Policing the colonial project of Aotearoa New Zealand (Voices of Women and Gender Minorities)

Policing the colonial project of Aotearoa New Zealand

 

Sandra Dickson is a Pākehā queer feminist bogan from the Hutt Valley who spends most of her time working to end gendered violence.  She is committed to working in relationships between Tangata Whenua and Tauiwi based on justice, equity and Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

In 1997 a government report[1] into police attitudes towards Māori found significant evidence of institutional racism.  Almost one in four police officers had negative attitudes towards Māori and half of the officers reporting negative behaviour said it received no reprimand from supervisors.  Māori officers were significantly more likely to believe Māori were being treated with more suspicion than other ethnicities, but overall:

  • A third of police acknowledged there was a greater tendency to suspect Māori of an offence
  • Nearly half reported police were more likely to query vehicle registration when Māori were seen driving a flash car
  • About a fifth reported police were more likely to ask Māori what they were doing in the early hours of the morning
  • At least two thirds had heard colleagues using racist language about suspects or offenders

It’s useful here to consider what institutional racism means.  It’s not about the intent of individual police officers, judges or corrections staff, though of course that may be racist.  It’s about the patterns of different treatment by an institution because of race.  It’s about differences at every stage of the criminal justice system all pointing in the same direction.  It’s about the impact of colonisation.

“As with all cultures, that of the Police imbues the individuals within it with its core values and its historic ethic. Because of that the behaviour of an individual Police Officer cannot be separated from that of the culture. If the culture is based upon the institutionalised racism of colonisation, then its members will be imbued with, and may even manifest, that racism.”[2]

Figure 1: Racism and Cultural Violence Wheel, Network Waitangi Whangarei.[3]

Figure 1: Racism and Cultural Violence Wheel, Network Waitangi Whangarei.[3]


Figure 1: Racism and Cultural Violence Wheel, Network Waitangi Whangarei.[3]

In 2007 a government report[4] about the over-representation of Māori in the criminal justice system confirmed that Māori are more likely to have police contact; be charged; lack legal representation; not be granted bail; be convicted; be sentenced to non-monetary penalties and denied release to Home Detention.  While these “small” perhaps “cumulative” kinds of racism are acknowledged, the report leaned towards concluding that Māori families are more likely to foster environments in which criminality takes place. In sixty pages the word colonisation appears just once, in a quote from another researcher.  It suggested changes were required in other areas:

“the primary domain for government intervention to address disproportionality is argued to reside in the areas of health, social support and education, in order to reduce disadvantage and the problems it confers.”

 

The acknowledgment from the state that people take up criminal behaviour because disadvantage and poverty are awful and therefore we should be interested in social and material contexts is welcome.  However, it is not acceptable for the criminal justice system to fail to address its own institutional racism by palming off government interventions elsewhere.  We cannot understand the over-representation of Māori in the criminal justice system outside the context of colonisation.

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

In the Aotearoa New Zealand colonial project, Māori have been “in the way”, obstacles for the police to overcome, rebels threatening the colonising process.  As colonisation embedded racism into the institutions and processes governing New Zealand, Māori were dispossessed.  This is not about individual police officers, but the systemic, endemic culture of policing in a colonised land.

New Zealand Police are the state enforcers, the sharp end of the colonial project in Aotearoa.  They invade when colonisation calls, arrest when the state needs.  We cannot make sense of a police killing in Taranaki today without the context of the Police invasion of Parihaka and illegal detention of Te Whiti-o-Rongomai (Taranaki and Te Ātiawa) and Tohu Kākahi (Taranaki and Ngāti Ruanui).

We cannot make sense of the impact of an invasion of Te Urewera in 2007 without understanding the police killing of Tūhoe leader Rua Kēnana’s son during his arrest nearly a century earlier.

____________________________________________________________________________

The 2007 report into Māori over-representation in the criminal justice system did not examine deaths in custody, taser use or police shootings.  What happens at the sharpest end of the colonial project, when the police use severe or lethal violence?

A recent ten year review by the Independent Police Complaints Authority (IPCA) of deaths in custody found just under half the deaths were of Māori prisoners.  The review argued that processes earlier in the criminal justice system was responsible for the disproportionate number of Māori deaths – that there was no additional (my emphasis) institutional racism.

“The disproportionate number of Māori deaths in police custody reflects the over-representation of Māori in the criminal justice system generally. The causes of this over-representation were not within the scope of the review.”[5]

 

The New Zealand Police Association actively campaigned for the introduction and national roll-out of tasers to increase the force at their disposal in the early 2000s. [6]

“A Taser is a hand-held, electro-muscular disruption device that is capable of incapacitating a person and causing pain through the application of an electrical current. For example, Tasers could be used by police to temporarily incapacitate a violent or combative person during arrest.  It can be used as an immobilisation device or simply as a device for inflicting pain on a person.”[7]

Police figures show that taser use has become increasingly heavily raced in the three years since initial trial, when there was little difference in taser use across ethnicity.  The data is based on rates per 10,000 apprehensions, which controls for earlier institutional racism.

 

 

Table 1: Ethnicity and Taser Use per 10,000 Apprehensions

Ethnicity Rate of taser use per 10,000 apprehensions[8][9]
1 December 2008 to 21 March 2010 22 March 2010 to 30 June 2012 1 January to 31 December 2013
NZ European 17 23 50
Māori 16 31 74
Pacific Peoples 18 39 91
Other 20

New Zealand Police are now tasering NZ Europeans three times as often as the introductory period; but for Māori and Pacifica people the rates are about five times as often as when tasers were first introduced.  It’s seems clear that as there is less scrutiny, the police are using tasers more often in general, but also that they feel more able to treat suspects differently based on ethnicity.  Additional institutional racism compounds earlier discrimination for Māori and Pacifica.

ethnicity and taser use

It should be noted that taser use is also heavily gendered.  In the trial period, men were three times more likely to be tasered than women; in the latest period this increased to four times more likely.  Men are eight times as likely to be tasered in the later time period than the early time period.[10]  Although there is no intersectional data combining ethnicity and gender, from these two data sets it’s clear that the police “immobilise or inflict pain” vastly more often on Māori and Pacifica men.

Table 2:  Gender and Taser Use per 10,000 Apprehensions

Gender Rate of taser use per 10,000 apprehensions
1 December 2008 to 21 March 2010 22 March 2010 to 30 June 2012 1 January to 31 December 2013
Male 19 32 162
Female 6 9 42

___________________________________________________________________________

Examining patterns around lethal shootings by New Zealand Police is more difficult.  Unlike taser use or deaths in custody, there are no public reports with ethnicity routinely recorded.  The best source of data after 1995 is the IPCA reports of deaths involving the police.  Before 1995 the sole information on fatal police shootings is a New Zealand Herald article with one sentence synopses of the 13 killings since 1941.[11]  This article does not include the lethal shootings of 11 Samoans by New Zealand Police shipped to Apia in 1929 during a peaceful demonstration.[12]  It is only possible to determine the ethnicity of four of the 13 the article names through cross-referencing with media and historical records online.  All four are Māori.

Because of these information limitations, I am going to focus on police lethal shootings in the period the IPCA reports cover, from 1995 – 2015.[13]  There were 16 killings, 15 of which have completed IPCA reports. The IPCA is more likely to find no problems with police procedures than to identify concerns, let alone recommend any changes in procedures.  Racism or colonisation is not addressed in any report as a causative factor.[14]

Ethnicity is not identified in IPCA reports or media coverage for four of the 16 people.  This may indicate the people concerned are Pākehā, but there is no certainty.  Ethnicity is noted in passing in several IPCA reports rather than because it is a requirement.  Media coverage sometimes includes ethnicity, most often when family members of the person killed have concerns of racism.  Given these limitations, I could identify twelve of the sixteen shooting victims as men of colour. The fact that finding this information requires trawling through media coverage and reports is significant in itself.

Table 3: Ethnicity of Victims of Lethal Police Killings – 1995 -2015

 

Ethnicity of Victim Number Percentage
Māori 9 56%
Unknown 4 25%
Iraqi 1 6%
Samoan 1 6%
Tongan 1 6%

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

 

Including the use of force and lethal force by New Zealand Police strengthens the case for institutional racism beyond the “small, cumulative” acts already well-documented.  Even if deaths in custody may not provide evidence of additional institutional racism, the use of tasers and police shootings certainly do, particularly when men of colour are seen as a group.  Knowledge of institutional racism and its location in police use of severe and lethal force needs to inform all liberatory political agendas seeking to be intersectional – whether that be discussions of how to respond to gendered violence, attempts to address the criminalisation of people living in poverty or resistance to queer people’s experiences of homophobia, biphobia and transphobia.  It also makes clear that any attempts to provide New Zealand Police with increased access to firearms – which continues to be on the agenda of NZPA spokesperson Greg O’Connor – should be resisted by those calling themselves anti-racist.  I hope the information gathered here contributes to further discussion and action.

Dedicated to those targeted by police racism, including family, whānau and communities who have lost loved ones due to lethal violence.

[1] Maxwell G. and Smith C., (1998), Police Perceptions of Māori: A report to the New Zealand Police and Te Puni Kōkiri, Victoria Link Ltd.

[2] Jackson, M., (2000), Steven Wallace: An Analysis of the Police Report, Peace Movement Aotearoa.

[3] This is an adaptation of the Power and Control wheel, developed to contextualise the ways in which domestic violence is experienced by victims.  Sourced from Came, H., (2012), Institutional Racism and the Dynamics

of Privilege in Public Health, University of Waikato.

[4] Department of Corrections, (2007), Over-representation of Māori in the criminal justice system: An exploratory report.

[5] Independent Police Conduct Authority, (2012), Thematic Report: Deaths in Custody, A Ten Year Review.

[6] Buttle, J., (2010), The Case Against Arming the New Zealand Police Force, Department of Criminology, AUT.

[7] Crime and Misconduct Commission, (2008), Facts About Tasers, Brisbane, Australia.

[8] The first two columns are Ministry of Justice figures, accessed at http://www.justice.govt.nz/policy/constitutional-law-and-human-rights/human-rights/international-human-rights-instruments/international-human-rights-instruments-1/convention-against-torture/united-nations-convention-against-torture-and-other-cruel-inhuman-or-degrding-treatment-or-punishment-new-zealand-periodic-report-6/article-16/31-tasers

[9] New Zealand Police, (2014), New Zealand Police Annual Taser Report Number Two.

[10] Figures from sources above.

[11] New Zealand Herald, Oct 23 2008, Chronology of fatal shootings by NZ Police.

[12] http://samoaobserver.ws/editorial/5132-black-saturday   New Zealand Police used a machine gun to disperse the demonstration; in addition to the 11 Samoans killed, another 50 people were injured by gunshots and police batons on “Black Saturday”, 28 December, 1929.

[13] All reports from http://ipca.govt.nz/Site/publications/Default.aspx

[14] These limitations have been addressed in some depth for the IPCA report on the killing of Steven Wallace in Jackson, M., (2000), Steven Wallace: An Analysis of the Police Report, Peace Movement Aotearoa.

What’s wrong with social bonds for mental health services?

Article by Grant Brookes, recently elected president of the New Zealand Nurse’s Organisation (NZNO).

Originally published in Kai Tiaki, journal of NZNO.

Health services funded by Social Bonds are due to open in New Zealand by the end of the year. Under the controversial new scheme, the private sector will be invited to invest in health and social services in return for “success payments” if targets are met.

ANZ Bank is behind the first of these profit-driven services, designed to get people with experience of mental illness in Wellington into the workforce. Also in the pipeline are schemes to reduce reoffending in Auckland and to “manage chronic illness” in Bay of Plenty/Lakes.

Despite Official Information Act requests and the imminent launch, little is known about these pilot projects. “There has been a dearth of information”, says NZNO Senior Policy Analyst Marilyn Head.

Dr Charlotte Chambers, Principal Analyst for the ASMS senior doctors union, agrees. “While the minister of health remains adamant that information is readily available on the Ministry of Health’s website, there is a worrying lack of detail.”

Evaluations are therefore forced to rely heavily on recently published cabinet papers dating from 2013.

Paternalistic, not person-centred

From a nursing perspective, supporting recovery for mental health service users means working in partnership to help identify and achieve goals which are meaningful to them.

In services funded under the Social Bonds pilot, by contrast, goals will not be set in partnership. Instead they will be “selected from ideas generated by the market”.

Clients will be expected to meet the organisation’s goals, rather than the other way around.

In this way, Social Bonds create services which are paternalistic and provider-centred, rather than person-centred.

They will also be prone to the generic problems afflicting all services driven by health targets – the loss of a holistic focus as people are viewed narrowly as “prospective employees”, “offenders”, “sufferers” and so on.

Then there’s the question of whether it’s ethical for investors to speculate on the lives of vulnerable members of our community.

“The introduction of social bonds signals a dramatic change in our values around assisting people with mental health problems”, comments NZ Psychological Society Dr Kerry Gibson. “Many New Zealanders might struggle with the idea of some citizens profiting from the misery of others.”

Failing overseas

Three international examples are cited for comparison in the cabinet papers released by the Ministry of Health. Two of these have since failed.

Launched in 2010, the Peterborough Social Impact Bond was intended to reduce reoffending among a group of male prisoners in England. It was hailed as “a world leader” by the Ministry of Health.

Yet in 2014, just over half way through its seven year term, the contract was cancelled after it failed to meet its targets.

The second international example cited in cabinet papers, a scheme to reduce recidivism at Rikers Island Correctional Facility in New York, also failed to meet its target. It was announced in July this year that it too has been cancelled.

Inherent inefficiencies

The strongest local backing for Social Bonds comes from the New Zealand Initiative (a think-tank formed in 2012 when the NZ Institute merged with the Business Roundtable).

But even these right-wing lobbyists acknowledge that Social Bonds “involve multiple players, agreements and contracts, creating great complexity. As an example, the Peterborough SIB took 18 months to set up, and required the equivalent of 2.5 years of staff time and 300 hours of legal and specialist tax advice” – all in order to deliver a programme for just 936 people, which ultimately did not succeed.

This is not to mention the other private sector inefficiency – the need to divert a portion of funding away from service delivery in order to provide a profit for investors.

Finance minister Bill English has admitted that Social Bond schemes may end up costing taxpayers more.

Flawed pilot?

Although details are sketchy, there are signs that the government may be repeating some of the mistakes of its Charter Schools experiment.

Cabinet papers assure investors that “favourable terms [will be] offered by government as part of the pilot”. “Payments or contracts will be structured to ensure investors have sufficient incentive or obligation to ensure their funds remain in the services”.

In other words, it appears that the government may spend much more on the privatised model than on comparable public services, just as in Charter Schools. This would skew any evaluations of the pilot schemes against existing services.

To this end, $28.8 million has been allocated to Social Bonds pilot schemes in the 2015-16 Budget – at a time when other health services are facing cuts.

In addition, the pilots will only include “proven” services which already have “a track record of success”.

This will make it difficult to generalise the outcome of the pilots across the sector.

No independent health professionals have been consulted in the design of the pilots.

Unhealthy incentives

The cabinet papers acknowledge possible risks that “providers ‘cherry pick’ to avoid hard to reach users” and that “parties delivering outcomes manipulate results”.

This is a feature of many privatised services. Private surgical hospitals, for instance, tend to cherry pick the routine electives and leave the complex cases to the DHBs.

Private operators like Serco have been caught out repeatedly manipulating their performance data and covering up service failures, the world over.

These behaviours are incentivised when the profit motive is made central to service provision.

As the Dominion Post editorial on Social Bonds said: “There are obvious reasons for companies to massage the numbers, to push for lenient contracts, and to make worrying decisions in pursuit of targets. Social bonds smell like a gimmick. The pitfalls outweigh the prospects of a happy ending.”

Ignoring the evidence

Social bonds are touted as an innovative model for tackling “intractable” health problems.

But these problems have social roots. For example, Mental Health Foundation chief executive Judi Clements says, “The biggest issue people face trying to get into work is discrimination, and whether social bonds of themselves will enable that discrimination to be eliminated or reduced I think is a stretch.”

International evidence shows that the prevalence of problems like substance use and teenage pregnancy rates – also mentioned as possible targets for Social Bonds here – correlates with income inequality.

Rather than address this social determinant, Social Bonds reward institutions which are widely blamed for making it worse.

Overseas, the main private investors in Social Bonds are Goldman Sachs and Bank of America Merrill Lynch (John Key’s former employer), which both contributed to the Global Financial Crisis and the rising inequality which followed.

Here in New Zealand, the two firms looking to profit from Social Bonds are the ANZ Bank and Cranleigh, a merchant bank co-founded by National MP Andrew Bayly and his brother.

Neither of these companies are known for their efforts to reduce inequality, either.

Ideological tunnel vision

Social bonds are not the first reform of public services undertaken by the current government.

Privately owned and managed Charter Schools were established back in 2011, and in some cases are now nearing collapse. Prison management has been privatised, under the now-notorious Serco.

State houses are currently being privatised, and the prime minister has acknowledged a possible role for Serco.

He has also signalled the privatisation of parts of CYFS, and social development minister Anne Tolley said she had no problems with companies like Serco picking up contracts.

The fact that such a similar model is being used across widely varying sectors, and that reforms are being rushed through in quick succession, strongly suggests that the changes are not based on careful analysis of the specific needs of service users.

It looks a lot like a template of predetermined “solutions” is being placed over public services, regardless of their diverse characteristics and regardless of past failures.

The cabinet papers stress that “exit points” will be built into the Social Bonds schemes, allowing government to cancel contracts if goals of service improvement are not being met.

But as the crisis at Mt Eden Prison has demonstrated, admitting failure has a high political cost for the government. A month after catastrophic failures forced the Corrections Department to resume responsibility for running the prison, they still haven’t cancelled Serco’s contract.

This all adds to an appearance of tunnel vision, and an inability to contemplate alternatives to privatisation.

These are some of the reasons why the NZNO Mental Health Nurses Section supports the petition to Stop the privatisation of the mental health sector.

We talk a lot about the struggle (Voices of Women and Gender Minorities)

Soft is stronger than hard 2011

Soft is stronger than hard 2011

Article originally published in Fightback magazine’s special issue dedicated to paid radical writing by women and gender minorities.

By Sian Torrington, a queer /  hard / super femme /  brute who makes art, writing and performance.

We talk a lot about the struggle. Getting it down, keeping it alive. Of making space, and letting it through. Like it is a hole that we need to make. Like what we are dealing with is an animal which keeps changing shape. Sometimes it’s a big soft, needing gentle, shifting hands. Sometimes it’s a noisy yell which needs a  funnel. Sometimes you just have to know how far away from the microphone to stand.

Other times it’s a silence and your job is to fill it.

Other times, it’s a dead weight and no strength will lift it.

When it is hard, treat it like it doesn’t matter. Make a bad drawing. Treat it like you have all the time in the world for it to get born. Like there’s no deadlines, no pressure. It comes from underneath and eats time like air. Just when you’re ready, just whenever you’re ready.

Just, try to relax.

*******

I lost a tooth because the specialist cost too much. I couldn’t afford to hang on. It took two weeks to recover. Two weeks of unpaid leave. The body decides, there is no form.

Artists’ bodies are sensitive. Artists’ bodies rot like all the rest. I lost a tooth, and gained a gap that a pencil fits in.

************

The system you have invented for managing your life and sustaining it is as delicate and intricate as an eco system. It’s like one of your drawings where tiny things balance and reflect off some unlikely other thing. But there’s no kudos or status in this. Just anxiety that one piece will fall.

To get here, it takes all of me. No nets, no halfway and when you get cold I live in you like an animal saying

Crash,

Breathe.

Living without protection. Every decision you make is vital to the survival of every other branch. Just, keep growing, forming shelves where the most difficult piece holds in space. I have four accounts where I put; money for now, money for later, money for housing, money for eating. I move them around and try not to feel bad when I forget or mistake one for the other.  

How do you get to be loose under pressure? There’s always so much losing in it. You lose time, holidays, babies, a house, a proper job, success. You try to draw from the shoulder, to drop your arm.

The shoulders, the dog, the sand, the bust we are broke we are rumbles he says wow, then how do you climb and we reply yes, a club, yes, a blanket and still there is no protection but we talk, we tell, if it was yours I would keep it, keep it , keep it safe.

Making plans and ways to put bits with pieces, sell things, create contracts, grow silverbeet which survives every winter, squirrel away money. Say, I can make you a cup of tea at home.

A rehearsal and repeat, repeat repent, do something keep moving

I take notes on sifted piles, the body which can’t  keep up.

****

Let us be clear. When you feel defeated by being unable to change an employment system, make bread. Clear leaves. Make small incursions into the actual world which thanks you, which responds.

Your effort is valued by units of hours and minutes and ticking. Time operates differently here. All day can produce nothing, and the last half hour is the full slide. All day can produce nothing which tomorrow is the way through. Your four part time jobs allow you to do this. You chose this. You wanted this. You are stubborn. You haven’t lived in one house more than two years your entire adult life, because of this. This is your child, this is what you chose to birth, to bring to life. Just keep it alive.

Just try to relax. Don’t be afraid of failure. Try to forget the height of the stakes.

You are so, lucky. You are falling behind.

(your body cannot contain a rest.)

Everything stopped working, and so did the obvious. I waited, looking physically and really for you.

****

You have created a soft and delicate, strong and permeable space in which all of this makes sense. It is temporary and movable. In here you are able to work.

There’s no formula available, only guides we try to write ourselves. We pass them in code, in text, in glances. They are unclear. We find our allies and cling to each other in cold halls. If we can work it out, we can reproduce this, prove it, the good bits, we get to survive. Efficiency is working out the fastest way there. What is it that you want to do? How will be involved? How much will it cost? Riding is free; bend your body against the wind; make it airborne, make it sleek, keep it strong.

Sometimes I can only draw it and when I can’t I get full and it eats me, my relationship, my sex, my balance. There is no option I must keep this space though real estate goes up and up.

It is anti-capitalist to sit. To sit with it, whatever it is. Because it takes time, and does not consume.

**************************

And do they sell?

Even the tiniest are not sorry. I take them, they say how do we ever, they contain a kind of lowering I can’t stop.

You gotta be willing to get to dying before something you want cracks out. It will not be what you want. It will be just what you need, as you peer at it with all your languages asking what are you, ugly unwanted thing?

There is no compromise, find the breath, breathe in on it, submit, relent, pay attention, yield, hold on, never give up. Touched body grieved never breaking and remaking, it is beautiful, it is full of living.

Try to relax.

Things present, how you came through trying,

marks of love,

We are allowed to be here, because we paid money

We are allowed to be here, because we are part of the earth.

How you have held things 2013

How you have held things 2013

Chatting “Pasifika” and “Feminism” (Voices of Women and Gender Minorities)

Article originally published in Fightback magazine’s special issue dedicated to paid radical writing by women and gender minorities.

By Malia Grace. Inspired by recorded talanoa with Fetuolemoana Tamapeau, Gem Wilder & Malia Grace.

F: It’s really interesting how different and similar our experiences are. I can’t really get away with just looking like a palangi

M: I kinda can – gesturing towards three old skinny palangi men, reading newspaper in suits – at THAT table, I couldn’t.

F: Could anyone at that table? – we giggle – I haven’t really inherited hesitation in the same way a lot of our New Zealand-born Pasifika people have ya know; in terms of identifying as Pasifika; or not feeling Pasifika enough. I mean one thing that’s always struck me, like in my family, and how I was affirmed as Pasifika; is that I had never heard the term “plastic”

G looks at me and I know her pale looking Fijian-Maori 2 year old is on her mind

M: What?!

F: I’d never heard someone go “plastic Samoan” or “plastic brownie”

M: Really?!

F: Nope.

M: Kinder surprise?

F: Really?! Have you had that? It’s a ridiculous term. It’s a strategy that divides us and it’s all to do with colonisation, know what I mean?

M & G: Totally!

F: It’s what’s in the backdrop of us having to prove authenticity all the time in a way that palangi don’t have too.

M: I’ve only just recently stopped calling myself plastic.

F & G: Really?

M: Yeah – I feel myself blush – I have to say I never saw it as a super bad thing. The only times I’d find it a bad thing was when I was at Island funerals and functions, but even then I’d be quite aware that even though I’m “plastic” in comparison to them, those people judging me are surely pretty “plastic” in comparison to whoever is in their head, ya know? So I always just thought of it as being closer to both worlds.

F: It’s like we’re all plastic, kinda thing, which is not really what we wanna be saying. It’s more like –  she pauses – we wanna be like, “We’re all Pasifika” and some of the conversations have been gravitating towards “We’re all plastic” instead, which is not productive.

M: Yeah totally. That changed for me going to university, doing Pacific Studies, reading Epeli Hau’ofa. Before that, I had even enrolled as New Zealand European with no indicator of Tongan.

F: I can’t ever imagine being in a situation, in my whole life; where that could happen.

Suddenly I feel very aware of the different shades at the table. G interrupts my thought –

G: I always felt internally connected to my Fijian side, despite being white. Going to uni gave me access to feminism. I had gone through high school and all that; before, not identifying as a feminist.

M: I don’t know there was much on feminism at uni for me. I think being able to get away with being both brown or white in different settings though, helped me understand differences between things at a young age. I remember the Tongan alphabet poster being next to the English alphabet in my house and trying to match up the letters with each other, asking “If that one is ‘B’?” and “Is that one ‘C’?” Realising they didn’t match up and instead, that they exist just as very different things, is something, some people just don’t seem to learn. I definitely feel privileged being in that knowingness.

G: Yeah, I find it really comforting going to spaces where I’m not battling that kinda – searching for words – I say “ignorance” but I don’t mean it in a put down way, I just mean it as an absence of knowledge, so when I go to things like Kava Club/Chop Suey Hui or doing the Maori & Pasifika Creative Writing paper, where you don’t have to start off fighting through that lack of knowledge, and teaching, and waiting for that catch up to happen, it’s so nice to be around people that get it.

We all sit nodding, smiling at our own experiences of these places. F looks at us both, checking if anyone else wants the air space before she proceeds –

F: It’s more palangi situations actually, I think – referring to uncomfortable spaces – especially not being straight as well. There was a trend, this idea, and to me it’s a myth; of brown people being anti-gay or inherently homophobic because they’re inherently “church-y”. Yeah, so kind of dealing with people’s perceptions and that they really take those myths on board and believe them. But it’s something that I’ve always NOT believed because Pasifika isn’t one-dimensional to me. So its like “why are you focusing on that?” There are Pacific people that aren’t cool with it, just like there are palangi people that aren’t cool with it. She jokes –  It’s just that we look more notice-able because we’re better looking – the three of us fill the room with big Island laughter.

G: I can’t think of a place where the two [Pasifika & Feminism] are uncomfortable and I think that is just because I’m more intrinsically feminist rather than activist feminist so its with me no matter what space I’m navigating. I think with intersectional feminism – like that whole thing of the “white feminist” having become a joke – the feminist groups I belong to, use that term and I totally understand what it means, but it’s always white women that are using it. They’re totally onto it women as well, but there just seems to be a real disconnect from their own privilege there.

M: That’s something I think we’re quite lucky in because of our Pasifika status, we get skilled at the whole two-worlds negotiation cause we’re constantly, daily, right now even, positioning ourselves, and making that position known.

F:  And that’s so important aye?  – nodding

M: Referring back to the two spaces though, I probably feel more that way about my Pasifika identity than my feminist identity. I grew up with mostly boys, so I sometimes think I’m feminist out of survival. Until very recently, I still battled the male opinion in my head that comments on my clothes etc – I take a moment to think – I get quite self conscious of my brown in spaces like Kava Club/Chop Suey Hui/ Maori & Pasifika Writers things, cause I always feel that there’s an expectation from people. Like people expect me to know Tongan things or make jokes I don’t understand. I kinda have to position myself as like “Na sorry, I don’t actually know much at all” Cause I don’t feel like I have much Tongan knowingness.

G: Yeah, I come into spaces, like “I’m here to be educated” but also because I’m white I feel like – pausing – people know I belong and that I do actually get it, and I’m not here as a tourist ya know?

M: How do you negotiate that?

G: I don’t, I can’t, I just have to keep going and keep learning and talking to people and eventually I won’t be seen as the “oh who is that white girl?” As I learn and connect to Pasifika culture more, I’m sorta naturally drawn to the feminists within that culture so as I come into my Pasifika culture, I’m coming into it seeking those people and those stories.

F: That’s what it is – her finger points in the air – our Pasifika – fumbling on words – what I was tryna get to earlier, of how like, I don’t see my feminist and Pasifika identity as separate. It’s because our indigenous knowledges already have those ideas networked into the way we be. Its just not labelled the same thing as what palangi do. We have our own ways of navigating “feminism” and other “ism’s” differently. They’re completely already networked into how we do things.

M:  Yeah – nodding and rushing through a mouthful of food-  that makes me think of something a friend said to me recently about secret knowledges. PhD/degree etc are all ways of keeping secret knowledge exclusive and protecting it she said. I wonder if our silence on certain topics works in the same way?  

Kaitāia Airport occupation statement

ngati kahu sovereign notion

Five people were arrested on September 9th, ending a 28-hour occupation of Kaitāia Airport by sovereignty activists.

Although this has been widely reported, the reasoning behind the protest has not been reported in detail. The government’s offered sale of land to iwi in the region neglected original owners Ngāti Kahu.

In an interview with Waatea News, occupation leader Wikitana Popata described this as a “divide and conquer” tactic. Negotiator Margaret Mutu similarly explained in an interview that their dispute is not with other far North iwi, but with the government. Mutu underlined that Ngāti Kahu “never ceded sovereignty.”

We republish a statement released by occupation organisers on September 8th.

Owners Repossess Kaitāia Airport

The owners of the lands on which Kaitaia Airport and Rangiāniwaniwa Kura have been built repossessed their lands today. The government took the land from Kataraina Mātenga in the 1940s and is now attempting to sell it to a neighbouring iwi.

The government has never owned Rangiāniwaniwa – it belongs to the descendants of Kataraina Mātenga, the Erstich whānau. They still live on the lands they have left at Rangiāniwaniwa and are clear that they are the only people the government can return this land to.

The government took the land in the early 1940s as part of its World War II effort, promising to return it at the end of the war. They have refused to do that despite extensive negotiations. The Erstich whānau has been asking and waiting patiently for over 70 years. The government decision to sell the stolen properties has resulted in the family taking the only recourse available to them which is, repossessing their lands.

The Erstich whānau are Patukōraha hapū of Ngāti Kahu and are closely related to Ngāi Tohianga hapū also of Ngāti Kahu. The Erstich whānau, Patukōraha and Ngāi Tohianga have the support of all the hapū of Ngāti Kahu in the action they are taking to ensure that their land is returned to them and not someone else who is not mana whenua at Rangiāniwaniwa.

It is for the Erstich whānau, Patukōraha and Ngāi Tohianga to decide whether the neighbouring iwi, Ngāi Takoto, has any role to play in Rangiāniwaniwa, not the government. The government is being deliberately divisive in selling Rangiāniwaniwa to Ngāi Takoto when it knows the land belongs to the Erstich whānau.