Te Pāti Māori has almost doubled its support from 1.8 per cent to 3.5 per cent in the latest Newshub-Reid Research poll, pointing to the prospect it could play kingmaker this election.
But since National’s Christopher Luxon has ruled out forming a coalition with Te Pati Maori, this underlines if it wanted to be in government its kingmaker role would shape only a left-of-centre government.
How then would a Labour-led coalition accept what Te Pati Maori is demanding in exchange for its support?
These demands are quite formidable and Labour leader Chris Hipkins hardly sounded enthusiastic when questioned on them.
Asked if he was amenable to Te Pāti Māori’s call to change the official name of New Zealand to Aotearoa, Hipkins said he had not given “any official consideration to it”.
“I’m aware that the name Aotearoa New Zealand is used in a much more widespread manner now than it was 10, 15 years ago, and in some cases people simply call it Aotearoa, depending on the context, and I’m quite relaxed about that.
“In terms of whether we change the official name or not, I actually think more important is what the common usage is, and I think we’re seeing increasing common usage of Aotearoa New Zealand and I’m quite comfortable with that.”
Te Pāti Māori also had a petition on its website calling for New Zealand to become a republic, with a New Zealander as head of state.
Co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer has spoken of why she thinks Te Pati Maori is gaining ground.
“We’ve been really strong on pushing GST off food which I think, particularly during this crisis of cost of living, people can relate to.”
She said the party had also shown its commitment to the environment with its opposition to seabed mining.
“This pivotal position we find ourselves in has been about confirming that we’re heading in the right direction, not only with our actions but our philosophies as well”.
She says the shock defection of Labour MP Meka Whaitiri to its ranks is another reason for its recent surge in popularity.
Clearly Whaitiri talked in depth with Te Pati Maori before her defection and decided her new colleagues had formulated policies more in tune with her own on Maori needs than Labour.
Ngarewa-Packer said the party’s focus was on delivering a “Tiriti-centric Aotearoa” and it had always been transparent about that.
She would not be drawn on whether the party would prefer to be part of a coalition government or not following the general election, but said National had “absolutely nothing in common” with Te Pāti Māori.
Ngarewa-Packer said National had “chosen to sort of go down a chaotic line and look at the potential of working with Winston Peters.
“Chris Luxon’s now polling even lower than Judith Collins; we had nothing in common with that leadership as well so I think we just have to keep focused on our waka and what it is that we’re here to contribute to the nation.
“Our preference is to be able to work with those who are focused on those critical factors – our people, our environment and the transformational change that we believe our nation needs, certainly from tangata whenua’s perspective.”
This fortifies the impression that party politics in NZ has become more sharply defined under the current leaders.
Luxon has made it quite clear why National led by him would not work with Te Pati Maori.
“We are one country. We have a single system for the delivery of public services. Those public services meet people on the basis of their needs not their ethnicity, and we’re all equal under the law, one person, one vote.”
He said National was “deeply committed” to outcomes for Māori.
“I just don’t believe that separate systems are the way that we need to do that.”
He said he wanted to make it clear “a vote for Labour, a vote for the Greens, or a vote for Te Pāti Māori, is a vote for a coalition of chaos with more economic mismanagement”.
Luxon said distancing from Te Pāti Māori was ultimately his decision, although there had been ongoing caucus conversations on the topic and it was not a surprise to them.
“It is obvious to me is that we have a Māori Party that is pursuing a separatist, more radical agenda.
“The focus of this Māori Party at this time in this generation is very much on constitutional arrangements, and it’s talking about having a separate Parliament, it’s wanting separate voting rights, it’s wanting not full and final Treaty settlement payments.
“What New Zealanders really need right now is none of this stuff.
On whether Te Pāti Māori ultimately became National’s only route to power after the election, if he would still not work with it, Luxon said: “Correct”.
“There is just no philosophical alignment between the Māori Party and the National Party.”
That makes plain the likely look of a coalition government led by Luxon.
The extent to which Labour would accommodate Māori Party demands is more open to speculation.
Point of Order is a blog focused on politics and the economy run by veteran newspaper reporters Bob Edlin and Ian Templeton
Asked if he was amenable to Te Pāti Māori’s call to change the official name of New Zealand to Aotearoa, Hipkins said he had not given “any official consideration to it”.
“I’m aware that the name Aotearoa New Zealand is used in a much more widespread manner now than it was 10, 15 years ago, and in some cases people simply call it Aotearoa, depending on the context, and I’m quite relaxed about that.
“In terms of whether we change the official name or not, I actually think more important is what the common usage is, and I think we’re seeing increasing common usage of Aotearoa New Zealand and I’m quite comfortable with that.”
Te Pāti Māori also had a petition on its website calling for New Zealand to become a republic, with a New Zealander as head of state.
Co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer has spoken of why she thinks Te Pati Maori is gaining ground.
“We’ve been really strong on pushing GST off food which I think, particularly during this crisis of cost of living, people can relate to.”
She said the party had also shown its commitment to the environment with its opposition to seabed mining.
“This pivotal position we find ourselves in has been about confirming that we’re heading in the right direction, not only with our actions but our philosophies as well”.
She says the shock defection of Labour MP Meka Whaitiri to its ranks is another reason for its recent surge in popularity.
Clearly Whaitiri talked in depth with Te Pati Maori before her defection and decided her new colleagues had formulated policies more in tune with her own on Maori needs than Labour.
Ngarewa-Packer said the party’s focus was on delivering a “Tiriti-centric Aotearoa” and it had always been transparent about that.
She would not be drawn on whether the party would prefer to be part of a coalition government or not following the general election, but said National had “absolutely nothing in common” with Te Pāti Māori.
Ngarewa-Packer said National had “chosen to sort of go down a chaotic line and look at the potential of working with Winston Peters.
“Chris Luxon’s now polling even lower than Judith Collins; we had nothing in common with that leadership as well so I think we just have to keep focused on our waka and what it is that we’re here to contribute to the nation.
“Our preference is to be able to work with those who are focused on those critical factors – our people, our environment and the transformational change that we believe our nation needs, certainly from tangata whenua’s perspective.”
This fortifies the impression that party politics in NZ has become more sharply defined under the current leaders.
Luxon has made it quite clear why National led by him would not work with Te Pati Maori.
“We are one country. We have a single system for the delivery of public services. Those public services meet people on the basis of their needs not their ethnicity, and we’re all equal under the law, one person, one vote.”
He said National was “deeply committed” to outcomes for Māori.
“I just don’t believe that separate systems are the way that we need to do that.”
He said he wanted to make it clear “a vote for Labour, a vote for the Greens, or a vote for Te Pāti Māori, is a vote for a coalition of chaos with more economic mismanagement”.
Luxon said distancing from Te Pāti Māori was ultimately his decision, although there had been ongoing caucus conversations on the topic and it was not a surprise to them.
“It is obvious to me is that we have a Māori Party that is pursuing a separatist, more radical agenda.
“The focus of this Māori Party at this time in this generation is very much on constitutional arrangements, and it’s talking about having a separate Parliament, it’s wanting separate voting rights, it’s wanting not full and final Treaty settlement payments.
“What New Zealanders really need right now is none of this stuff.
On whether Te Pāti Māori ultimately became National’s only route to power after the election, if he would still not work with it, Luxon said: “Correct”.
“There is just no philosophical alignment between the Māori Party and the National Party.”
That makes plain the likely look of a coalition government led by Luxon.
The extent to which Labour would accommodate Māori Party demands is more open to speculation.
Point of Order is a blog focused on politics and the economy run by veteran newspaper reporters Bob Edlin and Ian Templeton
4 comments:
Australia should think carefully about defining its population by ethnicity for political purposes. If they are not careful they will end up with the mess NZ has and all is side shows while the real issues of looking after it’s citizens are lost.
Certainly the elephant and one carefully avoided since 2020 when the He Puapua agenda was obvious.
The aim was to advance the agenda as far as possible - this becomes the base line and reversal is impossible.
When Hipkins says " I'm comfortable" with any issue , this means he is using the " comfort-creep" strategy ( cf Foon and Hunt who say " Noone seems to have a problem.")
This avoids any official endorsement by citizens - which is the legal way forward.
NZers will rue their apathy in this matter. This would never work in a mature democracy.
Well, yes – there is the elephant in the room metaphor for te pati Maori – but recent antics remind one more of a bull in a china shop – oh and then there’s the fox in the henhouse and a pig in a poke, a cat among the pigeons, the dog in the manger …… Probably more. Do look them up and then see if you don’t think such a coalition might be more trouble than it’s worth, according to the ancient wisdom from the north.
The elephant metaphor refers to an overwhelming factor ignored. If the msm did their traditional job the elephant and its abilty and intent to do vast irrepairable damage would be generally recognised
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.