Trick or Treaty?
Associate Professor Hinekura Smith (Te Rarawa, Nga Puhi)
For many New Zealanders Waitangi Day is a summer public holiday. For me, as a Māori women visiting on Aboriginal land, it is a day to reflect on and to grieve the injustices of the past, to be proud of the continued articulate, strategic and strengths-based resistance in the present, and to ensure that I take up and take action in the year ahead.
My friend and IFC colleague Dan Kiwa McKinnon (Te Arawa) shared his thoughts here:
“In the build-up to this year’s Waitangi Day, I am thinking of the strength and fortitude of my ancestors. Those on my grandmother’s side who refused to sign the Treaty, as well as those on my grandfather’s side who did—equally assured of their prestige and sovereignty over their lands. Either way, these latest assaults on the Treaty reflects their struggle and the struggles of Indigenous Peoples globally. But there is also something uncanny about this scene. This so-called Anthropocene of colonialism that keeps drawing me back to our own connections and relations, a collective power which reveals how easily it could all unravel. A collective memory through which we are presented the tasks and resources before us.
The Treaty Principles Bill I would say is characteristic of this trend, where both the subject (i.e. The Crown) and object (i.e. Sovereignty) escapes. But my fear is not whether it will eventually succeed as much as the growing sense of settler justice and grievance that is being perversely harnessed against us. We are in the midst of a new era of politics which is not only the very cause of inflation, rising inequality and geo-political conflict, but deceitful narratives about the perceived rise and privileges of Māori. Of course, the Treaty Principles Bill could have devastating effects on our people, but we are at the same time at war with a global imaginary. A new form of neoliberal individualism that is being reconstituted and mobilised algorithmically. As both an e-ffect and a-ffect of inwardly felt alienation and loss.”
February 6th this year marks 185 years since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. On this day in 1840 rangatira (male and female tribal leaders) mainly from Northern Aotearoa New Zealand gathered in the Bay of Islands to sign what is viewed by many as the founding document of Aotearoa New Zealand. Weeks of debate and discussions preceded the formal signing on February 6th as promises were made by British representatives of the Crown on behalf of her majesty Queen Victoria to protect the sovereignty and self-determination that Māori (who numbered around 80,000 to 2,500 non-Maori) already enjoyed.
These broad guarantees were encapsulated within three articles of the Treaty. The Treaty of Waitangi has two texts – one written in English by Governor Hobson a few days after arriving in Aotearoa - and Te Titiri o Waitangi, which was translated (overnight I might add) by Rev Williams into Māori language. These two documents are not a concise or sufficient translation of the other and is a key issue which has led to 185 years of deliberate and some perhaps well-intentioned misinterpretation.
Within five years of the 1840 Treaty being signed in good faith by Māori with the Crown, significant land loss, illegal purchases, raupatu (illegal land confiscations) and many other breaches of promises and protections made in the Treaty were being deeply felt by Māori communities. Treaty history is complex but the realities of bad faith from the Crown, and the subsequent Euro-centric parliamentary structures the Crown established to govern, continue to have negative generational impacts on Māori health, mortality, education success, incarceration rates, language and identity and more.
Some 50 years since the Māori renaissance and sovereignty movements of the 1970’s which saw leaps forward in reclaiming our language, customs, and small amounts of stolen land, ‘the Treaty’ is again at the centre of a globally re-energised right wing, neo-liberal political movement calling for a re-writing of the Treaty Principles 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act:
- Partnership – a relationship of good faith between the Crown and Māori
- Participation – the Crown should create opportunities for Māori to be involved in decision making over their affairs
- Protection – the Crown should prioritise the protection of mauri rights, interests, assets and sovereignty
The Treaty Principles Bill authored by the leader of the ACT party calls for sweeping “equality of all” effectively extinguishing the unique sovereign indigenous rights of Māori as first nation people in Aotearoa as guaranteed in Te Tiriti – the Māori language document. ACT’s bill is a historical revisioning done in bad faith under the thinly veiled guise of “equality for all New Zealanders” regardless of race.
The Bill will not pass its first reading. With a distinct lack of national education on New Zealand history and the Treaty, coupled with well-resourced right-wing movements, and less than 20% Māori population we are fearful of our Māori sovereignty on our own lands. What The Treaty Principles Bill has created however is another moment of Māori renaissance, protest and unity and will be forefront of the many formal debates and public conversation at this year’s Waitangi Day commemoration (watch here on Māori TV for livestream from 2am-1pm AEST on February 6th). Transdisciplinary research in Aotearoa and across the Indigenous research network in this tense and incredibly uncertain geo-political climate is critical.
While Treaty journeys are important and truths must be told, what is happening in Aotearoa right now is a sobering reminder that Treaty is about relationships and like all relationships they have their ups and downs, need to be worked on, discussed, compromises reached in agreement and so many more complex relationalities. One side of that relationship cannot make decisions to the detriment of the other. If the Treaty was human, this would be outright abuse. Toi Tu Te Tiriti!
The title of this opinion piece draws on this documentary by Māori journalist Mihingarangi Forbes drawing a connection between the Treaty Bills debate and The Voice Referendum.
