About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1995-1996 Maori L. Rev. 1 (1995-1996)

handle is hein.journals/maori1995 and id is 1 raw text is: The Maori Law Review A monthly review of law affecting Maori February 1995 Editor: Tom Bennion PO Box 11310 Wellington New Zealand Phone/fax (04) 475 3681 email bennion@actix.gen.nz Publisher: Esoteric Publications PO Box 11310 Wellington New Zealand Phone/fax (04) 499 6376 North American -Sales: Gaunt Publishers 3011 Gulf Drive. Holmes Beach Florida 34217-2199, U:A Phone (813) 778 5211 Fax (813) 778 5252 © Copyright Tom Bennion 1995 NOT JUST ONE TREE HILL It is becoming abundantly clear that the proposals released in December 1994 have stirred a suppressed impatience among Maori about progress with claim settlements and that the fiscal cap aspect of the proposals will be generally rejected. The Government was given ample warning that this would be the case. In the Parliamentary debate following the announcement of the propos- als, all non-Government speakers complimented the Government on its at- tempt to grapple with these issues, but warned that setting a fiscal limit would bring trouble. Helen Clarke said: Sometimes the Government may be in a position in which it can attribute Maori opposition to, perhaps, a small group of activists or radicals. This is not one of those times. The reservation about this concept stretches across Maoridom .... The whole concept of settling is in danger of becoming totally discredited because of the attempt to confine it to a set sum of money and to imply that timetables are involved. If we discredit the concept of settling in a fair and just way, then I fear that it will not be just one tree on One Tree Hill that suffers, but rather the state of affairs in our country generally. (NZPD 8 December 1994) There are other concerns arising from the present debate. One is the nature of advice from the Treasury. If, as has been repotted, Treasury advised that the settlement fund idea would reduce many claimants inflated expectations, one wonders how thoughtfully and thoroughly these issues were investigated. This phrase is more reminiscent of letters to the editor than carefully consid- ered policy advice on a matter of constitutional importance. In policy docu- ments produced in 1987, Treasury admitted it would be surprising if any settlement that might realistically be expected would extinguish all sense of grievance. What may be hoped for is that the level of settlements be a suffi- cient indicator of the sincerity and good intentions of the Government to satisfy most Maori and non-Maori opinion that justice had been done in a reasonable way (Government Management. Brief to the Incoming Government vol 1 p331). Is that central concern for justice evident in its advice today? Another concern is the pressure the consultation process is placing on Maori bureaucrats. As Wira Gardiner, Chief Executive of Te Puni Kokiri, has put it, these officials are often prominent members of their tribes, and are having to carry a message which their tribes by and large are rejecting (Wanganui Chroni- cle 20 February 1995). The cost of doggedly continuing to promote the fiscal cap might be the loss of talented Maori policy advisors for the future. ISSN 1172-8434

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most