Mike Mulrooney
I recently met Te Aturangi Nepia-Clamp at my home during a TV3 interview. I found him to be an articulate, well-educated and very likeable person. His knowledge of Maori history was very apparent, as was his desire that should we change the name Poverty Bay to a double name, then the Maori name Turanganui a Kiwa should be first, followed by Poverty Bay. He said that sequence was simply because of the chronological order that showed Turanganui a Kiwi was “our name” 400 years before Lieutenant Cook named us “Poverty Bay”.
His reasoning was also that Cook had no right to name our area, as it was already named by Maori. I suggested that as Cook did not understand Maori, and Maori could not understand Cook, it seemed like a “fait accompli”.
Te Aturangi felt my desire to retain the name Poverty Bay was more emotional than historical, as I mentioned the years of being a “Poverty Bay” football rep, loving the name and never receiving debasing or belittling calls from opposing teams. We were simply another province and were accepted for our skills and simply what we were.
The interview is to show on TV3 this month and my only concern is that in the editing, cutting etc, it may possibly paint a different picture to my opposition to a name change.
Apart from that, I was honoured to meet Te Aturangi and also privileged to be invited to share my views by TV3.
I still prefer Poverty Bay. Once we have adopted a dual name, as councillors have decided to apply for, what about Bay of Plenty, Mercury Bay, Palliser Bay, North Cape, Cape Maria van Diemen, Great Barrier Island etc, etc, etc all being influenced to change to their original Maori titles as well.
When would the changes ever end? Wellington, Dunedin, Christchurch, Auckland, Hawke’s Bay, Coromandel, New Plymouth, to name just a few. Should they all revert to their original Maori names?
Gisborne already has vehicles driving around featuring the Maori name for our city, eg Turanga Health. Did that ever go forward for discussion?
Te Aturangi, my meeting with you was both fruitful and enlightening. I thank you for your wisdom and trust you also saw my side of the discussion.
You pointed out that my use of the title for Cook as “Captain” Cook in one of my letters, as relating to 1769, was incorrect. Cook was actually a lieutenant in command of the Endeavour and Te Aturangi said that if I wished to quote history, I should get my facts right.
I guess that I, like the people who erected the Cook statue at The Cut, were poorly informed or advised. No matter what our future holds, I am certain people here will still call him “Captain Cook”. However, while a little pedantic, Te Aturangi was absolutely correct.