Aboriginal Rights and Land Claims in New Zealand

Tamati Waka Nene had been closely associated with the Wesleyan missionaries in the Hokianga in the 1830s. A year or so before the treaty signing he had become a Christian. This portrait is by Gottfried Lindauer. Courtesy of Alexander Turnbull Library with permission of Auckland City Art Gallery.

Canada is not the only commonwealth country addressing aboriginal self-government and land-claims issues. In Australia the commonwealth government passed national aboriginal land-rights legislation in 1993 following a High Court decision disavowing the doctrine of Terra Nullius— that Australia was unoccupied when the British arrived in the late eighteenth century. This decision and subsequent legislation provide a framework for aboriginal Australians to gain title to land they use and occupy or that has special significance to them. Constitutional renewal—to coincide with Australia's centenary in 2001—provides another means for them to further their rights and interests.

The situation in New Zealand is also similar to that in Canada. British authorities signed a treaty with the Maori in 1840, the terms, conditions, and purpose of which continue to be discussed and interpreted. While aboriginal Australians look to new agreements to provide for their rights and interests, New Zealand Maori look to the implementation and renewal of their historic treaty to do the same.

Both New Zealand and Australia are well aware of Canada's history of making treaties with its aboriginal peoples and are particularly interested in the modern treaties concluded in Yukon and the Northwest Territories. We have much to learn from one another, but our information exchanges are haphazard, done on a shoestring, and seem to be dependent on the personal interests and commitment of a few. Our academics occasionally work together—sometimes facilitated by the Commonwealth Geographic Bureau— and aboriginal leaders occasionally visit one another to provide encouragement. For the benefit of all three countries, we need to commit ourselves to information exchange and to better organize our sharing of ideas and experience.

Canada should seek to put aboriginal rights and interests on the agenda for the meeting of commonwealth leaders later this year in Wellington, New Zealand. And Prime Minister Chretien, who has noted the long-term economic and social importance of the Pacific Rim to Canada, should propose ways and means for commonwealth countries—particularly Canada, Australia, and New Zealand—to exchange information on aboriginal issues.

This issue of Northern Perspectives on the Treaty of Waitangi promotes such an information exchange. Peter Jull, an author well-known to our readers, makes the case for greater attention to comparative public policy research with emphasis on aboriginal issues. Claudia Orange examines the issues associated with the Treaty of Waitangi and makes specific reference to the different interpretations given the treaty. Finally, the Honourable Maurice McTigue, New Zealand High Commissioner to Canada, outlines the perspective of the Government of New Zealand.