How the Maori Party votes
Audrey Young reports from the Maori Party conference, and mentions that some analysis had been done on how often the Maori Party votes with and against the other parties. The findings were:
- Greens – 108 with, 55 against
- Labour 89 with, 80 against
- National 55 with, 112 against
I have always advocated that the Maori Party leans more to the left, and that analysis tends to support that. That is not to say Natiional and the Maori Party can’t work together – of course they can. But I recall certain bloggers from the left decrying the Maori Party as right wing conservatives etc etc.
What would be really fascinating is for someone to do the same analysis to all eight parties in Parliament. How often do United Future vote with Labour? How often do ACT vote with National? How often do Greens vote with National?
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
No tag for this post.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:41 am
It’s just the left denigrating anything that isn’t their precious Labour party. You see if they can’t form a coalition with Labour they must be “nasty”. The partisan hacks don’t stop for one moment to think it could be Labour that are the problem when it comes to coalitions.
October 27th, 2007 at 9:52 am
That is not to say Natiional and the Maori Party can’t work together – of course they can
I wonder therefore if National regret the IWI/KIWI billboards
October 27th, 2007 at 10:12 am
Best type of stats I’ve seen in a long time. Totally agree, would like to see everyone’s numbers.
October 27th, 2007 at 10:15 am
burt – the left isn’t only the labour party.
DPF – that analysis is certainly interesting and I agree that it shows the Moari Party is generally closer to the left is something everyone acknowledges. But Moari Party is not a normal party to be slotted in the right-left axis, it represents the interests of Maori which can sometimes be the interests of big business, sometimes the interests of ordinary people, sometimesthe interests of the iwi. It is conservative on social issues and only backed away from supporting the most reactionary, right-wing piece of legislation this term, the 90-Bill, at the last minute – that’s what people on the left like myself don’t like about the party.
And of course politics is complicated – just because parties vote the same way on an issue doesn’t mean they do it from the same ideological standpoint (look at Greens and ACT on foreshore and seabed).
That said, the Maori party will be doing its people a huge disservice if it permits a National-led government to rule, even if only by abstaining on c & s… and its democratic decision-making process, like that of the Greens, ought to prevent its leaders from going against its base’s will (remember that 2 elections ago, the Maori party’s base was voting Labour).
October 27th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Foreshore and seabed was what the iwi/kiwi ads were about. The Maori party also were against foreshore and seabed. Maybe National don’t need to regret those billboards?
October 27th, 2007 at 12:06 pm
Um Burt “The partisan hacks don’t stop for one moment to think it could be Labour that are the problem when it comes to coalitions.” Who is the hack???
It would appear Labour have no problem forming coalitions, in fact they are very good at it. As for National, they are obviously the problem when it comes to forming coalitions.
October 27th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Re the Natuarla Party’s remark: Why pussyfoot around with all the PC crap, just call a spade a spade – your thread might have read: ‘
“Let’s just get it out in the open shall we? The Maori Party will never be able to work with National because as far as the left is concerned, the National Party are racists, and it is in our interests to keep a flame lit under that particular idea.”
Funny though, recent events tend to indicate a bit of a blind-spot in that regard:
Brash’s Orewa speech and ‘IWI/KIWI’ billboards hardly constitute making up the Foreshore and Seabed Legislation and misusing the Suppression of terrorism laws, do they? National also have not smothered a generation of Maori under ‘welfarism’ either. In my opinion, if National is ‘racist’ let’s talk about it – but also lets talk about how they are just not as good at it as Labour are.
sorry.
October 27th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
Maori Party won’t come cheap, says Shaples
Extract from Nelson Mail Sat Oct 27th
“At the end of the day John Key had to weigh up whether he’s going to lose his red neck.. He’s made a decision I think the wrong one. He has yet to prove himself on a matter of principle”
October 27th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
or maybe Sharples
October 27th, 2007 at 12:46 pm
Im not surprised, the maori party is he only party in parliament that is not ideologically based. Also, Maori are not homogenous. So naturally their votes can be spread acrooss teh pilitical ideological spectrum.
Yet the party does not listen to non Maori. Perhaps one reason is because non Maori who party voted the Maori party had wasted votes….
October 27th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
“At the end of the day John Key had to weigh up whether he’s going to lose his red neck..” (Sharples)
Or
:
” At the end of the day John Key had to weigh up whether he’s going to lose his racism..”
Isn’t it wonderful to live in a country where that kind of casual racism – ‘redneck’ can be employed by a high-profile politician?
It is a term which has fallen out of favour in the US as it is quite insulting, and fools no one as being a polite euphanism for ‘White racist’>…
October 27th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
I did a long essay on the question of whether a Maori Party could ever be a major power in New Zealand politics. That was 5 years ago – and my conclusion was no. My principal reason for reaching this conclusion was that, as “dave” pointed out – people who ifentify as Maori are not homogenous. Some are economically right, some are socially conservative, some are liberal, and some are Maori Nationalists. So while 15% of New Zealand is Maori, only a minority are ever likely to vote for a Maori Nationalist party (i.e. our current Maori).
This leads me back to the original topic of this thread – would the Maori party ever back National over labour? My perception is that most Maori who vote for the Maori party are Maori-Nationalist leaning. So they are most likely to support the party with the strongest emphasis on biculturalism. Historically this has been the Labour party, and the National party has been dragged toward adopting aspects of biculturalism as political necessity by both Maori activism and social liberals/Labour. As such Maori Nationalists are likely to remain suspicious of National’s commitment to biculturalism for quite some time, and it’s likely that National will have to consistently show in practice that they are genuine about this before they can woo the Maori Party. But this will only come at the expense of alienating National’s largely working class redneck vote. So, National really is caught between a rock and a hard place on this one.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:51 pm
No, gnome I think you are wrong about that.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
LeeC – which part?
October 27th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
most of it.
October 27th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
I think it is wishful thinking dressed up as academic argument.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
I think that Helen Clark in the greatest asset that the National Party has, when they go seeking confidence and supply from the Maori Party.
Tariana will remember till past her dying day, the humiliation that H1 forced on Tariana and the Maori people, that day in the back of a Govt Limo.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Haters and wreckers, notwithstanding.
Also it suggests that National’s bedrock support is ‘redneck’ I think they are more sophisticated than that, Besides, National needs to win hearts and minds in Labour’s dissaffected electorate, and again, Helen et al is Nationals best ally there.
On top of that, the perception that Helen will not be around for long, coupled with the move towards the left by National.
Labour’s committmemnt to bi-culturalism will surely be seen for the eye-candy it has been in the wake of the recent anti-terrorism supprewssion and the f&S Act. So there it is…
Three more years! Yeah Right!
October 27th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
PS Michael thanks for the Sim thing if I haven’t said so already…
October 27th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Do some research of your own then LeeC. I suggest that you read some some Maori political history – or more specifically the history of the Maori political sovereignty movement/Mana Maori Motuhake . Professor Ranginui Walker’s writing on the subject is a good place to start. His book “Struggle without end = Ka whawhai tonu matou” is a good one.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
October 27th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
More recently he wrote a chapter in the book “Political leadership in New Zealand” which was called “Māori conceptions of leadership and self determination” – then you might see what I mean.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
gnome – you really should have been praised more as a child.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
LeeC – The Maori sovereignty movement isn’t about to back National, dig beneath the media representations of the issue and you’ll see. I do understand that it’s easier to rattle off things from the top of your head, and engage in personal attacks – so knock yourself out.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Lee C you really should grow up. If you dont understand what rogernome is talking about then STFU. Maori look at government and governance quite differently to us non-maori.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
dave keep your nose out. Everyday I sit at my computer reading the fatuous self-opinionated dabblings and obscufication that gnome attempts to pass off as academic judgement, sae in the knowledge that he cherry-picks the minutae of what here fers to to suit his own partisan needs at the time. When that fails, he resorts to insults and patronising little catfights. I understand perfectly what gnome is talking about I believe I satated it at the beginning. ‘Wishful thinking dressed up as academic argument. It’s the same shit from him everyday usually rounded up with some reference to
i) how clever he is
ii) How good looking his friends are
iii) How cool his mates are.
It’s tedious. So, if while I’m hard at work on a Saturday, and want to kill a bit of time by poking fun at a fatuous pompous windbag then respectfully, you STFU.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
If it is so tedious, come up with something better yourself – if you are able to. Or else, go back to work and stay there. And given that youve written about 10 comment to this post today, you obviously dont work very hard. Too busy on Kiwiblog..
October 27th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
dave
Who is “us non-maori” ? Race card anyone ?
Look roger nome has basically hit the nail on the head but then draws conclusions to suit his own agenda.
Maori (like any other group identified by one sigle attribute other than political ideology) are not all left or all right. Therefore saying that Maori cannot be successful in a coalition is like saying the Green’s cant be either.
Looking at Labour of the last 8 years roger might be correct, but I think this is telling us more about labour than either the Maori party or the Green party.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
To say… Maori have not managed to form a coalition with Labour and therefore would not be able to form a coalition with National is just a more long winded way of saying “labour good – national bad”.
October 27th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
“i) how clever he is”
I don’t claim to be particularly clever – but I do put a lot of effort into trying to understand the way things work beneath the surface of appearance. There are many others here who are the same. They’re the reason i come here.
“ii) How good looking his friends are”
WTF? bollocks – you can’t provide one link to support that.
“iii) How cool his mates are.”
Nah – most of my friends are pretty geeky. That’s not to say I don’t appreciate them a lot – but they’re hardly what you would consider to be “cool”.
“fatuous pompous windbag”
Thanks LeeC – I’ll take that as a compliment coming from an inane pervert like you.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Roger Ngome
Want to read a real book about Maori politics check out Redemption Songs
the story of Te Kooti Rikirangi, it was alive and well then and still is.Might even recommend it to some of your mates if you have any.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:02 pm
You are welcome, gnome.
You see what I mean? ‘inane pervert’ what kind of language is that for a man of letters?
All I did was cut out the middle man and save gnome a couple of hours of winding up some other poor sap with his pointless insights.
Yes burt got it in one another long-winded but essentially academically lazy analysis by gnome.
He is so drunk on his self-importance he doensn’t even realise how transparent his observations are, or that he is busted from the moment he commits his pomposity into words…
ps Maori hate pompous white men who try to buy them off with tokenistic busllshit.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
“Maori hate pompous white men who try to buy them off with tokenistic busllshit.”
Yep – and that’s why they’ll never side with the likes of you.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
I don’t look for anyone to take my side gnome, I’m not like you, buddy, I got something called self-reliance. Don’t need a gallery to play to, I just take each person as I find them. Hence my observations about you.
Go and stand next to someone who likes you.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
PS do you claim to speak for all Maori on that?
October 27th, 2007 at 3:13 pm
To be honest, if pseudo-Freudian psycho analysis mixed with a good measure of bluster is all you’ve got then you’re contributions are pretty worthless LeeC. It’s like trying to debate a 12 year old – there isn’t a lot of point.
So adieus – don’t bee surprised when the Maori party tell you Tories to piss off after next year’s election.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Mission accomplished.
Aythenkyu.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
roger
Just like has happened with Labour for the last 3 elections. Oh, but that’s different isn’t it. That’s the Maori parties fault isn’t it…..
You are so partisan it’s just laughable.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:24 pm
So, anyway… I think that the National Party and the Maori Party have a lot to gain by talking to each other. There is oh gotta go the wife’s here…. laters
October 27th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Lee C said gnome – you really should have been praised more as a child
Well, clearly its not too late.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
“So adieus – don’t bee surprised when the Maori party tell you Tories to piss off after next year’s election.”
Won’t happen,, so obviously won’t happen.
The Lab govt betrayed Maori on the foreshore and seabed.
I think it’s slipped through some that the Maori party is co-lead by an educated academic and can read the signs on the wall.
whats the point in supporting a party on the way out.
the electorate has had enough of overt Labour socialism and these police terror raids have spelt their death knell. Turia and Pita will not betray maori as Winston did.
I listened to informed historical oratory at Garden Place in Hamilton today
and although the protest was based on realistic terms the man the protest leaders tried to quench (quite childishly) was the lone Tim Wikiriwhi.
The press were guilty of editing what they captured on film obviously hoping to film negative reactions on his person by a dysfunctional individual
Tim took it in his stride commendably and was ably supported by others.
I made sure my presence beside him was noted and I got the scrutiny of the protest leaders.
Tim walked away victoriously, his lone mission achieved and I will now never question the power of a single voice against the tide.
October 27th, 2007 at 4:07 pm
“Turia and Pita will not betray maori as Winston did.”
You mean they won’t go with National? Did you know that two thirds of NZ first voters in 1996 were former Labour voters? And that in Winston went from having about 50% of the Maori vote in the 1996 election, to 5-10% in 1999, such was the betrayal felt by Maori after Winston went back on his promise to “get National out of government”? The Maori constituency really don’t like National. It is that simple.
Actually there’s an interesting analysis at this link which I think does a pretty good job of summing up the strategic political situation faced by the Maori Party and National. Definitely worth a read.
http://kiwiblogblog.wordpress.com/2007/10/27/dpf-munges-maori-party-analysis/
October 27th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
“The Maori constituency really don’t like National. It is that simple.”
crayon talk, pure and simple.
In the grown up world you go with who shares the sun. to remain with Labour is to have your voice stifled, they have already proved that.
Why go down with a sinking ship??
October 27th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
The Maori Party was formed as a protest movement to reverse the Foreshore and Seabed legislation. That was their primary purpose. However, they did also mention introducing a Maori perspective more directly into the legislative process.
And, truthfully, some (certainly not all) of the Maori MP speeches I’ve seen have offered a different perspective. It’s good food for thought.
But what I want to know from the likes of Dave and Phillip John/Roger Nome is this. Is it because Maori are a different political constituency that this Government felt able to pass special tax concessions for Maori authorities in (I think it was) 2003? Because if that’s so, then the Maori Party starts to look more like a special-interest group. Phillip John would be beside himself if we had a Big Business Party in Parliament, which favoured special tax concessions for *ahem* a select few “constituents”.
October 27th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
“In the grown up world you go with who shares the sun.”
Sure – if National, Act and UF had a majority I think the Maori party would quite possibly give the Nats support, in return for some concessions. But if the Maori Party held the balance of power, it would be very hard for Tariana and Pita to convince their constituency that a deal with National was for the best – and this is what they would have to do. And that’s assuming that the leadership would want to, and considering that it would kill their constituency, can’t see it happening to be honest.
“Why go down with a sinking ship??”
What sinking ship? The latest Roy Morgan poll has the left block ahead of the right block – Labour are still odds on to be part of the next government I’m afraid.
October 27th, 2007 at 4:46 pm
“Because if that’s so, then the Maori Party starts to look more like a special-interest group.”
I hope you are merely making an understatement here.
Maori are completely self serving and special interest.
They speak on nothing else but them selves.
I was enthralled with Pita Sharples maiden parliamentary speech.
It was so original for a Maori public speaker to talk about the larger world.
The Maori party canot be allowed to run this country. It will be completely biased and self serving. Even though I believe in tribalism as a support structure, (and having survived the onslaught of European colonianism and cultural destructiveness) that tribalism cannot be allowed to dominate over this country.
Maori will always survive. They will always be a clear and present force in our society, and in Aotearoa this should definitely be the case.
Co-leadership, not full leader ship.
a voice, not THE voice.
October 27th, 2007 at 5:01 pm
Is it because Maori are a different political constituency that this Government felt able to pass special tax concessions for Maori authorities in (I think it was) 2003?
No
October 27th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Well Dave – you’ll need to explain why a tax change that specifically affects one entity type (and no other) is not racially based? How is it different from the “Big Business Party” example I gave above? I have one particular line of thought in mind, that I suspect you’ll share with us, but let’s see shall we?
October 27th, 2007 at 7:17 pm
POC are you suggesting that the EFb could be used specifically against the Maori party?
October 27th, 2007 at 7:21 pm
POC
Your point is very valid, one way or another it’s a ’special interest group’ justification.
‘Affirmative action’ with race based quotas in University also springs to mind but that would be digressing too far from the thread.
I don’t think Maori realise yet how powerful the Maori party is. If all people who value Maori representation highly on their wish list for parliament give their party vote to the Maori party. The Maori party could easily hold 10 (perhaps 12) seats in parliament. The Maori party would enjoy Winston’s king maker position. Time the old boy had a rest, bring it on.
October 27th, 2007 at 7:28 pm
“The Maori party would enjoy Winston’s king maker position. ”
Exactly,,
This is what MMP is about. Winston milked it.
Maori will help National win hugely next year. When Maori work this out they will understand MMP. Pita and Turia’s input in parliament will be very visible come 2009. The EFB is dangerous, but can it silence members on the treasury seats?
Lets hope it doesn’t have to be put to the test!
October 27th, 2007 at 7:31 pm
This from kiwiblogblog – “Labour, of course, is in an odd position with the Maori Party. Labour covets the seats the Maori Party has co-opted. The last thing Labour wants to do is make such significant concessions to the Maori Party that effectively gives away any future chance of Labour recovering the Maori seats. And yet, that’s where National is trying to drive the direction of negotiations.”
Would it not benefit Maori and National to both support the further entrenchment of Maori in traditionally Labour electorates?
National would do well to negotiate a pact pre-election with Maori Party. I would, because I think the Maori Party is a worthwhile addition to the political spectrum – in particular a buffer against the Greens and Labour. I will vote for the Maori Party, because for me it represents a ‘democratic’ expression against the monolithic and selfish Labour party.
In terms of the philosophical similarities between the National and Maori partys – there is ‘conservatism’ ‘back to basics’ and a desire to stem the damaging impact that the welfare state has had on society.
Now I appreciate this prognosis does not benefit from all of gnome’s ‘fancy book learning’ but is it closer to the consensus?
The point I was trying to make earlier about gnome is that he tries too hard to b***sh**t people into accepting that which is not true, when a littel observation and common sense will suffice.
October 27th, 2007 at 7:34 pm
The EFB is weapon that is 100% certain to backfire if used to restrict Maori party campaigning,
The Maori party just need to get the message driven home that Maori people give their party vote to Maori just as trade union leaders give to Labour and farmers give to National. Their electorate vote is the vote for politics and their party vote is the vote for their people.
October 27th, 2007 at 7:39 pm
If we are really tired of the Nat-Lab psyche that is strangling this country
the Maori party is a storng and honest alternative to changing things for the better.
I hope the Maori party prove to be able to rise to the occasion of being responsible and effective voices for the people because this looks to being finally the day many have long envisioned as Maori having a real representation and bucking the old traditions for fresh and real democracy in New Zealand.
Can they fulfil the vision?
October 27th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
hinamanu
Will the key be dropping the Maori roll? This would force a rethink and an opportunity to educate everybody on the power of the party vote. In the same way as the Green party has successfully campaigned for years. As roger nome so dearly worded it, the Green party is not homogeneous, yet it’s touted as the natural coalition party for Labour.
Or will a few successfully terms of the Maori party under MMP see it let go without much fanfare.
As Labour have proven with it’s current coalition partners, enough players with a desire for the reigns of govt is all that is really needed to win the numbers game.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
Burt:
The Maori roll is a vexed issue. It’s original premise (bring Maori representation into the Parliamentary tent) has demonstrably been achieved. And yet anyone who advocates abolishing it will be labelled “racist” (a slogan too easily employed by those on the left to shut down legitimate debate).
Lee:
No need to apologise for putting Phillip John/Roger Nome in his place.
His long-winded utterance had very little substance.
He states: “My perception is that most Maori who vote for the Maori party are Maori-Nationalist leaning“. Well, duh!
He also states “[s]o while 15% of New Zealand is Maori, only a minority are ever likely to vote for a Maori Nationalist party (i.e. our current Maori)”. But he provides no evidence to back this up. My perception (which is no less valid that Phillip John’s) is that the overwhelming majority of the Maori constituency is left-leaning (either towards Labour or Maori).
Then this clanger:
What Phillip John fails to address is:
(1) why “most Maori who vote for the Maori party are Maori-Nationalist leaning” (implying a sizeable proportion of Maori eligible to vote think differently);
(2) why National would choose to align itself with Maori-nationalists; and
(3) why National would alienate its “largely working class redneck vote” (he provides no evidence of this, mind you) by chasing the Maori Party.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
“Will the key be dropping the Maori roll?”
the actual key word is confidence.
Maori need to be absolutely assured of a secure and stable future to make the old Maori seats obsolete.
If the maori party can wear the mantle shrouding their shoulders with promise and consistency Maori will embrace a future as a 21st centry race.
Radical elements are trying to hold the race to the past but this will be a lost cause if the party can not only attain treasury seats but remain in them for a goodly amount of time.
This will give Maori no end of confidence and finally make them feel part of the legal influence in this country. This is definitely what I question of the Maori party. Can Matt Rata’s vision of Maori being treated as full and co-governing members of this society be achieved in these coming days
for good. For perpetuity. It has to take this for the Maori seats to be seen as antiquated.
Nothing more, nothing less.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:41 pm
Peak Oil Conspiracy ,,
Remember,,
National is not being inconsistent in supporting Maori.
They handled treaty negotiations (Doug Graham)
Kokanga Reo (Rob Muldoon)
The problem is Maori have fickle memories,, but I beleive, a grudging respect for John Keys.
In the long term National have proved to be visionaries concerning Maori
issues and in reality it was only Don Brash who interferred with that historical ideology.
Perhaps ideology is the word in contention.
If National had of had a Maori ideology of substance the radicals would not have the modern day arguments that keep Maori mentalities enslaved to the past.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
“But this will only come at the expense of alienating National’s largely working class redneck vote. So, National really is caught between a rock and a hard place on this one.”
Johnn Keys has not shown this issue as being relevant to him,, so far
October 27th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Broken eggs to make an omelet.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Hinamanu:
I don’t disagree – you seem to have misunderstood me slightly.
My beef with Phillip John is, first, he limits the Maori Party to Maori-nationalist elements and, secondly, fails to consider how National might align itself with “mainstream Maori”. It’s and all-or-nothing proposition for Phillip John.
National can (and should) build bridges with mainstream Maori – but in a way true to National’s principles.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:53 pm
Under MMP National don’t need a Maori ideology, they just need to be able to work with the Maori party to incorporate agreed considerations into said policies.
Just like Winston isn’t required to be a socialist to support Labour in govt and get a few of his policies into the mix.
October 27th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Peak Oil Conspiracy ,,
No misunderstanding there,,
ab fab
October 27th, 2007 at 9:08 pm
“Under MMP National don’t need a Maori ideology.”
Then all we got at the end of the day is a pure and simple business agreement. We already have that in the treaty.
But of course a business agreement can encompass aspirations.
The question is will those aspirations be tolerated.
They simply have to be, that what partnership is about.
October 27th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
So, to recap, gnome’s statements were: wishful thinking dressed up as academic arguments….
This is where I was going, but gosh, a man can’t work be expected to work and think at the same time! (am I right?)
On a simple political, business relationship, the National and Maori Partys have the makings of a good arrangement.
But of course, the gnomes of this world will talk about Labour’s ‘biculturalism’ (dog-whistle=Nats=racist) or ‘the maori don’t like National (dog-whistle Labour=nice), or even have some neat quotes to back it up,
In brief the politics for a Nat/Maori coalition add up, and Helen has very probably not only been responsible for the need for a Maori party to form, but will also be the single factor most likely to keep the Maori party and Labour alienated from each other.
perhaps…
October 27th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
Oh and one last ting as this very nice bourbon my old man gave me takes effect at this late hour – The thing that really got my goat about gnome’s original post – the use of the term ‘redneck’.
It’s like a term which purports to describes something, passed off as common currency, and I don’t like it. It ignores the socio-economic factors which underpin attitudes some hold, and stereotypes them just like the term ‘nigger’ does. It demeans people as mindless racists by hijacking a term from America. NZ history of race relations is much more complex than that. I would vouch that practically every individual in NZ that is so lazily labelled ‘redneck’ has a Maori relative somewhere in their tree, or neighbourhood.
Plus, it raises an issue about how language is used to stereotype – is it akin to saying that it is ok to label one people but not another? I suggest that ‘redneck’ be thrown out of the language kept only as an historical reference t those who wanted to use it as an inflammatory or emotive term desigend to stifle rational debate.
October 27th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
Lee:
I also noticed the reference to “National’s largely working class redneck vote”.
But if you think Phillip John/Roger Nome was misbehaving on this thread – check out http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/10/dpf_still_powerless.html#comment-358314.
Someone’s posted some quotes that Phillip John may have trouble explaining away.
October 28th, 2007 at 12:17 am
How quick do you think John Key will ditch public access to the beaches if he needs the Maori Party votes?
Lets face it, its the only bribe he can really make them.
I will be fair, I think John Key is a politician of irreproachable integrity. It will be at least two or maybe even three sleepless nights before he caves in.
October 28th, 2007 at 6:34 am
Natural – That’s an interesting question, backed by an unproven assumption, finished with a pointless diversion.
In answer to the question – never. But perhaps negotiate, where Iwi prove they have tribal ownership of the land a setttlement which acknowledges their right to do so. Maybe with the proper local consultation and agreement. If I were looking to open a discussion I would do just that – encourage discussion.
I wouldn’t invent a new law to deny a whole swathe of society a voice.
October 28th, 2007 at 10:21 am
Lee C said
“…backed by an unproven assumption, finished with a pointless diversion.”
FFS! The majority of the comments on this blog fit this description, Left and Right.
October 28th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
uh uh – busted!
October 28th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
“My beef with Phillip John is, first, he limits the Maori Party to Maori-nationalist elements and, secondly, fails to consider how National might align itself with “mainstream Maori”.
That’s the thing POC – the power in the Maori Party lies with what might be “Maori Nationalists” – other Maori, or “Mainstream Maori”?, will generally vote for Labour or the greens – and a very small minority will vote for National. In the 2005 election National got about 3% of the Maori roll party vote – Lab = 49%, Maori party = 38%, NZ first 6%). The Maori party dominated the candidate vote, winning 4 of the 7 seats, with the rest going to Labour. So we know that only a very small percentage of those on the Maori roll will vote for National – and we also know that nearly all of them will vote for either Labour or the Maori Party. So if the Maori party went with National over Labour it would be a huge betrayal of their constituency. It would be instant death for the Maori party.
http://www.publicaddress.net/default,2569.sm#post2569
Also, National has made persistent calls for the abolition of the 7 Maori seats (which provides the bulk of the Maori party’s vote). Now without theses seats the Maori party wouldn’t exist (it wouldn’t have the numbers to win a seat, and it wouldn’t register over 5%. So is it really credible to say that the Maori party would a supportive arrangement with a party that wishes to legislate it out of existence, over another that supports its continued existence? Not very likely hey?
Another thing to keep in mind is that the Maori Nationalists are people who believe in nurturing a distinct Maori or Tribal identity, which will often require targeted legislation. i.e. the encouragement of a bi-lingual New Zealand through public institutions etc. Recently National has often fundamentally clashed with these aims with dog-whistling slogans like “one rule for all” and “kiwi not iwi”. These neo-assimilationist sentiments run deep within the National party, and they are contrary to the Maori party’s reason d’etre. So this is yet another area in which the National and Maori Parties have a profound, fundamental and intractable differences.
I could go on and on listing reasons why the Maori Party won’t go with National over Labour, but if you righties aren’t convinced of it by now I doubt you ever will be.
October 28th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
I found the comment about John Key “giving up access to the beaches” an interesting one. I have worked with a number of Maori communities, and I was at Okains Bay for last Waitangi Day, and the Maori I have heard speak on this is that they have NEVER said or even asked to restrict access to the beaches. It’s a red herring.
What it’s all about is respect (mutual respect), and if John Key can give (and get) that, then there will be a workable relationship. Labour has shown some rather patriarchal (hmmm …. matriarchal?) tendencies of late (I know my right-wing colleagues will claim it’s ingrained, but I of course disagree), and those actions could well undercut their support even more. Just look at Cullen lecturing us that we don’t know how to handle our money so he needs to do it for us. A most insulting stance to take!
October 28th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Phillip John:
I don’t necessarily share your point of view – but it’s helpful to understand where you’re coming from, I suppose.
As this thread appears to approaching its use-by date, I’ll just make one observation: your last contribution was noticably different from your first where you (apparently) summarised your “long essay”. So perhaps you’ve progressed your thinking somewhat? Hopefully my comments (and those of others) at least gave you food for thought.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Labour’s faliure to do anything for Maori is the very reason the party exists. I wouldn’t be so sure that they wouldn’t work with the nats.
Nome’s ‘conclusion’ that the Maori party will never be a major player in nz politics is a bold one. As demographics change and Maori/PI voters make up a larger portion of the electorate, there is huge potential for influence. Remember that at the moment the Maori party is really based on a single issue, the foreshore and seabed. As the party grows and develops more policy, they could be huge. Who else are Maori concerned with tino rangatiratanga going to vote for? Labour? no way. The Greens? maybe, but by far and away the winner’s gotta be the Maori Party. I wish them luck.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Actually I agree with that Helmet – I really should have said ….. “a Maori Nationalist Party will not be a Major force within National politics within the foreseeable future” (I think that was the actual conclusion of my “long essay” – but that was a long time ago). If the Maori party develops more comprehensive left-wing policy (let’s face it the voting statistics show that the vast majority of Maori are left wing), then they would take more of Labour’s left-wing vote. Also – if there are more “racially charged” events like the recent “terrorism raids” the political consciousness of Maori may be raised, and more may vote for an independent Maori voice in parliament – as Pita Sharpels has pointed out, Labour’s Maori ministers are constrained by their responsibility to parrot cabinet’s position (i.e. “terrorism raids”).
POC:
“last contribution was noticeably different from your first where you (apparently) summarised your “long essay”. So perhaps you’ve progressed your thinking somewhat?”
My position hasn’t changed since I made that comment – I’ve just supplemented my original conclusion with further facts. Though apparently you still think Maori Party voters wouldn’t far prefer a Labour-dominated government to a national-dominated government? How you reach this conclusion is quite frankly mind boggling.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
“What it’s all about is respect (mutual respect), and if John Key can give (and get) that, then there will be a workable relationship.”
I agree DavidN – Labour has been taking the Maori party for granted somewhat – though it does seem doubtful that National can offer a more Maori Party friendly agreement – Aside from the tino rangatiratanga issues, Maori are overwhelmingly left-wing, so National would have to offer substantially better Labour substantially better sovereignty based policy concessions and than labour to balance out the right-left difference. This isn’t likely in my view.
October 28th, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Edited version of the last comment:
I agree DavidN – Labour has been taking the Maori party for granted somewhat – though it does seem doubtful that National can offer a more Maori Party friendly agreement. Maori are overwhelmingly left-wing, so National would have to make a very good offer on the tino rangatiratanga front, in order to balance out the right-left difference between labour and national. This isn’t likely in my view.
October 28th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
Looking at the above voting patterns and listening to Metiria Turei
The Greens amd Maori have the most in common (The greens voted against the Foreshore bill)
I would like to see them coalesce b4 the next election
A powerful block eh?
October 28th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
Agreed Natural – this could be a a viable relationship, it would keep Maori close to the Labour Party, and maintain independence. , However, sadly, at the moment the only powerful block the Greens and Maori seem to be sharing is ‘Cell-Block H’.
Hoh hoh that’s funny, in a way….
Not so funny in another, though.