It’s over two weeks since a group of us went to Wellington for the hikoi: Toitu te Tiriti.

Reflecting on that day has led to reflections on some recent decades of Treaty history.

Up until 50 years ago Māori held fast to Te Tīriti o Waitangi pretty much on their own.

Meanwhile the Crown has continued to act as it has since the mid-19^th Century - with a soul-less and disciplined forgetfulness, carefully maintained inside its moral vacuum.

However, on Tuesday 19^th November 2024 probably the largest rally ever witnessed in our Capital seemed to show something promising, about the state of this nation’s soul.

Was it our largest rally ever? It was certainly the largest I’ve ever attended; and over the years I’ve seen quite a few. For example, there was a very large march opposing the 1981 Springbok rugby tour, when around 10,000 people gathered in Queen Street.

It seems that tour was part of a change in our sense of who we are - as a nation.

Queen Street 1981was one of the last protest events. Up until then, there’d been some sort of protest every week. These were held on Wednesdays or Saturdays - sometimes both – to keep up with all the provincial games. Opposition to the 1981 Tour had been happening all over the country; and when those weeks of protest finally ended the end of Tour gathering in Auckland was held at Takaparawha / Bastion Point.

It was to be a debrief, after which we’d finally return to quieter lives - or so we thought.

I went in a group of theological students from our college nearby. Following the meeting we gathered with Hau Kainga for karakia at the grave of one of their children: Joanne Hawke, who’d died in September 1977 during the Bastion Point Occupation.

Then, as we walked back to the marae, we were challenged by a Ngati Whatua friend who told us how jealous and angry they were about the Queen Street rally, asking us:

“When will there be 10,000 people marching to protest all the wrongs done to us?”

Most New Zealanders knew very little about South African apartheid until 1981. So, our friend was right to challenge us, for we knew almost nothing of Bastion Point, and the decades Ngati Whatua had had to spend, opposing aggressive colonial legislation.

Their opposition had culminated in 1977 with the occupation of that beautiful headland, later chronicled by film-maker Merata Mita in a documentary: “Bastion Point: Day 507”.

Back at College as we watched that film, I think our eyes began to open.   

In Wellington last month it seemed that in the last half-century, many Pakeha New Zealanders have sensed the significance of Bastion Point and other breaches of Te Tiriti.

Back then, events like the Springbok Tour, the Raglan occupation in 1978 and Bastion Point created a disruption of our Pakeha self-image. Because of those disrupting events, it seems widespread Pakeha recognition of Te Tiriti o Waitangi finally began to occur.

Treaty educator Ingrid Huygens notes that in 1984, at a major gathering of Māori elders and activists at Turangawaewae it was noted that a key aspect of Pākehā resistance to Māori protest was a result of Pākehā ignorance about the Treaty.

Some Pakeha attendees took note and soon, all around the country, in media, in businesses, in local bodies and even in churches Treaty education began to occur, led by initiatives such as Project Waitangi: a community adult education that began in 1986.

In 1981 I recall protest leader Tim Shadbolt observing that you can be sure some real change for the better is happening, when the most conservative citizens [i.e those of us found in our churches] start coming onto the streets to protest!

Some years later a pastoral letter, Catholic Bishop Peter Cullinane quoted High Court judge Paul Temm who said: “what we have going for us is the extraordinary patience of Māori New Zealanders and the tremendous sense of fairness of Pakeha New Zealanders… and it is reasonable to say that when New Zealanders know what the facts are, they always try to do what is fair…” [1989]

The churches were closely involved with the Treaty at its inception, but from 1860 Crown aggression saw intolerable strains between Pākehā churches and Te Ao Maori.

We are notably absent from high level decision making now. Perhaps it’s time for  churches to participate again alongside the Crown in conversations with hapu and iwi?  

Knowledge about our history is accelerating since 2022 with the Land Wars curriculum in schools. Now younger Pākehā may well become better informed than their parents.

Not that anyone can hold and retain more than a minimal knowledge of everything hapu and iwi have endured. Recently an historian friend asked me if I had ever heard of the Crown legislation of 1865 which became known as the “10 Owner Rule”? I said I hadn’t.

Under this rule the Native Land Court was required to name no more than 10 Maori owners - no matter the size of a block of land. By this rule those named would own the land individually rather than collectively and could choose to do with it as they wished.  

Suddenly singled out, the new owners became prey to land-dealers’ seductive trickery.

The point being made by my historian friend is that so much devious legislation has now been passed, that even a professional historian can only know a small measure of it. Yet I have noticed there is also great affection and trust in my friend from the hapu and iwi for whom they work, particularly for the fair-minded and humble attitude they bring.     

Despite endless deceptions, it’s as if some cautious optimism about Pākehā now exists amongst Māori. And on 19^th November, we were not only welcome; we were expected.  

All the major political parties and churches came - their leaders having endorsed the Hikoi as well as urging members to give it their support as it made its way to the Capital.

Joining in that day, we noticed some groups under banners identifying themselves as Tangata Tiriti: a name Judge Edward Jurie has used, to describe descendants of people of the British Crown.

This is now becoming an inclusive name for anyone who has come here under Te Tīriti.

Our little group of Pākehā/Tangata Tīriti felt an immense sense of gratitude to be able to join such an astonishing event. Feeling such warmth among the flags and the sunshine, we were all able to keep up a gentle pace, set by the many thousands who’d arrived from Cape Reinga, bringing what now feels like a newfound hope for our nation’s future.

ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill is certainly a threat to this hopeful future. And it’s serious - because if the Article Two Treaty guarantee of Tino Rangatiratanga is removed [and this is what the authors of this Bill intend] then we as Tangata Tīriti will also lose terribly.

How tragic when after 50 years we’ve just begun to find a more secure sense of identity!

In a radio interview recently, the sponsor of the Treaty Principles Bill lapsed into counselling-speak when they used the psychotherapy expression: ‘self-actualization’ to promise what their political party plans for us all, if the Bill is passed.

That expression [self-actualization] neatly captures the sponsor’s libertarian view that everyone is self-interested; and a mistaken idea that self-interest is good for everyone.

Coined first by psychiatrist Kurt Goldstein, self-actualization was then developed by psychologist Abraham Maslow. While Goldstein’s phrase had resonated with Maslow, it soon became clear it made no sense at all to indigenous people, nor did it resonate for women or anyone with a sense of collective identity.

In essence, collective identity requires a spiritual quality often referred to as ‘soul’.

Self-actualization leaves little room for this; yet the idea remains an appealing one, particularly in the West and those Westernized cultures where individuals come to see themselves as ‘self-made’ or ‘rugged’ or simply ‘successful’ enterprising individuals.  

Our situation is precarious. Even if the Treaty Principals Bill should fail, its sponsor has gained the attention of many citizens who have little or no understanding of Te Tīriti.

Should a referendum on the Treaty be held recent polls suggest roughly 30%  of citizens would support ACT, 30% would vote against and 30% are at present undecided.

ACT and its leader advocate individual rights with little apparent regard for the rights of others, particularly those whose profound and unshakeable sense of collective identity arises through land to which they will always belong, through their Māori ancestry.

While the Bill’s sponsor makes frequent reference to race, the policies of the ACT party are essentially white, Western racism still seeking to privatize public assets along with removing regulations protecting land inherited over centuries of indigenous ancestry.  

ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill seeks to draws us all into a moral vacuum, in which no consideration is given to the wellbeing of the home, land and sea, which is Aotearoa.

Rob Baigent-Ritchie is a retired Anglican priest living in Taranaki.