B.+CULTURAL+CONTRASTS


 * [|MAORI SOCIETY]**

1.__**THINK PAIR SHARE**__  Three questions are posed. Students are asked to discuss answers with a neighbour.
 * Learning activities**

 I have to say I like the clock __#|partners__ because it gives a chance to get up and move around, gives variety of partner and some accountablility - you tend to be looser with friends and less accountable

 2. **__Two concentric circles__**. Inner facing outer. Outer facing inner.. There can be 5 questions with time for each to answer and then the pairs discuss.  The circle can move one step to the right or left if you want variation. Can be done in a line as well.

 3. **__Concept circles__** - work well if the words are selected carefully. A concept is a big idea that generates lots of examples so government might lead to 'authority', 'chieftainship' or even 'kawanatanga'

=//Sir Douglas Graham//: A layman's guide to understanding customary title=

By Sir Douglas Graham 4:00 AM Wednesday Jul 8, 2009 Over the next few months the Government will have to decide what it's going to do about the foreshore and seabed. The ministerial review panel recommends the repeal of the act and that seems a foregone conclusion. Once done, however, the Government has the choice of letting the courts decide whether a customary title exists, or trying to do a deal with iwi now. As there are clearly conflicting views on when a customary title exists and what it is, going to the court for a ruling seems the most sensible action. The matter first arose when the court ruled that because the Crown had never extinguished customary title, the Maori Land Court could consider whether a customary title existed in a small area in the South Island. The court added that it thought it would be difficult for a claimant to prove a customary title. Within hours some representatives of iwi, ignoring the court's note of caution entirely, claimed that because iwi had never sold the foreshore or seabed they still owned it all. Article continues below Even the ministerial review panel seems to accept that customary title, if not extinguished, exists by default. However, other legal experts say that that is not right and that iwi have to prove that the customary title exists. It's no wonder, then, that the public is confused. Throw in the fact that these rights are only available to Maori and the activists and the rednecks are having a field day. So here is a primer's guide to customary title as I understand it, based largely on Canadian and Australian court decisions which are likely to be followed here. The common law has always recognised the right of indigenous people to carry on practising their customs. These may be non-territorial customary rights such as fishing and hunting, or a territorial customary title where they actually lived. Not all Maori have the same customary rights. Inland Maori do not have sea fishing rights. So they are dependent on what customary activity was being carried out. If Maori hunted with spears, are they still restricted to that? No - hunters can use modern equipment while exercising their customary right to hunt. The Crown had the ultimate radical title to all land. But a customary title is "parasitical" to the Crown's rights until it is lost. No. Customary title is unique and quite unlike freehold land. It is normally communally owned and exists to permit the indigenous people to practise their customary activities on it. My freehold title is a Crown grant. If a customary title is proved to exist, minerals and trees belong to them. But they cannot do anything inconsistent with the customary activity, such as strip-mine the land. Maori have to prove it exists by demonstrating on the balance of probabilities that an iwi was in exclusive possession of the land at 1840 and have continued to practise customary activities on it ever since. In Australia a spiritual association may suffice. In the 1860s The Native Land Act enabled Maori to convert their customary title to a Crown grant often to only 10 members of the iwi. This facilitated land sales and broke down communal ownership. Relatively little land remains in customary title today. In Canada, treaties were entered into swapping customary title over large tracts of territory for small reservations. Once proved to exist, a customary title can be lost by abandonment, by surrender to the Crown, or by extinguishment by Parliament. While it is a customary title it is inalienable. Abandonment is similar to a failure to exercise ahi kaa. If extinguished by statute the intention to extinguish must be clear and usually some compensation is due. No. Once lost, it is gone forever because the law only recognises customary rights that are still in existence. Not really. The Treaty imposes duties on both parties. The Crown has to act fairly and has fiduciary duties to Maori. But no customary right can be asserted if it is inconsistent with Crown sovereignty. At the end of the day Parliament decides what the law will be. It would be very difficult for any iwi to show that in 1840 they were in exclusive possession of the seabed, particularly as much of it was not under New Zealand's jurisdiction until long after that. Nor is it likely they could show they have maintained possession of the seabed close to shore since. It's possible there may be remote areas of foreshore from low to high watermark where it could be proved. Yes, but the Maori Land Court would have to order that and the law tries to prevent the alienation of any customary land. The court may decline to follow overseas legal precedent and find that some iwi have customary rights to the foreshore and even the seabed. The Government would have to sit down with Maori to discuss what should be done. If it decided to extinguish any rights it would most likely have to pay compensation. No one seems to be suggesting that whatever happens. The court might find that Maori have to prove a customary title and are unable to do so. That would be the end of the matter. That will be for the parties to decide. But there are problems assuming what the law is and it might be better for all involved if a court ruling was obtained so that both sides understand what rights and obligations each has. =Paul Holmes: Waitangi Day a complete waste= By [|Paul Holmes] **5:30 AM** Saturday Feb 11, 2012
 * 1) Share
 * 2) [|Print]
 * 1) [|Print]
 * What are customary rights and a customary title?**
 * Who has them?**
 * Who actually owns New Zealand?**
 * Is a customary title like my freehold title?**
 * What rights go with it?**
 * Do Maori have to prove a customary title or is it theirs by default?**
 * If Maori owned all the land before British settlement, how did the Crown deal with customary title?**
 * How is a customary title lost?**
 * Can it ever be regained?**
 * Does the fact that we have the Treaty of Waitangi make any difference?**
 * Is it possible iwi could establish a customary title to the foreshore or seabed?**
 * Could it be turned into freehold land?**
 * What are the risks to the Crown by going to court?**
 * What would happen then?**
 * Would the public be stopped from going to the beach?**
 * What are the risks to Maori by going to court?**
 * What would happen then?**
 * Is it better for the Government and Maori to try to work out something now?**
 * **Sir Douglas Graham is a former Minister of Treaty Negotiations.**

Security and Maori wardens grapple with a protester on Waitangi Day. Picture / APN
Waitangi Day produced its usual hatred, rudeness, and violence against a clearly elected Prime Minister from a group of hateful, hate-fuelled weirdos who seem to exist in a perfect world of benefit provision. This enables them to blissfully continue to believe that New Zealand is the centre of the world, no one has to have a job and the Treaty is all that matters. I'm over Waitangi Day. It is repugnant. It's a ghastly affair. As I lie in bed on Waitangi morning, I know that later that evening, the news will show us irrational Maori ghastliness with spitting, smugness, self-righteousness and the usual neurotic Maori politics, in which some bizarre new wrong we've never thought about will be lying on the table. This, we will have to address and somehow apply these never-defined principles of the Treaty of Waitangi because it is, apparently, the next big resentment. There'll be lengthy discussion, we'll end up paying the usual millions into the hands of the Maori aristocracy and God knows where it'll go from there. Well, it's a bullshit day, Waitangi. It's a day of lies. It is loony Maori fringe self-denial day. It's a day when everything is addressed, except the real stuff. Never mind the child stats, never mind the national truancy stats, never mind the hopeless failure of Maori to educate their children and stop them bashing their babies. No, it's all the Pakeha's fault. It's all about hating whitey. Believe me, that's what it looked like the other day. John Key speaks bravely about going there again. He should not go there again. It's over. Forget it. It is too awful and nasty and common. It is no more New Zealand day than Halloween. Our national day is now Anzac Day. Anzac Day is a day of honour, and struggle, bravery and sacrifice. A day on which we celebrate the periods when our country embraced great efforts for international freedom and on which we weep for those who served and for those who died. I wouldn't take my three great uncles who died at Gallipoli and in France - Reuben, Mathew and Leonard - to Waitangi Day and expect them to believe this was our national day. I wouldn't take my father, veteran of El Alamein and Cassino, there. Nor would I take my Uncle Ken who died in a Wellington bomber, then try and tell him Waitangi Day was anything but filth. No, if Maori want Waitangi Day for themselves, let them have it. Let them go and raid a bit more kai moana than they need for the big, and feed themselves silly, speak of the injustices heaped upon them by the greedy Pakeha and work out new ways of bamboozling the Pakeha to come up with a few more millions. When you start doing talkback or any kind of opinion broadcasting in New Zealand you learn that certain groups are loony, highly vocal, highly organised and they never rest. The second looniest are the anti-fluoride crowd. But leave them aside for today. The looniest crowd in this country, the most irrational and bullying are La Leche, the breast feeding fascists who've become involved in the most bizarre controversy I can remember. Breast feeding is all they think about. The row actually started with Piri Weepu filming a public health commercial in which he's seen bottle-feeding his daughter who has an allergy to dairy and the message is that she will grow up in a non-smoking house. That was the message, for God's sake. And it's a nice image. Dad, an All Black hero, Maori of the Year, bottle-feeding his little girl. Many mothers would have appreciated seeing a baby being bottle-fed. Others appreciated that it showed a man involved in an intense part of nurturing baby. One or two mothers came forward this week and spoke about how they've been monstered by bullying women in supermarkets who berated them for buying formula. Most mothers want to breast feed, I'm sure. No one disputes this. Some simply can't. And in the case of Piri's little girl, she can't handle dairy. But the hysterics saw a man, a bottle and a baby and were about to erupt. Never mind the positives, the non-smoking household, the All Black tenderly feeding his little girl. There was man and a baby and a bottle and it was the crime of the century. Take it off, screamed La Leche, obviously. And suddenly the segment disappeared. The chief executive of the Health Sponsorship Council, which made the ad, is Iain Potter. Mr Potter says the council received overwhelming opposition to the bottle-feeding clip. I bet it did. And I bet I know who from. Iain Potter should show some common sense, grow some balls, and learn to stand up to a highly organised band of intolerant people. Overseas, just to change the subject and keep an elegant internationalism in the column, can you believe Russia's and China's intransigence at the United Nations Security Council on the matter of Syria? So now Syria will grind on in broken, abject misery for the rest of the year until they shoot the despot. I can't figure old rat-face Bashir. He must know that he's going the way of Gaddafi, with a refuge in a filthy sewer pipe for a while before the bullet in the head, being towed backwards through the streets to public display in a meat locker. He's married to a very beautiful British woman, Bashir, a real English rose. One report suggested she and her family had tried to leave Syria last week but the convoy had been seen and turned back. She must know what's coming. Armageddon is what's coming. One dreads to imagine what they'll do to her pretty face. By [|Paul Holmes] =Hone Harawira: Paul Holmes, Maori have plenty to protest= By Hone Harawira **5:30 AM** Wednesday Feb 15, 2012
 * It's time to cancel our repugnant national holiday**
 * Note:** The comment function has been disabled from this article.

Protest is as much a part of Waitangi as the waka. Photo / Natalie Slade
Paul Holmes' column in Saturday's //Weekend Herald// was a nasty article from somebody who must have known it would hurt a lot of people. It was mean and mean-spirited. It was deliberately offensive and uncaring, and though he might claim that it was written to spark debate, at the end of the day it was just mean and nasty. The way he writes it, Maori have no right to protest on Waitangi Day. We should be full of happy, happy, joy, joy. "You know what I mean Hori - like back in the 60s when you Maoris were all so happy! Remember? When you could all play the guitar, and you all sang in such beautiful harmony, and smiled a lot, and drove trucks and bulldozers, and nobody talked about the Treaty, and none of you ever complained about anything. Why can't you be like that again?" Well ... the world has moved on quite a bit since those days, but one thing that hasn't changed that much is protest, and in case you didn't know it Mr Holmes, Maori have been protesting at Waitangi for quite some time. Yes, there were protests at Waitangi this year, but did you know Mr Holmes, that there were protests at Waitangi in 1840 ... before they even signed the Treaty! What? What on earth could they have had to protest about back then, I hear you say? Well, a lot of our tupuna seriously doubted that the Governor and his cronies could be trusted, that's why. Ring a bell, Mr Holmes? And quite a lot of them thought that Pakeha just wanted to steal our land. And they didn't think a treaty would stop untrustworthy Pakeha traders from pushing gut-rot alcohol into Maori communities. And they didn't think a treaty could make dirty, stinking, Pakeha whalers, sailors, thieves and brigands wash more than three times a year. And some of my tupuna didn't like the nasty way that early Europeans treated Maori kids - you know, telling them to get out of the way, telling them to shut up, hitting them ... And some of them were protesting because they thought that Pakeha only wanted a treaty to stall for time while they brought their military in to steal what they couldn't get honestly. Ring a bell Mr Holmes? You see Mr Holmes, back in 1840, Maori owned the whole of Aotearoa, and although life wasn't exactly a bunch of roses, we had strong and vibrant societies dotted all round the country, until you guys introduced the gun, the Bible and the pox of course, and wreaked havoc and devastation like we'd never seen before. So perhaps you can understand, Mr Holmes, that 172 years ago Maori weren't exactly jumping for joy at the prospect of signing a deal with an empire that had already signed and broken treaties all around the world. But we did, and the record suggests that our tupuna did so for all the right reasons - to protect their lands and their forests and their rivers and their resources, and to provide a solid future for their mokopuna. But things didn't quite work out that way did they? That's why we have a Treaty settlement process, with all its flaws and its failings and expectations, on both sides. But Mr Holmes, did you know that iwi must accept that their Treaty settlements are full and final even though they're not even allowed to claim land that was actually stolen? And can you explain why the Government is okay bailing out a failed (Pakeha) finance company down south to the tune of $1.7 billion, but doesn't want to pay Maori more than $1.4 billion for 63 million acres of dubiously acquired land and resources worth tens of billions of dollars? When you stack the facts up like that, it's not hard to see that there's not a lot to make Maori want to smile and clap is there Mr Holmes? And yes, life isn't just about the Treaty (even though your article was all about Waitangi Day). Maori are also part of the broader fabric of our society. But did you know Mr Holmes, that in terms of health, welfare, education, employment, housing and justice, Maori statistics are still worse than everyone else in the country? Not exactly something to wave pom-poms at is it? Those are just the facts Mr Holmes, but Waitangi Day is more than just facts. So I'd also like you to know that along with a whole lot of other people (Maori and Pakeha), I enjoy going to Waitangi every year. I enjoy the company, I enjoy the politics (both the Maori stuff and the Pakeha stuff), I enjoy the banter, I enjoy the people (both Maori and Pakeha), I enjoy having the kuia tell me they love me even when they're telling me off, I enjoy watching the kids playing sport, I enjoy the kapa haka groups, I enjoy the kai, I enjoy the march up to the top marae, I enjoy the church service, I enjoy seeing people I haven't seen in a while, I enjoy the occasion ... and yes Mr Holmes, I even enjoy the protest, because protest is every bit a part of Waitangi as anything else. Waitangi Day is our National Day Mr Holmes. It is rightly commemorated in many different ways in many different parts of the country, but it was at Waitangi that a group of people chose to sign a Treaty that was to be the foundation of our nation, and it is to Waitangi that we rightly return every year to see how well we're doing. It's not always going to be strawberries and cream, but it will always be a part of who we are. Maybe I'll see you up there next year, Mr Holmes. .**
 * MP Hone Harawira is the leader of the Mana Party