Church answers P.M.’s land gibe

Press, 10 February 1981, Page 6

Church answers P.M.’s land gibe

PA Auckland If the Prime Minister thinks the Anglican Church should' return its .land in the Tamaki electorate to' the Maoris then all Auckland landowners should follow suit. . , x This was the reaction last night of the executive director of the Anglican Church in Auckland (Mr H. Anderson) to a suggestion by Mr Muldoon that the St John’s and Melanesian trusts land should be returned to the Maoris.

“I completely refute that the Melanesian or St John’s land was acquired from the Maoris,” he said. “None of the land was in Maori ownership when Bishop Selwyn boughtit.” . Mr Anderson said his information came from deeds, documents, and a paper prepared by a former St John’s College lecturer in church history. Dr K. Booth. The land known as the Kohimarama block was originally sold to the Crown in 1841, a year, after the Treaty t>f Waitangi, by 12 chiefs of the Ngatipaoa tribe. Mr Anderson said in the next two years, the land was surveyed and sold mainly by auction or private sale to Europeans. Bishop Selwyn bought his first piece of land in the eastern suburbs in October, 1844, when he moved St John’s College from Waimate North to its present site. Mr Anderson said 80 per cent of the Kohimarama block land was bought from European owners,. 19 per cent from the Government by auction, and 5.3 ha by gift from Europeans. “What Mr Muldoon is really saying,” Mr Anderson said, “is that all of us in Auckland should give our land back to the Maoris, because the Crown in fact acquired Auckland, “The Church is in the

same position as any Auckland landowner.” The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) has suggested that the Anglican Church should return to the Maori people the “very large areas of the most valuable housing land in New Zealand” which the Church has in Auckland. Mr Muldoon was rising to the defence of the Minister of Maori Affairs (Mr Couch) who was criticised by the Archbishop of New Zealand (the Most Rev. P. A. Reeves) as being “provocative” in his address just before protests erupted on the National Marae on . Waitangi Day? Archbishops Reeves’ comments were printed in , “The Press” yesterday. V ' Mr* Muldoon said yesterday that Archbishop . Reeves was quite wrong in his allegation and it should not pass without comment. “The provocation came from the young Maori, Arthur Harawira, before Mr Couch spoke,-when he publicly told our Governor-Gen-eral (Sir David Beattie) that he was not welcome on the marae,” Mr Muldoon said. "His insulting speech was merely the prelude to what was clearly a planned, rather than a spontaneously violent demonstration,” he said. Mr Muldoon said that Mr Couch’s address, in contrast, had been “low key.” Mr Codch' 1 , had welcomed the young people on to the marae and endorsed the approval for them to speak, even though disagreeing with what, they said. “He majie a number of points which were warmly supported by those present, both Maori and pakeha. He said, that the people of his southern tribe welcomed the arrival of the British because, at that time, the Ngapuhi from the north had the guns and were exterminating the .people of the southern tribes. “At that point I was asto-

nished to see a look of contempt on the face of the Archbishop, but this turned to embarrassment as the Minister went on to say that it was the - British that brought the gospel of Christ to New Zealand and the missionaries who supported the British annexation as a means of restoring law and order. “The Minister then went on to say with justification that had any other colonising nation but? the British annexed New Zealand, then the fate of the Maori people would have \ been different. He then made a plea for harmony and fellowship. “Far from being provoca- : tive, the speech was a brilliant one and this was recognised with warm applause,” Mr .Muldoon said. “I regret that Archbishop . Reeves has allowed his personal attitudes to influence his judgment, and quite unfairly, criticise Mr Couch.. “I know that the Archbishop feels deeply about these matters and I suggest to him that a practical course for him to follow in respect to Maori grievances would be to see whether his Church is prepared to return to the Maori people the very large areas of the most valuable housing land in New Zealand —* in my Tamaki electorate — that have returned the Church such large sums of money for the St John’s and Melanesian Trusts,” Mr Muldoon said. “That would be a practical gesture of much greater value than his unwarranted public comments on the sad events of Waitangi morning,” he said. Archbishop Reeves yesterday, declined to comment on Mr Muldoon’s statement, saying the issue would otherwise develop into a “football match.” “It seems to me I’ve noth? ing more to say. I have really no desire to perpetuate it,” he said.