KEY POINTS:
One of the core requirements of multiculturalism is sensitivity towards the practices and attitudes of other racial and ethnic groups. Part and parcel of this is appreciation of, and tolerance for, different ways of doing things. Sometimes, this can lead to a realisation that the most common practice
is not the only sensible approach, or necessarily the best. But, whatever the case, different customs should be addressed with flexibility, not a frown.
Such, unfortunately, is not the case at the Manukau Memorial Gardens, where Pacific Island people are being asked to clear graves of excessive floral wreaths and other decorations. They have been given until Monday to remove the material. Then the city council will start its own clean-up. The decorations, says the cemetery's manager of customer services, create maintenance problems. In particular, they and the covering of burial plots with large mounds of sand and dirt, as is done in the Pacific islands, make it difficult to mow between the rows of graves.
Such may be the case, but this is a churlish imposition. It seems to owe more to the stark nature of European-style graveyards, where lawns are manicured beautifully but flowers and suchlike are few and far between, than any attempt to understand or accommodate a different practice. And it hints at little tolerance for an approach, which, like significant Maori burial sites such as that at Taupiri, makes European practice appear dull.
The cemetery believes it has catered for the Pacific way by setting aside an area where, for an extra $600, people can develop a full burial plot in the traditional manner. "They keep those beautifully," says the cemetery manager. "Pacific people really love their graves." But for many Pacific people, $600 is a large sum. They have good reason to question why they should pay that when their only ambition is to lavish care and attention on a grave, whatever part of the cemetery it is in.
There might be more reason for action if the city council had received a string of complaints from other cemetery users. If, perhaps, the presence of flowers, solar lights, cloth, pots and suchlike around the graves was creating access problems. But that appears not to be the case. The cemetery seems concerned only with making sure its grass is in tip-top condition.
The Waitakere City Council is grappling with the same issue at its Waikumete cemetery, where non-compliance with a grave-adornment bylaw is also widespread. In one area, more graves are thought to be breaching the bylaw than conforming to it. This indicates that the restriction has not been enforced for a long time, suggesting, in turn, that the flouting of the bylaw has, quite correctly, not been regarded as an especially serious problem. Nor should it be now.
Given the sensitivities involved, the response of Pacific Island people has been restrained. Some at the Manukau cemetery told the Herald they were not worried by the council's stand. One even conceded that some families went too far with grave decorations. Another noted that some items were left too long and started to look shabby. That suggests fertile ground for compromise.
It is a shame that those who have imposed the clean-up ultimatum are not showing the same willingness to see the other side. If they were more generous, they might see the Pacific approach for what it is, physical testimony to the grief felt for a departed relative or friend. They might even compare it favourably with the more spartan European-style approach. And, rather than issued ultimatums and suchlike, they might show a greater degree of flexibility and tolerance.
