Mai Rangiriri Ki Pōkaewhenua: the Confiscation of Pōkaewhenua in the National Interest - 1961-1969
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
MAI RANGIRIRI KI PŌKAEWHENUA: THE CONFISCATION OF PŌKAEWHENUA IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST - 1961-1969 BY DIONE LEE MARAMA PAYNE A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Victoria University of Wellington 2014 Photo 1: Te Ao Mārama Te Puru (nee Tamehana) – original owner in Pōkaewhenua. 2 Abstract The title of this thesis, Mai Rangiriri ki Pōkaewhenua, refers to the battle of Rangiriri as the point of reference that marks the first confiscation of Waikato land. It was at Rangiriri that Waikato Māori took up arms to defend their land against the invading army and in doing so, by Crown law, forfeited their customary ownership over their land through confiscation. It would be one hundred years later that another confiscation occured at Pōkaewhenua in the 1960s. The confiscation of Māori land is commonly discussed in New Zealand history literature as a practice of the nineteenth-century. However in this thesis I argue the practice of confiscation has endured into the 1960s through facilitated alienations of allegedly unproductive Māori land through lease and sale. This thesis examines the case study of Lot 512 in the Parish of Whangamarino to show how government agencies utilised some common practices of confiscation such as through legislation, economic expansion, settlement, conflict of interests, tenurial revolution and the concept of waste land to confiscate Pōkaewhenua through facilitated alienation in the national interest. Although the practice of alienation was widespread, the sale and lease of Māori land due to an alleged lack of productivity under Part XXV of the Māori Affairs Act 1953 was seldom investigated as part of Treaty settlements. For hapū and whānau, particularly in the Waikato, the re-examination of land alienation may change their land history and the manner in which future Treaty claims are investigated. Contemporarily, the drive for greater productivity of Māori land, as seen in the 2013 Review of the Te Ture Whenua Māori Act, focuses again on making all Māori land productive in the national interest, with little consideration of the impact on it’s Māori owners. The criteria and rationale for this push for productivity is strongly reminiscent of the practice in the 1960s and 1860s, and suggests any national interest alienations that occur as a result of the 2013 review, may also be confiscation. 3 One significant implication of this thesis for the field of Māori Studies is that the investigation of Lot 512 provides another perspective on confiscation. This thesis expands the definition of confiscation to allow for alienation by sale and lease in the national interest and departs from the limitation of the nineteenth-century. This research also contributes to Māori Studies through the analysis of Part XXV of the Māori Affairs Act 1953. As a wider implication for Māori land, it challenges researchers to look more closely at Māori land sales in the 1950-1960s, the manner in which those sales and leases were undertaken and questions national interest arguments for alienating further Māori land. This thesis is centred around a Māori world view and approach to research and is tied specifically to Pōkaewhenua – Lot 512 in the Parish of Whangamarino, but has implications for thinking about the way Indigenous rights are made subservient to colonial interests. 4 Acknowledgments I would like to thank my primary supervisor, Dr Maria Bargh, for her immense support, critical feedback, guidance and dedication to my study. I have appreciated all the assistance over these past three years. I would also like to thank Peter Adds, my secondary supervisor, Te Kawa a Maui and my PhD colleagues that provided support and feedback during my research. I am also especially grateful for my wider whānau, particularly my kaumātua of Ngāti Hinemihi, Takotowai Webb, Gail Bennett, Edwin Ashford, the Kapinga whānau, the Te Akau whānau, Ngāti Naho, through Brad Totorewa’s support and the use of his Tongikura framework, my Ngāti Hine and Ngāti Mahuta whānau including Judith-Anne Wanakore, Horiana Harris, Alison Ahu, Theresa Ahu, my cousins (in particular Maree Waru and Kiriana Hakopa), my Ngāti Turumakina whānau, Rueben Grace and my Ngāti Karauia kuia, Rose Albert. I would like to make a special mention of my grandmother, Ngawini Toka Puru, who played a significant role in linking my study to Te Ao Mārama in Pōkaewhenua. I am deeply indebted to her for her support, guidance, enthusiasm and willingness to share all she knew throughout my study. I would also like to acknowledge the financial assistance I received during my study from Waikato Raupatu Lands Trust for the Tainui PhD Scholarship, Victoria University for the Ahumairangi PhD Scholarship and Office of the PVC Māori/Toihuarewa Scholarship, Morikau Incorporation for the Dr Rangi Metekingi Post-graduate Scholarship and Atihau Incorporation for the Robyn Murphy-Peehi Post-graduate Scholarship. I am also grateful to the Whakairoiro Ahu Whenua Trust, Hauraki Māori Trust Board, Maniapoto Māori Trust Board, Sir James Fletcher Incorporation, Ngāti Tuwharetoa Māori Trust Board and Tuwharetoa Settlement Trust for their scholarships and grants. Finally, I am also extremely grateful to my immediate whānau, my parents Francis and Jolene Grace for their love, encouragement, support, belief and babysitting my kids throughout my study. My parents have never let me be complacent and provided me 5 with opportunities that have taken me from Otara, around the world and back to Waikato. My brother and his wife, Dean and Desiree Grace who are an important ongoing support for me and my whānau and my sister Mirimata Frost and her whānau for coming along for the ride. This research is not possible without my husband, Matiu Payne who has endured, tolerated, supported, and believed in my journey. I am extremely grateful for his patience and mopping up the many tears during my study. My children, Tre, Tūrāhui and Tāne, who have also been patient and tolerant throughout, thank you for everything. In addition, it should be noted that Māori words are not italicised in this thesis and translation for Māori words can be found in the Glossary. Photo 2: Te Ao Mārama (at a later age) with her great granddaughter and namesake, Linda Te Ao Mārama Puru 6 Table of Contents Abstract ....................................................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................................... 5 List of Figures .......................................................................................................................................... 10 List of Maps ............................................................................................................................................. 10 Whakapapa Tables ................................................................................................................................. 10 List of Photographs ................................................................................................................................ 10 List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................... 10 Glossary .................................................................................................................................................... 11 List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. 20 CHAPTER ONE: TE NGIRA O PŌTATAU - INTRODUCTION ............................................ 21 Chapter Outlines ........................................................................................................................................ 24 Rationale for the study ............................................................................................................................. 27 My background .......................................................................................................................................... 30 Discipline ..................................................................................................................................................... 32 CHAPTER TWO: TE WHARE TONGIKURA ............................................................................. 35 Tongikura .................................................................................................................................................... 36 He whare tongikura: A methodological framework .......................................................................... 38 Māku anō e hanga i tōku nei whare: Māori historiography ............................................................ 41 Ko ngā pou o roto: Whakapapa ............................................................................................................. 44 Ko te tāhuhu, he Hīnau: Kaupapa Māori ............................................................................................ 46 An evolving methodology ......................................................................................................................... 48 Me whakatupu ki te hua o te Rengarenga: Ahuwhenua ................................................................... 50 Te Whare Tongikura as a