With special votes still being counted, the interregnum provides time for the country’s political parties to reflect on their election performance. For Labour, in particular, that is proving to be a painful experience.
Hipkins emerged from his party’s caucus meeting last Tuesday saying, “We’ll spend plenty of time digesting the result and understanding that but it's clear from the end of 2021, we saw our support numbers drop quite significantly and nothing that we did in the two years that followed really rebuilt those numbers.”
Asked about caucus, Hipkins responded, “I think everybody will understand that it was pretty rough.”
That would make a change from the typical Labour Party caucus meeting. Labour MPs recount in private that during the Ardern years, caucus was generally a time for genuflection and deference. Questions were routinely used by MPs and Ministers to praise and flatter the party leadership in a manner than one MP described as “North Korean”. On the rare occasion that MPs did try to raise concerns, they were brushed aside by Ardern amidst a chorus of “tsk tsk” and shaking heads.
That aloofness from the public was also characteristic of some senior MPs. Nanaia Mahuta is one Minister who was seldom seen at electorate events during the term of this government. In her defence, Mahuta had several senior ministerial portfolios and was overseeing some of the most controversial reforms implemented by Labour. But that counted for nought at the ballot box, where the young firebrand Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke defeated Mahuta in Hauraki-Waikato becoming the youngest elected MP in 170 years.
That trend of young tyros defeating experienced performers was repeated elsewhere with Tākuta Ferris defeating Labour’s Rino Tirikatene, Cushla Tangaere-Manuel defeating Meka Whaitiri, and Tamatha Paul taking Wellington Central. This young cohort of new MPs will undoubtedly have an influence in the House and on political discourse in the country. The self-described kōhanga reo generation promises to be vocal and controversial. To borrow Rawiri Waititi’s phrase, they represent the “unapologetically Māori” perspective that he and his co-leader, Debbie Ngawera-Packer championed over the course of the last government.
It’s a strategy that has paid dividends for both Te Pāti Māori and the Greens in this election cycle, and has seen both Hipkins and his Minister, Willie Jackson, express their disappointment that Labour was not rewarded in a more fulsome manner for their government’s work progressing Māori issues over the last six years.
Much of that disconnect must be put down to co-governance. Whilst the term proved massively unpopular with the public, for politically active young Māori, co-governance is not an aspiration and certainly not a final destination given that it falls short of self-determination which they consider to be enshrined in tino rangatiratanga. It is, therefore, a concept that only retains popularity amongst Wellington’s political establishment. For both National and Labour it has been a useful mechanism to resolve some Treaty disputes, but it must be becoming clear to even its most vocal supporters that it has limited utility.
Iwi leaders, such as Tūhoe’s Tamati Kruger, have been very clear about this point in the past.
“Co-governance is not our term. Mana Motuhake is our term. So, we are committed to washing away dependency on the Crown and raising maximum authority for Tūhoe people.”
“I don’t see it as the final destination. I don’t see co-governance as the answer. But I think it’s the next bus stop in a journey that has to be made. It’s everyone’s journey. It’s like gravity, you can’t defy it. It’s on its way”, Kruger said last year.
With Te Pāti Māori and the Greens now having larger representation in Parliament this view will have a louder voice in Wellington. If anyone was in any doubt, then last week’s induction for new MPs provided the wake-up call.
An induction welcome was held for new MPs but to the surprise of some, large contingents from Te Pāti Māori and the Greens beyond their new MPs also attended. After some speeches by local iwi, the event was, in the words of one MP, “hijacked” by Tākuta Ferris who gave a “belligerent” speech that other MPs described as “horrendous”. It was seen by some in attendance as Ferris laying down a marker, in particular, to ACT MPs, that Te Pāti Māori intends to take a confrontational approach to Treaty issues.
Speaking to Te Ao with Moana last week, Greens co-leader Marama Davidson confirmed her party’s approach to opposition saying, “We’re going to rark it up. We’ve worked really well with Te Pāti Māori. It’s clear that out people have been inspired by an unequivocal voice on Māori issues and vision, and so that mahi, and I’m talking to our whānau at home to keep that hope, because that mahi stays and it grows.”
With this new generation in the House, some of the older generation find themselves outside Parliament after many years of service. Most notable is Nanaia Mahuta who finds herself out of Parliament for the first time in 27 years. In her concession call to Maipi-Clarke on election night, Mahuta stressed her desire that the gains that had been made for Māori over her term were not lost.
Mahuta has a significant legacy to protect and still retains a formidable power base in Waikato-Tainui. How she chooses to spend her time in the next few years will be interesting to watch but she may prove to be just as staunch a defender of Māori issues outside Parliament as she was as a proponent of them on the inside.
Lawyer and writer Philip Crump explores political, legal and cultural issues facing New Zealand. Sometimes known as Thomas Cranmer. This article was published HERE
That would make a change from the typical Labour Party caucus meeting. Labour MPs recount in private that during the Ardern years, caucus was generally a time for genuflection and deference. Questions were routinely used by MPs and Ministers to praise and flatter the party leadership in a manner than one MP described as “North Korean”. On the rare occasion that MPs did try to raise concerns, they were brushed aside by Ardern amidst a chorus of “tsk tsk” and shaking heads.
That aloofness from the public was also characteristic of some senior MPs. Nanaia Mahuta is one Minister who was seldom seen at electorate events during the term of this government. In her defence, Mahuta had several senior ministerial portfolios and was overseeing some of the most controversial reforms implemented by Labour. But that counted for nought at the ballot box, where the young firebrand Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke defeated Mahuta in Hauraki-Waikato becoming the youngest elected MP in 170 years.
That trend of young tyros defeating experienced performers was repeated elsewhere with Tākuta Ferris defeating Labour’s Rino Tirikatene, Cushla Tangaere-Manuel defeating Meka Whaitiri, and Tamatha Paul taking Wellington Central. This young cohort of new MPs will undoubtedly have an influence in the House and on political discourse in the country. The self-described kōhanga reo generation promises to be vocal and controversial. To borrow Rawiri Waititi’s phrase, they represent the “unapologetically Māori” perspective that he and his co-leader, Debbie Ngawera-Packer championed over the course of the last government.
It’s a strategy that has paid dividends for both Te Pāti Māori and the Greens in this election cycle, and has seen both Hipkins and his Minister, Willie Jackson, express their disappointment that Labour was not rewarded in a more fulsome manner for their government’s work progressing Māori issues over the last six years.
Much of that disconnect must be put down to co-governance. Whilst the term proved massively unpopular with the public, for politically active young Māori, co-governance is not an aspiration and certainly not a final destination given that it falls short of self-determination which they consider to be enshrined in tino rangatiratanga. It is, therefore, a concept that only retains popularity amongst Wellington’s political establishment. For both National and Labour it has been a useful mechanism to resolve some Treaty disputes, but it must be becoming clear to even its most vocal supporters that it has limited utility.
Iwi leaders, such as Tūhoe’s Tamati Kruger, have been very clear about this point in the past.
“Co-governance is not our term. Mana Motuhake is our term. So, we are committed to washing away dependency on the Crown and raising maximum authority for Tūhoe people.”
“I don’t see it as the final destination. I don’t see co-governance as the answer. But I think it’s the next bus stop in a journey that has to be made. It’s everyone’s journey. It’s like gravity, you can’t defy it. It’s on its way”, Kruger said last year.
With Te Pāti Māori and the Greens now having larger representation in Parliament this view will have a louder voice in Wellington. If anyone was in any doubt, then last week’s induction for new MPs provided the wake-up call.
An induction welcome was held for new MPs but to the surprise of some, large contingents from Te Pāti Māori and the Greens beyond their new MPs also attended. After some speeches by local iwi, the event was, in the words of one MP, “hijacked” by Tākuta Ferris who gave a “belligerent” speech that other MPs described as “horrendous”. It was seen by some in attendance as Ferris laying down a marker, in particular, to ACT MPs, that Te Pāti Māori intends to take a confrontational approach to Treaty issues.
Speaking to Te Ao with Moana last week, Greens co-leader Marama Davidson confirmed her party’s approach to opposition saying, “We’re going to rark it up. We’ve worked really well with Te Pāti Māori. It’s clear that out people have been inspired by an unequivocal voice on Māori issues and vision, and so that mahi, and I’m talking to our whānau at home to keep that hope, because that mahi stays and it grows.”
With this new generation in the House, some of the older generation find themselves outside Parliament after many years of service. Most notable is Nanaia Mahuta who finds herself out of Parliament for the first time in 27 years. In her concession call to Maipi-Clarke on election night, Mahuta stressed her desire that the gains that had been made for Māori over her term were not lost.
Mahuta has a significant legacy to protect and still retains a formidable power base in Waikato-Tainui. How she chooses to spend her time in the next few years will be interesting to watch but she may prove to be just as staunch a defender of Māori issues outside Parliament as she was as a proponent of them on the inside.
Lawyer and writer Philip Crump explores political, legal and cultural issues facing New Zealand. Sometimes known as Thomas Cranmer. This article was published HERE
4 comments:
The Maori party goes on about how it represents the Maori people, yet it could only get under 15% of them to give them their party vote.
In reality they are just a bunch of bullies, demanding others pay for their lifestyle.
They represent the unapologetically 'part' māori perspective.
What Waititi et al chooses to forget is that 'maori' is only a single part of who they are.
They should be representing a cultural equation rather than a race or ethnicity equation.
People like Waititi think (and speak) in simplistic terms (you know maori good/white people bad) and as such this is why when part maori are about 16% of the population they get so few votes from the part maori population as a whole.
The cultural aspect of 'maoridom is a hierarchical tribal system but like all cultures it has actually grown away from that due to urbanisation and of course maturity.
If, he and Mahuta would think in a broader more humanist and less ethnically derived sense then those part maori who feel unrepresented may actually feel like they are represented. However with that would come a decline of their political power and thus they never will.
Culture rather than graft is important to most people and most part moari see these people for the most part as the snake oil sellers they are.
Whether the 'new gen' think more broadly is up for bets but with people like Waititi still running the gaming tables those bets are probably not going to pay out any differently.
The average lanyard-wearing Maori activist (brown or white) thinks they can decry colonialism while enjoying the many benefits of it without questioning how that works.
We have had many years of Maori aspirations to take over our country.
I don't think that Waititi has a vision for NZ, he has a vision for Maori. Willie Jackson and Mahuta probably have more aspiration to be overlords of a multiculture ruled by the tribes. The way that the 3 Waters boundaries were set shows where their aspirations were for tribal rule.
We still have much to do to roll back the damage already done but I think the young ones will do OK if we can keep our democracy intact.
Imagine if Mahuta and Jackson get their way and all our elected councils have Maori appointed with unlimited say on anything really and no right of removal. Does anyone think that Kiwis would roll over for that?
MC
Maori have been to the fore in clamouring to encourage the youth vote. Repalcemnt of slightly sage oldies by immature firebrand youth is the inevitable outcome. If maori do not consider co governace as the path to self detemination they do not understand how it can work. With effective control they can do as they please. The only reservation is that elections can reverse their actions. Clearly they strive for a structure beyond democratic influence.
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.