People often refer to Tokoroa as the 16th Island of the country currently called the Cook Islands, though many may not know, that historically, Niue held this distinction. Thomas Wynne writes.

. In 1901, New Zealand took control of various Pacific territories under British colonial influence. Niue was initially included in the Cook Islands annexation. The Cook Islands Act 1901 formally annexed both the Cook Islands and Niue, treating them as a single administrative entity under New Zealand colonial governance.

However, this arrangement didn’t last long, and the unique needs and identity of Niue led to legislative changes, and by 1903, Niue was separated from the New Zealand government construct called the Cook Islands. The Cook Islands returned to 15 islands, and Niue, which recently celebrated 50 years of self-governance, rightfully became a standalone entity as it always should have been.

Niue’s distinct cultural and geographic identity paved the way for self-governance, which it achieved in 1974—nearly a decade after the Cook Islands also gained self-governing status in free association with New Zealand in 1965.

New Zealand, though still a British colony, was directly involved in the ceding of our sovereignty as a group of islands to Great Britain in 1901. Unlike our Māori cousins in Aotearoa, who did not cede sovereignty but instead signed a treaty with the Crown, we gave our sovereignty away, and would not regain it to manage for ourselves for another 64 years.

This is why October 8, 1900, should be taught in all our schools and included in our history curriculum. It marks the line in our journey from a sovereign state of separate islands to a ceded part of Great Britain, and, later, without consultation, transferred to the colony of New Zealand.

Our Ariki at the time—Makea, Tinomana, Pa, Karika, Kainuku, and Mataiapo Taraare, Vakapora, Vaimotu, Maoate, Terei, and Tamarua—signed away our sovereignty in Rarotonga at the Palace of Makea. Ngamaru, Makea’s husband, then signed away the sovereignty of Takutea, Atiu, Mitiaro, and Mauke. The following day, John Pakoti ceded Manuae and Te Au o Tu, followed by Mangaia with John Trego Nooroa Ariki and 34 other Mangaian signatories.

Promises of a coaling station in Rarotonga and plantations by New Zealand farmers never materialized, though land was set aside by Gudgeon. Claims that French threats in Tahiti towards us prompted this decision to cede sovereignty are simply not true and unsubstantiated.

In the New Zealand Parliament on May 13, 1901, the Colonial Boundaries Act was extended to include the Cook Islands, making them not a part of Great Britain but rather a colony of New Zealand. On November 7 of that year, this was fully enacted by the without full consultation or consent of Ariki, with laws established in Wellington to ensure New Zealand ships and trade would be duty-free in the Cook Islands, courts of law established, and within 11 years, all power vested in the Resident Commissioner.

Unlike our Māori cousins in Aotearoa, our sovereignty was given away, even beer was controlled, and bush beer outlawed. This is why the Bond Store is called the Bond Store: in November 1904, a King’s Bond was where liquor was stored, and no Native could purchase alcohol without written permission from a Medical Officer or Resident Commissioner.

So, what does this mean for us today? It demonstrates the power of Parliament when it passes laws that affect our lives and livelihoods. Like when four men are at work and electrocuted, with a scramble to silence them. And it becomes clear that current worker protections in law, represented by the Workers’ Compensation Ordinance 1964 and the Employers’ Insurance Liability Regulations 1965, are unable to meet the needs of Cook Islands’ workers or employers in 2024. Do our government agencies simply behave like government, when they engage lawyers to sue those that speak out? Where is our workers union, silence, where are our laws to protect workers, outdated, and where is the political will for change, in the Koru Lounge? So, I ask again, how healthy is our democracy when the laws meant to protect us are nearly as old as our 60 year-old democracy?