
"No One Came": How Māori Communities Were Abandoned During Cyclone Gabrielle
Study reveals systemic failures in emergency response while documenting remarkable community resilience
Research documenting how Hauraki Māori were abandoned by authorities during Cyclone Gabrielle was presented to the Waitangi Tribunal's Climate Change Priority Inquiry last week, revealing institutional racism and systemic failure in New Zealand's disaster response.
The 95-page report "Hauraki Māori Weathering Cyclone Gabrielle," presented by Te Whāriki Manawāhine O Hauraki CEO Denise Messiter ONZM last week, was the first time the research had been made public since its completion in April.
The research, led by Director of Research at Te Whāriki Paora Moyle KSO and funded by the Health Research Council, was received with "considerable interest" by the Tribunal panel for its documentation of lived experiences and practical solutions.
"It Began Because They Did Nothing"
The study, involving 30 participants including whānau and Thames-Coromandel District Council personnel, exposes shocking failures in civil defence response.
"It began because they did nothing. I mean, seriously, absolutely nothing. We did our own emergency management planning," one participant told researchers.
Despite repeated requests for emergency equipment over several years, Māori communities received no support from local civil defence. When Cyclone Gabrielle struck, communities were cut off for up to 15 days, forcing them to establish their own emergency centres with minimal resources.
Generators for the Rich, Nothing for Marae
Most concerning is evidence of resource allocation disparities that the research describes as "21st century, well-tuned, well-willed institutional racism."
One participant recounted: "Our marae needed a generator, but when we asked for one, there were none available. Yet earlier that day, we saw a helicopter fly over us with three generators for a more well-off community."
Civil defence officials even attempted to commandeer food and resources that Māori communities had sourced themselves, to redistribute to people they deemed "more worthy."
When people living rough in tents sought help at official centres, "the council people who were there, didn't want to have a bar of them."
Generations of Knowledge Ignored
Perhaps most significant for the Climate Change Inquiry, authorities systematically ignore invaluable Māori ecological wisdom. Hauraki Māori possess deep intergenerational knowledge about weather patterns and environmental risks that could enhance climate resilience.
"We've been reading these weather patterns for generations, but no one seems to listen when we warn about potential flooding," one whānau member said.
The study found a stark disconnect between Māori ecological wisdom and regional governance, with authorities failing to integrate traditional environmental knowledge passed down through generations.
Communities Step Up Where Government Failed
Despite abandonment by authorities, Hauraki Māori demonstrated remarkable resilience. Communities reactivated COVID-19 networks, set up evacuation centres at local schools, and coordinated their own food distribution and emergency equipment.
The successful Hauraki Relocatable Housing Project, funded by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, provided transitional accommodation for damaged homes. One emotional account describes a wāhine who had been living in a shed with no plumbing: "She wailed. She wailed... it was like, you're at a tangi. It was, it was a real welcome home."
Constitutional Change Demanded
The research calls for the constitutional transformation that Matike Mai outlined in 2016 - where Māori exercise real decision-making power over emergency management, not just consultation:
Hapū and Iwi Emergency Response Assemblies that actually make decisions for their people
Marae recognised as critical emergency infrastructure, not afterthoughts
Emergency management laws that embed Māori governance instead of excluding it
An Emergency Management Tiriti Assembly where Māori and Crown work as equals, not the Crown telling Māori what to do
"We don't need to be saved by the Crown - we need the Crown to stop taking up 'look at me' space and just get out of our way," one participant noted.
Persistent Disadvantage Perpetuated
The study links emergency management failures to what the Productivity Commission terms "persistent disadvantage" affecting Māori communities. Many whānau described being "land-rich but cash-poor" due to historical land alienation, with bureaucratic barriers in housing recovery further compounding disadvantages.
Thames-Coromandel District Council participants acknowledged "historical trauma and mistrust" affecting Māori engagement, admitting their approach was often "process-driven and one-way instead of people-driven."
Climate Justice Implications
The research exposes how climate change impacts hit hardest on communities already facing systemic disadvantages - then authorities abandon them when disaster strikes.
"We've been reading these weather patterns for generations, but no one seems to listen when we warn about potential flooding," highlights how dismissing Māori ecological knowledge weakens the entire country's climate adaptation.
The systematic exclusion of Māori from emergency management decisions, combined with the failure to protect communities most vulnerable to climate impacts, presents compelling evidence of Crown Treaty breaches in climate policy.
The Waitangi Tribunal's findings could require fundamental changes to ensure Māori knowledge and communities are central to climate adaptation, not afterthoughts.
As the report concludes: "The time for action is now. Failure to act perpetuates injustice, while bold and principled transformation ensures a more substantial, safer, and just future for all."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Otago Daily Times
3 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
What is the future for the Waitangi Tribunal?
Now that the Treaty Principles Bill has been consigned to the bin some who want to keep up the conversation about sovereignty and rangatiratanga (Māori self-determination), are refocusing on the Waitangi Tribunal. On the one hand are those who believe the tribunal should be remade to have the power to make decisions which are binding on the government. This would make the tribunal the highest power in New Zealand, above Parliament. (Incidentally, King Charles may well have concerns if Parliament attempts to cede its authority). On the other hand there are those who say the tribunal has done its job and should be dismantled. One of the earliest documents in our history was the Treaty. This document was intended to provide for a peaceful society by, among other things, describing Queen Victoria as in charge, reserving to each tribe their lands, other possessions and their rangatiratanga. This was interpreted for many years as leaving each Māori tribe authority over their own affairs and assets and that Queen Victoria was generally in charge over all. The Waitangi Tribunal came into being in 1975. Its purpose was to make recommendations on claims relating to the application of the principles of the Treaty. For that purpose it is to determine what the Treaty means and whether certain matters are inconsistent with these principles. It costs around $21 million per annum to run. For most of us this tribunal was set up to right the wrongs perpetrated on Māori by the Crown confiscating lands and other possessions. For many years it has had widespread support from New Zealanders. The law establishing the tribunal specifically denies jurisdiction in regard to any Bill that has been introduced to Parliament, unless Parliament has resolved to refer it to the tribunal. As historical land claims are coming to an end, the publicised work of the tribunal has been taken up with making comment about a wide variety of issues, with a focus on the choices government might make. For example the tribunal has spent some years looking into health. The tribunal made a finding that "the health system has not addressed Māori health inequities in a Treaty-compliant way, and this is in part why Māori health inequities have persisted". When the government disestablished the recently established Māori Health Authority the tribunal found that the Crown prejudiced Māori by not engaging with them over the scrapping of the authority. The Waitangi Tribunal has also been conducting a long-standing inquiry into a variety of claims relating to freshwater. Giving evidence to this inquiry The New Zealand Māori Council in 2018 pushed for a water commission to be appointed (rather than elected) made up of 50% Māori to control all water in New Zealand. A lawyer representing over a dozen hapu and iwi said the way the Crown had managed freshwater and left Māori out of the process was similar to theft. This year the tribunal has found that the Treaty Principles Bill breached Treaty principles by failing to guarantee rangatiratanga. When it looked into the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill it found that, if it were enacted, this Bill would be of constitutional significance, as it seeks to influence the way Parliament makes law and therefore it is inherently relevant to Māori. A potted version of the history could be described as thus. In 1840 the Treaty of Waitangi was signed between the Crown and various Māori tribes in New Zealand. This gave Queen Victoria overall control of New Zealand. Each tribe was guaranteed to keep ownership of their own land and possessions and to have internal control of their own affairs. Every citizen in New Zealand had the protection of the Crown. In 1975 the Waitangi Tribunal was set up to deal with legitimate grievances over confiscation of land and other possessions. It was expanded in 1985 in relation to historical claims. The tribunal has now interpreted its role as making pronouncements over any proposed legislation. It seems to have decided that all legislation can and would affect Māori, and if Māori could become part of a group who become or remain disadvantaged the law proposed is a breach of Treaty obligations. In our society, which now has many more than just British and Māori subjects, how can we best move forward? Will we continue with the tribunal with a focus on Māori to the exclusion of other priorities for government support hoping this will remain viable? Will we elevate the Waitangi Tribunal to make it the supreme decision-maker in New Zealand over all things which could possibly touch on the lives of Māori? Or might it be better to decide once the tribunal finishes its historic claims it is time to close it down, possibly replacing its role of critiquing government policies as they may affect Māori with a cheaper option? The challenge we have is to try to weave the Treaty and whatever arrangements we have around it with the primary duty of a stable democratic country to look after its most vulnerable without fear or favour. One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, One ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. Like Tolkien said. hcalvert@ • Hilary Calvert is a former Otago regional councillor, MP and Dunedin city councillor.


Scoop
13 hours ago
- Scoop
Left Bloc Would Have Enough Support To Turf Coalition Government Out Of Power
After the Budget and pay equity changes the left bloc would have the support to turf the coalition out of power, the latest RNZ-Reid Research poll shows. The preferred prime minister and leadership ratings are also bad news for the government, with the exception of Winston Peters who has seen his highest result since 2017 - and ratings of the government's general performance have also continued to slide. With Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori all gaining compared to the previous poll taken in March, they would have a majority with 63 seats between them, compared to the coalition's 57 - again, New Zealand First was the only coalition party to see a boost. The poll was taken in the seven days following the release of the Budget and in the wake of the $12.8 billion pay equity changes - which RNZ's polling also shows attracting more opposition than support. National continued a downward trend from the March survey, dropping 2.2 percentage points to 30.7 percent of the party vote - and overtaken by Labour, which gained 0.9 percentage points to 33.2 percent. The Greens' 1.6 percent increase brings them back to their election-night result of 11.6 percent, while Te Pāti Māori's 0.5 percentage point boost lifts them clear of the 5 percent threshold and - presuming they held all their Māori seats - nets them a list MP. ACT dropped 2.8 points to 6.6 percent - the largest shift in party polling - while New Zealand First gained 1.9 points to 9.1 percent, upending the trend facing their coalition partners. Undecided or non-voters made up 6.5 percent of those polled - up from 6.1 in the previous poll. For parties outside Parliament, TOP (The Opportunities Party) gained 0.4 points to 2.2 percent, New Conservatives fell 0.3 points to 0.8, and all others combined were at 0.3 points, a 0.1 point increase on the last survey. More New Zealanders polled say the country is going in the wrong direction (46.6 percent) than in the right direction (37.8 percent), giving a net negative result of -8.8, a substantial decrease on March's 2.9 result. Little surprise then to see National leader Christopher Luxon's net favourability ratings drop further into the negative, from -3.9 percent in March to -9.8 percent, with significantly more respondents (45.5 percent) saying he performed poorly or very poorly, than said he performed well or very well (35.7 percent). That compared to Labour's Chris Hipkins on net 5.1 percent rating (34 percent negative, 39.1 percent positive) - though Hipkins also saw a steeper fall of 7.1 percentage points. The survey shows New Zealanders' preferred prime minister as Labour's Chris Hipkins (23.2 percent, up 2.3), taking the lead over National's Christopher Luxon (18.8 percent, down 3.1). NZ First leader Winston Peters at 8.9 percent (up 1 point) recorded his highest result since 2017. Chlöe Swarbrick in fourth was at 6.9 percent (up 0.8) - a personal best and just ahead of ACT's David Seymour on 6.4 percent (down 0.4). The next highest ratings were former PM Jacinda Ardern (3.7 percent, up 0.1), Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke (1.7 percent, up 0.5), Finance Minister Nicola Willis (1.1, up 0.3) and Education/Immigration Minister Erica Stanford making her first appearance at 1 percent. 'I don't recognise the numbers' - Coalition plays down poll Luxon simply rejected the poll results. "Look, I mean, I don't recognise the numbers. There's lots of different polls and frankly I'm just not going to comment or focus on the polls. Frankly what we're focused on is we were elected in '23 and people get to decide again in 2026. "We've done a good job, and that's why we've got to focus on the economy, law and order, and health and education." He said New Zealanders had "responded really positively" to the government's Budget, and saw the economy turning a corner. "There's a sense of optimism that, you know, we actually have had to manage some very difficult things economically to get our books back in order. But we're doing that job, and it's all about growth, growth, growth." Seymour said the numbers would continue to "bounce around" but it was still a tough time for New Zealanders - and the numbers were not a reflection on the Budget. "Different voters will have different reasons for their choices ... so long as people are voting for the economy, it's going to be tough for parties that are tied closely to economic management," he said. It was possible the pay equity changes were changing some voters' minds, he said, "but I also think doing what is right is what is politically popular in the long term, and even if I'm wrong about that, good policy is worth it anyway". "The fact that ACT is close to where it was on election night 18 months into a government with 18 months to go is a good foundation. We have to prove ourselves on election night, and we've got lots of time to do that." Peters refused to comment on whether his coalition partners were suffering from the handling of the pay equity changes. The next 18 months leading up to the election would show the "critical need for stability", he said, and having ruled out working with Chris Hipkins he was "comfortable and confident in our prospects" because the Greens and Te Pāti Māori in government would be "a nightmare". The 80-year-old Peters said economies internationally were in trouble as a result of "unprecedented times for the last, say, 80 years", and the party was looking at New Zealand's fundamentals: asset values, and the need to increase wages and decrease business tax. "We're out there to ensure over the next few months that we can show enough improvement in the economy from what we're doing to make the prospects of an improved tomorrow possible." 'Nice to be popular' - Opposition Hipkins was also not counting his electoral chickens, but was happy to point out the effect of the Budget, saying New Zealanders were "disillusioned" with the government overall. "New Zealanders can increasingly see that this government is taking the country backwards," he said. "I don't think anyone expected the government to cancel pay equity as a way of balancing its books. Nicola Willis and Christopher Luxon told New Zealanders before the election that they knew their numbers, that everything all added up. It's clear that their numbers didn't add up." He said he did not pay much attention to small shifts from the minor parties or his personal ratings in the polls. "It's nice to be popular, but I'm really focused on making sure I win as many votes as possible for Labour at the next election." Swarbrick said New Zealanders wanted a sense of hope. "Things are feeling pretty bloody bleak. You know, we've got 191 New Zealanders leaving every single day, three quarters of them between the ages of 18 to 45, it's not a recipe for a flourishing country. "We had dozens and dozens of folks turn out to talk to us about our Green budget and the sense of hope that they feel that they need - the kind of building blocks that we can have for a fairer society." She said polls did not mean the writing was on the wall, but she was hearing from people that they were exhausted and fatigued - something she suggested was a deliberate strategy from the coalition. Te Pāti Māori's co-leader Rawiri Waititi said the poll numbers showed the party's policies and rhetoric around the government's actions were appealing to new supporters. "The kind of anti-Māori, anti-wāhine, anti-woman, anti-worker, anti-climate, anti-rainbow, anti-woke type agenda that this government is pushing at the moment also is not appealing to the people who are trying to find a place to put their political support and trying to support those who fiercely advocate for them." He said their internal polling showed even higher support for the party and its style of politics - but the decreased support for ACT and increase for NZ First was a zero-sum game. "You've got a hard-right type voter ... I think they think that National is a little bit weak, which I agree [with] because they're allowing ACT to kind of run the show ... they will use Te Pāti Māori as their political football to kick us in the guts the hardest to garner the support of their voters, but at the end of the day the enemy for ACT is New Zealand First, and the enemy for New Zealand First is ACT." Explore the full results with RNZ's interactive charts. This poll of 1008 people was conducted by Reid Research, using quota sampling and weighting to ensure representative cross section by age, gender and geography. The poll was conducted through online interviews between 23-30 May 2025 and has a maximum margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent at a 95 percent confidence level. The report is available here.


Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Left bloc could turf coalition out of power: poll
By Russell Palmer of RNZ After the Budget and pay equity changes the left bloc would have the support to turf the coalition out of power, the latest RNZ-Reid Research poll shows. The preferred prime minister and leadership ratings are also bad news for the government, with the exception of Winston Peters who has seen his highest result since 2017 - and ratings of the government's general performance have also continued to slide. With Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori all gaining compared to the previous poll taken in March, they would have a majority with 63 seats between them, compared to the coalition's 57 - again, New Zealand First was the only coalition party to see a boost. The poll was taken in the seven days following the release of the Budget and in the wake of the $12.8 billion pay equity changes - which RNZ's polling also shows attracting more opposition than support. National continued a downward trend from the March survey, dropping 2.2 percentage points to 30.7 percent of the party vote - and overtaken by Labour, which gained 0.9 percentage points to 33.2 percent. The Greens' 1.6 percent increase brings them back to their election-night result of 11.6 percent, while Te Pāti Māori's 0.5 percentage point boost lifts them clear of the 5 percent threshold and - presuming they held all Māori seats - nets them a list MP. ACT dropped 2.8 points to 6.6 percent - the largest shift in party polling - while New Zealand First gained 1.9 points to 9.1 percent, upending the trend facing their coalition partners. Undecided or non-voters made up 6.5 percent of those polled - up from 6.1 in the previous poll. For parties outside Parliament, TOP (The Opportunities Party) gained 0.4 points to 2.2 percent, New Conservatives fell 0.3 points to 0.8, and all others combined were at 0.3 points, a 0.1 point increase on the last survey. More New Zealanders polled say the country is going in the wrong direction (46.6 percent) than in the right direction (37.8 percent), giving a net negative result of -8.8, a substantial decrease on March's 2.9 result. Little surprise then to see National leader Christopher Luxon's net favourability ratings drop further into the negative, from -3.9 percent in March to -9.8 percent, with significantly more respondents (45.5 percent) saying he performed poorly or very poorly, than said he performed well or very well (35.7 percent). That compared to Labour's Chris Hipkins on net 5.1 percent rating (34 percent negative, 39.1 percent positive) - though Hipkins also saw a steeper fall of 7.1 percentage points. The survey shows New Zealanders' preferred prime minister as Hipkins (23.2 percent, up 2.3), taking the lead over Luxon (18.8 percent, down 3.1). NZ First leader Winston Peters at 8.9 percent (up 1 point) recorded his highest result since 2017. Chlöe Swarbrick in fourth was at 6.9 percent (up 0.8) - a personal best and just ahead of ACT's David Seymour on 6.4 percent (down 0.4). The next highest ratings were former PM Jacinda Ardern (3.7 percent, up 0.1), Te Pāti Māori MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke (1.7 percent, up 0.5), Finance Minister Nicola Willis (1.1, up 0.3) and Education/Immigration Minister Erica Stanford making her first appearance at 1 percent. 'I don't recognise the numbers' - Coalition plays down poll Luxon simply rejected the poll results. "Look, I mean, I don't recognise the numbers. There's lots of different polls and frankly I'm just not going to comment or focus on the polls. Frankly what we're focused on is we were elected in '23 and people get to decide again in 2026. "We've done a good job, and that's why we've got to focus on the economy, law and order, and health and education." He said New Zealanders had "responded really positively" to the government's Budget, and saw the economy turning a corner. "There's a sense of optimism that, you know, we actually have had to manage some very difficult things economically to get our books back in order. But we're doing that job, and it's all about growth, growth, growth." Seymour said the numbers would continue to "bounce around" but it was still a tough time for New Zealanders - and the numbers were not a reflection on the Budget. "Different voters will have different reasons for their choices ... so long as people are voting for the economy, it's going to be tough for parties that are tied closely to economic management," he said. It was possible the pay equity changes were changing some voters' minds, he said, "but I also think doing what is right is what is politically popular in the long term, and even if I'm wrong about that, good policy is worth it anyway". "The fact that ACT is close to where it was on election night 18 months into a government with 18 months to go is a good foundation. We have to prove ourselves on election night, and we've got lots of time to do that." Peters refused to comment on whether his coalition partners were suffering from the handling of the pay equity changes. The next 18 months leading up to the election would show the "critical need for stability", he said, and having ruled out working with Chris Hipkins he was "comfortable and confident in our prospects" because the Greens and Te Pāti Māori in government would be "a nightmare". The 80-year-old Peters said economies internationally were in trouble as a result of "unprecedented times for the last, say, 80 years", and the party was looking at New Zealand's fundamentals: asset values, and the need to increase wages and decrease business tax. "We're out there to ensure over the next few months that we can show enough improvement in the economy from what we're doing to make the prospects of an improved tomorrow possible." 'Nice to be popular' - Opposition Hipkins was also not counting his electoral chickens, but was happy to point out the effect of the Budget, saying New Zealanders were "disillusioned" with the government overall. "New Zealanders can increasingly see that this government is taking the country backwards," he said. "I don't think anyone expected the government to cancel pay equity as a way of balancing its books. Nicola Willis and Christopher Luxon told New Zealanders before the election that they knew their numbers, that everything all added up. It's clear that their numbers didn't add up." He said he did not pay much attention to small shifts from the minor parties or his personal ratings in the polls. "It's nice to be popular, but I'm really focused on making sure I win as many votes as possible for Labour at the next election." Swarbrick said New Zealanders wanted a sense of hope. "Things are feeling pretty bloody bleak. You know, we've got 191 New Zealanders leaving every single day, three quarters of them between the ages of 18 to 45, it's not a recipe for a flourishing country. "We had dozens and dozens of folks turn out to talk to us about our Green budget and the sense of hope that they feel that they need - the kind of building blocks that we can have for a fairer society." She said polls did not mean the writing was on the wall, but she was hearing from people that they were exhausted and fatigued - something she suggested was a deliberate strategy from the coalition. Te Pāti Māori's co-leader Rawiri Waititi said the poll numbers showed the party's policies and rhetoric around the government's actions were appealing to new supporters. "The kind of anti-Māori, anti-wāhine, anti-woman, anti-worker, anti-climate, anti-rainbow, anti-woke type agenda that this government is pushing at the moment also is not appealing to the people who are trying to find a place to put their political support and trying to support those who fiercely advocate for them." He said their internal polling showed even higher support for the party and its style of politics - but the decreased support for ACT and increase for NZ First was a zero-sum game. "You've got a hard-right type voter ... I think they think that National is a little bit weak, which I agree [with] because they're allowing ACT to kind of run the show ... they will use Te Pāti Māori as their political football to kick us in the guts the hardest to garner the support of their voters, but at the end of the day the enemy for ACT is New Zealand First, and the enemy for New Zealand First is ACT." Explore the full results with RNZ's interactive charts. This poll of 1008 people was conducted by Reid Research, using quota sampling and weighting to ensure a representative cross section by age, gender and geography. The poll was conducted through online interviews between 21-27 March 2025 and has a maximum margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent at a 95 percent confidence level. The report is available here.