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.

Nanaia joins the revolt

Nanaia Mahuta has come out against Goff. From Waatea News:

Another of Labour's Maori MPs has broken ranks with leader Phil Goff over working with former Maori Party MP Hone Harawira.

Waikato-Hauraki MP Nanaia Mahuta says Mr Harawira has taken similar positions to Labour on issues such as the 90-day bill, raising the minimum wage, and greater protection for employee rights.

“But the real proof is what happens after election 2011 and I’ve been in politics long enough to know that the wind blows both ways and you can’t rule anyone in and out before that day. That’s the day that matters,” she says.

Ms Mahuta has confirmed she will stand again this year, despite stepping back in Labour's rankings for health and family reasons.

Goff needs to get on top of this – there is clearly a huge amount of dissatisfaction among the Maori caucus. As I blogged a few days, Parekura has already come out against Goff. This means Labour’s most senior Maori MP’s have openly defied the leadership and reneged on the accepted party position. This is nothing but sloppy political management on Goff’s part.

But perhaps the most interesting aspect of Nanaia’s statement was confirmation that she will stand again this year. This will disappoint the Maori Party. Although Nanaia’s grasp may be more tenuous than previously thought. Make no mistake, Nanaia is an extremely dedicated electorate MP and a well connected and respected member of Tainui, but nothing lasts forever. Fatigue may begin to settle in and a good candidate may, keyword may, clinch an upset. Nanaia can run on her record as an electorate MP (bar her record on the foreshore and seabed) and cruise to victory. So often though there is no correlation between performance and re-election. Success is often a combination of incumbency, personality, reach and circumstance. More often than not ones chances of re-election are situational. Is the public generally favourable towards my/my party’s brand? Does society currently value what I espouse etc… 

Ultimately, I am picking Nanaia will retain her seat based partly on name recognition and partly on the perception that she is a dedicated electorate MP. This time around her connections to the Kingitanga may prove to be a black mark against her given the trouble surrounding the Kingitanga. It is almost certain that Nanaia will not be re-elected on the basis of her involvement on the national scene. She is silent on most if not all issues affecting Maori. I haven’t seen anything from her since I started blogging some three or four months ago. To be fair her focus is her family and good on her for that. 

In any case she will probably win given the state the Maori Party is in. In 2008 the Maori Party brand was at its apex and the party ran incredibly aggressive campaigns in all of the Maori electorates. Even then they could not unseat Nanaia who was, following the seabed and foreshore controversy, exceedingly stained. If politics is indeed situational, and if Nanaia cannot be unseated in the most unsympathetic situation for Labour, then I am not sure she will be unseated this time around. The tide is turning against the Maori Party.