Will the Mana "party" get increased taxpayer funding?

It is quite clear that Hone Harawira has every intention of breaking his agreement with the Maori Party not to stand any candidates in Maori seats. Furthermore he wants to get as much money as possible to contest the general election.

That’s why he announced yesterday that he is having a by-election, after lying about it by denying it earlier that day, at a cost to the taxpayer of $500,000. It’s got nothing to do with getting a mandate. It’s to do with getting the $100,000+ leaders budget and other perks in parliament to set up his new party. Whether he succeeds is another matter. I think he is somewhat misguided.

If I was Act leader Don Brash, I'd contest the by-election for the publicity.

Having missed out on the deadline on election broadcasting funding, Harawira is trying to scrape together 500 people to quickly register his party so he can have “Mana” (instead of independent) on the ballot paper and have more money for the general election. An unregistered parliamentary party will not be able to get a leaders budget if it is not recognised as a parliamentary “party”. There is some information about that, here. All registered parties are recognised as parliamentary parties if they have an MP in the House - and the MP was elected on that party banner.

Election candidate Annette Sykes has been asking for 1000 people to support the party by today, so that it can quickly register – even though only 500 are needed. She is also calling on people to enrol on the Maori electoral roll. Once enrolled on the Maori roll, these voters can only vote for candidates on the Maori seats – the seats that Harawira earlier agreed he will not contest. She is talking up the numbers at the weekend’s hui that launched the Mana party, claiming that “more like 700 to 1000” people were there. The media reported 300.

So why are people like Sue Bradford and Matt McCarten behind the Mana Party, when they don’t particularly like Maori nationalism? I believe it is because they see this party as the only party that will threaten John Key’s leadership for the benefit of the Left as Labour is no threat, even with union backing. With the assistance of the unions, they consider this support can increase the party vote beyond five per cent after the election – and perhaps take a few MPs away from the National-supporting Maori Party.

Anyway back to the leader’s budget. If Harawira resigns on Monday he won’t be getting paid as an MP from the day he resigns until the day he is elected - which could be as late as July. And he`ll lose all his parliamentary responsibilities. I’m wondering if there will be much difference between the money Harawira loses between resignation and election in unpaid salary and perks compared to the money he gains as a parliamentary party leader between the by-election and the General election - and to what extent he and his party are aware of this.

Graeme Edgeler has an pretty good post on the numbers, detailing the perks, what Harawira loses when he resigns, as well as providing more information on how the various instruments outline the status of political parties.

More about →

Our 23 Maori MPs

We now have 23 MPs of Maori descent now that Louisa Wall has been sworn in (again).

Just for the record these are the 20 Maori MPs who were elected in 2008.

National
Paula Bennett, National, Waitakerere; Simon Bridges, National, Tauranga; Aaron Gilmore, National, List; Tau Henare, National, List; Hekia Parata, National, List; Georgina Te Heuheu, National, List; Paul Quinn, National, List.

Labour
Parekura Horomia, Labour, Ikaroa Rawhiti (East Coast); Nanaia Mahuta, Labour, Hauraki-Waikato; Kelvin Davis, Labour, List; Shane Jones, Labour, List; Moana Mackey, Labour, List; Mita Ririnui, Labour, list.

In addition, Labour MP Darien Fenton’s mother is Māori , but Fenton does not identify as a Maori MP, nor is she part of Labour’s Māori caucus.

Maori Party
Te Ururoa Flavell, Māori Party, Waiariki ( Bay of Plenty); Hone Harawira, Māori Party, Te Tai Tokerau (Northland); Rahui Katene, Māori Party, Te Tai Tonga ( Wellington and South Island) ; Pita Sharples, Māori Party, Tamariki Makaurau (Auckland); Tariana Turia, Māori Party, Te Tai Hauauru (Western/Central.

Greens
Metiria Turei, Green Party, List.

Since the election Hone Harawira has left the Maori Party and is an independent, and three more Maori MPs have been elected: David Clendon, Greens, List (replaced Sue Bradford) Jami-Lee Ross, National Botany, Lousia Wall, Labour , list (replaced Darren Hughes).

More about →

UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

New Zealand finally formally agreed to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) early yesterday, more than a year after indicating it may do so, and a year after Australia voiced its support .

Last month, Canada indicated it would support the declaration, meaning the US will soon be the only UN member not to support it.(Update well, maybe not). And from the outset, may I remind everyone that that this declaration was not “signed” - it is not a treaty, it is not legislation, in fact it is not even a convention like the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child - and it is not legally binding. Any influence it has on law is open to interpretation by states - meaning it could have influence on legal matters, but it doesn't have to.

This support should have happened ages ago, but unfortunately Labour refused to support it based on Article 26, which gives indigenous peoples the right to lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired and that states should give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources.

The Government has that covered by stating that approval of the declaration is conditional on a proviso attached saying that progressing Māori rights occurs within New Zealand’s “current legal and constitutional frameworks”. Canada, no doubt, will do something similar. Article 27 of the Declaration urges governments to establish a ‘fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process... to recognize and adjudicate the rights of indigenous peoples pertaining to their lands, territories and resources, including those which were traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used’. Arguably, National’s current process with regard to the Foreshore and Seabed is doing this.

But that hasn’t stopped ACT saying that the declaration is divisive, is about “separating New Zealand into two”, and about providing special rights to Māori, but ACT has never shown any willingness to understand indigeneity. Clearly Article 46 of the declaration notes that nothing in the declaration may be interpreted as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States.

Phil Goff could see no point in "signing up" to the declaration, claiming that the Government did not intend to fulfil it after John Key said that the agreement has no practical effect. If that is the rationale behind support or opposition, perhaps Goff should ask himself why he supports our position on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights [PDF]. Perhaps he could ask himself why he supported the anti-smacking legislation, which, unlike a declaration, is legally binding.

Like other UN declarations and conventions agreed to by New Zealand (including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by NZ in 1948), rights recognised in UNDRIP have been supported in New Zealand for years, and there's no harm in officially reminding the UN community of it.

More about →

Maori seats and ETS

Could someone explain how the Maori seats are seen by National as special treatment, whereas horsetrading over the Emissions Trading Scheme with the holders of most of the Maori seats in a willingness to disproportionately benefit the Maori elite (and earlier the not-so-elite Maori) is not special treatment?

Another thing: Who does the Maori Party represent? Is it Maori, those who voted for the party, or some Maori,such as those involved with certain iwi groups, many of whose members voted for a party other than the Maori Party.

More about →

Maori are not listening to Maori Party over smacking

Those in the Maori electorates are more opposed to smacking being a criminal offence in New Zealand , on average, than those in the general electorates, despite the Maori Party's stance on the issue

The Maori Party has been encouraging a Yes vote. Yet in one of their electorates it holds, 90.74% of those who took part in the referendum voted no. The lowest was 85.13%. Overall Maori are more opposed to the current law than those in the general electorates.

Wonder what the Maori Party thinks of that.

More about →