Te Pāti Māori announces Ikaroa-Rāwhiti candidate
Photo:
Supplied
Te Pāti Māori has announced Haley Maxwell will stand for next year's general election - for the one Māori seat currently held by Labour.
Maxwell helped organise the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti in the region last year.
"Haley Maxwell spearheaded the historic Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti from Te Tairāwhiti right through to Kahungunu. Haley embodies the fierce compassion and courage that Ikaroa-Rāwhiti is famous for" Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said in a written statement.
"She has stood on the marae, in the courts and on the streets for our people. Parliament will be a stronger house with her voice echoing the roar of Te Tairāwhiti."
The statement described Maxwell as a wāhine Māori, māmā and nanny whose life's work centred on rangatahi justice, reo revitalisation and tangata-whenua drive community development.
It said her campaign would focus on "tackling sky-high food costs, unaffordable housing, and low incomes across Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, while championing Te Pāti Māori's justice, housing, and mana motuhake policies".
The party did not respond to questions about the timing of the announcement during a by-election for Tamaki-Makaurau, which Labour is also contesting.
In a statement, Labour's MP for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, Cushla Tangaere-Manuel, said the region deserved choices.
"I acknowledge the Te Pāti Māori candidate announcement of Hayley Maxwell, and commend her for putting herself forward," she said.
"Ikaroa-Rāwhiti deserves to have choices and will ultimately choose their voice in Parliament. In the meantime it's my honour to continue to serve the region."
Te Pāti Māori has announced Haley Maxwell will stand for next year's general election - for the one Māori seat currently held by Labour.
Maxwell helped organise the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti in the region last year.
"Haley Maxwell spearheaded the historic Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti from Te Tairāwhiti right through to Kahungunu. Haley embodies the fierce compassion and courage that Ikaroa-Rāwhiti is famous for" Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said in a written statement.
"She has stood on the marae, in the courts and on the streets for our people. Parliament will be a stronger house with her voice echoing the roar of Te Tairāwhiti."
The statement described Maxwell as a wāhine Māori, māmā and nanny whose life's work centred on rangatahi justice, reo revitalisation and tangata-whenua drive community development.
It said her campaign would focus on "tackling sky-high food costs, unaffordable housing, and low incomes across Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, while championing Te Pāti Māori's justice, housing, and mana motuhake policies".
The party did not respond to questions about the timing of the announcement during a by-election for Tamaki-Makaurau, which Labour is also contesting.
In a statement, Labour's MP for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, Cushla Tangaere-Manuel, said the region deserved choices.
"I acknowledge the Te Pāti Māori candidate announcement of Hayley Maxwell, and commend her for putting herself forward," she said.
"Ikaroa-Rāwhiti deserves to have choices and will ultimately choose their voice in Parliament. In the meantime it's my honour to continue to serve the region."
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
10 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Road user charges: AA backs shake-up but wants low admin costs
Photo: RNZ Private companies will need to keep the costs of running the government's new road user charges scheme as low as possible, the AA says. The government is inching closer to replacing petrol tax with electronic road user charges on all light vehicles, in what Transport Minister Chris Bishop calls [ the biggest shake-up of road funding in half a century]. He says it'll be fairer and will be like paying a power bill or Netflix each month and will be in place by 2027. The changes will put an end to the existing two-tier system, where petrol users pay a fuel excise duty of about 70 cents a litre at the pump, while diesel, electric and heavy vehicles pay paper-based road user charges based on distance travelled. However, Labour says the timing of the coalition's transition to a universal road user charges system risks "clobbering" motorists with more costs. AA's policy director Martin Glynn said his organisation is also worried about how much motorists would have to pay under the new scheme. He told Morning Report he was unsure if it would be more expensive. At present the minimum road user charge kicked in once a light vehicle had travelled 1000km. That was $76 and $12-$13 for an administration fee. With private providers being brought in to run the revised scheme they would need to be making money, Glynn said. "We really want to see the administration costs be as low as possible." He agreed with the Minister that with more vehicles becoming more fuel efficient, the current petrol tax penalised those with older vehicles. "It's become more unfair over time and it's going to become more unfair if we don't change." The current system of buying RUCs was "a bit clunky", he said. Those using diesel or a heavy vehicle purchased RUCs online from the NZ Transport Agency or they could go to an agent. Motorists needed to keep an eye on their odometer to ensure they stayed up to date. The other problem was the the RUC came in the mail and needed to be displayed on the dashboard. AA supported Bishop's plan to make the system fully electronic. Annual warrant of fitness checks were the main way to ensure compliance at present. "But it's fair to say it's difficult to enforce being an annual system so there's a fair degree of evasion and avoidance and that's something that will have to be addressed in the transition." Heavy vehicles already have an ERUC, a device in the trucks that monitors kilometres and location.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
The people working for $10 - and less
Even with living wage employment opportunities, some only earn between $8.78 and $10.65 an hour for additional hours worked. Photo: RNZ / Rebekah Parsons-King New Zealand needs to rethink how the welfare system interacts with tax - and how we approach "punishing" people who are on the benefit, a prominent economist says. Ganesh Ahirao said the marginal tax rates that people were earning when they shifted off income support, or took on more work at middle incomes, were much higher than those paid by higher-income people. He looked at a number of household scenarios to illustrate the point and said even with living wage employment opportunities available, people were only earning between $8.78 and $10.65 an hour for additional hours worked. Someone on a minimum wage would earn even less. The Living Wage is currently set at $27.80 per hour. In one case, a single person whom he referred to as Manaia, with no children, no student loan and paying rent of $415 a week for a one-bedroom flat in Wellington would receive the Jobseeker Support (JS) payment alongside Winter Energy Payment (WEP) and Accommodation Supplement (ASUP) totalling in the hand $592 per week. Six hours' work at the living wage would take income to just over $700 with those supports. "But thereafter, the reduction of JobSeeker - at the gut-punching rate of 70 cents for every extra dollar earned - slows in-the-hand increases to a snail's pace. Consequently, the effective marginal tax rate (EMTR) faced by Manaia soars into 80 percent-plus stratospheric territory," Ahirao said. In another case, a sole parent of two children paying $600 a week would receive the Sole Parent (SP) payment alongside WEP, the Family Tax Credit (FTC) component of Working for Families, and ASUP totalling $1047 per week. With six hours work at the living wage, the person's income would rise to nearly $1200. "But then the reductions in support payments brutally cut in. Firstly, the SP declines by 30 cents for every extra dollar earned and then after 10 hours per week by 70 cents per extra dollar earned. The resulting EMTR of 89.2 percent is pushed to 93.3 percent (after 14 hours per week) as FTC payments begin to decline at 27 cents for every dollar of other income. Another hit (at 24 hours per week) pushes the EMTR to 95 percent, as the ASUP also begins to decline (25 cents for every dollar of other income)," Ahirao said. If the person worked 40 hours a week they would receive $352 more than if they did not work at all. Ahirao said the tax and welfare systems needed to work together. "MSD does benefits and IRD does Working for Families and student loans… they have this separation there that needs opt brought together. "Abatement rates in the welfare system are not seen by the tax system. That's one element. "We also need to think seriously about our perspective on penalising people. It's a punitive-first approach welfare system. There is a belief out there that everyone should work, should be able to go to work and should take up work whenever they can. To a degree that's ok but then it goes to those who don't work are somehow at fault and should be penalised. That is the perspective to get past." He said many people out of work were not jobless by choice. There was little encouragement to work when the benefit was clawed back so quickly, he said. "You take away 70c in the dollar - there's a perspective that if we add on to their part-time income with jobseeker they're going to get too much, it's going to be too generous so we've got to claw it back… do we want to encourage people into the workforce or penalise people for not being in the workforce? "That's the mindset we need to get over before setting any other policies. That's a big shift in our thinking across the whole political spectrum." A universal basic income could be part of the conversation, he said. "I'm comfortable saying you have aright to an adequate income and that involves an obligation to contribute in society, make yourself available for work. You don't go from there to we're going to bash you with a whole lot of sanctions. You tweak the settings to make it as attractive as possible to contribute. A carrot rather than a stick approach." Ministry of Social Development general manager of welfare system and income support Fiona Carter-Giddings said the ministry's priority was getting people into work. "Between June 2024 and June 2025, 86,000 benefits were cancelled because the person found a job. "We're pleased New Zealanders continue to move off benefit and into work, despite challenging economic circumstances. When people are employed they have a higher income and more opportunities to improve their quality of life. "Government financial assistance generally reduces as other income increases, because New Zealand's welfare system targets support to people who need it the most. This is a long-standing principle of social security. "The ideal rate at which support should reduce involves trade-offs between income adequacy, incentives to work, and maintaining appropriate costs to the taxpayer. The welfare system is designed to balance these objectives, and it is an area of ongoing debate." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Marine and coastal rights law changes not justifiable, former United Future leader says
Peter Dunne, was leader of United Future in 2011 and voted in favour of the original Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. Photo: RNZ / Rebekah Parsons-King Former MPs who supported the National government's foreshore and seabed legislation back in 2011 are lambasting the coalition's move to make it harder for Māori to get customary rights. The government will amend the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act to toughen the customary rights test. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the changes would restore Parliament's "original intent" for the law, after a 2023 Court of Appeal ruling made it easier for groups to win customary title. A Supreme Court ruling overturning that decision meant the government paused introducing the changes last December. But, on Tuesday, it announced it would push ahead with amending the law saying the Supreme Court decision was still "able to be interpreted in quite a broad way". The changes will mean those seeking title will need to prove they have had continuous exclusive use and ownership of the area since 1840. Former Attorney-General and National MP Chris Finlayson has condemned the move calling it foolish and saying it would "undermine" Parliament's original intention and be "extremely harmful" to race relations. There is a similar sentiment from Peter Dunne, who was leader of United Future in 2011 and voted in favour of the law. He told RNZ the original legislation was designed to sort out the public's access to the foreshore and seabed while also recognising customary rights of Māori, if they could prove a "continuous connection" to it. Proving that connection, Dunne said, was already "quite a high test". "It was set out to be relatively high for quite a specific purpose; to make sure that the claims that were being made were genuine and well founded and not frivolous or opportunistic... it was generally accepted there needed to be a high bar." The Supreme Court had already made the law's original intent clear and he did not know why the government wanted to make it "clear times two". "It seems to me that that's almost a way of saying 'we want to make it tougher than was originally intended' and I don't think that's correct or justifiable." The Marine and Coastal Area Act replaced the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 , which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership, provoked widespread protest, and led to the formation of the Māori Party - now Te Pāti Māori. Dunne said the Supreme Court decision was definitive and if he were still in government he would lobby the government to "let sleeping dogs lie". "Uphold the spirit of the 2011 legislation [because] I don't think this issue, which has caused such controversy over the last nearly 30 years, needs to be reopened and all those old wounds brought to the surface again," he said. "It's time to now to move on, let the situation resolve itself according to that legislation, and do so without further provocation." Tau Henare was a member of the National Party at the time, and speaking at the bill's first reading, said the difference between the Marine Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act and its predecessor the Foreshore and Seabed Act, was access to the judiciary. "Everybody has a right, it does not matter whether they are black, white, red, or green; it does not matter, everybody has an absolute right to go to court to find out whether they are right or whether they are wrong." "This is about human rights, and that is what that whole debacle was about. Fifty thousand people were outside the front door of this place," he said at the time. Speaking to RNZ on Wednesday, Henare said Chris Finlayson was "absolutely right" and there was not "one person" in caucus who had any experience with "Treaty Jurisdiction Prudence". "It's a play for the dumb red neck vote. It shows how backward National have slipped. Be glad to see them go," he said. The law change is expected to pass before October. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
