"Jacinda
Ardern. Prime Minister of New Zealand. She has been the poster child of the
left for a couple of years now. But what she is doing to New Zealand actually
amazes me. In fact it scares me. Be warned. This is where woke politics is
taking us all to a form of apartheid."
During the segment, the Australian news channel host interviewed
Dr Muriel Newman, director of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research
which she founded in 2005 after nine years as a Member of Parliament.
The interview canvassed a range of topics including: the He Puapua report, Maori representation, the Treaty of Waitangi, the Public Interest Journalism Fund, and Three Waters. The full clip can be seen HERE.
The following day Newshub (a New Zealand multi-platform news service that airs on TV
channel Three, radio stations run by MediaWorks Radio, and on digital
platforms) published an article called, "Fact-check of Sky News
Australia segment warning of 'apartheid' in New Zealand". It was written
by Newshub reporter Zane Small, and started with the comment, "Sky News
Australia host Andrew Bolt has warned of ‘apartheid’ in New Zealand, pointing
to the controversial He Puapua report and Three Waters reforms - but many of
the claims are questionable."
Newshub's report may be seen HERE.
What follows is a fact-check of Newshub’s fact-check.
Newshub confirmed a number
of points mentioned in the Andrew Bolt interview were factually correct:
·
That Maori make up about 16 percent of the
population,
·
That a Māori Health Authority is being
established and will have a right of veto over the whole health system,
·
That the creation of a Māori Health Authority
is mentioned in the He Puapua report.
·
That the He Puapua report was withheld from
public release.
He Puapua
With respect to the He Puapua report, Newshub added the comment
made by the former Deputy Prime
Minister the Rt Hon Winston Peters that the report was
"deliberately" withheld from his party during the previous term when
they were coalition partners with Labour.
Presumably, in the interest of balance, Newshub states that Prime
Minister Ardern denies the report was deliberately withheld. They say,
"Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern revealed earlier this year that He Puapua
wasn't released publicly over concerns it could be misconstrued as Government
policy." They also confirm as fact that He Puapua was only made public
"after it was forced to".
Here are some facts about the release of the He Puapua report.
FACT: Minister Mahuta received the He
Puapua report around October 2019. It was not released until after the October 2020
General election campaign. It was given wide public attention in March 2021
when a heavily redacted copy was obtained by Muriel Newman, who obtained the
full report a week or so later.
Newhub says it is not correct to say He Puapua is about Maori
taking control of half of everything in New Zealand. They say He Puapua report
contains ideas about Māori "self-determination".
FACT:
Newshub is correct to say He Puapua contains ideas about "self-determination".
However, He Puapua also says, "the meaning of self-determination and how
it is exercised is up to the Indigenous peoples to determine". In other
words, self-determination is whatever Maori want it to be.
He Puapua goes on to say it may mean
FULL independence at one end of the spectrum or participation in state
government at the other, which may include "independent indigenous
education systems and healthcare services". (Para 3)
Newshub says He Puapua "outlines a 'roadmap' to achieve
'Vision 2040' - a realisation of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples, which New Zealand signed up to in 2010 under former Prime Minister
John Key's leadership."
FACT: It is correct to say it was the
John Key Government when in coalition with the Maori Party that signed up to
the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2010. At the time the
then opposition member the Hon Nanaia Mahuta said this in the House:
"The Government [National] has taken care to recognise that this
document is aspirational and
non-binding, an approach that should weigh heavily on the efforts of those
people who wanted the declaration to be
a strong platform for the continued assertion of indigenous rights."
(Hansard See HERE
>>>) (emphasis added)
FACT: It
was after Labour became the government in 2017 that the UN Declaration was
given a mandate to become "a strong
platform for the continued assertion of indigenous rights" and that
gave rise to the commissioning of the He Puapua report.
Presumably
the aspirational
and non-binding approach taken by the National lead government in 2010 weighed
heavily upon Nanaia Mahuta.
Newshub says, "The
Government commissioned the report in 2019 as a response to New Zealand signing
the UN declaration."
FACT: That is not correct. The UN
Declaration was signed in 2010, nine years prior to the He Puapua report being
commissioned. The timelines would suggest He Puapua is a consequence of Nanaia
Mahuta being in a position to use the UN Declaration as "a
strong platform for the continued assertion of indigenous rights".
Maori
representation
During the interview a comment was made that "because the Labour Party doesn't need a coalition partner anymore under
our MMP electoral system, it means that the Māori caucus actually has a lot of
control over Cabinet".
Newshub has confirmed as fact that "there is more diverse representation today. New Zealand's 53rd
Parliament is the most diverse in history, with nearly 50 percent of the 120
seats held by women, 11 percent LGBTQI representation and 21 percent Māori
MPs." They have also confirmed as fact, "Labour's Māori caucus is the
largest ever, with 15 members."
Here are some more facts about Maori representation.
FACT:
21 percent of MPs identify as being Maori, which is greater than the
16.7 percent of the population that identify as Maori.
FACT: 25 percent of the Cabinet
identify as Maori.
FACT: Maori are overrepresented in
Parliament and in Cabinet.
Public
interest journalism fund
Newshub says, "There is
no condition of the $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund, announced in
February, for journalists to report favourably on 'this Treaty partnership
agenda'".
FACT: That is not correct. The
eligibility criteria for funding applications from the Public Interest
Journalism Fund says: "All general eligibility criteria below must be met
for applications to be assessed." The first of those criteria is: "Commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and
to Māori as a Te Tiriti partner".
Applicants need to show "a clear and obvious commitment or
intent for commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including a commitment to te reo
Māori. This commitment will enhance public interest journalism, resulting in
stronger Māori representation and greater bi-cultural collaboration within the
wider journalism sector." See guidelines HERE
>>>
FACT: Newshub was successful in
gaining funding for two projects in the first funding round of the Public
Interest Journalism Fund. This included the "Te
Rito Journalism Project, NZME, Māori Television, Newshub and Pacific Media
Network with 11 support partners, up to $2,419,253 (Funding spans two financial
years, $800,000 in Yr 1). A programme to identify, train, develop and hire 25
cadet Māori, Pasifika and diverse journalists." Details may be viewed HERE
>>>
Treaty of
Waitangi
During the interview, Muriel Newman said: "The reality is that the Treaty brought equality - equal rights
for all New Zealanders and that is the way this country has developed."
Newshub's Fact-check says, "The
term 'equality' is questionable" because "Māori have worse outcomes
than non-Māori across almost every measure." They add, "Dr Claire Charters, a member of the
He Puapua working group commissioned by Te Puni Kōkiri, advocates for what's
called substantive equality, which is ensuring disadvantaged people aren't just
treated the same - but that the outcomes are equitable."
FACT: Muriel Newman was referring to
the Treaty providing equal legal rights, not equality of outcome. Equality of
rights is explicitly stated in the Third Article of the Treaty, "In
consideration thereof Her Majesty the Queen of England extends to the Natives
of New Zealand Her royal protection and imparts to them all the Rights and Privileges
of British Subjects."
Three
Waters
During the interview Muriel Newman made the comment, "We're fighting a battle against Three
Waters, where the Government's got this plan to centralise control of water
services ...take it away from councils, and centralise it in four authorities
and they'll be half controlled by
local iwi…That'll give them essentially the right of veto over water in New
Zealand." [emphasis added]
Newshub says that is not true. Newshub then pivots away from
‘control’ to cite comments about ‘ownership’ by Judith Collins and Ngāi Tahu.
Newshub says, "The Government has
confirmed the four entities will remain in public ownership".
FACT: The government proposal is for 6
of the 12 governance seats on each water authority to be appointed by iwi and
decisions will require a super-majority of 75 per cent. No decision could be
made without the consent of iwi interests.
FACT: The Department of Internal
Affairs website states, "The
Government has proposed that new entities would be required to partner and
engage early and meaningfully with Iwi/Māori, understand local aspirations for
Te Mana o Te Wai, mātauranga Māori, tikanga Māori and kaitiakitanga and support
and enable these."
FACT: The Government's interpretation
of ‘ownership’ in the context of the Three Waters assets is ownership through a
legislative provision rather than through a conventional shareholding - it is
in name only exercised through their representation on the 12 member "representative"
governance board, six of whom will be appointed by iwi to represent iwi
interests. This is confirmed in a Cabinet Briefing Paper released in June which
states, "local authority ownership
rights are instead provided for in the oversight and governance
arrangements".
FACT: The Three Waters reform proposes
local council water assets will be vested in the four new water authorities. A
council's control over those assets will diminish from absolute (100 per cent)
control to fractional control. For example, the 22 councils in proposed Entity
B will share between them 6 of the 12 governance seats that will control those
assets. That's six seats to share between 22 councils. There are 21 local
councils in Entity C, 20 in Entity D, and four in Entity A.
Newshub took issue with
the comment by Muriel Newman that: "All
this is going on without an open debate…It's going on secretly. I mean, we're
sort of picking up on it but we're small voices trying to warn the country that
this is underway and they should be aware of it and if they don't like it they
should damn well speak out about it."
Newshub said, "The
Government is currently consulting with Māori on proposals mentioned in He
Puapua, before engaging with the wider public. It's been reported a preliminary
document for public discussion will be announced by the end of the year."
FACT: Cabinet papers reveal that the
Government has had 60 consultation meetings with Maori about the Three Waters
proposals. To date, it has not had any meetings with the community.
Newshub says the Government is currently consulting with Maori on
proposals in He Puapua.
FACT:
That is true. The Three Waters reform proposal is consistent with that
goal on page 31 of the He Puapua report which states, "The Crown's contribution to capacity-building will be resourcing.
There are multiple streams from which financial contributions might be sourced,
including, for example, levies on resource use where Maori have a clear
interest if not a strong claim to ownership, such as water."
Accuracy is an important part of the principles of good journalism
and it is laudable that Newshub has confirmed the accuracy of the Bolt
interview through a fact-checking exercise. Accuracy is included in the very
first Statement of Principles published by the New Zealand Media Council, which
states:
"Accuracy, Fairness
and Balance - Publications should be bound at all times by accuracy, fairness
and balance, and should not deliberately mislead or misinform readers
by commission or omission. In articles of controversy or disagreement, a
fair voice must be given to the opposition view." [emphasis added].
As Newshub is a member of the NZ Media Council, I am sure there
are many who look forward to it upholding those principles and provide a fair
voice to those with a view that challenges the prevailing political narrative
of the day.
Frank Newman is a director of the
NZCPR, a political commentator and investment analyst, and a former local body councillor.
7 comments:
"As Newshub is a member of the NZ Media Council, I am sure there are many who look forward to it upholding those principles and provide a fair voice to those with a view that challenges the prevailing political narrative of the day."
The chances of that happening any time soon are depressingly zero. Newshub, like TVNZ, are political organisations now. They are paid to report what the government deems to be acceptable. I'm afraid Kiwis wanting fair and balanced reporting need to look elsewhere for it. The internet and overseas news channels are the only options!
Surely a complaint can be made to this NZ Media Council, best by yourself Frank, to keep the pressure on Newshub to get them to stop being a Labour govt news outlet?
It was so refreshing to see Muriel on Sky tv. This is the sort of interview we used to have on New Zealand tv,knowledgeable people expressing different viewpoints and informing the public on topics of the day.
Unfortunately we don't have any quality programmes or journalists here now.
Honestly, you can't really compare the political reporters we have on tv1 and TV3. They probably would be pretty hard pressed to get a job anywhere except in little old New Zealand wouldn't they? That's if the same suspects are still there that featured when I watched the local media a few years back. They don't seem to have been taught adequate interviewing techniques or manage to pose any probing questions.
Maybe more New Zealand politicians could feature on Kenny or Bolt or Credlin?
I'm pretty sure those shows are getting the bulk of the intelligent Kiwi viewers these days.
The word apartheid should have been applied to Govt laws decades ago! You have enough South Africans in NZ to recognise it easily, and special treatment for one race over another goes back a long time.
South African apartheid favoured white over blacks, NZ apartheid favours browns over whites. The colours may be different, but the system is the same.
The South African immigrants may now be leaving for yet another country, the white Kiwis might as well join them. The NZ you will be living in will be unrecognizeable as the one you grew up in. The descent of Africa into violent tribalism once the white Govts were removed will be a model for NZ in the future.
Don't be silly, it can't happen here you say? That's just what they said in Yugoslavia under Tito...
For the 85+% of us who cannot claim even the slightest trace of Maori inheritance it is starting to look like KEEP NEW ZEALAND BROWN.
But never should we consider the suggestion by KP above:
KEEP NEW ZEALAND, BROWN.
How interesting that newshub share govt definitions and policies . I enjoy both TV1 and TV3 evening News , although I cannot stand their morning shows . TV1 is hosted by a group og giggling clowns (not unlike the maori party ) and TV3 is so,ewhat wayward : they don't know where they belong or how they should conduct a basic information or news hour . The managers or people who direct the policies of either chanel have never watched UK or US news programs : they , are at least professional and informative . I am sure their advertisers must wonder just where their money is going and to what effect . Slowing sales of their products or lawsuits against their products must be a real problem . Imagine if the people stopped buying the Herald and all its regional papers that it owns . I refuse to buy or at least pay for ( I wait till the next day or so when the retailer has chopped off a corner of the paper for its admittance as unsold and a refund is issued ) and therefore is FREE ! I have added RESENE to my list of NEVERBUYFROM products for their support of an extended maori language week . I do not want to be taught any language by any advertiser or any media medium . There are maori RADIO STATIONS (21) 2 Maori TV stations all funded by the taxpayer . Not that anybody asked me if I minded some of my money going to these bottomless pits of loot gobblers . We need to agitate the farmers so they can withhold their taxes and gst and rates , to wake up the opposition and what sensible labor MPs there are . The govt cannot survive without our taxes . Well spoken Mr Newman : I'm with you all the way . Lets get Winny out there and start stirring some stuff .
The term Iwi/Maori puzzles me. Does it have some special catch-all meaning? Can a person not be a member of an Iwi but still be a Maori, or vice versa? Perhaps it is used as a way to soften the concept of Maori entitlement..
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.