As MPs we often get email from people expressing their opinion on one subject or another. I got one from ‘Denis’ obviously with an axe to grind about Maori issues. I share it below, sorry it’s a bit long but I’m interested in opinion on both Denis’ perspective and mine.
Subject: Our Nation is Becoming Unhinged
Dear Kelvin
A group of students climbed to the top of Mount Egmont for an ‘epic barbecue’ and also cleared rubbish from the mountain – they were denounced by Maori groups and by DOC for ‘trampling on Maori dignity’. Since when have state institutions been given the mandate to uphold Maori spiritual values and practices? Officially, our secular state has no place for imposing religious or cultural practices on us. One Maori leader claims there are ‘cultural values’ all around the country that should be protected, including all mountain peaks – that people should not even go near the summit of a mountain! Incredible. The bi-cultural movement in New Zealand is subverting democracy, erecting ethnic boundaries between Maori and non-Maori and promoting a cultural elite within Maoridom. Supported by you with policy and finances, it has led to a rapid increase in the rights of Maori over the rest of NZers plus a mountain of race-based policies. You people continue to promote the Maori separatist movement at huge cost for all NZers in terms of loss of assets and resources. This concerns all of us Kiwis. The foreshore and seabed is next with more property and asset takeover down the track. It’s time you folk put the brakes on and governed justly for ALL New Zealanders.
Regards,
Denis
Denis
So you’re telling me your world view should prevail over the Maori world view. Don’t you think your attitude is as exclusive as the ones you criticize? For as long as you hold the views you do some Maori will hold the views they do. You are part of the problem, but none of the solution. You won’t be able to see that though.
Kelvin Davis MP
Kelvin … Excuse me but that sounds like a stock answer.
This is not about being exclusive it’s about being inclusive. I cannot see the logic of your argument that if one person holds a point of view that the others will also. It does not follow logically. I believe that we all you need to be under the same laws as one nation.
Laws based on one ethnic groups religion, whether European on Maori, cannot be applied to everybody.Your response seems unreasonably prejudiced. I have many Maori friends and we are good mates.
Maybe you need to grow a more universal view of the whole of New Zealand as one nation.Thanks for your response - Denis
Kelvin
On reflection about your response to my email I would like to make a comment -
I wrote to you (as a supporter of the National party) expressing what I believe are legitimate concerns concerning National party leadership decisions.I would expect from a man of your position: a reasoned response to my concerns answering these – maybe giving a different opinion for me to consider.
If you disagree with my concerns please say so and say why …I am surprised and concerned that instead of a reasoned response:
1. you made a scathing attack on my opinion and my person.
2. You accuse me of being part of the problem.
3. You give the opinion that I ‘will not see that’ – a real put down.Kelvin I believe you are appointed to a high office in our country’s leadership — we pay you well — and we expect a more reasonable and helpful response — not a scathing, vindictive personal attack on me.
Think about it man — you can do a lot better than that.Denis
Denis
Taranaki is an ancestral mountain – to Maori it is extremely tapu. Cooked food is extremely ‘noa’ the opposite of tapu. What they did was desecrate an ancestor of the Taranaki people. At my marae up in the Bay of Islands we rub bread on our hands when we leave our cemetery after funerals to completely remove tapu from ourselves and our clothing. For us it is not a ‘cultural belief’ it is just the way of life.
We take our shoes off before entering our meeting house so that we don’t carry dirt into the body of our ancestor. If those same kids walked into our meeting house with their shoes on they’d be asked to take them off. Are you saying they should be allowed to do this, or DoC officers should be allowed to walk into our marae with shoes on because government agencies shouldn’t have to uphold cultural beliefs?
If something had have happened to that group on the mountain or copycat groups, those Taranaki people would have felt responsible.
What would the reaction be if they had set up their barbecue on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, cooked some sausages, spilt some sauce, sat around laughing and joking, then picked up some rubbish?
I think people would see that as desecration despite their best intentions. Government agencies such as the police would be expected to act not be criticized for acting.
But most telling is that this christian youth group wouldn’t even dream of doing this because they understand the sacredness and respect all New Zealanders have for the Unknown Soldier, who is very much like an ancestor of us all. It’s not actually a kiwi cultural belief, but just the way things are, just like the way things are with my hapu and the bread at our cemetery, taking our shoes off at the meeting house and Taranaki iwi beliefs about their mountain.
But non-Maori just don’t have that intrinsic understanding or feeling for the Maori world and pour scorn on us for upholding what is precious to us.
People such as yourself accuse us of being separatist. If us trying to uphold our way of life by telling people when they offend us is separatism then so be it.
Why can’t you and others like you simply accept there are two world views and embrace them both and celebrate the diversity.
What annoys me about your original message is the implication the Maori world view is irrelevant.
NZ is like a river. On one bank is the Maori world and on the other bank is the pakeha world. The Treaty of Waitangi is a bridge that connects the two worlds.
The trouble is Maori have crossed the bridge into the pakeha world and taken up the language, culture and laws. Almost no pakeha have crossed over into the Maori world and understand our language, culture and lores.
The ignorance almost entirely lies with pakeha, but Maori are accused of being the problem.
While the Maori world view continues to be ignored we will continue to have conflict.
If you don’t understand the Maori perspective you are part of the problem but none of the solution.
It is your ignorance that has erected ethnic boundaries. It is your ignorance that has you sitting comfortably in your own ethnic and cultural enclave while throwing stones at Maori who are able to stand tall in both worlds.
I challenge you to look long and hard at yourself.
Kelvin
Before I post Denis’ latest reply I want to hear other’s views.
Denis speakeths the truth, Kelvin. Good on him for stating it. Many New Zealanders would agree with him, including the illustrious Michael Laws. But of course, the views of middle NZ is largely ignored, these days, by both sides of the House. Democracy is indeed being subverted.
I am always amazed at how wound up people get about Maori issues. There appears to be a part of New Zealand society that takes a very “Chicken Little” view toward Maori culture and the Treaty. To them, Maori are treated better than other New Zealanders, Maori have special privileges and rights that non-Maori do not have, every Maori is flush with cash taken from the pockets of non-Maori taxpayers, the Government gives into Maori at every turn and, as a result, the country is on a slippery slope to the bottom of the heap. To them, the sky is literally falling.
Now, I’m not inclined to get into a protracted debate with people like Denis about Treaty grievances and the historical treatment of Maori. Suffice to say Denis has his particular view, and I have a completely different view. But it may be useful to unpack a few things for him, using the Doc example that he has written about.
Firstly, eating or climbing on top of Mt Taranaki is not illegal. There is nothing to stop you doing it, and I have not seen or read anything from Doc or any other Government department that says otherwise. Doc, and local Maori, have simply asked that people not do it and have explained why. Whether or not you comply with the request is up to you – no one’s values or culture is being imposed, you are simply being made aware.
Secondly, New Zealand is not a secular society. Our Parliament opens every session with a prayer to God. Businesses and other institutions are forced to close on specific days of the year to observe events that are significant to Christians. I look forward to Denis’ email highlighting how Christianity is being imposed on New Zealanders.
Thirdly, just out of curiosity, what rights do Maori have that non-Maori do not? The majority of our rights are enshrined in laws that tell us what we can and can’t do, and I am not aware of any that make exceptions for Maori. As far as I am aware, my Maori neighbour has to abide by all of the same rules that I have to. However, Denis may wish to look at the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act and the Maori Community Development Act that place restrictions on Maori which other New Zealanders do not have. I look forward to Denis’ email expressing his concern that, because of these statutes, Maori are not being treated as fairly as other New Zealanders.
Fourthly, with regards to the foreshore and seabed, there is no escaping the reality that the Labour Government of the time took away a property right from a particular group of people. If “Kiwis” like Denis are truly concerned about the future of New Zealand, then I am sure he recognises the complete injustice of the 2003 Foreshore and Seabed Act, and would support its repeal.
Finally, and most importantly, why does any of the above matter to your average Kiwi? Does it really have any impact on our day-to-day lives? Or do people like Denis simply make a mountain out of what is, in reality, a pretty small and minute molehill? I suspect they do. I go about my life how I wish. Maori cultural values and the Treaty do not place any restrictions on me and want I want to do. I am not accosted on a daily basis by Maori wanting to impose their culture on me. I am not treated differently to my Maori neighbour because he has some special right that I do not have. I’m sure that, we’re people like Denis to stop for a moment, take a deep breath and look past the news headlines and the political spin, they’d find that race relations in New Zealand aren’t as dire as they think.
@Louis Re Catholic education “That’s completely ridiculous. How people spend their own money, be it on a private school or a hamburger is their own business so long as it’s within the law.”
Not that I want to derail the thread – but lets get something very clear. Catholic education is not private education – with the exception of the property, which is funded by the diocese – a catholic school is funded by the state – the staffing, the resources and the ops grant. There are some rules around who gets appointed etc, but essentially its a state funded school. So the original point from the other poster about how if we get rid of Maori stuff then we should be getting rid of other stuff, in this context, is actually correct.
How about the evidence that there was a celtic civilisation here before the Maori? There is actually alot of it you would be suprised
I share the concerns about private correspondence being shared with the public – perhaps it has been made anonymous by changing the mountain and all names. That should have been done to make it a hypothetical case, – based on a real incident perhaps, but such that no individual or group except the MP could be identified.
On the face of it, there is some missing information. How did DoC and Maori groups hear about this school trip – were they at the top of the mountain? What was the group actually criticised for? Were they praised for clearing rubbish? – or is this something they should not have done? Are there signs pointing out the history / facts about the mountain that would be seen by any group climbing the mountain, explaining the traditions for those going where they did? – or were they effectively ‘ambushed’ for something they had no way of knowing about?
Without that knowledge the initial response does seem a little peremptory.
Yes there were subsequent statements that do appear a little over the top, and the confusion over political parties is amusing, but there appear to be unwarranted assumptions on both sides. Yes we should be culturally sensitive – but would a group from say Australia have also been criticised for doing something they had no idea they shouldn’t?
Perhaps I am missing something, but this looks to be a missed opportunity for constructive dialogue.
Weren’t the Mori Ori here before the Maori, or is that hogwash? My understanding is that Maori come from the Cook Islands.
Kelvin, my comment is that perhaps you could have made your last response to him your first response? It was eloquent, gentle and educative.
I dont understand how anyone can feel “the Maori” are being treated so well in NZ as to require an outrage from white NZers? I mean health, education and prison statistics over represent Maori not Pakeha, Maori are not abundant in the top echelons of business or politics. If not for treaty settlements how many Maori would be at the highest level of busienss at all?
I could be labelled a white middle class NZer and I do not share Denis or other posters here frustration.
Dylan, such evidence as exists of Celtic or even Phonecian inhabitation suggests they were passing through or were extinguished, Maori are netiher.
@Dylan and Red Devil – I would advise you to read some peer reviewed research before repeating what “someone told you down the pub”, as these falsehoods inevitably come from the “sunburned neck” brigade. There is ZERO evidence of ancient Celts being in New Zealand before Maori, with Maori or even after Maori. Mori-”Ori were here at the same time as other Maori, NOT, before. When I read posts such as yours I always remember my 6th Form English teacher telling me the best thing to remember in life is to “engage your brain before opening your mouth”. Wise words in response to unsustantiated dribble.
I find the definition, or lack of of one, of what constitutes ‘maori’ unhelpful when talking about who is at the top/bottom of the pile.
If someone is, for example, one eighth maori and seven eighths pakeha, and does either well or badly at something, is this an example of maori or pakeha success / failure? Personally I don’t think it really matters, but it seems to to so many people on both sides, so we do need a clear indication of what is meant by ‘maori’ success or failure.
I’m a quarter scots, although I have never lived in Scotland and had no contact whatsoever with the scottish part of my family (because my scots grandfather was a solider who was killed before my mum was born). Does my heritage mean that any success or failure I have is an example of scots performance?
Red Devil, may I suggest reading Michael King’s Penguin History of New Zealand – it will clear up some of the popular mythology about the Moriori – mythology that was largely debunked in the 60′s and 70′s but is still used ad nauseam to support and justify some poor prejudices.
Nice post Frank, and I too can recommend this book to those who can bear having the mythical basis of their arguments challenged.
@Lou Peters heres a life lesson for you too – Don’t assume anything when you have absolutely no basis to make such an assumption on. I have a book sitting in the lounge called ‘Ancient Celtic New Zealand’ it’s quite a large book thats mostly of an archaeological nature it’s a very interesting read, I did not hear of Celts in NZ before the Maori ‘down at the pub’.
There are apparently remains of stone cities in some NZ forests that I’m going to go have a look for myself someday. My mate who is attending film school knows someone who is actually making a documentary about it.
As for high school History, I took NZ history in year 13 and one thing we learnt was that there were Maori myths/legends of ‘faries’ with white skin and blue eyes that lived in the mountains that existed before even Abel Tasman made contact (first known European to reach NZ). There were also reports of Maori with red hair and white complexions when Europeans first made contact. These are just a few things of many really. I’m not going to go on about it here.
@Frank Richie if by ‘Moriori’ you mean ancient NZ celts then I will take your advice and read what you suggested and see if it debunks anything I know of
Hi Dylan,
There is really no evidence for ancient celts in New Zealand.
Compare the evidence for Maori settlement around 850 years ago. You have an ocean going people living within a reasonable distance of NZ. You have major changes in the make up of forests, widespread burning for first time, then a whole bunch of extinctions. You have archelogical sites with middens, artifacts and remains. You have genetic evidence, both from the people themselves and form the animals (kiore) they brought with them. And so on it goes…
What about the celts? It seems to mainly be funny shaped rocks that sort of line up in patterns. The celtic NZ crowd spend almost no time trying to explain where the population that supported the crazy priests that were erecting these monuments were living. People have a way of effecting the places in which they live, and there’s just no record of those impacts. Or how a not particularly maritime people got here without leaving evidence of their travel across the globe.
I should add, the book you’re talking about is written Martin Doutre who is associated with neo-Nazi and 9/11 truth movements. His arguments aren’t wrong _because_ he’s a racist with no training in archeology, but it’s something you should consider when you think about how fairlly he’s making his case.
@david winter alright fair enough maybe it is all bollocks
@Dylan – yes it is
For god’s sake, you lot are all missing the point!
Instead of arguing about who came here first – for the record, we’re all immigrants, who gives a shit – the real question we should be asking is, why does DOC think it has the right to tell people how to behave? Their job is to promote conservation and the environment, not to instruct people on Maori cultural beliefs.
The other point is that certain Maori need to pull their head in and realise that everyone does not believe the same spiritual guff as they do, just as certain Christians and Muslims and every other religion under the sun need to realise that we don’t all belive in that spiritual guff either.
Everyone is free to practise their own beliefs, but we have no right to enforce them on others – even if we do claim to be tangata whenua.
Were these kids doing any real harm on the mountain? No. In fact they were doing the opposite, they picked up some rubbish while they were enjoying themselves in a healthy and positive manner. Do they believe in Maori mountain gods? No. Are these Maori spiritual rules logical or scientific in any way? Absolutely not.
If you ask people to follow spiritual rules that they don’t believe in, that’s no different to the Taleban telling women they have to wear head scarves to avoid offending Allah, even if they don’t want to.
A mountain is there to be climbed, and food is an essential activity for maintaining energy levels. To those precious and self-absorbed Maori who take offence so easily at such an innocent act, I think they should stop interfering in other people’s lives.
It seems to me that Maori believe that “everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others’, to quote George Orwell.