Gerry Eckhoff: The past

“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.” (F Scott Fitzgerald 1896-1940)

The recent opinion piece from Anaru Eketone, associate professor of Otago University challenging the sovereignty of New Zealand cannot pass as having any credibility.

It is astonishing that Dr Eketone seems to believe that the question of sovereignty over New Zealand is still an open question.

It’s not.

Dr Eketone states that he believes Maori became independent in 1835 after a declaration of Independence by some northern tribes. Independent from or of whom Dr Eketone? Each other?

Noted historian, the late Dr Michael King in his authoritative History of NZ wrote “The declaration of Independence had no constitutional status. An official in the Foreign Office in London at the time referred to it as “silly and unauthorised”.

One possible explanation is that the northern tribes sought independence from each other as many tribes were still warring with each other. Others sought protection with the British who also recognised the French connection threat in Akaroa from one Baron De Theirry in 1837. While the threat from the French claiming New Zealand for themselves was considered real at the time, the good baron ended his days teaching music in Auckland.

One way or another Dr Eketone needs to explain how it is possible for a government to govern without sovereignty (his words) these past 180 years.

He seems to further believe that due to Maori appointing their own King in 1857, that action conferred an equal status with the British monarchy, who in fact did not govern anything other than by decree of the British Parliament.

Here in New Zealand the Governor General -on behalf of King Charles - is required to sign off all legislation - not the Maori Queen.

Dr King also believed that sovereignty in 1840 meant “mana” to Maori whereas the concept of whole country governance was of lessor importance to them.

Whatever the belief of that time, the reality of our legal and constitutional arrangements today must not be subjugated to an interpretated history by activist academics or judges. The past injustices cannot be resolved by believing that a return to the old ways will somehow ensure a better and more prosperous future.

New Zealand is in some real danger of becoming a state within a state if the radicals within Maoridom, aided and abetted by many within academia - would have their way. Their own political, economic, legal, cultural institutions would be ungovernable. Presumably aided by academia and financed by compulsion.

If Te Pati Maori’s recent performances are anything to go by, they are even likely to lose support from their most ardent backers.

The ability to rationalise the past and its relevance to the future and to do so without prejudice, is essential. Nor should we ever luxuriate in our shared but questionable history, which few would regard as ideal but the past holds clear messages which mark out the only pathway forward.

No one can serve two masters - one to erase, the other to reclaim. Neither resolves our shared history in any way.

The UN statement on the rights of indigenous peoples makes no reference to so called indigenous people’s obligations to the rest of us nor a qualification of who is indigenous.

It is estimated 170,000 people of Maori heritage now live permanently in Australia. Neither Te Pati Maori nor the UN offers any explanation as to their role, rights and obligations after living for generations in Australia and possibly becoming citizens of Australia.

Nor has the contribution we have all made to these islands with peace, wealth and security ever been acknowledged by those who would reallocate our sovereignty.

Our established sovereignty of some 180 years has taken NZ to a first world status. Political leadership therefore must not accept anything less than the strengthening of a clear, inviolable written or unwritten constitution. Cutting and pasting our sovereignty with the bits that suit radical Maori offers only separatism and division.

Curiously, New Zealand along with Britain are two of the few counties without a written constitution but we have statues and laws by which we are governed.

Currently, the political self-harm as promoted by Te Pati Maori will likely condemn our collective futures to another Palestinian type of tragedy. The past offers no choice. The future does but depends on learning from our past and embracing decisions made collectively, regardless of race or background.

Like it or not Associate Professor Anaru Eketone of not very much at all - we belong here and we belong to this land. We will never accept “being borne ceaselessly back into the past”

Gerry Eckhoff is a former councillor on the Otago Regional Council and MP.