Maori Party turns against workers

Written By: - Date published: 11:30 am, April 30th, 2010 - 5 comments
Categories: labour, maori party, workers' rights - Tags:

Labour’s Darien Fenton is a gutsy, tireless advocate for working Kiwis. She was left gobsmacked yesterday by the Maori Party’s decision to vote for the weakening of Kiwis’ rights to work breaks.

The law enshrining the right to these breaks was one of the last victories for workers under the Labour government when it was passed late in 2008. The Maori Party voted for it at the time. National never liked it and, under the flimsiest of pretexts have moved to undermine those rights. For no good reason that anyone can work out, the Maori Party voted for this.

Of course, I’m sure it’s all in keeping with the Party’s kaupapa.

There’s a cunning and invisible plan at work – eventually, by some form of magic, the Maori Party’s backing of a party that wants higher unemployment, weaker work rights, and lower wages will see more Maori in better paid jobs with improved conditions. Then we’ll all see that the Maori Party selling out their voters was the right thing to do.

We probably just have to be patient.

5 comments on “Maori Party turns against workers ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Badger 1
    30 April 2010 at 7:15 pm

    Where is the senior sickly paternalist liberal and defender of Maori party Lew now?

    His delusionalist apologies always amuse me so.

    [lprent: Be careful what you wish for. ]

  2. Lew 2
    30 April 2010 at 8:53 pm

    Woo, name-dropped. Got friends visiting from overseas, so I apologise profusely for not attending to my duties of rebutting every bit of bullshit in the blogosphere.

    For what it’s worth, I agree with the primary analysis of this post: this is bad law, the māori party shouldn’t have supported it, and I think it’ll come to bite them in the arse. Likewise the CPI increase for benefits. There was no obligation to vote for these bills (as there is for the GST increase, with which I also disagree).

    What I don’t accept is the secondary analysis: the assertion that it makes them enemies of workers and beneficiaries. I think it takes more than this sort of thing to do that, and I think there is a bigger game being played — it’s not magical, or invisible, but it is evidently too cunning for some.

    But what Marty and Zet and you and I think is pretty irrelevant — their constituency comprises many beneficiaries and many workers whose work rights and incomes will be eroded by this legislation. They deserve to be punished for that, and if those voters see fit to abandon them, then fair enough.

    Edit: Lynn, why does my URL get transposed to my name field when I’m not logged in these days?

    L

  3. Alexandra 3
    1 May 2010 at 10:16 am

    The MP deserve to lose signifcant support for supporting the erosion of workers rights and what in effect is a the reduction to benefits. Lew, I dont care about the bigger game because if the MP is unwilling to share what it is, then it is magical and invisable. I have little time for what ever the cunning plan is if it means saying one thing and doing another. For me, the bigger game is represented by a series of horrible little games, the MP seem all too willing to play. All of which are are harmful to their own people and land.

Links to post