what do we do with stolen property? We return it to the victim of the theft at no cost to the victim.

The drafters of this Bill really need to stop behaving like the Pekapeka was gifted to them because it was not. And it is ironic that the drafters of this Bill have attempted to disguise Pre-emption as a fair and balanced solution instead of ensuring the hapū can regain the unqualified right to exercise full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their lands and estates, forests, fisheries and other properties. A gift is not a gift until it is freely offered.

TTW recommends the MASC to:
• And we are going to use the words of a Colonel Robert Trimble, who in 1885 made a speech about the Treaty of Waitangi while defending the invasion, destruction and occupation of Parihaka; but we am going to repeat his words in relation to this New Plymouth District Council Waitara Lands Bill 2016 … “which I hope will be relegated to the waste paper basket which is about the only place it ought to be seen in.”

• And we recommend the MASC direct the NPDC to return the stolen lands to the hapū that hold mana whenua over the Pekapeka, without ‘strings attached’.

• Require the NPDC to undertake authentic and genuine dialogue with the Manukorihi and Otarua hapū about the stolen Pekapeka lands and that the NPDC put a stop to its ongoing shameful and disrespectful conduct in attempting to further alienate the Pekapeka from both hapū.

• That the NPDC support Manukorihi and Otarua Hapū, to utilise the hapū lands for their authentic purpose that is to benefit the collective not just a few people.

• We recommend that the Select Committee consider and give weight to our request that the NPDC be directed to return fair reparations to lease holders who have been paying a lease for their own stolen lands and that the time frame commence from the Sim Commission Report to the present day.

• We recommend that the Select Committee establish an independent inquiry, funded by the Crown, to fully investigate endowment and leasehold properties on the Pekapeka in Waitara that have been privatised since the restructuring of local government in 1989. And that the inquiry requires the NPDC to give a full account of what the proceeds gained from the stolen property was spent on including the amount spent on legal fees that have been funded from Waitara leasehold payments and sales.

• TTW recommends the MASC encourages the NPDC to do the right thing, to engage and help create an alternative future and to join into a decisive conversation, to make it relevant and new and to help invigorate it in our own unique Taranaki way. Because this did not happen, this did not happen with the drafting of this Bill; being able to ‘twick’ it here or there does not amount to co-creating nor is it an act of justice to any of the parties concerned.

• We support and encourage the Select Committee to show leadership in relation to these stolen lands so that the damage that has been inflicted on the Whaitara community can begin to be repaired and start to heal. The healing of this festering corrosive soul wound will benefit the whole community and the entire Taranaki region; in fact it will benefit our Nation because our country has been holding its breath for a long time. If you allow NPDC to continue to do business as usual it will not serve community wellbeing. Return the stolen lands and we will hear a collective sigh of relief. The diseases in this region are our stories etched into our land and bodies. Even if they are our inherited legacies they can be rewritten. This is an opportunity to rebalance and rewrite our inherited legacies.

To the members of the MASC, our kaumatua and members of all our communities, thank you for hearing this oral submission from TTW today; and our final words today are to Manukorihi and Otarua hapū “me kore rawa koe e taka – don’t ever give up – me kore rawa koutou e taka”.
No reira rau rangatira mā tena koutou, tena koutou, tena tatou katoa.

Acknowledgements & references: Waitangi Tribunal Report – Te Kaupapa Tuatahi, Sims Commission Report, Hansard report, Professor Linda Smith, Dr Ramona Beltran, Dr Leonie Pihama, Dr Mihi Ratima, Mereana Pitman, Dr Janice Wenn, Moana Jackson, Veronica Tawhai, Vivian Hutchinson, Kaimahi & Trustees TTW

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Christchurch Santa Parade Float Demeans Native Americans

PRESS RELEASE SUNDAY 4TH DECEMBER 2016

“The raising of issues by Christchurch residents Michelle and Derek Flores related to the inclusion of a float in the Christchurch Santa Parade that demeans Native American people are concerns that have been raised consistently in New Zealand and continue to be ignored due to both arrogance and racism” states Associate Professor Leonie Pihama, Director of Te Kotahi Research Institute at the University of Waikato. The float is defended by parade organiser Pam Morris who stated in an interview with Morning Report the Native American float had been part of the parade for 20 years who would continue to be included. She is supported by the Chair of the Santa Parade’s trust, Anne Jamieson. What both Pam Morris and Anne Jamieson fail to understand is that for the past 20 years Native American people have been fighting against such racist and demeaning representation.

Dr Pihama was a part of a group of Māori academics and Phd scholars from the University of Waikato that recently met with the Yocha Dehe Wintun tribe of California who have been instrumental in challenging such degrading representation of Native American people, “It has been clearly voiced for many years that white people playing dress up and appropriating Native American symbols as costumes or mascots is totally unacceptable. The Christchurch parade organisers lack any insight into the racism inherent in such actions. ‘Cowboys and Indians’ is not a game, white colonial invasion was about the genocide of Native Americans” states Dr Pihama.

The expression by Parade organisers that they have permission to have the float is also dismissed by Dr Pihama as were the comments made by Māori academic Dr Rawiri Taonui. Stuff highlights Professor Taonui’s assertion that the float is acceptable, “ if they are dressing up in costume as a way of learning about that culture in a respectful way”, however Dr Pihama responds stating “he is clearly not up to date with where things are for Native American critique of such behaviour, firstly Native people are not ‘costumes’ and secondly having people who are not Native American ‘dressing up’ and ‘playing’ Indian is as offensive as when the Engineers students dressed up in grass skirts in the 70’s and actively demeaning our people. This is not respectful, this is not ok, not now, not ever.”

The call by Michelle and Derek Flores to have the float removed is supported by a range of Māori organisations such as Te Kotahi, and Māori women’s network Te Wharepora Hou. Spokesperson for Te Wharepora Hou Dr Mera Lee-Penehira believes the float needs to be removed “As a national network of Māori women were are in total support of the call for the float to be removed. It is offensive and culturally demeaning of Indigenous people and should not be supported in this country. We would not support a float that demeaning Māori and we do not support a float that demeans our Indigenous relations.”

Te Reo Māori Interviews: Dr Mera Lee-Penehira
English Interviews: Dr Leonie Pihama

For further information refer:

http://www.notyourmascots.org

http://nativeappropriations.com

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Māori and Indigenous National Doctoral Conference Endorses Global Solidarity for Standing Rock

PRESS RELEASE Friday 25th November 2016

Delegates at the National Māori and Indigenous (MAI) Doctoral Conference, being held at Victoria University of Wellington, today voiced their collective support to the Sioux nation of North Dakota at Standing Rock.

University of Auckland MAI academic leader, Dr Mera Lee-Penehira states, “The people occupying Standing Rock are being subjected to the same and worse levels of police brutality and intimidation we suffered here in the 1970s on Bastion Point, and again during the shameful Spring Bok tour. It is our duty to speak out against such atrocities.”

solidarity-with-standing-rockThe long standing disagreement between the U.S. Government and the Sioux Nation centres on what has become known as the Dakota access pipeline. It will cut across the sacred lands of the Sioux Nation, presenting a serious threat to both land and waterways. “It’s an issue of serious risk to environmental sustainability and an issue of the sovereign right of native peoples to protect their land and to protect water, the very essence of life”, said Dr Lee-Penehira.

In her keynote address, Harvard graduate and lawyer Natalie Allan-Coates said, “The people at Standing Rock have called for support from Māori, our strength and solidarity is important to them. We need to do whatever we can to help.” Mrs Allan-Coates recently visited Standing Rock and spent some time working with the onsite legal advisory team.

Mrs Allan-Coates was joined by keynote speaker Kingi Snelgar in condemning the current violence of both private security firms and state authorities. As a human rights observor at Standing Rock Mr Snelgar noted, “The violation of human rights has to be brought to the world’s attention and it has to stop.”

Tāwhanga Nopera, University of Waikato doctoral candidate states, “It is unacceptable that Indigenous peoples, who are simply exercising their sovereign right to peacefully protect their lands and waterways, are subjected to such violence and degredation. We must say something and show solidarity”

Conference delegates voiced their commitment and solidarity to Standing Rock as Māori and Indigenous academics. Associate Professor Leonie Pihama, Director of Te Kotahi Research Institute (University of Waikato) says “A key role for Māori and Indigenous scholars is to to challenge the continued oppression of our peoples both locally and across the globe. We must not be complacent. The Protectors at Standing Rock are standing to protect this planet, Papatūānuku, for all people. They are placing their lives on the line to ensure that current and future generations have access to life sustaining water. We have an obligation to both bear witness and to voice our strong support for their stand”

Media Contacts:
1. Mera Lee-Penehira
2. Natalie Allan-Coates

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Waitara Lands Taken Must Be Returned

This blog includes three Submissions to the Māori Affairs Select Committee on New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill 2016 presented on November 18th at the Novotel New Plymouth. The Submissions are from Dr Leonie Pihama, Veronica Tawhai and Ngaropi Cameron.  We hope over the next few months to add more submissions here to update what is happening with the Pekapeka Block and Waitara Leaselands that were confiscated by the Colonial government in 1865.

Submission to Māori Affairs Select Committee on New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill 2016

Associate Professor Leonie Pihama (Te Ātiawa, Ngāti Māhanga, Ngā Māhanga a Tairi)

Opening Statement

“E kore e pōuri tonu,
Waitara e mamae nei i te wā i mua a rā
e tū te hunga rīriki
me tōna raukura hei tohu ki te ao, hei!”

  1. I am a descendant of Ngāti Rāhiri hapū, Te Ātiawa, with whakapapa connections also to Ngā Māhanga a Tairi and Ngāti Māhanga.
  2. Our whānau have lived on the Pekapeka Block for over 50 years. Our whānau have paid lease on that whenua for 50 years. My father struggled to raise his whānau on our own lands while paying leasehold to those that confiscated the Pekapeka block.
  3. Our whānau have watched as sections within the Waitara Lands have been changed in status to Freehold without any knowledge of the hapū or iwi. Living on our lands, paying mortgage, rates and lease has been the experience of many hapū and the iwi of Te Ātiawa.
  4. The injustices have culminated in many generations of Te Ātiawa descendants living within a context of Historical Trauma and with the significant impacts of that trauma being experiences intergenerationally.
  5. In my work I am part of a Māori research group investigating Historical trauma and the impact on our people there is vast amounts of evidence that indicates that historical trauma events of colonisation create a context of wounding our people.
  6. Native healer and scholars Eduardo Duran and Bonnie Duran refer to this as a ‘soul wound’. Soul wounds that are not healed are passed through our whakapapa, they impact on every part of being Maori, of being Te Atiawa, they create a context where within te ira tangata the pain memories of our tupuna are passed intergenerationally. That is the impact on whanau in Waitara. That is what needs to be healed.
  7. The issue of what is happening with the Pekapeka block is not solely one of land ownership or economics, it is one of needing meaningful and enduring pathways of social justice to heal those soul wounds.
  8. Within this Bill and in the documentation provided by the Council the name ‘Pekapeka’ does not appear. The history of these lands are identified through the naming of the lands. The invisiblisation of the names of these lands is an act of selective memory which denies the true history of the land and marginalises the role of mana whenua in the discussions related to these lands.
  9. This process of not naming the whenua is a means by which the council can then present the ‘lease lands’ as if they are just any other block of land. But this is not just any other block. This is the Pekapeka block and the name is significant within our history.
  10. Referring to the Pekapeka block only as ‘Endowment’ lease-lands removes an understanding of the history of land theft, the acts of colonial oppression, the imposition of colonial rule, the impact of the associated historical trauma upon generations of Te Atiawa descendants.
  11. 11. It is my view as a researcher in this area is that this Bill will not only remove our ability as Te Atiawa to receive social justice, it will also further embed the pain of the historical spiritual and cultural wounds that our people carry as a result of the invasion of our lands and oppression of our peoples.
  12. As a political representative body for our people this Select Committee can take a key role in stopping this process and facilitating the return to a pathway of meaningful negotiations that will be about social justice and healing.

Comments on the Bill.

  1. In looking through the New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill I am deeply concerned that this Bill removes any and all possibility of the Waitara lands being returned to the hapū and iwi of Te Ātiawa.
  2. This Bill effectively provides a process for the Waitara Lands to be fully privatised and deny any pathways for the return of the land through a Crown facilitated process. The hapū and iwi of Waitara have waited for justice for this confiscation of these lands for over 150 years.
  3. The current Treaty Settlement process has severely marginalised the voice of hapū within the Crown defined systems and Waitara is a clear example of the impact of that marginalisation.
  4. The hapū of Manukorihi and Otaraua have consistently voiced their aspirations for the return of the Pekapeka Block. This has been ignored throughout the Treaty Settlement process. This continues with this legislation process with the hapū of Manukorihi and Otaraua being rendered invisible within the Bill.
  5. Te Ātiawa Treaty Settlement Bill that is currently before Parliament has constructed a context where the Waitara Lands are to be negotiated separately with the New Plymouth District Council, leading to this New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill.
  6. The assumption underpinning this process is one of the lands being ‘owned’ by the Council. The land is in fact stolen property.
  7. The history of the Waitara Lands is clear; it was placed into the hands of the Council through colonial land confiscations. This is clearly stated in the Waitangi Tribunal report and reiterated in the opening of this Bill as follows:

The land was originally confiscated by the Crown from Waitara hapū in 1865 under the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863. Waitara was then surveyed and renamed Raleigh by the Crown.

The Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill, which is currently before the House of Representatives, contains an account of the historical relationship between Te Atiawa and the Crown. That Bill also contains factual acknowledgements and an apology from the Crown.

In 1876 the Crown vested land in the Waitara Harbour Board and the Raleigh Town Board for harbor improvement and municipal development. During the next 70 years, further land was vested in the Council’s predecessors for those purposes. (174-1)

  1. The 1876 vesting of lands in the Waitara Harbour Board and the Raleigh Town Board was undertaken in direct conflict with Te Tiriti o Waitangi and was an act of colonial oppression and denial of fundamental rights of hapū and iwi of Te Ātiawa. As such the lands must be returned to mana whenua in order to restore and honour the obligations of the Crown in relation to the Treaty.
  2. The Bill advocates for the transfer of a small amount of land to Te Kotahitanga, the Freeholding of the land and the establishment of a process for the profits of sale and other funds received in relation to the Waitara Lands to be distributed by a joint Board including the Council and Te Kotahitanga.
  3. It is my view that the transfer of Waitara Lease Lands to fee simple (Freehold) status for purchase by Leaseholders is in breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Such transfers move the whenua one step further from the descendants of the hapū of Te Ātiawa that hold mana whenua over the Waitara Lands.
  4. The privatisation of these lands by the Council, facilitated through this legislation, will be the final act of dispossession of the hapū and iwi of Waitara. This is a continuation of the acts of muru raupatu imposed upon the people of Taranaki.
  5. The Pekapeka block and other Waitara Lands have provided income for the various Borough, District and Regional Councils that have held local government control within Waitara since 1865. This income has been used by the Council in a range of ways to supposedly benefit ‘all’ community in Waitara.
  6. The Bill continues this generalised approach to the funds and profits taken from the Pekapeka Block with the proposal that income to be spent in ways to develop the entire township.
  7. It is clear that stolen Māori lands have provided a revenue stream for these Councils for over a hundred and fifty years. It is time to put a halt to the ongoing commodification and exploitation of hapū and iwi lands within Waitara.
  8. It is time to stop the ongoing perpetration of colonial dispossession of the hapū and iwi of Te Ātiawa.

The Pekapeka Block and other Waitara Lands held by the New Plymouth District Council are stolen lands. The general Waitara community have benefited for long enough at the detriment of the hapū and iwi of Waitara.

  1. This Bill continues the reproduction of the intergenerational denial of the hapū and Iwi within Waitara. This is embedded in the privatisation of the lands through the transfer of title to Fee Simple.

The ongoing exploitation of Waitara Lands is also embedded in the proposal that the expected $60million income stream will be used for the community as a whole. Again the wider community benefits from the theft and sale of hapū and iwi lands within Waitara.

  1. A clear example of the ongoing commodification and exploitation of hapū and Iwi of Te Ātiawa is highlighted in the Bill Part Four which states:

TRC has the right to half the net proceeds relating to 1940 Act land.

Clause 25 requires TRC to apply its share within Waitara, or for the benefit of the Waitara community or parts of it (eg public transport to New Plymouth).

If TRC cannot apply the money for those purposes it may accumulate it until those purposes arise.

Alternatively, TRC may include in its long term plan or annual plan a proposal to apply the amounts more generally within the region, but including benefit to the Waitara community.

TRC also has the option, if it wishes, to apply the money to meet the costs it has al- ready incurred in respect of the Lower Waitara River Flood Control Scheme. (p.13)

  1. It is noted that this section is premised upon the following mechanisms through which the Taranaki Regional Council (TRC) took control of these lands:

The Waitara Harbour Board’s land holdings included foreshore, and grazing and town sections in the Waitara township. The Waitara Harbour Act 1940 vested the foreshore between the high and low water marks on the East and West Beaches in the New Plymouth Harbour Board (now Taranaki Regional Council (TRC)) as a foreshore en- dowment for harbour purposes. The balance of the land was vested in the Waitara Borough Council (now New Plymouth District Council) for municipal purposes subject to section 9 of the Act. The foreshore endowments reverted to the Crown under section 36 of the Local Legislation Act 1952. 
(p.2)

The assertion within the Bill that the TRC maintain its control over the lands and associated income is fundamentally flawed. As with the process with the NP District Council these lands are stolen and must be returned.

  1. The TRC should have no rights to continue to benefit through the extraction of financial and economic benefit from stolen lands.
  2. The TRC as with the NPDC maintain their assumed control over the lands and any income derived. The role of hapū and iwi as sovereign is marginalised throughout the Bill.

I riro whenua atu, me hoki whenua mai.

  1. The New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill raises significant and long-term issues for the hapū and iwi of Te Ātiawa. The Bill will remove any hope or realisation of the aspirations of our tupuna that is encapsulated in the saying ‘I riro whenua atu, me hoki whenua mai’. Many generations of those of us that have lived on the Pekapeka Block have waited patiently for the return of those lands to our people. We have watched the struggle and pain of those who have had to lease lands back from those that represent the colonial forces that confiscated the lands of our ancestors.
  1. It is critical that this Bill be halted and that the Crown, the Council and hapū and iwi representatives resume discussions in regards to the return of these lands to mana whenua.
  1. This can be done over a number of years and with careful planning to ensure that the relationships within the community are treated with respect.
  1. The return of the lands will also enable the hapū and iwi to work to heal both the lands and the people of Waitara. This will include a process of understanding the historical trauma experienced and the developing pathways for healing that is grounded within ensuring connectedness to the land, sea and river of Waitara.
  1. Please note that I wish to make an oral submission and request that the Select Committee hold the Public Hearing in Waitara at Owae W’aitara Marae.


New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill Submission to the Māori Affairs Select Committee  Veronica MH Tawhai, 7 November 2016

Without justice, there can be no peace. – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Personal details

  1. My name is Veronica Makere Hupane Tawhai, and I am from the Ngati Porou, Ngati Uepohatu people on the East Coast of Te Ika a Maui (North Island) of Aotearoa. I also have ancestors who immigrated here from England and Ireland. During most of the year I live in the Manawatu, amongst the lands of the Rangitane, Ngati Kauwhata people.
  1. I currently work as a lecturer for Te Pūtahi a Toi (School of Māori Studies at Massey University, Palmerston North) and as a community educator for Te Ata Kura (Society for Conscientisation) in the field of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, indigenous rights, constitutional, electoral, political and citizenship education. In these roles I regularly share the story of Waitara and the Pekapeka block as an essential facet of the education every citizen in Aotearoa needs to be able to progress greater justice and peace for all who live here, in our every day lives and at all levels of society.
  2. I write this submission on behalf of myself and my two daughters Taumaihiroa and Whiutaikaha Tawhai-Porter who, through their father James Porter, belong to the Te Atiawa people, Manukorihi hapū, and the lands whose future is the subject of this bill.

Regarding the Crown’s responsibility of redress:

  1. Since at least 1989 and the establishment of the Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi the Crown has committed to a process of ‘redress’. This includes taking responsibility for ensuring the resolution of grievances “in the expectation that reconciliation can occur” (Office of the Prime Minister, New Zealand Government, 1989, p. 1).
  2. In the Bill’s explanatory note it is acknowledged that the Waitara lands were “confiscated by the Crown from Waitara hapū” (p. 1) under the 1863 New Zealand Settlements Act. Irrespective of the arrangements made for the land since that time by and between various Crown entities, including all further and subsequent legislation, for reconciliation to occur the lands must be returned to the hapū of Waitara from whom they were taken.
  3. That the suite of 1863 legislations under which these lands and others were confiscated have been widely recognised as breaches of fundamental human rights, the rights guaranteed to Māori under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the rights of Māori as indigenous peoples as affirmed in the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, forms part of the wider context within which the benchmark for redress and reconciliation must be considered. These contexts reaffirm the right of Waitara hapū to the return of these lands as is their wish, as opposed to monies or other forms of compensation preferred by the Crown and/or other Crown entities such as the New Plymouth District Council (NPDC).

Regarding the stated purposes of the Bill:

  1. Given the Crown’s principle of redress and expectations regarding reconciliation, that the Bill’s purposes (Part 1, section 3) does not include return of these lands to Waitara hapū, the Bill should not proceed. This includes abandonment of the clauses relating to:
  • The right of the NPDC and/or other entities who are not Waitara hapū to sell or purchase Waitara lands;
  • The right of the NPDC and/or other entities who are not Waitara hapū to allocate rent and sale proceeds;
  • The right of NPDC and/or other entities who are not Waitara hapū to establish any Fund and Board for the purposes of administering any monies from Waitara lands.

Regarding the importance of redress and reconciliation:

  1. It is an oft-quoted principle that ‘without justice, there can be no peace’. As Crown redress and reconciliation is one basis upon which justice might be achieved, that we commit fully and whole-heartedly to these processes is essential to ensuring the return of peace for the people of Waitara, Te Atiawa, Māori, Pākehā/non-Māori and wider Aotearoa New Zealand.
  2. In my role as an educator, year after year I witness Māori and Pākehā/non-Māori participants’ horror, anger, deep sadness and in the case of Pākehā, guilt, in response to the history of our country, including what occurred at Waitara and with the Pekapeka block. That the Crown has a redress process in place that is committed to reconciliation is a foundation upon which participant’s feelings of hope and justice are anchored. That the Bill withholds justice to Waitara hapū is the withholding of this foundation upon which the wellbeing of New Zealanders regarding our history might be based.
  3. As a rāwaho/Māori from another iwi who stands in solidarity with Waitara hapū, that justice is achieved in the return of Waitara lands to Waitara hapū is important to the processes of healing being undertaken by and within other Māori communities nationwide. The withholding of justice from Waitara hapū threatens the hope that reconciliation for Māori and other New Zealanders throughout Aotearoa might be achieved.
  4. As a partner to a Waitara hapū man and mother of Waitara hapū children, the harm this Bill will cause personally to our whānau and the ongoing trauma that my whānau members will face should this Bill proceed weighs heavily on my heart.

Conclusions and recommendations:

  1. This proposed Bill in its current form would not only fail to meet the objectives of redress committed to by the Crown in its expectation of reconciliation, but will also cause further injury and itself constitute another grievance to be addressed in future, with all the strain and harm that the process of resolution itself brings.
  2. I therefore ask that the Committee recommend the Bill be abandoned in its entirety;
  3. I also ask the Committee recommend a Commission of Inquiry to investigate all dealings concerning the Waitara lands, including the more recent self sale-and-buys activities of the NPDC that are absent from this Bill’s historical note;
  4. I wish to present this submission in person, and ask that the Committee come to Waitara so oral submissions may be heard and considered on the lands in question.

Kia kaha tātau!


Submission: To Maori Affairs Select Committee regarding the New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill 2016.

Ngaropi Cameron, Director, Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki Inc

4 November 2016

In summary I am asking the Select Committee to REJECT in its entirety the New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill 2016.

  1. My name is Ngaropi Cameron. Ngati Mutunga, Ngati Maru, Te Ātiawa and Taranaki are four of several Iwi I have whakapapa connections to.
  1. I am a member of the Taranaki Māori Women’s Network (TmwN) and I am also the Director of Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki Inc. (TTW).
  1. I am writing this submission on behalf of TTW as the founding member of the organisation, on behalf of my daughters and mokopuna and myself.
  1. The Taranaki Māori Women’s Networks is a collective who hold in trust the wellbeing of Taranaki and whose purpose is to creatively respond to issues that impact on whānau, hapu and iwi by way of the contemporary application of tikanga Māori to ameliorate the effects of historical trauma on the collective. The taonga tuku iho (non-negotiable treasures) handed on to us by our Tūpuna and the principles exemplified by Te Raukura encourage members to enact collective ownership, responsibility and accountability by strengthening whānau relationships, cultural practices and to actively pursue the reclamation and resurrection of protective hapū institutions.
  1. Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki is a kaupapa Māori tangata whenua development and liberation organisation. The values that underpin TTW are tikanga Māori which is central to all service provision with the primary aim of empowering whānau, hapū and iwi to address historical and intergenerational trauma in the context of their lives today. The organisation has a responsibility to provide all whānau with an analysis of the socio-cultural, economic and political factors that impinge upon their lives and to maintain and promote; te wairua, te mana, te tapu, te ihi me ngaa moemoea o ngā Mātua Tūpuna.
  1. The organisations activities over the past 30 years have stemmed from a desire to: a)honour our Tūpuna for their courage, fortitude and the passive resistance movement they coordinated to retain their homelands mō ngā tamariki mokopuna b) to help reclaim their vision of the future for their uri and c) to help heal the corrosive intergenerational wounds inflicted on their descendant’s by the theft of their cultural and economic base – their lands.
  1. The base of the organisations mandated Kaupapa Māori stance originates out of the direct instruction from our prophet Te Whiti o Rongomai “ E tu tama wahine i te wā o te kore”. This directive was reissued by Dr Huirangi Waikererpuru and Matarena Rau-Kupa QSM in 1989 when they named the organisation, Tu Tama Wahine o Taranaki, and instructed us to continue the work our Tūpuna kuia had done.
  1. Because there are well documented reports in the form of the ‘Confiscated Native Lands and Other Grievances, Royal Commission’, generally known as the Sims Commission 1928 and the 1996 Waitangi Tribunal Report on Taranaki ‘Te Kaupapa Tuatahi’ WAI 143, there seems minimal use in restating this process again other than to remind the Select Committee members that Commission and Tribunal members were made up of High Court Judges, prominent Community Leaders, Former Prime Ministers and Governor Generals who concluded that Manukorihi and Otaraua hapū lands were unjustly taken. In layman’s language – stolen.
  1. In spite of the agreement by both commissions, that the land was stolen, successive local government bodies and central government acting on behalf of the Crown have managed to avoid correcting an unjust act and have in actuality also managed to keep the naked truth from the field of their moral vision.
  1. There have been hundreds of thousands of hectares of land confiscated from Māori in Aotearoa/NZ however the blatant theft of the Pekapeka block of land should perhaps sit at the pinnacle of the list of festering scabs in our country. Because the sinful theft of these lands has been benignly packaged by successive Governments and Local Councils as endowment it allows people to relegate the iniquitous morality of the original sin to the recesses of their mind, a form of wilful amnesia.
  1. But the continued and ongoing sin is by the NPDC. The Councils latest attempt to ‘gobble de gook’ it even further with this Bill, which is almost incomprehensible to a lay person, and it is quite simply immoral and cruel for the NPDC to put forward this manipulative Bill to further dispossess the Manukorihi and Otaraua hapū of their lands.
  1. Over six generations of revengeful systemic injustice and institutional racism has been the price Taranaki Hapū have paid for the passive resistance movement stance of our Tūpuna, which was their right to exercise (as it is the right of free people throughout the world) and it is time for the NPDC to face up to its wilful ignorance about this latest unhealthy exercise of power and greed in the form of this ‘final land grab’ in Waitara.
  1. In Part 1 of the Bill the Preliminary Provisions – 3 Purpose – the purposes of this Act are to – (a) – (l) : are of particular concern as they will:
  • Extinguish hapū connections to their lands.
  • A further expropriation of property rights without consent.
  • In Breach of Article 11 and Article 111 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) and in particular I would draw the Select Committees attention to Chapter 8 in the Waitangi Tribunal Report – Te Kaupapa Tuatahi 1996 which states that “There may be no others where as many Treaty breaches had equivalent force and effect over a comparable time”.
  • In breach of (to name just a few) Articles: 8 no.1 & 2 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), 10, 11 no.1, 25, 26 no.1 of the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
  • The reserves offered do not come close to being an adequate replacement for the lands stolen or culture usurped.
  • This Bill will have an overwhelming negative effect on Māori within the region and in particular on both Manukorihi and Otaraua hapū.
  1. Further to the above the NPDC has been unable to enact Māori representation on the Council as the Local Electoral Act 2001 and the Local Government Act 2002 provided for and article 81 which spells out what a local authority must do to allow contributions to decision-making processes by Māori.

(1) A local authority must—

(a) Establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(b) Consider ways in which it may foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(c) Provide relevant information to Māori for the purposes of paragraphs (a) and (b).

  • The process by which this Bill has been developed is wrong and flies in the face of the above and will actively disenfranchise both hapū to the disadvantage of all the hapu in Taranaki.
  • The Bill is fostering conflict in the wider Te Ātiawa community by representing that Te Kotahitanga o Te Ātiawa position as tangata whenua as holding sway over the hapū mana whenua status.
  • It is also fostering conflict in the Waitara community between the lease holders and the hapū.
  • The Human Rights Commission, in its annual review of race relations, identified Māori representation in local government and an effective voice for Māori in the decisions… as being among the top ten race relations priorities for 2010…..Unless positive steps,are taken, Māori representation in local government will continue to languish well below the proportion of Māori in the population. Past Council members and some current members on the NPDC have been actively and publicly working to prevent full Māori participation on the NPDC.
  • How can they be trusted to act in the best interests of the community when there is active manipulation to ensure a section of the community continues to be marginalised and excluded from the decision making process.
  • How can the Council be trusted to act in the best interests of the Waitara community when they have proven themselves to be totally inept in relation to securing Māori representation on to the Counci
  1. We are asking the Select Committee to REJECT the Waitara Lands Bill 2016. And in doing so, recommend that the Select Committee Direct the NPDC to :

a) Undertake authentic and genuine dialogue with the Manukorihi and Otarua hapu about the stolen Pekapeka lands and that the NPDC put a stop to its ongoing shameful and disrespectful conduct in attempting to further alienate the Pekapeka from both hapū.

b)To return the stolen lands to both hapū without ‘strings attached’.

c) To support Manukorihi and Otarua Hapū, to utilise the hapū lands for their authentic purpose this is to benefit the collective not just a few people.

d) We recommend that the Select Committee consider and give weight to our request that the NPDC be directed to return fair reparations to lease holders who have been paying a lease for their own stolen lands and that the time frame commence from the Sim Commission Report to the present day.

e) We recommend that the Select Committee establish an independent inquiry, funded by the Crown, to fully investigate endowment and leasehold properties on the Pekapeka in Waitara that have been privatised since the restructuring of local government in 1989. And that the inquiry requires the NPDC to give a full account of what the proceeds gained from the stolen property was spent on including the amont spent on legal fees that have been funded from Waitara leasehold payments and sales.

  1. We support and encourage the Select Committee to show leadership in relation to these stolen lands so that the damage that has been inflicted on the Waitara community can begin to be repaired and start to heal. Because the healing of this festering corrosive wound will benefit the whole community and the entire Taranaki region.
  1. Please note that I wish to make an oral submission and also ask the Select Committee to hold the hearing at Owae Whai Tara Marae in Waitara, Taranaki.

Ko Waitara, ko Waitara

Ko te rā tēnei i mate ai te whenua, i mate ai te tangata

Ka pewhea tātou e te iwi?……

Thank you for your consideration of the above submission

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment