Glimmer of hope
p. 45 · Read in the full issue
Views
Glimmer of hope for the islanders
THE main problem Pacific Islands community leaders in New Zealand have had in campaigning for improved living standards for their peoples over the years is a lack of accu rate statistical information.
Nobody really knew how many island people actually lived here, let alone the age groups of their popula tions, what education they had, what they did and how much they earned.
There were some general assump tions, but in the absence of hard facts, the true picture of a growing segment of the New Zealand population was cloud ed in guess work.
In those circumstances, it was impos sible for the nation’s policymakers to focus on the needs of the Pacific Islands peoples and difficult for their leaders to lobby on their behalf.
This has been rectified by the publi cation of a series of profiles on the six main Pacific groups living here by Statistics New Zealand.
Like so many such exercises, the information was out of date before it was published, being based on replies given in the last census in 1991.
Nevertheless, it is the most complete picture yet compiled of the Pacific Islands community in this country.
As Government statistician Len Cook and Ministry of Pacific Islands Affairs chief executive Apii Rongo-Raea say in their foreword: “A predominantly young and fast-growing group, the Pacific pop ulation ought to be a focus for policy makers and strategists in facilitating those communities to contribute even more to the fabric of the New Zealand society.”
The youth of the island community and that it is one of the fastest-growing in the country are key factors revealed in
the profiles.
About half the island people living
here are under 20, compared with a third of the total
population. The
number of islanders grew 25 per cent between 1981 and 1986 and a further 28 per cent in 1986- 91, compared with 3 per cent for
the total New Zealand population in both periods. These facts alone mean the island community is destined to play an increasingly important role in New Zealand affairs in the future.
To start with the basic facts, the cen sus showed that 170,442 Pacific Islands people were living in New Zealand in 1991, about 5 per cent of the total popu lation. (Maori, in comparison, comprise about 13 per cent).
The 85,743 Samoans were the largest group, accounting for 53 per cent of the island population and being just under half the number still living in Western Samoa at that time. Then came Cook Islanders (21 per cent) and Tongans (14 per cent) followed by Niueans (7 per cent) and Fijians and Tokelauans (both 2 per cent) The number of Tongans more than doubled between 1981 and 1991 to 23,175 while the Samoan population increased by nearly 100 per cent.
Apart from Fijians and Tongans, the majority of islanders living in New Zealand were bom here. Most live in the main cities, with the majority by far hav ing based themselves in Auckland, long known as the biggest Polynesian centre in the world.
The depopulation problem which worries the governments of so many Pacific Islands states is highlighted by the profile of tiny Niue. There were
14,424 Niueans living in New Zealand at the 1991 census, six times as many as those left in their homeland. Fifty-seven per cent of them were bom in New Zealand and half were under the age of 20. This imbalance has raised concerns among the community there that the Niuean language and culture will wither away.
Information revealed in the series certainly demonstrates that Pacific Island people, especially the young, are among the most disadvantaged at pre sent.
One in five islanders were unem ployed in 1991, with the highest jobless rate being among the 15-19 year age group, where 43 per cent were out of work.
The median income for the total Pacific Islands population was only $lO,BOO and more than half the men and two-thirds of the women were receiving some form of income support from the government. Nearly half the population over 15 had left school with no qualifi cations and only one-in-five had gone on to tertiary education.
There were some encouraging signs that things are changing. Seventy per cent of Samoans bom in New Zealand, for instance, had some form of educa tional qualifications, against only 50 per cent of those bom in Samoa.
While 53 per cent of Samoan-bom men worked in manufacturing (the tradi tional sector for island workers), only 24 per cent of those bom in this country did. New Zealand-born Samoans were twice as likely as immigrants to work in the service sector, including business and financial services.
Facts like these offer a glimmer of hope that the younger generation of islanders is educating itself and integrat ing into the broader New Zealand econ omy.
There is still a long way to go. But information is a good starting point. This set of profiles is an invaluable resource and should be compulsory reading for all New Zealand bureaucrats and plan ners and for islands leaders interested in the welfare of their people who have made this country their home. A