Carol Sakey


New Zealand identity by Fiona Barker

A scenic paradise inhabited by friendly Māori; a far-flung land where rugged bushmen hunt deer in the backblocks; the social laboratory of the world, trialling innovative policies; a courageous small nation standing up to the US over nuclear-ship visits – these are all strands that have contributed to New Zealand’s multiple national identities over time.  Understanding New Zealand national identity: National identity is a form of social identity – meaning people’s understanding of who they are in relation to others. National identity is a shared understanding of the characteristics and behaviours that distinguish one nation from other nations.

Multiple Identities: National identity is not fixed and has multiple strands- Different people and groups view the nation in different ways. A Southland farmer may describe New Zealand identity differently from a Pacific person in South Auckland – National identity may change depending on the situation. Many people notice that being a New Zealander means something different to them when they travel overseas. – Internal national identity may be different from external identity. An external identity is how a nation state presents itself to other peoples and countries. A strong external identity helps a country to have a strong diplomatic presence internationally and to advance national economic interests. Major export-oriented industries, such as education and tourism, rely for their success on a positive external image or ‘national brand’. – National identities evolve over time. New Zealand identity has changed due to the shifting relationship with Britain, changing relationships among Māori, Pākehā and newer New Zealanders, and the interaction of New Zealand with other countries and cultures.

Expressions of identity: National identity is expressed in many different ways. In New Zealand’s case these include:- deliberate promotion of images by the state through symbols like flags or coins, immigration propaganda or tourist advertising, or through displays such as international exhibitions – the performance of New Zealanders internationally in war or in sport – major political acts that attract international attention, such as when New Zealand banned visits by nuclear-powered and -armed ships – artistic portrayals, in films, books, art or music.

The Overseas view of New Zealand’s identity: The external image of New Zealand may be quite different from the way locals see it. In 2004 a contributor to a web page of ideas about New Zealand wrote: ‘I close my eyes and just imagine what “New Zealand” will be like, and I get the best vibes, the cool ocean wind relaxing my senses, the blue skies making me fly, the lovely grass caressing me like a newborn and the people treating me like one of their own. All this when I haven’t even seen New Zealand, what happens when I actually do?’

Māori identity Before the European settlement of New Zealand, Māori tribes did not share an overarching national identity. The 1835 Declaration of the Independence of New Zealand by the Confederation of United Tribes, and the 1834 choice of an ensign that became known as the United Tribes’ flag, introduced symbols of a shared identity. However, this did not mean that there was a single national indigenous political authority and shared identity. The signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 by chiefs of iwi from around the country suggests that the British Crown made a treaty with the leaders of many nations, not a single nation with a unified identity.

Colonialism and New Zealand identity After New Zealand became a colony of the United Kingdom, largely peopled by British settlers, the relationship with ‘Home’ (Britain) was a central focus of identity. The extent of loyalty to Britain varied over time – but at least from the late 19th century until the 1950s New Zealand’s identity was contained within an imperial identity. New Zealanders saw their country as playing a special role as a loyal member of the British Empire, and for a long time New Zealand aspired to be a ‘Britain of the South’. Until the 1960s few New Zealanders yearned for an identity independent of the empire. Since then there has been a stronger sense of a separate identity, located firmly in the South Pacific.

Contested identity:  Social struggles from the 1960s onwards showed that, as in every nation, New Zealanders had diverse understandings of their country and its identity. This contrasted with the memory of united suffering and identity from the first and second world wars. Debate about New Zealand involvement in the Vietnam War, the anti-nuclear movement, and the 1981 Springbok rugby tour provoked conflict among New Zealanders as to the nature of their country. Debate also existed about whether New Zealand was a bicultural or multicultural nation, and whether it should see itself as part of Asia, as a Pacific nation, or as still closely linked to the United Kingdom.

LAND: The Land has always been central to New Zealanders’ identity. Māori believed that Papatūānuku, the earth mother, was the origin of all life. People were born from the land and returned to the land. The word for land (whenua) was also the word for placenta. Tribes typically assert their identity in relation to their mountains and rivers.

Pioneering the land: British navigator James Cook’s three voyages of exploration established a view of New Zealand as a fertile place which could become a site of prosperous European-style agriculture. Sydney Parkinson, the artist on Cook’s first voyage, believed that the East Coast ‘with proper cultivation, might be rendered a kind of second Paradise’1. Such images were reinforced by 19th-century immigration propaganda designed to attract landless rural labourers to the new country. They were promised a land with a benign climate and productive soil for growing crops.

Southern Eden In 1954 Patrick O’Donovan of the English Observer, who was in New Zealand for the royal tour of Queen Elizabeth and the Duke of Edinburgh, wrote that New Zealand was ‘like one of those fat and promised lands that restless men have always believed to lie on the other side of the hills. It is green and seamed with ranks of trees.’2 The Queen herself was told that ‘a waste of fern, bush and swamp’ had become ‘the rich, productive area it is today’.3 From the early 20th century this rural ideal was strengthened by the idea that men and women who worked on New Zealand farms had strength and do-it-yourself ingenuity, in contrast to the decadent and physically inept populations in older countries. The hard work of the New Zealand pioneers was valued for having turned bush into productive farm land. Even in the early 2000s – although 85% of New Zealanders lived in urban areas – many still thought of themselves as part of a largely rural or agricultural nation.

Pure New Zealand: While some early European visitors to New Zealand thought that its natural scenery had romantic features, for a long time Pākehā saw the bush as monotonous and frightening. However, at the end of the 19th century New Zealand sought to attract foreign tourists. The Department of Tourist and Health Resorts was established in 1901 and promoted a view of New Zealand as ‘the most wonderful Scenic paradise in the World – unequalled Fjords, Awe-Inspiring Geysers’.4 The areas of the southern lakes and the ‘hot lakes’ around Rotorua were especially praised. During the 20th century New Zealand’s golden beaches became symbols of natural beauty, and as areas of indigenous forest became smaller there was a movement to preserve the bush as essential to New Zealand’s distinctiveness. ‘The most beautiful country in the world’ became part of New Zealand’s self-image. The campaign to save Lake Manapōuri from being raised for hydroelectric power production in the early 1970s was a significant moment in the evolution of this view.

In the early 2000s New Zealand’s wild landscapes were promoted through calendars, glossy picture books and travel advertising. Tourism New Zealand featured a ‘100% Pure’ campaign which suggested a world of unpolluted lakes and rivers and pristine forests. Environmental campaigners frequently pointed out that the country’s record in areas such as water and air pollution was not as ‘clean and green’ as many New Zealanders liked to believe.                              

 The Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 and the replacement Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011, legislating as a consequence of Māori claims to the foreshore and seabed, provoked political debate. In part, this was because the legislation touched the strong and often emotional connection that New Zealanders, Māori and Pākehā, had with the land, beaches and the ocean

  1. Sydney Parkinson, journal, 23 October 1769. accessed 1 November 2011). Back
  2. Evening Post, 4 February 1954.Back
  3. A tour of New Zealand by Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, 1953–1954. Wellington: Secretary for Internal Affairs, 1953.Back
  4. Quoted in Lydia Wevers, Country of writing: travel writing and New Zealand, 1809–1900. Auckland: Auckland University Press, 2002, p. 182.Back

War and sport: National identity is often shaped by remembered success and failure in war. This is certainly true of New Zealand’s 20th-century wars. But the battles between British and Māori during the 19th century were less often commemorated as founding moments of New Zealand. While Māori remembered them, Pākehā preferred to forget. This makes New Zealand different from societies like the United States, where the Civil War of 1861–5 is central to national identity and memory.

South African War The first occasion when New Zealanders gained national pride and international attention in war was in the South African War (1899–1902). The 10 contingents of New Zealand soldiers (6,500 men) established a reputation as brave soldiers who were adaptable, full of initiative and natural leaders.

First World War: The deaths of over 18,000 and the service of over 100,000 soldiers in the First World War (1914–18) became a key feature of New Zealand’s national memory and identity. Foreign observers gave them international recognition, and in meeting soldiers from other countries Kiwis judged themselves against others.

International praise: New Zealanders like to quote, and requote, the praise showered on their soldiers at Gallipoli. King George V said the New Zealand troops had ‘proved themselves worthy sons of Empire’; Sir Ian Hamilton, the British commander, said they had ‘upheld the finest traditions of our race’; poet John Masefield described them as ‘the flower of the world’s manhood’.1While fewer died at Gallipoli than on the Western Front, the landing at Gallipoli in Turkey on 25 April 1915 became especially commemorated as the first significant occasion when New Zealanders displayed their courage to the world. In 1920 that day became a public holiday, Anzac Day; it has been a national day of commemoration ever since. Although New Zealanders seek to distinguish themselves from Australians in many ways, the close relationship forged in the First World War between New Zealand and Australia, and commemorated through the ‘ANZAC spirit’, has remained important to how New Zealanders understand their history.

Second World War  The experience of New Zealand soldiers fighting in Greece, Crete, North Africa and Italy during the Second World War reinforced New Zealand men’s sense of themselves as tough, adaptable and egalitarian. The service of New Zealand women abroad as nurses or at home as factory workers or housewives established their reputation as dependable and able to ‘make do’.

Sport: International sport was another area where New Zealanders demonstrated their identity to themselves and the world. The success of All Black rugby teams since 1905 and netball teams since the 1970s established an image of New Zealanders as good at working in teams and with a physical strength which was thought to have derived from a rural background. Rowing successes reinforced this image.Individual sporting successes such as Jack Lovelock at the 1936 Olympics, Yvette Williams at the 1952 Olympics, Peter Snell at the 1960 Rome and 1964 Tokyo Olympics and John Walker at Montreal in 1976 were also noteworthy, and like Edmund Hillary’s success in climbing Everest in 1953, presented New Zealanders as people who had strength and stamina, yet were modest and down-to-earth. From the 1990s, New Zealand’s yachting successes in the America’s Cup evoked the image of a people who combined physical abilities with cutting-edge technological innovation. Footnotes:- Quoted in Jock Phillips, A man’s country?: the image of the pakeha male, a history. Auckland: Penguin, 1987, p. 165. Back


Social laboratory of the world– During the 1890s the innovations of the Liberal government attracted international interest and established an image of New Zealand as a place that pioneered political experiments. These innovations included: giving women the vote in 1893, the first country in the world to do so- the 1894 introduction of a system of compulsory arbitration in industrial relations – legislation in the early 1890s to break up the large landed estates and establish more egalitarian smallholdings – the introduction of old-age pensions in 1898.

Foreign observers: Reports from visitors to New Zealand helped promote the idea that New Zealand had a distinctive political tradition. American journalist Henry Demarest Lloyd described New Zealand as the country without strikes; French socialist André Metin defined its philosophy as socialism without doctrine; and French geographer and economist André Siegfried agreed that New Zealanders had a contempt for theory. Later governments built on this reputation for experimentation and novelty in such initiatives as the welfare-state measures of the 1930s, the introduction of a government accident compensation scheme in the 1970s, the introduction of a radical policy of open government in 1982 and the free-market policies of the 1980s and early 1990s.

An independent status: The movement from a British identity towards a New Zealand identity was also expressed in political change. New Zealand did not experience a sudden moment of independence. After its transition from British colony to dominion status in 1907, New Zealand’s relationship with the United Kingdom weakened over time. The 1931 Statute of Westminster of the British Parliament, which removed its right to legislate for New Zealand, was ratified by New Zealand only in 1947. Some institutions took longer to establish in New Zealand. New Zealand’s Supreme Court replaced the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as the final court of appeal only in 2003. The country’s place as a member of the Commonwealth still shaped it in the 2000s.

Citizenship: Changes in citizenship policy affected the way New Zealanders understood their national identity. In 1948 New Zealand citizenship was created. However, the Citizenship Act 1977 was the first time that all links between British and New Zealand citizenship ceased. New Zealanders had previously been subjects of the British Empire, but the Citizenship Act 1977 made their citizenship – imprinted in the New Zealand passport – simply that of New Zealander.

Trade: The process of moving away from Britain also occurred in New Zealand’s foreign and economic policy. In 1973 the United Kingdom joined the European Economic Community (EEC). New Zealand lost its privileged access to the British market, and began searching for new markets throughout the world. Active, government-led protest against French nuclear testing in the South Pacific showed that New Zealand foreign policy increasingly focused on the Pacific. Prime Minister Jim Bolger suggested in the early 1990s that New Zealand should think of itself as part of Asia.

Moral example: The idea of serving as a moral example to the world has been an important element of New Zealand national identity. The anti-apartheid movement in the 1970s and 1980s, protests against French nuclear testing at Moruroa atoll in the 1970s, and popular support for the New Zealand government’s anti-nuclear position in the 1980s were manifestations of this. In 1985 a United States naval ship, the USS Buchanan, was denied entry to New Zealand and Prime Minister David Lange gave a famous anti-nuclear speech at the Oxford Union debate in the UK. In 1987 Parliament passed the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act, banning visits by nuclear-armed or -powered vessels. Many New Zealanders saw these as the courageous actions of a small nation staking out a clear position on the world stage.

Political ideals: Ever since Prime Minister Peter Fraser’s strong stand at the 1945 San Francisco conference which established the United Nations, New Zealand has consistently promoted human rights and multilateral action through international institutions like the United Nations. New Zealanders have held to other ideals as central to the nation’s political culture. Although not all agree, some claim that New Zealanders believe egalitarianism, a ‘fair go’, easy access to politicians and ideological pragmatism are important features of New Zealand’s political culture.

New Zealand’s peoples: Fierce Māori – At least until the 1850s the identity of New Zealand to European observers was strongly affected by the fact that the majority of the people were Māori. Early contact established an image of Māori as fierce fighters and cannibals, and New Zealand gained a reputation in the early 19th century as a dangerous place.

Romantic Māori: The signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 established an ideal that Māori and Pākehā were ‘one people’, and there was an official policy of assimilating Māori into European culture. Gradually New Zealand came to promote itself as a model of race relations. Following the New Zealand wars and the pacification of Māori resistance, and with the Māori population dropping to under 50,000 in the 1890s, some Pākehā began to romanticise Māori. They turned to Māori culture as a source of a distinct New Zealand identity and promoted New Zealand as ‘Maoriland’. Māori designs entered New Zealand life and the All Blacks adopted the Māori haka.

One or two? The idea that Māori and Pākehā were one people became widespread by the early 20th century. Kate Sheppard, the women’s suffrage leader, wrote in 1901, ‘Maori and Pakeha have become one people, under one Sovereign and one Parliament, glorying alike in the one title of “New Zealander”’.1 However, this belief rarely accorded with reality. As historian Michael King has written, New Zealand society was marked by ‘at least two cultures and two heritages, very often looking in two different directions’.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         20th-century conflicts: During the first half of the 20th century Pākehā believed that New Zealand was living a ‘golden age’ of harmonious co-existence among ethnic groups and that the country had ‘the best race relations in the world’. From the 1960s activism by Māori grew in protest at their political, social and economic circumstances. The 1975 march to Parliament to protest grievances over land loss and Ngāti Whātua’s 1977–78 occupation of Bastion Point (Takaparawhā) in Auckland were examples of protests that advocated a stronger recognition of Māori identity in national life. This Māori renaissance encouraged a strengthening of Māori cultural expressions in art, language and tikanga (customs). The Māori language was promoted through the kōhanga reo (language-learning nest) movement and Māori-language media from the 1980s. When the national anthem was sung solely in Māori prior to an All Blacks’ game in the 1999 Rugby World Cup in England, vigorous public debate ensued. Two important symbols of national identity – sport and language – came into conflict. New Zealanders disagreed over whether bilingualism was central to the national identity. Despite this, by the 1990s most government agencies had adopted both Māori and English official names and signage and the Māori language was increasingly part of New Zealand life. Māori ritual was increasingly used to welcome foreign guests, and Māori motifs such as the koru (unfolding fern frond) were widely adopted. Outside New Zealand, Māori culture and indigenous practice became prominent in the country’s external national image. This was partly because, as Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen said in 2006, Māori were ‘the New Zealanders who, by definition, make us different from any other nation’.3 An early example of such external promotion was the Te Māori exhibition of Māori arts and artefacts, which toured internationally from 1984 to 1986. Partly in response to Māori protest, from the 1980s onwards New Zealand governments adopted a policy of biculturalism. This implied a partnership between Māori and the Crown, whereby the government ensured that services were appropriate to both cultures. Some people criticised this approach for identifying a particular ethnic group as distinctive. There was tension between those believing in ‘one nation’, and those who thought that multiple identity groups co-existed within an overarching New Zealand identity.

Immigration, multiculturalism and diversity: From the mid-1980s New Zealand society became increasingly multicultural. Following the Immigration Act 1986, which removed rules that gave preference to certain countries of origin, immigrants arrived from many countries. Whereas in 1986 12.4% of New Zealand’s population identified themselves as Māori, 3.7% as Pacific and just 1.5% as Asian, by 2006 14.6% were Māori, 6.9% Pacific and 9.2% Asian. 21.8% of New Zealand residents were born overseas. These changes brought vibrancy and visible diversity to New Zealand’s cities. The multicultural society meant there were many ways of being a New Zealander. For instance, the Pacific presence in the national identity became stronger in arts, music and sport. One challenge for New Zealanders was to reconcile a multicultural society with the policy of biculturalism. New Zealanders have traditionally seen themselves as tolerant and open, and New Zealanders score highly in international surveys on measures of social liberalism. In 2002 Prime Minister Helen Clark stated that the government saw New Zealand as ‘a land where diversity is valued and reflected in our national identity’.4 Almost all New Zealand political leaders supported this view.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Footnotes:

National Council of Women conference report, 1901, pp. 13–14. Back

Michael King, The Penguin history of New Zealand. Auckland: Penguin, 2003, p. 167. Back

Quoted in P. Skilling, ‘National identity in a diverse society.’ In New Zealand government and politics, edited by Raymond Miller. 5th ed. Auckland: Oxford University Press, 2010, p. 62. Back                                                                                                                                                                                     Quoted in ‘National identity in a diverse society,’ p. 61.                                                                                                                                                                                Culture and arts: Art, literature, music and film unofficially reflect many important aspects of a national identity. The arts confirm a sense of identity for locals and help establish the character of New Zealand for people overseas. In particular, they show us how the geographical and cultural anchors of New Zealand identity have changed over time.

Colonial culture: Much 19th-century literature is known for its romantic accounts of rural life in New Zealand. It often embodied the pioneer mythology. Some of the poetry and novels at the end of the 19th century romanticised Māori – as did paintings such as those by Charles Goldie.

Expatriation: In the early 20th century some significant writers and artists saw New Zealand as a desolate cultural landscape. A number, such as the writer Katherine Mansfield and the painter Frances Hodgkins, expatriated themselves. Most novelists published their books in London for a British readership, although they often used colonial settings.                                                                                                                               Cultural nationalism: From the mid-1930s a cultural nationalist movement sought to establish a thriving local culture and break with British traditions. The men alone in the rugged bush and mountains, or the moment of European discovery of New Zealand, were favourite themes. They were expressed in John Mulgan’s novel Man alone, Denis Glover’s poems about Arawata Bill, Allen Curnow’s verse and composer Douglas Lilburn’s ‘Landfall in unknown seas’. Painters such as Rita Angus, Colin McCahon and Toss Woollaston also focused on the distinctive landscapes of New Zealand. At a popular level, writers such as Barry Crump elevated the hard life of the backblocks deer culler into a national icon.

New ‘home’: The poet Denis Glover, who helped establish a local publishing outlet, Caxton Press, showed in his 1936 poem ‘Home thoughts’ how ‘home’ had moved for many New Zealanders: I do not dream of Sussex downs or quaint old England’s quaint old towns—I think of what may yet be seen in Johnsonville or Geraldine.1

Film and television: From the 1960s New Zealand television reflected New Zealanders to themselves. Expressive of the rural mythology, Country calendar became New Zealand’s longest-running programme, and John Clarke established a large following for his comic persona Fred Dagg, a gumboot-wearing farmer. Local film-makers took time to become established. Some, such as Jane Campion, left New Zealand to build their career abroad. Not until the 1990s, with the more rapid growth of the local film industry around Peter Jackson’s film productions, was it common for film-makers to make their career in New Zealand. Jackson’s films, particularly The lord of the rings trilogy, became hugely important in presenting images of the New Zealand landscape to the world. Māori filmmakers such as Taika Waititi also presented Māori culture and identity on the big screen. The work of Weta Digital – creating digital and special effects for movies – conveyed an image of New Zealanders as technically sophisticated.

Diversity: Contemporary New Zealand literature, film, theatre and music is enriched by the diversity in New Zealand’s population. Composer Gareth Farr incorporates European, Māori and Pacific strands into his classical compositions, while musicians such as Che Fu, King Kapisi and Ladi6 present a strongly Pacific-flavoured New Zealand identity to the global hip-hop scene. New Zealand reggae – infused particularly with a Māori and Pacific flavour – is also represented internationally by groups such as TrinityRoots and Fat Freddy’s Drop.

Modern expatriation Although cultural life flourishes in New Zealand, expatriation remained a major phenomenon among New Zealanders in the 2000s. Over 16% of New Zealand citizens, and almost 25% of tertiary-educated New Zealanders, were estimated to live abroad. The largest group of overseas New Zealanders lived in Australia. In 2001 the Kiwi Expat Association (KEA) was founded to connect New Zealanders overseas to the nation, to enhance business opportunities and to promote New Zealand around the world. Their activities are a reminder that the nation also includes New Zealanders not currently resident in the country.

The ‘OE’ (overseas experience), whereby young New Zealanders travel and work abroad, was seen as an important rite of passage. This circulation of New Zealanders in and out of the country had become part of the national identity. It shaped how New Zealand and New Zealanders interacted with, and related to, the wider world.

Footnotes: Denis Glover, ‘Home thoughts.’ In The Penguin book of New Zealand verse, edited by Ian Wedde and Harvey McQueen. Auckland: Penguin, 1985, p. 211. Back

Symbols of identity; National identity is also reproduced on a daily basis through national symbols and everyday items. These range from official symbols such as stamps, flags, coins or coats of arms through to trademarks or the popular icons commonly known as ‘kiwiana’.

Stars, land and sea: New Zealand’s location in the southern hemisphere was symbolised by the Southern Cross constellation in both the United Tribes’ Flag (the first national flag, adopted in 1834) and the New Zealand Ensign (the national flag since 1902). The Southern Cross was also used on the tomb of the unknown warrior, established in 2004 at the national war memorial in Wellington.

New Zealand’s distance across the seas from Britain was symbolised in the waves and sailing ships found in early crests. In the 19th century the Southern Alps featured in early tourism books and were represented in the 1898 stamp issue, one of the first pictorial stamp sets in the world. In the 20th century the beach became a more important national symbol, expressed in late-20th-century Christmas cards of flowering pōhutukawa trees and the kiwiana symbol of jandals. The national identity of New Zealanders as pioneering farmers was expressed in the use of sheep as a symbol of New Zealand. Sheep also appeared in coats of arms. More recently gumboots, no. 8 fencing wire (symbolising the alleged innovative ‘can-do’ attitude of New Zealanders) and the Swanndri bush shirt have been kiwiana cultural icons originating in farming.

Native flora and fauna: Indigenous plants and animals quickly became symbols of New Zealand. The Māori koru design, which was eventually adopted by Pākehā, depicted an unfurling fern frond. In the 19th century ferns were represented in books and in cabinet-making, and New Zealand became known as ‘fernland’. The fern was used to mark the graves of New Zealand soldiers and appeared on stamps and coins. Native birds were also quickly adopted as symbols. In the colonial period the moa was a pre-eminent symbol of the country – but from the early 20th century the kiwi was the dominant symbol. During the First World War New Zealand soldiers became known as ‘Kiwis’. This soon spread to become the common name for all New Zealanders and an adjective applied to all things New Zealand. Even the country’s currency became known as the kiwi. In 2011 the dollar coin featured a kiwi and ferns. In 1990 the symbol for the sesquicentennial of the Treaty of Waitangi was a white heron (kōtuku).

War and sport: New Zealand’s achievements in war were symbolised by the distinctive lemon-squeezer hats worn by its soldiers, and in the hundreds of war memorials placed at crossroads in the 1920s and the memorial halls built after the Second World War. The success of the All Blacks rugby team made the silver fern on a black background into a widely used symbol of the country. Some even promoted it as the design for a possible new national flag. Edmund Hillary’s triumph in climbing Mt Everest led to his portrait being used on the $5 note from 1990.

Politics: New Zealand’s early status as a colony of Great Britain gave the Union Jack a continuing place on the national flag. At the beginning of the 20th century the figure of Zealandia, daughter of Britannia, briefly became a symbol for the adolescent nation. In 2011 the Queen as head of state remained on the coins, the $20 banknote and many stamp issues. New Zealand’s reforming history found expression in the portrait of Kate Sheppard, pioneering suffragist, on the $10 banknote.

Māori: Māori designs were used quite often on 19th-century publications, especially tourist books. They also became common on trademarks and stamps. The $50 banknote featured early-20th-century Ngāti Porou politician Apirana Ngata. A piece of pounamu (greenstone), often carved, became a common item of dress distinguishing Kiwis overseas in the late 20th century, and designs with koru elements were important in the branding of many public agencies.

In sum, the different ways in which New Zealand identity has been expressed over time have been given symbolic form in the everyday imagery of New Zealand life.

External links and sources

More suggestions and sources

Barker, F. ‘Political culture: patterns and issues.’ In New Zealand government and politics, edited by Raymond Miller. 5th ed. Auckland: Oxford University Press, 2010: 13–28.

Belich, James. Paradise reforged: a history of the New Zealanders from the 1880s to the year 2000. Auckland: Allen Lane; Penguin, 2001.

Bell, Claudia. Inventing New Zealand: everyday myths of Pakeha identity. Auckland: Penguin, 1996.

Byrnes, Giselle, ed. The new Oxford history of New Zealand. South Melbourne; Auckland: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Liu, James H., and others, eds. New Zealand identities: departures and destinations. Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2005.

Skilling, P. ‘National identity in a diverse society.’ In New Zealand government and politics, edited by Raymond Miller. 5th ed. Auckland: Oxford University Press, 2010: 54-65.

How to cite this page: Fiona Barker, ‘New Zealand identity’, Te Ara – the Encyclopedia of New Zealand, (accessed 28 March 2023) Story by Fiona Barker, published 20 Jun 2012

The idea that Māori and Pākehā were one people became widespread by the early 20th century. Kate Sheppard, the women’s suffrage leader, wrote in 1901, ‘Maori and Pakeha have become one people, under one Sovereign and one Parliament, glorying alike in the one title of “New Zealander”’.1 However, this belief rarely accorded with reality. As historian Michael King has written, New Zealand society was marked by ‘at least two cultures and two heritages, very often looking in two different directions’.2

Foreign observers: Reports from visitors to New Zealand helped promote the idea that New Zealand had a distinctive political tradition. American journalist Henry Demarest Lloyd described New Zealand as the country without strikes; French socialist André Metin defined its philosophy as socialism without doctrine; and French geographer and economist André Siegfried agreed that New Zealanders had a contempt for theory. 

International praise New Zealanders like to quote, and requote, the praise showered on their soldiers at Gallipoli. King George V said the New Zealand troops had ‘proved themselves worthy sons of Empire’; Sir Ian Hamilton, the British commander, said they had ‘upheld the finest traditions of our race’; poet John Masefield described them as ‘the flower of the world’s manhood’.1




Uncategorized Blog Posts View all Categories


Soft Law is non-binding, is used as a gap filler between non-binding UN- International Agreements. Hence it has some form of political legality, it appears legal but is not necessarily lawful. Be prepared for the ‘hard knocks’ of soft law. Lawful matters are ethically enjoined in the law of the land, the law of the people our actual nature.

The term ‘Soft Law’ is used to denote non-binding agreements, principles, declarations that are predominantly found in the International sphere such as UN Assembly resolutions. It was dubbed by a Commonwealth Interdepartmental Committee as a ‘grey-letter law’, has no legally binding force.

Soft Law is intended to influence conduct. The impact of ‘Soft Law’ plays a role in facilitating, mobilizing the consent of UN Member States that are required to establish binding international agreements. Soft Law is the non binding gap filler until UN Agreements are introduced into domestic policy.

Soft Law can be persuasive, have hard consequences, civil liberties and human rights become limited. September 2001 the UN and various global, regional selective institutions created a specific ‘Soft Law Eco-System’ that limits human rights. Soft Law has does not undergo serious human rights scrutiny

In ‘Soft Law’ there is nothing about specific impingement on human rights. Obligations of UN Member States to International UN Agreements can result in particularly harmful weak norms that can lead to serious human rights violations that undermines security for all.

Human Rights and Security are fundamentally entwined and co-dependent. Security without Human Rights protections is an illusion. Soft Law is developed in the form of resolutions, guidelines, technical manuals, opinions from informal or inaccessible institutions.

Lacks the meaningful process of public assessment by human rights experts. Is implemented in the absence of ‘Hard Law’ (Legislation.) ‘Soft Law can serve as the sole reference point for years, despite the lack of human rights input.

For example: NZ Government agreement of UN Agenda Non-Binding- entered into parliament as a Soft Law. For 5 years remained a ‘Soft Law’ until 2020 when Ardern entered it into domestic policy. Then became Hard Law (Legislation). Legally Binding.

Hence an ‘Osmosis’ takes place. Soft Law enters ‘Hard Law’ Legislation. There is a spiders web of ‘Soft Law’ norms within counter-terrorism standards in counter-terrorism institutions as to inconsistent human rights. Soft Law policies formulated without meaningful assessment of human rights impact

2011 Global Counter Terrorism Forum was an action orientated platform to combat vulnerability to terrorism which issued practises and recommendations on the implementation of counter-terrorism policies. Access limited for human rights entities and civil society

1989 Financial Action Task Force was founded, considered as the global standard, a setter of policies, combatting money laundering and terrorism financing. Recommendations were not legally binding but UN Member States strive towards compliance due to the benefits linked to membership. Its mandate contains no references to International Human Rights.

Common Law has been deliberately ignored- Firstly Do No Harm. The Common Good of All People. ‘Soft Law’ needs no political consensus, its accepted in parliament once the govt agrees to a non-binding international (UN) Agreement

25/09/2015.UN General Assembly unanimously adopted UN Agenda 2030 ‘Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda to transform every aspect of peoples lives worldwide. Re-engineering of peoples behaviour, of society, infrastructure, economy, land use etc., in favour of WEF Stakeholder Corporate Capture.

Fitting hand in glove with Klaus Schwab’s WEF ‘Global Redesign Initiative’ otherwise known as the ‘4th Industrial Revolution or the Great Reset’. The Decade of Action’, 2020 -2030 the deliberate destruction of the ‘free market’ economy, to replace it with ‘Multi-stakeholder’ Corporate Capture. This being the transforming out our we once knew it. The ‘New Normal’. WHO (UN) stating “We must never go back to the old normal”

NZ Govt signed UN Agenda 2030 in September 2015, it then entered parliament under ‘Soft Law’ until 5 years later, in 2020 Ardern entered UN Agenda 2030 into domestic policy hence it then became ‘Hard Law’ Legally Binding. (Legislation)

UN Agenda 2030 Global development goals are to be implanted globally, worldwide. Universally applicable to all countries, highlights challenges, the requirement for transformation of human behaviour from an old normal to a new normal. These are substantial behaviour changes, detrimental to living standards of all peoples, leaving no-one behind, everyone, everywhere at every age.

Each SDG addresses a specific range of issues, governmental goals, specifically detailed targets, within specific timeframes (2030, sometimes 2025). Supported by indicators which at regional and national level are to be developed by UN Member States. At the global level are established by a global indicator framework, that’s reviewed annually, has a comprehensive review every 5 years

The monitoring, revision of the SDGs, targets, indicators are entrusted to the ‘High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development’ under the auspices of the UN Economic & Social Council. The aim to monitor human behaviour, the goal to transform- re-engineer all aspects of human behaviour. A massive one world strategy, firstly a nudge then a push, full compliancy requires a shove.

This One World Governance global strategy is exceptionally authoritarian, immoral theoretical tyranny. All UN Member States have agreed to implement this strategy on populations worldwide. Involves Central and Local Govts, parliaments, civil society, international and national institutions, NGO’s, Businesses-Corporations, Academia and Indigenous Communities

Religious Leaders including the Pope is fully involved whom wants the whole world to embrace UN Agenda 2030 as a moral duty to mother earth (Gaia). This is nothing short of cultism. Pope collaborating with Rothschilds, chaplain of the UN.

Its massively obsessively ambitious, enormously destructive. Deliberately promotes the plundering of sovereign nation states. The telling of the big lie is ‘Self Determination’. They determine your life, you do not that’s the end goal.

Its crazy insanity, courts around the world have already granted legal standing, constitution’s to grant legal personhood to rivers, non human parts of nature and to the earth itself. (Worship of Gaia -Mother Earth) Not God the creator.

13th June 2019 WEF and UN entered an official strategic partnership agreement to accelerate UN Agenda 2030. A global corporate capture. The agreement grants transnational corporations preferential access to the UN System at the expense of UN Member Nations populations.  Includes NZ Sovereign people.

This UN -WEF partnership has been condemned by many, is seen as delegitimizing the UN, weakening the role of UN Member States in autonomous decision making. It formalises a very dangerous corporate capture of the UN System. A UN -WEF One World Corporate Governance. The UN-UN Member States are ineffective at holding corporations to account

Drives the world dangerously towards a privatised non-democratic global governance, corporate influence in the UN has been well known for years.

The Sovereign people of NZ did not vote for this global, nor was this publicly debated hence the Sovereign people of NZ have deliberately have been run rough shot over. A Government that namely a corporation planning the future of your life and that of your children’s, and future generations.

The stakeholder corporate public-private framework is pre-determines, pre-planned. The boiling frog. The frog is about to boil. Ouch will it hurt.. Yes, could it kill you. Yes. Will it kill your freedoms Yes. Unless we stand up to the political cronies in the toilet bowl of Wellington.  Stakeholder Capitalism has failed in the past, but then it was not implemented in such a global vast way.

Stakeholder Corporate Economy– the goal is destroy Free market enterprise-economy. Small businesses, farming communities. Without the Global Pandemic, the lockdowns, the plundering of the economies this leftist Socialist Marxist global entity would never have such massive power as it has now

Multi-stakeholder Corporate economy. Everything is at stake. Your freedom, human rights are at stake.(Non-democratic).  Free- market economy is about supply and demand. Businesses are innovated, consumers choose what they want to buy. Have the freedom to come up with new ideas, freedom of expression and democratic rights.

Jacinda Ardern is the poster child for UN Agenda 2030. The UN blueprint for Socialism reported the ‘Star News’ 16/11/2020 by Muriel  Newman NZ Centre for Political Research’

4.Refers to the Bill & Melinda Gates hosting of a Global Shapers event in New York. Ardern being guest speaker. Ardern boasts to the audience that under her admin she had taken the lead embedding UN Agenda 2030 into our regulatory framework, domestic policy making. Saying “NZ Govt is doing something no other countries have tried, incorporated the principles of Agenda 2030 into domestic policy making, to drive system level actions, an approach needed on a global scale”

Melinda Gates gave Ardern high praise as she told the audience that Jacinda Ardern had released an international human rights plan that NZ promises to take the lead on, among gender equality, women and girls empowerment. Melinda Gates described “Ardern as a true international leader that understands that the future of the world depends on eliminating inequality”

The non-binding ‘Soft Law’ was introduced by the National led Govt and the Labour led government introduced it into ‘Hard Law’ Legislation (team work)

John Key in 2015 praised the adoption of UN Agenda 2030 particularly he said ‘SDG 1 End all forms of poverty on this earth by 2030. The World Ban reported 2nd May 2022. The new extreme poverty line of $2.15 per persay per person

COVID19. (Child poverty Ardern’s Portfolio)

Auckland Scoop News. Food and Financial Hardship in NZ. Reported today. Fruit and Veges increased by 23%. The lack of choice many people are experiencing when purchasing food. The effects of food security. 27/2/2023.

62% of families run out of food every week, 5.6% experience inadequate nutrition every day. 66% Experience stress about their inability to afford food weekly for their families. 35% feel constantly stressed about their inability to afford food (Press release by Vision West) West Auckland Community Trust. Wealthy corporations keep the poor in poverty. Unless you create the life you want then there is a great risk you will be eventually forced to deal with a life you do not want.

Chris Trotter article 12th February 2023. Referring to Three Waters calling it a mastermind of misdirection. Tribal corporation already halfway into the deracinated world of global capitalism, well hidden from their own people behind swirling veils of Māori mysticism.

Any politician willing to front this power grab by the Iwi Elite Corporations is bound to become a lightening rod for all manner of racially charged criticism and abuse.  Deliberately silencing, censoring freedom of speech all part of stakeholder corporate capitalism. Your freedom is seriously at stake.

Part and parcel of the UN-WEF multi-stakeholder partnership of UN Agenda 2030. Transforming our world SDG 6. ‘Water’ UN Agenda 2030, received great praise in Parliament in 2015. The ‘Soft Law’ gap filler. Arderns ‘Hard Law’ -Hard to swallow. Whatever Hipkins or any other MP says. UN Agenda 2030 ‘Water SDG6 like all the other SDGs are all part of the Governments legislations. Don’t be fooled its not going away.




Chris Trotter: The privatisation two-step – is Three Waters a masterpiece of misdirection? – Point of Order (

Auckland.Scoop » Food And Financial Hardship In Aotearoa New Zealand – PART TWO – The Effects Of Food Insecurity

Goal 1 Ending all forms of poverty everywhere. Impossibibility. › sustainabledevelopment › povertyEradicating extreme poverty for all people everywhere by 2

Auckland.Scoop » Food And Financial Hardship In Aotearoa New Zealand – PART TWO – The Effects Of Food Insecurity






2019 Jacinda Ardern was the guest speaker at a private gathering in New York which was hosted by Bill and Melinda Gates. She boasted to the audience that New Zealand is the first country in the world to embed UN Agenda 2030 in NZs Legislation and Regulatory framework.  UN Agenda 2030 was non-binding however once entering it into domestic policy becomes binding. The gathering was an event arranged by Goalkeeper an organization set up by the Gates Foundation in 2017 to accelerate UN Agenda 2030 with its 17 goals which include 169 targets globally.

The first in the world, the leader of human experiments, the experimental path of UN Agenda 2030, to leave no-one behind, everyone, everywhere at every age. Prior to implementing Agenda 2030 into NZs domestic policy did the opposition publically warn us, after all this is a global economic, social engineering strategy to be actioned at local level.

UN Agenda 2030 was however in the 2017 ‘Confidence and Supply Agreement’ between the Labour Party and Greens, but the name was missing, it was merely a commitment to 17 Sustainable Development Goals.

Agenda 2030 featured in the 2017 Confidence and Supply Agreement between the Labour Party and the Greens – although not by name. Instead, the parties made a commitment to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals that underpin Agenda 2030: And yes Jacinda Ardern became the poster child of UN Agenda 2030.

In 2018 Ardern spoke at the Conference on Sustainability in New York, she again boasted that her intention was to lead the world by embedding the UN Agenda 2030 SDGs into NZ’s domestic affairs saying :we have decided to try something no other country has done before, we have embedded the SDG Indicators into everything we do. (NZ Government chooses to do) She pointed out that traditional measures of progress for economic growth would no longer exist but these traditional methods would be replaced by new experimental indicators, “a national achievement that go far beyond growth”, she said.

Ardern’s ambitious project namely Indicators Aotearoa N Z, the creating of a set of indicators across varying dimensions eluding to New Zealanders future economic, cultural, social, environmental wellbeing. The introduction to the ‘Wellbeing’ Budget’ was not an innovative strategy to grow NZ’s economy it was merely the beginning phase of Ardern’s deliberate Socialist degrowth of our country. The plundering of New Zealand had begun. Ardern introduced the ‘Wellbeing Budget’. Never mind growth because she had already started taking the country into ‘degrowth’, and 2022 the global media familiarly report purposeful, deliberate ‘Degrowth’. . Ardern has said “whilst economic growth is important and something we will continue to pursue, it alone does no guarantee improvements to New Zealanders living standards”, and so New Zealanders living standards started to drop, as more people joined the public housing waiting list.

To publicly oppose any of Ardern’s decision making, pending legislations, regulations makes one the governments political politicking target practice. Failure to be compliant to government demands means that deliberate character assassination is deal out by the governments purchased mainstream media. Sadly far too many people in New Zealand can not, or choose not to conjure up moral courage to publicly speak out for one reason or another.

The housing crisis in New Zealand is a nightmare, the high cost of housing and sections. I have to wonder does anyone just purchase a section anymore. All I see are’ pack and stacks’ hastily being built all over Auckland. I wonder whatever happen to council bylaws etc., where a huge number of townhouses over shadow peoples property next door, stopping the sunlight, spoiling their privacy, built right close to the boundary fence line. The intensification of housing ‘Agenda 2030’ Smart Growth.

Everything is just so entrenched in an ideological global framework of so called ‘Smart ‘Cities’ which don’t look that smart to me. No gardens for the children to play in and n o apple tree to climb, eem yes my dreams of yesteryear. No children playing  with the neighbours kids in the cul-de-sac’s now its little ones in pushchairs with cell-phones in hands. Both parents having to work to survive, children put into day care during their parents working day, they have no choice of being a ‘stay at home mum’

Now its all about ‘Smart Growth’, Agenda 2030,  surveillance camera’s and the talk of transhumanism where humans meet machines and become robot like. The UN Agenda 2030 that Ardern boasted about on the global stage, as she implied that she would take the lead, the lead to control every aspect of our lives, the UN-WEF have mapped it all out. Destruction of ‘free-market enterprise economy’, replacing it with ‘multi-stakeholder Capitalist corporations’, in public-private partnership with governments worldwide. Corporations in the drivers seat, government (regime) as the back seat passenger, small businesses and rural communities – farmers are the roadkill, those that New Zealand’s socialist regime deliberately throw under their tractors. The government using the farmers as their whipping boy in their ambitious climate hoax scheme. Yes, New Zealand the ‘guineapig state’.

There is no open public debate and no justification for Ardern’s actions nor that of any of the other political cronies in the toilet bowl of Wellington… In my research I have touched on UN Agenda 21, Agenda 2030. Agenda 2050 and Agenda 2063 in on the table yet to be exposed worldwide. The UN Global Socialist States of the World. Socialism has failed miserably and caused huge suffering in the past. If you wear a blindfold and a mask around your mouth time to get rid of both and see it for what it really is. Ardern has gone replaced by Hipkins, just rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Yes New Zealand truly is a guineapig state number one alongside Australia for human trials. New Zealand with its one regularity agency-Pharmac. A small populated country with numerous cultures, ethnic groups that live her. For human experiment, varying cultures are important part of human trials. NZ is the first country to see the rising of the dawn which is advantageous when it comes to the rest of the world. Much needed cancer drugs for example are often too expensive for people to buy, hence more people are inclined to take part in human trials. New Zealand has one of the quickest time frames for human trials to be completed, therefore saves drug companies, research agencies lots of money. ‘Wealth NOT Health’

New Zealanders have become guineapigs of socialist experiments.  Ardern also offered New Zealanders up to be guineapigs for the World Economic Forums ‘Reimagining Regulation for the Age of AI

Back in 2013 Google chose New Zealand to be the guineapig for global tech firms. Facebook has enthusiastically used New Zealanders as guineapigs when they trailed a scheme where user pay to make their posts more prominent on friends newsfeeds. In 2011 Facebook also rolled out its timeline feature first in New Zealand in 2011 saying at the time “As a global company we need to gain perspective and insights from outside the US”

The LinkedIn social network also tested its endorsement feature in New Zealand

However Googles Project Loon is probably the most ambitious high tech test carried out in New Zealand, this aimed to bring the internet to 2/3rds of the global population currently without web  access. This involved send 30 helium filled balloons to the edge of space above the South Island, each of these balloons were carrying transmitters capable of beaming wi-fi internet access down to antennae on properties below. Googles ultimate goal was a network of thousands of these balloons thus creating a  network that provides online access to anywhere in the world.. this was Googles dream and still remains Googles dream.

NOTE; Guinea pigs often sleep with their eyes open looking like they are in a trance. COVID19 Guineapig State. Ministry Of Health reported ‘COVID19 Vaccine trials and testing..ongoing trials, safety monitoring and real world data from COVID19 vaccination programmes worldwide provide us with useful information.

We are in phase 3 of the clinical vaccine (Jab) trials as the government determine whether the Pfizer BioNTech COVID19 jab is safe and effective.  YES this government purchased enough of these shots for every man, woman and child in New Zealand to be a guineapig for this human clinical trial. Coerced, blackmailed, lied to, manipulated and mandated into being guineapigs in global Human Clinical Trials as Guineapigs. And to top it off the government ignores the multitude of post jab deaths and numerous severe adverse events.

NOTE: A Texas Court demanded that FDA share their thousands of papers that Pfizer produced to gain authority to market their jab. This information will not be available to the public until at least 2024. Therefore NZ Government know jack shit about the Pfizer drug and all its contents, however they do know that there are huge risks but continue to announce this is for the public good, benefits the public with zilch risks.

October 2022 Pfizer admitted in European Court it did not test their jab to see if it stopped transmission of the virus before it entered the global market place . Governments, including NZ Govt continues to lie to us. If a person has a COVID test and it comes up positive e, if they die within 28days of that positive test they are counted as a COVID death. This was introduced 10th March 2022 in NZ. The World Health Org., (UN) requested that all countries align themselves in counting COVID19 deaths in this way. Therefore a suicide, a post jab death, a motor vehicle accident, being shot by the police equates to a COVID death if that person came up with a positive COVID19 test within 28 days of their death. The window of time can be expanded and has been in the UK.   ZILCH TRANSPARANCY AND THE BULL SHITE LIES CONTINUE. Just keep people in the state of fear, so they are easier to control.

Guineapigs that sleep with their eyes open as if in a trance.



RNZ  Reported 12/7/2021 ‘US  citizens and companies are buying NZ land for farming, forestry , wine making. Almost 180,000 hectares of farming land had been purchased or leased by foreign interest between 2010-2021. During the 11yr period almost 460,000 hectares, a little under the size of Auckland region shifted out of NZ control through purchases, leases or rights to take forestry. Control of another 178,000 ha. Of land  was sold to international buyers for forestry operations. These figures are from an RNZ analysis of OIO data carried out as part of the series ‘Who’s Eating New Zealand’. Foreigners, organisations & investment funds that are more than 25% foreign owned must get consent from OIO before purchasing sensitive land, significant business assets or fishing quota. RNZ revealed  17/10/2019 the 4 largest private land owners in NZ, which are all foreign owned forestry companies. As follows:-

TAUMATA PLANTATIONSown 101,854 hectares whom also purchased Carter Holt Harvey Forests which is owned by several overseas investment funds & banks. The largest shareholder is Manulife a major Canadian Insurance Company. In Oct 2016 Palisade Investments Partners Sydney closed the sale on interests of Taumata Plantations Ltd  to Manulife. Taumata’s assets exceeded $1.8 billion. Palisade’s director  said the company had achieved a sale at an attractive price. Taumata has just achieved record profits from the high harvest of strong timber prices. In 2021 Hancock Natural Resource Group adopted Manulift Investment Management brand in NZ, therefore their forestry operation now operate under Manulife Investment Management (NZ) Ltd.,(MFM) NZ.  As of 30/7/2022 Manulife manages over 213,000 hectares of plantation forestry in NZ on behalf of 3 clients. These clients are located in Northland, Auckland, Waikato, Bay Of Plenty, Manawatu-Wanganui and Hawkes Bay regions.

HANCOCK NATURAL RESOURCES  specializes in Global Farmland and Timber portfolio development and management, there parent company headquarters is in Toronto. They are head of global agriculture investments that expands markets worldwide in timber and ag-business. They manage a portfolio of 6 million acres of timberland located in the US, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Brazil & Chile. Also 400,000 acres of farmland properties in US, Canada, Chile and Australia.

THE MALAYSIAN TIONG FAMILY GROUP OWN 77,686 hectares. They own forestry, media, property assets worldwide. Land holdings in NZ include their subsidiaries-  Ernslaw One Forests, NZ King Salmon, the property & land development company Neil Group, Talus Industries, LumberBank, Winstone Pulp NZ (International), Oregon Nurseries, Innova Products. The Tiong Family Group subsidiary is the Oregon Group which is an Investment Holding Corporation.  RNZ reported 20/9/2018 The Tiong Family Group were to blame for tonnes of debris that washed up on Tolaga Bay, they had been fined twice before for illegal logging overseas. RNZ reported that it had taken OIO  9 yrs to realise this.

TIONG FAMILY GROUP(Hikirangi Forest Farms): Tiong Group also own Samling’s Group Hikurangi Forest Farms. The owner also owns Samling’s Group Hikurangi Forest Farms and another forestry company in Tolaga Bay, this was granted 24 consents to buy sensitive land in NZ between 2005-2017 even though the company faced accusations of environmental and human rights abuses since 2004. Samling’s subsidiaries namely Barama Company was also fined for illegal logging in Guyana and fined. It was fined again in 2008. Samlings Palm Oil operations in Myanmar were accused of illegal deforestation indigenous land grabs & environment abuses by human rights groups in Myanmar. OIO said they were aware of reports of the company’s practices in Myanmar but had not verified them, saying it only became aware of illegal logging fines in 2017. The Overseas Investment Office (OIO) decided not to act on information as to  Samling’s, they considered the fine was too long ago and limitation issues, far too long to act on information alone, Land Information NZ Overseas Investment Office manager said. Yes this could have forced the sale of Samling’s assets.

Tiong Family Group (Ernslaw One) :  Ernslaw One is another of Tiong’s company’s also implicated in the Tolaga Bay flooding has continued to buy sensitive land in NZ, despite owners facing allegations of environmental and human rights abuses abroad. Ernslaw One is one of the three companies investigated by Gisborne District Council as to flood in June.

The Founder of Tiong Family Group is  Tan Sri Tiong King he has made his fortune in forestry and palm oil plantations. Queen Elizabeth awarded him an environmental award., this angered Prince Charles as the Tiong Family Group had been alleged involved in environmental and human rights abuses abroad.

Tiong Family Group (Rimbunan Hijau: Tiong) This is another logging company owned by the Tiong Family Group which faces accusations of illegal operations, environmental and human rights abuses in Papua New Guinea and Malaysia, documented by Greenpeace in 2004 and more recently by Oakland Institute.  Published report dated  3/3/2016 entitled ‘The Great Timber Heist’ Papua New Guinea. Referred to massive tax evasion, financial misreporting by foreign logging companies of millions of dollars. Named 16 subsidary members of the largest logging firm in Papua New Guinea… namely Malaysian Multinational company  Rimbunan Hijau Group. The government failed to take action, the Commission of Inquiry into special Agriculture and Business Leases found widespread fraud, corruption, a lack of consultation with local communities where the logging took place. NOTE: NZ Overseas Investment Office grants  24 consents Tiong owned companies since 2005 to purchase sensitive land in NZ.. Both Tiong Group owned  Samling and Rimbunan Hijau were named as irresponsible palm oil producers by Greenpeace.

TIONG FAMILY GROUP ENVIRONMENTAL & HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES:-Multiagency Report on 10th Nov 2014 confirmed that police were working for Rimbunan Hijau that were brutaliing communities in SABL areas. The investigation was undertaken by government officials and civil society organizations whom confirmed allegations of continuous brutality and human rights violations by police personnel operating on behalf of  Rimbunan Hijau inside two Special Agriculture and Business Lease areas in the East Britain Province of Papua New Guinea. Instances of violence included brutal assaults with tree branches that rendered victims unconscious, locking  villagers in shipping containers  for days on end, attacks by police on  villagers with fan belts, rifle butts,  and toe capped boots. Forcing villagers to spend the night lying in the rain on felled logs and forcing them to drink polluted water. Police were found to have forced various groups of youths and landowners to sign agreements pledging not to resist logging operations on their land even though the people had not consented to the logging, this was a breach of their constitutional rights and human rights.  Police forced various people to make compensation payments in cash to the logging company. The fact finding mission stated the police were operating at the instigation of the Malaysian logging company  Rimbunan Hijau, that was found to the a serial offender in PNG when it came to using police to brutally abuse local communities. It was found that police were flown into the area and were being deployed in the hire and care of the logging company. This report was publicly released in Feb 2013.

Rimbunan Hijau hired  subsidiary Gilford Ltd., with the intention of preventing landowners from protesting against the companies operations. The Commission of Inquiry into the leases of the logging company covered more than 5 millions ha in total, unlawful. They found widespread abuses in developments of leases, failures to follow the process and requirements in the Lands Act, failure to secure informed consent from the local communities. The Commissions finds was accepted by the Prime Minister and endorsed by the National Executive Council, whol ordered many of the leases to be revoked. At the time of this publication this action had not been implemented and endorsed by the National Executive Council..

TIONG FAMILY GROUP GRANTED MORE THAN NINETY  CONSENTS IN NEW ZEALAND: – Over a period of 20 years for companies owned and controlled by the Tiong Family Group. Overseas Investment Office spokesperson said “For OIO to take enforcement action after consent has been granted for any breach of good character it would be needed to be proven the person is not fit to hold an asset- We need to consider the nature of the allegation and public interest in taking action”. It was reported by Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) that the OIO good character test was not rigorous enough.. “To prove companies are of a good character usually only one NZ Lawyer has to sign a bit of paper certifying they are of a good character”. Council of Trade Unions spokesperson said “the test apples to individuals, not the company itself”. No action can be taken under the current law.

NEW FOREST ASSET MANAGEMENT: is an  Australian based management company owns 77,465 hectares of land in New Zealand, also operates several investment funds in NZ. RNZ reported that OIO were investigating subsidiary’s purchases, this resulted in a formal warning-$80,000 Charity donation and $20,000 Costs. The Sydney based company is reported as eyeing up trillions of dollars of opportunities in 20/5/2022, the company plans to manage $25 billion of forestry assets by 2030 which could well become trillion dollar assets as they had been jointly acquired by Japanese giants Mitsu and Nomura, thus signalling rapid growth of their forestry fund, making it the second largest asset manager globally in forestry. The company referred to climate solutions, sustainable materials. They manage forestry assets in Australia and New Zealand, North America, Africa- derive returns from productive timber, appreciation of land value and carbon mitigation.  David Brand CEO said “there is potential of trillions of dollars to be made out of carbon pricing also shifting from plastic to paper, also capital appreciation of land. (Source of information -Financial Review)

MATARIKI FORESTS  (RAYONIER) is based in the US, was formed in 2005 through the acquisition of Carter Holt Harvey well as the purchase of Rayonier Forestry assets, they remain an investor in managing  Matariki Forests.  An Australian company Waimarie Forests Pty own the other half shareholding. Rayonier Inc is the 3rd largest forestry company in NZ, owns 120,000 ha.of plantations on 166,000 ha of land base. When it originally purchased its first forest in 1991 it was initially a log export operation. It has now quadrupled in size expanding log trading operations in NZ and Australia.. Rayonier business activities include:- timberland management and the sale, entitlement of real estate in land, they own manage land in North America & NZ, are involved in leasing properties for hunting, mineral extraction and cell towers. Their headquarters are in Yulee, Florida USA.

Rayonier Court Case In Atlanta: Pollution of the Altamaha River that flows to  Darien on the Atlantic Coast. Their pulp and paper mill in Jessop Sth East Geogia was discharging, dumping approc 60 gallons of waste water aa day into the river. Conservation groups stated that the river was used for swimming, fishing, kayaking. The river smelt of a bad odour and looked coloured. Rayonier responded saying -they had spent millions of dollars over the years on their discharge system. The court allowed them to continue with their waste water permit. The Rayonier plant manufacture bleached wood pulp used in plastics, cigarette filters, cosmetics and other products, it’s the largest such factory in the world.

PORT BLAKELY is US owned 35,889 New Zealand. US owned.

SUMUTOMO FORESTRY. A Japanese forestry group owns land in Nelson and Tasman 25461ha

JUKEN NZ LTD., Japanese forestry investment company (WoodOne) their forests are in the Wairarapa and near Gisborne where it owns a mill-12435 hectares.

CORISOL NZ LTD.,Purchased from Ngai Tahu in 2011. ., A Swiss owned investment  company that purchased forestry land -18,231 ha.                               

NELSON FORESTS LTD., Owned by Australian Forestry Investment Company- 18135 hectares, purchased the company and land from another foreign owned company.

SOUTHLAND PLANTATION FORESTRY CO.,LTD., 13366 hectares. Ownership of this Sth Island forestry land is split between three major Japanese companies -Fuji Xerox, Itochu Corporation and Oji Holdings.

OCEANA GOLD NZ LTD.,Australian owned company 13,682 hectares. Owner-operator of Waihi Gold Mine.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            .

GREENHEART MANAKAHIA FOREST LAND LTD.,Hong Kong based investment company owns forests in Northland 12558 ha.

CHINA FORESTRY GROUP NZ have various site from Wellington to Te Kuiti. Related to Forest360, operates out of every port in NZ. Forest 360 has a corporate structure. Took over the Remutaka Forest. Main business includes forest ownership, harvesting, transportation, sales and export for wood products, development of forest resource and storage logistic services.

The China  Forestry Group company originally set up nine enterprises under the State Forestry Administration 1996, started operating in 2001. The corporation is engaged in fast growing high yield plantations, production, processing and export of wood products and forest seedlings. It also provides a forest tourism service as well fire fighting equipment.  Subsidiaries of the corporation have six wholly owned subsidiaries in China, holding more than 70 enterprises altogether, which have set up production bases, businesses in NZ, Russia, Singapore, Burma and other countries. China Forestry Group own 24 forests in New Zealand 22,000 hectares of plantation on 29,000 hectares of land. Website: https// Headquarters Auckland CBD, Described as Type being – Government.

SYNLAIT MILK:ACQUIRED THE NZ DAIRY COMPANY: For $56.5 million. China Bright Food, a Shanghai based State owned food industry conglomerate is the biggest shareholder of Synlait Milk. The largest shareholders are Bright Dairy Holdings Ltd (39.1%), Friesland Campina (9.9%) and Mitsui & Co NZ Ltd., Synlait have manufacturing sites in Canterbury, Auckland and Pokeno, its admin office is in Christchurch. They have a Research and Development Centre in Palmerston North and the Talbot Forest cheese factory in Temuka. Synlait export specification for infant formula powder using Bright Dairy’s distribution and marketing expertise to sell it to China. Bright Dairy is China’s third largest dairy company by volume, owning 210 farms in China and sources milk from another 500. Owns 23 processing factories, is the worlds largest yoghurt factory.

Synlait Sacked Lee Williams (PUBLICALLY REPORTING OF HE PUAPUA)- Stuff NZ referring to allegations of Lee Williams being a  ‘white supremacist’ 24/5/2021. Referred to Lee Williams attacking Maori Party MP Rawiri Waititi and Willie Jackson by stroking fear as Lee Williams was determined to bring the He Puapua Report to the publics attention. Synlait responded they take these matters seriously. Lee Williams responed that He Puapua creators wanted to cancel and destroy him for telling the truth.. Lee was suspended from his job whilst Synlait investigated. Lee Williams lost his Westpac Personal Bank Account and his job at Synlait.. In 2020 Synlait started distributing plant based milk products domestically and in Sth East Asia also Australia.. They have increased their plant based food manufacture which they call healthier farming practices.. Ambient drinks, creams, butter which is plant based.


OTHER: NZ FONTERRA DAIRY COMPANY –(HIGH NITRATE CONTAMINATES) Fonterra NZ owns 700 parcels of land across NZ. RNZ published several articles on Fonterra’s 29 Ghost Farms across NZ, that are used to pipe their waste water for cleaning factory equipment into farms they had purchased in rural areas. This waste water was sprayed onto the land. Neighbouring farms were affected when this contaminated waste water leached into bores on neighbouring farm properties. Nitrate levels were higher than that that required by farmers, but this was overcome because Fonterra call this ‘Nutrient Management’



Ngāi Tūhoe (243495 hectares):Includes 209,000 ha that was formerly Te Urewera National Park. Iwi settlement with Crown 2013 gave Te Urewera legal person-hood with a trust board made up of Iwi and Government.

CNI Holdings Ltd., -126,147 hectares. CNI Holdings is made up of eight central North Island Iwi: Ngai Tuhoem Ngati Manawa, Ngati Tuwharetoa, Ngati Whakaue, Ngati Whare, Ruakawa and affiliate Te Arawa Iwi Hapu. Includes large amounts of forests.

Ngati Tuwharetoa – 113,414 hectares. Iwi multiple trusts own forests and other land in the central North Island. The Iwi own the bed of Lake Taupo. (RNZ excluded bodies of water and underlying land in their analysis)

Ngai Tahu– 102,136 hectares. One of the first Iwi to settle with the Crown, is the largest landowner in the South Island after the Crown

Proprietors of Mangata Blocks 44,663 hectares. A mixture of Iwi based  in Tairawhiti on the East Coast of the North Island covering about 3,000 shareholders. Land includes 15,000 native forest, some exotic forest, farmland & vineyards.


TOP FIVE LAND OWNING PUBLIC ENTITIES:= Does not include the Crown. RNZ Analysis found the Crown own at least 6.3 million hectares.

Wellington Regional Council 49,244 hectares. Owns and manages several large forest parks including Orongorongo, Akatarawa, Kaitoke Forest Parks.

Auckland Council – 48,220 hectares, land holdings include large parts of Waitakere and Hunua Ranges.

University of Canterbury – 40,302 hectares. The university owns farm and research field stations across the South Island.

Dunedin City Council- 38,356 hectares includes council owned ‘City Forests Ltd.,’ which owns Flagstaff  & Ross Creek Forests.

University of Otago – 19,030 hectares, owns large areas of land endowed to it by the government.

Note much of this information was analysed by RNZ by using Land Information NZ Data. (Did not include some land transfers that were documented in LINZ Database). RNZ used information from the ‘Companies Office’. RNZ followed a similar methodology to one developed by Auckland Council researchers. Bodies of water & roads have been excluded from the database along with lease titles.–regional-govt–politics/georgia-judge-says-clean-altamaha-river/4dMVeDdBNbuJWvgud8YmhJ/–regional-govt–politics/georgia-judge-says-clean-altamaha-river/4dMVeDdBNbuJWvgud8YmhJ/


Carol Sakey


There you were, being a nice little guy just going on about your business. You couldn’t find your last mask that day. You got on the bus, to go get something to eat. While on it you picked up the TRIPLEDEMIC. On the way off you shook the bus drivers hand, and sure enough you got a hold of his Warts. Now you’re QUADRUPLEDEMIC infected. Your chicken strips lunch in little China town tasted good, but come to find out not only was it not chicken, but even worse the creature had Monkeypox. Now you have QUINTUPLEDEMIC. While sitting on the bench waiting for the bus, you get bit by a mosquito, giving you West Nile Virus. Now you’re SEXTUPLEDEMIC!

It may be some time before you notice the symptoms, but in the meantime you’re out spreading your cocktailedemic to your colleagues and loved ones. All because you wouldn’t get vaccinated, didn’t wear a mask, and went out for lunch.