Native Affairs post-election special

If you didn’t watch Native Affairs last night, you should. In their last show for the year, and probably the best of the year, Julian and Annabelle hosted a raft of MPs and a brilliant panel (minus Mike King who was pretty bad).

Julian interviewed Pita Sharples, Winston Peters, Hone Harawira, Shane Jones, Meteria Turei, Rino Tirikatene, Simon Bridges and Louisa Wall. Annabelle discussed the interviews with Sandra Lee, Matt McCarten and Mike King. I don’t want to have a moan about Mike King, but I can’t let it slide that following Meteria’s interview King admitted to having never seen Meteria in action before. Even worse King then proceeded to speak of Meteria as if he’s never seen a sharp Maori women nor ever expected to see one. Prior to that King was salivating all over Winston again, just like he did on Saturday night.

Anyway, Pita Sharples came across as despondent. He found himself having to defend why the Maori Party lost a seat, had their party vote slashed and majorities in their remaining electorates slashed. Pita did have the good sense to admit the party’s relationship with National contributed to, or is still contributing to, the decline of the Maori Party.

Winston was, well he was Winston. Hugely charismatic, likeable in a mischief way and abrasive. Winston touched on good themes, for example poverty and asset sales, but he reverted to attacking the media when it wasn’t justified. He tried to dump Maori TV in the same basket as the mainstream media which was, in my opinion, patently unfair and a great way to burn bridges. After all, the Maori media have given Winston fair and consistent coverage.

Hone, true to form, gave a good interview. He was upfront and he added a dash of humour. Nothing really stood out.

Shane Jones. What a waste. The panel pointed out Shane was the first Labour MP to give an honest account of their loss. He didn’t sugar coat it, he didn’t repeat Labour’s lines, he called it as he saw it. 3 out 4 New Zealanders didn’t vote Labour (discounting the one million who didn’t vote) and that’s a problem they need to address.

Meteria Turei was the best performer of the night. As Mike King found out, Meteria is hugely intelligent, incredibly articulate and she’s pretty charismatic. The best Maori leader in Parliament in my opinion. Every thing was to the point and she didn’t deviate from the script.

Rino was given a soft interview and still seems like the win is yet to sink in. Julian almost caught Rino out when he put the proposition to him that would he support Ngai Tahu if they want to snap up SOEs. Rino seemed surprised and quickly stated Labour’s position.

Simon Bridges and Louisa Wall appeared together. Both MPs won huge majorities in their respective electorates. Louisa is the first Maori woman from Labour to win a general electorate and Simon is one of National’s best, no the best, Maori MP. Yes, better than Hekia Parata. In Mike King’s best call of the night he called Simon on his smugness. Mike correctly identified that NZders hate smug politicians, or smug people in general actually.The panel agreed Simon is a future leader of the National Party and maybe the first Maori Prime Minister. Agreed.

Te Tai Tonga, Sharples and Brash, Tainui and asset sales

I don’t have much time to blog this week so I’ll quickly comment on a few things I’ve missed over the last few days:


Te Tai Tonga

The latest Te Karere Digipoll puts Rahui Katene ahead of Labour’s Rino Tirikatene. Katene is on 46% to Tirikatene’s 35%. The last Te Karere poll put Tirikatene on 41% to Katene’s 34%. Hurricane Clinton Dearlove registers 9% support while the Green’s Dora Langsbury comes in with 10% support. I think the following has happened: 1) Katene has, realising it’s do or die, reenergised her campaign and reclaimed the momentum 2) Dearlove and Langsbury have siphoned more votes from Tirikatene than they have from Katene 3) Tirikatene is suffering from a swing against Labour. The seat is now 50/50. Whereas everyone was picking a win for Tirikatene, this isn’t so sure anymore. 

A Tirikatene win is certainly still possible. As Digipoll points out, Tirikatene’s older support base is far more likely to vote and younger voters, who strongly support Katene, usually change sides at the last minute. Jobs and asset sales also rank as important issues. This is where Tirikatene will be strong. No one can forget Katene going against the wishes of iwi in Te Tai Tonga, notably Ngai Tahu, and voting for the MCA Act as well. Meanwhile Katene is calling for better resourcing for Maori electorates. The Maori electorates are huge and there is a need for access to more staffers and more expense funding. Apparently Katene could do with three staffers. I say try six. Maori electorate MPs are allowed three staffers and an EA so I don’t know why Katene is saying she could do with three when she’s allowed three.


Pita Sharples vs Brash

The Maori Party continue the line that they need to be at the Cabinet table to oppose Don Brash. Firstly, the Maori Party sit outside of Cabinet – so they’re not really at the Cabinet table. If Act enter a formal coalition with National, rather than a confidence and supply agreement, then Brash will sit at the table (in a figurative and literal sense) to the exclusion of the Maori Party (because what are the chances they will enter a formal coalition). This makes the whole at the table rhetoric a little hollow.


Tainui support the Maori Party on asset sales

In an about turn Tuku Morgan has come out in support of the Maori Party’s stance on asset sales. Previously Tuku actively supported the sale of assets and iwi acquisition of those assets. However, Tuku now opposes asset sales, but should assets come on the market Tuku will look to invest. Tuku reckons that the Maori Party is looking out for the needs of Maori. If this isn’t an endorsement, then I don’t know what is. 

This is a blow for John Key. The Iwi Leadership Group were, at one point, one of the strongest advocates for asset sales. John Key is quickly losing his allies on this issue. Without Iwi support and the active opposition of Mana and the Maori Party the Nats won't be able to sell the idea to Maori. Not that they need Maori support.

Martin Cooper controversy

By all accounts Martin Cooper is a good guy and has done a lot for the community. Fair enough. He still abused his position and should suffer the consequences though. The Herald on Sunday followed up on their story from the week before this time revealing Cooper wanted to give some guy the bash or something.


Tamaki Makaurau debate

Four strong candidates. I like picking winners, unlike Joshua Hitchcock who has blogged a brilliant summary here, but I genuinely can’t pick one. Each candidate was strong in certain areas. No candidate did them or their parties a disservice let’s put it that way.

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)

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.

Native Affairs Kowhiri 11: Te Tai Hauauru Review

Disappointing. That’s about the only way to describe lastnight’s Te Tai Hauauru debate. If it wasn’t for Jack McDonald and Tariana Turia I would have switched off. If last night should be noted for anything it’s that Jack McDonald is, without a shred of a doubt, a rising star. He knew Green policy well, he made reference to Maori values and he spoke with a certain amount of depth and good knowledge of Green talking points. He represented the Greens brilliantly and did himself and his whanau proud.

Tariana Turia was, naturally, very strong. Her responses were, across the board, the strongest. She will retain her seat with ease after last night. Although I disagree with what Tariana has done over the past term, I have mad respect for what she has done for Maori, most notably her role in the foreshore and seabed battle where Tariana played an integral part in ushering in a new era of Maori political consciousness. I also respect her lead role in forcing the government to introduce Whanau Ora. Tariana has, despite some low points over the past three years, been a champion for her people.

Soraya Peke-Mason had her high points, but she wasn’t up to the same standard as Tariana. This is, to be fair, expected. Soraya is a first timer and was under some pressure to perform. The lights, the cameras and crowd will often get to people who are not extroverted and experienced. I don’t think she will threaten Tariana. I should also point out that she knew, at the beginning anyway, her talking points well.

Fredrick Timutimu, well, he was no Hurricane Dearlove, but he did okay in the circumstances I guess. He needs more polish. I don’t think he is political material – or not yet anyway. Very Solomon Tipene like.

I enjoyed the question on how each party would act on job creation. Tariana was the strongest, I expected much better from Soraya (she should have prepared an answer to this question in advance – it was so obvious!), Jack McDonald spoke well on the Green’s job creation policy mentioning insulating homes, cleaning up the environment and steering a new direction in the economy.

The question on Iwi allegiances was also good. Jack McDonald pointed out he was moving around the entire electorate, Tariana pointed out her job in Parliament comes with an obligation to all Maori (and she’s right and I don’t doubt she acts under anything but an obligation to all Maori), Timutimu said Mana was for the people by the people and that whakapapa binds all Maori, Soraya highlighted her links across the entire electorate including in the Waikato.

On points, it’s Tariana all day, but the real star last night was Jack McDonald. Kudos must go to Julian Wilcox as well – one of the best interviewers in New Zealand.

Native Affairs Kowhiri 11: Te Tai Tonga

New Zealand politics is devoid of genuine charisma. Kiwi politicians have that matey sort of charm or a very casual allure, but nothing in the way of real magnetism, read charisma. Enter Clinton Dearlove. “Hurricane Dearlove” (as he is known now) came storming out of left field in last nights Te Tai Tonga election debate. This from the NZ Herald:

Maori Party MP Rahui Katene started strong but was soon paddling against the tide, and finished the Te Tai Tonga debate looking frazzled and beaten.

Meanwhile Mana candidate Clinton Dearlove was full of beginner nerves, but soon found his feet to deliver a message with emphatic authority, along with an Obama-esque smile.

There is now a palpable sense among Mana supporters that Dearlove can steal the seat. On the basis of his performance last night this is a reasonable expectation, but I doubt it. Instead, I think Dearlove has done enough to snatch a significant number of votes from Rahui Katene and push the seat towards Rino Tirikatene. Rino was, in my opinion, going to win whether Clinton did well or not. I always thought there were enough tribal Labour voters coupled with a large enough reflex backlash against the Maori Party (for supporting, among other things, the MCA Act and the tax switch) to hand the seat to Rino. And, perhaps, Rino is best placed to represent Te Tai Tonga. Rino made the point that Labour, as one of the major parties, is best placed to achieve change for Maori. This is, for the most part, true. Labour will always sanction or lead change for Maori. The minor parties, Mana, Maori and the Greens, will always be subordinate to either National or Labour. Having said that, this doesn’t mean minor parties are irrelevant. The minor parties play a fundamental role in introducing Maori issues onto the agenda and pushing change. However, going back to the main point, Labour, or sometimes National, will always sanction or lead change.

As I said last night every candidate communicated their message well. I think Rino and Rahui were quite nervous, but this is to be expected, after all, all the pressure was on those two. Dora Langsbury and Clinton Dearlove were not weighed down under the pressure of expectation. They had nothing to lose and nothing to prove whereas last night was probably in Rahui and Rinos minds make or break.

Rahui performed well choosing to follow her leaders lines and focus on what the Maori Party has achieved – even though some of her claims were erroneous. Rino was weighed down by expectation, but outperformed everyone on the economy. He had his soundbites at the ready and delivered them with finesse. I was impressed with the pace of his delivery. He adjusted his tone in response to the audience mood as well. Dora Langsbury did well on policy. The Greens are always strong on policy so it is no surprise Dora performed well here. Clinton did well on all fronts. He delivered his message powerfully. He was animated, he concentrated on the message and was not too mindful of the medium (i.e. the cameras), the tone was conversational and the pitch was perfect.

I’m hesitant to name a winner. I think they all performed well in certain areas. In my opinion the debate is going to break Rahui and reward Clinton and, as a result, Rino. Clinton will seep enough votes from Rahui in Wellington, where Mana is strongest in Te Tai Tonga, to award the seat to Rino.