spinofflive
Workers remove the statue of Captain John Fane Charles Hamilton, June 12, 2020. (Photo: Michael Bradley / AFP)
Workers remove the statue of Captain John Fane Charles Hamilton, June 12, 2020. (Photo: Michael Bradley / AFP)

ĀteaJune 26, 2020

Hamilton or Kirikiriroa? New poll on backing for a city name change

Workers remove the statue of Captain John Fane Charles Hamilton, June 12, 2020. (Photo: Michael Bradley / AFP)
Workers remove the statue of Captain John Fane Charles Hamilton, June 12, 2020. (Photo: Michael Bradley / AFP)

A new survey by Stickybeak for The Spinoff shows more than one in four would like to see Hamilton’s name revert to Kirikiriroa. But a Waikato kaumatua says he’ll continue to push for change.

As statues come down around the world and long-venerated slave traders and colonialists have their actions put under the microscope for the first time, the same battles are being waged within New Zealand’s communities and councils. Do our statues and street names teach us about history? Or are they simply monuments to the side that “won”? John Bryce, who led the invasion of Parihaka, and Colonel Marmaduke George Nixon, whose attack on a Rangiaowhia settlement led to the massacre of women and children, are just two forefathers in the line of fire, as is the man for whom Aotearoa’s fourth-most populous city is named.

As part of a series of demographically weighted polls by Stickybeak for The Spinoff, we found more than 27% supporting a switch. But that left more than half the respondents against using the original name for Hamilton, Kirikiriroa.

But the kaumatua whose actions led to the recent removal of the statue of Captain John Fane Hamilton from Hamilton’s Civic Square, Taitimu Maipi, says he’ll keep pushing for the name change regardless.

He told The Spinoff: “We will push for the name change for Hamilton to Kirikiroa whether the number is 57% or 1.1%.

“Hamilton statue and the Hamilton name both represent the atrocities that happened at the Battle of Gate Pā, and Kirikiriroa was the original name of the town.”

Poll: Sticky Beak

In 2018 Maipi took to the statue with red paint and a hammer after discovering that the Ministry of Education had announced it wouldn’t include the Land Wars in the New Zealand school curriculum. After giving the statue a hammering in the face, he calmly walked to the city council offices to leave his contact details.

Then in June 2020 during a Black Lives Matter solidarity protest, Maipi threatened to remove the statue, this time with help from the Mongrel Mob. Not long after, the statue was removed by Hamilton mayor, Paula Southgate.

Maipi and other Waikato-Tainui hapū aren’t the only ones that believe the original name should be restored. In 2018, former Hamilton mayor Andrew King suggested changing the council’s name to Kirikiriroa City Council to promote closer links with iwi. After facing a huge backlash to the decision, King withdrew his suggestion.

It’s believed Captain Hamilton never stepped foot in the city. He died in the assault on Pukehinahina (Gate Pā) in Tauranga. According to Maipi, he was “an asshole”.

“The story is only their story, their hero. These Pākehā think history is just their history, it’s not.

“In the same battle where Hamilton died, there was a rangatira who told his soldiers that if an English soldier falls, give him water. Don’t kill him. Now if they’d put that as part of the story, that would be a nice balance, aye?”

Maipi says he wants his children and grandchildren to know the real history of New Zealand.

“Kirikiriroa means the gravel along the river. When you have a look at the history of the Waikato region, it was one of the best in the world for gardens. George Grey made that point in 1840, he said ‘what a beautiful place, look at the beautiful gardens, look at the healthy children’. Well, all of that is gone since the invasion. The beauty is now polluted. The river is polluted and our people are sick. You have to ask the question: why should we support that kind of behaviour? It’s time for a change.”

A second question in the Stickybeak poll asked if New Zealand is a racist country.

Poll: Sticky Beak

To the nearly 20% of people who answered “not racist at all”, Maipi says the evidence against that claim is easy to access and has been for a long, long time.

“Institutional racism is very clear to see. In 1870, the Tohunga Suppression Act and the restriction of rongoā. We can’t use that medicine because it’s evil. And now everybody wants our plants! Look at the 1984 report, then the 1988 Puao-te-ata-tu Report, our kaumātua went out all over the country, led by John Rangihau. It was very clear that institutional racism had to be brought into the discussion. The 1961 Hunn report, said that Māori should not live in their villages, they should be pepper-potted to become like Pākehā.”

“We don’t need a report though, we know all about it, aye. Our people live it.”

Keep going!
The Māori Television building, Auckland. Photo: RNZ / Shannon Haunui-Thompson
The Māori Television building, Auckland. Photo: RNZ / Shannon Haunui-Thompson

OPINIONĀteaJune 24, 2020

Māori Television needs to go – here’s what should replace it

The Māori Television building, Auckland. Photo: RNZ / Shannon Haunui-Thompson
The Māori Television building, Auckland. Photo: RNZ / Shannon Haunui-Thompson

The CEO of Pango Productions and creator of some of Māori Television’s biggest hits, Bailey Mackey, lays out his vision for the future of Māori media – and there’s no place for Māori Television in it.

I love Māori Television. I always have and always will. I started working there one week before it launched in 2004 as the inaugural head of sport. I remember the mix of apprehension and excitement as the decades of struggle to have te reo Māori recognised by a major broadcaster came to a head on that brisk morning in Newmarket. The pre-start up phase of Māori TV had been a mess, with misspending allegations at Aotearoa TV (the pilot precursor) and fraudulent CEO John Davy adding to the nervousness. After stints at TVNZ and TV3 many thought going to Māori TV was career suicide and I’m pretty sure (not that anyone would admit it) no one really knew what the hell was going to happen. Would we make it to air? Would we find an audience? Would we keep out of the papers? All valid concerns at the time.

The launch of Māori Television in 2004. (Image: Māori Television)

What happened over the next three and a half years was the most crazy, intense but fulfilling ride of my career. I grew up at Māori TV and some of my fondest memories and dearest friends come from that period. We built a sports department that included the show CODE and we made innovative deals with the Breakers, NZ Rugby League, Waka Ama and David Tua, to name a few. We outmanoeuvred other networks and I learned a lot along the way, but mostly we had fun. I produced, directed and presented. We all did whatever needed to be done. We won awards and when we were in the papers it was positive. Most importantly, we found an audience and we were fundamentally contributing to the overall aim of revitalising and normalising te reo Māori.

In subsequent years I have continued to contribute to Māori TV as an independent producer and have produced some of their biggest shows, including ANZAC Day, Te Matatini, Beneath the Māori Moon, Sidewalk Karaoke and Piri’s Tiki Tour.

I would love to think that I have helped shape the channel in the same way it has shaped me, which is why it pains me to say this: it’s time for Māori Television to go.

Recently, the minister for Māori development Nanaia Mahuta set out some options in the Māori Media Sector Shift review document. The proposals included a Centre for Media Excellence including cadetships and mentoring for Māori and iwi media, to be located within Māori Television; a single Māori news service to be located within the Māori Television Service; a Reo Aotearoa national radio station to be delivered through the Māori Television Service; and “digital pataka” where digital content would be held within storehouses across the Māori, iwi and public media ecosystems.

The review doesn’t address the elephant in the room, which is why the government is continuing to prop up an outdated platform that is losing its audience.

The document itself shows (albeit using outdated data) that Māori TV is the 15th most used platform by Māori, out of 16.

Source: NZ on Air/Māori Media Shift Options document, Te Puni Kōkiri.

Māori Television’s time as a linear television service needs to come to an end and something completely new be built in its place.

The idea that it be the home for a single news service or a centre of media excellence (when it has no track record of being a training provider and isn’t aligned with best practice) is bad and avoids the real issue of what is needed: an audience-focused publisher.

This new hub needs to become the digital portal for all people who have an interest in te reo Māori. It needs to be a fully-fledged digital OTT platform (a streaming media service offered directly to viewers) and it needs become one fast. The portal could include all Te Māngai Pāho funded content since its inception as well as be the home for an increased focus on high-end original programming. And it would need an increase in direct funding from what Māori Television is currently receiving.

Secondly, while it’s important to acknowledge Māori language revitalisation efforts as the primary driver of the sector, it is equally important to recognise the need for an appropriate articulation of a Māori perspective in English.

The discussion document places little importance on a Māori perspective in English. While I acknowledge that to some extent this occurs incidentally via content funded to “promote Māori language and Māori culture”, there needs to be greater provision for English language funded content without diluting the reo Māori-focused investment. A generous amount of contestable funding for platform-agnostic content in te reo Māori and English needs to be made available, and that content provided to a range of distributors, as well as the centralised streaming service.

Like many others, I will be putting forward a submission in response to the options presented by the minister. I agree with others such as my good friends Mihingarangi Forbes and Annabelle Lee-Mather in regards to ensuring a much wider spread of news and current affairs and the need for plurality as an important part of a democratic society.

Māori language-focused government investment has concentrated on language outcomes and therefore has undertaken most of the heavy lifting when it comes to providing a Māori worldview. It is important to acknowledge while a Māori worldview is gained through te reo Māori broadcasting, that from a funding perspective these outcomes are varied and responsibility sits with different government agencies and ministers.

My set of proposed recommendations are designed to create better cohesion by placing the responsibility for Māori language revitalisation and Māori perspective in English focused content under the one minister and just two agencies.

Māori Television was approached to write a response but declined.