NZ Politics

563 readers

1 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to the NZ Politics community!

This is a place for respectful discussions about everything that's political and kiwi

This is an inclusive space where diverse opinions are valued, but please don't be a dick

Other kiwi communities here

Banner image by Tom Ackroyd, CC-BY-SA

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Dave

RaoulDuke

Treaty of Waitangi: Call for input from 'variety of voices' for revamped exhibition at Te Papa (www.rnz.co.nz)

submitted 7 months ago by AWOL_muppet to c/politics

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Now is time to change Te Papa's Treaty of Waitangi display, the museum's co-leaders say.

It comes after the museum left a defaced version of the Treaty of Waitangi on display over summer to enable "valuable conversations" about te Tiriti o Waitangi

...

Te Papa said it would consult with te Tiriti experts, iwi and communities for the permanent exhibition

...

The removed panel will be stored by the museum, and while no decision has been made about its future, Johnston said it was part of the exhibition's history and the story of te Tiriti o Waitangi.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Ilovethebomb 2 points 7 months ago (9 children)

It really annoys me that these people broke into a museum, vandalised an exhibit, and got what they wanted.

[–] liv 3 points 7 months ago

I'm wondering what solution you'd like to see?

Looks like Paul Goldsmith told Te Papa to take it down.

The display was obviously misleading/ahistorical and it was a known problem, so paying to just put a new copy of a flawed display up again would be a problematic use of taxpayer funding.

People had been writing letters of complaint, petitions, trying to liaise with Te Papa for literally years about this problem with no action taken. There were also peaceful protests about it outside, pretty sure some of them got arrested in 2021 for gluing themselves to steps.

The whole thing could have been avoided.

load more comments (8 replies)