E/CN.4/2006/78/Add.3 page 19 effect of this has been to reduce the disparity in outcomes between the Maori and non-Maori populations, indicators of well-being for Maori are still relatively poor in a number of areas, and in particular health, paid work and economic standard of living. IV. CONCLUSIONS 76. On the basis of his conversations and observations the Special Rapporteur has reached the conclusions outlined below. 77. During the last three decades or so, ethnic relations in New Zealand changed from an assimilationist model (that undermined Maori cultural identity and governance structures) to a new bicultural approach based on the Treaty of Waitangi principles and the partnership between Maori and the Crown. The increasing assertiveness of Maori in demanding their long-denied rights and their claims for redress of past injustices led to inquiries and recommendations by the Waitangi Tribunal, negotiations leading to Treaty Settlements and the enactment of laws by Parliament when such settlements were finalized to the mutual satisfaction of the Government and Maori, with the sympathy and support of the majority of New Zealand society. Yet the legacy of the first 150 years of New Zealand was difficult to overcome, and many inequities continued to plague the relationships between Maori and Pakeha. 78. The inherent rights of Maori were not constitutionally recognized, nor were their own traditional governance bodies, which allowed Parliament to enact legislation by simple majority that modified this relationship according to the circumstances, a condition that the minority representation of Maori in the political process was unable to reform. Maori have the perception that all along they have been junior partners in this relationship. 79. Nothing illustrates this situation better than the complex land rights issue. Having been dispossessed of most of their lands and resources by the Crown for the benefit of Pakeha, Maori had to accept sporadic and insufficient redress, only to be faced with accusations that they were receiving undue privileges, which left in their wake resentments on both sides about perceived social and racial tensions. The latent crisis broke over the controversy concerning the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, whereby the Crown extinguished all Maori extant rights to the foreshore and seabed in the name of the public interest and at the same time opened the possibility for the recognition by the Government of customary use and practices through complicated and restrictive judicial and administrative procedures. 80. Despite social programmes, disparities continue to exist between Maori and nonMaori with regard to employment, income, health, housing, education, as well as in the criminal justice system. Although Maori collectives (iwi, hapu, whanau) are increasingly involved in the strategies designed to reduce these inequalities, as well as in those designed to promote economic development and Maori success in business, actual self-governance mechanisms based on the recognition of the right of indigenous peoples to selfdetermination have not yet been devised. There appears to be a need for the continuation of specific measures based on ethnicity in order to strengthen the social, economic and cultural rights of Maori as is consistent with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.