Why I am against the proposed hikoi

Some Maori are proposing to hikoi against the Takutaimoana Act. I agree with Turia when she says that Maori ought to read it and understand it before they take to the streets. The article from the Radio New Zealand website outlines her position on the suggestion of a hikoi.

'Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia says Maori should read the Marine and Coastal Area Bill before they march against it.
Waatea News reports that Auckland District Maori Council is threatening another hikoi against the bill, which is expected to have its second reading in the next couple of weeks.
Mrs Turia says the bill the Maori Party has contributed to is significantly different to the 2004 Act which sparked the first hikoi.
While the new bill does not go as far as the Maori Party wanted, Mrs Turia says it is an improvement on the Foreshore and Seabed Act.
Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Treaty Negotiations Minister Chris Finlayson says people taking court action under the Marine and Coastal Area Bill will be able to seek funding from a special fund administered by the Minister of Maori Affairs, rather than being eligible for legal aid.' (Radio New Zealand News, February 15th, 2011)

This proposed hikoi will, if it does actually go ahead, cause much more contention than the hikoi of 2004. Collectively Maori were more united in stance against the Foreshore and Seabed Act and to this day (nearly 7 years later) there remains widespread animosity to it from both Maori and non-Maori alike. As I have stated in a previous post, the new act is still in a lot of ways similar to the Foreshore and Seabed Act and yes there are problems with it and yes it doesn't go as far as properly acknowledging the rights that the Maori Party wanted but I believe that the new act is a step in the right direction. Harawira, Turia and Sharples all want the same thing but their methods, about how best to approach it and attain it, are different.

The method of change being advocated by Turia and Sharples is one of gradual change with the inclusion of mana tuku iho in the phrasiology of the new bill and the ability for funding to be sought through the Ministry of Maori Affairs. Turia has noted that if things don't work for Maori then we can change things again, as she argues that nothing is set in concrete, laws change and develop as we seek improvement. Harawira wants to do it in an 'all-or-nothing' manner which demands rather than dialogues and which threatens rather than talks. Harawira is to be commended on his 'no compromise' position but I'm scared of his overtly religious overtones on his own website which states that the Maori Party ''are no longer being seen as active defenders of the faith." Defend away but I believe that if the hikoi does go ahead it will then contribute to an exacerbation of the binaries; 'pono' vs the 'plastic' Maori, 'those who defend' vs 'those who do not', those who are 'true Maori' vs those who 'play Maori'. This is what I am scared of developing after seeing the heckling that Sharples got last week where he was labelled a 'plastic Maori'. I believe that the proposed hikoi will not only be about the Marine and Coastal Bill but it will cut to the core of Maori identity. Such a hikoi will be a symbolic slap on the hand to those Maori who propose gradual change rather than the expediency and almost revolutionary-like change others are seeking.