WELLINGTON, New Zealand — On the eve of New Zealand’s Māori language celebration week, the country’s right-wing political leaders ordered public agencies to stop affirmative action policies for Māori people, who are disadvantaged on almost every metric.
The lawmakers then posted on social media about their enthusiasm for the Indigenous tongue. “In New Zealand we’re lucky to have this language and I’m glad to celebrate it,” Prime Minister Christopher Luxon of the center-right National party wrote on Facebook Monday.
Māori was not solely “the preserve of people who think a certain way,” said David Seymour, the leader of populist party ACT — whose detractors accuse him of anti-Māori policies — in a video introducing his followers to economic terms in the language.
Their remarks reflected the exploding popularity of Māori culture and language – which has reversed course from the brink of extinction decades ago to become part of everyday life in New Zealand. There are waiting lists for classes and a chain store’s clothing line for Māori language week sold out in minutes.
But they also belied a fraught debate about race roiling New Zealand, fueled by the polarized politics confronting many Western democracies and a backlash against the previous left-wing government. Last year, that sentiment brought to power fringe parties claiming that special treatment for Māori language and people — promised in the country’s founding document and intended to address deep inequities — has created social division and unequal rights.
As a government comprising those groups and Luxon’s ramps up initiatives stripping recognition of Māori from policy and law, analysts say they imperil New Zealand’s standing on Indigenous matters.
“We’ve been world leaders and now that is being clawed back,” said Ella Henry, a Māori entrepreneurship professor at Auckland University of Technology. “I don’t know that this government quite understands the negative impact that is not only going to have on us politically but economically, because Māori culture is a tourism destination.”
The relationship between Māori and the government — a coalition between Luxon’s and Seymour’s parties and a third, populist New Zealand First — promises to be “not just the most, but the only regressive one” in nearly two decades, said Ben Thomas, a political consultant who worked for a previous National government before Luxon led the party.
Their words echo others across the political spectrum who spoke to The Associated Press. They describe the way in which New Zealand has grown more racially fraught since the government took office last November, while at the same time public support for Māori culture has surged — a paradox rooted in the way the political system functions.
Without enough seats in Parliament to rule after an election that tipped Jacinda Ardern’s Labour party from office, Luxon formed a government with two minor parties whose leaders — both Māori — capitalized on dissatisfaction about policies that favor Māori.
The two groups combined received less than 15% of the national vote, but extracted a series of concessions from Luxon amounting to “an onslaught of racist policy,” said Janell Dymus-Turei, an expert in Māori health policy currently based at the Centers for American Indian and Alaska Native Health in Colorado.
Central to the groups’ resentment is how the Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand’s founding document, has become integrated in law. It was signed in 1840, between Māori tribes and the British Crown which colonized New Zealand, but breaches of the rights promised to Māori and contested interpretations of the treaty since gave way to an Indigenous protest movement in the 1970s.
The activism prompted a Māori renaissance – immersion language pre-schools, billions of dollars in settlements between the government and tribes, and inclusion in law of the Treaty’s principles, which promise Māori a say in decision-making and protection of their interests. Much of the legal recognition is due to be revised.
This week’s order to public servants to stop targeting policy initiatives by race — unless it was proven as the only contributing factor to a problem — was insidious because it did not require a parliamentary vote, Dymus-Turei said.
“The government are not just using legislative measures, they’re using their directive powers within their ministries” to repeal Māori rights, she added. Māori die on average seven years younger than non-Māori for women and eight years younger for men. They record higher rates of health issues — including cancers and respiratory and heart problems — that policies such as earlier screening and free doctors’ visits have sought to address.
Speaking to reporters Friday, Seymour denied the directive was anti-Māori. Policy should be “based on equal rights for each and every citizen, no matter what your background,” he said, adding that health issues where Māori disproportionately suffered could be explained by poverty or lack of housing, which affect other New Zealanders too — although Māori are disadvantaged in both.
Seymour has also secured a pledge that parliament will consider his proposed law drastically redefining the Treaty of Waitangi’s principles. Luxon has promised the bill will not succeed, but it will be open for public submissions. Detractors warn this threatens months of racially charged debate about a matter that many New Zealanders consider long settled.
“The wording is so vague that if something like that were to ever go through, you would see decades of court cases and probably greater rights for Māori,” said Thomas. “But none of that matters because the bill is a cipher for people to project all of their feelings and frustrations about the place of Māori in society.”
A greater threat to Māori rights, Thomas said, was a concession won by New Zealand First, led by Winston Peters, to review and either repeal or replace all mentions of the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand law, with a few exceptions.
“This is not the prime ministership that Luxon expected or planned for or wanted,” said Thomas, adding that ACT and New Zealand First had gained power unprecedented for minor parties.
Luxon on Tuesday promoted his government’s record on Māori matters in Parliament, citing plans to improve literacy and numeracy and to move children out of emergency housing.
“When I actually think about what we’re doing to rebuild this economy, giving tax relief for Māori families to support them in a cost of living crisis, we’re a government focused on outcomes and we’re improving them for Māori and non-Māori,” he said.
Luxon took Māori language lessons ahead of an election campaign in which he pledged to change the names of public agencies — some have adopted Māori titles in recent years — back to English.
The turmoil has arisen as a fresh Māori political movement has come of age. Māori lawmakers — including Seymour and Peters — hold 33 of Parliament’s 123 seats, six of them representing a Māori political party.
But Thomas said the previous left-wing government didn’t do a good job of explaining its “completely defensible” policies advancing Māori rights, with the coronavirus pandemic and cost of living crisis amplifying the backlash.
Māori — who are nearly 20% of New Zealand’s population and disproportionately young — were more ready to oppose challenges to their rights than generations before, said Henry.
“The last 55, 60 years of Māori protest transformed the country that I was born into 70 years ago,” she said. “We’ve been galvanized into action, which I think is really positive.”