Nov 7, 2011
Native Affairs Kowhiri 11: Waiariki
Well, there's no doubt about it, Annette Sykes toppled Te Ururoa Flavell and Louis Te Kani in tonight's debate. I'm not going to write anything substantive on the debate here, instead look out for my review in Wednesday's Rotorua Daily Post. I might reproduce the piece and add to it on Thursday depending on how much time I have.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It depends how you look at it Morgan. Annette promised the world - she said the things people (moreso radicals) want to hear - but she will never ever achieve any of them. She also lied - she represents one of the Urewera accused, not 14 and many here in Ruatoki hate her. She spoke with her typical legal BS language and noone could understand her. She encapsulated the BMW - Bitter Maori Woman - and everyone in our household becomes more and more disgusted by her. She was there to attack Te Ururoa. Te Ururoa was there to inspire the people and he did so by speaking eloquently, by being respectful, by staying true to his Maoritanga and not buckling to the pressures of pakeha influence such as Annette Sykes doing the typical attack the opposition style. Can you imagine the response she would get as a member of parliament trying to seek advice from a Minister in reagrds to a constituent issue? They would tell her to shove it BMW. She will achieve nothing for Waiariki, she will just be the BMW yelling from the sidelines and our people will go backwards just like Te Tai Tokerau.
ReplyDelete"Te Ururoa was there to inspire the people...." LMAO. I guess two-faced deception and meaningless rhetoric does 'inspire' some.
ReplyDeleteTe Ururoa will achieve a lot - for the brown and white 1%.
We've been going backwards since 1840.
Ka pai, I was there last night and I agree with anon above. Te Ururoa was composed despite being labelled a "sell-out" in front of his family and community - Te Ururoa laughed it off, but regardless it would be hard to take, it was wrong and lacks tikanga. I have a lot of respect for Annette and for what she stands for - however, I am dissappointed that such an intelligent Maori women had to resort to calling Te Ururoa a "sell-out" - Mana's campaign need to get off the "let's turn all Maori against the Maori Party" strategy - act with integrity and treat people with dignity. Instead of biting the bait Te Ururoa replied with facts and never made promises which we all know are only good for getting kids to do the dishes. Te Ururoa was able to draw on results which the Maori party have achieved which is substantial having only been in parliament for 6 years (not bad considering Helen Clarkes famous "Maori Party is the last cab off the rank comment"), he highlighted that you can say all you want but nothing gets achieved unless you are at the decision-making table which the current four Maori Party MPs currently sit at now (how many Maori have been there and got real results), instead of promises he publicly advocates that his job is to carry the "desires and aspirations" of his constituency. Te Ururoa & Annette are strong Maori & Te Arawa descendants - however, Annette let us down last night with Mana's constant badge of belittling our own. Te Ururoa made us proud. Ina te mahi he rangatira.
ReplyDeleteYour call on support for Mana and Annette by Tuhoe is way off and shows your lack of knowledge about the history between Ms Sykes and Tuhoe…..many people who were directly affected by the 2007 Police raids on Tuhoe (including defendants) are not impressed with Annette’s claims of being THE lawyer for this case, actually Annette was the lawyer for one defendant only, and it was the work of Rodney Harrison QC at the Supreme Court the allow some of the defendants to have their charges dropped.
ReplyDeleteIt is my understanding that Annette, although only formally representing one or two defendants, drafted written submissions for all defendants alongside Mr Harrison and others including Jane Kelsey.
ReplyDeleteBack to the debate - Te Ururoa performed brilliantly, but he was outplayed. Annette spoke with more depth, passion and the hit the perfect pitch (e.g. MP sitting under the table taking crumbs). Te Ururoa was made to look weak in comparison because he could explore issues in equal depth or refute/negate Annette's attacks.
I'm a different anon to the ones above.
ReplyDeleteKiaora Morgan It appears you have a strong preference for Annette, and that's completely fine. But I can't help but feel it shades your view of what you see. I don't think Annette won at all - name calling is not winning. I was very turned off by Annette. She was disrespectful and as usual resorted to name calling. I'm well over the 'kupapa' insult that get's thrown at people whose views Annette doesn't agree with. Compromising is not selling out - it is a political reality. Like ANON 2:35pm, I do have a lot of historical respect for Annette. But it's fast waning. And I have to agree with ANON 8:43am, I can't see how she would get traction in parliament which requires you act collegially with other parties (at least out of the public eye). She would be virtually redundant in a representative role. By design she would be effectively 'useless'. They will shut her out.
*could not explore issues in equal depth
ReplyDeleteAgree with the last anon (why is everybody anon?). I have a lot of historical respect for Annette whom I have found to be articulate, intelligent and very clear and concise on the issues confronting Māori. But that was the same rhetoric last night that she has been saying since I took up my first flag and marched as a First Year Student at Uni! Many moons ago! I keep questioning whether I understand things as I used to, and whether I'm a bloody kupapa because I feel like the MP have made some ground, so much gained. And Te Ururoa cemented that feeling for me last night. Oh and BTW, the MP maybe be "getting crumbs under the table", but at least they're AT the table.
ReplyDeleteI must have been watching another debate... or perhaps I didn't rank them based on the volume of their delivery but rather the content of their argument... and those who know Annette know that her path of defiance is well trodden and she is obviously fluent in activist rhetoric... but in terms of a sound foundation for a political profile... I don't think it's what we deserve... or want... and like whanau for life says... If you are getting crumbs under the table... doesn't that show how little you are getting when your not even in the room??? and no matter how many stones you launch... the fact remains your not in the room and not in the picture...
ReplyDeleteTe Ururoa & the Maori Party are sellouts, Annette called that correctly. With the Unemployment rates for Maori and Pacific Islanders in New Zealand are double those of the rest of the population, what has sitting at the table with the Nats achieved for the vast majority of our people? Sweet fa, nothing. The Maori party sitting at table has meant selling out the environment by supporting the ets, propping up multinationals with human abuse records in their support of prison privatization. The list of their selling out & providing the brown wash for all of the excess of the National govt goes on and on.
ReplyDeleteOur youth are leaving for Australia in their droves, Te Ururoa might as well be siting at the table stamping their passports as they leave.
Quite right Ana he is indeed sitting under the table stamping their passports for the Nats and Act! And thats all Maori like Te Ururoa Flavell will ever be they will be the boot boys and girls, the subservients to their political masters. Like Annette says we want to make our own bread not make a mad dash for the crumbs which is not just rhetorical but a fact. Im a treaty negotiator on behalf of my iwi and already we have been blocked out of treaty negotiations by the Crown. What Maoridom needs in Parliament is a new breed of politician and its time is here and now, lets cast out the has beens like Te Ururoa and put in people who can articulate the true voice of the people and who are not afraid to do so. Annette Sykes is indeed one of our future political leaders.
ReplyDelete"required to act collegially with other parties", umm about a month ago our PM made a I'm going to slit your throat gesture at the opposition leader, and then was called a scumbag by the opposition leader's second in comand. Acting collegially is not really an imperative in the house. The Maori Party members who get in, through relatively safe seats, (I'm gauging two, TM and TTH) can be as collegial as much as they like, as they have been thus far, (cough) whilst they fade into the background. If you want a candidate who is courageous enough to aim for the jugular for those who actually NEED representation in parliament, because they ARE disenfranchised, Annette looks like the person for the job.
ReplyDeleteWhy is it that Mana and their supporters are adament that destroying the Maori Party's credibility is a positive action for Maori? Wena Harawira highlighted following last nights debate that the real challenge is getting Maori out to vote in the first place - so why do Mana insist on splitting the vote with the idea that this is good for Maori? Why is it that Mana continue to campaign "jobs for all" & "free education for all" like it is as easy as switching on a light? Why is it that you Morgan have set up a blog for Maori issues yet it is blatantly clear that you support Mana's "kill off the Maori Party" campaign? How is Annette's "Tino Rangatiratanga" credentials stronger than Te Ururoa's?
ReplyDeleteBoth Te Ururoa and Annette are equally strong advocates of Tino Rangatiratanga - however, Te Ururoa's sense of "tino rangatiratanga" does not urge him to resort to desperate politics by trying to strip Annette of her "rangatiratanga" by belittling her in front of her whanau, in front of her community and in front of the Native Affairs viewers by branding her in anyway.
It is obvious why we have never supported National and their history of white-collar policies - however, John Key has done more in terms of listening to informed, educated and dedicated Maori such as Pita, Tariana and Te Ururoa who substantiate their waving and wearing of the "Tino Rangatiratanga" flag with implementation at a political and national level, than Helen Clarke/Labour ever did with their promises pre-election only to blatently turn their back on Maori publicly.
National ain't great! Neither is Labour! But when is another Prime Minister like John Key going to come along (especially from National) who will even let us sit at the table, let alone someone who goes against all the white-collared/rednecks who criticize him for supporting Maori initiatives which Annette describes as "crumbs?" New Zealand ain't no financial powerhouse of the world, yet the "crumbs" we have received are significant compared to every other indigenous group throughout the world.
I am in support of my whanaunga Hone and Mana, but I do not suport their "turn Maori on Maori" characteristics. God says work together. Many Maori personalities such as Te Puea & Apirana Ngata advocated working together. Yet Mana's strategy and actions is to "turn Maori against Maori?!" Whose selling who out here?
Kaua e mate wheke, Te Ururoa - mate ururoa. It seems sell out just got a new name - compromise. Te Ururoa is a one percent iwi elite scumbag. Annette is the real (ururoa) struggler and fighter. Who needs another compromising self-serving scumbag like Te Ururoa? There's plenty of those in the Labour and National Parties. And there's too much buying into empty mainstream rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteThat's the problem with representative democracy where you get to choose side A or side B of the same record every 3 years. And that's the extent of our so-called freedom.
Does style over substance apply just as much here as with the pakeha politics? What is with the vitriolic personal attacks against Annette Sykes (BMW??)As Audre Lord says, "The master's tools will never dismantle the master's house". The Maori Party continues to kowtow to and prop up the master's house, within which the power dynamics between Maori and pakeha will always be that of master-servant. Focussing on Annette's personality diverts attention away from her substantive message, which is far more empowering than Te Ururoa's, regardless of whether he was more "composed" or not. I'd take passion and anger about injustice and inequality over a composed show of respect for the status quo any day.
ReplyDeleteFar out you got a lot of friends called Anonymous Morgan... According to iPredict, the Maori Party has a 65% chance of retaining the seat against the challenger.
ReplyDeleteAint nothing wrong with being anonymous - some prefer not to be as extrovert.
ReplyDeletePolls should be illegal during an election year. Why bother voting when you've got psychological mainstream weapons like iPredict and other polls making your mind up for you? It didn't work for Te Tai Tokerau why should it work now? Most look at the 'results' of these self-serving polls then deduce something like this: "It's obviously from the polls that I'm wasting my vote by giving it to party A over party B so I'll vote 'strategically'." Problem is most are being strategised and manipulated by someone else rather than being strategic themselves.
The Maori Party have destroyed their own credibility, primarily by by selling out on the foreshore & seabed. In real terms what have Te Ururoa & the Maori party achieved "sitting at the table" with the National Govt ?
ReplyDelete"Unemployment increased by 50 per cent,leaving 157,000 people out of work.
100,000 Kiwis left for Australia
Prices up nearly four times faster than incomes.
First credit rating downgrade in 13 years.
60,000 more on benefits costing $1b
Wage gap with Australia increased by $32 a week.
55,200 people aged 15 to 24 not in education, employment or training.
Economy grown by just 0.4 per cent
Tax cuts actually cost an extra $1.1b in their first nine months.
Underclass grown with 32000 more children living on benefit dependent households."
A vote for Te Ururoa is a vote for National. A vote for the Maori party is a vote for National.
Is it too much to ask for a well thought out response from the Te Ururoa & Maori Party supporters and not more of the misogynist dribble that has already been posted.
I recall Te Ururoa and the Maori Party attacking and belittling Hone. But now the rules of conduct and civility have changed because it's an election year? How convenient. I recall too the Maori Party sitting smug, refusing to make deals with Hone because he hurt their feelings and sure they would triumph. This increased with the infusion of strategically inept Pem Bird and Ken Mair after the changing of the guards. But the smugness has diminished somewhat and the Maori Party are still struggling to deal with the fall out and miscalculation of their tactical applications and arrogance. Some suggest we should feel sorry for them; that dividing the Maori voice is bad?
ReplyDeleteDeliberate and uneven distribution of Treaty settlements were designed to divide and conquer. The Crown chose to give appropriations to a nominal and arbitrary body called 'iwi' rather than the true treaty partner - hapu. Actually, the Treaty makes no mention of 'iwi' because like the word 'Maori' it's a reinvention.
Prior to Treaty settlements many Maori were struggling but there was unity amongst the strugglers, and there was almost a sense of identity that it was better to maintain the struggle than be forever on one's knees (as the proverb goes). But then once some Maori got money, power and resources they sold out and quickly changed perspective.
Money, power and resources have the ability to easily change one's perspective. Many of the old school activists and leaders are now sitting pretty and passive in cushy jobs and directorships. The Maori Party are just the latest sell outs on the block. I would hasten to say that the people who are benefiting the most from Maori Party policy and direction are those who carry more influence within the upper echelons of Maoridom. Exactly the same people who didn't vote for the Maori Party in the last election.
Through deliberate and uneven distribution of Maori wealth and power the Crown has achieve one of its goals - to divide and conque
John Key is just another example of Wall Street installing their puppet. Don't forget they replaced the Reserve Bank Governor with another banker from Merril Lynch that noone's every heard of. But once WS decides on a small fry puppet and a course of action the rest is history. Oh it helps WS, too, if one easily aquiesces. Jewish heritage is a bonus too.
ReplyDeleteIf you thought neoliberalism of the 80s and 90s was something, well you aint seen nothing yet. Hold on to your britches, bitches! Good luck. LOL
I find many of the comments above to be lacking in any analysis. Can I ask, what should the Maori Party have done re the F&S? They certainly couldn't get what we all wanted - a total repeal. National made that clear. What was the advantage of Maori walking away thus leaving the evil F&S standing that the Labour Party put in place? To 'sell out' is to leave an oppresive piece of legislation standing. The current Takutai Moana bill is not perfect - but 10x better than the F&S. Ana and co - argue otherwise, I'm intrigued.
ReplyDeleteAlso, we are in a godawful recession. All numbers are bad. How was Maori Party meant to change these? What was National meant to do in just 3 years? Keep in mind, our youth began heading offshore to Pakeha lands as soon as Cook turned up. It's not a new phenomenon. And it's probably what led to our Tupuna coming to Aotearoa many moons ago.
Lastly, to correlate a vote for Maori Party as a vote for National is to correlate a vote for Mana as a vote for Labour. Maori Party will partner with whomever has the best deal on the table. If it's National so be it. And likewise if it's Labour so be it. That's tino rangatiratanga. To refuse to partner with National is to lose any ability to influence because Labour can alway take our Maori voice for granted given we won't go with the Nats. And let me remind you, the wonderful Labour party passed the F&S and then stated the Maori Party would be 'the last cab off the rank' in terms of coalition. So yay the left.
Hi anon above, the option of repeal and no replacement was on the table - in fact it was one of the options presented in the discussion paper. The Government's preferred option was the MCA Act of course, but there was room for the Maori Party to negotiate a repeal and then allow more time to explore the issue in an attempt to find a durable solution. Instead, the Maori Party forced upon us a dog's breakfast that was not what Maori wanted and, most importantly, was not sufficient to restore our Mana Whenua/Mana Moana over the foreshore and seabed.
ReplyDeleteThe MCA Act is similar in spirit to the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 - it is in place to suppress/deny Maori rights. It is not an acknowledgement of our tino rangatiratanga and the Maori Party knows this.
It is incorrect to say that a vote for Mana is a vote for Labour. Firstly, Goff has ruled out working with Mana and, secondly, Hone and John have stated they will sit on the cross benches in the medium term. Activist parties do not become part of the machinery (i.e. government).
Te Ururoa a scumbag?! Te Ururoa a sell-out?!
ReplyDeleteI've met a lot of scumbags & sellouts amongst our own people and that isn't Te Ururoa. Drug and alcohol abusers, family abusers and people who try to hustle their own whanau & friends are scumbags. Maori who don't commit to the language and Maori who continue to perpetuate the "we are victims & struggles" mentality are closer to being sell-outs in my opinion. All of us blogging in pakeha are probably blind to ourselves "selling-out" to a degree or another.
@Ana: Phil Goff's list ain't the Maori Party's fault. If we all do our homework we will see that the Maori Party including Hone did a lot in only two terms in Parliament. All of the Maori Party including Hone need to take ownership of undermining the Maori Party's credibility.
They couldn't sort it out, they aired their laundry out publicly outside the Maori community and now both sides are being "smug" and "arrogant" towards each other - all MPs, challengers for seats and supporters.
Maori Party are not perfect. But neither is the Mana Party or any Maori initiated party before. But does this mean we should endorse turning "Maori against Maori?!" Calling Te Ururoa a "sell-out" to vilify him, which serves more to appeal to filling your support ranks with negative people than to work for the people.
Why have we given up on working together? We don't have to and won’t always agree, but to jump out and publicly call Te Ururoa a "scumbag" and a "sell-out" is nothing short of kuware!
Annette and Hone are awesome advocates of Tino Rangatiratanga, but the action to turn Maori against Te Ururoa publicly does nothing but to "turn Maori against Maori." The Maori Party are not the enemy! Our quickness to cut each other down when things get hard which is being fed to the gluttons by this slander is the enemy! Kuware is the enemy!
When are we going to stop fighting each other and work with each other? Maori are a minority in our own lands, heoi he iwi taketake tonu, he iwi tu maire, he iwi e kaha ana ki te whakapapa ki te orokohanganga o te ao. Ahakoa kii katoa ta tatou hitoria i te korero kua roa te tu hei wheiwheinga te maori ki te maori ano - kua huri te ao inaianei! E hia ke nga iwi no tawahi kua kapi noa i nga motu nei?! E hia ke nei nga whakatauaki a o tatou tupuna e whakakaha ana i te akiaki ki te tu ngatahi - ae, me tautohetohe! Heoi ano, ma te tautohetohe ka whai kiko te kaupapa kia hira ai ta tatou tu.
I've met and read about many scumbags. Our iwi are full of sell-outs and we all are guilty of it to some degree or another. Te Ururoa is neither a sell-out or a scumbag to the nature being thrown around.
But oh well, we're a firy people, just disheartening to see when we become our own enemy - prime examples of recent: Maori vs Mana/Tuhoronuku vs Nga Hapu O Nga Puhi/Te Kura Kaupapa Maori O Nga Maungarongo vs Te Puna Reo Maori O Nga Maungarongo - throwback to our history: Tamatekapua vs Hoturoa/Toroa vs Puhi/Porourangi vs Tahupotiki.
Ma te Atua nga iwi Maori e tiaki, e manaaki.
Mark Ngahoia Scott
Kaiako i Te Kura Kaupapa Motuhake O Tawhiuau
Nga Puhi/Te Waiariki/Waikato-Hauraki
Supporter of Hone, Annette, Te Ururoa, Mana & Maori, not a supporter of turning Maori against Maori.
[My name comes up as Anon as I don't know how to get my name at top]
Kiaora Mark - it was Kingi Ihaka who said words to the effect of 'tatou hoariri ki a tatou'. Never a truer word eh.
ReplyDeleteKiaora Morgan. Thanks for the reply to my anon 1.30pm. You've opened a great debate here and I really appreciate it.
Both of us have access to internal govt negotiations - that's clear. I'm well informed that 'repeal' was never really an option. There was a strong element of coercion on the Maori Party. And that came from Iwi themselves who didn't want a repeal as they would have to go to the courts and would likely lose (re the state of affairs leading up to Ngati Apa 2004). My Iwi have a similar status to Ngati Apa and we would have succeded in the courts.
I think you might have misinterpreted my point re correlation. I was merely pointing out a fallacy in Ana's 'logic'. To say a vote for Maori Party is a vote for National is as wrong as it is to say a vote for Mana is a vote for Labour. Maori will do the deal with whoever offers the best conditions.
Yep, activist parties do not become part of the machinery. So what's the point if you have no intention of being able to set the agenda or at least influence it? The easy stuff is to sit on the sidelines and chuck stones. The hard stuff is to have to go in and try and work a change with the dominant party. Not easy but better than Mana's 'nothing' option.
I guess that's true - the Maori Party were under pressure to find a replacement from both the Nat's and Iwi and repeal would not have been politically palatable for either party. However, I would expect the Maori Party (as a Party of principle) to brush aside the political consequences and pursue the right option.
ReplyDeleteThe NZ "activist left", if you will, believes in tearing down the walls from the outside. Mana believes, in part, in this logic. The fundamental difference between the Maori Party (MP) and the Mana Movement is that the MP believes in injecting our own into the system and making incremental changes so the system better reflects our values. Mana believes in applying pressure from the outside to change the system. Mana, I think, sees the danger in allowing themselves and Maori to be co-opted in the system. When you enter the system you become part of the system and, as a result, help to uphold that system. Maori for the past 160 years have entered the system and never come back. They get comfortable - as the saying goes: you don't change the system, the system changes you.
Co-opted into the system, jezz we have been there since 1840!
ReplyDeleteRE: “Mana, I think, sees the danger in allowing themselves and Maori to be co-opted in the system”, we have been co-opted into the system since 1840 and if that is the danger Mana sees then perhaps they would be better to stay out of the system and let those who understand the numbers game in Parliament to get on with then job – activist rhetoric won’t work, will never work in Parliament and personal attacks on Te Ururoa and the Maori Party will not endear Mana to its potential voters ~in fact it is an absolute turn off our people young and old in Te Waiariki deserve better!
Ka pai Morgan and latest Anon.
ReplyDeleteI like your korero. Both of you are obviously well-versed in what is going on and are putting across well articulated points of view. I have only began actively following politics since the Maori Party came on board and this forum provides a medium to find understanding from both sides of the forum as long as the blogging is constructive and informative.
I personally wish Hone (+ Annette & company) were still on board with the Maori Party, as Hone brought a balance to the representation - however, it seems that they were unable to foster that balance of varying approaches.
I feel Hone is more settled and more composed now that Mana is afloat. I am hoping that both the Maori Party and the Mana Party are able to work together as Hone did say he would do when he first raised Mana. I was just watching Te Karere and both Hone and Pita were interviewed together - yeah there is still an air of kawa, but Hone even addressing Pita with a repectful title as his rangatira, shows that Hone is worth the time in politics.
It is clear that the Maori Party including Hone are all to fault with the split as they were unable to resolve things well before issues arose, during the complication and then following with the split.
Hone, as is Te Ururoa, Tariana and Pita are now responsible for reigning in both sides of Maori representation so that the split vote accommodates difference as opposed to flaring up kino turning Maori against Maori.
Ma te Atua nga iwi Maori e tiaki e manaaki.
Mark Ngahoia Scott
Kia ora Mark,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your informed comments. I think things might have been better if Hone and co had stayed on board (or were allowed to stay on board with the Maori Party) too.
Hone now carries a greater weight of responsibility and he knows it.
I think if Mana and the Maori Party combined next term Maori would be a significant force in Parliament. Mana has the advantage of bringing in a few friendly Pakehas to add to the mix of Maori advocates in Parliament. With, say, four MPs from Mana and three or four from the Maori Party we'd have a kaupapa Maori bloc the size of the Greens.
What needs to be promoted, is for both parties to come together and establish a coalition. I agree wholeheartedly with Mark Ngahoia Scott's comments.
ReplyDeleteI ask this : Would our Tipuna Matua who literally died fighting the crown, be proud of us fighting amongst each other, whanau against whanau, because we have ultimately YET AGAIN been sucked into the Crown agenda? Divide and rule wins out again.
I say, shame on both parties for seeing their own personality or ego clashes as MORE important than the kaupapa of what our tipuna matua have fought and died for. They have the ultimate power to swallow their pride to bring about kotahitanga, I say shame on them for even calling themselves 'leaders'. TRUE LEADERS WOULD NOT CHOOSE TO DIVIDE OUR PEOPLE LIKE THEY HAVE TODAY. I say CHOOSE because ultimately they could CHOOSE to create a coalition for the kaupapa and STOP WHANAU FIGHTING.
To all of the leaders, to the National Councils, to all of our IWI, we need to voice that we support the KAUPAPA, and we need to remember what our tipuna matua have fought and died for. We need a coalition to be established RIGHT NOW.
MANA MAORI UNITE!!!
If the parties wont agree then we need
Pfft The Maori Party said they were going to 'repeal' the FSSB Act. Repeal, we understood in its narrow sense meant to throw it out completely and revert to situation before its inception. Tariana and Co left us with no doubt they were going to trash it altogether, and there was no need to replace it with anything. The Maori Party then turned around to assert they would replace it with something else. WTF? That's not what we were lead to believe. Replace with something else? Come again? Is that the wider meaning of repeal?
ReplyDeleteThere is division amongst Maori the Maori Party definitely didn't help - nor are their apologist. Unity only matters now because the Maori Party are desperate and grasping at straws.
I can't bring myself to vote for the Maori Party's diluted policies any more. Giving the one percent more power, money and resources through the Maori Party machinations does me and my whanau absolutely no good.
I support more Maori in parliament, therefore I support a Split vote, Mana Party and Maori Party - one for candidate, one for party vote, until we get a proper coalition up and running.
ReplyDeleteIf I had a t-shirt it would say this
MORE MAORI IN PARLIAMENT
SUPPORT MANA / MAORI PARTY SPLIT VOTE
KOTAHITANGA
The slogan would be 'Against splitting whanau,hapu,iwi.....' or something to that effect...
Yeah, Annette Sykes whole fire breathing taniwha thing is a put off. Sweet as if it's aimed at Don Brash or John Banks but not our own people. You may disagree on the path but we're all trying to get to the same place, there's no need to slander someone who is doing his best to further our people.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't it be cool if all the Maori MPs in the major parties quit and joined the Maori or Mana party. If we had those kind of numbers, repeal would be served to the table with a pot of boil up. That's what we should really be fighting for, unity and voting participation among all Maori without drawing lines because your directions to Tino Rangatiratanga say go right and the other guy says go left.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand the call for airs and graces re: debates. Have we become so precious that we are not allowed to challenge anyone for fear we may hurt their feelings? Te Ururoa is the incumbent MP and everyone has a right to challenge his and his party's record. If he doesn't like this then maybe he would like to find a less stressful position? We used to welcome the cut and thrust of whaikorero, and debate. What's changed?
ReplyDeleteI used to vote for the Maori Party. It was two ticks in this whare for them. I know heaps of people say they did, but they can't have (according to the actual numbers of who voted for the Maori Party). No longer. The rise in GST, the Takutai Moana Bill, private prisons etc and sitting on their hands while our people continue to experience economics reminiscent of the great depression have put me off. I won't vote for people who promised so much and have delivered 'crumbs from the table'.
Crumbs from the table my ass.... read up on your facts mate! The most successful Maori Party in history! Sorry but rome wasnt built in the day! You cant expect the world to fall under your grace in just a three year term buddy! The Members of the Paati Maori such as Pita, Tariana, TU and Rahui work there asses off for our people! Whether you now it or not, it is ignorant, selfish people like yourself who have really fallen curse to the kupapa! E oho... Whakaarohia o korero! And regardless of the successes, there are those still those proportion of people who still cant be pleased! E oho!!
ReplyDelete