title: Redistribution and Recognition for Migrants and Refugees in Aotearoa New Zealand: Neo-Liberal and Multicultural Discourses in NGO Claims-Talk

authors: Fraser, Rebecca Mary

subjects: Redistribution

abstract: Located in demographically diverse Aotearoa New Zealand, this thesis provides evidence that claims made by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on behalf of refugees and migrants are defined by discourses that interact to provide improved outcomes, but also reproduce marginalisation. My core argument contends that while the parameters of social justice in society are framed by the key concerns of redistribution and recognition, as Nancy Fraser (1997) has asserted, these concerns are also discursively constructed. In order to develop a fuller understanding of redistribution and recognition, the thesis maps them to the key discourses within the settlement sector, described as those of neo-liberalism and multiculturalism. The former (even while it is currently influenced by a turn towards social cohesion) draws on economic ideologies and remains the dominant state discourse of Aotearoa New Zealand. The latter has been identified internationally as a discourse relating to the settlement of migrant and refugee minority cultures within a state. Neo-liberalism and multiculturalism offer distinct and comprehensive responses to social justice. As this thesis demonstrates, redistribution is positioned discursively as either a modest safety net or as a right to rectify structural and/or historical injustice. The discourses also provide alternative conceptions of how to recognise the migrant or refugee individual: as either a culture-free market oriented individual, or a culture-bearing community member. It is in the tension of these two discourses that NGOs frame their claims for redistribution and recognition. This thesis comprises a critical discourse analysis which investigates the claims-talk of NGOs in this environment, identifying what NGOs involved in the resettlement of migrants and refugees say when making claims to the state. Drawing on interviews with ten different actors working within nine NGOs, a small survey of thirteen NGOs, and information displayed on websites of seven NGOs – some of the largest working in the settlement sector – I establish the ways in which questions of social justice are discursively constructed in Aotearoa New Zealand. I further determine how these NGOs negotiate conflict and alignment between the discourses, to consider the points at which their negotiations fail or succeed in building better social justice. I find that NGOs use the discourses of neo-liberalism and multiculturalism strategically, frequently deploying them together, or using one to counter potential or perceived negative effects from the other. Lastly, I identify points of unresolved tension in the discourses, particularly regarding the positioning of ‘need’ as a claim upon the state. This thesis thus extends existing scholarship on multiculturalism, neo-liberalism, and recognition and redistribution, and draws together these diverse bodies of theory to elucidate the complex nature of claims-making in the settlement sector in Aotearoa New Zealand.

text: Redistribution and Recognition for Migrants and Refugees in Aotearoa New Zealand: Neo-Liberal and Multicultural Discourses in NGO Claims-Talk Located in demographically diverse Aotearoa New Zealand, this thesis provides evidence that claims made by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) on behalf of refugees and migrants are defined by discourses that interact to provide improved outcomes, but also reproduce marginalisation. My core argument contends that while the parameters of social justice in society are framed by the key concerns of redistribution and recognition, as Nancy Fraser (1997) has asserted, these concerns are also discursively constructed. In order to develop a fuller understanding of redistribution and recognition, the thesis maps them to the key discourses within the settlement sector, described as those of neo-liberalism and multiculturalism. The former (even while it is currently influenced by a turn towards social cohesion) draws on economic ideologies and remains the dominant state discourse of Aotearoa New Zealand. The latter has been identified internationally as a discourse relating to the settlement of migrant and refugee minority cultures within a state. Neo-liberalism and multiculturalism offer distinct and comprehensive responses to social justice. As this thesis demonstrates, redistribution is positioned discursively as either a modest safety net or as a right to rectify structural and/or historical injustice. The discourses also provide alternative conceptions of how to recognise the migrant or refugee individual: as either a culture-free market oriented individual, or a culture-bearing community member. It is in the tension of these two discourses that NGOs frame their claims for redistribution and recognition. This thesis comprises a critical discourse analysis which investigates the claims-talk of NGOs in this environment, identifying what NGOs involved in the resettlement of migrants and refugees say when making claims to the state. Drawing on interviews with ten different actors working within nine NGOs, a small survey of thirteen NGOs, and information displayed on websites of seven NGOs – some of the largest working in the settlement sector – I establish the ways in which questions of social justice are discursively constructed in Aotearoa New Zealand. I further determine how these NGOs negotiate conflict and alignment between the discourses, to consider the points at which their negotiations fail or succeed in building better social justice. I find that NGOs use the discourses of neo-liberalism and multiculturalism strategically, frequently deploying them together, or using one to counter potential or perceived negative effects from the other. Lastly, I identify points of unresolved tension in the discourses, particularly regarding the positioning of ‘need’ as a claim upon the state. This thesis thus extends existing scholarship on multiculturalism, neo-liberalism, and recognition and redistribution, and draws together these diverse bodies of theory to elucidate the complex nature of claims-making in the settlement sector in Aotearoa New Zealand.

year: 2011

title: The International Law Gaze: The Plain Victory of Tobacco Plain Packaging Legislation in Philip Morris Asia v Australia

authors: Alvarez-Jimenez, Alberto

abstract: The legal regime on the protection of foreign investment through international investment agreements passed a very important test recently with the award rendered by an arbitration tribunal (the tribunal) adjudicating the dispute between Philip Morris Asia and Australia (Philip Morris Asia v Australia, Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 December 2015. https://www.pcacases.com/web/view/5). The origin of the controversy was the adoption of tobacco plain packaging legislation by the latter in 2011, which Philip Morris regarded as a violation of the standards of protection provided for in the Agreement between the Government of Hong Kong and the Government of Australia for the Promotion and Protection of Investment, signed on September 15, 1993 (the BIT). According to Philip Morris, the legislation barred the use of intellectual property on tobacco products and packaging and had, therefore, substantially reduced the value of Philip Morris’s investment in Australia. Fearing that Australia’s example would start being followed by other nations, Philip Morris did not hesitate in requesting far-reaching relief orders from the tribunal: suspension of the plain packaging legislation and compensation that could be of the order of billions of Australian dollars. (PMA v Australia, para. 8). The tribunal concluded that Philip Morris had carried out an abuse of process, that its claims were inadmissible and, consequently, that the tribunal was precluded from exercising jurisdiction to settle the dispute. (PMA v Australia, para. 588).

text: The International Law Gaze: The Plain Victory of Tobacco Plain Packaging Legislation in Philip Morris Asia v Australia The legal regime on the protection of foreign investment through international investment agreements passed a very important test recently with the award rendered by an arbitration tribunal (the tribunal) adjudicating the dispute between Philip Morris Asia and Australia (Philip Morris Asia v Australia, Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, 17 December 2015. https://www.pcacases.com/web/view/5). The origin of the controversy was the adoption of tobacco plain packaging legislation by the latter in 2011, which Philip Morris regarded as a violation of the standards of protection provided for in the Agreement between the Government of Hong Kong and the Government of Australia for the Promotion and Protection of Investment, signed on September 15, 1993 (the BIT). According to Philip Morris, the legislation barred the use of intellectual property on tobacco products and packaging and had, therefore, substantially reduced the value of Philip Morris’s investment in Australia. Fearing that Australia’s example would start being followed by other nations, Philip Morris did not hesitate in requesting far-reaching relief orders from the tribunal: suspension of the plain packaging legislation and compensation that could be of the order of billions of Australian dollars. (PMA v Australia, para. 8). The tribunal concluded that Philip Morris had carried out an abuse of process, that its claims were inadmissible and, consequently, that the tribunal was precluded from exercising jurisdiction to settle the dispute. (PMA v Australia, para. 588).

year: 2016-12-01

title: Redefining taonga: The Treaty Principles Bill and its potential impact on the status of te reo Māori

authors: Carter, Wayne Ngahuka

abstract: This thesis explores the potential impact of Aotearoa New Zealand’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill on the recognition and protection of te reo Māori (Māori language) as a taonga under the Treaty of Waitangi. This research examines the redefinition of fundamental Treaty principles as outlined in the bill, specifically addressing important questions concerning how the transition from partnership, protection and participation towards a focus in equal rights might influence both the legal standing and the cultural status of te reo Māori. With a quantitative methodology approach, this study draws from a range of sources, including legislative policies, political documents, historical records, and academic analysis, to evaluate the impacts and risks this bill could impose. A comparative analysis study with international examples of indigenous language protection provides broader insights into the potential effects on Māori language revitalisation efforts and te reo Māori and its status under the 2016 Māori Language Act. Early findings indicate that the Treaty Principles Bill has ignited considerable debate throughout Aotearoa New Zealand, emphasising tensions between traditional interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi and framework proposed by the Act Party. Māori rights advocates and public debates express worries that the bill could diminish current protection and reduce advancements achieved for te reo Māori as a taonga. Critics argue that redefining these principles might fracture Māori-Crown relationships, possibly weakening differences and impacting New Zealand’s governance and national identity. This debate emphasises the challenging task of restoring New Zealand’s colonial past with its modern goals for fairness and equality. As Parliament reviews this legislation, it is confronted with a crucial decision that will influence the future direction of Aotearoa New Zealand.

text: Redefining taonga: The Treaty Principles Bill and its potential impact on the status of te reo Māori This thesis explores the potential impact of Aotearoa New Zealand’s proposed Treaty Principles Bill on the recognition and protection of te reo Māori (Māori language) as a taonga under the Treaty of Waitangi. This research examines the redefinition of fundamental Treaty principles as outlined in the bill, specifically addressing important questions concerning how the transition from partnership, protection and participation towards a focus in equal rights might influence both the legal standing and the cultural status of te reo Māori. With a quantitative methodology approach, this study draws from a range of sources, including legislative policies, political documents, historical records, and academic analysis, to evaluate the impacts and risks this bill could impose. A comparative analysis study with international examples of indigenous language protection provides broader insights into the potential effects on Māori language revitalisation efforts and te reo Māori and its status under the 2016 Māori Language Act. Early findings indicate that the Treaty Principles Bill has ignited considerable debate throughout Aotearoa New Zealand, emphasising tensions between traditional interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi and framework proposed by the Act Party. Māori rights advocates and public debates express worries that the bill could diminish current protection and reduce advancements achieved for te reo Māori as a taonga. Critics argue that redefining these principles might fracture Māori-Crown relationships, possibly weakening differences and impacting New Zealand’s governance and national identity. This debate emphasises the challenging task of restoring New Zealand’s colonial past with its modern goals for fairness and equality. As Parliament reviews this legislation, it is confronted with a crucial decision that will influence the future direction of Aotearoa New Zealand.

year: 2025