https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/09/te-pati-maori-must-walk-away-from-any-aspiration-to-govern/?utm_source=Newsroom&utm_campaign=dbd037664f-Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-41c1b1e3d3-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&ct=t%28Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025%29&mc_cid=dbd037664f&mc_eid=67296b087d
This article clearly spells out the pros and cons for the Maori Party
being in a government. Their co-leaders would do well to read and
understand that article. After the coalition agreement is done, they
are bound by it for as long as the Government survives. Don't like
being dependent on Labour/Watermelons as a minor player? Tough luck
folks because outside the bounds of the negotiated coalition agreement
you have no power. With snap elections, minor parties that cause them
do not do well, and Labour will forever think they have a chance with
a snap election to take back the Maori seats.
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/09/te-pati-maori-must-walk-away-from-any-aspiration-to-govern/?utm_source=Newsroom&utm_campaign=dbd037664f-Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-41c1b1e3d3-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&ct=t%28Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025%29&mc_cid=dbd037664f&mc_eid=67296b087d
This article clearly spells out the pros and cons for the Maori Party
being in a government. Their co-leaders would do well to read and >>understand that article. After the coalition agreement is done, they
are bound by it for as long as the Government survives. Don't like
being dependent on Labour/Watermelons as a minor player? Tough luck
folks because outside the bounds of the negotiated coalition agreement
you have no power. With snap elections, minor parties that cause them
do not do well, and Labour will forever think they have a chance with
a snap election to take back the Maori seats.
Pay walled.
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/09/te-pati-maori-must-walk-away-from-any-aspiration-to-govern/?utm_source=Newsroom&utm_campaign=dbd037664f-Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-41c1b1e3d3-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&ct=t%28Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025%29&mc_cid=dbd037664f&mc_eid=67296b087d
This article clearly spells out the pros and cons for the Maori Party
being in a government. Their co-leaders would do well to read and
understand that article. After the coalition agreement is done, they
are bound by it for as long as the Government survives. Don't like
being dependent on Labour/Watermelons as a minor player? Tough luck
folks because outside the bounds of the negotiated coalition agreement
you have no power. With snap elections, minor parties that cause them
do not do well, and Labour will forever think they have a chance with
a snap election to take back the Maori seats.
On Fri, 10 Oct 2025 08:54:27 +1300, Mutley <mutley2000@hotmail.com>Thank you for that.
wrote:
Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/10/09/te-pati-maori-must-walk-away-from-any-aspiration-to-govern/?utm_source=Newsroom&utm_campaign=dbd037664f-Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_-41c1b1e3d3-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D&ct=t%28Newsroom+Pro+8+Things+09.10.2025%29&mc_cid=dbd037664f&mc_eid=67296b087d
This article clearly spells out the pros and cons for the Maori Party >>>being in a government. Their co-leaders would do well to read and >>>understand that article. After the coalition agreement is done, they
are bound by it for as long as the Government survives. Don't like
being dependent on Labour/Watermelons as a minor player? Tough luck >>>folks because outside the bounds of the negotiated coalition agreement >>>you have no power. With snap elections, minor parties that cause them
do not do well, and Labour will forever think they have a chance with
a snap election to take back the Maori seats.
Pay walled.
My apologies - I did not check. Here is the article written by Peter
Dunne:
-----
Recent ructions within Te Pati Maori, culminating in the Toitu Te
Tiriti movement cutting its ties with the party, have raised questions
about how it might function, were it to become part of a centre-left >government after next yearAs election.
Already, Chris Hipkins has distanced Labour from what has been
happening, saying Te Pati Maori needs to sort itself out, and that it
appears to be a olong way awayo from being able to play a role in a
future government.
But he has left the door ajar to the possibility of Te Pati Maori
joining a Labour-led government, knowing that without it the chances
of Labour (and the Green Party) having the numbers to take control of
the Treasury benches next year are minimal.
Two more fundamental issues arise from these events u first, what are
Te Pati MaoriAs longer-term ambitions about being part of a
government. And second, how does Labour manage u let alone sell to its
more conservative supporters u the prospect of having to work with Te
Pati Maori to form a government?
It is not immediately obvious that Te Pati Maori even wants to be a
party of government, as either a confidence and supply partner or a
full member of a formal coalition. Though the party has made it clear
it has no desire to sustain a National-led government in office like
the previous Maori Party, its intentions towards Labour seem more
ambiguous.
Te Pati Maori will be mindful of the experience of the earlier Maori
Party in its confidence and supply agreement with the last
National-led government. While it was able to achieve significant
policy gains u like the repeal of LabourAs foreshore and seabed
legislation that had spawned the Maori Party in the first place, and
the establishment of Whanau Ora u the arrangement had cost the party
all its seats at the 2017 election.
It will also be aware that formal coalition partners u like the
Alliance in 2002, and NZ First in 1999 and 2020 u have suffered
heavily after a term in government. It will be wary of risking a
similar fate in the future.
Te Pati Maori could therefore decide that the best way of securing its >long-term political future is to stay out of any coalition, or
confidence and supply arrangements, and sit independently on
ParliamentAs cross-benches. If a Labour-led government required its
support to pass specific government legislation, it would have to
negotiate directly with Te Pati Maori on a case-by-case basis, or risk >defeat.
While Te Pati MaoriAs antipathy towards National and especially ACT
and New Zealand First is well-known and unlikely to change, it would
be wrong to assume similar antipathies do not exist towards Labour.
Party president John Tamihere has long been resentful of his treatment
when he was an MP and minister during the Clark years. A sense of utu
against todayAs Labour cannot be ruled out, his friendship with senior
Labour MP Willie Jackson notwithstanding.
Moreover, Te Pati MaoriAs ambition to fully and permanently supplant
Labour as the dominant political voice for Maori would be better
served by Labour remaining out-of-office and therefore politically >ineffectual, rather than coming to office and implementing policies
that might win back votes from Te Pati MaoriAs supporters.
From LabourAs perspective, Te Pati Maori choosing to keep its distance
would be the best solution of a potentially difficult conundrum.
Labour is keen to avoid having to work at all closely with Te Pati
Maori in government, but it also knows, given the probable numbers, it
is extremely unlikely to be able to form a government without some
form of relationship with Te Pati Maori.
That very possibility contains the risk of turning away enough
potential Labour voters to deny it the election victory it is seeking.
But while Labour cannot afford to be overly encouraging about
involving Te Pati Maori in some way in government, it cannot afford to
appear too discouraging either.
That dilemma makes it unlikely that Labour would contemplate a formal >coalition with Te Pati Maori, and that a confidence and supply
agreement or looser form of arrangement for support (or even
abstention) on matters of supply could be a more realistic option.
Even that would be fraught with challenge. A less formal arrangement
would be much easier for Te Pati Maori to abandon, if it became
aggrieved about an aspect of government policy.
Faced with these difficulties, LabourAs response so far (as in so many
other areas) has been to deflect the question by publicly ignoring it,
so that the focus is kept on the governmentAs performance, rather than >LabourAs challenges. Hipkins needs to keep his options open for as
long as possible. He knows that acting too soon to rule Te Pati Maori
in or out of government formation calculations u in whatever form u
would be extremely unwise.
And he also knows that National and its allies are ready to pounce the
moment Labour makes a call about Te Pati Maori. Labour will be
attacked hyperbolically for either having surrendered to Te Pati
MaoriAs alleged separatist agenda, or for potentially setting up the
type of disorganised three-way partnership National campaigned so >successfully against in 2014. That could be just the distraction
National needs to get its own campaign back on track.
Therefore, the best outcome for Labour might be if Te Pati Maori
proactively decides it does not want to be a formal part of a
Labour-led government, but would stay on the sidelines, supporting the >government as and when required in return for specific policy gains.
That would leave Te Pati Maori free to maintain its mana and
independence, without the taint of government, and to criticise
without constraint. Such a move would also de-fang much of the
centre-rightAs potential attack lines and bring the focus of the
election campaign back to the GovernmentAs performance.
It could prove to be the best outcome for all concerned.
-----
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 54 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 17:39:53 |
| Calls: | 742 |
| Files: | 1,218 |
| D/L today: |
4 files (8,203K bytes) |
| Messages: | 184,414 |
| Posted today: | 1 |