In this issue we discuss Article 11 which states:

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions

and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past,

present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and

historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and

performing arts and literature.

2. States shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include

restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their

cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior

and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs.

What this means

Self- determination is the central right of the Declaration. All other rights help to achieve self-determination. Rangatira have the authority to maintain, control, protect and develop their knowledge related to their lands, forests, fisheries, kainga and all other taonga. The Crown has a responsibility to protect this authority by obtaining tangata whenua free, prior and informed consent.

How does it fit with the Treaty?

The claim Wai 262, is about the place of Māori culture, identity and traditional knowledge in New Zealand’s laws, and in government policies and practices. It concerns who controls Māori traditional knowledge, who controls artistic and cultural works such as haka and waiata, and who controls the environment that created Māori culture.

It also concerns the place in contemporary New Zealand life of core Māori cultural values such as the obligation of iwi and hapū to act as kaitiaki (cultural guardians) towards taonga (treasured things) such as traditional knowledge, artistic and cultural works, important places, and flora and fauna that are significant to iwi or hapū identity.

The Treaty established a partnership between Māori and the Crown. Through this partnership, the Crown won the right to govern and enact laws, but that right was qualified by the guarantee of ‘tino rangatiratanga’ (full authority) for iwi and hapū over their ‘taonga katoa’ (all their treasured things).

This requires the Crown, as far as practicable, to ensure that iwi and hapū have authority over taonga such as those referred to above, which are core aspects of Māori culture and identity.

How do you think Aotearoa, New Zealand measures up to Article 11 ?

The Commission’s Te Mana i Waitangi project seeks to do this by promoting discussion on human rights and the Treaty, promoting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and working with Māori communities to build human rights capacity and leadership (Tūhonohono).

In 2012 the Tūhonohono projects will involve the Commission working with four specific groups in Taitokerau, Wairarapa, Te Waipounamu and the Central North Island, while maintaining support for Tūhonohono groups from 2011 in Wairoa, Ōpōtiki, South Auckland, Wellington and Taranaki.

The event, called Te Tōanga Mai o Te Ra, or 'the rising of the sun', is hosted by Bay of Plenty Regional Council and will be held on Monday, 23 April at TECT Arena in Tauranga. Organiser, Regional Council Māori Policy Manager Kataraina Belshaw, said the conference is about bringing Māori together to hear some of New Zealand's top academics talk about environmental issues and local government.

The event was postponed in late October last year because Regional Council Māori Policy staff and many local iwi were involved in the response to the MV Rena grounding.

The conference will target Māori who live in, or have an interest in the Bay of Plenty region, including hapū and iwi practitioners as well as representatives and members of Māori land trusts and entities. The Ministry of Māori Development, Te Puni Kōkiri and Eight Associates are sponsoring the event.

Ms Belshaw said the conference was an opportunity to build relationships and learn from each other.

"This event will provide an occasion where experts and practitioners can share knowledge, skills and experiences on topics of relevance that will help Māori build capability and capacity to contribute to Council decision-making. It's an opportunity to strengthen existing relationships and build new ones," she said. 

Topics to be discussed at the conference include the use of Māori land, constitutional reform and local government, Māori perspectives on water, natural resource co-governance models and human rights.

Keynote speaker is Justice Joe Williams and guest speakers include Human Rights Commissioner Joris de Bres, Auckland University Māori Studies Professor Ann Sullivan, Professor Linda Te Aho and senior law lecturer Jacinta Ruru. The conference will also feature presentations from Environment Canterbury Chief Executive Bill Bayfield, Bay of Plenty Regional Council Chief Executive Mary-Anne MacLeod and Chairman of Ngāi Te Rangi Iwi Trust Charlie Tawhiao on the importance of relationships in a disaster.

The conference was requested through the Regional Council's Māori Committee last year. Under the Local Government Act Councils must consider ways to foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to Council decision-making.

Iwi and hapū members wishing to attend the conference should email Jacqui Ranui on jacqui.ranui@envbop.govt.nz

For further media information please contact Kataraina Belshaw, Māori Policy Manager on 0800 884 880 or Linda Thompson, Senior Communications Advisor, on direct dial 0800 884 881 ext 8149 or (021) 923 339.

The effective promotion and protection of languages requires four components:

1. a clear strategy agreed between indigenous peoples and the State
2. Indigenous community commitment and action
3. State financial support and a legislative and institutional framework; including official recognition of indigenous languages
4.  wider community acceptance and recognition of the right to language.

It is important for National Human Rights Institutions to promote the right to language for indigenous people as an integral part of their general advocacy for human rights.

A draft of the Expert Mechanism’s study will be finalised in early April 2012 in preparation for the Expert Mechanism’s fifth session in July 2012.

For further information on this study.

Read the Commission’s consultation paper on the role of languages and culture in the promotion and protection of the rights, and identity, of indigenous peoples  (Word 90Kb).

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination considers race relations in New Zealand every five years. The Government’s report, and shadow reports, inform the Committee’s thoughts on issues they would like to question the Government on further.

What do you think the Committee should be aware of when it considers race relations in New Zealand? We encourage you to tell the Committee about issues that are most important to you. We welcome copies of your reports to the Committee, if you decide to submit one. We will keep record of reports and what issues they focus on and can share that information with you, to keep you informed of the issues raised by others. For more information, contact CatrionaS@hrc.co.nz.

The Government’s report and other background documents are available at  the Commission’s website. For guidance on ‘Preparing and submitting an alternative report’ see page 26 of ICERD and CERD: A Guide for Civil Society Actors.

The review also celebrates solid progress made in race relations over the last five years, outlines the key barriers that continue to hamper community relations and recommends 10 priorities to address these. Working towards a New Zealand that provides a “fair go for all” will need action to be taken in these priority areas to ensure that everyone in our society is included, valued and treated with respect.

School enrolment data for 2011 offered an insight into New Zealand’s demographic changes. Notably in the Northern school region (Auckland and Northland) nearly 60 per cent of students are Māori, Pacific, Asian and other non-European, while in the Central North region (South of Auckland and north of Turangi) nearly 40 per cent of students are Māori.

“These figures indicate that in the future, no single ethnic group is likely to constitute a majority of the population,” says Race Relations Commissioner Joris de Bres.

Despite relatively healthy race relations, the report finds that three barriers continue to undermine positive race relations. The first is a continuing degree of racial prejudice; the second is significant and entrenched racial inequalities; and the third is the exclusion of minorities from full participation in all aspects of society.

The report singles out the top ten priorities for race relations for 2012:

1. The safety and wellbeing of our children: focusing on the rights of children, including through the Māori Affairs Select Committee inquiry into the wellbeing of Māori children, and the Government responses to the Green Paper for Vulnerable Children and the Early Childhood Education report.
2.  Reducing social and economic inequalities: addressing entrenched inequalities across different sectors, with a focus on structural discrimination.
3.  Protecting beneficiaries and their families: ensuring that reforms aimed at reducing welfare dependency do not adversely affect the welfare of beneficiaries and their families.
4. Christchurch earthquake recovery: developing central and local government capability to communicate with culturally and linguistically diverse communities in the Christchurch earthquake recovery, and in the event of future civil emergencies elsewhere.
5. The constitutional review: public discussion of New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements including the Treaty of Waitangi.
6.  Inclusion: actively focusing on inclusion in all aspects of New Zealand life as a means to break down discrimination against Asian New Zealanders and other minority ethnic groups.
7.  Refugee resettlement: approving and beginning to implement the refugee resettlement strategy.
8.  Language: implementing the Pacific Languages Framework and determining the future strategy for te reo Māori.
9.  Diversity in the media: improving representation of diverse communities in the media, recognising the changing demographics of the New Zealand audience.

10.   United Nations review of New Zealand: engaging with the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in their review of New Zealand’s compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

Read the full review Race Relations in 2011 − Tūi Tūi Tuituiā

Read the introduction in Māori follow the link below

http://www.hrc.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/RRR_Introduction_Maori_2011.html

Dove-Myer Robinson was the mayor of Auckland. Jack Marshall was prime minister, followed by Norm Kirk later that year. Suzanne won the Loxene Golden Disc Award with “Sunshine through a prism” and in Munich, the men’s eights rowed all the way to golden glory at the Olympics.

The law was promoted by the then National Government to foster New Zealand’s role in international forums as a keen and impartial advocate for human rights. New Zealand had been a key player in the drafting and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948 and this was a further step on that path.

To enhance New Zealand’s international aims the Government sought to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. To do that required enacting specific domestic law and so the first piece of race relations law was passed, but not without some anxiety. This was a time when many New Zealanders happily described their country as having “the best race relations in the world.”

While routinely expressed, it was based more on good faith than deep analysis. The perception was acknowledged by Eric Missen the Justice Secretary who in his 1972 annual report wrote, “Hitherto this legislation (the Race Relations Act 1971) has been regarded with some suspicion in New Zealand, not because of any lack of commitment to racial equality but in part because of a feeling that the great degree of harmony and the genuine fund of goodwill between different races in New Zealand, and in particular between Māori and Pākehā, renders legislative intervention unnecessary.”

Some wondered what the new Race Relations Conciliator would actually do. As it happened, Sir Guy Powles, the first Race Relations Conciliator, his deputy Ken Mason and executive officer Pita Sharples and those who have served in the 40 years since, have found that the issue has been limited resources rather than lack of work.

When Prime Minister Jack Marshall opened the first Race Relations Office in Auckland at the YWCA building in Queen Street, he noted the vast urban migration that saw Māori and Pacific people settling in Auckland and Wellington. He saw the role of the Race Relations Office as an expression of the wish to “act to prevent a serious problem developing rather than react to one that has arisen.” He affirmed what many political leaders since have found, social problems “cannot be solved by pretending they do not exist” but nor did he think New Zealand need worry about its social attitudes. After a few months Sir Guy Powles reported that from the experience of the fledgling Race Relations Office the prime minister was mistaken.

In its first six months the race relations team fielded 79 complaints, the majority from Māori and Pacific people. Today race related grounds make up about a third of the more than 1300 complaints that involve unlawful discrimination the Human Rights Commission seeks to resolve each year.

From the start Sir Guy Powles was adamant that complaints could only be one facet of the work. He believed good race relations flourished on three key foundations, education, awareness and research. Pita Sharples, in his first job from university, and the staff who later joined the office in those first years, carried out a great deal of advocacy work, explaining the law, discussing what good race relations entailed and exploring the real-life practices that could see someone, whether intentionally or not, treated unfairly because of their race or ethnic background.

They held regular meetings with those that could make a difference, from insurance companies to real estate organisations, educators, students and the police. They believed they held a responsibility to assist the minority communities in our society, to find a place and a voice. It is very much the kind of work that continues today

Rather than coming in with a stick, the goal has always been to produce the data and analysis and to rely on people’s sense of fairness supported the law. In just one example, in its first years, the Race Relations Office investigated accusations that the Labour Department was accepting discriminatory job advertisements from employers. This resulted in changed practices and extensive training for Labour Department staff. Workplace discrimination still happens, but when made transparent it is unacceptable.

First executive officer Pita Sharples has described the race relations work as providing an impartial forum for discussion and development of race relations issues. “Countries go through different things. We’ve had anti-Māori times, we’ve had anti-Pacific Island times, we’ve had anti-Asian times, anti-Irish and anti-English. In my eight years in race relations I experienced all those times.”

When interviewed in 1999, Sharples said in his time he found the worst case was antagonism towards English people in the 1970s. People told Sharples it was just a series of jokes, but he recalls, “It was getting out of hand a bit. What happened was this lady came in crying, she was in front of Whitcoulls and she spoke to her mokopuna in a broad Lancashire dialect and this person standing by her said, ‘Another f—-’ Pom’ and spat on her.”

Sharples consoled the woman and later called a press conference. “I said, ‘we don’t spit on people; we don’t bang on their cars and paint their fences’. I pointed these things out and said there was a danger we could go overboard.” Some newspaper editorials accused the Race Relations Office of lacking sense of humour, but many others supported the stand.

As Sharples, Powles and Mason found it then, so it has been. A succession of Race Relations Conciliators and later when the Race Relations Office was merged with the Human Rights Commission, Race Relations Commissioners, have worked to ensure that all New Zealanders, whatever their national or ethnic orgin, are treated fairly, have the opportunity to express their culture and are encouraged to participate in New Zealand society.

Society does not sit still. So in the 21^st century, it would be very odd if the national anthem was not sung in Māori at an All Black test. You won’t lose your job if you answer the phone with ‘Kia ora’. If you are a Sikh and a police officer, then you can wear a turban. Our children can learn Mandarin along with French. New Zealand’s sense of place in the world has shifted to match the changing makeup of its population.

But it would be a mistake for historians to record New Zealand’s race relations as a series of sensational headlines: whether it be a radio station stunt for “bash a pom a day” or a prominent broadcaster calling the Secretary General of the United Nations a “cheeky darkie”.

Speaking authoritatively about race relations is not something you can take a course on. The role means searching for a path that relies not on populist sentiment; but on fairness, respect and human rights. The job is to inject balance when it is lacking and to speak on behalf of minorities and the vulnerable when the majority won’t listen.

Some former conciliators and commissioners will say that when offered the position they had to think twice. But it is also a role that offers rare satisfactions.  Harry Dansey, a gracious man, and respected journalist and writer, was the second Race Relations Conciliator. When asked about the most worthwhile achievements in race relations he said, “They may be counted as the things that didn’t happen.”

Joris de Bres, Race Relations Commissioner, Human Rights Commission

Race Relations Conciliators and Commissioners

Sir Guy Powles, 1972-73
Ken Mason (Deputy Conciliator), 1972-1989
Harry Dansey, 1975-1979
Hiwi Tauroa, 1980-1986
Wally Hirsch, 1986-1989
Chris Laidlaw, 1989-1992
John Clarke, 1992-1995
Rajen Prasad, 1995-2000
Gregory Fortuin, 2001-2002
Joris de Bres, 2002- present