Maori grievances discussed

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32561, 22 March 1971, Page 14

Maori grievances discussed

“The social and cultural gap between Maori and pakeha is hardly apparent to people on the right side of it, but to people on the other side it seems a gap they can never bridge,” Dr R. S. Duff said in Christchurch in Saturday.

The director of the Canterbury Museum and a noted ethnologist, Dr Duff was introducing a panel of speakers on Maori and pakeha relationships to the annual conference of South Island Rotarians.

For a thousand years, said Dr Duff, the only utterances heard in New Zealand had been the beautiful sounds of the Maori language. Then, between 1840 and 1870, an influx of white settlers had transformed the Maoris into a minority in their own country.

The early Europeans had been quite confident that the gap between the Polynesian culture and theirs could be bridged. All the Maori had to do was take a deep breath, flex his muscles, and jump over to the European side. Mr W. J. Karetai, chairman of the South Island Maori Tribal Council, said that the Maoris would fix what was wrong with their world, and the pakehas could fix what was wrong with the rest of the world.

To the pakeha, he said, land was a very common thing; to the Maori, it was a deep and personal issue. “Our land is where out ancestors lived and died, perhaps defending the tribal land. The blood of our

ancestors is soaked into this land.”

Much legislation had been aimed at removing Maori control over land, and he did not have sufficient time to list all the injustices suffered by Maoris through the Treaty of Waitangi and on subsequent occasions, Mr Karetai said. He did, however, specify a particular difficulty relating to the probate of Maori wills. After expressing concern at the growing numbers of young Maoris who were convicted of criminal offences—mainly, he thought, through poorer education and poorer opportunities than the pakehas—Mr Karetai said there was too much complacency about the situation. “Too many of us sprinkle ourselves with self-satisfac-tion. The drying-out period could be longer and more painful than we think,” he said.

Mr K. H. J. Headifen, S.M., commenting on Mr Karetai’s remarks, said the Maori crime rate was a social problem rather than a racial one. It was a problem of development, and much of it was due to young Maoris living away from home. After two or three generations in the city, the rate could be expected to fall. As far as serious crime was concerned, said Mr Headifen, he doubted if there would be much difference between the Maori and pakeha incidence. Miss Catherine Brown said that perhaps she was an example of bridging the gap, since she had one Maori Barents and one paheka. She had always thought of herself as a Maori and had encountered no difficulties as a result. Children, she said, were not aware of racial differ-

ences and saw people as individuals, and she quoted the example of a young child who had asked: “Mummy, what’s a Maori?” “Well, dear, Mr Brown’s a Maori,” had been the reply. “Yes, but he's just another person,” said the child. She had never found'being a Maori to be a disadvantage in sport, said Miss Brown. The only consideration in selection had been who was the best player. Mr A. F. Orme, who has a degree in law and who described himself as a Rotorua Maori, said the paheka attitude toward integration was that it was up to the Maori to conform with the paheka society and culture. He compared this attitude with the old common law doctrine that husband and wife are one, and the husband is that one.

Young Maoris were very, angry at losing control of their land, said Mr Orme, As he saw the situation, there could be racial riots within 10 to 20 years, and the land issue could provide the flashpoint. Mr H. M. McMillan, regional superintendent of education, said that mistakes had been made, especially in suppressing the use of the Maori language in schools. This had been done with the best of intentions—to help the Maori get on better in a paheka environment—and the authorities had not realised the tremendous disadvantage of making the Maori a rootless person. Teachers should be reeducated so as to have a greater respect for Maori culture, said Mr McMillan. Commenting on work opportunities, he said that to compete with Europeans, it was not enough for the Maori

youngster to be as good—he had to be better or he would not get the job. The last speakers was a Christchurch architect, MrW. Taurau Royal, who opened by addressing his audience briefly in Maori and then asking them if they had understood any of it—even one word.

“Integration means intermingling,” he said. “For years now we have been learning your language, your ways, your culture, your science. As a child, I had these knuckles hammered because I dared to speak Maori in the classroom.”

There was no reason why New Zealand could not be a bi-lingual nation, and some aspects of Maori culture were far superior to the paheka’s, said Mr Royal. “I’m tired of trying to get across to the other side. Now it’s your turn. “When you want to sell New Zealand meat to Japan you put Kiri Te Kanawa and Inia Te Wiata on a stage and say: ‘This is New Zealand culture.’ You do this because the Japanese are interested in the Maoris,” said Mr Royal. "There’s no heart in it You’re just, chasing the allpervading dollar.” The mercenary attitude of the paheka was something the Maori could not understand, said Mr Royal—“though we’re beginning to get with it now. "As a Maori who has moved into the commercial rat-race—and 1 defy anyone to say that it isn’t one—l have often wondered at this attitude of going to church on Sunday and doing others in the eye on Monday. You might as well put it across them on Sunday. Everyone else is resting then and you can do it easily.”