4 January, 2025
Justice Committee
Parliament of New Zealand
Dear Committee Members,
I wish to make a submission on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill that you will
be considering in the near future.
As the map below demonstrates, I have independently consulted on governance and
management in dozens of diverse nations. Many of them have experienced ethnic
tensions and attempted to resolve them.
Before expressing an opinion on the Bill before you, I ask that you read the short true
story below. It exemplifies aspects of New Zealand’s current situation relevant to the Bill. (The story has been previously published at https://www.mendhurst.com/serious-fun/.)
Bi-Culture Wars
I was enjoying my conversation with a fellow passenger on an Air New Zealand flight to
Christchurch. He was a capable and lively professional, good at communicating. And we seemed to share many ideas about good governance and management.
We talked for half an hour before I remembered to introduce myself. He reciprocated. “Oh, like everyone from my country, I have a very long name. It’s on my card here. But just call me Hazik. In the Tamil language, my name means cheerful!”
And cheerful he was. Hazik explained his current role with gusto. “I’m a business analyst working with New Zealand government departments. My job is to help them get better value for money, by evaluating results from different programs to see what works well and what doesn’t. For example I just finished evaluating rehabilitation programs for prisoners. Very interesting! Some programs achieve a lot at not much cost, others are the opposite.”
“So what will happen from that evaluation?” I asked.
“Well of course they should act on the results”, Hazik said breezily. “Continue or expand the effective programs, and close down the others.” Then he gave me a sly smile. “But actually, what they usually do is continue, maybe even expand, the effective programs – and also the ones that are not effective!” His cheerfulness was infectious and we laughed loudly together.
I changed the subject. “You said before that you were working in southern Africa, at the same time I was working there. Were you born there? And, if you don’t mind me asking, how did you come to be working in New Zealand?”
Hazik was happy to explain. “I was born in Sri Lanka and went to school there. I did very well at school. But as you probably know, we have terrible ethnic divisions there, and opportunities for Tamils like me were limited. My family decided it would be better for me to work somewhere else. I had relatives in Africa, so I went there. Then I made friends with a Kiwi, who said that with my maths skills I could probably find work here. So I came for a visit and to study, and then looked for a job.”
Hazik smiled again, and continued. “My Kiwi friend helped me apply for a job with a government department. They needed my skills, and everything was going really well. I got to the final interview and I thought I would get a job offer for sure! But I did something foolish and spoiled it.”
I was intrigued. “What did you do?”
“They said they had just one more question: ‘What did I think about biculturalism?’”
Hazik shook his head. “I never heard this term before! So I asked them, ‘What does it mean?’ They explained that it is wrong to think of everyone in New Zealand as having one national identity. Based on history, there are two different cultures – Māori and European. Those two cultures are separate, and have different history, customs and language. So surely the government should apply bi-culturalism, and treat each individual as belonging to one of those cultures.”
Hazik smiled ruefully. “‘What did I think about that idea?’, they asked me again.” He shook his head. “That was when I was very foolish. I told them ‘I think this biculturalism would be a very bad idea. That is what we have in Sri Lanka, and so we always have prejudice and discrimination, and sometimes riots, and even a civil war killing many people. Government should not create differences between people. It would be much better to emphasise what all the citizens have in common as New Zealand citizens, to strengthen unity and to help treat everyone fairly.’”
I smiled. “I bet that wasn’t the answer they expected!”
“Yes, it surprised them,” Haziq said cheerfully. “‘Oh no!’, the Māori person on the interview panel said. ‘We don’t want problems like those in Sri Lanka. We just want to emphasise the identity of our Māori people, so we can feel attached to the land of our ancestors, speak our own language, and receive government services tribally. And we want to vote separately for our own Māori representatives in Parliament.’”
“What did you say then?”
Hazik shook his head again. “I made it worse! I told them ‘That sounds to me like apartheid in South Africa. When I was working in Africa, everyone there knew apartheid drove people of different races further away from each other. It was wrong! We were all against it. In a democracy, everyone of all races should have equal opportunities and the same voting rights. So we were very happy when New Zealand rejected apartheid and would not play rugby with the Springboks.’”
It was my turn to laugh. “So you didn’t get the job?”
Hazik grew serious for a moment. “Of course not. My friend was furious with me. He explained how I must say that I support government policy on biculturalism, and not say what I truly believe.” Then he brightened. “Before my next interview, I practiced exactly what to say. So that time I had no problem getting the job. Since then I say only the right things, and now I am doing very well!”
We broke off to prepare for landing. I never saw Hazik again. Our conversation stayed with me though. Hazik had personally experienced where “bi-culturalism” can lead, and knew first-hand that what people have in common should be emphasised over their cultural identity. And he had learned another lesson. For those who hold a different opinion but want to work in New Zealand’s government, honesty is not the best policy.
(end of story)
As stated earlier, I have independently consulted on governance and management in
dozens of diverse nations. Many of them have experienced ethnic tensions and
attempted, often in good faith, to resolve them. Typically they implement policies that
identify and categorise their citizens by ethnic origin, and then legally differentiate
between citizens in various ways according to those categories.
I have encountered many different examples of the social and economic harm such
policies cause within the nations that implement them. Examples abound, ranging from civil wars to the horrors of comprehensive apartheid in South Africa to the inevitable and counter-productive divisiveness, inefficiency and corruption that results from preferential access to government jobs, services and contracts by ethnicity.
I have not encountered a single example where policies of ethnic discrimination have
generated social and economic benefit to the nation as a whole. The greater harm done to the nation always outweighs any direct benefits achieved for the favoured groups.
The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill aims to counter and prevent the extension of such harmful policies in New Zealand. I therefore support the concepts it embodies. I urge you to give the Bill careful consideration and a favourable overall recommendation.
Yours sincerely,
John Mendzela
John Mendzela has over 25 years' experience in central bank governance and management as an independent external adviser, in-house change leader, and consultant to the official sector. He has worked with over 20 individual central banks and led many multinational forums.
The closing date for submissions is 11.59pm Tuesday, 07 January 2025. You can make your own here.