The Demographic and Political Imperatives for Improving Crown-Maori Relations in Aotearoa-New Zealand HARRY A. KERSEY, JR. AsiaPacific ISSUES Analysis from the East-West Center SUMMARY Nearly a decade has passed since the United Nations declared No. 64 November 2002 International Year of the World’s Indigenous People. Yet issues of social and The U.S. Congress established the East-West Center in 1960 to economic marginalization, inequality, cultural survival, and change related to foster mutual understanding and cooperation among the govern- indigenous peoples continue to challenge the global community. In Aotearoa- ments and peoples of the Asia Pacific region, including the United New Zealand the Pakeha (Caucasian) settler population for many decades States. Funding for the Center comes from the U.S. government dominated the political landscape, leaving little voice for the nation’s indige- with additional support provided by private agencies, individuals, nous Maori people struggling for greater rights. Today, however, the growing corporations, and Asian and Pacific governments. Maori population makes New Zealand the only First World country in which The AsiaPacific Issues series contributes to the Center’s role as the indigenous people’s movement for self-determination is sufficiently large a neutral forum for discussion of i issues of regional concern. The to promise the possibility of major societal transformations. Over the past views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those quarter century, regardless of which political party or coalition held power, of the Center. escalating Maori demographic trends and increased political activism have encouraged the Crown to address Maori concerns and grievances.ii Today, with one out of four children under the age of five a Maori, the government has little option but to negotiate with a growing indigenous community. 2 Analysis from the East-West Center The contemporary context of Crown-Maori relations than the European ethnic group and making up an can be understood only against the historical back- increasing share of the total population.”vi Maori are drop of the Treaty of Waitangi, the founding docu- expected to reach nearly one million by 2051 and ment of the contemporary nation of Aotearoa-New constitute 22 percent of the population; along with Zealand. The treaty was translated from English into Pacific Islanders and Asians they will make up ap- the Maori language—its most distinctive feature— proximately 43 percent of New Zealanders by mid- and a number of copies were circulated and signed century. Equally significant is the projection that 68 by more than 500 chiefs.iii Although signatories rep- percent of New Zealand’s children in 2051 will be resented less than a majority of Maori iwi (tribes), in of Maori, Pacific Island, or Asian extraction.vii In May of 1840 the British lieutenant-governor of New the future Maori may well have to compete with a A carefully fostered South Wales, Captain William Hobson, declared Brit- growing non-white immigrant population for scarce appearance of racial ish sovereignty over all of New Zealand.iv Through- resources, but they have learned the value of the bal- harmony masks out the intervening 162 years, Maori have protested lot to achieve their goals. Due to increased enroll- the crown’s interpretation of the treaty and their loss ment on the Maori Roll under New Zealand’s Mixed the reality of of rangatiratanga (sovereignty). Today, a carefully fos- Member Proportional electoral system, the number political tension tered appearance of racial harmony masks the reality of of Maori parliamentary seats has risen from 4 in 1993 political tension between the predominantly white- to 7 in 2002. In the 1996 election 63 percent of the dominated Crown government and Maori political Maori electorate cast votes; a large number of Maori activists. Crown-Maori relations stand as New Zealand’s remained on the General Roll but it is unclear how single most pressing sociopolitical issue as it confronts they voted. and seeks to address its colonial past while forging a These figures have major political and social policy just and equitable multicultural society. This process implications for New Zealand’s future. The national and its outcomes are being carefully observed by gov- election of July 2002 provided the latest referendum ernments and indigenous peoples worldwide. on the Crown’s efforts to address Maori concerns and At the beginning of the twenty-first century, cur- grievances. The Maori struggle has had at least two rent and projected population dynamics clearly de- fronts: calls for justice based on human rights and monstrate the challenge to the Pakeha majority and Treaty of Waitangi principles, and increasing involve- the momentum behind New Zealand’s changing so- ment in the political process as voters or supporters of cial and political reality. The New Zealand census political parties. Maori voters usually have a clear per- of 2001 revealed that 1 in 7 people (526,281) are of ception of which party will best serve their interests. Maori ethnicity or 14.5 percent of the population, an increase of 21 percent since 1991.v It is also a young Political Background population. The Maori median age is 22.0 years, significantly below the New Zealand median for all Maori have been a strong constituency of the social groups of 32.0 years. By comparison, the number of democratic Labour Party since the 1930s when the Europeans grew by 3.5 percent and their median age Ratana Church movement, a Maori variant of Old is 34.6 years. More important, however, a 1996 ana- Testament beliefs, entered an alliance with the Labour lysis of census data found that “Maori now account Party. Yet Maori had little to show for nearly four for one in every four, or 25.6 percent of all New Zea- decades of political loyalty. When Labour took power land children under five and 23.6 percent of chil- in 1972, it moved to defuse social unrest and address dren under fifteen years.” Furthermore, “with higher Maori demands by passing the Treaty of Waitangi Act rates of fertility, greater proportions of people of in 1975. The legislation established a quasi-judicial child-bearing age, births from inter-ethnic unions Waitangi Tribunal to hear individual and tribal claims and (in the case of non-Maori) immigration, non- arising from breaches of the treaty. The act placed European groups are growing at a much faster rate severe limitations on the tribunal; for example, it had 3 Analysis from the East-West Center no retrospective powers and could consider only con- of most Maori, especially the urban group that oc- temporary and future claims. The tribunal had power cupied the lowest rung on the socioeconomic ladder. only to recommend settlements; final disposition was Maori suffered most from Labour’s unexpected turn by act of Parliament or executive fiat. Furthermore, to “New Right” economic policies in the 1980s. One tribunal cases considered only claims against Crown critic noted, “On the surface, the Labour government lands, forests, fisheries, and the like; no private prop- did take unprecedented steps to redress the injustices erty could be involved. Thus, for the first decade of the past, and the ‘principles of the Treaty of Wai- of its existence the Waitangi Tribunal was relatively tangi’… . But in reality little changed. Labour’s eco- ineffectual, although some important cases set prece- nomic policy and its policy on the treaty were on a dents for enforcement of Maori rights under its collision course. The dilemma would require it to re- provisions.viii define Maori treaty rights and induce Maori to accept Labour regained control of the government in the a settlement which left intact individual property 1984 election and renewed its effort to set things rights, unrestrained exploitation of resources, max- right with Maori. The energetic minister of justice, imisation of private profit and the supreme authority Sir Geoffrey Palmer, pushed through the 1985 Treaty of the Pakeha state.”x of Waitangi Amendment Act, which gave the tribu- nal retrospective review power to 1840, thus effec- National Party policies, 1990–1999. The New Zea- tively covering the period when most transgressions land electorate, including Maori, leery of Labour’s occurred.ix In the 1987 State Owned Enterprises radical departure from democratic socialism, replaced case, the New Zealand Maori Council challenged the it with the conservative National Party at the 1990 Crown’s right to sell properties while tribal claims election. In a stunning reversal of fortune, Labour that might encumber them were still pending before lost all of the Maori seats in Parliament.xi The new Three important the tribunal. The High Court of New Zealand sus- government continued dismantling New Zealand’s pieces of legislation tained the Maori position but gave neither side a welfare state for another decade and looked to settle significantly ad- clear victory; instead, the court invoked a theory of with Maori as well. National expanded the process, vanced Maori “partnership” and “spirit of the treaty” as means for begun under Labour, of devolving control over social fortunes in the the Crown and Maori to reconcile their differences. service programs for Maori. Labour had begun to This decision led to three important pieces of legis- shift control of services by contracting them directly late 1980s lation that significantly advanced Maori fortunes in to local tribal agencies. In urban areas this policy gave the late 1980s. prominence to the role of pan-tribal Maori authori- First, the 1988 Treaty of Waitangi (State Enter- ties. Before vast sums of money were awarded to iwi, prises) Act gave the tribunal power to award Crown however, governmental structures had to be in place holdings to Maori claimants under limited condi- to handle the funds.