Flavell Te Ururoa: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:665;Page:13103] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker Barker. Kia ora tatou. I do not have too much to contribute because like my colleague David Garrett it is not as if I am an artiste but Maori performing arts—that is where some of the action is at. In fact last week we had the kapa haka competitions in Te Arawa. Te Arawa came second but that is all right; we came second. 
I want to make a couple of important points in respect of the Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Bill. As we know and as I think the Minister pointed out this bill replaces the Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa Act 1994 which established the council known as Creative New Zealand. Under the 1994 Act the governance structure is made up of a council of seven members and two boards: the Arts Board with seven members and secondly Te Waka Toi with seven members. This bill replaces the old structure with a single board to be known as the Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa—the Arts Council. 
Catherine Delahunty alluded to one matter that we have a concern about although having said that with most first readings of bills we try to let them have some air. We let them go out for public debate and consideration. One of the issues we want to raise is around the make-up of the council and in particular I suppose the relegation of Te Waka Toi in terms of membership and status. 
This bill determines that the Arts Council will consist of 13 members who will be appointed by the Minister and that at least four members must be acknowledged as people who have qualified for appointment because they have at least a regard for or understanding and knowledge of Te Ao Maori tikanga Maori and Maori arts. Bearing in mind that Te Waka Toi has been an important part of Maori art and creativity for a period of time I will reflect on some of the discussion that has come back to us from the people who have been involved in this particular area. As someone who has been at least involved in the Toi Iho branding exercise as well as being involved in Te Waka Toi—and aside from what Catherine Delahunty said about not having much feedback—I can say that the Maori Party has had some feedback from some of the people involved. To be truthful many of them were trying to work out any benefits that might come from the change from having a Maori board of seven people serviced by its own unit of Maori staff to having a mainstream council where Maori are but four of 13 people who may form an Arts Council committee. 
Catherine Delahunty talked about the fact that the proposed new structure destroys a Maori icon and a successful positive arts model for and by Maori. It takes away a body that has its own whakapapa its own history that is identified with whanau hapu and iwi and urban Maori authorities significant Maori individuals tohunga artists and communities. So there is the rub. She said further that when she heard about the changes she believed that it meant that the vital and important entity of Te Waka Toi would be lost to us for ever and she could not see the reason for it. She was not at that point convinced that there was any good for Maori for New Zealand or indeed for the international communities that identify the Te Waka Toi brand with high-quality Maori art and culture. So there is an issue that hopefully will be considered by the select committee. 
The second issue is around the protection of Maori quality which Toi Iho the Maori brand was all about: maintaining the quality and authenticity issues. The feedback that we have had is concern about an inability of the Government to protect in particular Maori concepts and symbols. In fact we see many cases of them being misused misappropriated and mistreated. I cite the incident for example of a Maori face moko kit promoted on an American Halloween store website. I cite the incidents of the use of Maori designs by a person by the name of Philip Morris on cigarette packaging and a baker’s advertisement in which gingerbread men performing a haka are flattened by a giant bag of white flour. I cite the incidents of the copyright use of Maori names by the Danish toy company Lego and the use of the so-called Maori warrior in the Sony game. I also cite the designs that featured in  
Vogue 
 from Jean-Paul Gaultier’s collection in which the use of the moko is combined with images that from our perspective were culturally offensive—namely a female model with a moko is posing sitting with her legs open and the other images convey a theme of cannibalism. 
As soon as some of these images hit the headlines we know that Maoridom certainly waits and shakes and therefore we hope to find some mechanism that allows those sorts of images to be protected; in the past Te Waka Toi was that. We hope that there is some mechanism that protects those particular images where possible and we hope that in the select committee process those points are made to allow this to happen. With that I say thank you very much. Kia ora tatou.