Foreword: 

The 2001 Hui-a-Taiohi – The Young Maori Leaders’ Conference in a Developmental Context

Edward Te Kohu Douglas  

 

Within the space of one or two generations, Maori have undergone a very rapid transformation from agrarian, subsistence-level communities to a predominantly urban, wage-based society not fully integrated into national life and with a significant proportion of its membership not fully connected to their rural roots, and with a sense of marginalisation from the wider Pakeha-led society. That these social, economic and cultural issues will resolve themselves without direct intervention is unlikely.

 The aims of the 2001 Young Maori Leadership Conference (YMLC) were to bring together young Maori men and women from as wide a cross-section of the community as possible, have them discuss issues confronting Maori people in our various communities today, and plan for future directions. This was not a new concept, but was a prominent feature of public education and debate last century.

YMLC 2001 was to bring together young Maori from a range of different communities to discuss common problems of the people. Such discussions would not only promote understanding necessary to a solution, but also establish personal contacts between young Maori from all tribes, in different communities and different socio-economic circumstances. This was expected to facilitate cooperation towards future effective action.  

There was much similarity of purpose with earlier Maori leadership conferences. In an editorial in Te Ao Hou magazine forty-two years ago, it was asked:

‘What are the issues before the Maori people today? Many people have tried to answer that question but the most massive reply undoubtedly is that given by the Young Maori Leaders’ Conference in Auckland last September. Most of what was said is truly representative of Maori opinion. Here then can we find what the Maori people desire and how they progress’. (Te Ao Hou, Vol 8 No 2, 1960) 

Two years later, in 1962, Erik Schwimmer, a social anthropologist and the magazine’s editor, wrote of the nature of these conferences and the frequency in which they were being held.  

‘Young leaders’ conferences, like action songs, are hybrids – crosses between Maori and European custom. Over the last two years, young leaders’ conferences have become quite a fashion- they are being held in different places every few weeks. The fashion started with a conference called by the Auckland Regional Council for Adult Education in August-September 1959. . . . Those who attended were very enthusiastic and considered similar conferences should be held in every district of the country. Since then some twenty have been held in just about every important centre of Maori population. (Te Ao Hou, Vol. 10 no 1, 1962 p39)

Origins of the Young Maori Leaders’ Conferences 

The first such conferences were held by Te Aute old boys in 1897 and the years following. The idea of the younger generation of Maoris trying to influence the older ones was at the time most unusual, in fact revolutionary. It was remarkable that the young men, returning to their village after the conferences and preaching their message, were given a hearing at all. When the members of the Young Maori Party became members of parliament, and ceased to be young, but remained leaders, nothing was heard of young leaders’ conferences for quite some time. In fact the first major one to be held this (20th) century was in 1939, organised by Sir Apirana Ngata, Professor Sutherland and Professor Belshaw.  (Schwimmer, opcit.)  

The 1939 conference arose from an initiative at the Institute of Pacific Relations Conference at Yosemite in 1936. In the course of research for a symposium on 'The Present Position of the Maori People', Sir Apirana Ngata, Dr I.G.L. Sutherland, Professor H. Belshaw, and other leaders discussed the desirability of holding such a conference, and it was organised through the National Council for Adult Education.  

As Belshaw stated,  

'During visits to Maori communities extending over several weeks (in 1938) I found certain definite impressions. The economic and social problems of the Maori people were difficult and serious and their solution was of profound importance to both Maori and Pakeha.  It seemed doubtful whether their real significance in relation to the future of both peoples was understood by either of the two races.  

Maori communities were isolated from each other and from main centres of European population. As a result, it was not easy for Maori communities to view the problems in their broader, national aspects, and mutual understanding between Maori and Pakeha was lacking.' (YMLC Proceedings, 1939)  

The agenda for that first YMLC in 1939 covered Economic Conditions, (including Land Resources and Land Use, Work Other Than Farming, Expenditure, Housing and the Home, Health, The Community and Education). Back then, it was thought that if free discussion could be stimulated so as to bring home the importance and generality of the problems, it might provide an incentive to the exercise of leadership. Such a demonstration of their capacity to discuss problematic conditions with sincerity and intelligence might encourage older generations to assist them and give them scope for the development and exercise of their talents.  

The tradition, which began in 1939 under the tutelage of Sir Apirana Ngata and others, aimed at examining the questions of adjustment and development in rural Maori communities. His choice of a non-marae venue was deliberate but carefully considered. As Bishop Manuhuia recollected (elsewhere in this volume) Maori took every opportunity to discuss issues of the day whether at sports tournaments, poukai , tangihanga or other hui. This was a conference held in an educational setting, which would impress the status of the conference to outsiders. Also, unlike the marae where the gate is always open, it was for a chosen few, who had been identified already by their iwi or their teachers as elites and actual or emerging leaders. They discussed the major questions of the day, which were centred on land use and development. However, diminishing land resources and a rising population led to the consideration of off-farm employment opportunities and rural to urban relocation as possible solutions.  

Leaders’ Conferences Reflect Development and Change in the Maori World  

Others national Maori Leaders’ conferences followed in 1959, 1970, and 1977. In addition, many regional YMLCs followed up on these national conferences.   

The 1959 YMLC followed the same format as in 1939. Economic conditions related to land use and land development remaining an important point of the conference discussions, but so too were social conditions (housing, education, health, and crime) debated. Elders for most of whom land issues were a focus, were well represented at the 1959 conference, but there were elders from other backgrounds too. In 1959, twenty or so elders who had been at the 1939 conference were invited as well. There were thus two rangatahi round tables and an elders’ round table.  

Group members were well educated. Many were public servants and teachers with experience and some specialist knowledge of the subjects on the conference agenda.  Their Maori cultural background varied greatly, from very extensive to an almost total blank. In selecting each delegate, not only were their achievements considered, but also their potential, either as leaders or as students of Maori culture.  

Harry Dansey was one of the youngest to attend the 1939 conference and returned as a member of the 1959 elders’ table. Subsequently he had a distinguished career in public affairs, first as a journalist, and then as Race Relations Conciliator. Dansey put his thoughts on paper on the characteristics of conference participants in 1959, on what he perceived to be the similarities and differences between the two generations of participants and on the deliberations of the young and their elders in 1959. (Dansey, 1960:24-25)  

‘From the first, I tried hard to pick how the two groups - the younger and the older – differed, why it was I felt more at home with the older men, although I was one of the youngest at the 1939 conference. Now I know. We looked at each other across the years of war. We had grown up in the shadow the war had cast before it and had matured before our time as it rolled over us; they had grown up in the years that followed. What are they like then, these young people, these young leaders? Honestly I think I can answer ‘better than we were, yes better than we were’. They are more confident than we were, more assured than we were, more knowledgeable than we were, better adjusted to the strains of this day an age than many of us were to ours. They have the fire of youth, the burning enthusiasm which sees things that are wrong and which demand instant change; they tend to see in compromise a deviation from principle and not a bridge towards it. They are angry without being bitter, merry without being frivolous, eloquent without being verbose, passionate without being cynical, forthright without being discourteous. If they differ from their elders they do so with respect, if they feel they are not well enough informed on a subject they will seeks the best advice available, if they are certain that the course they have decided upon is right they will not divert from it. Above all they are proud of their race, its achievements, its traditions, its culture; jealous of its good name; earnest, sincere and determined in their desire to help their fellows towards fuller, better and happier living.’  

In comparing the deliberations of the younger group with those of the older, Dansey wrote that the young leaders approached their tasks differently from their elders. He wrote that  

 ‘In one way at least, that of definition, it was often a more effective approach. From their reports it is clear that the problems were better defined, laid upon the operating table, so to speak, in a manner well fitted to receive the surgeon’s attention. When it came to making a firm decision on where to make the decisive cut, what instruments to use and how to assist the patient back to health again, then it was clear that the vital necessity, the necessity of experience was not always there. The elders did not always define their problems as completely as their juniors. More often than not, this was because they knew these problems well and were thus able quickly to come to grips with the essentials. When definition was disputed however, the tussle began. The views of the veterans were sought, the experts called in and a solution arrived at after a session of really hard slogging’.  (p24-5)  

Dansey wrote about the relative importance placed by the two age groups on their treatment of the subject of ‘Leadership’. To him, the reports of the younger group made most interesting reading, but the elders did not even discuss the matter. In a discussion about ‘Leadership’ per se he wrote:   

‘(Leadership) to acknowledged leaders can best be an academic topic, at worst an arid one. They could do something practical by discussing education for they were in a position in their private and public capacities to influence the powers that be.’  

In the deliberations of the younger members at the 1959 conference, leadership itself was an important topic: hardly surprising as they had been invited because they were people with some experience in running Maori organisations, or were educated Maoris who were thought to be potential leaders but whose community activities so far have been quite limited. (Schwimmer, 1960:39)  

Contributions to the topic of leadership were very wide ranging. Three types of leaders were identified in Maori communities, viz. traditional leaders, educated leaders, and moneyed leaders.  Because leaders are part of groups, they cannot be considered unless the composition and configuration of the groups they lead are considered too. The elders voted on whether to discuss leadership at all. The vote was split, but won by those who wanted to devote more time to the topic of education. They likely saw themselves as leaders anyway so moved on to other issues.  

The younger participants related leadership to social problems, especially those which arose from or were more evident in recent rural-urban migrants. There appeared to be a vacuum of leadership in many larger urban areas, but especially Auckland. Leadership problems were many and varied; there was a shift from autocratic to more democratic leadership. Most participants spoke about leaders and the transmission of leadership roles in their own communities. There was considerable variation, depending on the strength of the paepae in each area, the extent to which Maori had taken leadership in what they termed Pakeha organisations (hunt clubs, golf clubs, PTAs) the leadership roles of women, the contexts in which leadership is demonstrated. There was debate about the demise of the rangatira as leaders and their roles being taken by kaumatua who were not rangatira. 

There was general agreement that leaders need to transmit their skills to succeeding generations. In older times much of this was done by association, learning by observation and participation and through the sharing of knowledge and skills and actively promoting opportunities for younger people to take the lead locally or nationally. All agreed that leadership was changing as the world of the Maori changed, and more deliberate leadership training was required.  

The conference sought to influence the NZ Rugby Union on the vexing question of the exclusion of Maori players from the impending tour to South Africa. In the final plenary session on this topic a recommendation was passed that deplored the discriminatory policy of the rugby union.      

In a post-event statement, the Department of Maori Affairs recognising the poor quality of Maori housing and the need for greater provision of housing, drew attention to housing as an issue of concern to the conference participants. This was an interesting twist, especially as the department was actively promoting in the department’s own journal, what it euphemistically called the rural to urban ‘relocation’ of thousands of Maori families.  

The most crucial issue raised during at the 1959 conference was Maori housing. Here delegates acknowledged that the Department of Maori Affairs has made a greater contribution than any other organisation and expressed their thanks, but at the same time all three round tables independently thought that the housing programme was too small. It is not surprising that a Maori conference should express such a view. Nobody, and least of all a Maori leader could look at the Maori housing situation with any complacency. It should be pointed out however that Maori housing has not over a long period of time been held back purely for lack of loan moneys. Until the present government allowed family benefits to be capitalised in advance, there was a gap between the cost of a house and the loan finance available, Maori families found it hard to bridge this gap. The hold-up lay here, rather than in the government’s total provision for Maori housing. (Te Ao Hou Editorial Vol.8 No2 1960)  

Writing in Landfall in 1962, and drawing on the data papers, YMLC deliberations and recommendations, and other contemporary sources, Pearson1 noted that the most striking feature of the Maori situation 17 years after the end of the war was the continued existence, within the welfare state of rural enclaves of material poverty and in the city and county spiritual insecurity. He wrote that  

‘All the evidence available at the present time points to the fact that no very great improvement has taken place in the comparative health standards of the Maori as opposed to the European during the course of the intervening quarter –century. Though the crude death rate of Maoris is slightly lower than for Pakeha, when adjustments are made for the different age structure of the Maori population, the death rate is roughly twice as high and in the younger age groups roughly three times as high; and expectation of life for a Maori males almost twelve years less than for a Pakeha and for a female 15 years less. Apart from the deaths, the sickness rate of the living is too high’ (Pearson 1962:101)  

Pearson who had been a rapporteur at the 1959 conference (and also at the 1977 one) related the then current social condition to past acts of policy which together determined a number of vexing questions; the migration to the towns and cities in search of employment, and the consequent increase in contact or contiguity with Europeans; the continuing alienation and fragmentation of iwi land inheritances; and the accelerating efforts of government to promote what is called integration; comparatively poor educational achievement; low-level labour skills and insecurity of employment, the increase in crime; the uncertain future of the Maori language, changes in patterns of leadership. He argued that together these matters question our professions of equality and racial goodwill. All of these issues made the agenda for the 1959 national conference or the round of nearly twenty regional young Maori leaders’ conferences that followed, some were formally dealt with in data papers and on the agendas, others were raised and discussed in formal and informal gatherings.  

Pearson was prophetic in his analysis when he predicted that the high proportion of Maori in unskilled labour would make them vulnerable to economic depression and economic restructuring in the future. He predicted that job queues would be mostly Maoris and racial friction among the workless would be almost certain. (Pearson, 1962:114) Although he did not predict the timing, he forecast accurately the impact of  ‘rogernomics and ruthanasia’ in the 1985-92 period when the privatisation of crown assets would put 40% of the Maori labour-force out of work and throughout the 1990s when Maori unemployment levels have remained two to three times those of Pakeha.  

The persistent disparities between Maori and Pakeha educational attainment were recognised and discussed. There was a growing and widespread perception in Maori society that the nation’s schools, its educational system and the policies that sustained them, fail Maori children, as much as Maori are failing at school. Regrettably, a great many Maori school children feel that their teachers take no special interest in them, they become apathetic and find themselves pushed into the lower streams. Even today Maori children lag about a year behind Pakeha pupils in attainment, are three times more likely to be suspended or expelled from school, and are twice as likely as Pakeha children to leave school with no qualifications and few work prospects. Even though the education gaps are closing slowly, education was a major issue at YMLC 2001, reflecting the concern more widely held in Maori society.  

What Pearson did not envisage was the momentum to wrest control of the education of Maori through the establishment of kohanga reo, kura kaupapa Maori and tertiary wananga. He did raise the question of the psychological effects of linguistic frustration; of not having a language to express ones most complex thoughts or most intimate feelings. And he argued that there is a connection between self-respect and knowledge of a language that expresses one’s ethnic traditions. Pearson, with two decades of university language and literature teaching behind him further argued that language, like land, would seems to be an anchor against demoralisation. (Pearson, 1962:118)

1 refer Appendices

At least until then, insufficient trust had been placed in Maori initiative he said. Yet it was Maori initiative that was ultimately responsible for the 1945 and 1961 Maori Affairs Acts, and Te Ture Whenua Maori Act of 1993, for the formation of the Maori Women’s Welfare League, for the 28th Maori Battalion Association, Tu Tangata, Te Toi Whakari, The highly acclaimed Te Maori exhibition, Maori language in the secondary school curriculum and the other educational initiatives noted above. Maori too initiated the national and regional leadership conferences that began in 1959. Pearson noted that  

‘If the initial direction of such moves is withdrawal from the Pakeha, it is only for the purpose of establishing identity; from this position, Pakehas are invited to share in activities.’ (Pearson, 1962:123)  

Although the urban relocation of Maori youth and young families, envisaged as a solution to the economic depression of rural life, had begun during World War II, and took hold in the late nineteen-forties and the nineteen-fifties, the magnitude of the problem related to urban adjustment took some time to manifest itself in public policy. At the 1966 census, almost 50% of the Maori population was to be found living in urban places, whereas little more than a decade earlier, only about thirty percent of Maori were urban dwellers. In view of the dislocation accompanying the rapid growth of urbanism as a way of life for Maori, it was felt that another Young Leaders’ Conference with urbanisation and urban life as its central theme was needed, and the NZ Maori Council successfully proposed a further YMLC for 1970.  

The 1970 YMLC differed from its precursors in several respects.  

At all YMLC there was a wide social range represented, but especially at the later two in 1970 and 1977, where, besides kaumatua, there were teachers, clerics, other professionals, farmers, artists, gang leaders, students, labourers, and unemployed.  Women were much better represented in the seventies conferences than ever before. 

In 1970, most of the discussion on leadership centred on the qualities required of leaders. Discussions recognised the growing complexity of Maori society as it came in closer association and contact with Pakeha.  Participants recognised that different types of leaders were required for different situations. The elders at the conference  (they had their own round table as in 1959), regarded fluency in te reo Maori as a necessary requirement for leadership in Maori organizations, especially in those areas where Maori was widely spoken. They also recognised that facility in English was a desired leadership quality, especially in a time where the younger generation speaks little or no Maori. The elders emphasised the importance of marae etiquette for young leaders who wish to gain the support of their elders. Education was seen as an added qualification for leadership, but does not in itself make a leader of anyone who has lost contact with his people. Knowledge of the workings of the pakeha world was also seen as desirable, because of the dominance of Pakeha in the world of work and commerce.   

Younger participants had different concerns. A knowledge of te reo, etiquette and reo were considered necessary, but so too was the ability to achieve harmony and to guide, assess, reflect and absorb the opinions of followers. Leadership was identified as acting in accord with the wishes of the people, rather than dictatorship. In urban settings, there tended to be a split in roles. The relatively scarce kaumatua had an advisory role while the work of running an organisation were left in the hands of younger people.  Nonetheless there was controversy in this debate. A significant proportion of younger delegates criticised kaumatua for running the show in some districts and squashing the initiatives of the young. They wanted kaumatua to ‘stick to their knitting’ providing leadership in the teaching of te reo and tikanga. Yet they still saw kaumatua as part of the leadership, functioning to complement younger active leaders.  

By the 1977 conference, elders were even less in evidence.  One of the most important addresses given was by Mira Szaszy, the retiring president of the Maori Women’s Welfare League. She spoke on the leadership role of Maori women. In her address she noted that in the first of the modern conferences (1939) there was not a single woman present, and further reflected on changes which had occurred, not just in the composition of subsequent conferences, in the increased visibility of Maori women in community leadership. In reviewing changes in the role of Maori women in the twentieth century she placed greatest emphasis on the league, its membership, its charter and its results as a centralising force for Maori society as a whole.  

‘The formation of the league became the historical point in time when Maori women as a whole assumed leadership roles at a time when the Maori world was seeking political and cultural autonomy. Therefore the time has arrived for a serious examination of the present-day dilemma regarding the leadership role of Maori women within the full context of Maori society and cultural traditions. Changing times, the concept of human rights, the moral force of women, scientific knowledge of human biology, adherence to Christianity and the subsequent changes in religious beliefs, as well as the reality of today, demand a closer scrutiny of the Maori cultural view of women. Not only is this necessary, I suggest that the concept of tapu as applied to men and the questionable behaviour of some on our maraes today also requires examination – if there is to be credibility or validity in what we believe and what we practise in our way of life.’ (Szaszy: 1977, app.v: 3).  

Women held their own workshops and decided to hold a further conference for Maori women later in the year because they felt that there were many of their gender who had not been invited to this conference and who had a positive contribution to make to leadership issues in Maori society.  

 Each of the six workshops was asked to judge Maori leadership in a range of contexts: various Maori organizations including the NZ Maori Council, the Maori Women’s Welfare League, the Kingitanga, tribal organizations, Maori missions and churches, sports clubs, artists and writers and Nga Tamatoa and other activist protest groups. Participants were asked to consider how young Maori could be given better chances to fulfil leadership roles, whether the formation of a Junior Maori Council or Junior Welfare League would help these ends. They were also referred to a frequently heard put-down from Pakeha that there are no leaders today of the calibre of Ngata, Pomare or Te Rangihiroa, and asked how they should respond to that.  

Besides leadership itself, other issues were placed on the conference agenda. All but two (Youth in the City and Women’s Rights) were topics that had been on earlier agendas.  So social issues such as housing, education, employment and crime were deliberated upon, and so too were issues of tikanga, Maoritanga, te reo, and rural reconstruction.  

 

The 2001 Young Maori Leaders Conference  

Previous conferences were variously titled and promoted as Maori Leaders’ Conferences, others as Young Maori Leaders’ Conferences and yet others as Maori Leadership Conferences. This was a leadership conference for young Maori. The 2001 conference was clearly aimed at younger people.  A rule that dates back to the 1939 conference is that ‘young leaders’ must generally be no older than 35. Almost all of the participants were aged between 22 and 35, but a few were younger and others older than this modal group. The conference aimed to promote leadership skills amongst young Maori and encouraging the inter-generational transfer of leadership skills, YMLC by its very nature, addressed many of the issues associated with community capacity building, a major programme in the 1999-2002 Labour Government's Maori Affairs policy.  

Delegates, while nominated by various organisations, did not represent them per se. Nonetheless they were encouraged to report on their participation to others and were further encouraged to organise and participate in regional YMLCs similar themes, thereby widening public awareness and understanding of the various issues covered.

 

What Was Envisioned?  

Now in the 21st century, and 23 years since the last YMLC, many of the issues relating to Maori land use and development remain unresolved, although there is now a wider range of development possibilities than previously. Despite an increase in Maori-held wealth over the last few decades, the level of land-based wealth per capita has been depleted greatly by continuing land alienation and population increases.  

Neither have the urban adjustment problems of the mid-century disappeared, even though we have become essentially an urban people (80% of the Maori population now lives in urban places). To these geographically orientated rural/urban issues have been added others, which relate to identity, social dislocation, poverty, and the widely held perception of yawning gaps in access and attainment levels between Maori and mainstream New Zealand.  

Nonetheless Maori society is much more diverse than ever before. There is a wider range of vocational and social skills and expertise, and a wider range of experience and life-style held by young Maori now, and from which participants were drawn. Generational, experiential and ideological differences have emerged, even though the Maori population is still heavily loaded towards the youthful end of the spectrum, (half of the Maori population is aged under 25 years).  

In order to obtain as wide a representation of young Maori as possible, key organisations throughout New Zealand were invited to nominate delegates to attend the conference.  Nominating bodies included: Iwi Runanga and Trust Boards, Te Roopu Wahine Maori Toko i te Ora, The Maori Health League, Maori Wardens’ Association, larger Maori land trusts and incorporations (such as the members of FoMA), major religious denominations (such as Catholic, the Anglican bishopric of Aotearoa, Ratana, Presbyterians, Methodists, Latter Day Saints), gang leaders (such as Black Power, Mongrel Mob, Storm Troopers), student unions in polytechnics and universities, labour unions with significant Maori membership, other community organisations (such as Te Kawariki, Maori Artists and Writers collective, Waitangi Action Committee). The Ministry of Youth Affairs, Te Puni Kokiri, and other central or local government agencies deemed appropriate.  

It was expected that contacts and exchange of ideas between younger people who are beginning to assume leadership roles would facilitate the search for solutions and cooperation towards effective future action. There is no doubt that there are substantial leadership skills in hand, it seems an ideal time and action to bring these nascent leaders together, as they are the inheritors of future leadership roles in Maori society.  

The purpose of bringing such a wide cross-section of young Maori men and women as possible together and discuss the problems confronting Maori today was very effective. Inviting Government agencies (such as Ministries of Youth Affairs, Social Policy, Child Youth and Family Services, Te Puni Kokiri, District and Regional Councils etc) to nominate too, was to broaden the community’s understanding of this conference and its potential value for all New Zealanders. An often repeated remark during this conference was that such conferences should be held more regularly, some argued for annual Young Maori Leaders’ Conferences regionally or nationally, others for conferences at less frequent intervals than that, but the final session agreed on the holding of another national conference within the next two to five years. I was left with no doubt that this YMLC was of value, not just to those who attended, but also to their sponsors, their whanau, hapu and iwi, and to the many and varied communities in which they dwell.  

Finally, I want to refer the reader to the Harry Dansey’s conclusions from his report on the 1959 conference, because it is as valid now as it was then.  

The organisations, which supported the conference, may be assured that dividends in the form of enlightened and inspired work for the Maori people will repay them a thousand fold.  The conference is over. It can never be repeated in exactly the same manner but the spirit which we all felt, the strengthening of will we all experienced, the knowledge we all gained will help and inspire us for our people’s sake in the years to come. (Dansey, 1960:27) 

No reira e te rangatahi, maranga mai, karangatia.

No te ao tenei wa e tu, hapainga ra tou iwi.

  References  

Dansey, H. D. B., ‘Tomorrow’s Leaders’ in Te Ao Hou, Vol 8 No 2, Department of Maori Affairs, Wellington 1960. 

Dewes, Koro, ‘Waiariki-Murupara Leadership Conference’, Te Ao Hou, Vol 12 No 1, Department of Maori Affairs, Wellington, 1964. 

Pearson, Bill, 1972, ‘Under Pressure to Integrate, The Situation of Maoris in 1962’, in his Fretful Sleepers and Other Essays, Heinemann Educational Books, Auckland. 

Reports of the Young Maori Leaders’ Conference, 1939, 1959, 1970, 1977, Council of Adult Education (or later) Centre for Continuing Education, University of Auckland, 1939, 1959, 1970, 1977. 

Schwimmer, E. G.,  ‘Young Leaders’ Conference’, Te Ao Hou, Vol 10 No 1, Department of Maori Affairs, Wellington, 1962 

Szaszy, Mira, 1977, ‘The Leadership Role of Maori Women’, Appendix V, Report of the Young Maori Leader’s Conference, University of Auckland 

Te Ao Hou: The New World,  ‘Editorial’, Vol 8 No 2, Department of Maori Affairs, Wellington 1960.