The Press SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1960. One People

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29366, 19 November 1960, Page 12

The Press SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1960. One People

The Manchester “ Guardian ” and Mr Richard Thompson have chided both main political parties in this election campaign for paying too little attention to Maori questions (as “ The “ Press ” had done briefly at an earlier stage). This reluctance to discuss what could become New Zealand’s greatest social problem stems from two attitudes common among New Zealanders—one a lack of interest and the other . feeling that the questions raised are too difficult No-one should now be unaware that something has gone wrong in relationships between Maoris and Europeans. Symptoms include the Maoris’ relative lack of professional and economic success, bad housing, bad health, and a higher rate of criminality. None of these need, or should, be accepted. As for the difficulties, they seem to be increasing rather than diminishing with time. This is not to say that we support Mr Thompson’s remedy of legislation to prevent racial discrimination. At best, it could be little more effective than the one constructive proposal of the politicians—the National Party promise to include the Treaty of Waitangi in statute law, which would satisfy an ancient aspiration of the Maori people and possibly make them more willing partners in the development of New Zealand. The chief objections to Mr Thompson’s proposed legislation are that it would be ineffective against the type of racial discrimination that really matters and that it would help to perpetuate that discrimination by emphasising the distinction between white and brown New Zealanders. The problem is not how two separate peoples may live in harmony in a small country, but how their integration into one people can be achieved in friendship. -The discrimination that is practised by both races is a social one; and no act of Parliament can tell us among whom we may find our friends. The remedy is

not to force Maoris and Europeans into reluctant association but to make both feel that all are New Zealanders. How is this to be done? Royal Commissions have been appointed to answer less perplexing and much less important questions. Even without expert advice we could start attacking some of the barriers that tend to keep two sections of New Zealanders apart in spite of their common qualities and interests. Much effort is now being spent in finding children of exceptional ability so that they can be educated to the best advantage. It is more important to ensure that Maori children of all grades of intelligence are encouraged and helped to get the appropriate education. With our great shortage of skilled manpower at all levels we could 1 certainly do with more Maoris in the best jobs in the professions, in commerce, in administration, and in trades. We should discourage emphasis on cultural separateness, losing nothing of the best of Maori culture but absorbing it into a truly national culture. Compensation has been paid for the confiscation of Maori lands on an apparently generous scale; but has the method been the best way of appeasing Maori bitterness? The Acting-Secretary for Maori Affairs (Mr J. K. Hunn) has warned us of how Maori housing projects can help to perpetuate racial segregation. Finally, the

communal representation of Maoris in Parliament is wrong in principle and does more than anything else, perhaps, to draw a line between white and brown. Worse, it is likely to create serious friction in a few years because of the quicker growth of the Maori part of the population. The Maoris are already entitled on population to five seats in a House of 80, not four. In 20 years they will be entitled to seven By the turn of the century (when some members elected in 1960 may still be in Parliament), the Maoris will be entitled to 11 seats in a House of 80, or a proportionately greater number if the size of Parliament is increased. Would such a racial ; schism be tolerable?