OPINION: While National demands debate, the Mori Party argues such a debate would only ever suit the majority.

STUART SMITH: There is no doubt that the Mori language has a significant place in New Zealand. I like using Mori place names, and I am an enthusiastic student of te reo. I take regular classes, as is my individual choice, but I might add my ability does not match my enthusiasm.

However, I am well aware that not everyone shares my enthusiasm for learning languages nor sees the role of te reo exactly as I do.

Ricky Wilson/Stuff

Kaikura MP Stuart Smith is concerned that moves towards co-governance are happening without democratic process.

In the past few months, there has been an increasing spotlight placed on significant changes to how our Government enacts the Crown responsibility to uphold the Treaty of Waitangi.

READ MORE:* The contentious He Puapua plan explained* The Detail: What is He Puapua, and why is it making headlines?* Let's not get tied in knots over the little that divides us* What Te Tiriti means for 2021 - and why it's more important than ever

While there are those who vehemently support the notion of co-governance and, of course, those who oppose it, it is my opinion that most New Zealanders fall into a third group. This group is more concerned with the lack of transparency from the Government in implementing co-governance policies without consultation or engagement with the whole of New Zealand.

National Party Leader Judith Collins has been labelled a racist by the Mori Party for bringing this conversation to the table and inviting Kiwis to have their say on these matters.

My view is that asking legitimate questions about the future of our country is not racist.

LAWRENCE SMITH/Stuff

Leader of the National Party, Judith Collins and her deputy, Shane Reti, attend the launch of their new Demand the Debate campaign on Carbine Road in Auckland.

Parliamentarians are voted in by the people and work for the people. If we sit back, dont ask questions, and let the Government advance what are pretty radical changes, without advocating for adequate consultation, then we are not doing our jobs properly.

There is a particular change that, while seemingly nominal, has sparked some controversy; the de facto changing of New Zealands name to Aotearoa New Zealand by the Government and in the media.

Now, I am not seeking to make a judgement call about whether we should change our name or not. That is neither here nor there. I am simply giving voice to the argument that perhaps before the shift began to be put in motion, New Zealanders themselves should have been consulted.

It is presumptuous and disrespectful to make a decision of such cultural importance for the country without engaging all who live there.

David Walker/Stuff

The George Hotel in Park Avenue, Christchurch, displays the five proposed flag options during the 2015 referendum.

Sir John Key had the courage to stand by his convictions and let New Zealanders decide whether we should change our flag. No matter where you stood on the issue, you still had the opportunity to have a say. Sir John lost that debate when New Zealand voted to retain the existing flag, and he accepted this verdict.

Arguably changing the name of the country is even more significant than changing the flag, and it is my belief that the right thing for the Labour Government to do is to advance an open conversation on this.

For some people, for example those who have represented or fought for New Zealand, there is a very strong connect with our existing name. For others, the te reo name Aotearoa holds greater significance.

As I see it, there is no right or wrong perspective. However, it is wrong for a public service and Government to decide a way forward with no regard for how New Zealanders think or feel about it.

Supplied

Mori Party co-leader Rawiri Waititi says Smith will be left behind if he will not embrace a Te Tiriti centric Aotearoa.

RAWIRI WAITITI: I want to mihi to MP Smiths opinion piece for not only giving his view but also allowing the opportunity for reply. Not only does the piece make mention of Te Paati Mori (the Mori Party), but it also makes mention of the changes being made to uphold our obligation to Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Take a deep breath, perhaps a gaze outside to clear your mind. Then ask yourself this - have we really, ever upheld Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the first place?

You see, the document has been around for 181 years but still Mori remain worse off when it comes to health statistics, dying seven years younger. We are worse off when it comes to educational achievement, homelessness and incarceration, the list goes on.

KATHRYN GEORGE/STUFF

Stuff's NZ Made/N Nu Treni project: When the Treaty of Waitangi was signed, Mori owned more than 66 million acres of land. By 1975, almost 97 per cent had been sold or taken.

The intergenerational effects of these outcomes for Mori are engrained from kaumatua (elders) to mokopuna (grandchildren), except now there is a new horizon on the rise the rise of a Te Tiriti centric Aotearoa, the changing of the tides.

I applaud MP Smiths quest in taking up te reo Mori and using Mori place names, however, demanding a debate that Mori have never really been part of to determine the outcomes best for us, will only ever suit the majority. Demanding a debate will only keep Mori as second-class citizens on their own whenua (land).

Te Tiriti o Waitangi was never about the democratic process in this country, it was always about rowing our waka alongside each other.

This is not about change, this is about the return to the true intention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi as consented by our tpuna (ancestors). Sharing of the whenua for the greater good of both tangata whenua (people of the land) and tangata tiriti (people of the treaty), moving together in a Te Tiriti centric Aotearoa.

Mori TV

Mori youth are the key to ending high Mori prison population numbers believes Justice Sir Joe Williams. (Video first published in May 2021)

Its also not about race. It should, however, be all about our right. Nine times out of 10, Mori have never been involved in the debate and the creation of systems and solutions suited for us.

But lets also not be afraid, because as Kura Kaupapa, Khanga Reo and Whnau Ora have proven when Mori are given the opportunity to create solutions for us, we all succeed.

You can feel the change in the air, you can read the messages and posts from tangata tiriti on social media, you hear it on the street change is occurring.

STACY SQUIRES

With the support of a Te Ora Hou Whanau Ora navigator, Dave and Joanne Conrad and their children have settled into school, work and a home.

This is not about inciting hatred, division and dare I say it, apartheid these words dont belong to us. This is all about living up to the expectations of Te Tiriti as signed 181 years ago in Waitangi.

Perhaps MP Smiths identification of the third group of people has been wrongly mistaken for those who arent afraid of that new sunrise and change in the tide those embracing and committed to a true Tiriti centric Aotearoa.

So my question to MP Smith, and yourself is, as the next sunrise occurs and at the changing of the tide what will you do? Will you go with the sunrise into a new tomorrow and so naturally as tides change, or will you be left behind, in the archaic dark day and age and struggle to stay afloat against the changing tide?

Perhaps youre already living in the aspirations of a Tiriti centric Aotearoa nau mai, haere mai.

See the original post:

'Aotearoa New Zealand': What if it went to a vote? - Stuff.co.nz