Latest news with #HelenClarkFoundation
The Spinoff
29-06-2025
- Politics
- The Spinoff
Reimagining a multicultural New Zealand
Do New Zealanders really want to live in a multicultural country? And if so, would it be at odds with our bicultural foundation? Is New Zealand currently a multicultural country? That's the obvious first question to ask Colleen Ward, as we sit in hotel function room, the 'multicultural exemplar' of Singapore out the window. Ward, a psychology professor at Victoria University in Wellington, is speaking at the International Conference on Cohesive Societies on her decades of research into multicultural dynamics and acculturation – the process of adopting and exchanging values and practices with another culture. At the conference, she's focused on New Zealand as a case study of navigating multiculturalism in a country with an a bicultural framework. So is New Zealand multicultural? She says yes, but also not yet. True multiculturalism requires cultural diversity but also cross-cultural contact between New Zealanders and policies that support all cultures. 'I sometimes talk about it as multiculturalism in principle and multiculturalism in practice,' Ward explains. 'Multiculturalism is hard work. It's not easy, but it is really easy to agree with. 'New Zealanders are very supportive in terms of the principles, but, you know, as soon as the principle impinges on me and I might be bothered, or have to put in extra effort, or my tax dollar goes to support it, then it sometimes becomes a different situation.' Ward's assessment is backed up by the recently released Helen Clark Foundation social cohesion report. In its survey of 1,000 New Zealanders, more than half (56%) agreed that accepting immigrants from diverse countries makes New Zealand. But a much smaller 37% agreed (with 32% disagreeing) that ethnic minority communities should be given government assistance to maintain their customs and traditions. But Ward says even that can be a matter of perception. On the matter of public festivals like Diwali and Lunar New Year, which 'gives members of those communities not only the opportunity to engage in their traditions, but makes other people aware of what those traditions are', Ward would be 'kind of surprised' if one in three people were unsupportive of them. 'But when you put it in that way, that you're getting special treatment because you're different, or whatever, New Zealanders really don't like that idea.' Ward got a good laugh during her conference presentation when she explained that 'New Zealand Europeans often don't think they have a culture' and therefore many would consider multiculturalism in New Zealand to not include them. With a colonial history, where British customs and ways of working and communicating were forced on Māori, it is now the belief of many, including within government agencies, that Pākehā New Zealanders are without a unique culture. In fact, the only ethnicities not covered by the three ethnic ministries (Te Puni Kōkiri, Ministry for Pacific Peoples, Ministry for Ethnic Communities) are English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh. Therefore, immigration and acculturation in New Zealand has typically required an adopting of British norms, whether it be language, food, communication styles or changing names to English equivalents. Assimilation into Pākehā 'culture' has been the default for decades of immigration, resulting in dozens of minority communities, including Māori as tangata whenua, all working to coexist primarily with Pākehā New Zealand. But in times of crisis and need, it is Māori who have proven pivotal to multicultural harmony. The day after the February 22 Christchurch earthquake in 2011, Rēhua marae hosted a meeting with more than 60 people from organisations like Te Puni Kōkiri, New Zealand Police and the Ōtautahi Māori Wardens' Association. It was agreed that the joint response effort would be inclusive of and accessible to all communities, and would be driven by Māori values. Rēhua was designated an Earthquake Recovery Assistance Centre. Rakesh Naidoo, superintendent and head of partnerships at NZ Police, remembers the marae providing for all 20 different nationalities of families affected by the quakes. 'It was fascinating, when we took our families there, whether Chinese or Japanese or Korean families, they were welcomed into that marae and there was karakia, there was sharing of sorrow and empathy, and just that space,' he says. 'Being in the marae was quite cathartic for those families, they felt a real sense of safety.' When Naidoo presents at the conference in Singapore, it's specifically on the police response to the March 15 terror attacks. When detailing the police strategy in assisting the Muslim community following the attacks, he notes that 'importantly, we engaged with the indigenous Māori community and interfaith networks from the very beginning, ensuring our response was grounded in cultural and religious understanding and respect'. After his talk, he elaborates on the role of mana whenua in guiding 'how we were going to have the service, how we were going to support some of the grieving processes'. 'It really was a voice of leadership and while different communities have different voices, they're all very respectful of having mana whenua provide their perspective and know they have a role to play in manaakitanga.' That Māori leadership and flaxroots response to crises has been consistent, from the eruption of Whakaari to the Covid-19 lockdown and vaccination efforts. And in each response, that emphasis has been on supporting all communities and their unique needs. Which would make it perhaps surprising, at first glance, to see that in the New Zealand social cohesion report, it was Māori respondents who were least likely (38%) to agree that immigration enriches life. Can New Zealand successfully embrace multiculturalism if it hasn't yet fully embraced biculturalism and Māori as tangata whenua? Can there be successful Te Tiriti-based multiculturalism? Those are the questions Ward and her colleagues Tia Neha (Ngā Puhi, Ngāti Porou, Te Whānau Ā Apanui, Ngāti Kahungunu) and Tyler Ritchie are currently researching. In ' Re-imagining multiculturalism: Small steps towards indigenising acculturation science ', published this year, the scientists interviewed Māori participants about their views on multiculturalism and how it might, or might not, work in Aotearoa. The overwhelming sentiment from participants was that cultural diversity is good for all New Zealanders, but there was a healthy dose of scepticism regarding the likelihood of any government implementing a Tiriti-based approach to immigrants given the ongoing struggles to have the original Treaty honoured. While some Māori-led organisations currently welcome refugees to local communities here, and immigrants have shared positive and meaningful experiences integrating with Māori culture, there is little Māori involvement in the welcoming of migrants to New Zealand. Both Ward and Naidoo pointed to 'shared values' among migrant communities and Māori, which were echoed by the participants in Ward, Neha and Ritchie's study, and which suggests a tikanga-led approach to immigration could prove mutually beneficial. But at the same time, many Māori felt there was still too much work to do in their own communities before they could be asked to help others, with one participant summing it up: 'If we were able to … just step back… so we can take care of ourselves again, cause yeah once we take care of ourselves, we can manaaki them. Once our cup is full, we can keep overflowing.' For Ward, the conversation around New Zealand's potential as a Tiriti-based multicultural society is only just beginning. And the country has a long way to go before achieving anything close to it. 'I think we can continue to progress, but we will progress better under some circumstances and some governments more than others. I don't think we're in a good place right now, but that won't last forever.'
The Spinoff
25-06-2025
- Politics
- The Spinoff
The one simple trick to social cohesion? Trust your neighbours more than your MP
At a gathering of global religious, political and cultural experts in Singapore this week, one action has been cited over and over as a key to social harmony. At the International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICSS), more than 1,000 delegates from around the world have listened to former politicians, academics and digital entrepreneurs speak about the increasing polarisation around the world and what it will take for societies to flourish in a new reality. And the message that keeps coming back around, whether in talks about combatting online extremism, increasing social cohesion or embracing multiculturalism, is almost laughably simple: talk to your neighbours. In April, the Helen Clark Foundation released its commissioned report on social cohesion in New Zealand, which painted a bleak picture of the country as one filled with uncertainty, resentment and dissatisfaction. The worrying headline that emerged in local reporting on it was that New Zealanders were 'less happy than their Australian mates, have a lower sense of worth, and are less satisfied with their finances'. 'On every dimension, New Zealand is falling behind,' said co-author Shamubeel Eaqub at the time, pointing to levels of happiness and financial satisfaction. But there was one area where New Zealanders scored significantly higher than Australians. 'More New Zealanders believe government can be trusted to do the right thing (42% vs 33% in Australia),' read the report's summary. Speaking at the ICCS on the newly released 2025 Southeast Asian Social Cohesion Radar, which aims to track a similar sentiment to New Zealand's own report, Dr Farish Noor pointed out the slight decline in trust in government institutions but an increase in civic mindedness across the region. A decline in trust in the state is not inherently a cause for concern, he posited, or a suggestion of decaying social cohesion. In fact, when coupled with a rise in civic-mindedness or community engagement, it was actually a positive. 'Ultimately the state can't be a micro-manager,' he said. 'You have to trust your own neighbours and people.' Ideally there'd be an increase in both trust in the government to do the right thing and trust in our neighbours, but on its own, an increase in what's known as 'horizontal trust' is a positive thing, said Noor. In New Zealand, one's satisfaction with their financial position and trust in government appeared to have an inverse relationship with community engagement and trust. Of the respondents in the New Zealand social cohesion report, Māori and Pasifika were more likely to have had to skip meals due to finances, were more concerned with crime in their neighbourhoods and were least trusting of the government, but were also more likely to be happy, more likely to have helped out someone they didn't live with in the past four weeks, more likely to be part of a community group and more likely to view their neighbourhood as a place where a diverse range of people got along. This apparent contradiction was mirrored in the Southeast Asia social cohesion radar, which showed there was no connection between political systems (or civil liberties) and social cohesion. One very clear signifier of disenchantment in the New Zealand report, however, was age. Those aged under 30 were most likely to feel unstable financially, as well as isolated and disconnected from community. Younger people have reported higher levels of loneliness compared to older people for generations but as the first generation to grow up entirely with the internet, there are new concerns about young people's likelihood of finding real-life community later in life. A recent trend on Tiktok has been young users having their minds blown by the phrase 'the price of community is inconvenience'. The words adorn videos of neighbours moving furniture together, young women getting ready for a birthday they really can't be bothered attending, and cross-generational friendships. The moral? Sometimes being a part of something bigger than yourself means making sacrifices or compromises for the sake of maintaining community. This is the crux of the issue being tackled at the ICCS. Building horizontal trust relies on human-to-human interaction – whether it's speaking over the fence with your neighbour, dropping a friend to the airport or making small talk with the supermarket checkout operator. It depends on exposure, in mundane ways, to people different from ourselves in order to find connection and a common goal (to happily live alongside one another). So how do we do that when digital advancements are removing these opportunities at every turn? In an earlier panel, former ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade predicted that by the time there are 10 billion humans in the world, there will be 100 billion artificial agents representing them. AI 'advocates' who can negotiate on our behalf for better insurance, or work with other people's artificial agents to coordinate schedules. You potentially wouldn't have to speak to another person ever again. A representative from Google then spoke of the developments to its Gemini AI assistant tool and how there would soon be a version specifically for children under 13. There was extensive talk of the role of regulation and governments in fostering community and limiting harmful content on social media platforms in order to create resilient digital systems. No one suggested any of this would increase social cohesion, simply that they would be necessary to reduce the current growing harms. Instead, the one solution for increasing social cohesion that everyone – former politicians, economists, tech experts, dignitaries – could agree on was just to be a real-life neighbour to those around you while you still know how to. Apparently nothing breeds trust, connection and empathy like regular human exposure. As social media expert Benjamin Lee was spoke about the impenetrability of online forums and the resentment they breed, a group of women at the table next to me in the cavernous hotel ballroom started a whispered conversation. I couldn't understand what they were saying but I could certainly hear them over the top of the panel speakers. It was distracting and, if I'm honest, really annoying. I wouldn't have had to listen to them if I was watching the livestream of the event from my hotel room instead. But if I'd done that, I'd have had no idea they existed at all.
The Spinoff
18-06-2025
- Business
- The Spinoff
Slashed Matariki funding threatens to leave communities in the dark
Government funding for Matariki events was cut by nearly half this year. With some festivals now cancelled or scaled back, Liam Rātana investigates what's been lost – and what's still happening. Just four years after Matariki became a public holiday, the future of our public celebrations is looking less certain. In Budget 2024, the coalition government slashed funding for Matariki events by 45% – dropping from $5.5m to $3m. For many communities, the impact was immediate, with events cancelled, scaled back, or organisers left scrambling for alternative funding. Some organisers have described this year's funding process as a 'lolly scramble'. And others say the cuts have made it harder to plan with confidence or secure support for multi-year programming. The budget decision was made alongside mounting evidence that Matariki is delivering significant benefits – both cultural and economic. According to research commissioned by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, electronic card spending over the Matariki long weekend in 2024 reached nearly $607m. That's a 2.7% increase from 2023 and a 10.8% jump from 2019, the year before the holiday was introduced. The arts and recreation sector, while making up just 2.8% of total retail spend, saw the largest year-on-year increase, up 32.7% from 2023 and 61.7% from 2019. But the value of Matariki isn't measured by spending alone. Recent research by Manatū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage also shows a deepening public understanding of the holiday's meaning. The 2024 New Zealanders' Engagement with Matariki report found that while general awareness of Matariki remains steady, there's been a notable increase in people recognising it as a time for reflection, whānau connection, cultural learning and environmental appreciation. Roughly 70% of survey respondents agreed that Matariki brought people together through local events, helped connect them with te ao Māori and encouraged a deeper connection to the natural world. These are intangible benefits that speak to Matariki's wider role in national identity and social cohesion. That role has become even more important in a time of increasing political and cultural division. A March 2024 report by the Helen Clark Foundation found that less than half of New Zealanders agreed with positive statements about social cohesion in Aotearoa. The report warned that ongoing polarisation could weaken trust in institutions and make long-term planning more difficult for businesses, communities and individuals alike. While Matariki alone won't fix social cohesion, it has become a rare moment in the national calendar that brings people together around shared values. The government has defended the decision to cut funding, with prime minister Christopher Luxon telling media during last year's Matariki celebrations: 'We're going through some tough times, we have to make some tough choices across the whole of government spending.' Some of those choices have already had visible consequences. Free public events like the Tuturu Matariki Festival in Southland and Matariki Kaiapoi in Canterbury have either been cancelled or scaled back due to budget restraints. Te Puni Kōkiri, which took over responsibility for administering Matariki event funding from Manatū Taonga in 2024, was approached for updated data on this year's funding allocations. No response was received in time for publication. In 2023, Manatū Taonga allocated $3m across 121 applications through the Matariki Ahunga Nui Fund. By comparison, Te Puni Kōkiri's 2023/2024 Te Pū Harakeke Fund allocated just $211,349 across 46 organisations. Despite the cuts, hundreds of events are still taking place around the country this Matariki. Many organisers have turned to local councils, iwi authorities or philanthropic partners to keep celebrations going. The official national event will be hosted this year by Ngāti Rangi at Tirorangi Marae in Ohakune, with a national broadcast scheduled for Friday morning. But with central government support reduced and demand for funding remaining high, organisers say the sustainability of these events is becoming harder to guarantee. As Matariki continues to evolve as a public holiday, questions remain about how it will be resourced – and whether communities will have the support they need to keep the kaupapa alive.
Scoop
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
IINZ Calls For Resignation Of Peter Davis From Helen Clark Foundation Over Antisemitism Comments
Press Release – IINZ You cannot claim to champion social cohesion while minimising or rationalising antisemitic hate, the Institute said. Social trust depends on moral consistency, especially from those in leadership. Peter Daviss actions erode that trust. The Israel Institute of New Zealand is calling for Professor Peter Davis to step down as trustee of the Helen Clark Foundation following his recent comments dismissing the seriousness of antisemitic graffiti discovered in Wellington. The graffiti was widely condemned by community leaders and human rights advocates. However, Davis, in a public social media post, appeared to downplay the incident or even justify it, writing 'you reap what you sow'. 'At a time when Jewish communities are feeling increasingly vulnerable, this kind of response from a high-profile public figure is deeply irresponsible,' said Dr David Cumin, spokesperson for the Institute. 'Antisemitism is not a political football. It is a real and rising threat that demands unequivocal condemnation.' The call for Davis's resignation is especially urgent given his role as a trustee of a foundation that seeks to influence public policy. The Helen Clark Foundation recently released a report on social cohesion in Aotearoa New Zealand, highlighting the importance of inclusive leadership and the dangers of racial and religious scapegoating. Davis's dismissive remarks directly contradict those values. 'You cannot claim to champion social cohesion while minimising or rationalising antisemitic hate,' the Institute said. 'Social trust depends on moral consistency, especially from those in leadership. Peter Davis's actions erode that trust.' The Israel Institute of New Zealand is urging the Helen Clark Foundation to take a public stance against antisemitism and to reaffirm its commitment to inclusivity by appointing new leadership. 'There must be zero tolerance for hate in any form,' the statement concluded. 'If the Foundation is to maintain its credibility, Professor Davis must resign.'
Scoop
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
IINZ Calls For Resignation Of Peter Davis From Helen Clark Foundation Over Antisemitism Comments
The Israel Institute of New Zealand is calling for Professor Peter Davis to step down as trustee of the Helen Clark Foundation following his recent comments dismissing the seriousness of antisemitic graffiti discovered in Wellington. The graffiti was widely condemned by community leaders and human rights advocates. However, Davis, in a public social media post, appeared to downplay the incident or even justify it, writing 'you reap what you sow'. 'At a time when Jewish communities are feeling increasingly vulnerable, this kind of response from a high-profile public figure is deeply irresponsible,' said Dr David Cumin, spokesperson for the Institute. 'Antisemitism is not a political football. It is a real and rising threat that demands unequivocal condemnation.' The call for Davis's resignation is especially urgent given his role as a trustee of a foundation that seeks to influence public policy. The Helen Clark Foundation recently released a report on social cohesion in Aotearoa New Zealand, highlighting the importance of inclusive leadership and the dangers of racial and religious scapegoating. Davis's dismissive remarks directly contradict those values. 'You cannot claim to champion social cohesion while minimising or rationalising antisemitic hate,' the Institute said. 'Social trust depends on moral consistency, especially from those in leadership. Peter Davis's actions erode that trust.' The Israel Institute of New Zealand is urging the Helen Clark Foundation to take a public stance against antisemitism and to reaffirm its commitment to inclusivity by appointing new leadership. 'There must be zero tolerance for hate in any form,' the statement concluded. 'If the Foundation is to maintain its credibility, Professor Davis must resign.'
