Flavell Te Ururoa: General Debate 
Flavell Te Ururoa: General Debate 
[Volume:633;Page:5210] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 I move  
That the House take note of miscellaneous business 
. Kia ora Madam Speaker. Kia ora tatou katoa. Over the last month the nation has been engrossed in debates that at their very heart demonstrate the significance of the relationship between tangata whenua and other New Zealanders. Dr Paul Tapsell Maori director at Auckland Museum welcomed these debates as expressing the maturity of the nation. In his article in yesterday’s paper he reflected on the value of debating and reviewing cultural practices as a means of bridging cultural spheres. The Maori Party has eagerly accepted the challenge to immerse ourselves in the ongoing debate towards nationhood. We need to have the dialogue to listen to grow and to learn. 
The debates over the culture of gift-giving in Samoa known as lafo and the tikanga of utu or reciprocity associated with koha—indeed the notions of altruism and social obligation found in European practices of gifting—have opened up the korero. What we have are notions of tikanga Samoa tikanga Maori and tikanga Pakeha. They followed an experience of unprecedented cultural learning represented at the tangihanga of the late Te Arikinui Dame Te Atairangikaahu. 
I myself have taken time to reflect on an opinion piece by Dr Ranginui Walker who wrote about another tangihanga— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: There is too much conversation in the House. It is discourteous to the member speaking. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: —within the Tainui confederation of tribes some 15 years ago in 1991. Dr Walker described the tangi of one of New Zealand’s most gifted entertainers Billy T James in terms such as “the clash between two cultures”; “the cultural divide between Maori and Pakeha”; or “the media hype about the event by ignorant monocultural commentators only served to inflame the situation between Maori and Pakeha”. What a huge contrast. What has made the nation willing to learn now at the time of the passing of Te Arikinui? What were the prevailing factors that created the atmosphere of openness that paved the way for future understanding? 
Much has been written about the manaakitanga of the host Tainui waka. People have been so overwhelmed and amazed at the organisational detail that they showed to the nation—Maori and Pakeha and the many ethnic groups of Aotearoa—and people from overseas. Their huge generosity to their manuhiri—their visitors—in opening up their tikanga and their marae to the nation has been appreciated by many. But the funny thing is that this sort of manaakitanga is expressed on marae throughout the motu but technology enabled this occasion to be seen in real time rather than from archival footage. 
But there are many other aspects to tangihanga that make the experience so unique. As one example one of the most special moments for myself is when I have the privilege of digging the final plot the resting site for the deceased. It is nothing for me to jump into the hole to feel that sense of connection and to appreciate being so closely involved—it is the very last time one will see that person. Some whanau members find the process of digging the grave and getting on the end of a shovel to bury their loved one to be very therapeutic. In our hapu the qualification to perform this final ritual is not one linked to New Zealand Qualifications Authority unit standards in grave digging using machinery or grave collapse consolidation; the qualification we have acquired is through whakapapa—the overlapping layers of connection built on genealogy. 
As a nation we must never lose sight of the value that can be gained through opening our eyes to different ways of being. In the Maori Party we have been interested in the values that Pakeha may bring to the process of death and dying and the rules of engagement that determine how relationships develop. I have reflected on the research of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross and her work  
On Death and Dying 
 which is an analysis of the process of grieving. This is an example for me of tikanga Pakeha associated with death. I wondered what my tikanga Maori regarding death has in common with tikanga Pakeha and what was different. Kubler-Ross identified five areas: denial and isolation anger bargaining depression and acceptance. I think the difference lies in the manner of expression the rituals and the processes of recounting history and further affirming the nature of the relationships between people. These things are inherent in the practices of tikanga Maori. 
We need to understand the norms and values of other cultures before relationships can be developed. The recent discussions generated from the tangihanga for Dame Te Atairangikaahu have opened the door. The challenge for us is to continue the dialogue as a nation. The Maori Party relishes the opportunity to learn from each other and to nurture our relationships. I am confident that Te Ao Maori will continue to share as we deem appropriate. We have much to share.