On Another Planet

Dem Bones Are Rising

Professor of Maori Studies at Auckland University is on another universe. If anyone disbelieves the existence of parallel universes, we cite Professor Margaret Mutu and rest our case. (Now we must issue a caveat before going further. Our comments are based upon a report in the NZ Herald, entitled Mount Revealed as Cemetery. It is probably gratuitously generous to assume that the NZ Herald has got the facts and story straight, but we will proceed on that basis.)

Some photographic evidence of pre-European Maori bones from burials on Mount Maunganui beach has come to light. Professor Mutu argues that the soon-to-be-voted upon "beach bill" will mean that Maori can restrict beach access at Mount Maunganui and on numerous other parts of the coastline accordingly.

Auckland University head of Maori Studies Margaret Mutu said wherever bodies were buried, the Government's proposed replacement for the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act lets presiding iwi restrict access. "It makes that beach tapu because you don't want people there digging them up accidentally. Where it's known, it will be," Dr Mutu said.

"The legislation allows it, that wahi tapu must be protected." No one should be fossicking around a beach where bodies had been buried - just like any other cemetery, she said. "This is actually very, very common all around the coast. We bury our dead in sand dunes as a defence mechanism."

So, let's get this straight. Maori historically buried their dead in the sand on the beaches of New Zealand. It makes sense really--since grave digging in the sand would have been relatively easy. Under current Maori cultural revisionism, this makes the beach a sacred site. This, says Mutu, means that the "beach bill" will come into play, since it allowed for Maori to protect such sacred sites. Ergo, Maori will be empowered to restrict public beach access in many places in New Zealand.

Now enter Tauranga MP, Simon Bridges who has actually read the "beach bill".

The National Party's Tauranga MP, Simon Bridges, said he was very clear that public access at the Mount would remain open. It would be "utterly unreasonable" to restrict New Zealanders from the Mount, and local iwi recognised that, Mr Bridges said.

"I'm sure there are cases where wahi tapu is reasonably and legally found to exist, but the fact of the matter is the Mount gets tens of thousands of people walking over the stretches of beach where the bones have been said to be found, and it will be utterly unreasonable to expect Kiwis to stop doing that."

"Local iwi are being exceptionally reasonable about bones of pre-European Maori that have been found, and they recognise that the Mount is for all New Zealanders." Moreover, access could only be restricted where iwi were granted customary title, and they would not meet a requirement to show exclusive use of the beach since 1840. "It's quite clear that it has been enjoyed by all kinds of Kiwis," Mr Bridges said.

Maori, under the "beach bill" would have the right to preserve their "sacred" beach spots if they were granted customary title over that particular piece of land. And the burden of proof is high.

Under the proposed legislation, the Marine and Coastal Areas Bill, iwi will have the ability to prohibit or restrict access to wahi tapu areas. But this is only if they are granted customary title over the coastline, which requires exclusive use since 1840. This is unlikely for a public beach - much less a popular one like the Mount. (Emphasis, ours.)

Professor Mutu is numbered amongst the co-sovereigntists, asserting that Maori must be regarded as co-rulers of New Zealand with the Crown. The "beach bill" for them is a start. It does not go anywhere near where they want to go. And they will not rest until they get it. They are prepared to play a long game. The subtle sub-text of Mutu's argument is that sacred burial grounds trump customary title; Maori bones in the sand give a more weighty title than uninterrupted customary usage.

The end game for these radical revisionists is control of the country. They will keep manufacturing spurious claims and rights until they get there, or until they are confronted and refuted. We suspect that the vast majority of welfare-dependant Maori secretly and inwardly cheer them on. They see it as the mother of all payouts and a path to the true restoration of their mana. They are fools indeed.

The unmitigated sadness is that they are inflicting upon themselves and their children still more generations of welfare dependency and slavery. It is so pervasive that nowadays many Maori have to emigrate to escape its debilitating miasma. Professor Mutu and her ilk are false prophets and unwittingly act to destroy their own people--as Sir Apirana Ngata so presciently foretold seventy years ago.