Great piece by Willie Jackson writing after Chippy becomes the first leader of a major political party who acknowledges that Māori never ceded sovereignty…
Labour acknowledges Māori did not cede sovereignty – Willie Jackson
THREE KEY FACTS:
The Treaty of Waitangi is New Zealand’s founding document and takes its name from the place in the Bay of Islands where it was first signed, on February 6 1840.
Missionary Henry Williams and son Edward translated the English draft into Māori overnight on February 4. About 500 Māori debated the document for a day and a night before it was signed.
The Treaty was prepared in just a few days.
Willie Jackson is a Labour MP
Labour Leader Chris Hipkins has become the first leader of a major political party to acknowledge the historical truth that Māori did not cede sovereignty, in an interview on Te Ao with Moana.
At the time of the signing of the Treaty, the Maori population was between 80 – 100,000 people compared to 2000 settlers. The idea that Māori intended for the Treaty to take from them their tino rangatiratanga is laughable and only something that people like Christopher Luxon, Winston Peters and David Seymour cling to because they think rolling out reality is too hard.
People should know there was an English and Māori version of the Treaty and that the Māori version of the Treaty gained 90% of the signatures.
They should also know that when there is a difference in the versions and disagreements that international law states the indigenous version is the one that is upheld.
Māori didn’t sign away sovereignty no matter how much the angry reactionary right want that to be true and since the signing of the Treaty, the Crown and Māori have worked to try and flesh out the promise of the Treaty.
They managed this with the Treaty principles which provided a guide on how the Crown was obligated to work with Māori to honour a Treaty with an indigenous people who didn’t sign away their sovereignty. These principles were designed in 1987 by the courts and have been accepted and acted on by every government since then.
For the most part, Māori and pragmatic Pākehā have found ways to work together for a better shared future.
The problems have arisen when angry reactionary right wingers who don’t know their history start agitating against the process.
Acknowledging Māori didn’t sign away sovereignty doesn’t mean Parliament must tumble down or a new legal system is necessary, or a new currency created! This isn’t Zimbabwe, and Pākehā farmers are not suddenly going to be moved off their land.
Pākehā and Māori have been learning to work together for almost 200 years. Māori don’t want separatism; they want history accepted and genuine attempts to work together in partnership with the Crown to deliver tangible and much-needed resources so that Māori are able to move forward and turn around some of the negative statistics we all know act as a barrier for Māori to truly thrive.
Yes, the Māori Party want a Māori parliament, separate legal and health systems, and that’s fine and their right to advocate that. However, I believe that most Māori are more focused on housing, jobs and the welfare of their families, the bread-and-butter issues will always be at the forefront.
This along with Māori language and culture being accepted as an integral part of this country’s identity is what I think most Maori want. We don’t want a revolution, we just want to be treated like a respected partner that the judges of 1987 said we were.
I’m with Labour because the only way forward is by working together, accepting the truth of our history doesn’t damage our democracy, it strengthens and grows it for everyone.
By accepting the truth that Māori never ceded sovereignty, Chippy shows us he has the courage and cultural security in his own identity as a Kiwi to lead us away from the dark rhetoric of National, Act and NZ First whose anti-Māori, anti-Treaty, agenda is tearing this country apart.
Chris Hipkins is the Prime Minister this country urgently needs.
…it takes enormous political courage by Chippy to stand and state a basic historic fact and Jackson has articulated a narrative that never gets any air time in this country.
There were 2 versions of the Treaty, the Māori version doesn’t talk about losing sovereignty and the Māori version revived the most amount of signatures.
The idea that 100 000 Māori were handing sovereignty over to 2000 settlers is an absurdity and we have signed UN Human Rights Declarations stating that when there is a Treaty, the one written in the indigenous language takes precedence.
Again, acknowledging that Māori didn’t cede sovereignty doesn’t mean Western Civilisation as we know it ends, it means that you work in good faith to put together principles that accept these historical facts, that’s ultimately what the Treaty Principles were all about.
Yes, there is no mention of co-governance in the Treaty, but we have evolved co-management out of an understanding that Māori didn’t cede sovereignty and we have attempted to construct a legal rights situation around this reality.
A Māori Parliament isn’t Government, it can be a legitimate voice – like many Indigenous Parliaments around the world, where that sovereignty can be expressed.
Chippy is showing real political courage here and that is worth respecting.
There maybe no co governance in the treaty but there was no allowance to take land by force or to change the rules so the fishing industry can rape the sea daily .Recreational fishers are going to regret it if the law is changed so that the few people who are protecting the fishery are prevented from doing so .The seabed will become a moon scape from sea bed mining and the fish stocks will be depleted .Already near by to me on the west coast there is a Rahui in place for two years to stop the gathering of shell fish because stocks are low .Imagine if the whole sale fishing and mining is allowed there will be no fish to take my grand kids to catch .
International law allows nations to take by force anything they want and change any laws they want, provided they are strong enough to do it, and their powerful allies allow it. It has always been so, even to this day. Take a look around the world. Is it right? Is it fair? Of course not. Can we change it? Or are we powerless in the face of world powers? Do you have an answer? I don’t.
International law does not “allow nations to take by law anything they want”. “Realpolitik” may. If it is not “right” and “fair’ it will not endure. “Can we change it? … Do you have an answer? I don’t.”.
Yes, I do have an answer. We can change it.
Off you go then & while you’re at maybe bring peace to the Middle East (one that doesn’t involve the silence of a nuclear wasteland).
Would you like to elaborate on your methods? I’m genuinely interested.
Yeah sure “might is right” is the reality a lot of the time – but lets see where that takes us: If we Pakeha took everything by force, then we must maintain our dominance by force, and logically Maori would also use force to try get the country back. I really don’t want to live in a country where we let that play out. Hell, even David Seymour doesn’t want to live in that country, which is why he has all these weaselly arguments to justify what he is doing.
I’d rather be a decent human being, living in a decent country which tries to do the right thing by all of it’s inhabitants.
They didn’t use the phrase co-governance but the Te Tiriti did plan for a governor who would be responsible for the Pakeha population and who would sit alongside Maori leadership – so it kinda actually does look like co-governance to me.
The other thing people need to understand is that the English and Maori versions of the treaty actually made polar opposite statements about Maori ceding sovereignty – this was a bit of an Aha! moment for me because it helps make sense of the confusion
Well, the original Te Tiriti is one thing, but as settler numbers built up as part of a deliberate “swamping” policy by England, the Red Coats arrived and went to town. Some of you will have seen the maps that show how little land is left now in full Māori ownership and the time lines involved in its transfer to Tau Iwi hands.
https://teara.govt.nz/en/map/19476/loss-of-maori-land
There are so many rednecks/crackers in the provinces particularly because they depend on denial to justify their sitting on or benefitting from stolen or dubiously acquired land.
Good on Hipkins for making his statement, but I hope he won’t be leading NZ Labour for much longer unless he has a highly unlikely epiphany and renounces Rogernomics…
He said half of what John Key said – Maori didn’t cede sovereignty but the Crown has sovereignty (it took it by force, against the Treaty). The task now, for this and future generations is to simply honour the treaty.
Way to simple they would rather have another land grab war but as they have already got all the land they now want the sea bed so they can fuck that up as well so then the whole place will be fucked .
What changes if you acknowledge this? Do we say “Sorry, the last 180 years were a misunderstanding, we’ll roll everything back & return to England. We apologize for the inconvenience. Carry on.”
Of course not, your sovereignty is gone, but you still have a future, pray you don’t lose that too. Get an education, get skills, embrace technology & learning, the past is gone, the future is now. Move forward, not backwards.
It’s also worth remembering that there are a lot of people in New Zealand whose future looks pretty bleak. Don’t be one of those.
@ratty: the future is bleak for us all. We all die at the end. Living in the now will sort what’s left of any future
Beautiful conclusion Rat.
Whether by treaty or the bayonet the result is the same. What dont these morons understand about conquest?
Perhaps the ignorance arises because the conquerors themselves won’t honestly admit that unlawful conquest is what they engaged in.
Well considering the treaty was between Maori and the queen because there was no government till a few years later there is no way the government can say they are sovereign .As the governor general represents the king she is sovereign not the government .So clearly the treaty was never signed by any government so to say the government is sovereign is another right wing lie .
King Charles is sovereign according to the law of the Realm of New Zealand. He appoints the Governor-General who in turn appoints the Prime Minister and other Ministers who make up the Government. The Treaty was signed by William Hobson on behalf of and in the name of Victoria. Hobson subsequently issued two proclamations of sovereignty in the name of Victoria. King Charles has inherited Victoria’s claim to sovereignty on the basis of Hobson’s proclamations. He could not have inherited on the basis of Te Tiriti which did not cede sovereignty, and even in the English version did not contain any provision for royal inheritance or succession. When the Government, in the person of the Prime Minister, claims that it is sovereign it is speaking very loosely to avoid stating the unpalatable truth which is that it holds a foreign monarch to be sovereign over Aotearoa on grounds of deception and coercion.
Beautiful conclusion Rat.
Maori did not cede sovereignty in Te Tiriti. That much is indisputable. However the British Crown still claims sovereignty over Aotearoa based on Hobson’s declarations of 21 May 1840. The Crown would say that it does not matter whether Hobson’s declarations were fair, justified, or reasonable given the fact Aotearoa was already occupied. Just like Putin’s declaration of Russian sovereignty over the Donbass, it is not a question of whether we like it, but whether we can do anything about it.
In our case we can do something about it. We fought a series of wars of resistance against the British colonialists in the nineteenth century and we must be ready to fight again if we are to frustrate the ambitions of the British Crown and assert the sovereignty of tangata motu in their own land. That is neither a pipe dream nor a nightmare. Colonialism is becoming an unsustainable proposition in Aotearoa, and those in charge of the regime are seized of a political death-wish. When the time comes the system will fall with a very slight push from below.
Chippie, eh Prefect, i prefer. Winston, deriding today in the house, got one fact knowing, Te Treaty only one half page of right, Winnei, tell that truth right.
Article the first— Maori ceded kawanatanga to the Queen. Means dif things to dif people.
No, it means the same thing to all educated people. Rangatiratanga is sovereign absolute authority. Kawanatanga is an authority which is subordinate to rangatiratanga. Kuini Wikitoria was rangatira. Sir George Gipps, governor of New South Wales, was Kawana. Gipps served at the pleasure of Victoria. The Emperor Tiberias was rangatira of the Roman Empire. Pontius Pilate was Kawana of Judea. Pilate was responsible to Tiberias (Ruka 3:1).
Stick to your knitting bomber. Chippy just announced his resignation from labour.
You could already have that, many iwi are showing considerably leadership for their people. The real questions are what powers will you have, who will you rule & who will pay for it? The other question is where do those disenfranchised from their iwi or hapu fit in?
No government signed the treaty .It was signed by the cheifs and the queen .So now the government in NZ can fuck right off and if NZ wants to revisit the treaty then it should be the King and Maori doing that .I am sure the King would tell the current government to get fucked and may even dissolve the current paliament
NZ did not have a so called government till well after the treaty was signed .As is the case now the then government twisted the wording to steal land and murder as many maori as they could to make that theft look like they were defending them selves .My great great grand father was killed when sent to negotiate the surrender of the HOU HOU at PATEA so the crown could take their land for the white people to fuck up .Now I have educated myself around the great land grab wars I have little sympathy for him .
tREATY, THREE SIDE, Wai, river, you have, te waitai, you have, whenua, we have.
Comments are closed.