Sometimes when you ask a question in Parliament it does not go exactly according to plan. Today I was asking a question based on this story in the New Zealand Herald which said that the PM was stumping up $300,000 for the running costs of the so-called “tupperwaka.”
Yesterday, a spokeswoman for Mr Key said it was not unusual for the Prime Minister to fund new projects he personally believed had merit. “In this instance the money was appropriated via the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet,” the spokeswoman said.
It is in fact very unusual for DPMC to fund anything like this, hence my question. Sadly for me, the Prime Minister got up in Question Time today and said that the spokeswoman was incorrect because they had received incorrect advice and that the money in fact came from contingency funding in the 2010 Budget that was given to Te Puni Kokiri.
But how could a mistake like this be made? Well, a look at the Cabinet papers authorising the spending on the plastic waka provide a clue. Recommendation 9 of the paper CAB (11) 50 says the following
note that the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Culture and Heritage have confirmed contributions of up to $0.300 million and up to $0.800 million respectively to underwrite the showcasing and festival programmes to be staged within and around Te Waka.
Hmmm, that sure sounds like the PM was going to fund it. Interestingly, and somewhat conveniently, by the time the funding was finalised it was described as being from the Emerging Priorities Fund, and today we learn this appears to have been through TPK.
Whatever, the whole process around approving funding for the plastic waka is murky, with little in the way of transparency. In tight fiscal times it does not seem to be a priority or an “emerging priority” for that matter.
Posted in Tupperwaka, Parliament and Maori. |
The Herald on Sunday editorial wades into the state of the National Party’s relations with Maori.
The biggest worry about the state of the relationship between National and the Maori Party is that the Prime Minister doesn’t seem to have noticed that there is a problem.
It certainly was a bizzare few days last week as John Key’s political judgement seemed to totally desert him. It would be interesting to know what David Farrar’s polling is telling National about its relations with Maori, but activities of the last week indicate they seem to think it is doing them some damage.
In any case his dumb joke about being eaten by Tuhoe is not really the point here, its where it fits in his view of relations with Tuhoe and Maori in general. As the editorial says
But Tuhoe spokesman Tamati Kruger has made it plain that it was the joke’s timing and context, not its content, that was problematic. A joke’s reception depends entirely on the quality and depth of the relationship between the jokester and his target. To say Key’s comment, a few days after a major slight, was ill-timed and misjudged is an understatement.
Treaty negotiations are a critical element of race relations in New Zealand. Their success relies on good faith and honesty. I am not saying Labour got everything right in this space, but it is essential that both parties in a negotiation know where they stand. I think Michael Cullen particularly understood this in his time as Treaty Negotiations Minister. When Tariana Turia says John Key’s approach lacks “integrity”, that is a problem.
So, where to from here? National’s relationship with the Maori Party is seemingly on shakey gorund. But what is more important for the long term political landscape is not what this means in terms of the Maori Party, but of Maori voters.
With Maori unemployment, especially among young people still sky high, a rising cost of living and the prospects of tax shuffle that will be unfair to many Maori families, Maori voters will be wanting to see their representatives find solutions to those problems. Not propping up a government that seems to have lost interest in their concerns.
Posted in Tuhoe, John Key and Maori. |
Just watched Guyon interview Tariana Turia and Sir Mason Durie on Q+A. Will not be up on the web til later, but I have to say it left me with far more questions than answers about the policy. Don’t get me wrong I am always interested in different ways of doing things when it comes to public services, and I like the notion of an outcome focus for the delivery. But beyond that we still know very little about how whanau will access it, which families will be targeted, and the scope of the services/agencies that are included.
My overall impression was that we are going to see a modest pilot of around 20 existing Maori health and welfare providers being given some more resources to coordinate activities. Not quite the revolution, but as everyone said, the proof will be in the pudding.
Posted in Public Services and Maori. |
A lot of media comment today on Phil’s speech to Grey Power in Palmerston North. Some of it does not bear much relation to the actual content. It is vital that we can have a mature debate about difficult and challenging issues, and the media have an important role to play in that. This does not mean agreeing with every word, just that it is reported fairly. Please do follow the link above, have a read for yourself and make up your own mind.
For an example have a look at Gordon Campbell’s take on the speech. He does not agree with all of it, but he debates the substance. A sample
The one area where Goff’s speech did hit home cleanly was over the failure of the ETS deal to meet the environmental challenge. The rewards for big polluters, Maori and pakeha, are indefensible. So however is the response that calls Goff’s speech an instance of ‘playing the race card.’ Unlike Don Brash at Orewa, this speech dealt with specific and substantive issues – and if its faults are also substantive, they should be attacked on those terms.
After all, if the Maori Party are going to become the kingmakers in future New Zealand elections, they – and we- are going to have to learn how to debate their shortcomings without being called racists for doing so. The fact racists will undoubtedly prey on such criticism is not a reason for remaining silent, or for giving the Maori Party a free pass.
Posted in Media, Climate Change and Maori. |
An interesting game of brinkmanship is now playing out over the question of the Maori seats on the Auckland Super City Council. To recap on the last 12 hours or so, an email allegedly written by Tau Henare, is released by TV3 suggesting that Rodney threatened to end the coalition if there were Maori seats. Rodney says that is not true, but that yes he would have to resign as a Minister if there were Maori seats. John Key’s office make placating noises that discussions are on-going. Tariana Turia is worried the ACT tail is wagging the National dog. Sounds like a Coronation St script.
There no doubt is intense negotiation about Maori seats. This is something that Hide and Key stoked by moving away from the Royal Commission recommendations. Its high stakes stuff for all involved, including the Maori Party who if there are not seats will be forced to support a government that is working fundamentally against the interests of those they were elected to represent.
But my question for this morning is who would have leaked the email? Possibilities abound, and we welcome your thoughts. A few starters.
Steven Joyce: Joyce is running strategy for the Nats. If the Nats are going to have Maori seats, which will be unpalatable to many of their supporters, then Joyce wants the story to be one of ’strong leadership” by Key. He can also be seen to deal to Hide. Equally Joyce can now gauge public reaction. If it swings in behind Hide, he needs to be able to present a deal with Hide as the only route to stable government.
Tau Henare: Henare can see that he is struggling to convince his colleagues that there should be Maori seats. Never one for the subtle strategy he is putting his views out into the public to see if the reaction of the Maori Party ( and their general uneasiness about Rodney) can generate enough support in his Caucus for the seats.
Rodney Hide: never underestimate Rodney’s capacity for Machivellian games. If he thinks he is going to lose on the Maori seats issue this is a perfect way to call John Key’s bluff. He gets to take the ‘moral’ high ground in terms of his own support base, and possibly generate enough heat to convince Key that there should not be seats.
Whatever, the losers in this particular game are the people of Auckland, and most especially the Maori population. If only the government had stuck with the Royal Commission recommendation.
Posted in Auckland and Maori. |
