Parallel Treaty
Workshops
A paper by Robert Consedine
| 1.1. |
Since the
inception of Treaty education in 1986, there has
been continued debate about the process of
providing parallel Treaty workshops for Māori and
Pakeha. This debate has ranged across all
cultural lines as we continually struggle with
radically different ideas about dealing with
issues emerging from our colonial history. The
writer has been part of the evolution of this
process and has led every conceivable combination
of workshop during the past eight years. From
this experience, and in constant dialogue with
Kai Tahu, a policy of providing parallel Treaty
workshops for Pakeha and Māori emerged. |
| 1.2. |
This is a
dynamic process that is constantly being
reviewed. To date the overwhelming feedback, from
people who experience the Treaty workshop
process, would confirm the value of providing
parallel workshops for the two cultures to do
this particular work. The primary difficulty is,
that until people have experienced the workshop,
they tend not to appreciate the need for the
parallel process. |
| 1.3. |
This paper will
briefly set out the reasons why we provide
parallel workshops for Māori and Pakeha to do the
Stage One Treaty workshop. It is important to
note that we are talking about the Stage
One process only and that subsequent
gatherings can be combined once the basic
groundwork has been completed. |
| 1.4. |
The issues being
struggled with in this area relate to cultural
diversity and were central themes at an
international conference on teacher education
held in Thailand during July 1995. Colin
Knight, the Principal of the
Christchurch College of Education (Te Whare Whai
Matauraka ki Otautahi) who attended the
conference, noted in his report back that the
acceptance of diversity was a situation to be
encouraged and nurtured. (1) |
| 1.5. |
In a paper
delivered at the same conference Dr. Dolores A
Escobar noted that in spite of the reality
diversity is here to stay (or may be because of
it) it has been a struggle to convince educators
that diversity can be enriching instead of a
problem to be remediated....."Y plurus
unum"(from many, one) consistently has been
interpreted by many educators and members of the
public to mean the iradication of differences.
.... Escobar underlines her plea to have
diversity centrally placed in the context of
education reform.(2) |
| 1.6. |
n a further
paper delivered by Toh Swee-Hin called Teachers
of Compassion, Teachers of Hope: Towards Teacher
Education for Empowerment it is noted that
cultural hegemony favouring the dominant groups
in making certain minorities invisible or
voiceless ensure that differences are suppressed
and "others" pushed towards conformity/
assimilation and labelling as "self
"failures. (3) |
| 1.7. |
New Zealand as a
nation is in a process of radically changing the
relationship between Māori and Pakeha that has
existed throughout our colonial history since the
Treaty was signed in 1840. One way of describing
the change taking place is in the move from
policies of assimilation, i.e. of assimilating
Māori people into the Pakeha system to
a policy of recognising and valuing cultural
diversity. One of the outcomes of assimilation is
a strong belief permeating the country that there
is no cultural difference between Māori and
Pakeha people. Policies of assimilation,
particularly in education, were predicated on
that belief as successive generations of Māori
people were forced into a Pakeha system. Cultural
diversity has not yet been explicitly or formally
recognised. |
| 1.8. |
In that
recognition, it is necessary for Māori people to
have the opportunity to disconnect themselves
from the majority Pakeha culture and to explore
issues pertaining to them in an appropriate
environment with competent Māori leadership. |
| 1.9. |
Because of the
radical change that is taking place in New
Zealand society between Māori and the majority
culture that we call Pakeha, we need to seek new
ways of approaching the issue of our colonial
history. Once the Treaty is being honoured and
Māori are able to exercise Tino Rangatiratanga
the issues surrounding how these matters will be
attended to will be much clearer. |
| 1.10. |
The challenge
for us now is this. How to critically empower all
people to be confident and full participants in a
society that is confronting its colonial history
and radically changing the traditional
relationship between the colonisers and the
colonised. It is not about giving participants
the answers. It is about giving them
tools to find their own answers. |
| 1.11. |
With this
background I have set out seven key issues
underpinning the emergence of a policy relating
to parallel Treaty workshop processes for Māori
and Pakeha. |
| 2.0 |
Different
Perspective |
| 2.1. |
A Pakeha Treaty
workshop explores our colonial history from the
perspective of the European settlers who have
come during the last 155 years. It also deepens
understanding of the Pakeha cultural journey and
the nature of evolving Pakeha culture. Similarly
a separate Māori workshop provides the
opportunity for Māori to explore their reality,
their own cultural journey and the effect that
colonisation has had on successive generations of
Māori people. This process enables Māori to
explore what it means to be Māori today and to
explore the significance of their Māori ancestry
in contemporary Aotearoa/New Zealand. It
therefore follows, that a Māori workshop be lead
by a skilled Māori workshop leader and a Pakeha
workshop lead by a skilled Pakeha workshop leader. |
| 3.1. |
Much of the
Treaty debate today is conducted in an
environment where there is considerable fear.
When Māori and Pakeha gather to have initial
exploration of Treaty issues either, out of fear
or cultural sensitivity, both parties tend to
edit what they are saying. While creating an
environment where our colonial history can be
explored and issues emerging debated, it
is exceptionally difficult to get people to say
what they really think. The process of
self censorship impacts negatively on the
possibility of any realistic movement in people's
understanding of these issues. |
| 4.1. |
A significant
amount of our colonial history and many of the
deeds of our ancestors are very painfilled. It is
also very painful for many Māori to sit and
listen to Pakeha people talking about these
issues from a Pakeha perspective. One of the
outcomes of colonialism is, that most New
Zealanders have grown up in a
monocultural/racist/colonial society and absorbed
many of the stereotypes that come out of that
environment. These stereotypes need to be worked
through in a very culturally safe
environment if we are going to
understand, confront and let them go. |
| 5.1. |
What happens to
Māori people regularly when they are present in a
group of predominantly Pakeha is, that Pakeha
people then tend to treat the Māori people
present as though they are an authority on all
things Māori and also, responsible for all that
is happening in the Māori world. This is an
unconscious process that frequently
places the Māori presence in an impossible
situation. |
| 5.2. |
There are three
key issues here: - No one Māori
person is able to speak for the whole Māori world
- People with Māori ancestry may know very little
about being Māori and about the issues that face
Māoridom
- The effect of this is that some of the
group become intimidated, marginalized and afraid
to speak
Like many Pakeha much of this
information has been excluded from them during
our colonial history and however this happens it
is embarrassing for Māori people to be put,
often unintentionally, in this situation.
|
| 6.1. |
The provision of
parallel Māori workshops is one opportunity for
people with Māori ancestry to explore this aspect
of their heritage. All other training is done
together in a totally Pakeha environment,
structure, programme. |
| 7.1. |
During the last
six years a policy of doing parallel workshops
has been worked out and regularly evaluated
between Waitangi Associates and Kai Tahu. After
many experiments and nearly 700 workshops with up
to 15,000 people, the policy of having parallel
workshops for Māori and Pakeha remains firmly in
place. It is a process that is supported by both
experienced Māori and Pakeha. Combined workshops
have been tried during an earlier period (and
occasionally since) and the feedback and evidence
strongly suggest they do not work. It is not
uncommon for Māori people to decide to leave a
combined workshop after listening to Pakeha for
as little as half a day. |
| 7.2 |
It needs
to be emphasised that we are talking about the
stage one process only and that
subsequent gatherings can be combined once the
basic groundwork has been thoroughly attended to. |
| 8.1. |
While this
policy has been in place for more than twelve
years, Māori people continue to attend Pakeha
workshops either, because they have been told to
or, in the belief that none of these issues will
affect them. Each time that this has occurred
they have often shared with me, that the workshop
was not safe or enjoyable for them and they
wished they had opted to go to a separate
workshop where they would have been culturally
safe to explore the issues that concerned them.
Although there are occasionally individual
exceptions, the policy of separating Māori and
Pakeha for a Stage One Treaty Workshop remains
firm. |
Robert
Consedine
Waitangi
Associates
10
August 1995 - revised 26 March 2003
This
paper was prepared in consultation with Irihapeti Ramsden (1946 -2003)
Ngai
Tahu/Rangatane
References:
C.L.
Knight, Newsletter to Staff and Council,
Christchurch College of Education, (Te Whare Matauraka Ki
Otautahi), No 6, 19 July 1995.
D.A.
Escobar, The Role of Colleges and Schools of Teacher
Education in Education Reform: Today and the
Challenge Ahead. Conference on Teacher Education,
Chulalongkorn University, Thailand, 11-14 July 1995.
Toh
Swee-Hin , Teachers of Compassion, Teachers of Hope:
Towards Teacher Education for Empowerment.
Conference on Teacher Education, Chulalongkorn
University, Thailand, 11-14 July 1995.
1
October 1995 University(Canterbury) based
research conducted in 1995 by Ruth Miller with Year One
Primary Teacher Trainees at the Christchurch College of
Education firmly underpins the above policy.
Prior
to their experience of a Treaty workshop: 16%
favoured separate workshops, 72% said no and 12% did not
know
Following
their experience of attending a Treaty workshop:
90% favoured separate workshops, 2% said no and 8% did
not know.
There
were 49 students in the sample.
Note:
I would appreciate any feedback on your experience and
views of the issues raised in this paper. Please send
your comments to: Robert
Consedine Waitangi Associates PO
Box 35 089 Otautahi/Christchurch
Back to the Top 
|
