Tag Archives: mātauranga māori

Removing barriers to sharing for the benefit of Māori #FigshareFestNZ

Data for whom? Removing barriers to sharing for the benefit of Māori
Dr Kiri Dell, Ngapera Riley, CEO figure.nz

Ref Decolonising Methodologies by Linda Tuhiwai Smith

The academy privileges a certain type of knowing, but indigenous people have other ways as well (which we all use to some degree) eg

  • Sense perception – I felt it
  • Imagination – I envisioned it
  • Memory – I remembered it
  • Inherited – My nanny told me
  • Faith – God told me

Example of using data badly: MOTU (economic research centre) put out research a few years ago comparing Māori and other ethnicities and concluding that collectivist beliefs were holding Māori back from economic success. This was not taken well by Māori…. Researchers made sweeping statements about Māori culture where they had no research; compared Māori to completely different groups (eg African Americans, Chinese) with different histories and belief systems; interpreted through white male lens.

Basho haiku
Pull the wings off a dragonfly and look – you get a red pepperpod!
Add wings to a pepperpod, and look – you get a red dragonfly

Figure.nz set up as charity to democratise data – aims to provide valid and ethical data. Data is important but so is context and people behind it. Draws licensed data from over a hundred sources. Exists for the benefit of Aotearoa so believe if they can get data right for Māori they can get it right for all. Kaupapa that data is for everyone not just experts.

Partnering with Te Mana Rarauranga – Māori Data Sovereignty Network; and with nine government agencies who’ve got a lot of data that was never meant to be shared so navigating benefits and dangers of sharing. How will data be used, for whom, why?

Data is never perfect – it’s just one tool alongside experience and connections. Māori data has traditionally not been collected well – cf especially the latest census – so have to be careful about conclusions drawn.

Figure.NZ –  over 44,000 charts and datasets (CSVs and images) around people, travel, health, education, employment, economy, environment, social welfare, technology, broken down by geographic area. Very careful to publish metadata around sources etc.

Original data was a mess so have been working hard to tidy it up.  Check sources, make sure it’s statistically valid (no small datasets) – have a robust process to work with source to make sure the metadata explains methodology and context.

Focused on public aggregate data but starting to use other sources. Wondering how to safely share research data. Excited to see people have started publishing theses etc with CC licensing.


The development of a digital atlas of Ngāi Tahu history – Takerei Norton #open17

Hope to launch Kā Huru Manu | Ngāi Tahu Atlas this November. Opportunity to tell their own stories instead of having their stories told by others. When gathering evidence for the Waitangi tribunal hearing, a principle was that if it fell through (as claims had so often before), they’d at least have their chance to tell their story to New Zealand.

Gathering evidence, was important to show how tupuna viewed the land early on before any written evidence. The names of places carry heritage and history – mnemonics for knowledge about the places and stories.

Started the mapping project in one area, then extended to whole Ngāi Tahu takiwā. Started with sticking dots on large topographical maps; later digitised. Probably 100,000 pages worth. Technology, Google Earth, streamlined it heaps and made it much easier. Get a name, locate it on the map, add the data/story behind the name.


1/10 of South Island are Crown-owned low-rent leases in the high country to Ngāi Tahu – and government wanted to freehold it. Tenure Review involved visiting farms, interviewing people, identifying sites of cultural significance. Manuhaea needed to be protected – famous mahinga kai site for gathering tuna and birds; later flooded as Lake Hāwea was raised. But when told this to the Crown, the Crown kept saying they needed more information. Went to Trevor Howse, developed relationship, and he provided a pile of papers full of evidence. Wrote a 30-page report and the Crown agreed to protect the site.

Get to the point where they want to identify what sites are key to be protected. Started mapping hui where people would bring info and map on topographic maps with colour-coded dots. Decided to visit each site – mapping hikoi for 2-3 years with guest speakers, archaeologists, parents and kids. Nearly finished mapping the high country and then decided to do one more small job: map the whole of the South Island. Because had always wanted to do it, just hadn’t had the resources; Tenure Review was a way in.


5000 placenames: mahinga kai, ponds, lagoons, streams, mountains, pā, travel routes, native reserves. Names that are pre-Ngāi Tahu, Ngāi Tahu, incorrect names put in by Pākehā, everything – and every name must be referenced. Mostly from 19th century manuscripts, maps, books, newspapers.

“The east coast was state highway one, and the rivers were highways into the interior”

Used old maps but some mistakes eg Beattie misread/parsed sources, so working to find other sources and correct them.

Nervous about putting out the full 5000 placenames in case used by council against them, so starting by putting out 1500.


Informant gets credit as well as collector. Another problem with Beattie: “an old Māori man told me this” but who? In one case Teki Pukurakau = ‘Jack Pukuraki’.

“This has been done by the ordinary Ngāi Tahu person.” – Trevor Howse  Done by Ngāi Tahu for Ngāi Tahu. If any institutions have information related, this project wants it!

Huakina te whare ki te ao – Ariana Tikao, Catherine Amey, Anahera Morehu #open17

Ngā Upoko Tukutuku thesaurus created by looking at cataloguing worldview within Te Ao Māori framework. Classifying mātauranga Māori in a Library of Congress framework is pretty hard; but it was also about revitalising te reo. So Ngā Upoko Tukutuku aims to help cataloguers and archivists assign appropriate subject terms; and enable library users to find resources within a mātauranga Māori framework.

Kaupapa are preferred terms – with a whakamarama; related to Reo-ā-iwi (dialectal); within Tāhuhu (broader terms), Heke (narrower terms) etc.

Tukutuku panels made with a person on each side weaving threads back and forth; Ngā Upoko Tukutuku are made in the same way.

Example of frogs – in Māori worldview frogs aren’t part of an ‘amphibian’ category but rather part of aitanga pepeke (animals that jump) so added poraka there.

Once had a request for a term for ‘environmental ethics’, but no term for this so added two terms, one for ethics, one for environment. Added scope notes.

Rakiraki – the specific readers inspiring the request were actually about family so suggested using whānau there. But also added rakiraki as it was suitable for other resources about ducks.

Manawaroa for resilience.

Trying to create scope notes that are easy for cataloguers/archivists with little knowledge of mātauranga Māori to understand.

Reo-ā-iwi – Hura kōhatu / Hura kōwhatu; kōkā / māmā / whaea

Opening up the data to the world eg http://miriamposner.com/msh; converting a subset into Linked Data

Feedback, questions, interest in collaboration to reo@dia.govt.nz

More lightning talks #ndf2012

Jock Phillips, Manatu Taonga – Ministry for Culture and Heritage: Short Stories
Began with Rugby World Cup 2011. Wanted to recreate childhood experience of driving around with parents reading out stories from a guide. So got 140 stories prefaced of extracts from RadioNZ archives – 4minute sound bytes. Then road tested them, listening to stories and taking photographs.

Didn’t originally realise how important these photos would be. Originally envisaged as CDs they could hand out at airport but then found out the cost this would involve and rethought… How to get the stuff out? Could deliver as mp3 files so people could download trips. Put together iPod app with sound and images. Put together a google map with access to all stories. But main way was on YouTube. And had to use images taken as historic images often had rights issues.

Roadside Stories possibly not that successful with rugby fans — but the YouTube videos have been viewed often and often also embedded in other contexts.

Main problem is that does involve staring at still photos – hope to work with archives to move beyond this and put together some war stories.

Max Sullivan, Victoria University of Wellington: Digitising sensitive material
Digitising Salient student magazine. Contains a lot of images that can be considered offensive – nudity (inc. child nudity), violence, death. 50,000 images on website and haven’t dealt with this before or had policy to deal with it, though have withheld images for cultural reasons.

Image of dead child from Vietnam War. Does portraying it respect the person?
One with headline re “rapes chicken”.

Need to display images in context. If you can’t display in context maybe shouldn’t display it at all. Eg album cover with naked 13-year-old – okay if used to illustrate article on music.

Need to create a defensible position – create and display a policy.

Will display Salient in full; but want people to see images in context, so will block the images from search engines. Will also develop and display an image policy.

Why block all images? Easier to be consistent, easier to implement, avoids having meetings about each image (because will soon be doing the 70s!)

More info: An Investigation into the Display of Potentially Offensive Salient Magazine Images

Stuart Yeates, Victoria University of Wellington: Digital usage statistics

Web stats – google analytics, apache logs, other systems

Good for some things – how many people use site, what pages more frequently used, did people stop using search after upgrade, did marketing lead to uptick in usage?

Do we value reuse and remix? Everyone.
Do we measure it and report it upwards? A few tentative hands

“Bureaucracies measure success in terms of what is reported up the management chain. If you have no plan to report, you are planning to fail.”

Broadcast vs kaitiaki – broadcast is all about selling slots, measuring bums on seats. If we’re to be guardians, we don’t have content, users have content loaned to us for their future selves. If they’re not doing stuff with it, why the fuck do we have it?

Easy measures

These are quantity not quality. (If you measure gate count, you don’t subtract the number who just came for the toilet.) They don’t mean more than current statistics, they mean different things.

Chris Thomson, University of Canterbury: Digitising a bibliography of writing by Māori in English
Bridget Underhill created Kōmako bibliography as dissertation. Bibliography is authorised – she contacted writers and whanau for consent and to annotate.

Chris involved much more recently. They’re doing project mostly in spare time. Bibliography is a Word file, non-searchable pdf, and in print. Want to turn into flexible data format, interoperable with other systems, maintainable and updateable.

Using TEI, eXist-DB, and XSLT and XQuery. Doing everything with xml which can be verbose, pedantic, heavy-handed but others love it.

“XML is like violence – if it doesn’t solve your problems, you are not using enough of it.” attributed to sparklemotion

OxGarage to convert docx to flat TEI XML

Lots of tools out there for learning this stuff.

Coming soon: www.komako.org.nz

Clarion Wells, NZ On Screen, How to Survive the Content Apocalypse
Clip of Rotting Hill zombie apocalypse in NZ outback which Clarion says is how she feels about the web.

NZonscreen has thousands of title free to watch. Tasks include selecting, clearing, sourcing digitising, writing. Very high stats. But besieged by horde of information. How do we survive and thrive in information apocalypse?

4 rules

  1. use the right tools – have built own ruby on rails applications, and challenge is to keep it simple and usable. Use analytics tools to get info about visitors and measure performance
  2. find your peers and work with them. Don’t become isolated. NZonscreen team from film/tv background, involved in industry. But also part of cultural and heritage sector.
  3. find allies outside of your peers. Find common ground in sectors beyond your own. Eg approaching Tourism NZ re helping tourists find out more about locations of favourite films.
  4. make yourself known to the public – survival depends on people knowing you exist. Active on Facebook and Twitter, strong relationships with the Press, approach radio and tv when something to offer.

A snippet #lianza11 #rs1

From the very end of the first research session, I walked in on the middle of:
Liz Wilkinson, Penny Bardenheier, Hēmi Dale, Tauwehe Tamati
Me whakarongo ki te kōrero: let the conversations be heard

New call number structure with the Framework-Kete Sublevel Series-Letters Title-Letters eg K-HAa PUR KAI

Used Ngā Ūpoko Tukutuku – still remains gaps for subjects in Māori language readers. Sometimes a feeling of indecision about whether a term can be used. Would support workshops.

User-centred access lets users browse by difficulty level, or search by difficulty or topic. Supports language and literacy development, and supports relationship building. Have made some great connections between library and Te Puna Wānanga.

The WAI-262 claim #lianza11 #keynote3

Aroha Te Pareaka Mead (Speaker notes)
The WAI-262 Taonga Claim

Treaty of Waitangi claim – WAI# is the chronological number, so 262 is a fairly old claim. The WAI-262 claim has big implications for people working with Māori knowledge.

Six original claimants: Ngāti Kuri, Ngāti Wai, Te Rarawa, Ngāti Porou, Ngāti Kahungunu asserted that Crown had

  • failed to actively protected exercise of tino rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga by claimants over indigenous flora and fauna and other taonga and also over mātauranga Māori
  • failted to protect the taonga
  • usurped tino rangatiratanga and kaitiakitanga
  • breached Treaty of Waitangi by agreeing to various international agreements/obligations that affect these.

Complex claim – includes all native species; Māori arts and designs; traditional knowledge, medicines; DNA, genetic modification. Covers misappropriation, offensive use, inappropriate use, and trademark laws that prevent Māori from using Māori language terms – a singer who couldn’t use her name Moana in Germany because it’d already been trademarked there.

Claim lodged in 1991; hearings began 1998; 2001 other evidence; 2006 statement of issues and 2nd round of hearings; 2007 end of hearings; 2011 Ko Aotearoa Tēnei report (very long but you should either read all or nothing – can’t just read a bit – but very good and recommended). Only one of the six original claimants still alive to hear the report, and has since passed on.
Report created new definitions of taonga species (significant to culture or identity of iwi), taonga works (significant because there’s inherited body of knowledge associated with it and iwi or hapu obliged to act as kaitiaki), taonga derived works (works with a Māori element but generalised or adapted and combined with other non-Māori influences – eg new artform by Ta Moko experts for non-Māori requesting moko).

Report decided that:

  • Treaty entitles kaitiaki relationships and a reasonable degree of control but not ownership or veto over uses of IP in all cases.
  • Māori are not ‘the other’ – the Treaty partnership requires the Crown to be both Pākeha/Māori. Crown has often acted in a hostile way towards mātauranga Māori issues. Treaty principles must be read collectively, not cherrypicked.
  • Crown has a right to govern but Māori interests vital.
  • Can’t do business as usual – need a more sophisticated Treaty partnership.

Mead says it’s like a marriage in dire need of counselling. One partner has got a lot more out of the marriage than the other; one partner thinks the other is a continual whinges. Lots of bruises, scars, fights, but when they think about the kids, and they don’t know what to do with the chattels – though one of the partners is trying to sell off the chattels.

Intellectual Property in taonga works
Should be able to protect against offensive or derogatory use. Kaitiaki should be able to object to commercial uses of taonga works. Should develop a register of cultural works such as haka, moteatea so kaitiaki can be identified. Should be a new commission to hear objections to commercial uses.

Basically tinkering with existing system. Claimants had wanted an indigenous system.

Māori and the environment
Three levels of protection:

  • full decision-making authority to kaitiaki
  • partnership with crown – shared decision-making
  • influence over decisions

Tribunal suggest moving to the first, acknowledging we’re not even at the third.

Text in legal situations re Māori issues tend to be very waffly eg “give consideration to”. Tribunal says we need to be more specific.

Wildlife Act should be amended to give Māori and Crown shared management – rather than Crown ownership. (This is the only act where the Tribunal comes straight out about.)

Taonga and the Conservation Estate
“For Māori [this is about] the survival of their own identity. Without the mātauranga Māori that lives in the DOC estate, kaitiakitanga is lost.” Less than 4% of land is left in Māori ownership. Everything other than land has been given to Māori – have actually lost more land. 33% is held in the conservation estate.

So much land is ‘hands off’ – ideally to protect species, but it’s not working. All frogs threatened, 5 of 6 species of bat endangered, 2420 species threatened, 180 species on brink of extinction. The best conservation outcomes come from communities living alongside and working with nature. “Nature without people” doesn’t work – need connection between people and land.

Tongariro National Park was first park in the world to be created by a gift of land by an indigenous people.

When the Crown controls mātauranga Māori
Report points out Crown is in control of funding/managing education/arts, etc, so is basically controlling mātauranga Māori whether it knows it or not.

Distinction between kaitiaki relationship (when taonga legitimately sold/transferred) and rangatiratanga relationship (when taonga lost or wrongfully taken or newly discovered). When held in libraries/archives, Māori have a strong interest in it – but important to maintain relatively free public access. Recommend managing use through objection-based approach. Should be free access for private research but commercial use should consult/gain consent.

Recommendation to establish viable partnerships to support mātauranga māori. Real proactivity required.

Q: Thanks for speech – media never gives balanced picture and bad for everyone.
A: When report promoted, attempt by someone else to make it as racially divisive as possible – often a challenge to turn around media’s challenges.

Q: Please explain more about where rangatiratanga would apply to objects acquired wrongly – is this objects overseas or within NZ?
A: Tribunal makes distinction between items wrongfully taken (especially through Antiquities Act), where Māori interests weren’t identified; now you can go through Land Court to establish your interest. Gisbourne just got their wharenui returned from Te Papa. Need to be discussions – kaitiaki might decide to let the items remain. But other situations where Māori just have ‘an interest’.

Q: Might a commission be set up for libraries and archives (to monitor use of IP etc)?
A: Good question – but commission the Tribunal’s recommending has a specific legal and commercial reason to exist. In case of libraries probably less of an imperative. But still sitting on collections where people might access info for commercial purposes and we need to work out how we manage that access.

Q: Process around how to access information – weren’t asked who they were or why they wanted, and might have been easier to access if it had been known that it was the iwi representatives.
A: Need to delegate the care of taonga to iwi, who are the people who can/should give access decisions.

Kei hea te taunga mai o aku kupu?

(Where will my words rest?)
Terehia Biddle
abstract (pdf)

Archives NZ is official repository for Treaty of Waitangi and other historical documents.

Relationship objectives with Māori

  • Can act with respect but question is whether Māori feel respected.
  • Trust and have confidence
  • [missed two]


  • Treaty obligations
  • legislative requirement under Public Records Act 2005
  • Waitangi 262 claim (flora and fauna) with respect to cultural and intellectual property issues – brought against Crown by 6 iwi asserting Crown breach of Treaty by agreeing to international agreements that affect indigenous flora and fauna and intellectual property rights, eg commercialising sacred knowledge

Building blocks

  • Statement of intent – responsiveness to Māori as a strategic priority
  • business planning documents and performance measures have sections covering responsiveness to Māori
  • Individual performance-based reviews from the general manager down

It’s hard to build a relationship with Māori if internal infrastructure isn’t set up to support it.

In last 5 years has been an increase in the number of iwi requests seeking assistance to support their efforts to access information; increase in number of iwi/hapū organisations seeking solutions in management of iwi records and information. Recognise that there’s an ongoing expense attached to maintaining records. Looking at working collaboratively. Some movement from full repatriation to virtual repatriation.

Important to have conversation first rather than make assumptions about where conversation is to go. Easy to forget the large population group you’re serving when you’re dealing with just a few people face-to-face.


  • establish precedent for future Māori-ArchivesNZ relationships
  • create win-win situations between ArchivesNZ and Māori
  • Hands-on cultural awareness training for staff

Projects they’ve worked with:

Kai Tahu – pilot project selecting items that local hapū Ngāti Tūahuriri had. Turned out they had a system set up so ArchivesNZ only needed to create hyperlinks and they could make sure that information that was only for their people would remain secure; whereas information that could be shared with the public could be made public. Was some concern about how much information should be shared. Some didn’t feel comfortable sharing it; others pointed out that their people lived across the globe. So now have mechanisms in place for those who can prove whakapapa.

Currently Taranaki Reo revitalisation Project. -Language identified as being in state of decline. Identifying and digitising records.

Tūhoe project to identify historical records re land area now known as Te Urewera National Park.

Common themes:

  • one size doesn’t fit all
  • Māori are clear of where they want to be positioned in the work, discussions and decision-making process
  • aware of significant role ArchivesNZ can play in Treaty claims
  • want to be part of solution

Guiding principles

  • build a strong relationship with māori
  • competency in te reo and (local) tikanga adds to credibility
  • kaumātua provide guidance and advice – to get into communities, and talk to people, kaumātua open the door
  • iwi determine the scope for the research
  • iwi determine the criteria for quality of data – needs to be Māori-intuitive
  • involved in all phases of project, determining milestones, etc
  • iwi-nominated kairangahau (researchers) are appointed to do the work.
  • protocols re distribution of product rests with iwi
  • work conducted in a culturally appropriate way
  • database that identifies items of significance needs to comply with ArchivesNZ standards and meet needs of iwi
  • don’t compromise originals
  • be clear about what is possible
  • when necessary, say no – gently
  • manage expectations and relationships well

Q re breakdowns in relationship
A: it occurs mostly when we let our ego get in the way and aren’t willing to say we’re wrong. Need to keep focus not on ourselves / our department, but on people we’re wanting to encourage.

Q re records that might be borderline on what should and shouldn’t be accessible
A: records will always be controversial, it’s a matter of interpretation, fortunately iwi-nominated researchers pull out only records that they believe are of significance to them, so it helps that they’re the ones making the decision.

Q re pay of researchers
A: Up to recently salary came from ArchivesNZ baseline budget. The researchers come in and learn all the jobs there so leave with good experience too.

Q re whether there’s any homogenisation of Māori viewpoint vs iwi differences in a national organisation
A: Not their job to make judgement, it’s about each iwi. Each iwi have their own mana.

Q re Māori-intuitive finding aids
A: Have been working on this since the Tainui project – this became the platform on which they can improve so they now have a template. 16 fields to complay with professional standards, now have added to this fields to include names of people and places mentioned in the records. Have tried to keep it simple as are looking to the database being usable by pākehā colleagues.

Generation Ngai Tahu

Hana O'Regan and Sir Tipene O'Regan

Sir Tipene O’Regan and Hana O’Regan

The Whare Mahara – The House of Memories

The house is an acknowledgement of the past; embraces the present, providing a place to gather and collect; and is about future as a legacy to be there for the next generation.

Intergenerational transmission of knowledge – will look at tools, systems etc that have been used transmitting knowledge in Ngai Tahu.

Transmitting knowledge also means loss of knowledge. With the arrival of the potato, the whare arohe, the knowledge, poetry, references of fernroot disappeared. With the arrival of iron saws, the time-consuming process of grinding pounamu was lost. The knowledge of those who lost wars – their poems and stories – is gone. “History always forgets the losers.” — Tā Tipene

Hana says she and her father have very different perspectives. (Her father interrupts to correct “focuses” to “foci”. 🙂 ) Each generation influenced by events and values of their time. Tipene says older generation may have longer view.

Hana defends “she waits for the movie to come out” by pointing out that it’s higher quality than old reels, and in colour, and she has access to a wider range of technologies than older generations had.

Tipene’s father had benefit of his father’s library; his uncle read Gibbons’ Decline and Fall 20 or so times and also a fisherman, but belonged to “an aristocracy of knowledge”. Tipene was exposed to Dickens before he read it as father read it to him when a child. Father: “What’s the use of Latin? None, thank God. Lord preserve us from the tyranny of relevance!” Tipene: “We all handle knowledge differently.”

Structural questions: – selection, determining what we want to know and preserve; loss – do we want to lose it and not-know just because we’re no longer using it.


  • Priorities: maintaining tribal boundaries, survival, whakapapa, mahinga kai
  • Tools: mōteatea, karakia, kōrero o nehe, pūrākau, whakairo

Early settlement

  • Priorities: adaptation (fish hooks and axes, steel replaced stone), globalised knowledge, new worldviews and worlds (sealskins going to China and Māori travelling in those ships), new commerce/production
  • the written word, books, Christianity

Post Ngāi Tahu Deeds/Treaty

  • Priorities: survival, diseases, introduction of an abstract legal code, retaining land, economic sustainability
  • Tools – petitions, letters, presentations to commissioners

Ngāi Tahu Claim

  • Priorities: documenting the Middle Island land claims and securing fulfilment of South Island Purchase contracts
  • Tools: private journals, whakapapa records, manuscripts, petitions, legal documents

Waitangi Tribunal

  • Priorities: collection of information to prove traditional use rights and mana whenua, establishing the tribal base, political organisation, economic sustainability
  • Tools: secondary and primary research, records of oral traditions, oral accounts of sustained practices and traditions, specialist analysis of mahika kai resources

Ngāi Tahu settlement

  • Priorities: commercial viability, maintaining tribal boundaries, understanding development, redevelopment of tribal resources, moving from claim-mode to looking to future
  • Tools: radio, tv, digital media, websites, print, books, magazines (Te Karaka, Te Panui Runaka) – new tools but still missing something.

Move away from process of repetition to transmit knowledge – can now be recorded and stored and retrieved in other ways – print and video. Don’t have to retain knowledge as parents and grandparents did – can Google it.

Knowledge as entertainment – takes it back to the fireside.

Te Reo as an example – language was neglected for a long time. Why did so many generations raised in the language not transmit it to their children? Sir Apirana Ngata argued that the first priorities of education for Māori should be English, English, English. They felt that the community spoke Māori and it couldn’t possibly be lost, so focused on English. This happened to Gaelic in Ireland too, and elsewhere. Hindsight is 20/20….

Languages (47% endangered, threatened or extinct) are far more threatened than birds (11%), mammals (18%), fish (5%), plants (8%). Particularly low statistics of Ngāi Tahu language proficiency among Ngāi Tahu speakers. Hana’s frustrated that language doesn’t feature on the tribal wish-list; Tipene interrupts to say it features on the wish-list all the time – just not on the “must do” list. It’s a systemic problem: you can’t understand place names unless you have Te Reo.

Hana comments on the “PC-ing” of knowledge that is being transmitted. Lullabies used to include quite graphic depictions of past wars and necessary revenge – what it might look like (“or taste like”). Now sanitising a whole body of knowledge by omitting this.

How will Ngāi Tahu decide what knowledge to transmit to their mokopuna? What will they need to know to be Ngāi Tahu, to survive, and prosper? What songs will they sing?

Call back to conference theme – He aha te mea nui o te ao? He tāngata, he tāngata, he tāngata. (What’s the most important thing in the world? It’s people, people, people.)