Charter Schools and Maori

Charter schools: at best the evidence is mixed, at worst the evidence is an indictment against the idea. There is no compelling evidence in clear support of the idea – or at least I’m not aware of anyone who has produced or pointed to any compelling evidence.

Over the past 48 hours a lot of has been written on charter schools, most of it rightly rubbishes the idea, but we haven’t seen anything from a Maori perspective. With that in mind, I’ll give an outline of the idea from a Maori perspective.

On first principle, the charter schools idea is attractive. Allowing iwi to take control of education in their rohe (area) satisfies the very foundation of tino rangatiratanga – the right of Maori to control things Maori. Any idea that will advance tino rangatiratanga is certainly welcome. The idea also fits nicely with the partnership principle i.e. the government funds education while Maori deliver it.

On a cynical level, the charter schools could, hypothetically speaking, mean profit. If the corporate arm of iwi, as opposed to say the social services arm, took responsibility for iwi charter schools then the motive would be profit. Controlling education would be another step in iwi’s desire for more control over New Zealand, especially in strategic areas. The iwi leaders are currently transfixed with delving into strategic resources and companies like geothermal power and Air New Zealand, but control over education is probably a far more potent area. Iwi could, hypothetically and cynically speaking of course, shape how their students see the world.

On a brighter note, iwi would be attracted to the idea as a means of reviving Maori culture. If our charter model is anything like the overseas models iwi would have the power to set the curriculum. Iwi could include subjects like rongoa (broadly speaking Maori medicine) or set up traditional wananga. This probably ties in to the principle of active protection i.e. the government, in allowing iwi to set such a curriculum, is taking active steps to protect Maori culture.

It’s a gamble though, allowing iwi anywhere near education. Iwi certainly have no experience in delivering education and I doubt there are many overseas models to draw on. Having said that, the kura kaupapa model is a good place to start. However, in my opinion kura kaupapa, although successful overall, are still suffering from teething problems. I don’t think it would be sensible for Iwi to deliver Maori language medium schools only too. Young Maori need to be prepared to enter the Pakeha world. This necessitates an element of mainstream education in whatever model iwi adopt.

I tentatively support the idea of iwi having some power over Maori education. This doesn’t mean I support the charter school model. In fact, I strongly oppose charter schools. I think it’s unfair that the overwhelmingly Maori populations in South Auckland and Christchurch East, along with the non-Maori population too, be subject to a trial of what is, at worst, a failed model. Surely John Banks should use his people in Epsom as guinea pigs for his pet idea. When the trial fails, or is repealed as soon as Labour gets in, New Zealand is going to have a subset of failed young people. I don’t think Act and National can see that there is a connection between poor policy and results in real world. Anyway, as above the idea of iwi control over Maori education is decent and if the charter idea goes ahead I’d support iwi involvement.     

triple threat

A few thoughts on Closeup’s interview with the main contenders for the Labour leadership:


Cunliffe:

Easily the strongest. Cunliffe was the most relaxed, concise and prepared. He also varied his tone and expression well. Cunliffe wisely played to his strengths intelligently identifying one of his weaknesses as a tendency to call “a spade a spade”. Of course this isn’t a weakness in the eyes of 90% of New Zealanders – it’s only a weakness in the eyes of Labour’s, and I hate using this term, PC brigade. However, Cunliffe could be perceived as smug, but hell he’s nowhere near as smug as Simon Bridges and the high priest of smug Steven Joyce.


Parker:

Parker stumbled early. A little stiff, which is to be expected, but unlike most he didn’t seem to loosen up as the night progressed. Strangely Parker kept claiming he can “touch people”. I thought that was a strange way to say he can connect with New Zealanders. Surprisingly, according to Parker he has no weaknesses as a leader. Wow. In the face of Labour’s massive defeat humility will go a long way. Someone should tell Parker.


Shearer:

I love Shearer’s story, but he didn’t look ready tonight. Under prepared and not very good off the cuff. That can be fixed though. Easy. Ultimately, he didn’t seem to ooze, for want to a better description, gravitas. Cunliffe and Parker looked and sounded more like leaders in waiting. Shearer, rightly in my opinion, focussed on the fact he’ll be different from the Clark government and he brings a fresh face. But I don't think that was enough in the face of his constantly stumbling. He was always searching for answers rather than firing them out.


Sainsbury:

He conducted a very blunt interview.

Finally, the txt poll had Shearer on top with 50%. Understandable. Cunliffe polled second and Parker third. On tonight's performance I'm backing Cunliffe. Shearer a close second and Parker a distant third. For me, the ideal ticket is Cunliffe as leader, Shane Jones as deputy, Parker at finance with Robertson, Ardern, Mahuta, Shearer, Twyford, Hipkins and Dalziel rounding out the top 10. 

Parliament according to the Maori vote

Here's an interesting graphic via Robbie Ellis. It shows what Parliament would look like according to the Maori vote:

Bad polling

I posted this in the comments section of another post, however I think it deserves a wider audience so I've copied and pasted here. These are the poll results from the election period Te Karere Digipolls compared with the actual results. Like I've said earlier, it shows that the polls were well out. I've rounded the numbers and have only included the main candidates.


Te Tai Tokerau:

Digipoll – Hone 42
               Kelvin 35
               Waihoroi 20

Actual – Hone 43
              Kelvin 38
              Waihoroi 16


Fairly close resemblance between the poll and the actual results in this electorate. Certainly within the margin of error of 4.9% so we’ll give them this one. However...

Tamaki Makaurau: 

Digipoll – Pita 58
               Shane 23
               Kereama 14

Actual -  Pita 40
              Shane 36
              Kereama 16


This poll grossly overstated Pita Sharples’ support. Shit, it was well out. This poll did seem to confirm what many Maori political commentators were thinking though. I haven’t seen anyone come up with a satisfactory answer as to why Shane did so well. Maybe low turnout hurt Pita. With 16% of the vote Kereama Pene certainly did I guess.


Hauraki-Waikato:

No poll from Te Karere on this electorate but the Marae Digipoll from September put it like this.


Digipoll – Nanaia 59
               Angeline 18
               Tau Bruce 13

Actual – Nanaia 59
              Angeline 22
              Tau Bruce 17


A decent result from the Marae Digipoll. They correctly stated Nanaia’s support and were thereabouts with Angeline and Bruce Mataki of the Maori Party. Remember this poll did not factor in undecideds.


Waiariki:

Digipoll – Te Ururoa 56
                Annette 22
                Louis 22

Actual –  Te Ururoa 41
               Annette 30
               Louis 23


Again, this poll was well out. Well beyond the margin of error. The poll overstated Te Ururoa’s support by a country mile. This race was tight – not the cakewalk the poll was predicting. 

Correction: I had the wrong figures before - all corrected now. 

Ikaroa Rawhiti:

There was no Te Karere poll here too, but we’ll have a look at the Marae Digipoll results.


Digipoll – Parekura 40
               Na 49
               Tawhai 1

Actual – Parekura 62
              Na 24
              Tawhai 14


Wow. I don’t think any poll in the history of mankind has ever been this out of whack. However, it should be remembered that this poll was conducted in September and they phrased the questions oddly. Something like “which party will you give your candidate vote to” instead of saying “who will you give your candidate vote to” or something like that.


Te Tai Hauauru: 
No Te Karere poll here either. However, Marae Digipoll from September comes in handy.


Digipoll – Tariana 49
                Soraya 40
                Fred Timitimu 1
                Jack (didn’t register I don’t think).

Actual –  Tariana 48
               Soraya 30
               Fred 8
               Jack 11


Tariana’s support was about right, but the poll exaggerated Soraya’s support and barely even factored Fred Timutimu. Jack McDonald didn’t even feature in the Marae poll but polled 11% and he wasn’t even going for the electorate vote.


Te Tai Tonga:

Digipoll – Rahui 46
                Rino 35
                Dora 10
                Clinton 9

Actual –  Rahui 31
               Rino 42
               Dora 15
               Clinton 8


Again, way off. Well outside the margin of error. The poll got Clinton about right, but failed miserably in predicting the correct outcome and share of the vote.

The polls in the Maori electorates have failed. Theses poll failures follow the Native Affairs Baseline poll which failed to accurately predict the share of the vote each candidate would receive in the Tai Tokerau byelection. I don’t think I can ever take a poll on the Maori electorates seriously again. To be fair, the polls were conducted late October to mid November and things change at the last minute. Polls are, of course, snapshots of a moment in time. The moment these polls were picturing was spread across a significant period of time.

Lastly, I think the other criticisms I have made of polls in the Maori electorates still stand.

On a Maori Party deal with National

Some on the left are throwing around the theory that once the special votes are counted National could drop two seats to the Greens. On past trends this is plausible. That would give National 58 seats, or 60 with Banks and Dunne, meaning the right would need the Maori Party to form a majority. The question then becomes: will the Maori Party oblige. The answer: yes.

If Maori Party agree, and I’m almost certain they would, the party would expect some heavy concessions from National. The Maori Party have had to, as the minor partner in the relationship, bear the consequences of heavy compromise. However, should the above situation eventuate the Maori Party will be in a stronger position to exact major gains.

I expect the Maori Party to demand retention of their ministerial positions and a guarantee Tariana Turia’s portfolios will pass to Te Ururoa Flavell if or when she stands down. An expansion of Whanau Ora will be the only bottom line. The Maori Party campaign revolved almost exclusively on Whanau Ora and the flow on effects the policy will have on “strengthening the whanau” and addressing problems like poverty. Whanau Ora is inclusive of a range of Maori Party policies like the Marae Hubs idea too. I expect the Maori Party to push for universal access to te reo classes in high schools. Some of the more low key policies which will be a Maori Party priority are establishing a Parliamentary Commissioner for the Treaty, reviewing Te Puni Kokiri and a commitment to implementing the recommendations of the constitutional review (given Bill English is heading the review with Sharples I expect concrete action to be taken anyway). On the subject of the constitutional review this is one of the primary reasons the Maori Party will hesitate to go with Labour – the Maori Party have a number of ongoing projects with National (both visible i.e. the review and behind the scenes with Whanau Ora and Maori education).

Asset sales will not, as both leaders have said, be a deal breaker. The Maori Party opposition to asset sales is hollow. They oppose the sales, but should they go ahead they will support iwi access. Some on the left have hoped, should the above situation eventuate, that the Maori Party block asset sales. This won’t happen. Asset sales will be a bottom line for John Key and the Maori Party will accept this when Key agrees to give preferential access to New Zealanders and New Zealand bodies (iwi, Kiwisaver schemes etc). Key came under increasing pressure in the last week of the campaign to ensure assets will stay in New Zealand hands and I don’t expect Labour and New Zealand First to allow that pressure to ease. Key will not just give preferential access to iwi. He cannot, for the sake of the ‘separatist’ vote, allow New Zealand First to cultivate the perception that National are giving Maori special treatment. However, the electorate has, I think, moved on from the separatism issue. At least the issue doesn’t hold as much salience anymore thanks to the, in Pakeha eyes, reasonable behaviour of the Maori Party and John Key’s symbolic olive branch in 2008. Giving NZders the right of pre-emption if you will satisfies both sides really. Firstly, the assets are kept in New Zealand hands (satisfying a plank where National is weak). Secondly, National will placate a powerful and increasingly friendly bloc – iwi. If National align with iwi interests I don’t doubt that iwi will begin throwing themselves behind the Tories. Certainly Labour and the Green’s platforms may hurt iwi. For example, no asset sales and water charges (iwi and countless Maori land trusts run farms with irrigation etc).

Iwi will also help determine who the Maori Party go with. The Maori Party will, and rightfully so, consult the people. However, the only people to turn up will be conservative, mainly rural Maori with connections to their Marae and Runanga. The sort of Maori who are more likely to support National and whatever is good for the Runanga. The Maori Party is no longer a party where all Maori will flock (like they were in 2005 and 2008). The Maori Party have fractured their base. Some of whom have fled to Mana while others have returned to Labour. The Green’s seem to be benefiting too.

I’m going to break with the orthodox here and suggest that another term with National may not be a death sentence. In fact, if the Maori Party play it right they could hold steady. Over the past term the Maori Party have carved out a niche. They no longer play to all Maori, but the emerging Maori middle class. A middle class that sees Maori rights as paramount, but recognise that they – as in the Maori middle class – need to breach the power structures and insert themselves where they can make change, read the Cabinet table, and this approach takes compromise. They got to the middle, and in some cases the top, by sacrificing things like their cultural values in the workplace and they analogise this to government. Often the Maori middle class comes from existing iwi power structures. Maori who were never as disenfranchised as, if I can use this metaphor, the Jake Hekes of the Maori world. I’ve said this time and again that the Maori Party and the Mana Party represent the divide between the haves and the have nots in the Maori world. The haves are iwi with their settlements and emerging middle class. The have nots are the mainly urban and some rural Maori without trusts, without settlements and sometimes without Runanga. Both groups, although working towards the same goal, embody different approaches. The have nots, who are perhaps naïve in the ways of the world, want to see rapid change and uncompromising politics. The have nots are, in my opinion, probably sick of seeing their whanaunga getting ahead well they are stubbornly stuck at the bottom. They see the way to advancement as tearing down the walls. The haves are a bit more street wise about it. They know how to manipulate the Pakeha game and will do so. Working for gradual change from the inside. Some Maori probably resent the fact that other Maori are engaging like that, but that’s an approach I support (even though I don’t support the Maori Party per se).

Anyway, I’m heading way off track here. The second niche the Maori Party have carved are conservative Maori. Maori are, in my opinion anyway, naturally conservative. Not always politically, but socially. Also on many Marae I think conservatism tends to reign. For example, a lot of Marae like to hold steadfast, and fair enough, to old traditions rather than letting those traditions change like cultures eventually do.

Back to the original topic. Assuming the Maori Party play to these groups and stem anymore bleed then they will not die. If the Maori Party can give practical effect to the line that it’s better to be at the table then survival beyond 2014 will be likely. Giving effect to this will involve tangible policy wins and a perception that the Maori Party are negating the worst effects of the global economic crisis. Of course, much, much easier said than done. If the Maori Party position themselves as a counter balance against National then the above groups will certainly see the value in keeping them around. The only situation where the Maori Party can expect to claim the counterbalance title though is if they stop asset sales, but as I said I doubt that’ll happen. For the counterbalance narrative to work the Maori Party need to stop just one, for lack of a better term, big bang nutcase policy e.g. asset sales. When Tariana abdicates her throne the Maori Party could solve their succession issue quiet easily and, thus, secure their post-2014 future too; they could put up Rahui Katene in Te Tai Hauauru. Though I don’t think she has whakapapa connection to the area which would count against her.

I didn’t intend to write anywhere near this much, so I’ll conclude essay style. The Maori Party will almost certainly renew their relationship with National. The Maori Party will expect heavier policy concessions this time around with Whanau Ora as a bottom line. Asset sales will not be a deal breaker. Iwi will determine who the Maori Party go with and another term with National will not spell death so long as the Maori Party play to their new base – the Maori middle class (of which iwi are a part) and conservative mainly older Maori. I don’t agree with what the Maori Party did last term, but I would feel assured if they were at the table this time around. I think a second term National government with a strong mandate is far scarier than a first term government with a shakier share of the vote. We could be in the shit.

Steve Chadwick resigns

Sad news from the NZ Herald:

After more than a decade in Parliament, former Rotorua MP Steve Chadwick has resigned from politics.

Mrs Chadwick quit after losing the Rotorua electorate to incumbent MP Todd McClay and failing to win a seat through the list votge.

Mrs Chadwick was generous in defeat, saying Mr McClay ran a clean campaign, but was obviously saddened at her loss.

"I'm really going to miss being in Wellington, especially since my children are down there.

"I'll be taking some time off for myself, its been 12 years, and you spend a lot of that time putting others first instead of yourself. The door's been closed for me by the people of Rotorua and I accept that."

Steve Chadwick was an excellent constituent MP for Rotorua from 1999 to 2008 and an excellent Labour list MP for Rotorua from 2008 to yesterday. Steve is one of the warmest people I have ever met. She has a beautiful aura and was a fine politician. She will be a loss to Rotorua and New Zealand. I wish her well in whatever she does. 

(It was a crime that useless deadwood nobodies like Moana Mackey, Rajen Prasad and Darien Fenton were ranked ahead of Steve).

On a related note, congratulations to Todd McClay who had his majority affirmed. Todd is also an excellent constituent MP and he will no doubt continue to serve the Rotorua electorate well.

How the Maori electorates fell

I’m packing out some fast analysis, but I don’t have much time on my hands and I want to get my thoughts out. What I’m getting at is that these conclusions are provisional, but still sensible of course, and I may change my views over time. Anyway, I’ve been pouring over the numbers booth by booth in the most interesting electorates; Te Tai Tonga, Waiariki and Tamaki Makaurau. Here is how the vote went:

Waiariki:

As I predicted Annette won the Eastern Bay of Plenty. She thrashed Te Ururoa in Kawerau. This happened because 1) Annette grew up in Kawerau and the people know her and her whanau 2) Te Ururoa never shows his face in Kawerau 3) Kawerau is a working town/Maori radical town. Annette also won Whakatane thanks to, I think, young voter turnout and as punishment for Te Ururoa’s support for the Marine and Coastal Area’s Act (Whakatane being a coastal town after all). There are a few very young Mana activists in Whakatane who are selling the message very well.

Annette also won Torere and Raukokere convincingly and also Te Kaha. There was always going to be a swing against Te Ururoa for his silence over oil prospecting off of the coast and, as I’ve said, his support for the MCA act. Annette also won Matata (another tino rangatiratanga town). As I predicted on Pundit Annette won the periphery towns in Tuhoe territory, for example Kaingaroa and Minginui, and she ran Te Ururoa close in the Ruatoki Valley. Taneatua and Waimana fell Annette’s way too. 

However, as I said last night, it wasn’t enough to bring Annette over the line. She needed to win the bigger centres like Rotorua and Tauranga Moana. Te Ururoa won Tauranga, but it was very close with both Annette and Louis Te Kani claiming a close second in different booths. In fact, Te Kani actually won a few booths in Tauranga as did Annette, but Te Ururoa won the majority.

Where Te Ururoa won it was in Rotorua proper. Annette’s home base of Rotoiti and the more radical parts of Te Arawa, meaning Ngati Pikiao, swung behind Annette. For example Okere Falls, Rotokawa and of course Rotoiti. This was no surprise. Te Ururoa was always going to win the conservative support that characterises Te Arawa while Annette was going to win the smaller rough edges.

As I picked Tuwharetoa also fell behind Te Ururoa. He won all but one of the polling places in Taupo. Annette’s campaign team failed to really breach Tuwharetoa and incumbency and Tuwharetoa conservatism helped Te Ururoa over the line.

In summary, Annette claimed the Eastern Bay of Plenty and Tuhoe in good numbers. Te Ururoa won Te Arawa and Tuwharetoa. It was extremely close in Tauranga with Te Ururoa just pulling away. What we can say is that the tribes of the Te Arawa waka pulled Te Ururoa through. I’m going to blow my own trumpet here and highlight that I called the regions/tribal allegiances right, but…. I didn’t call the result right did I. So no bragging rights here I guess. Then again I did pull away from calling the win for Annette on Pundit.


Te Tai Tonga:

Like I said last night, Rino Tirikatene held Labour support in the South Island. Ashburton, Blenheim, Bluff and Invercargill fell Rino’s way. It was a close slog in Christchurch, but Rino also pulled away there too. Some people will be surprised with this result given Rahui’s work in the city in the wake of the quake. White flight has affected Chch, but I don't think the same trend is true of Maori so I think we can draw the conclusion that Rahui's work has 1) gone unnoticed or 2) was not as good as people were hyping.

Given Rino’s solid performance in the South Rahui had to, like she did in 2008, win Wellington in sufficient numbers, However, as I predicted (yes I hate to brag), Mana’s Clinton Dearlove stole votes from Rahui while Rino held Labour’s numbers from 2008. Couple this with Dora Langsbury’s polling in Wellington and this was enough to erode Rahui’s support sufficiently to allow Rino to maintain a healthy lead. Karori, Kelburn and parts of the Hutt fell Rahui’s way, but only just. Rino, surprisingly, won the Green Party belts of Wellington, for example Kilbernie, Hataitai and Lyall Bay. It was much closer in working class suburbs like Petone and Newton. In the 2008 election Rahui won these suburbs in large numbers. It seems as if Wellington, with our high proportion of public servants, have punished the Maori Party for their association with the public service hating National Party. The working vote also seems to be returning to Labour in response to their shift to the left. The working vote is also transferring, but in small numbers, to Mana. It’s interesting to see Aro Valley, a strong student area, fall behind Rino too.

Turnout has also worked against Rahui. With a turnout of below 60% according to Maria Bargh you can bet that many of these people who didn’t turn up with young, read Rahui’s voters.

In sum, Rahui seems to be the victim of the swing against the Maori Party. Tino rangatiratanga is not as big in Te Tai Tonga as in other electorates. Labour, and by extension social democracy, is the ideology in these parts. It was always going to be hard for her to face Rino Tirikatene who is, of course, a Tirikatene. He was hand picked by Parekura Horomia because Labour knew Te Tai Tonga was an electorate where support for the Maori Party and Rahui was soft. This assessment has held true. Despite Rahui’s work in Chch Te Tai Tonga is still a Labour electorate, or more accurately a Tirikatene electorate.

I think Rino will be an excellent MP. He’s genuine, intelligent and will now (with a Maori seat behind him) have a lot of Mana in the Maori Caucus. Rahui deserves credit, and lots of it, for her work as a local MP. Two very good candidates but only one could win. It’s also interesting to note that Rino is the first Labour MP to topple a Maori Party MP.


Tamaki Makaurau:

John Tamihere, supporting what Willie Jackson said last, reckons Shane Jones ran a “very poor” campaign. John Tamihere and Willie Jackson, as the two Maori political heavyweights in Auckland, would know too. With that in mind it’s hard to say how Shane polled so highly. I’ll put forward the following reasons: Pita suffered from a reflex backlash against the Maori Party (like Rahui and Tariana who has a reduced majority), Kereama Pene helped exacerbate this backlash and, as a result, steal many of Pita’s votes, lastly Shane is a high profile MP and he benefited from a swing towards Labour in the Maori seats. The commentators on Marae Investigates are pointing out that Labour is rising in the Maori seats. 

Unfortunately I can't bring up the candidate vote details polling place to polling place. Only the party vote details. You can possibly analogise the party vote to the candidate vote, and I will since I have nothing else to work on. Labour, and I guess Shane by extension, did very well in Manurewa, Mangere and Manukau. There is a strong Maori Labour organisation in Manurewa, with Louisa Wall of course, a strong organisation in Manukau East with Ross Robertson and Mangere with Sua William Sio. Out of interest Mana did very well in these places too. Shane also seems to have benefited from Labour’s organisation in New Lynn, Mt Roskill and Mt Albert. However, I expect in the candidate vote that Pita pulled away in central Auckland and places like Orakei. Pita’s strong support among Ngati Whatua probably pulled him through I imagine. 

This isn’t a killer blow against Shane’s career. In fact Labour need him now more than ever. Pita deserved the win though. All power to him over the next three years.

Maori Party in strong position... (updated)

As the results become clearer the Maori Party are not Kingmakers, but they can provide National with a useful buffer and, as a result, "stable government". 

The Maori Party are in a strong position. They could even be Kingmakers. If this is the case I expect them to side with National in exchange for an expansion of Whanau Ora, possibly a sweet deal for Iwi re asset sales and a review of the MCA Act. However, they will know this is suicide. They are, after all, two MPs down thanks to their their relationship with National. In terms of relationships, the Maori Party have a successful working relationship with National and also a strong personal relationship with John Key and others. Although the Maori Party maintain good relations with Labour's Maori caucus, the Maori Party don't have any sort of working relationship with them. Labour have also tried to, and in the case of Te Tai Tonga succeeded, in burning the Maori Party. A few things to chew over.

The commentators on Maori TV seem to think a second term with National will hurt the Maori Party. Sandra Lee, correctly i think, states that the Maori Party will want a lot more gains in exchange for their loyalty. That's the only option really. The Maori Party need concrete, visible and easily sold policy wins. The, for example, constitutional review and the UN Dec. on the Rights of Indigenous People are too abstract and remote for many Maori voters. They don't connect to those sorts of policies nor see the relevance in a time where material needs are most pressing. The decade for symbolism has passed. For many Maori, this decade is about getting by the basics.

UPDATE: It appears to me that Pita Sharples is hinting on all channels that the Maori Party will support National. He cites on going projects his party have with National and says asset sales are not a deal breaker. In fact, Sharples restates his hollow opposition to asset sales on TVNZ saying that if it happens the Maori Party will push for iwi access. Interesting.

- Key has just publicly invited the Maori Party back. John Key is gracious and correct with his praise for Phil Goff too. If I can add my own comments, Goff is a great man and a great New Zealander. He deserves nothing but praise, praise and more praise.

- Consensus on Maori TV seems to be the Maori Party face some huge challenges in terms of working with National. Everyone seems to be in agreement that it another three years with National may prove to be the Maori Party's death sentence.

First thoughts on the Maori results (updated)

Most of the results are in and these are my unrefined thoughts.


Te Tai Tonga:

As predicted, Labour’s Rino Tirikatene has dislodged the incumbent Rahui Katene. The specials remain to be counted, but Tirikatene enjoys a healthy lead. The Green’s Dora Langsbury polled well and Mana’s Clinton Dearlove underperformed taking less than 9% of the vote. Interestingly Tirikatene is performing better in the candidate vote than Labour is in the party vote so it appears that Tirikatene has built a personality vote – much like his colleagues Parekura and Nanaia. Turn out among older voters who remember the colossals, Whetu Tirikatene-Sullivan and Eruera Tirikatene, appears to have helped Rino over the line. Rino also credits his message that a vote for the Maori Party is a vote for National. I agree. That is a resonate line. Ultimately, Rahui needed Wellington to pull her through, but it looks like the four way race has split the vote in Wellington and, instead, pulled Rahui back.


Waiariki:

Te Ururoa has put some distance between himself and Annette Sykes. That surprises me. I expected there to be only 10% in it (there's about 12% between them). The complicating factor seems to be that Louis Te Kani has secured more votes than I expected. Te Ururoa has no doubt held Rotorua and stemmed the bleed in other parts of the electorate. Despite Annette’s momentum the advantage of incumbency appears to have done enough for Te Ururoa. Numbers wise, Annette’s strongholds (Opotiki, East Coast etc) are just too small compared to Te Ururoa’s strongholds (Rotorua, wider Te Arawa etc). Louis Te Kani, at around 23%, I think has done well in his home patch of Tauranga Moana and adopted home of Rotorua. I firmly believe if Annette started campaigning four months out (rather than four weeks out!) that she would have snatched the seat. Annette’s campaign machinery, which was stronger than Te Ururoa’s, just did not have enough time to stamp their mark. Considering the Maori Party experienced near operational collapse their win is a real testament to Te Ururoa Flavell as an individual.


Tamaki Makaurau:

No one ever expected Pita to lose this seat, but I don’t think anyone expected Shane to come so close. Even though he isn’t going to win, this is a close loss and it certainly won’t end his career. It looks as if Mana’s Kereama Pene has stolen more than a few tino rangatiratnage votes from Pita. Mana is, of course, strongest from Waiariki tracking north. Auckland especially - think Sue Bradford, John Minto, Matt McCarten, UNITE and the Auckland socialist community. Pene, like Rino, seems to be building a personality vote too. Pene polled over 16% while Mana polled only 14%.


Te Tai Tokerau:

Hone has held his seat.


Ikaroa-Rawhiti:

Parekura has held. No surprise to see such a significant majority too. I expect support would have been split in Tai Rawhiti, but the further south you go the stronger support for Parekura becomes.


Hauraki-Waikato:

Nanaia has held too. No surprise she has secured a predictable majority.


Te Tai Hauauru:

Tariana has secured another win and deservedly so. No surprises looking at her majority.


Other Maori candidates:


Paula Bennett appears safe in Waitakere. This battle was always going to be close and it looks like Carmel Sepuloni, a rising star in Labour, is gone (I don't think she was high enough on the list to make it back).

Hekia Parata had a decent crack at the Mana seat, but Kris Faafoi has maintains a safe lead.

Simon Bridges is, predictably, safe. He wasn't threatened by Deborah Mahuta-Coyle.

Louisa Wall has galloped home in Manurewa.

General Comments:

The biggest surprise is how bloody wrong the polls were. Te Tai Tonga has swung Rino Tirikatene’s way – comfortably too. It was much closer in Tamaki Makaurau and slightly closer in Waiariki. Perhaps my criticisms of polls is justified, having said that my predictions were only slightly more accurate. Meh.

UPDATE: Rino's win appears to be one of the only bright spots in a day of shame for Labour. They look to fall below 28% and lose real talent like Kelvin Davis. Shame on the makers of the Labour Party list.

According to TVNZ voter turnout could be below 70%. I think this is unprecedented and will hurt Mana, the Maori Party and Labour.

The Maori have been punished in Te Tai Tonga, losing to Labour of course, and the Maori Party's share of the party vote has being slashed in Waiariki, Hauraki-Waikato, Tamaki Makaurau and Te Tai Tokerau. Mana's party vote result was small in the other electorates. Labour is still the party of choice for Maori.

The week in Maori politics

It’s been a long week, don’t you think? I can’t wait for it all to be over. But anyway, here is the summary of the week in Maori politics:


Monday

There were a few stories on Monday. The Maori Party moved to clarify their position on asset sales. The party leaders reiterated that the Maori Party opposes asset sales, but, key word but, if the sales were to go ahead the Maori Party would swing behind iwi. Hollow opposition to be honest, but supremely pragmatic. On the topic of the Maori Party Pita Sharples informed Radio New Zealand that he “must” be at the Cabinet Table if Don Brash is there. Pita, it appears, sees himself as a counterbalance against the redneck Brash.

Te Karere released their last poll this time on Te Tai Tonga. The poll put the incumbent Rahui Katene 11 points ahead of Labour’s Rino Tirikatene. Labour was expecting to win Te Tai Tonga; however this is far from assured now. The Maori Party look set to retain all of their seats.

Native Affairs ran their final electorate debate this time in Tamaki Makaurau. Pita Sharples clashed with Shane Jones, Mana’s Kereama Pene and the Green’s Mikaere Curtis. In my opinion, all four men performed well. Joshua Hitchcock provides a useful review here.

Waatea News led with the angle that Labour relegated Maori issues during the campaign. This was a continuation of the angle they ran last week.

Mana’s foreign policy launch still had legs on Monday. John Minto announced, or re-announced is probably the better description, Mana’s plan to recall New Zealand troops in Afghanistan and use the $40m that would save to “feed the kids”. Make lunch not war as Damien Christie says. Minto also called for immigrants from the Pacific to be given the same status as immigrants from Australia.


Tuesday

Maori politicians bombarded each other with claims and counter claims on Tuesday. Labour’s Nanaia Mahuta claimed that asset sales will diminish the Crown’s ability to settle treaty claims. Once, for example, power companies are sold to private interests the Crown’s ability to recognise, for example, Maori water rights will be diminished because those rights will have to be balanced against the interests and rights of private owners. I hope I have paraphrased her argument correctly.

The Maori Party told us not to send Hone Harawira to do the groceries. The Maori Party claimed that Mana’s costing for their breakfasts in schools program was well over $40m. Pita Sharples reckoned the price of providing breakfast to all children in low deciles schools is closer to $500m.

Labour’s Kelvin Davis gained some traction and came out against Anne Tolley. Davis attacked the Education Minister’s decision to close a successful class for mainly Maori students. According to opponents Tolley closed the class as punishment for Moerewa School’s refusal to implement National Standards.


Wednesday

Hone Harawira delivered his state of the nation speech in South Auckland. Harawira called for a war on poverty. Harawira also outlined some of Mana’s policies, like the abolition of GST, and emphasised the history and strength of Mana’s team (Sykes, Minto and Bradford).

The Maori Party leaders met in Wellington to discuss post election arrangements. Tariana Turia spoke to the Herald’s Audrey Young and seemed to, or at least this is how I see it, be implying that if the Maori Party hold the balance of power they will support National. The Maori Party have already stated that if National can form a government without the Maori Party then they will still pursue an agreement similar to the one the two parties made in 2008. Anyway, Turia informed Young that the Maori Party deal with National was aimed at building “a lasting and respectful relationship”. Emphasis on lasting. It is also worth keeping in mind John Key’s reluctance to use the Maori Party as a bogeyman. In fact Key has openly praised the Maori Party. The Maori Party have also refrained from really criticising National. Another factor that may come into play is Pita Sharples close relationship with John Key.


Thursday

On Radio New Zealand Phil Goff reiterated his position on Hone Harawira – he can’t be trusted according to Goff. Goff went so far as to say he won’t work with Mana rather than just Hone.

Morning Report held their minor leaders debate. For a review see this from Tim Slewyn.

The Thursday night polls from the two main news networks didn’t make great viewing for Maori. Mana dangled around 1%, the Maori Party between 1.5 and 2%. Labour was on 28% in the One News poll and 26% on the 3 News poll. However, the Greens, who are always supporters of things Maori, sat between 10 and 13%.

Finally, I put out my picks for the Maori electorates at Pundit.


Friday

In the Herald I write on how Maori can make their vote count. Willie Jackson and I also discuss the Maori seats on Morning Report.

I think the most significant story today was Te Ururoa Flavell’s claim that the Maori Party have “undersold” themselves.

And that brings the week to a close and, of course, the election. Tomorrow is voting day so please, please get out there and vote. Don’t forget to vote for MMP too. Soon after the election I’ll be posting a few election post mortem pieces. I’ll review each parties campaign, some individual politicians and I’ll also take a look at the issues that I think were important/influenced the way Maori voted.

If you want a full overview of the election in Maori politics see this post on week 1 of the campaign, week 2 and week 3.

Lastly, thanks for reading me over the campaign. Over the past four weeks on average 1000 of you view this blog each day. The lowest number of views was Wednesday with only 700 and the highest was in the second week when it hit over 2000. When the election's over please don't leave me! I think I'll still be interesting. 

My picks and my votes

If you want to know my picks for the Maori electorates you can take a look at my latest post over at Pundit. My calls are largely consistent with what I’ve been saying for the past year.

On a slightly related note I’m going to tell you how I plan to vote. Deciding to whom I’m going to give my electorate vote isn’t hard. Readers will know I’m openly supportive of Annette Sykes so I guess it’s no secret that’s where my electorate vote will fall. Yes, I live in Wellington, but I’m still enrolled in Waiariki (I’ll get round to changing this soon). If I was enrolled in Te Tai Tonga I’d be casting a vote for Rino Tirikatene. Rahui Katene hasn’t impressed me over the past three years.

Readers may, however, be a little surprised when it comes to my party vote. I thought about this pretty hard and I’ve decided to cast my party vote for the Greens – not Mana. Although I support Mana and almost everything the party stands for, I don’t agree with all of their policies. On the other hand, scrolling through the Greens catalogue of policies I found myself agreeing with almost everything. My vote will not be informed on Maori issues alone, if it was I’d vote Mana, but across the board the Greens have the most comprehensive set of policies and, in my opinion, the best plan for moving New Zealand forward. This doesn’t mean I’m all of a sudden an enthusiastic Green Party supporter. I really, really, really dislike Russell Norman.

I should add I’m not voting strategically. I’m voting on principle. Annette Sykes is the best candidate in Waiariki and the Greens offer the best plan for New Zealand. That’s it.

The week in Maori politics

A round of the week in Maori politics. Tea tapes aside, week 3 of the election campaign in Maori politics was a lot more exciting than the last.


Monday:

Surprisingly, the Herald on Sunday’s (HoS) story on Pita Sharples electorate manager, Martin Cooper, failed to carry over to Monday. The HoS revealed Cooper used his position to influence the Auckland Council. On Radio Live with Willie and JT Sharples blames the media for highlighting the story. It appears that Pita Sharples thinks that possible corruption in his office is a non-issue and the media should be beat up on for doing their job. Nice (sarcasm).

Te Karere released their latest poll, this time on Waiariki. The poll showed Te Ururoa Flavell enjoys a commanding lead. I, as well as Bomber and Tim Selwyn, doubted the poll’s validity. I don’t accept that Te Ururoa enjoys 56%. Annette and Louis both polled 22%.

On RNZ Social Development Minister Paula Bennett refused to commit to retaining Whanau Ora. Bennett claimed the policy is not National Party policy and these things will be fleshed out after the election. On the same program Labour’s Annette King said Labour has no qualms about continuing Whanau Ora. Bennett’s stance may prove detrimental to the Maori Party/National Party relationship. King’s comments may go some way to rebuilding trust between Labour and Tariana Turia.

On Monday night Native Affairs held their Te Tai Tokerau debate. As an aside, Native Affairs won best current affairs show at the Aotearoa Film and Television Awards. I picked Kelvin as the winner, but most in the media and the blogosphere picked the win for Hone – fair enough.


Tuesday:

Tariana Turia led with her call for family who care for disabled whanau to be paid as caregivers. I see no issue with this. It seems wrong that the government pays strangers to act as caregivers but not family. I’m not sure if this is Maori Party policy is whether Turia is acting in her capacity as Disabilities Issues Minister.

The Maori media, particularly Radio Waatea, started paying attention to Labour’s Maori policy. Labour quietly released their Maori policy statement after I criticised them for not doing so last Friday. For my discussion of the policy see this post over at Pundit. The statement was broad, but the first step to influencing Maori political discourse. I say broad, but I should also add that there are some very specific policies like increasing funding for Maori tourism, extending 20 hours free education to Kohanga reo and restabilising Maori trade training.

RNZ reported sparks were flying at a Te Tai Tonga debate hosted by Ngai Tauira at Victoria University. The two main contenders, Rino Tirikatene and Rahui Katene, were at each others throat for most of the debate. National’s Paul Quinn, apparently, got in on the action as well. The highlight of the debate was probably the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis candidate telling the others they need to calm down and smoke more weed.


Wednesday:

Wednesday was fairly quiet. Labour’s Maori policy statement still led on Waatea and TVNZ’s multiparty leaders debate was held that night. Consensus seems to be that Hone Harawira was a top performer and Tariana Turia performed well too. John Armstrong, who is certainly no friend of Hone, declared Hone the standout. Tracey Watkins praised Tariana Turia in the Dom and I took my hat off to both leaders, but Tariana in particular.


Thursday:

It was a busy day for the Mana Movement. In response to the Nat’s draconian plans to drug test beneficiaries Hone Harawira and Annette Sykes called for Cabinet to lead by example and submit themselves for drug tests. After all, as the Nat’s say when they propose draconian measures, the innocent have nothing to fear. Mana also slammed the pay increase MPs are set to receive next year and Sue Bradford continued her run of positive publicity with another profile in a major daily.

In the Herald Claire Trevett looked insightfully at the Maori Party relationship with the Nats. Rawiri Taonui gave his opinion on the Maori seats too. His points bear close, close resemblance to everything I have been saying for the past year. Except Taonui takes the safe road and picks Te Ururoa to retain Waiariki. A safe bet, but it's still 50/50.


Friday:

On RNZ Mana's Annette Sykes slams the Maori Party statement that Mana cannot represent Maori because Mana contains many Pakeha. Annette takes offence at this saying it goes against Maori values. Annette highlights that Maori values dictate that Maori embrace Pakeha and that saying this isn't true is a misunderstanding of kaupapa Maori. I would add that the Maori Party's contention disrespects the Pakeha whakapapa of many Maori too. Annette tops it off and says the Maori Party is, rather than Maori led, "National led".

I speculate in the Herald that the Green activist base may move to Mana in response to Russell Norman throwing Joylojn White overboard. Over at Pundit I also explore Labour’s Maori policy statement and the surprises it contains.

Pita Sharples reckons his opponent, Shane Jones of course, is a waste if he is not the leader of the Labour Party. Sharples thinks the party should have gifted him a safe seat like Manurewa. I agree. I don't know what Labour was thinking standing him in Tamaki Makaurau.

If there's anything I've missed please leave a comment and I'll update it as soon as I can. And also remember to keep tuned to Radio Live next week. Willie and JT have been interviewer prominent politicians in the lead up to the election including many Maori politicians.

On the two political debates

Did anyone notice that three of the six leaders in TVNZ’s multi party debate were Maori? If Meteria Turei was put in the place of Russell Norman then four of the six would have been Maori – a clear majority. Maori must be doing something right huh. The two kaupapa Maori leaders, Hone and Tariana, came out of the debate looking good. Hone found an unlikely friend in Claire Robinson who commended Hone for his communication skills. Even John Armstrong declares Hone a “surprise standout”. The Dom’s Tracey Watkins praises Tariana as “the kuia of the nation” and I have nothing but praise for her performance too.

I’m only going to focus on Hone and Tariana and then I’ll review Native Affairs Hauraki Waikato debate.

Hone was probably the stronger of the two. He really is the master communicator and, along with the other Maori in the room Winston Peters, had the audience enthralled. Hone was strong on the financial transactions tax and never strayed far from focussing on the poor. A minor highlight of the debate was trying to decide who, out of Hone and Tariana, came up with their respective policies first. A common line was “I agree with Hone” or “I agree with Tari”. Tariana did particularly well during the race relations section. She really underlined her reputation as a strong advocate for Maori. She was all class. Tariana never strayed far from focussing on Whanau Ora too – the Maori Party’s trophy policy win in my opinion. It was a smart appeal to her base.

The question on coalitions was also interesting. Tariana certainly didn’t express a preference for any party pointing out that the Maori Party can and will work with anyone – except Act. This signalled, to me at least, that should the Maori Party hold the balance of power on November 27 they will support a Labour led government. In other words a government that does not include Act. However, if Act is a no show on November 27 and the Maori Party holds the balance of power, well, in that scenario I think they would support a National led government. As Winston said, you develop an amount of respect and admiration for the people you work with, but then again familiarity breeds contempt (or so they say).

On that note it was unfair of Hone to paint the Maori Party as if they are in a coalition with Act. Hone knows this isn’t true. The Maori Party has a relationship, more specifically a confidence and supply agreement, with the National Party – not Act. Act just happen to have one with the Nats too.


Native Affairs debate:


Nanaia Mahuta was the stand out. Hands down. Angeline Greensill was close second while Tau Bruce Mataki from the Maori Party rounded off the night.

Initially, the candidates were evenly matched. Angeline was aggressive off the mark, Mataki was strong on the Maori Party’s policy of asking all Maori organisation to hire two rangatahi while Nanaia was in blazing form on asset sales.

As the night wore on Nanaia proved to be the most consistent. Nanaia showed her experience in response to a question on co-management deals with the Crown and Iwi. Nanaia highlighted Labour’s work in that area, especially around the Waikato river. In response to a question on child abuse Nanaia, quite impressively in my opinion, highlighted specific legislation Labour enacted to reduce assaults on children.

Angeline was strong too. On the child abuse question Angeline linked the problem to poverty and then reeled off Mana’s policies to combat poverty and, as a result, reduce child abuse. On health Angeline skilfully linked her answers to the principles that Princess Te Puea stood for. Angeline also expressed the need for better support for rongoa and Pharmac.

Mataki started strong, but wore off as the night progressed. He managed to recover when discussing the Maori Party’s policy of turning Marae into economic hubs. He also did well to highlight Whanau Ora, as I said the Maori Party’s trophy policy, and link this in with other themes like child abuse.

All three candidates were strong on employment. Nanaia talked about shifting benefits to apprenticeships, Angeline talked about governments role in creating jobs and Mataki talked about the Marae as economic hubs idea.

The debate was probably most notable for Nanaia’s stinging attacks on the Maori Party. She accused the Maori Party of being the National Party’s proxies in the Maori seats and acting as a “Trojan horse” for the Nats. Ouch. Angeline probably garnered the biggest roar at the end of the night when she said if the Maori Party go with the Nats then then your, as in Maori, only option is to vote for the Greens, Labour or Mana.

So the night belongs to Nanaia. She was the most consistent. I guess her experience showed. If last night proved anything though, it’s that Labour will struggle to retain the seat when Nanaia retires (probably next term). The same is true of Ikaroa-Rawhiti. If Angeline runs again I think she’ll take Waikato and if Na Raihania runs in Ikaroa I think he’ll take that seat in the absence of Parekura.

Native Affairs Kowhiri 11: Tai Tokerau review

I don’t have too much to say about the Tai Tokerau debate on Native Affairs. The three candidates, Hone, Kelvin and Waihoroi Shortland, were pretty even. If forced to pick a winner I’d go with Kelvin. Yes, Kelvin not Hone. Hone was certainly the most authorative, but Kelvin was the most articulate. He focussed firmly on Labour policy without peppering his answers with useless rhetoric. Yes, Hone and Waihoroi were guilty of providing meaningless, read useless, answers. However, I think the criticism that Kelvin is too “wooden” is well placed. This may have something to do with Kelvin remembering his lines too well and he comes across as scripted. I tend to think, or I know from personal experience, that that’s just how Kelvin is. To me it makes no difference.

Having said the above, on a strict points decision the night probably belongs to Hone. Hone speaks well off the cuff and he knows better than anyone how to connect with Maori on a personal level. One thing Hone does well is use colloquialism without taking away from the authority of his message. Maori, well New Zealanders actually, like their politicians to speak like them. That’s part of the appeal of John Key. Where Americans appreciate soaring rhetoric New Zealanders enjoy understated and familiar language. Hone understands this. Many New Zealand politicians are guilty of trying to be like Obama.

Waihoroi was strong in parts and weak in others. He did well to highlight the Maori Party’s role in securing funding for treating rheumatic fever in the north. Waihoroi is much better in te reo than English. He suffers from the problem many fluent Maori speakers suffer from – they speak English like they speak te reo. English is not meant to be spoken in the same manner as te reo. I’m nitpicking here, but one of the problems fluent Maori speakers have is that they can be too verbose. English is about simplicity whereas Maori is often about heavy metaphors, animation and so on. When someone speaks English like they speak te reo the message can be bogged down and lost. This isn’t an attack on Waihoroi, he did well, this is just a general observation.

In fairness, the night was probably too close to call. But I’ll give it Kelvin for focussing on policy. Kelvin provided a template for how political discourse in this country should be run.

Native Affairs Kowhiri 11: Ikaroa Rawhiti review

There isn’t an awful lot to say about the Native Affairs Ikaroa Rawhiti debate. There were no surprises, no real stand outs or no real disappointments. Business as usual up the coast really. If forced to call it, I’d give it to Parekura (yes, I used to work for Parekura, and yes I want him to win, and yes I think he will win).

It’s a fact though, isn’t it? Parekura’s just bloody good. It doesn’t even matter if he doesn’t address the question – he still sounds bloody good. The man was well versed in Labour talking points and he tied them in well with local themes and concerns. Where I thought he was particularly strong was on Maori trade training. He affirmed Labour’s commitment to reintroducing Maori trade training and he also mentioned the need to modernise the scheme because, quite obviously, the old school model isn’t going to fit so well with Maori in 2011. Parekura was also strong on health focussing on preventing problems rather than responding to them. This linked in with Labour’s children first policy. Policy wise, the highlight for me was Parekura’s speaking on putting money into post settlement governance entities. Post settlement Iwi structures are a real problem in Maori society, think of the problems engulfing Tainui, and Labour appears to be the only party taking note (please correct me if I’m wrong here).

Parekura wasn’t the only man in the room though. Na Raihania was good as well. When Parekura calls it a day I’d put money on Na taking the seat. He’s polite, moves well between te reo and English and knows Maori Party policy/the issues affecting his people. Na spoke well on health touching on Whanau Ora which he termed as “devolving” services to Maori organisations. I always associate “devolving services” with privatisation. Na failed to maintain his trajectory though. In the second half of the show Na came out in support of National Standards. He went as far as to say the Maori Party supports National Standards. Have he and the Maori Party not seen the international evidence against standards? Have he and the Maori Party not heard the warnings from NZ experts against the standards? Have he and the Maori Party not smelt the discontent coming from the education profession? Na said “in the absence of anything better we need to get something on the ground”. Anything better? National Standards are the worst option imaginable. The status quo works better. Anywho, other than that shocking hiccup Na performed very well and came across as a polite, respectful and knowledgeable candidate.

I don’t have much to say about Tawhai Mcclutchie. He was good - but no Hurricane Dearlove that’s for sure. I think he needed to provide more depth and try to keep away from saying Mana so much. He was good though (I won’t be disparaging of people who have taken a leap for something they believe in) and should be commended for doing so well on what is his first campaign and, probably, first time in front on the cameras and a live audience. I was a little shocked though when in response to a question on Maori wards in Gisborne Tawhai said there should be a 60/40 ratio of Maori to Pakeha – talk about radical huh.

On balance, the night belongs to Parekura. Na certainly didn’t harm his chances though and I think he may just be positioning himself for a successful run in 2014.

(The next debate screen Monday from Te Tai Tokerau)

Pita ahead in Tamaki

Further to Tamaki Makaurau, I forgot to mention this poll earlier in the week. From the Herald:

According to a Te Karere DigiPoll released today, Dr Sharples appears to have victory in the Auckland Maori electorate sewn up.

The poll, which surveyed 400 Maori roll voters, gave Dr Sharples a massive majority of 58 per cent for the electorate vote, with Labour's Shane Jones coming in second with less than half the votes, on 23 per cent.

Trailing further behind were Mana's Kereama Pene and Green Party candidate Mikaere Curtis, on 14 and 3 per cent respectively.

I don’t expect Pita to poll that high on the day, but, as I expanded on over at Pundit, I expect Pita to win. Kereama Pene’s influence on the result will be negligible. He will not siphon enough votes from Pita to hand the seat to Shane. This is a two horse race.

Taking a Punt on Tamaki Makaurau

If anyone's interested I have a post up at Pundit on the Tamaki Makaurau seat. I'm calling it for Pita Sharples, but Shane Jones isn't one to be counted out.

Waiariki debate continued...

My last post (and it was hardly a post – more like a few sentences) generated a passionate response from camp Annette and camp Te Ururoa. The comments fell into three broad categories: 1. Annette smashed Te Ururoa and he is “the one percent iwi elite scumbag”, as one fiery commenter put it 2. Annette is, in the words of the first commenter, a “BMW” (Bitter Maori Woman) with nothing more than a big mouth while Te Ururoa is quietly doing the job. 3. We, as in Maori, need to stop turning on each other.

I’m glad this blog is stimulating debate, but please, please can we keep it civil. Calling someone a “scumbag” or a “BMW” probably doesn’t help anyone.

Anyway, a few words on the debate itself. Annette won, hands down. She controlled the debate. Te Ururoa found himself having to respond to her attacks, or allegations is probably the nicer word here, therefore, he was unable to control the agenda. Annette backed him into a corner and portrayed him in an unfavourable light. It was masterful politics. However, Te Ururoa responded almost as well. He didn’t come out of the corner fighting, instead he steadily moved himself out with careful justifications and a focus on the Maori Party’s achievements. Te Ururoa’s responses detracted from the potency of Annette’s attacks (or allegations) and helped build the picture that he is a respectful person (which I’m sure he is).

Annette is prone to well crafted and well delivered rhetoric, so naturally this is where she stole the show. Te Ururoa built the best image, but Annette spoke the best. Each answer she provided explored Mana policy, at times she digged at her opponents and, most importantly, she linked every answer to themes that will resonate with Maori. For example tino rangatiratanga, anti-capitalism and the effects of colonisation. It was masterful politics.

Te Ururoa also provided in depth and considered answers. But often he found himself having to defend himself or his party rather than going on the front foot like Annette. However, he still managed to paint a good picture of himself as respectful and considered. Louis Te Kani, unfortunately, wasn’t a feature. He found himself relying too heavily on non-specific soundbites. A little depth from him would have gone a long way.

On a similar note the Ikaroa-Rawhiti debate is on tonight at 9pm. I’ll probably write on it tomorrow.  

   

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.

Waiariki: Electorate analysis

There are three marginal Maori seats – Te Tai Tonga, Tamaki Makaurau and Waiariki. Of the three, Waiariki is the hardest to call. Te Ururoa Flavell is facing a strong challenge from Mana’s Annette Sykes while Labour’s Louis Te Kani could gallop up the middle if Annette falls short.

Today’s post is the second in a series analysing the Maori electorates. I’ll look at the electorate profile, the candidates and then I’ll offer my thoughts on how and to whom the electorate will fall.


Profile:

(Here is the link to the electorate profile from the Parliamentary Library)

Waiariki wraps around the Bay of Plenty coast from Cape Runaway in the east to Waihi Beach. The boundary then extends inwards to Turangi. The main centres in Waiariki are Tauranga, Rotorua, Taupo and Whakatane. Smaller centres include Kawerau, Opotiki and Te Puke. The tangata whenua in Waiariki whakapapa to either the Mataatua Waka or the Te Arawa Waka. However, some hapu derive from peoples who predate the arrival of both Waka.

The most populous Iwi in Waiariki is Tuhoe (Mataatua) followed by Nga Puhi (Mataatua), Ngati Tuwharetoa (Te Arawa), Te Arawa (Te Arawa), Ngati Porou (Nukutaimemeha and others) and Ngati Awa (Mataatua).

There are over 82,000 Maori in Waiariki. 41.7% are under 30 while only 12% are over 65. Waiariki has the highest rate of Maori language speakers with 26.9% speaking fluent Te Reo. Little over 5% of Maori in Waiariki hold a bachelors degree or higher. In terms of educational achievement Waiariki ranks in the bottom half of Maori electorates. Waiariki isn’t an overly religious electorate, again, ranking in the bottom half of Maori electorates when examining religious affiliation. The median household income in Waiariki is $45,200 while the New Zealand median is $59,000. 36.8% of households in Waiariki earn $50,000 or over. Again, this ranks in the bottom half of Maori electorates. Almost 25% of households do not have access to a landline while over 50% do not have access to the internet (this presents significant difficulty when it comes to polling the electorate). 26.7% of Maori in Waiariki are on some sort of government benefit.

At the 2005 election Te Ururoa polled at almost 55%. Labour’s Mita Ririnui managed to pull in 39% of the vote. The late Hawea Vercoe sponged 6% of the vote. Labour did well in the party vote coming in at 53%. The Maori Party followed with 31% and New Zealand First with 7%.

Te Ururoa Flavell increased his majority in 2008 and utterly smashed Mita Ririnui securing almost 70% of the vote. However, the Labour Party captured a plurality in the party vote stakes with 45.5%. The Maori Party secured 35.5%. New Zealand First polled well gaining almost 8% of the vote while National and the Greens did very poorly with only 5% and 2% respectively.


Candidates:

Three candidates will contest Waiariki. The Maori Party’s Te Ururoa Flavell (incumbent), Labour’s Louis Te Kani and Mana Movement’s Annette Sykes.

• Te Ururoa Flavell:

Te Ururoa affiliates to Ngati Rangiwewehi (Te Arawa) and Nga Puhi (Mataatua) and was born in Tokoroa (Te Tai Hauauru), but was raised in Waiariki attending Sunset Primary School in Rotorua. Te Ururoa trained as a teacher and has worked in education most of his life. Entering Parliament in 2005 Te Ururoa became an active Select Committee member and in 2010 his Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill was drawn from the ballot and will probably have its first reading next term.

• Annette Sykes: 

Annette has extensive affiliations across Te Arawa including Ngati Pikiao and Ngati Makino. Annette also affiliates to Taiwhakaea (Ngati Awa) and Hamua (Tuhoe). Annette was schooled in Kawerau attending Kawerau North School, Kawerau Intermediate and then Kawerau College. Annette studied law and politics at Victoria and Auckland Universities and also studied in Singapore. Over the past thirty years Annette has been one the most prominent tino rangatiratanga activists and a tireless supporter of human rights. Prior to full time full time campaigner Annette was a partner at Aurere Law in Rotorua.

• Louis Te Kani: 

Unfortunately, I can’t find any reference to Louis tribal affiliations, but I assume that he connects to Te Arawa and the tribes of Tauranga Moana. Te Kani was born and bred in Tauranga and works in Rotorua (Louis is a very prominent lawyer in the city). Louis comes from a Labour background (he’s also Ratana) and was shoulder tapped to stand in the seat.


Analysis:

Waiariki is one the harder electorates to call. The Maori electorates aren’t homogenous – there are separate and often disparate communities of interest, there are different issues at play for different iwi, there is sometimes an urban/rural dichotomy and inter-tribal dynamics can favour/discriminate against some candidates.

I tend to think Annette will win, but this isn’t guaranteed.

One cannot underestimate the importance of a strong campaign. At this point in the game Annette is running the stronger campaign due, in part, to superior campaign infrastructure and a reflex swing against the Maori Party. Annette is also driving the narrative.

Annette can tap a deeper well of campaign support than Te Ururoa and Louis. Mana can rely on numerous branches across the electorate whereas Te Ururoa can’t (the Maori Party branches are weak to non-existent in Waiariki) and Louis can not tap the same numbers that Mana can. Annette even has a big campaign bus like John Key and National’s bus in the 2008 election. In terms of hoardings, however, I would (anecdotally speaking) say Louis Te Kani has the most.

A well defined message can go a long way. Annette has, I think, the perfect throwaway line: a vote for Te Ururoa is a vote for National. The Nat’s poll horrendously among Maori in Waiariki (see above) and much of the reflex swing against the Maori Party is due to their support for the Nat’s on, for example, tax and the MCA Act. Annette needs to cement the narrative that the Maori Party, and by extension Te Ururoa, have sold out Maori interests.

Te Ururoa enjoys only soft support outside of Rotorua. Tauranga is anyones game, Whakatane and Taupo are marginal and Kawerau, Te Teko, Ruatoki (and the Tuhoe rohe generally), Opotiki, Turangi and Te Kaha (as well as the rest of the East Coast) will probably fall Annette’s way.

Booth by booth the party vote is fairly consistent across the electorate. In case you wondered I’m examining the party vote because the candidate vote is misleading given that only two candidates stood and the losing candidate was weak (to the point of not even trying).

The distance between Labour and the Maori Party is fairly even across all the polling places. In the Eastern Bay the tino rangatiratanga vote (TR) - i.e. Maori Party vote - was strongest in Te Kaha (as well as Cape Runaway and Torere), Te Teko, Waimana (as well as Kutarere), Ruatoki and, surprisingly, Ohope. In Rotorua the tino rangatiratanga vote was strong in Mamaku, Koutu and Glenholme/Springfield (the polling place was on Devon St which is part of Springfield and Glenholme). In Tauranga the TR vote was strong in Bethlehem and Waitangi only. The TR vote was strong in the southern end of the Taupo region, in particular Turangi, Tokaanu and Wairakei.

Annette’s, for want of a better term, tino rangatiratanga credentials are far stronger than Te Ururoas. She can stand on her record as an advocate for Maori. Maori know who Annette Sykes is and Maori know what she stands for. Annette can easily eat into Te Ururoa’s vote in the above areas because of this. However, to win the electorate she needs to siphon sufficient votes in Opotiki, Rotorua, Tauranga, or Taupo. Or she needs to win one of those areas in large numbers. Opotiki is Whakatohea territory. Whakatohea is a rural Iwi and, in my experience, staunch tino rangatiratanga. Annette's rhetoric and record will appeal. Rotorua is a hard sell for Annette. I have mentioned one of the disputed attitudes of Te Arawa that may count against her. However, I think Annette will do well in Ngati Pikiao and in Rotoiti. I think she will not do too well in Ngati Whakaue though. I tend to think Tauranga will fall Louis Te Kani’s way – at least in Tauranga proper. On the outskirts I think Te Ururoa will hold his vote. I think Tauranga Maori are quite unionised (e.g. port workers). Annette could do well in Taupo, but it depends on how well she campaigns. Mana infrastructure in Taupo is fairly strong. The Party is standing a general seat candidate so Annette could tap the general seat candidate’s networks.

Te Ururoa will almost certainly lose the East Coast from Opotiki to Cape Runaway. He’s played the invisible man over the past three years. Initially, the Maori Party, morespecially Te Ururoa, did not back Te Whanau a Apanui in their opposition to oil prospecting. The job was left to Hone Harawira (who of course isn’t even the local MP), Greenpeace and, but to a lesser extent, the Greens. Te Ururoa will also lose Tuhoe and Kawerau as well. In the aftermath of the Terror raids Te Ururoa did a brilliant job attacking the then Labour Government and he also provided outstanding support to his constituents. However, Annette has played a major role as well representing many of the Tuhoe accused/former accused. She has been their since the beginning and stuck at it. Annette also whakapapas to Tuhoe and her politics appeals to them too (think Te Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe – Tuhoe independence). Te Ururoa will probably lose Kawerau too. Annette is a local girl who knows the town and the issues. Te Ururoa hasn’t been very active in Kawerau so the town does not really have much of a connection with him.

Te Ururoa will probably lose significant support along the coastline from Whakatane to Waihi Beach. Iwi along the coast were, or are, unhappy with the MCA Act. However, it is a moot point whether this alone will be enough to swing the vote in the Coast. If it is that vote will fall to Annette. Maori still have not forgiven Labour for the foreshore and seabed debacle in 2004.

(Here is the link to the booth by booth summary)


Conclusion:

I doubt Louis will gallop up the middle. I think Annette can steal enough of Te Ururoa’s vote outside of Rotorua to steal the seat from him. Louis will do well in Tauranga, but to win you need to win more than one of the main centres. Annette’s victory is not guaranteed. If Te Ururoa can execute a strong campaign he will retain the seat. But this is unlikely. There are few functional Maori Party branches, few resources and few functioning networks. The momentum is in Annette’s favour.