the shift in usage from pākehā to tau iwi was not done without an awareness of its "go home" subtext, a long way from the formal designation "tangata tiriti", "people of the treaty", those who live here by right of the Treaty of Waitangi. Now, even if you've never lived anywhere else and have no ties with any other country, you are still a "foreigner" in Māori.
This is the inevitable dilemma faced all round the world in situations where by invasion (like NZ) or peaceful trading migration (like Chinese in various places), an incoming people have grown to rival or outnumber the indigenous population, but not by so much that the incomers have so much power they can do whatever they like and get away with it (as in the case with Native Americans, Aboriginal Australians, etc).
The incomers to New Zealand
have outnumbered the indigenous people by a large enough margin to "do whatever they like and get away with it". History shows that the dominant non-indigenous population groupcould and did do pretty much what they liked, with only a little less ruthlessness than in Australia. At one stage the Māori population was not much larger as a percentage of the total than is true of Aboriginal Australians, and even now the most generous count has them at between 8-14% of the total, a figure close to being matched by Asians. The real difference is that New Zealand's existence was founded on a document that purported to guarantee certain rights to the indigenous people, and in recent decades those rights have been more vigorously asserted. One way in which those rights are being expressed is in the conscious choice of a more exclusionary term, an "exonym", to replace an older exonym that was beginning to be adopted by some of those it was applied to.
It's also not as much of a problem in Fiji as it used to be with the Indo-fijian population dropping rapidly. It's now down to around 41% of the total, down from high of nearly 51% before the first coup in 1987
onymata