Editorial: Signs of shift in attitude to Waitangi Day

Opinion

Every year about this time, tens of thousands of words are expended discussing what to do about Waitangi Day. Many people are likely to skip over them with a roll of the eyes. They are mostly things we have seen and heard before. Nothing much new. But this year among the verbiage is a single idea, expressed in two different speeches, that is worth noting. The Governor-General and the Deputy Prime Minister pointed out yesterday that, 30 years ago, Anzac Day was a lightning rod for protest and national discontent, much as Waitangi is today.

It was inconceivable to many at the time that the national division over fundamental issues of peace and war could ever be bridged. And yet, today, with the past behind us but not forgotten, new generations have discovered Anzac Day as a solemn commemoration of the people who made great sacrifices for the nation.

The point has extra importance because Anzac Day is often cited as an alternative to Waitangi Day by those who are tired of protest and political discord marring what they believe should be a plain and joyful celebration of our common bonds. Prominent among the Anzac Day advocates was the historian Michael King who argued in his Penguin History of New Zealand that it meant as much to Maori as it did to Pakeha.

Quite apart from the fact that the day is also shared by Australians, such a move is never likely to succeed because - as the Weekend Herald pointed out - Anzac Day, however important it remains in our hearts, will always be a day for the specific commemoration of our war dead. Nevertheless, there are lessons to be learned from the example. Not only has Anzac Day itself been the focus of protest, as Dame Silvia and Dr Cullen pointed out yesterday, but it shows that any worthwhile commemoration of historic ideas or events will be the focus of debate, argument - and, yes, protest - from time to time. Without such discussion the celebration is likely to become little more than an empty gesture which aims to cover up the past by distracting attention from any aspects of it that might be disturbing. Dr Cullen's vision is that Waitangi Day will evolve like Anzac Day as the difficult issues are worked through.

It may seem an unlikely dream for a leading member of the Government that passed the foreshore and seabed legislation, the most divisive policy since its predecessor's ill-fated fiscal envelope. And yet there were signs this weekend of a shift in attitudes which were all the more important because of the depth of feeling among Maori about the foreshore issue. There was no mud-slinging or violence and, in comparison to previous years, the protests were low key.

Part of the reason for this may have been the impetus given by the foreshore issue to the new Maori Party thus channelling energy away from protest and towards the coming election. The party's candidate to contest the Tai Tokerau seat is none other than Hone Harawira, veteran Waitangi protester and organiser of the foreshore and seabed hikoi to Parliament.

While not apologising for his role as protester - writing in Thursday's Herald he argued that protest is often the basis of positive change - he is, nevertheless, now sedulously playing the role of aspiring MP, courting votes and talking of an annual conference at Waitangi to discuss broad issues of nationhood.

A change of tone like this is a characteristic of all who take the well-worn path that leads from radical protest to Parliament. The need to broaden your appeal to win votes tends to blunt the sharper barbs of radical rhetoric.

A softening of the rhetoric will also make it easier for the complex issues surrounding the Treaty of Waitangi to be resolved, or at least discussed, in a way that will allow New Zealand's national day to be like Anzac Day, once again celebrated by all.