Ngāti Kahungunu Appalled By Pulling Of Te Reo Signage
Ngti Kahungunu demands the immediate reinstatement of bilingual signage and a full rewrite of Waka Kotahis rulebook so that this never happens again.
Ngāti Kahungunu is appalled by the Minister of Transport and Waka Kotahi's decision to pull the use of Reo Māori traffic signs and stands unapologetically in defence of te reo Māori 'Taihoa' 'Haere' stop-go signs in Te Matau a Māui.
Says Ngāti Kahungunu Chair, Bayden Barber, 'This is not about rules – it's about racism.
Te reo Māori is not a translation, a novelty, or a risk. It is official. It is sacred. It is ours. It belongs on our roads just as it does in our wharenui, classrooms, homes, and workplaces.'
He adds, 'I loved seeing the use of Te Reo in these contexts. It's only two words surrounded by green or red, which most people understand as go or stop. This is a perfect opportunity to introduce te reo to the masses.'
Ngāti Kahungunu has been on a 25-year journey to reclaim and restore the use of te reo amongst its 100,000 people, 96 marae and over 150 hapū with the recent review of its language strategy, Kahungunu kia Eke. Last year the Toitū Te Reo Language Festival in Hastings attracted over 7000 people from all walks of life, Māori and non-Māori alike. Te reo Māori is thriving in parts of the community and Ngāti Kahungunu was to see te reo continue to flourish.
Barber again comments, 'As part of our language strategy, Ngāti Kahungunu has worked closely with workplaces and organisations within our rohe to support our language aspirations. Hastings District Council has bilingual signage on all its main roadways. The iwi has a good relationship with Tūpore Infrastructure who have over 90% Māori workforce and commends the use of te reo on its stop-go signs.'
Ngāti Kahungunu demands the immediate reinstatement of bilingual signage and a full rewrite of Waka Kotahi's rulebook so that this never happens again. In addition to this Ngāti Kahungunu is ready to meet with Waka Kotahi, the Minister of Transport, and TMNZ. But we do not come to negotiate our identity – we come with clear demands: restore the language, revise the rules, and acknowledge the damage done.
Te reo Māori is a language of this land. It must be seen, spoken, and protected – not paused, not questioned and not erased.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
3 hours ago
- Newsroom
Making heated tobacco products cheaper than cigarettes is no scandal
Opinion: The Government's decision to introduce a lower excise rate for heated tobacco products (HTPs) has been widely framed as 'giving tax breaks to tobacco companies'. It's a provocative line – and politically potent – but it doesn't help us have an honest, evidence-informed discussion about how to reduce smoking harm, particularly for the most disadvantaged New Zealanders, or how to deal with conflicts of interest. Let's be clear: this isn't a corporate subsidy, so long as the reduced tax is passed on with cheaper products. It's an excise adjustment applied to a class of tobacco products that heat rather than burn tobacco. (Like vaping products, HTPs are marketed as smoke-free alternatives to cigarettes, but are not the same thing.) Combustion is what makes smoking lethal. Cigarettes burn at over 800C, releasing thousands of toxic compounds. Heated tobacco products operate at much lower temperatures and don't produce smoke – just an aerosol – with far fewer harmful constituents. That distinction matters. The multinational tobacco company Philip Morris does hold a monopoly over HTPs in New Zealand. That's not ideal, but it doesn't mean the tax policy exists for Philip Morris International. The intention is to make a less harmful product more affordable than cigarettes – a principle long accepted in tobacco harm reduction, and already applied to vaping. Unfortunately, it appears Philip Morris International hasn't yet passed on the tax savings to the small number of HTP users in New Zealand – this is the real scandal. In addition, the apparent impact of PMI on government policy is tough to ignore, and contrary to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which seeks to protect government policy from tobacco industry influence. New Zealand has rightly taxed cigarettes heavily to deter use. But excise taxes are also regressive. The remaining people who smoke – fewer than 7 percent of adults – are disproportionately Māori, Pasifika, low-income, and more likely to experience mental health distress. The associate minister of health, Casey Costello, justified the excise differential by citing relative harm reduction and the growing inequity of uniform excise. Her reasoning deserves more attention than it has been given. Critics argue there's insufficient evidence that HTPs help people quit, but the UK Office for Health Improvement and Disabilities, the UK Committee on Toxicity, and the US Food and Drug Administration all acknowledge HTPs reduce exposure to toxicants compared with cigarettes. That doesn't make them harmless – but being less harmful than smoking is enough to warrant a differential tax. The example of Japan is instructive. There, HTPs make up over 30 percent of tobacco sales. Though vaping is banned, cigarette consumption has plummeted by 40 percent in some markets. Surveys suggest many smokers switched completely to HTPs. Youth uptake has been minimal. No policy is perfect, but that's a shift in the right direction. What's really at stake here? Not a tax break for big tobacco – but increasing the options for people who smoke and want to quit, and whether we believe in a response to nicotine products based on their comparative risks to human health as a foundation for public health policy. A more productive debate would ask: • Are they less harmful than cigarettes, and do they help smokers quit? • Are tax savings being passed on to consumers? • Are HTPs being promoted responsibly? • Will there be an independent evaluation of their impact on smoking rates? In a country that leads the world with its Smokefree 2025 goal, we should be asking how to accelerate the decline in smoking, not defending a one-size-fits-all excise regime that's increasingly disconnected from the realities of risk, behaviour, and equity. If HTPs can help some people switch, pricing them appropriately is not a scandal. It's a good policy – provided it's transparent, monitored, and grounded in evidence, and the tax savings are passed on to consumers.
The Spinoff
3 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Who wants to be the next mayor of Hamilton?
There's a wide-open race to lead the city of the future. With incumbent mayor Paula Southgate headed for the door, it's anyone's game for the Hamilton mayoralty. Nominations for the race are now closed and 12 candidates are in the running. Tim Macindoe Yes, that is Tim Macindoe as in the former parliamentarian for the National Party circa 2008 to 2020 as MP for Hamilton East, who has represented the city council's East ward since February 2024. Despite being a ward representative himself, Macindoe is keen to scrap the ward system and keep a smaller council, and in the face of $1.25b in council debt, he's campaigning on the promise of balancing the council's books by putting a halt on the 'nice-to-haves' and fostering a 'customer-focused' mindset within council to keep investors and developers keen on the Tron. Clearly, Macindoe has skin in the game, but it also can't hurt his chances to have been one of the lobbyists who held the government to its promise to open a third medical school at the University of Waikato. Maria Huata This current Hamilton Māori ward representative has worn plenty of hats in her career: educator, broadcaster, translator, consultant, iwi representative, councillor and … mayor? Her campaign is largely focused on community wellbeing, telling a public forum in late July that she would address safety concerns in the city by tackling poverty, would like to establish something akin to the city's former youth council to give rangatahi a voice, and called for social housing to be designed alongside disadvantaged communities. Her broadcasting background also shines through in her hopes to revitalise the city's arts and culture offerings. Sarah Thomson A current two-term councillor and former lawyer, who once took the minister for climate change to court over the government's emission reduction goals, and kinda won but also kinda didn't. Her current work to date with the council has seen major growth in the city's natural vegetation by growing more trees and restoring local gullies, and she chairs the strategic growth and district plan committee. If elected mayor, Thomson wants to reduce the council's costs while still funding community wellbeing via City Safe and venues such as parks and pools, secure funding for a central community hub, and pressure central government to support the city's community services. Rachel Karalus A centrist and former chief executive of K'uate Pasifika Trust, and another 'back to basics' candidate who's got a 'head for detail, heart for Hamilton' – though she reckons she could balance community and commercial needs pretty well. Much like the prime minister, Karalus is keen on going for growth, with plans to reduce debt and support infrastructure projects while also prioritising environmental and social projects, and a push for the council and city to advance its technology. Rudi Du Plooy Known in some circles as 'Bokke Bo', this colourful conservative candidate has stood in a few local elections in his time and has yet to make it onto the council table. If he did, Du Plooy would like to see the city become more seniors-friendly, and would scrap IAWAI – the council-controlled organisation looking after water services across the city and Waikato district – and the city's proposed water metres, and instead investigate chlorine-free water system options and offer rates rebates for rainfall harvesters. Du Plooy is known to be pretty anti-vax (if that appeals to you, he's got a lot of content on Facebook you should check out), and once made it into the news for celebrating South Africa's Day of the Vow. Lily Carrington The youngest in the race and a representative for the Animal Justice Party. Carrington also ran for the mayoralty in 2022, with the goals of funding desexing programmes for animals and local shelters, and supporting the call for an independent commissioner for animals. Not much intel on what she'd do for the city's transport, infrastructure or economy, but at least your pet will have a voice. Dave Taylor A 'thought-leadership consultant' and Green-adjacent candidate with a storied background in writing and publishing, hailing from Hamilton West (where he is also running as ward representative). As a mayor, he wants to uplift Kirikiriroa's cultural and creative communities to boost the city's identity and tourism, would prioritise investments in long-term infrastructure and green, blue and urban spaces, and wants to keep the city's Māori ward. He says his parents named him after a very handsome paediatrician. Jack Gielen This is not Gielen's first rodeo in the local elections, and it may not be his last, having stood in every Hamilton mayoral election since 2010. He is a longtime candidate, pastor of the Church of Zion, singer of dittys and founder of the NZ Suicide Prevention Trust, a role which got him into hot water he was caught stalking funerals and providing dodgy advice with no qualifications. In the 2022 local elections, Gielen told the Herald he'd like to be the father of the city, would support car-free days to encourage public transport, and would keep a 24-7 open-office policy to hear his constituent's woes. He also reckons he's got a good grasp on housing affordability and climate change. Roma Tupaea-Warren Founder of the single-issue New Zealand Constitution Party, which called for the creation of a written constitution for Aotearoa, and is also no longer a political party. We're not sure what Tupaea-Warren would bring to Hamilton as mayor, but hopefully he'll get it in writing soon. Roger Stratford A man who stands for the 'common sense folk', and who has already lost an election to Macindoe, having failed to become the East ward representative in the 2024 byelection. Stratford reckons he's the one candidate with enough guts to stand up to Christopher Luxon, and due to the city's high population of South Africans, would issue an executive order to make Afrikaans an official language immediately upon becoming mayor (which is not something a mayor can do). Guy Wayne Temoni-Syme Husband of Tania Temoni-Syme, who ran unsuccessfully in the East ward byelection with the promises of freezing rates and repairing potholes. Mr Temoni-Syme hasn't yet announced what he'd offer to the city, but you could assume he's doing it out of love. John McDonald Perhaps some larger journalistic failings at play here, but it is unclear who John McDonald actually is, and what he's going to do about the Tron. Let's hope it's good.
1News
13 hours ago
- 1News
Government forges ahead with foreshore and seabed law
The Government is forging ahead with plans to change the law governing New Zealand's foreshore and seabed, despite a Supreme Court ruling last year that appeared to undercut the rationale for the change. The proposed legislation stems from a clause in National's coalition deal with NZ First, which promised to revisit the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. That commitment was driven by fears that a 2023 Court of Appeal decision could have made it significantly easier for Māori groups to win recognition of customary rights over parts of the coastline. The Government introduced a bill to Parliament last year to prevent that, but it hit pause in December after the Supreme Court effectively overturned the earlier ruling. At the time, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith welcomed the development and said ministers would take time to reassess their plans. ADVERTISEMENT On Tuesday, Goldsmith confirmed to RNZ that Cabinet had agreed to press ahead with the law change regardless and to pass it before October. "Everybody in New Zealand has an interest in what goes on in the coastline, and we're trying our best to get that balance right." Goldsmith said he was not convinced that last year's Supreme Court ruling had set a high enough test for judging whether customary rights should be granted. "We've had a couple of cases that have been decided since then - which have shown almost 100% of the coastline and those areas being granted customary marine title - which confirmed to us that the Supreme Court test still didn't achieve the balance that we think the legislation set out to achieve." Asked whether he expected an upswell of protest, Goldsmith said that had been an earlier concern but: "time will tell". "There's been a wide variety of views, some in favour, some against, but we think this is the right thing to do." The legislation was one of the key objections raised by Ngāpuhi leaders last year when they walked out on a meeting with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in protest. ADVERTISEMENT More than 200 applications for customary marine title are making their way through the courts. Under the amendment bill, any court decisions issued after 25 July 2024, will need to be reconsidered. That would appear to cover seven cases, involving various iwi from around the country. "I understand their frustration over that," Goldsmith said. "But we believe it is very important to get this right, because it affects the whole of New Zealand." Goldsmith said the government had set aside about $15 million to cover the additional legal costs. The Marine and Coastal Area Act was originally passed by the National-led government in 2011, replacing the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership. The 2004 law, introduced by Helen Clark's Labour government, provoked widespread protest and led to the creation of the Māori Party, now known as Te Pāti Māori. National's 2011 replacement declared that no one owned the foreshore and seabed but allowed Māori groups to seek recognition of their rights - or "Customary Marine Title" - through the courts or in direct negotiations with the Crown. ADVERTISEMENT Customary title recognises exclusive Māori rights to parts of the foreshore and seabed, provided certain legal tests are met, including proving continuous and "exclusive" use of the area since 1840 without substantial interruption. The 2023 Court of Appeal ruling, however, declared that groups only needed to show they had enough control over the area that they could keep others from using it, and that situations where the law itself had prevented them from doing so could be ignored. The Supreme Court subsequently overturned that and said the Court of Appeal had taken an unduly narrow approach in its interpretation.
