Bishops unite over Brash

By BERNARD ORSMAN

New Zealand's Anglican and Catholic bishops have united to oppose National Party leader Dr Don Brash's views on the Treaty of Waitangi and raced-based privileges for Maori.

In a rare move, 20 bishops from the two churches yesterday issued a statement calling for a treaty debate rather than a race debate, which had revealed a volatile state of feeling about race and ethnicity.

The statement, which did not mention Dr Brash by name, said most Maori health, education and welfare programmes were needs-based rather than ethnic privilege.

"If claims to the contrary are made, we would ask that they be tested in the light of facts and figures," the 12 Anglican and eight Catholic bishops said.

"Self-determination is the issue, not ethnic privilege. Government schemes giving preferential treatment to Maori account for less than 2 per cent of the national budgets on health and education.

"The evidence for such preference being effective in addressing huge socio-economic disparities is overwhelming, compared to the failure of policies that treat everyone the same."

The Anglican bishops said they had a historical responsibility to honour the treaty. The Catholic bishops said they shared that responsibility.

"So we have to disagree with those who say the treaty offers no blueprint for modern New Zealand, creates no partnership, defines no principles or constitutional relationship and serves to fuel separatism. Our experience contradicts those claims."

The bishops said the treaty could not be ignored or made to go away, as it had been enshrined in more than 30 pieces of legislation since 1975.

"Equally important for us, the document forms a spiritual covenant through promises made by our forebears and never forgotten by Maori.

"To break those long-standing promises is to erode the moral foundation of the nation and undermine the ethical basis of Pakeha settlement in New Zealand."

Dr Brash said the bishops had a right to express a view on this political issue, but he hoped it was on the basis of factual information and good historical material.

He disagreed with a number of the bishops' statements, saying he did not see the treaty as something that was living in the sense that it was evolving.

"I don't underestimate the importance of the treaty, but to imply that it creates some kind of eternal and permanent partnership between two separate bodies is to me not an accurate way of understanding the treaty."

Dr Brash said the bishops' statement that most Maori health, education and welfare programmes were needs-based was wrong.

There was a racial component in education through decile funding, public health organisations and a huge range of special arrangements for Maori getting into universities.

Herald Feature: Sharing a Country