Charles Waldegrave: We all want fairness - so let's discuss how to get it

COMMENT

In the debate on the Treaty of Waitangi and race relations, it may be helpful to underline the things we agree on as a constructive way forward. Fairness is probably the operative word. The debate can then focus on how we achieve it.

After a good read of the Herald over the past few weeks, it would appear most people, Maori and non-Maori, agree on three things.

First, the vast majority want everyone to have a fair go, regardless of who they are. It is generally considered to be part of the Government's role to help meet the needs of citizens who are disadvantaged.

Second, most Pakeha desire good outcomes for Maori. They do not wish them ill. They want Maori to have the same opportunities as everyone else, and have no desire to see them poorer, less educated or less healthy than themselves or any other group in the community.

Third, the vast majority accept there were gross injustices during the colonial period and that these should be redressed in some way.

There are different views on the amount of redress and the length of time it should take, but most agree bad things happened and they need to be put right.

These three positive aspects, which centre on a concept of fairness, could become the basis for a fresh look at our relationship.

Clearly there are differing views on how fairness should be achieved. It is interesting to note that, according to Herald-Digipoll surveys, most Maori and Pakeha do not consider Maori should be treated differently from other New Zealanders.

But a substantial number of Pakeha New Zealanders are clearly stating they consider Maori families receive better treatment in terms of educational scholarships, health services and the degree of consultation on development matters than they do.

They are also indicating that their culture is being valued less than the indigenous culture.

In short, they consider Maori have favoured status and this is unfair.

But most Maori, while not wishing to be treated differently, clearly consider that if they are to achieve equality with non-Maori, financial resourcing and culturally relevant delivery systems offer the best way forward.

In short, they consider that government policies should recognise them, in the light of their indigenous status and the unjust history, as a distinct group. This is fair for them, as they catch up.

So as not to stereotype, it should be noted that a substantial proportion of non-Maori accept the majority Maori view, and, similarly, some Maori accept the majority Pakeha view.

The debate appears to have disturbed the unwritten social contract concerning the way we address our problems of history and inequality.

It is unsettling, and needs to be resolved quickly, fairly and to the satisfaction of the majority of Maori and non-Maori in order to renew or forge a new social contract.

Failure to do so could quickly create national distrust and disharmony, which is in no one's interest.

To this end, it is very unhelpful to have extreme behaviour featuring on our television screens night after night.

It is surely time to reflect on the essentially good race relations we have as a country when compared to other countries, and conduct the debate with dignity and trust.

We need not panic that many Pakeha are criticising what they consider to be unfair treatment.

It does not mean they have become racist, or that we must rush into changing legislation concerning the treaty.

It means some serious criticisms have developed among many Pakeha, so we should look at them.

We should investigate them, weigh them and address them in the same manner we have addressed criticisms of unfairness raised by Maori.

The goals for the current debate should emerge from that which we already agree upon. The vast majority want to be fair to all New Zealanders. They want good outcomes for Maori and they do not wish to deny their history.

With that in mind, a constructive debate can take place that will enable us to renew our unwritten social contract or forge a new one that will achieve the agreed goals.

This will require factual data to debunk the unhelpful myths on both sides. These myths include the assertions, on the one hand, that Maori graduates are less qualified than other graduates, and, on the other, that practically all Maori live in poverty and, therefore, deserve extraordinary measures to help them. Both are quite untrue.

With good information, a set of goals that we have already agreed on, faith in our essentially positive relationship and good trust, we should be able to debate well and arrest the current disturbance in our informal social agreement.

Furthermore, as with any other resolution of conflict in a relationship, we may build new trust and hope for our children.

* Charles Waldegrave heads the Family Centre social policy research unit.