Demise of the Maori Party

Written By: - Date published: 10:15 am, November 29th, 2011 - 91 comments
Categories: maori party - Tags:

I’m calling it right now. This is last election where the Maori Party will return MPs. It has gone from 5 to 3 MPs, 2 of whom are retiring this term, and the survivors have had their majorities slashed (on the back of scandalously low turnouts). Turia and Sharples will take the baubles again, which will just be the final nails in the party’s coffin.

Key has signaled he will offer Turia and Sharples their old ministerial jobs again. He will need the Maori Party in every circumstance where Dunne or Banks doesn’t back him. And, if as could well happen, National loses 2 seats on specials, he will need them on all votes to make a majority (that’s why Key was whining about the votes in Parliament being tight despite his large “majority”. He’s a clue, John, a majority is over 50% – you didn’t get one, and your allies a one man wonders, so, yeah, it’s tight).

But don’t expect Turia and Sharples to leverage that power. They will support, directly or by abstention, whatever heinous budgets, attacks on worker rights, and asset sales National puts up because the alternative (in the scenario where National loses 2 seats on specials) would be an early election, which would be the end of their political careers.

Turia and Sharples will keep their heads down and sell out for the next 3 years like they did the last 3.

We’ve seen the results of 3 years of selling out. 1 MP jumped ship. 1 MP voted out. Turia’s share of the electorate vote slashed from 66% to 46% and a 5,000 cut to her majority. Sharples share of the vote from 63% to 39% and his majority slashed by 90% to 746. Flavell’s vote share from 68% to 41% a 4,000 cut to his majority. Nationwide, the party got only 27,000 votes.

Flavell and Sharples were only saved by vote-splitting between Labour, the Greens, and Mana (expect Annette Sykes to get a clear run in 2014 if the new Labour leader has brains), and low turn-out, which was down up to 25% in the Maori- Party-held electorates.

In 2014, Sharples and Turia’s successors are not going to have their mana or profile. The party’s brand is going to be further damaged by 3 more years of selling out. The Mana Party will be better organised (it is only 6 months old, remember) and Sykes will be poised to beat Flavell. It’ll be a rout.

And a well-deserved one. Many of us on the Left welcomed the Maori Party as a dedicated voice for Maori. They turned out to be the very worst of hypocrites. They still spout the left-wing lines and offer up left-wing policies but they support National and vote for a government that has seen Maori unemployment skyrocket and Maori incomes plummet.

In 2014, no-one will lament the passing of a party that betrayed its people.

91 comments on “Demise of the Maori Party ”

  • Comments are now closed

  2. vto 2
    29 November 2011 at 10:38 am

    Why are Sharples and Turia retiring?

    They aint that old. And I thought they were driven by good and strong principles. It also seems there is plenty of unfinished business for them. Perhaps they are just worn out and need a rest …

  3. Colonial Viper 3
    29 November 2011 at 10:40 am

    Yes, you can credibly expect Turia and Sharples to be hard out cutting deals for themselves and their cronies over the next 3 years.

    And to the Maori who voted for them – you are all getting what is coming down the pike to your communities from a renewed right wing National Party which doesn’t care about the gap between rich people and poor people.

    • Brett 3.1
      29 November 2011 at 10:52 am

      All Maori are hopeless poor people, who need mother Labour to look after them?
      Your a Fucking Dick head.

      • Pundit X 3.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 10:57 am

        Bringing clear coherent argument to the korero Brett..

        • Tiger Mountain 3.1.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 11:22 am

          Brett struggles to express himself.

          There are all strata in Māori ranks, lumpen proletariat, unemployed, low wage, middle class and entrepreneurial, iwi leaders with bankster links etc. but the majority are clearly in the 75% category of kiwis on under 50k per annum income, and many substantially less than that. So CV is correct.

          While it was politically inevitable that the MP would founder that process was accelerated by the arrangement with National. Symbolic gains were not enough to cement their style of identity politics. But I actually take no pleasure from that outcome as reactions are often more negativity projected to Māori and another chance for white trash to imply, “see be a good Māori and John Key will smile at you too”.

          Mana offers hope for the future, strongly Māori focused and led but inclusive of all exploited and oppressed people and their supporters.

          • Brett 3.1.1.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 11:38 am

            The Maori party are Nationals Maori representation.

            Mana represents the deadbeat vote
            Maori party represents the Maori urban professional

          • Misanthropic Curmudgeon 3.1.1.1.2
            29 November 2011 at 11:52 am

            And what we see is a schism in the Maori vote:
            – the entrpenurial and aspirational among Maori vote for The Maori Party (or leave for Australia), for programmes that address root casuses and advance opportunities and that The maori Party have been able to deliver to maori by being in the tent.
            – the indolent and parasitical among Maori vote for Mana and more handouts.

            • Tiger Mountain 3.1.1.1.2.1
              29 November 2011 at 12:11 pm

              Several of the right that comment on this blog have actually entered into the spirit of things, as have the lefties in light of a grim election for them. But quite frankly trolls like you two belong with the tory sector with a predilection for four legged partners.

              Back on thread, the Māori party is indeed on the way out whichever way you want to analyse the voters.

            • Anna 3.1.1.1.2.2
              29 November 2011 at 12:33 pm

              Actually, I voted Mana and will continue to vote for them. I’m neither indolent or parasitical. I could give you a brief CV, but I really couldn’t be bothered. I prefer to snigger at statements like yours because they reveal themselves to be so distant from the Maori community, I’m positive you couldn’t pronounce the term.

              I view right wingers and the 1% as parasites on society. One of the mistakes to make is to think the Maori population votes, acts and resembles yours. The low voter turn out is a punishment for the infighting (as someone so rightly identified above).

              • Colonial Viper …
                29 November 2011 at 1:03 pm

                Which comment of mine precisely were you referring to?

                • Anna …
                  29 November 2011 at 1:05 pm

                  Are you referring to me? I was responding to the idiot above with the Star Wars type name who asserted that all those who vote Mana are indolent and parasitical – something I pointed out is patently untrue and a lie.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    29 November 2011 at 1:39 pm

                    Ahem. That ‘indolent’ comment was made by Misanthropic Curmudgeon. Please don’t attribute the shite he spouts to me.

                    • Anna …
                      29 November 2011 at 1:40 pm

                      I didn’t. I replied to him and he’s already replied back. His reply was rubbish, but so was his first statement.

                    • mac1 …
                      29 November 2011 at 1:47 pm

                      “I could give you a brief, CV, but…..” and “I could give you a brief CV, but….”

                      CV, regarding your comments towards Anna- your exchange hinges on that tiny little mark called a comma. Sometimes pedantry in punctuation pays off. 🙂

                      Darn, RobC already picked that up.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      30 November 2011 at 1:09 am

                      pnctn nt impt bro? 😀

                • RobC …
                  29 November 2011 at 1:42 pm

                  CV as in curriculum vitae, not Colonel Viper … LOL

            • Akldnut 3.1.1.1.2.3
              29 November 2011 at 12:58 pm

              Misanthropic Curmudgeon

              – the indolent and parasitical among Maori vote for Mana and more handouts.

              A retards comment – and judging from your previous comments meme the hat fits you well.

              • Anna …
                29 November 2011 at 1:02 pm

                Hahaaaa. Is that it? P.S. The use of “meme” was semi-impressive (but a bit try-hard) and ruined by the absence of “proper” grammar, and good punctuation.

                As an aside, why do people like you write on Maori issues? Clearly, you have no inside knowledge or expertise so why do you choose to write such idiocy? Or are you one of these people that inhabit the msm thinking that if you write something enough it may become true? It won’t though because you don’t have any influence (at all) and probably no friends either.

                • Tiger Mountain …
                  29 November 2011 at 1:48 pm

                  Anna, Colonial Viper may have scanned your comment 12:33pm and seen “CV” and thought it was about him, whereas in context to me it seems like “curriculum vitae” was the meaning.

                  ps I am a Mana member.

                  • Anna …
                    29 November 2011 at 1:56 pm

                    Oh! Sorry Colonial Viper for the mix up. Lol. I did mean curriculum vitae. Call me old fashioned, but resume sounds too American.

                    • Akldnut …
                      29 November 2011 at 2:48 pm

                      Anna are you replying to me? If so read my post again – you’ll find that I was quoting and replying to Misanthropic Curmudgeon.

                      As an aside, why do people like you write on Maori issues? …………. and probably no friends either.

                      I take it this was meant for Misanthropic Curmudgeon as well
                       

      • vto 3.1.2
        29 November 2011 at 11:12 am

        Oh, you mean like that old whore the National Party? Whose farmers need our money to fund their irrigation because the investment is so poor that the private sector wants nought to do with it…. without we taxpayers providing a tit for them to suckle on…

        Or their farmers who pay so little tax that it is in fact the city workers who pay for the rural roads and schools and doctors?

        Or their South Canterbury Finance and other finance company shitty investors who needed billions od dollars in welfare from the taxpayers?

        Or businesses like Mediaworks who couldn’t pay their licencing thing fee of $35million and needed taxpayer welfare to help them out?

        It is the Nats who are like an old suckling sow with their constituents sucking at the multiple tits. Open your eyes fool.

        • uke 3.1.2.1
          29 November 2011 at 12:33 pm

          Plus those welfare beneficiaries Warner Brothers; and a corporate sector so uncreative that SOE takeovers have been their staple form of entrepreneurship for the last two decades.

          • ghostwhowalksnz 3.1.2.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 1:23 pm

            Or that great government welfare scheme ” Working for Dairy Farmers” , where Fonterra gets a nett tax refund every year of about $100 Million.

  4. ianmac 4
    29 November 2011 at 10:54 am

    This issue was discussed on Maori TV Native Affairs last night. The consensus was as Eddie says, that to support National this time would be the death knell. Last night Peta was grumpy and defensive and obstinate in interview.

    • Lanthanide 4.1
      29 November 2011 at 11:35 am

      They’re kind of in a hard place. They can see from the votes that they haven’t had the support they were expecting this time around. But a Labour – Greens – Mana – NZFirst – Maori Party coalition isn’t very tenable because of Winston going on about how he’ll be in opposition to any government and was also quite clear about favouritism and separatism being given to maori not being in the best interests of the country.

      The MP’s hands are really tied, their choice is basically to support National or support no one. Might as well support National, get the ministerial perks and have more influence.

      • prism 4.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 1:19 pm

        Lanthanide
        I think that MP should do what the Greens do – agree to basic support and to work with NACT on useful policies, and stay out of coalition and Cabinet or near-C. jobs. It would leave room to save their souls and prestige.

      • Treetop 4.1.2
        29 November 2011 at 3:38 pm

        If being inside the tent is being whistled at to come running now and again, stay out of the tent and make Key do the running and wondering.

        Excluding asset sales from a confidence and supply agreement is just the tip of the iceberg.

        Just heard Key on the news and he is desperate to find a way to exclude the Maori Party from asset sales as he knows he needs three crucial votes to safeguard him.

  6. ron 6
    29 November 2011 at 11:47 am

    I won’t be the only one to say “I told you so” but I did. I am amazed they got the support they did this time. Maybe their voter support is pretty similiar to the rest of the country who for some reason gave party votes to National despite their misgivings about the Tories’ agenda and the evidence of the Tories’ incopmpetance over the past three years.

  7. Misanthropic Curmudgeon 7
    29 November 2011 at 11:48 am

    The Maori party have delivered more for Maori in this last electoral term coperating with National than Maori ever did in half a century by giving their vote en-masse to Labour.

    • lprent 7.1
      29 November 2011 at 11:51 am

      Nice assertion, typically not exactly backed by facts or links. Above all not believed by Maori voters who didn’t vote for the Maori party because it doesn’t match what they see on the ground.

      You’d have ask yourself which Maori it benefited.

      • Jackal 7.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 12:20 pm

        It benefited the elitist Maori who have adopted the right wing philosophy that it’s OK for them to become wealthier at any cost. Let’s look at the stats which say inequality is growing, there’s more unemployment and more children living in poverty under National… all of which effect Maori the most. It’s no wonder they are leaving New Zealand in their droves.

    • Anna 7.2
      29 November 2011 at 12:35 pm

      No. They haven’t and that is resembled in their loss of seats and majorities. The Maori Party “could” have delivered for Maori, but haven’t.

    • Blighty 7.3
      29 November 2011 at 1:08 pm

      MC.

      Examples?

      Thought not.

  8. Android 8
    29 November 2011 at 12:22 pm

    Maori will be/are heading back to Labour in there droves. Unless there is unity ‘one party one voice’, their is one person & she should lead that party ( In brand name ‘Maori’ ). National have effectively written themselves out of winning 2014 by not covering their guard ie. NZ First. They know that, so Key will be off, he won’t have the stomach or desire for another term after fighting 2 bitter fronts. A feisty opposition & extremism from the piper.

    • Anna 8.1
      29 November 2011 at 12:38 pm

      No. Maori aren’t. I actually think the Labour vote by Maori will decrease over time. Why would Maori want to vote Labour? Historically, they’ve done little for Maori and I can’t see them doing anything in the future until they get rid of the patronising idea that they know what is best for Maori by telling us what we want and need, and without listening to our views on the same.

      I’ll never vote Labour again. I left them three elections ago and won’t be going back in my lifetime.

      • ianmac 8.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 12:44 pm

        Anna Surely you might consider going back after your lifetime?

        • Anna 8.1.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 12:46 pm

          Oh wow – that’s really funny, except it’s not.

          • Bored 8.1.1.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 1:12 pm

            See you voted Mana, seems to me Labour have to come back to you by becoming “Mana” for us honkies.

            • Anna 8.1.1.1.1.1
              29 November 2011 at 1:17 pm

              Well, Labour can try or do what they want, but I won’t ever be voting for them again.

              • clandestino …
                29 November 2011 at 1:45 pm

                That’s really silly, ruling out voting for someone while not knowing what they might offer. I can see how attitudes such as this led to such low turnout.

                • Anna …
                  29 November 2011 at 1:54 pm

                  Oh no. My decision is based on experience: Labour betrayed Maori, have never apologised nor tried to repeal the FS&SB Act. They did this while they held the Maori seats. Why would any Maori want to vote for them? I know people who voted Labour not because they liked them, but they viewed them as better (or a lesser evil) than National. As options open up, I suspect that type of voting may become less and less (I could, however, be very wrong). I also don’t vote Labour because while the country was experiencing a boom, the actual social living conditions of, in particular, Maori women and children worsened. The Labour-led government also sent documentation to the UN (and encompassed in reports such as CEDAW even when their own literature such as Mapping Inequalities contradicted their position) that all was well with ALL women in NZ, including Maori and Pasifika. As far as I’m concerned, Labour and National have overseen Great Depression type conditions for Maori, and done little to change it.

                  Labour’s policies mean little to me when I contextualise their past actions and attitude of benign neglect toward the Maori population.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    29 November 2011 at 3:00 pm

                    As far as I’m concerned, Labour and National have overseen Great Depression type conditions for Maori, and done little to change it.

                    And they won’t. In a hierarchy you need people at the bottom and the minorities are usually it.

                    We need a better, more inclusive, society/culture.

    • Bored 8.2
      29 November 2011 at 1:27 pm

      Depends what you mean by Maori…if I was an urban “Maori” of no fixed hapu / iwi I suspect I would give the Maori Party the big thumbs down on the basis that they are doing a great job for their tribe / hapu / iwi which means not me. Hones already tumbled that one, he knows the Maori Party creates “us” Maori and “them” Maori.

      In that scenario Hone looks a whole lot more attractive, a lot more inclusive. As Maori unemployment grows and social conditions deteriorate I bet you wont hear hapu / iwi calling out to share their new found riches from deals with National with Mr Random Rangi of Manukau. And they will go via Hone before they go to Labour in the same way grey goes Winston.

      • Anna 8.2.1
        29 November 2011 at 1:35 pm

        Well said. The iwi elite have had every opportunity to invest in Maori, but haven’t. I doubt they ever will, but they don’t have the numbers (which is why they have used the Maori Party as their de facto representatives with National). The Maori Party are largely a conservative organisation – made even more so with the exit of Hone (the only one to give them any cred with the radical branch of Maori).

        Not all iwi-ites are iwi-elite or fundamentalist and/or Maori cultural nationalist either, but they tend toward Labour with their vote, but are now heading to the Greens. Hone’s appeal is an interesting mix of the impoverished, champions of the under-dog, radical and highly educated. Next election will be interesting.

    • BruceMcF 8.3
      4 December 2011 at 11:19 am

      Its not automatic that Maori voters who leave the Maori Party will flock back to Labour ~ the Mana Party, Greens and NZ1st will all be working to appeal to voters abandoning the Maori Party, and its likely that all three will be vocal in their own particular way in opposition to the National Party policies that will be the driving force in killing off the Maori Part vote.

  9. gingercrush 9
    29 November 2011 at 1:45 pm

    I actually think the Maori party survived pretty well considering not only was there some revivial in Labour but also the splintering Mana party. Te Tai Tonga was always going to be difficult for Rahui Katene. I don’t think she was expected to take the seat in 2008. Having a new Labour candidate from a family with a long connection to the electorate wouldn’t have helped either. Bit disappointing for Katene. But she really did have everything against her.

    Three parties purport to represent Maori and despite three parties contested strongly for the Maori party with the Greens, New Zealand First and National also hoping to attract Maori votes. 50% of Maori essentially stayed at home and essentially do not identify with a single party in parliament. That has to be hugely disappointing for everyone.

    Can the Maori party survive? Probably not. The Maori party may have started around a movement but its essentially a personality-based party and thus its difficulty is that when its leaders are set to retire. The party thus will not have followers. Only Te Ururoa Flavell has the possibility to change that. I’m not sure if he has enough mana within Maoridom to allow the Maori party to survive.

    Mana too is personality based and really has to be disappointed with how little in-roads they made into the Maori vote. Perhaps they can take that Maori party vote next time. I’m not entirely convinced. The Mana party needs to decide who they represent. I’m not sure Bradford or Minto actually helped them. If the Mana party wants to be more encompassing with left-wing radicalism and represent the underclass, beneficiaries and low income workers then they need to be smarter. For despite South Auckland and areas in West Auckland being made up of such people. Those people have been shown to be incredibly loyal to the Labour party (Minto and Bradford essentially grabbed just over 200 party votes between them). If Bradford, Minto and the like are to stay with the party. Then they need to look at the urban swing electorates where the Greens and previously Alliance always did well. Namely, Rongotai, Wellington Central, Auckland Central and the like. Will that party be able to hold a tension between the Maori electorates and left-wing radicalism? Doubtful. Thus Mana may need to solely focus on the Maori electorates.

    Labour weren’t very impressive either. They may have increased their vote within Maoridom and gained one MP but they still don’t hold the majority of the Maori seats. Unlike 1996 where those Maori seats held by New Zealand First went back to Labour. Labour have been unsuccessful. They too will be waiting in the wings for the Maori party to fall and to pick up those votes.

    I still believe there to be a gap that Labour nor the Mana party and Maori party have been able to attract. Those are the younger and slightly more savvy Maori voters. They won’t just be Maori either. They’ll be Maori-Pakeha, Maori-Pasifika or even Maori-Asian. They won’t necessarily identify solely as Maori but identify with several communities. For them the Foreshore and Seabed will simply be something in history nor will have they heavy ties to the Waitangi deals Maori leaders have been able to do with governments of both Labour and National. When these people come out, I’m not sure. But surely one of them will have a combination of both Tariana Turia and Hone Harawira with a bit of Winston Peters as well. It’ll certainly be interesting.

  10. Ianupnorth 10
    29 November 2011 at 1:49 pm

    OK, let’s throw this into the mix – 20% of Maori now live overseas http://www.nzherald.co.nz/maori/news/article.cfm?c_id=252&objectid=10769488

    so are the Maori electorates still relevant? The reason I ask this is that potentially they harm the left, would Anne Tolley take East Coast if there was not a Maori roll? Would Todd McClay take Rotorua? I am sure there are other examples.

    • Anna 10.1
      29 November 2011 at 1:58 pm

      They’re still relevant to me. If there wasn’t a Maori seat option, I wouldn’t vote. No-one would represent me.

      It’s pretty hypocritical of the “centre-left” (but really more centre) to want to end the Maori seats because it potentially doesn’t benefit them anymore. Why don’t Labourites find out “why” their core support has left them and start from there.

      • Bored 10.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 2:07 pm

        Ians got a point, but having said that you cant you choose to be on the Maori roll if you identify as Maori? That could end up interesting, according to the demographic projections within 10 years 25% of NZers will be of Maori blood (Dept Stats)…who knows how that will play politically but I betcha the Nats are worried.

      • joe90 10.1.2
        29 November 2011 at 2:42 pm

        Māori representation in parliament looks like it mirrors the population.

        2006 census: 14.6% of the population identifying as Māori.

        2008 parliament: 16.4% of MPs identifying as Māori.

      • Draco T Bastard 10.1.3
        29 November 2011 at 3:14 pm

        No-one would represent me.

        The people you vote for would represent you especially under MMP where the party you voted for is likely to have representation. It doesn’t matter what colour their skin is or their cultural identity. The Maori seats became obsolete the moment universal enfranchisement was enacted and have become more and more useless and divisive since.

        • Anna 10.1.3.1
          29 November 2011 at 3:22 pm

          In your opinion. It might not matter to you, but it does to me. Someone who has no understanding of Maori issues and/or Maori cultural beliefs and systems does not represent me, and never will. Characteristics, values, beliefs, ideas etc – it’s pretty much the basis of representation. If there were no Maori seats or Maori candidates next election: I wouldn’t vote.

          You do, however, have a point. I’ll await universal enfranchisement and then revisit the topic.

          • Draco T Bastard 10.1.3.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 3:49 pm

            Someone who has no understanding of Maori issues and/or Maori cultural beliefs and systems does not represent me, and never will.

            Maori seats aren’t needed to give you that as the Maori Party proved (although they did then go and betray most Maori).

            Perhaps you’d prefer the term Universal suffrage which NZ has had since 1893.

          • Craig Glen Eden 10.1.3.1.2
            29 November 2011 at 7:59 pm

            I guess for Anna, Labour supporting Maori retaining Maori seats is Labour doing nothing for Maori? Who passed legislation so Maori have rights to NZ Schools , Hospitals, Maori TV Anna?

            Also you seem to forget Anna not all Maori supported the Maori Parties position on the seabed and foreshore. While Labour and their Maori MPs dont get everything right they have done a shit load more than a flag. While I am sure Hone means well he has delivered bugger nothing from his involvement in Politics for Maori so far.

            • Anna 10.1.3.1.2.1
              30 November 2011 at 1:20 am

              Actually – having schools, hospitals etc were guaranteed under the Treaty (Ngai Tahu in particular were promised their own schools and hospitals, but successive Governments used the land to build national schools and hospitals on until the protest movements of the 1970s and 1980s). To my knowledge, there are no Maori owned or run hospitals. Just provisions for Maori to be acknowledged within the state/national system.

              The vast minority of Maori were in favour of the FS&SB Act. This is an empirical fact. If you don’t believe me, please read all the submissions on it. The Maori MPs ignored their own constituencies on the matter and voted with Labour.

              As for Hone: I think his political activism speaks for itself. He has led the anti-smoking campaign and been one of the few voices to speak out for the Maori, and working poor in this country. Labour and National have ignored them.

              You can argue what Labour has and hasn’t done, but Labour and their supporters need to sit down, and ask themselves some questions. Next election, when Pare and Nanaia leave, I can’t see those seats staying with Labour. RTS has won back Te Tai Tonga, but that is now a volatile seat. If he and Labour don’t deliver, the seat will go somewhere else. I can’t see Labour ever winning back the Far North, Tari, Pita or Te Ururoa’s seat.

      • ron 10.1.4
        29 November 2011 at 3:43 pm

        That I agree with. I too have stopped voting Labour and will not vote for them again. FS &SB was my deciding factor and it was the gutlessness of that policy that most angered me. But also Labour have never returned to being a workers’ party. They believe in the market, globlisation and the neo-liberal lie.

        In another comment I wondered if the perception that the Greens were moving to the centre was actually a case of the centre moving to the Greens. In other words that much of what used to be “fringe” environmentalism is now “mainstream”. I used the example of the young, educated candidates who are qualified in professions that simply didn’t exist 20 years ago and certainly one couldn’t study them at Universities .

        I wonder if the move away from Labour is similiar.
        I wonder (nay hope) that many ideas that used to be too radical for New Zealanders – or became radical after the Right populated the accepted centre – (ideas such as: that the rich shouldn’t benefit at the expense of the poor; that Te Tiriti should be properly honoured; that a redistribution of wealth is sensible in a civilised society; that a level of intervention is essential to ensure the safety and prosperity of citizens; that collaboration is better than competition) are becoming more mainstream ……

        I do notice the surge to Peters and the Conservatives. But maybe that is the natural reaction of a society afraid of change in the face of the wave of fresh ideas (and idealism) …..or maybe I’m just an old hippy

        • Ianupnorth 10.1.4.1
          29 November 2011 at 4:00 pm

          BTW Anna and Ron, I wasn’t saying I want Maori seats doing away with, just illustrating that their existence could actually be harming the Maori electorate by gifting seats to the right.

          Ron is correct re. the Foreshore and sea bed stuff, that was the reason behind MP getting set up (and conversely Orewa was the downfall of Brash).

          As a Pakeha male who only wants the best for everybody in this country I do find myself being frustrated by the frequent use of the ‘I’m Maori therefore I am different’ argument; I believe we are all human and I want the best possible outcomes for everyone regardless if they are pink, white, brown or yellow with a green polka dot! What I don’t want is an elitist ruling class exploiting those with less power. I think that is something most Maori would also aspire to see.

          • Anna 10.1.4.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 4:20 pm

            @ Ian – I know you are sincere in your comments, so I want you to know that I’m not having a go at you and just stating my position. I get tired of people writing, discussing and telling Maori what we should want, do, how to act, feel, respond, think etc. I know your belief in “sameness” is akin to your version of an anti-racist standpoint. My view is that “sameness” runs dangerously close to the extinction policies directed toward Maori and first articulated by the likes of Pitt-Rivers, Fox, Herries Beattie, Featherston and latterly, Don Brash (or the we are all NZers brigade).

            I have no interest in being the “same”. I am Maori and I won’t give that up in order to subscribe to a particular version of the anti-racist brigade. I’d look for common interests and alliances, but that’s about it. You may be “tired” of the “I’m Maori therefore I am different argument”, but it doesn’t mean that it isn’t true.

            • insider 10.1.4.1.1.1
              29 November 2011 at 4:33 pm

              So are all Maori the same?

              • Anna …
                29 November 2011 at 4:48 pm

                No. I thought that would be patently obvious.

                • insider …
                  29 November 2011 at 5:00 pm

                  “I have no interest in being the “same”. I am Maori…” implies a sameness that you at the same time reject when used by non Maori.

                  • Adele …
                    29 November 2011 at 7:08 pm

                    Tēnā koe, Anna

                    Tautoko + 1000!

                  • Anna …
                    30 November 2011 at 1:09 am

                    It might imply that to you, but with all due respect I’m not sure what type of framework you’re working from or your level of expertise on the subject. I get a little tired of postcolonial/bicultural type definitions and paranoia over dichotomies and/or polar positions. If my comment implies a “sameness” and a rejection of “non-Maori” to you – so be it. I’m not rejecting “non-Maori”. I am rejecting “sameness” and I take issue with the type of universalising anti-racism stance which ignores difference.

                    Under this type of framework my being Maori and my culture don’t matter to people who subscribe to that anti-racist stance (it is seen as progressive). It does, however, matter to me.

        • Anna 10.1.4.2
          30 November 2011 at 1:28 am

          The world needs old hippies! I agree with you Ron. I think a lot of once were radical ideas are now the norm.

          Winston has an interesting constituency. People who are economically a bit more centrist-left and socially a bit more conservative. For everything, Winston is a scrapper and he probably has a broader appeal in NZ than Hone, Minto or Bradford. Labour should have cut a deal with Annette Sykes in Waiariki. If the Labour candidate hadn’t stood, Annette would have beaten Te Ururoa. Word on my aka kumara is Te Ururoa wandered around promising pennies from Hawaiiki through whanau ora to secure his vote. Even then, he nearly got beaten. I’m pretty sure he’ll lose next time.

    • Conditional 10.2
      29 November 2011 at 2:47 pm

      20% of Maori live overseas? I think 20% of New Zealanders live overseas.

  11. David 11
    29 November 2011 at 1:59 pm

    I think best the way forward is for those who remain true to the original kaupapa of the Maori Party (ie those who went with Mana) to replace it and become a strong progressive electoral vehicle for Maori. I don’t think this will happen as long as they muddy the waters by trying to include the Pakeha left within Mana. As gingercrush notes above, John Minto and Sue Bradford (much as I respect them both) bring no electoral appeal to Mana. More detail on this here http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=251371574920249

  12. deemac 12
    29 November 2011 at 2:25 pm

    easy to say “Labour do nothing for Maori” but how about an actual analysis of real gains??
    Of course many Labour policies have benefited ALL lower income groups but as Maori are disproportionately represented in these you’d have to be churlish (or Hone H) to discount these.

    • Anna 12.1
      29 November 2011 at 2:41 pm

      Like what? Please be specific and not generic. Do you think any of Labour’s policies helped the one third of Maori women and children that lived under $20 k per year? I don’t think W4F reached them (a primary criticism), but it would have reached the Maori working poor and middle classes. What else? State house subsidies? Depends on whether they were in a State house in the first place to benefit from this policy.

      What else? More service providers? Arguably, but Labour had a tendency to get iwi service providers when 4 out of 5 of the one-third of Maori and women in the lowest income bracket lived outside of that network.

      Then there’s the FS & SB Act – something that Labour did i.e. taking our right to go to Court away because we were Maori claimants (while they held the Maori seats).

      This might seem churlish to you, but it seems foolish to me that anyone would look at Labour as a more progressive option.

      • Colonial Viper 12.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 6:02 pm

        Labour pushed up the median wage of Maori and pushed down Maori unemployment rates, and did so decisively. And during the time of Helen Clark’s tenure as PM, iwi gained multiple billions of dollars worth of Treaty settlements.

        • Anna 12.1.1.1
          30 November 2011 at 1:11 am

          As I’ve stated above, Labour also left one-third of Maori women in children in poverty and contradicted their own findings when writing glowing reports to the UN about the subject. The largest iwi settlements came under National (as much as I hate to say it), but the start of the largest confiscation came under Labour.

  13. the pink postman 13
    29 November 2011 at 3:16 pm

    What is it with Turia and Sharples ? Did they not get the message that the marjority of Maori people do not want a bar of National .They are both well educated yet they act like kids waiting for Santa to recieve their personal goodies. Just watch the final move away from this “Brown Table ‘party from decent ordinary Maori people . Who deserve much better from this pair,

  14. anne 14
    29 November 2011 at 3:49 pm

    Key needs sharples and turia to make his nat govt have absolute control,if they dont do a deal and sign on the dotted line then getting through asset sales and the punative welfare measures would be more difficult and uncertain.
    If sharples and turia sign it would show both of them up as self serving and not giving a damn for
    their people or the wider population.
    The wider public have been kept from the facts of the asset deal,when it is the public right to know,the wider public have been kept from the facts of the ‘tea tapes’ when it was the public right to know,but the sleepy hobbits still worship the man who is going to bring great heartache and heartbreak and economic ruin to every one except himself and his followers,also his overseas boosam buddies,the next 3yrs are going to be very difficult for everyone.
    Going to the govener general with a majority of ‘1’ or ‘2’ aint good so it would be better to say ‘4’ or ‘5’ which he will have with the maori party and if they do shame on them.

    • Treetop 14.1
      29 November 2011 at 5:48 pm

      Call me the ulitmate optimist, I’m waiting until all the special votes are counted before I cry.

    • Hami Shearlie 14.2
      29 November 2011 at 11:11 pm

      Tariana and Pita are the equivalent of Peter Dunne, it seems to me. Totally self-serving, they’ve watched their party’s support crumbling, but they will still suck up to national for their nice big fat ministerial salaries! Tariana was quoted in the media as saying “I’m a big spender!” No kidding!!! Bet her constituents would like to be big spenders too, pity they have no homes, no food, no jobs, no hope!

  15. tc 15
    29 November 2011 at 9:46 pm

    A party founded out of a hatred of labour’s F&S wasn’t exactly playing with a balanced deck was it…F&S was unecessary politically and ended up being a bad call that really didn’t need to be made, we all get that but you need a bit more going than hatred of an act passed by a party you’ve served for many years.

    Their policies seem to centre around a) annoy labour as they say we shouldn’t so we will and b) feather our own nests whilst justifying it with the ‘providing stable gov’t’ line.

    Hardly the basis for a long lived political entity is it so here we are. It would’ve helped if they got decent MP’s but Flavell and Katene always came across as muppetts whilst Hone had the bollocks to do what they all should have done and stand up for the maori at the bottom of the heap, not elite iwi.

  16. infused 16
    29 November 2011 at 11:25 pm

    I don’t know why. They got nothing out of Labour. They have got alot out of National. I believe they will get alot out of national this time.

  17. Glenn 17
    30 November 2011 at 5:23 pm

    Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia has slammed the name suppression of a former All Black on child abuse charges on the same day a mother who allegedly assaulted a teenager who’d bullied her daughter was refused name suppression.

    “It makes a mockery of the justice system, when the identity of a 13-year-old child is released into the public arena, despite her mother seeking name suppression, while a former All Black star is allowed to keep his name secret,” Turia said.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6063344/Turia-slams-sportsmans-name-suppression

    Credit where credits due… Ministerial privileges and the baubles of office aside she is doing her job here.

  18. barenz 18
    6 December 2011 at 1:48 am

    Maori party take note: Now is the time to right the wrong your people felt when you chose to sit with national after the last election. Your reason that you needed to be at the table to effect change was wrong. All you did was go cap/cup in hand and ask “Please sir may we have some more” at which the man at the head of the table threw a couple of spoonfuls in the cup and said “There! now sit down, behave!, and be quiet”. (Karma: a simple cup has show the truth behind the man) At least Hone showed he was sorry and broke away, cup/cap in hand he realised was not what his people wanted. I wish him well but hope he has good advisors around him to stop Te wae wae entering Te waha before any more unfortunate comments. I hope you can still listen to each other and the people, and remember ‘many opinions come from many experiences’. So ‘Kia Kaha!’ stand tall, and fight the fight with ‘DIGNITY’

  19. barenz 19
    6 December 2011 at 11:21 pm

    Have changed my mind from my previous comment, to much mucking around. Will Turia please confirm the death of the maori party. All this dilly dallying stuff is unnecessary, cause i reckon you will take the money to see whats in the nats bag. (Ha! Ha! no assets in there), and what stand will you take on the ‘asset sales’ vote. My guess is you will abstain (dictionary definition) is to keep oneself away. Away where? I know go bury your head in the foreshore sand, and while there contemplate the power cables along the sea bed. How will that work if in an asset sale? OBITUARY: The maori party is deceased: Coroners report attributes the cause of death to excessive fence sitting and the resulting impalement, having fallen on ones own sword.