Multiple sites of Māori political participation

The Waxing and Waning of the Politics of Authenticity: The Situation of Urban‐Based Māori through the Lens of Municipal Politics

“…Since the 1990s, according to Chris Barton (“The Long Road to Settlement,” New Zealand Herald , February 5, 2011), most tribal organizations have adopted what is known as “the fast track”—this option means bypassing the tribunal to engage in direct negotiations with the government. The acceleration of the Treaty of Waitangi settlements process produced “a proliferation of government‐recognised tribal organisations to receive and manage returned assets” (Bargh , 447). They work alongside Māori Land Trusts and Māori Incorporations that manage business ventures on Māori land.…”

“…Recent years have seen these iwi (tribal) leaders becoming successful and more vocal, for example through initiatives such as the Iwi Chairs Forum created in 2005, which has “become a body with which government ministers discuss nationally significant economic and political matters” (Bargh , 447; see also Katene ; Rata , ). As Bargh mentions, “Māori organisations constantly engage politically and legally with the Crown”: they “provide input at a parliamentary level to select committees and seek the opinion of the Waitangi Tribunal and the courts in attempts to have ownership and resources use rights clarified” (2013, 448; see also Belgrave ).…”

“…While the IMSB was not what most Māori were looking for—generally speaking, Māori wanted actual seats on the council (Sullivan and Toki , 16), as confirmed in interviews with five Māori individuals involved in a formal capacity in local government (Bargh , 451) —many groups and leaders have chosen to participate . Tame Te Rangi, the iwi selection chairman, said that they had to deal with the choice made by the government (Yvonne Tahana, “Unelected Maori board ‘outrageous and unfair’,” New Zealand Herald , October 7, 2010).…”

“…You're going to have teething problems because there's no manual” (Yvonne Tahana, “Review: The power and the mana,” New Zealand Herald , November 24, 2012). As for Glen Wilcox, in a 2012 interview with Bargh (, 453), the mana whenua representative and member of several Auckland Council committees emphasized the capacity for neutrality of the IMSB—its apolitical character compared to the likely capacity of actual seats. Only time will tell what the future of entities such as statutory boards will be—but if one thing is certain, it is that Māori will not take a step backwards: they will continue to assert their right as tangata whenua (indigenous people) to have a real and broader say in local politics, including in increasingly diversified urban centres, and will explore a whole variety of strategies to achieve their goals.…”

“… Bargh and Otter () point out significant limitations to the “progressive spaces” made possible under neoliberalism. Neoliberal policies are imbued with long‐standing genealogies of colonization, which pressure indigenous people to comply with specific ways of being and relating to each other (see also Bargh ; Belgrave : 204–5; McCormack ; Poata‐Smith ). Durie sounds an alarm, speaking of the “fragility of the principle of self‐determination” (, 38) under the present circumstances.…”