logo
Bid to change Russell's name to Kororāreka declined

Bid to change Russell's name to Kororāreka declined

Russell, in the Bay of Islands. Photo: Getty
The New Zealand Geographic Board has announced the proposal to change the name of the Northland town Russell to its original Māori one has been declined.
The board publicly consulted on the proposal from the Kororāreka Marae Society to officially name Russell Kororāreka in 2023.
The decision was made by Minister for Land Information Chris Penk, as part of of his overseeing place naming.
In September 2021 the Kororāreka Marae Society lodged a name-change application with the New Zealand Geographic Board, which considered three options: An outright change to Kororāreka, the dual name Kororāreka/Russell, or the alternative names option, where both names have equal standing.
A report from December 2022 showed the board's preferred option was for an outright change from Russell to Kororāreka. However, minutes from the board's June 2023 meeting, released under the Official Information Act, show the board asked the minister for land information at that time, Damien O'Connor, to make the final determination.
Name-change decisions are sometimes referred to the minister if they are especially contentious.
A decision was expected in 2023 but O'Connor had not made up his mind when Labour was voted out of office in the general election later that year.
The responsibility then passed to National's Chris Penk, Land Information Minister in the new government.
In late 2024 Penk released a number of decisions - both for and against name changes - but Kororāreka/Russell was not among them.
Kororāreka Marae Society chair Deb Rewiri, who has campaigned since 2021, told RNZ the decision was "sorely disappointing".
"It dismays me because I don't understand why, when the majority of submissions they had in front of them were for it."
"Even the ones that were opposed to it were literally saying they didn't mind the name being there but they just wanted a dual-name, rather than Kororāreka on its own."
Rewiri said she spoke with the board, before the decision was made public, and it did not give a reason as to why the decision was made.
Speaking to RNZ last year, Rewiri was optimistic the change would go ahead, because it was part of a tide of traditional names returning around the country.
For example, she cited the Whangārei suburb of Kamo, which had recently reverted to its previous name of Te Kamo - even though most submissions called for the status quo.
Arguments cited against an outright name change include that Russell is well known as a tourist destination under that name; that Kororāreka is too long and difficult to pronounce; and the cost of changing signage, business cards, postal addresses and the like.
Rewiri said Russell was the only town in Northland not known by its original Māori name, and people seemed to manage with the region's other place names.
(Broadwood, in North Hokianga, is another locality officially known by its English name, but with a population of 130, it's moot whether it can be called a town.)
The name Kororāreka was already widely used in the town, Deb Rewiri said. Photo: RNZ
Whatever the government's decision, Rewiri said Kororāreka was already in widespread use, with many businesses already displaying on their signs and people writing Kororāreka/Russell on their correspondence.
Kororāreka was also inscribed on the waharoa [gateway] welcoming visitors to the town, she said.
How did Russell get its name?
Heritage New Zealand Northland manager Bill Edwards earlier told RNZ there was a curious twist in the tale of how Russell got its name.
While many people thought of Russell as the first capital of New Zealand, the Russell of then was not the Russell of now.
New Zealand's first capital was established at what was now known as Ōkiato, about 8km south of present-day Russell, where the car ferry from Ōpua docked.
That Russell was named after Lord John Russell, a British politician who never set foot in New Zealand.
In 1841 the nation's capital moved to Auckland, and a year later the original Russell was destroyed by fire and faded into obscurity.
At that time the name Kororāreka was used by Māori and Pākehā alike for the bustling whaling port north of the original Russell.
In 1844, however, two years after the original Russell burnt down, Governor Robert FitzRoy officially designated Kororāreka as "part of the township of Russell".
The name came from the Port of Russell, which was used to refer to the wider waters around Kororāreka.
As for the origin of the name Kororāreka, Rewiri said it came from the words kororā, or little blue penguin, and reka, meaning sweet or delicious.
"What I've been told is that one of our chiefs, he was ailing. And so the soup of the kororā was brought to him. And so he said, 'kororā reka', or 'how sweet is that kororā broth'."
The minutes from the June 2023 Geographic Board meeting stated that both Russell and Kororāreka had a unique place in New Zealand history, and both names were well-known to many New Zealanders.
"Although a substantial number of submitters object to an outright change, quite a number support alternative or dual names.
"This indicates that they don't want Russell dropped but also support Kororāreka being restored, and this demonstrates fairly strong support for Kororāreka to be recognised somehow," the minutes stated.
"The option of having Kororāreka and Russell as alternative official names would allow both names to be used in much the same way that the board had done for the North Island and South Island - Te Ika-a-Māui and Te Wai Pounamu."
"This might also provide for a natural transition to the original Māori name over time, although this could not be guaranteed. It would also address Whangārei District Council's concerns about the cost of transitioning."
The minutes stated there were similar numbers of public submissions for and against the proposal. Two "very abusive" submissions had been removed from consideration.
Speaking to RNZ after the decision was made public, Rewiri said she would continue pressing the government to change the town's name.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Letters to the Editor: Māori, supermarkets and Israel
Letters to the Editor: Māori, supermarkets and Israel

Otago Daily Times

time33 minutes ago

  • Otago Daily Times

Letters to the Editor: Māori, supermarkets and Israel

Woolworths and Foodstuffs are effectively the only two players in New Zealand's grocery sector. Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi, Simon Rogers Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including bullying language from Pākehā males, supermarkets rorting the public, and Israel's "vibrant democracy". Outrage fair response to response to column I cannot stand by in silence after reading letters from Pākehā males (Russell Garbutt and David Tackney) responding to the May 30 opinion column by Metiria Stanton Turei. We could choose to think with respect about the experience of our tangata te whenua, our Māori brothers and sisters. Quite simply, and it is simple, could we not take a moment to put ourselves in their shoes. The Treaty Principles Bill had the potential to reduce our first peoples to be stamped upon again; to arrest memory of taking their land — only five, six or seven generations ago. Not to mention the shutting down of te teo — their language, through the numbers of their people lost by way of influenza and war, by government policies including the punishment of school children for utilising te reo, and by integration policies designed to stamp the Māori way out. Imagine having our generationally owned farm taken off us, along with our language. How might we feel? Undoubtedly, enraged. A haka could be considered to be an appropriate way to express their rage. More appropriate than some of the behaviours we have seen previously by others in the Parliament. Mr Garbutt's letter was an outright personal attack on Mrs Stanton Turei, both as a person and on her professional life using very patronising language. His reference to "Mrs Stanton and her ilk" and then stating that he has "no desire to see this country return to tribalism" is unsavoury. Mr Tackney's dramatic language referred to anarchists and Māori radicals and further referred to Māori's need to "grapple with the darker aspects of their culture instead of trying to bring this country to its knees". This is bullying. Frances Anderson Alexandra Inquest coverage Recently the ODT reported on the inquest into Ian Loughran's death. I, and many others were dismayed at the level of detail that was reported. A family member who I spoke to discussed their distress when the article appeared on the ODT Facebook page in a subscriber-only article that they could not access. When the family member queried the ODT, the response was that it was in the public domain. While I understand that it is news that should be reported on, I implore the ODT to reconsider how it is reported. What we need to know is how the system failed him. Holly Aitchison Mornington [The Otago Daily Times recognises that coronial proceedings can canvas material which friends and family may find distressing. We attempt to report these proceedings carefully and responsibly as part of a public judicial process. Editor.] Dastardly duopoly For many years now we have put up with supermarkets rorting the public. Likewise we have all seen numerous insipid reports, investigations, recommendations and consultant's opinions on how to deal with the public perception of being ripped off. What has happened? Nothing. If this or any government is serious about stopping us being ripped off, the solution is simple. To solve our being overcharged for any supermarket offerings, simply force Foodstuffs and Woolworths to sell off all their supermarkets to the highest bidder, ending this insidious duopoly, making sure of excluding anyone or any entity that has any connection to aforementioned businesses. Suddenly, you have something not seen here in an age, competition. We all have a right to be able to eat and feed our families at a price we can all afford. Graham Bulman Roslyn I've lived there and trust me, it ain't that great A. Levy argues with Mark Hammond (29.5 and 6.6.25) whether "happy Israel" is a contradiction. Hammond wonders how Israelis can be happy and at war; Levy gives us typical Zionist propaganda on this "vibrant democracy". I have lived in Israel most of my life and can assure you it is neither. Israel is an apartheid state that derides international law, where open racism is the norm, and expressing your opinion can land you in prison. Israelis are, as a rule, tense, unhappy, aggressive and rude to each other. I am still regularly struck by New Zealanders' kindness and generosity. My family and I are happy here, and were deeply unhappy in Israel. It is no wonder a million of its Jewish citizens left "happy democratic" Israel in the past 10 years. Rod Pik Dunedin Smiles per capita According to A. Levy, a country that has militarily occupied and displaced another people for decades somehow holds unique moral clarity. This, we're told, is confirmed by its high smiles-per-capita — as if national happiness somehow absolves systemic oppression. Oppression that has been recognised by humanitarian organisations and the International Criminal Court as a form of apartheid. Levy also presents Israel as a uniquely persecuted victim, surrounded by enemies and unfairly maligned by criticism and rhetoric. But a recent Penn State University poll shows that this very population overwhelmingly supports actions many scholars and legal experts have described as ethnic cleansing, or even genocide. So is Israel really unfairly targeted by criticism? P. Maloney Dunedin Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@

New Zealand sanctions top Israeli ministers
New Zealand sanctions top Israeli ministers

Otago Daily Times

time5 hours ago

  • Otago Daily Times

New Zealand sanctions top Israeli ministers

New Zealand has banned two extremist Israeli politicians from travelling to the country because of comments about the war in Gaza that Foreign Minister Winston Peters says "actively undermine peace and security". New Zealand joins Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and Norway in imposing the sanctions on Israel's Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. Peters said they were targeted towards two individuals, rather than the Israeli government. "Our action today is not against the Israeli people, who suffered immeasurably on October 7 [2023] and who have continued to suffer through Hamas' ongoing refusal to release all hostages. Nor is it designed to sanction the wider Israeli government." The ministers were "using their leadership positions to actively undermine peace and security and remove prospects for a two-state solution", Peters said. "Ministers Smotrich and Ben-Gvir have severely and deliberately undermined that by personally advocating for the annexation of Palestinian land and the expansion of illegal settlements, while inciting violence and forced displacement." The sanctions were consistent with New Zealand's approach to other foreign policy issues, he said. "New Zealand has also targeted travel bans on politicians and military leaders advocating violence or undermining democracy in other countries in the past, including Russia, Belarus and Myanmar." New Zealand has been a long-standing supporter of a two-state solution, Peters said, which the international community was also overwhelmingly in favour of. "New Zealand's consistent and historic position has been that Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories are a violation of international law. Settlements and associated violence undermine the prospects for a viable two-state solution. "The crisis in Gaza has made returning to a meaningful political process all the more urgent. New Zealand will continue to advocate for an end to the current conflict and an urgent restart of the Middle East Peace Process." Israel's foreign minister Gideon Saar said the move was "outrageous" and the government would hold a special meeting early next week to decide how to respond to the "unacceptable decision". His comments were made while attending the inauguration of a new Israeli settlement on Palestinian land. Peters is in Europe for the sixth Pacific-France Summit hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron in Nice. 'You have to take actions' University of Otago international relations professor Robert Patman told RNZ's Morning Report programme today it was a "calibrated fulfilment of the promise to follow up actions if Israel did not desist" from expanding its military operations in Palestinian territory. "In May, the UK and France and Canada had demanded that Israel stop expanding its military operations in Gaza and allow emergency aid, humanitarian aid into Gaza. "It should be recalled that in early March, Israel, unilaterally cut off all humanitarian aid to Gaza and something like more than a million Palestinians now face starvation. And so this statement was made in May by those three countries, two of whom are members of the Five Eyes." New Zealand is also a member of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, as are the United States and Australia. Patman also noted that the International Court of Justice last year said Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory - not just in Gaza, but also the West Bank - was illegal. New Zealand supported that recommendation. "New Zealand's position has been… that there must be a two-state solution to the conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis. Now the problem is that [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and his ministers adamantly opposed the two-state solution." The growing condemnation around the world of Israel's response to the 7 October atrocities was a result of the United States' "lack of will to try to make Israel comply with international law", Patman suggested. "I think the other liberal democracies are now beginning to react to that because they realise that Netanyahu, the Netanyahu government, has no intention of having a two-state solution. "Iin fact, it seems to be in the process of weaponising food distribution in Gaza… They set up, with the United States, something called the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which seems to be part of a strategy to gradually evict Palestinians from Gaza. "Netanyahu's government doesn't make any bones about this. He wants to extend control over Gaza and… annex the West Bank [which] would completely rule out a two-state solution." Rather than just symbolic, Patman said European nations' sanctioning of Israeli ministers could have a real impact. "About 34 percent of Israel's trade is with members of the European Union, and if this stance taken by these five countries is replicated elsewhere and spreads, not just to these two ministers but to the Netanyahu government, then we could be looking at a different situation. "Verbal appeals to Israel to comply with international law have not worked. So, you know, if you believe in a two-state solution, then you have to take actions to try to bring it about." - Additional reporting by Reuters

Letters to the Edtor: Māori, supermarkets and Israel
Letters to the Edtor: Māori, supermarkets and Israel

Otago Daily Times

time8 hours ago

  • Otago Daily Times

Letters to the Edtor: Māori, supermarkets and Israel

Woolworths and Foodstuffs are effectively the only two players in New Zealand's grocery sector. Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi, Simon Rogers Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including bullying language from Pākehā males, supermarkets rorting the public, and Israel's "vibrant democracy". Outrage fair response to response to column I cannot stand by in silence after reading letters from Pākehā males (Russell Garbutt and David Tackney) responding to the May 30 opinion column by Metiria Stanton Turei. We could choose to think with respect about the experience of our tangata te whenua, our Māori brothers and sisters. Quite simply, and it is simple, could we not take a moment to put ourselves in their shoes. The Treaty Principles Bill had the potential to reduce our first peoples to be stamped upon again; to arrest memory of taking their land — only five, six or seven generations ago. Not to mention the shutting down of te teo — their language, through the numbers of their people lost by way of influenza and war, by government policies including the punishment of school children for utilising te reo, and by integration policies designed to stamp the Māori way out. Imagine having our generationally owned farm taken off us, along with our language. How might we feel? Undoubtedly, enraged. A haka could be considered to be an appropriate way to express their rage. More appropriate than some of the behaviours we have seen previously by others in the Parliament. Mr Garbutt's letter was an outright personal attack on Mrs Stanton Turei, both as a person and on her professional life using very patronising language. His reference to "Mrs Stanton and her ilk" and then stating that he has "no desire to see this country return to tribalism" is unsavoury. Mr Tackney's dramatic language referred to anarchists and Māori radicals and further referred to Māori's need to "grapple with the darker aspects of their culture instead of trying to bring this country to its knees". This is bullying. Frances Anderson Alexandra Inquest coverage Recently the ODT reported on the inquest into Ian Loughran's death. I, and many others were dismayed at the level of detail that was reported. A family member who I spoke to discussed their distress when the article appeared on the ODT Facebook page in a subscriber-only article that they could not access. When the family member queried the ODT, the response was that it was in the public domain. While I understand that it is news that should be reported on, I implore the ODT to reconsider how it is reported. What we need to know is how the system failed him. Holly Aitchison Mornington [The Otago Daily Times recognises that coronial proceedings can canvas material which friends and family may find distressing. We attempt to report these proceedings carefully and responsibly as part of a public judicial process. Editor.] Dastardly duopoly For many years now we have put up with supermarkets rorting the public. Likewise we have all seen numerous insipid reports, investigations, recommendations and consultant's opinions on how to deal with the public perception of being ripped off. What has happened? Nothing. If this or any government is serious about stopping us being ripped off, the solution is simple. To solve our being overcharged for any supermarket offerings, simply force Foodstuffs and Woolworths to sell off all their supermarkets to the highest bidder, ending this insidious duopoly, making sure of excluding anyone or any entity that has any connection to aforementioned businesses. Suddenly, you have something not seen here in an age, competition. We all have a right to be able to eat and feed our families at a price we can all afford. Graham Bulman Roslyn I've lived there and trust me, it ain't that great A. Levy argues with Mark Hammond (29.5 and 6.6.25) whether "happy Israel" is a contradiction. Hammond wonders how Israelis can be happy and at war; Levy gives us typical Zionist propaganda on this "vibrant democracy". I have lived in Israel most of my life and can assure you it is neither. Israel is an apartheid state that derides international law, where open racism is the norm, and expressing your opinion can land you in prison. Israelis are, as a rule, tense, unhappy, aggressive and rude to each other. I am still regularly struck by New Zealanders' kindness and generosity. My family and I are happy here, and were deeply unhappy in Israel. It is no wonder a million of its Jewish citizens left "happy democratic" Israel in the past 10 years. Rod Pik Dunedin Smiles per capita According to A. Levy, a country that has militarily occupied and displaced another people for decades somehow holds unique moral clarity. This, we're told, is confirmed by its high smiles-per-capita — as if national happiness somehow absolves systemic oppression. Oppression that has been recognised by humanitarian organisations and the International Criminal Court as a form of apartheid. Levy also presents Israel as a uniquely persecuted victim, surrounded by enemies and unfairly maligned by criticism and rhetoric. But a recent Penn State University poll shows that this very population overwhelmingly supports actions many scholars and legal experts have described as ethnic cleansing, or even genocide. So is Israel really unfairly targeted by criticism? P. Maloney Dunedin Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store