Article 6 and Carbon Credit Denial: We’re More Trumpy Than We Admit.

I’ve been watching the events at COP25 in Madrid, as always, am very proud of those representing our Indigenous interests. In particular I am noting Article 6 of the Paris Agreement featuring strongly in the media and wanted to send a shout out to all who are raising their voices on this issue because it’s one that makes me sick with worry.

Seeing it pop up so much has also left me wondering whether many of our whānau here in Aotearoa understand what Article 6 is about, and how this article connects to our whenua, wai and rangi here in Aotearoa.

Bear with me while I connect this up with a little story:

No photo description available.

Back in 2017, a few of the cuzzies and I were in the thick of defending our coastline from oil prospectors Statoil (now Equinor) and Chevron. Over the previous year, with the support of our waka Te Matau a Maui, and Greenpeace NZ, we had gathered the support of 83 of our Iwi and hapu (tribal communities) along the eastern seaboard, and along with over 25 thousand signatures of New Zealanders, we took our petition to the United Nations Ocean Summit to present to the Norwegian government as the majority shareholders of Statoil. Our message was clear – we do not want them drilling for oil in our waters, we do not want them drilling for oil at all.

We managed to deliver our message loud and clear, and again we were aided over there, this time with the support of our Indigenous brothers and sisters. Outside the UN, we had our Mohawk and Standing Rock whānau, who had driven so far, to read out to the media the support letter of Chief Arvol Lookinghorse for our campaign.

Image may contain: 8 people, people smiling

Inside, our Indigenous Moana brothers and sisters Maureen Penjueli (Pacific Islands Association of Non-Government Organisation) and Julian Aguon (Blue Ocean Law) graciously allowed us space to present our petition to Norway as a part of their UN event, which we did so with the support of our Chumash brother and sister (Mati Waya and Luhui) from the Wishtoyo Foundation.  It was an emotional journey, and while Statoil kept its distance, it was only in June of this year, when we heard the official notice that they had surrendered their prospecting permit, that I felt like we could exhale.

Something else happened on that journey as well, another act of solidarity that I want to discuss a bit more.

On the way home, I stopped in to participate in the Oil Refinery Walk – a walk that is organised by the San Francisco Bay Idle No More movement, run by First Nations peoples on Ohlone lands, to raise awareness to the 5 refineries that are splayed across their land. The largest one, the Richmond refinery, is also the largest of the Chevron refineries, and has exploded three times, sending tens of thousands of people to hospital with burns and toxic fume poisoning. It is a continual source of pollution and pain to the local community.

We marched together, past the dead waterways and the bay that had been routinely polluted by these refineries. I listened to elders talk about the ancestral footprint of that land, long gone from physical sight, but still vivid in their spoken histories. We shared our story with them, about Chevron coming to our shores, about us taking to our waka to read them their trespass notice, about our journey to the UN, and the solidarity of our peoples. Even after we left, the SF Idle No More movement took our Tino Rangatiratanga Flag, and printed out our images, and a huge placard of the map of our coastline, and they marched upon the Chevron Refinery to tell them “We know what you are doing in Aotearoa!”.

I was so thankful because truth be told, it’s lonely going to places like the UN. You wish you could take all of your communities with you but it’s so often just you, with their voices, and that is why Indigenous solidarity matters so much in these spaces. They were there for us in our time of need.

It’s these acts of solidarity with our people, our communities and coastline that I think about when we talk about carbon credits. These are the communities who experience the SOURCE POINT destruction of the oil companies that purchase carbon credits. While our forests may absorb some of the carbon from the atmosphere, they do not halt the environmental devastation on the lands of the Ohlone, and for our brothers and sisters to take their time out to fight for us and our coastline, a world away – well I think that deserves some more discussion and thought from us about the carbon credits some of us are providing to the companies who ruin their territories.

Carbon credits have not reduced the amount of emissions from the likes of Chevron. In fact, since the establishment of the carbon market, global emissions have increased. Certainly Chevron continues to extract, and pollute around the world, and abuse human rights while they are at it. The 2012 Richmond fire sent a thick plume of black toxic smoke over the communities and Bay. Our carbon credits did not alleviate that. Nor do they alleviate the disproportionately high rates of cancer and heart disease in the Richmond community, nor the displacement of Indigenous peoples from the Amazon in order to access oil reserves or establish carbon forests.

When I sit in our landblock meetings and I hear us discuss carbon credits as a source of income for our whanau, hapū and Iwi, I can’t help but think about our First Nations whānau and the stand they made for us so that we would not have the oil industry on our coastline, and the carbon credits we sell to the oil industry so that it can stay on theirs. I can’t help but think about the call they have put out to the world to please stop engaging in the carbon market that is ruining their lands and waters at the point source.

The commodification of our sky is being called out again, right now at COP25 in Madrid Spain.

Not surprisingly it’s Indigenous peoples leading that charge. We are, after all, the ones most immediately and worst impacted by carbon markets. These schemes that are responsible for, amongst other things:

  • Removing Indigenous peoples from their forest homes
  • Removing access for Indigenous peoples to their forest food systems
  • Replacing biodiverse native forest with exotic plantation forests
  • Devastating waterways and waterbodies with fungicides, herbicides, pesticides, and organic leachate
  • Enabling largescale polluters to devastate local ecologies

This list could go on and on, because really – the carbon market is what has allowed oil, gas and coal companies to continue extraction, and these companies in turn are guilty of mass crimes against humanity and the planet. It has allowed the general public to believe that we have a solution to the climate crisis that just hasn’t really kicked in yet.

Here’s the problem though – there’s every likelihood that it will never kick in.

After 30 years of concerted climate action – as a planet we are tracking worse than ever. We have known for 30 years that we need to reduce our emission rates but we have only increased them, and we do NOT have the time up our sleeve to tinker with models that have demonstrated over 3 consecutive decades that they do not work. At what point do we call time on these false solutions? The human race and a good deal of life on this planet is facing an existential crisis and we are behaving as though we can just wiggle the sparkplug and we will be good to go again. Our belief in faulty solutions means simply are not acting urgently enough, or radically enough, to provide our mokopuna with a future.

In a very real sense – it may wind up being the false solutions which pave the way to our complete failure to address the climate crisis.

THIS is why you are seeing Article 6 being brought up again and again in the COP25 talks. It is the foundation of the emissions trading system that has not only failed to halt emissions but has arguably enabled them to increase. The fact that Indigenous peoples are again leading this discussion belies another upsetting fact: Indigenous rights did NOT make it into the body of the Paris Agreement, in spite of the fact that we have demonstrated over successive years that we DO sequester more emissions than anyone else, and we protect more biodiversity than any other group. The return of Indigenous lands and protection of Indigenous rights is a demonstrable climate action that holds significantly more evidence of success than emissions trading, yet it did not feature in the Paris Climate Agreement.

Without a doubt, this is because the United Nations is a collection of colonial states that are 1. controlled by corporate elites and 2. voted in by their colonial populace.
They cannot fathom returning stolen lands back to Indigenous peoples, they cannot conceive of shutting down oil extraction and re-scripting the global and domestic economy in a way that prioritises the needs of Papatuanuku. For this reason we NEED to discuss the inherent racism, colonialism and elitism, that sits at the root of carbon reduction efforts, and center Indigenous voices.

For colonial governments and those who keep them in power, shutting down industries, rescripting economies and returning Indigenous lands are too radical in their approach, and so instead they will continue to tinker with a broken model until we all go over the cliff.

Seems to me that Trump isn’t the only climate-denier we have to deal with.

Which brings me back to our land-blocks…. and I know this is not a popular, or easy discussion for us to have. Particularly in my own region – where our hilly back country means that income for our whānau comes in the form of farming or forestry (both of which hold impacts for our waterways) – or carbon farming. It’s tempting for us to turn a blind eye to the fact that emissions trading enables climate change but when we do that – when we turn our back on our Indigenous brothers and sisters who have defended our rights, when we turn our back on the science that is shouting at us that carbon trading does not work, when we fail to have the conversation about what a failed emissions reduction effort mean for our mokopuna – when we put off the HARD work of radical change for the sake of some money in our pocket – are we really any better than Trump and other climate deniers?

The very, very least we can do is have the full conversation about WHO we are sacrificing, without their consent, in order to make a buck in the carbon market. At least, then we are facing up to our own decisions.

Image credit: David Tong

I have seen Indigenous practice in its fullest, richest sense, modelling for the world where we need to go, how we need to live, in order to have a future. I’ve seen the outcomes it provides. Our biodiversity and carbon sequestration wins are not occurring as a result of us chasing a carbon market, they are occurring where we are being pono to our ancestral responsibilities. I don’t just believe, I KNOW our Indigenous ancestors left, within us, all that is required as a value system to bring our planet back from the brink of no-return and secure a future for our mokopuna. I’ve marched the refinery corridor with First Nations brothers and sisters who still carry radical hope for a clean, healthy future for their communities. They have walked that hope for us all until their feet are sore and blistered.

Perhaps it’s time that we started walking our full potential too.
Here are some powerful Indigenous voices on carbon markets and article 6:

and *HERE is a great critical resource on carbon markets.

TUIA250 Are Narcissistic Abusers


Unsurprisingly, the return of the Endeavour has been the centerpiece in the TUIA250 Cook celebrations. The protests have thus far been effective enough to raise awareness and expand the conversation, but of course not halt the multimillion dollar juggernaut. Naturally, those who are profiting extreme amounts from the exercise are quick to defend it, to present it as a unifying, beneficial, culturally rich affair. The most common retorts to the protests are that we either don’t understand, or are too selfish to see, the “bigger picture” of how beneficial TUIA250 really is. In fact if you look at their behaviour overall, there are some hallmarks that align very closely with that of a narcissist abuser. I’m raising this because like interpersonal relationships, there is often confusion, a lack of clarity and awareness around whether or not we are being abused. Sometimes it takes a friend to point out the languaging and behaviour that is abuse.

Hello friend.


Your partner doesn’t have to exhibit all of these traits in order to be a narcissistic abuser – but if they are experiencing some/most of them, you should probably, at the very least, tread with caution, but better yet consider leaving.

As you can see, though – TUIA250 comfortably exhibits all of them.

Deconstructing the Imperial Psyche in Pursuit of a Just Global Economy.

I’m currently in London on the invite of the British Labour Party for their inaugural International Social Forum. There are bold questions being asked – what should Britain’s role be in re-scripting a global economy that will secure our descendants a future on this planet? 

As I have pointed out in my speech below – there is a reckoning to be had in order to answer that question:


Tēnā koutou. I have travelled for 2 days to get here, my return trip will create 4.8 metric tonnes of CO2, that’s a great distance and lot of carbon for 10minutes so I will be cutting to the chase to make the most of our time together here. I normally wouldn’t agree to travel this far for just one engagement but I have made an exception here because as I am about to outline to you – I really believe that of all nations, you, Britain, have a particularly special role to play in avoiding planetary catastrophe.

We are, as a planet, caught in a trap right now. It’s a manmade trap and one that we are struggling to find our way out of.

Image result for supermarket shopping

After over 30 years of deliberate focus on reducing emissions – we are now emitting more than ever. 2018 was an all time emissions high. The world’s government struggle to meet their COP commitments, which were already too weak to begin with. We are way offtrack for reaching the planet’s Sustainable Development Goals and the global south, as well as Indigenous peoples all around the world, are paying the price of this failure.

It’s well past time for us to consider what we are MISSING in our discussions and plans to pull the brakes on this destructive trajectory.

We are all, now, trapped in a framework of economic domination upon the planet, upon resources and upon other nations. A system that permits profits at the expense of lives, futures and ecological survival. A system that has economically forced and assimilated us into extractive, pollutive systems of food procurement and lifestyles that disconnect us from the implications of our decisions.

Washed up plastic waste on the beautiful shores of Fiji

And we are here today to discuss how to get ourselves out of this trap.

For Indigenous peoples, we understand this issue only too well – when you talk about a system that extracts from our worlds to profit another, when you talk about a system that spells the end of our way of being, that forces us to worry about our very survival, that impacts our food systems, our bodies, our human rights – we know this experience very well.

We call it colonization.

It is a imperial entitlement to impact upon other people’s bodies and territories that we have personally experienced now for hundreds of years. And now, the corporate empires are on track to impact your bodies, your lives and your territories, your futures.

And you want to know what to do about that.

We are all currently stuck in an abusive relationship with our planet and just like any abusive relationship – if you want to break your patterns of behaviour you need to understand where your patterns of behaviour come from. That is a task for all of us but I have to say – for Britain it will be hard. You need to come to terms with where this imperial entitlement comes from, and what has been your role in this pattern. This will not be an easy healing journey for you, but you cannot delay it a moment longer.

You want to recreate an architecture for a climate just economy but there is a reckoning that needs to happen here. The psyche of corporate imperial entitlement that besets our planet has a heritage and that heritage is you. You really need to come to terms with that and own it in order to start your healing journey.

britain invasions
A map of the countries in the world that Britain hasn’t invaded (in blue). Source:

As an Indigenous person I look at colonial society and what I see is that you have spent so long disconnected from your sacred relationships with this planet, I honestly don’t know if you remember what that looks like, in order to set your trajectory in that direction. For Indigenous Peoples that memory is much more recent, for many of us around the world, it is still being practiced but it remains under threat from colonial settler governments – many of whom today still call themselves The Crown.

So decolonization has been a big part of the discussion on climate justice now and we have seen it arise with the movements at Standing Rock, the Alberta Tar Sands, and in our own territories as well. We are constantly pointing out the contribution of Indigenous peoples to climate mitigation – we hold 80% of the world’s biodiversity in our territories, we have sequestered 30 times the global CO2 emissions in our Indigenous and communally managed forests but still we are hunted, assassinated, criminalized and imprisoned by our settler colonial governments for protecting these same surviving territories from exploitation and I want to know what are YOU doing to stand with us, to stand by us in protecting this planet from the system YOU largely created?

carbon sequestration
Carbon sequestration on Indigenous and communally held forest estates.

What often upsets me is that it is assumed the job of Indigenous peoples to drive decolonization of lands, of minds, of economies. Colonial abusers must begin to take responsibility for their role in this and figure out how they will dismantle their own paradigms of imperial entitlement.

There are concrete things you can do – you want to start redeeming yourself in this story? Start with decolonizing your trade – incorporate UNDRIP into your trade deals so you are holding your trade partners accountable on how their trade may be impacting  Indigenous peoples and their territories. You want to redeem yourself? Stand up as a powerful nation and DEMAND equitable Indigenous involvement in climate talks.

Image result for indigenous march paris cop
Indigenous environmental defenders at the Paris climate talks

Demand that we are at that table rather than being shut out.

You want to recreate an architecture for climate justice, you really want to do that?? This is what it will take – it will take nothing less than a full account of climate injustice and its roots in imperial entitlement.

You need to recognise when colonial entitlement is in play, you need to know what that looks like as a food system, as an energy system, as an economy, as a trade deal and as a government.

You aren’t there yet and I know this because the Indigenous peoples of the world, who territories were stolen MOSTLY by the British Crown, are still awaiting an apology and acknowledgement of that fact. In my country the government is REENACTING your invasion of our lands – in that story – you’re the abuser, it’s your actions being reenacted here – what are you going to do about that?

Imperial entitlement can no longer be sanctioned, endorsed or re-entrenched it wasn’t ok in 1769 and it’s not ok today.

I can indigenize my world, my home, my family, the worlds of my daughters as much as possible but that ain’t going to change who holds the power here. We are tired of telling you we need to decolonize, this isn’t a new discussion so I want to know what YOU are going to do as global colonizers to understand your history of colonial mentality, so you can understand how to begin to heal yourselves?

Those of you who retain your white knuckled grip on power – you’re not the ones making the good decisions, you’re not the ones with the living memory of how to nourish this planet You’re not the ones protecting the remaining biodiversity, you’re not the ones protecting the remaining carbon sinks. In our region we have chased off four oil and gas companies – it was colonial law that ushered them in, it was our application of Indigenous law that chased them out. So you need to be also considering not just a new economy but a new power structure.

Customarily Indigenous peoples claim 50% of the worlds lands but legally today we have just 10% and you have a role in that story. The climate mitigation that we carry out with that 10% means that returning the remaining title holds huge potential for our climate.

We need to have our lands and oceans handed back so we can get about the business of developing and growing the economic systems that have managed to salvage the remnants of biodiversity on this planet, and the vast majority of the carbon sinks.

We need protected Indigenous sanctuaries in order to foster the models of best practice that this world needs, and Britain owes it to Indigenous peoples around the world to actively support us and advocate internationally for the return of our territories that is the least you can do. No more washing your hands of our history – we don’t get to walk away from that legacy, the planet doesn’t get to either – so nor should you.

You have a role here and you need to step up to it on your healing journey. We are all waiting on you to do it.

The “Taken Generation” is not a Māori Problem – it is a Colonial Racism Problem.

Te Wharepora Hou


If you venture into the websites for Ministry for Women, Ministry for Children and Ministry of Health, the images and language around your maternal healthcare journey, parental and child support paint a very particular, and positive picture.

Smiling brown faces, generally uptilted, the sun on their face – full of hope and aspirations, looking up towards a bright future. Declarations of support for loving, nurturing environments and belief in young people living up to their full potential. The use of our potent moko kauwae as the logo for the Ministry for Women infers the acknowledgement of the sacred role of wāhine in the family and community.

What has been made very clear in Newsroom article that has, this past week, rocked our nation, is that the reality for young Māori mothers is very, very different. Like rats circling a birdnest, Ministry for Children agents come back, again and again, trying…

View original post 2,325 more words

Cerebrum Coloniae (Colonial Brains)

He Tirohanga Ki Tai (A View from the Shoreline): Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery is an exhibition featuring both leading and emerging Māori artists, who have created a completely sovereign space, supported by Indigenous funds, to hold a conversation critiquing the Cook invasion, the ensuing colonial experience, up to and including the TUIA250 events.

This exhibition started at Tairāwhiti Museum, in Whataupoko, Tūranganui a Kiwa, not far from the actual site of invasion itself. It subsequently toured to New York, where it was hosted by the ORA Gallery in Manhattan and accompanied with talks by First Nations scholars and myself on the specific impacts of the Doctrine of Discovery and Indigenous women. It will next be on display during NAISA at the University of Waikato, opening June 26th 2019 and on display until September 2019.

The works are able to be viewed here. A full catalogue and essay will soon be available, however for now I am sharing a brief essay I wrote about my own entry in the show: Cerebrum Coloniae (Colonizer Brains) – Whataūpoko.


Tina Ngata
Ngāti Porou
Cerebrum Coloniae series: First they discover you, then they subjugate you, then they fund you.
Plastic, glass, steel, wood

cerebrum diagram

#1 Cerebrum Praesumptor
14mm x 11mm x 4mm
“I am aware that the most humane men who have not experienced things of this nature will cencure my conduct in fireing upon the people in this boat, nor do I my self think that the reason I had for seizing upon her will att all justify me, but when we was once a long side of them we must either have stud to be knockd on the head or else retire and let them gone off in triumph and this last they would of course have attributed to their own bravery and our timourousness”

#2 Cerebrum Agripeta
14mm x 9mm x 5mm
“They didn’t kill enough”

#3 Cerebrum Rex
14mm x 9mm x 5mm
“Where is the 5 percent discount for Pacific Island people, if they are actually causing trouble as well? They climb in the windows of other New Zealanders at night. It is not only Māori.”

This artwork (by the author) – responds to the claims that Cook was on a research expedition, and was no more than a benevolent scientist – a claim that is supported by the involvement of the Royal Society for Science and the various scientists on board such as Solander and Banks. This argument is often used to cloak the fact that Cook was also a naval officer, the HMS Bark Endeavour was a weaponized naval vessel, and they had direct orders to discover and claim lands for the Crown.

This fact aside, the use of science as a benevolent cloak also belies another truth – that it was systematically utilized in the colonization process to justify the killing and assimilation of Indigenous Peoples. In his article for E-tangata “Understanding Racism In This Country”  , Moana Jackson writes:

“Like all of the ideas that have been used to justify colonisation, racism developed over time through a complex and uniquely European history, in which the normal curiosity people have about the different and unknown was morphed into a patronising determination to equate difference with inferiority… The bodies of the racialised “other” became chattels to be enslaved, and lab rats to be dissected and measured and experimented upon.

Forlorn samples of pickled indigenous brains were scanned, and skulls were measured, as pseudo-scientists justified the European will to dispossess by inventing rationalisations about an indigenous lack of intelligence, and even an inability to appreciate the sublime.”

Many of the pseudo-scientists referred to by Jackson in this statement were members of the same Royal Society that sponsored expeditions into Indigenous territories. The practice of “phrenology” was based upon the notion that Indigenous peoples, due to the shape and size of their skulls, housed smaller brains and were therefore intellectually inferior. This conclusion was then used to justify colonization as a beneficent act upon savage, indolent peoples.

Collectively, this artwork turns the tale around, placing colonial brains on display, subjected to the gaze of others. They are presented in belljars, a common display method in Victorian science.

It’s also referenced in 1960s popular culture through the literary iconic novel “The Belljar” by author Sylvia Plath. In this novel, the author uses the metaphor of the belljar to describe how, from within the belljar, one’s perspective of the outside world is bulged, ugly, and distorted, and inescapable.

“Wherever I sat, on the deck of a ship or at a street café in Paris or Bangkok, I would be sitting under the same glass bell jar, stewing in my own sour air.”

Within the context of this artwork, the belljar therefore references the lens of colonial phrenologists, anthropologists, navigators and politicians who have, throughout time, distorted the realities of Indigenous peoples to suit their own agendas.

This collection from the “Cerebrum Coloniae” (Colonial Brains) is termed Whataupoko, which references a site that is closely located near the Cook landing site, and a story which, from the Native perspective, plays a pivotal role in the story leading up to Cook’s invasion. It is also the site where “Tirohanga Ki Tai – Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery” first launched.

Whataupoko referred to the “piked heads” of Mahaki chiefs Tuarau o Te Rangi from Repongaere and Waiopotango from Whanau-a-Kai which were placed at the boundary marker of the Waimata riverbank, a mark of the mana of Konohi, a leader from Whāngarā who killed the two to protect the Whānau a Iwi people of that area. Konohi was the nephew of the highly esteemed chief Rakaiatāne. The grandson of Rakaiatāne was Te Maro – who was the first ancestor murdered during Cook’s invasion.

The three brains, as disembodied heads on pikes, therefore also reference the landblocks upon which the invasion took place, as sites of resistance, conflict, protection and resolution.

Although the brains are given quotes that come from actual people, each piece is given a latin name, as latin was the common language for European science from the 18th century onwards, and commonly used to denote species. The artists utilized this nomenclature to demonstrate the dehumanizing approach of European science towards Indigenous subjects – but also to reference that these are not just about singular events or individuals, but rather a socialized mindset and system of which these quotes are representative.


The first in the series is called Cerebrum Praesumptor – Brain of the Aggressive Invader. The quote is taken from the journal of James Cook, in reflecting upon his invasion of Tūranganui a Kiwa, wherein he shot and killed a number of unarmed fisherpeople on board their waka.

“I am aware that the most humane men who have not experienced things of this nature will cencure my conduct in fireing upon the people in this boat, nor do I my self think that the reason I had for seizing upon her will att all justify me, but when we was once a long side of them we must either have stud to be knockd on the head or else retire and let them gone off in triumph and this last they would of course have attributed to their own bravery and our timourousness”

This is an important quote to highlight, because it highlights that Cook’s decision to carry out this mass-murder was not at all an act of self-defence – but merely one to exercise their superiority, so that the victims were not to think that they were in any way superior. This therefore speaks to the aggressive nature of Cook, and directly challenges the notion of colonization as a benign experience.

The second in the series is titled “Cerebrum Agripeta”. “Agripeta” translates in latin as “squatter, settler, landgrabber”. This refers to the colonial hordes who followed upon the heels of Cook, grabbing land, and establishing “settlements” by way of unsettling the Māori who were already there, and eventually setting up their own system of governance which is still in power today. The “Agripeta” power structure relies upon the colonial fictions of Cook’s arrival being just, and even the killings being necessary. This was reflected last year when a Gisborne District Councillor was heard to utter that Cook did not kill enough local Māori during the invasion. Thus, the brutal, presumptuous nature of the original invaders lives on, and continues to bear impacts for local Māori through the policies and governance decisions of “Cerebrum Agripeta”.

The final in the series is “Cerebrum Rex”. Rex, in latin, holds the multiple meanings of: Monarch, oppressor, usurper, and patron. This quote is taken from ex-MP Jenny Shipley, who, in response to the government selling radio channels to Māori with a 5% discount, remarked in parliament:

“Where is the 5 percent discount for Pacific Island people, if they are actually causing trouble as well? They climb in the windows of other New Zealanders at night. It is not only Māori”.

As Ani Mikaere notes, “This comment revealed as much about Pākehā New Zealand’s obsession with home invasion, as it did about Shipley’s racist belief in a Polynesian prevalence for criminal activity”. 

Like Cerebrum Agripeta, Cerebrum Rex relies upon colonial fictions, and the suppression of Indigenous truth, in order to maintain it’s oppressive power structure. This is seen in Shipley’s attitude towards Maori historical accounts, when she said:

“While all political parties in my experience are generally committed to closing the gaps that exist in health, welfare, education and employment, this won’t be achieved by rewriting history”.

This was in response to Tariana Turia referring to the Māori experience of colonization as a “holocaust” (which is literally defined as destruction or slaughter on a mass scale).
Mikaere goes on to note that “The response of Pākehā politician, media and public to a simple truth about the genocidal impact of colonization on Indigenous Peoples typifies the fear and ocerreaction that usually accompanies any interpretation of events other than the one that sustains their own shaky foundations.”

Today, Dame Jenny Shipley is the co-chair the National Coordinating Committee for the multimillion dollar TUIA250 patron fund that is facilitating the invasion anniversary events.

Why I Won’t Give the Cook Celebrations My Brown-ness.

porourangi poutama
So here we are, in the thick of it – 2019. The Cook celebrations are set in train in multiple townships across our country and there is a hearty debate on their impact and value.

From the moment it crossed my attention back in 2014 I have opposed it wholeheartedly. There are many other Māori, however, who have decided to participate. I’m not going to speak to their motives – that is for them to do. One of the most common tactics of the colonizer is to place Natives in front of other Natives to hold the debate about colonial abuse – so that the colonizer can continue on their business.

What I am going to speak to here, however, is my own reasoning why I, as a Ngāti Porou woman from Te Tairāwhiti, have not, and will not, participate in the TUIA250 funded Cook events.

The “Kia Mau” FB group and Declaration was founded by Robyn Kahukiwa, and is for Indigenous Peoples to state their opposition to TUIA250.

Now, back in 2014 when I first started vocally opposing these events, I was approached by members and associates of “Te Hā Sestercentennial Trust” with various versions of “please be quiet and/or get on the waka”. I have been offered a “River Award”, I have been cajoled, and cried at, and when the attempts to recruit failed – the tactics shifted to publicly discrediting me as a liar, purist, and a hater who “needs to keep her mouth shut”. That’s not so much cause for “woe is me” but rather, it’s interesting to see how determined these attempts have been. I’ve seen them do the same with others who have opposed – with varying results. The conversation themes generally went along the lines of:

“This is your chance to tell your side of the story”
“There’s a lot of money involved, you can make this work for you and your people, get something good out of it”
“You can get some conservation wins out of this”
“We need to start focussing on how to chart a path forward together”

“Look for better or worse, it happened, and we need to acknowledge that”
“Well the events are going ahead anyway, with or without you, so you just need to decide if you want your voice in there or not.”

Now, I can focus on every single one of those arguments but I think it’s more important right now to focus on why brown endorsement of the TUIA250 events is so important.

Of course, if you ask any person involved in these events they will rightfully point out that it is ethically important to “both sides of the story”. Of course we have never required colonial permission or validation to tell our side of the story, we’ve been doing that for a long time – but in all honesty – if this were really about some benevolent intent to make sure I had my side of the story included, then the attempts would never have tipped over into aggression.

So let’s consider, instead, what this would have looked like without any brown endorsement and involvement: Colonial funds, celebrating colonial arrival, telling a colonial story. Colonizing governments spending tens of millions of dollars purely on themselves, while Indigenous peoples remain in poverty.

It would never have gotten past square 1.

For this reason, whenever I hear people talk about how we can use this as “our chance to tell our story” – what I cannot help but consider, is how we are actually being used for the colonizer to center their own story. Indeed, Indigenous participation on the margin is vital to the centering of the colonizer.

Therein is my first reason why I will not lend them my brown-ness: I will not play any role in the colonizer centering of themselves in the story of my land.

Of course it’s vital to get brown endorsement of these events – it sends a signal to ourselves, and the world, that our interests are being represented and supported. In this sense – it doesn’t really matter what is said in our participation – what counts is that we participated. That is what the world will see, and when TUIA250 is critiqued, that is the first defence they have.

Therein lies the second reason I will not lend them my brown-ness: I will not be a tool of defence for our colonial government.

This is a form of exploitation that functions to cloak the white supremacy which sits at the heart of these events. The very articulate Moana Jackson (I know… I quote him a lot) has reflected that:

When many Europeans were still nervously venturing into what Socrates called the “little pond” of the Mediterranean, the peoples of the Pacific were charting the greatest ocean in the world. They mapped its currents, reached for stories in its depths, and established a whakapapa that joined all of its islands together. That is a story worthy of being honoured — but in the Crown commemorations, it is only being told in the shadowed narrative of someone else.

There is what you say in an event, and there is what an event says – just as monuments are a signal of what society deems important enough to embed as a marker of our identity on the landscape – so too are publicly funded nationwide events a statement in and of themselves. They are a monument in time that says THIS date matters, that THIS person matters, and that they matter enough to center our identity on it. In placing our stories within the wake of the colonizer, we give them power to once again be our great benefactor, the center of our success. This is why groups like Robyn Kahukiwa’s “Kia Mau” page, and the accompanying declaration, is so important. It is not just opposing the celebrations – it is DENYING them our participation, as Tangata Whenua.


Like I stated above – the colonial story does not hold center stage in my story of Aotearoa. It does not even share center stage. Māori are the center of this nation’s identity, and the colonial story (even that which sits in my own whakapapa) is a much more recent addition to the story of Aotearoa. We are very selective in what counts as history in this country – certainly, the “Māori Land Wars” (probably more aptly called the Colonial Theft Wars) are not deemed important enough to be embedded in the national curriculum. In Aotearoa our history is consistently misrepresented, and indeed even the historians at the very center of the Cook campaign continue to misrepresent the facts of what happened, positioning Cook as benevolent, framing his killing of Native people as a mere character flaw of an otherwise noble renaissance man, and deliberately minimising the murders of brown people that he carried out everywhere he went. Our participation alongside these people implies endorsement of their fictions, and therein lies my third reason I will not participate in these events: I refuse to allow my brown-ness to endorse the continuation of colonial fictions about the killing of my ancestors, and the theft of our lands and waters.

There is also a larger story and issue at play here and that is the global struggle of opposing the impacts of The Doctrine of Discovery. It has played out all around the world, and has been highlighted by the United Nations as the driver of all Indigenous dispossession. As a mindset, the Doctrine of Discovery reiterates an entitlement to conquer for the sake of imperial expansion. That mindset sits at the heart of corporate empires to this very day, and fuels the processes of climate change and ocean pollution which place our very existence at threat. I cannot maintain a position of solidarity with my Indigenous brothers and sisters, or one of care for our Earth Mother, while reinforcing the very mindset which threatens them all. I will not allow my Indigeneity to be used in a process that places the roots of my Indigeneity, and my Indigenous brothers and sisters, at threat.

The Doctrine of Discovery is the bedrock of the colonial structure that sits around us. Like all structures – if left alone, the colonial power structure will soon crumble in on itself. It requires acts of restoration and reinforcement in order to sustain itself. Disguising Indigenous truth with colonial fiction is one such act of reinforcement. These colonial fictions look like:

“We were discovered”
“Our colonial experience is historical”
“Our colonial experience was benevolent and non-violent”
“Our colonial experience was invited”
“Our colonial experience has been overall beneficial”

Capitalising on the ‘benefits’ of a platform for us to tell our side of the story belies two facts, one: that we have already been telling this story without them for 250 years, and have generally been vilified, by our colonizers, for doing so. And two: that if the colonizer was generally interested in our side of the story they could have joined us in this practice at any point over the past 250 years rather than vilifying us, or arguing with us. The entire Waitangi Tribunal process is a harrowing experience of us telling our truths about the colonial experience while the Crown continues to deny or minimize it – and that is going on still, today.

Of course it is hoped that the pockets of Indigenous truth that are allowed through these events will result in some social shift towards justice. This does not, however, allow for the bulk of colonial fiction that is being funded through this event. Those colonial fictions will continue to frustrate my children and mokopuna’s struggle for sovereignty in their own land – because the first step to justice is TRUTH. TUIA250 may not be willing to take responsibility for the colonial mistruths they are facilitating around the country, but I can certainly make them accountable through refusing to lend them my brown-ness.

Most especially – you will not find me anywhere near a welcoming ceremony for the replica of the death ship, Endeavour. To provide welcoming ceremonies for the replica of a ship which killed our people and stole our lands is exactly the kind of endorsement our colonizer requires of us to maintain their false premise of being invited, and welcome, in their role. These kinds of optics are vital for the colonizer – which is why I use the term “brown-ness” because to them it is very much a performative, optical endorsement of their presence and behaviour that they seek – even though within Te Ao Māori these ceremonies, our whakapapa and mana, should mean so much more. This is why it becomes difficult and confusing for whānau and communities who don’t want to welcome the colonizer, but do want to welcome each other, our waka hourua, and our performers, who are walking alongside the colonizer, ushering the colonizer into these opportunities. You see – it is US providing the coloniser with opportunities to tell their story and indeed center it, not the other way around.

Tōku mana Māori, he mana Māori motuhake – a line from the anthem of our tuakana, Te Whānau a Apanui. My mana is a gift of my ancestors, inherited to me by way of whakapapa, genealogy. They have survived 250 years of colonial fictions and oppression. Their marks upon my skin, their name that I carry, their values in my heart, their matauranga in my mind. Regardless of my actual skin colour – everything that the colonizer perceives as my “brown-ness” actually comes from them, it is a sacred part of who I am, my connection to this land and these waters – and that is the most important reason I cannot, and will not, allow it to be used within a systemic legitimisation of colonial crimes.

Nōku tēnei whenua, kei a au te kōrero. Nōku tēnei whenua, ko au te rangatira – Apirana Mahuika

(This is my land, this is my story to tell. This is my land, and I am the authority)

James Cook and the Doctrine of Discovery – 5 Things to Know

The Doctrine of Discovery (also known as the Doctrine of Christian Discovery) is an international legal concept and Christian principle, that is borne out a number of catholic laws (called “papal bulls”) originating out of the Vatican in the 15th and 16th centuries. It gave the monarchies of Britain and Europe the right to conquer and claim lands, and to convert or kill the native inhabitants of those lands.

In 2019 it will be 250 years since this process was carried out in Aotearoa New Zealand, by James Cook. Here are 5 important things to know about that:

Related image

  1. The intent of the Doctrine
    The Doctrine of Discovery provided a framework for Christian explorers, in the name of their King or Queen, to lay claim to territories uninhabited by Christians. If the lands were vacant, then they could be defined as “discovered” and sovereignty claimed.

  2. Within the framework of the Doctrine, Indigenous Peoples were considered non-human
    The Doctrine asserts that non-Christians on these discovered lands were not human and therefore the land was empty or “terra nullius”. When Cook arrived in Aotearoa he was under orders to claim land for King George III, preferably by consent – however he did so without consent. When he arrived in Australia, there would have been up to 750,000 people living there, who had been living on those lands for over 65,000 years, however, he declared the land “terra nullius”, which means he declared the Indigenous people of Australia to be not human, and the land empty – and then claimed the land for King George III. In Aotearoa, Lieutenant William Hobson, on order from the British Crown, declared Te Waipounamu (The South Island) terra nullius in 1840 and then claimed it for the Crown.

    Image result for united nations doctrine of discovery

  3. The UN’s perspective on the Impact of the Doctrine of Discovery (May, 2012)
    “The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues concluded its eleventh session with the approval of a set of nine draft recommendations, highlighted by a text approved on the special theme, the ongoing impact of the Discovery Doctrine on indigenous peoples and the right redress. That fifteenth century Christian principle was denounced throughout the session as the “shameful” root of all the discrimination and marginalization indigenous peoples face today.

    The Permanent Forum noted that, while such frameworks of domination and “conquest” were promoted as authority for land acquisition, they also encouraged despicable assumptions: that Indigenous peoples were “savages”, “barbarians”, “inferior and uncivilized,” among other constructs the colonizers used to justify their subjugation, domination and exploitation of the lands, territories and resources of native peoples.

  4. The Doctrine of Discovery is a legal foundation for many of the courtcases and pieces of legislation in Aotearoa New Zealand, that have alienated Māori land.
    One of the most famous courtcases in New Zealand legal history is Wi Parata vs The Bishop of Wellington 1853. You can find the details out here, but it’s impact was huge for New Zealand law, in that it famously declared the Treaty of Waitangi “a simple nullity” and found that the only valid title to land was Crown title. This finding, by Judge James Prendergast, relied upon a precedent case from the USA: Johnson vs McIntosh which invoked the Doctrine of Discovery. In this case, US Chief Justice John Marshall repeatedly cited the Discovery Doctrine, saying:

“that discovery gave title to the government by whose subjects it was made, against all other European governments [which] necessarily gave to the nation making the discovery the sole right of acquiring the soil from the natives.” Johnson v. M’Intosh, 21 U.S. 543, 5 L.Ed. 681, 8 Wheat. 543 (1823)

In using this US case as a precedent, Judge Prendergast inserted the Doctrine of Discovery into New Zealand law, and these findings continued to then be used as precedent and be supported by New Zealand judges in the denial of Māori rights and the alienation of Māori land right up to the current day. In fact, in the Court of Appeal case Ngati Apa v Attorney-General – famously known as the Foreshore and Seabed case, Chief Justice Sian Elias referenced Wi Parata vs Bishop of Wellington by saying that:

“I am of the view that the approach taken by Turner J in the Supreme Court and by the Court of Appeal in In Re the Ninety-Mile Beach can be explained only on the basis that they were applying the approach taken in Wi Parata v Bishop of Wellington. On that approach Maori property had no existence in law until converted into land held in fee of the Crown. Until then it was assumed to be Crown property…. For the reasons already given, such view is contrary to the common law”
Ngati Apa v Attorney-General [2003] 3 NZLR 643, 663.

In legal speak, that’s Chief Justice Sian Elias saying “GTFOH with any idea that the Crown owns the foreshore”. In response, the NZ Govt drafted legislation that, in direct conflict with these findings, vested ownership of the NZ Foreshore and Seabed with the Crown.
So even when the judges stopped explicitly supporting it, the NZ government still based legislation on the Doctrine of Discovery that alienated our foreshore and seabed.

5. The Doctrine of Discovery continues to dispossess Indigenous Peoples of our rights every day

The Doctrine of Discovery has come to mean much more than a legal concept. It has been acknowledged by the United Nations as “the driver of all Indigenous dispossession”. The laws and policies that grew out of the Doctrine have come to shape society’s ideas and attitudes about Indigenous Peoples and our rights. In 2012 at the United Nations, international human rights and Indigenous rights lawyer Moana Jackson said:

“. . . while the Doctrine of Discovery was always promoted in the first instance as an authority to claim land of indigenous peoples, there were much broader assumptions implicit in the doctrine. For to open up an indigenous land to the gaze of the colonising “other”, there is also in their view an opening up of everything that was in and of the land being claimed. Thus, if the Doctrine of Discovery suggested a right to take control of another nation’s land, it necessarily also implied a right to take over the lives and authority of the people to whom the land belonged. It was in that sense, and remains to this day, a piece of genocidal legal magic that could, with the waving of a flag or the reciting of a proclamation, assert that the land allegedly being discovered henceforth belonged to someone else, and that the people of that land were necessarily subordinate to the colonisers.”

In short, Moana is pointing out that the Doctrine of Discovery has been used not only to exercise control over Indigenous lands, but also over Indigenous peoples – this is probably best reflected by the many, many times Cook and his crew took natives lives while also taking the land.

This disregard for Indigenous rights remains to be the case, at all levels, today. Importantly – the “waving of a flag or reciting of a proclomation” that Moana refers to are the rituals carried out by colonisers to apply the Doctrine of Discovery and state the claim of the Crown to those lands. These rituals are about to be re-enacted around Aotearoa and Australia to mark the anniversary of the original claim of the Crown.


If we are to accept that the current NZ government is in breach of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi by 1. establishing itself in a way that subverted tino rangatiratanga and 2. failing to secure adequate and appropriate Māori representation as defined by Māori – then this begs the question – by what right does the government of New Zealand make laws that impact upon Māori lives and lands? By what right does this government continue to breach the very document that permits its presence, yet still retain power?

The simple answer is – the NZ government is not operating under the provisions of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. It is operating under the provisions of The Doctrine of Discovery – which it will be re-entrenching throughout 2019.