'I was frustrated': Bishop explains music award comments
Senior government Minister Chris Bishop says he was frustrated by the politicisation of Stan Walker's performance at the Aotearoa Music Awards, when he said "what a load of crap".
During Walker's performance of Māori Ki te Ao on Thursday last week in Auckland performers took to the stage with flags displaying Toitū Te Tiriti - a movement borne out of opposition to the controversial and voted down Treaty Principles Bill and other government legislation.
Bishop, who was in attendance, was seen criticising the performance, and has since said he should have kept the comments to himself.
Today he told reporters his comments were not directed specifically at Walker.
"I was frustrated and annoyed by the sort of overt politicking around it.
"It's not about Stan Walker, I actually quite like Stan Walker, actually quite liked his performance. It was just the sort of politicisation of it that frustrated me."
Bishop singled out the Toitū Te Tiriti "banners and paraphernalia" as the source of his frustration, not the performance itself.
He said he would not be apologising to Walker.
"It's not clear what I'd be apologising for."
The producers of the Aotearoa Music Awards said Bishop's remarks had "no place" at the ceremony. In a statement, they said they were committed to creating a safe, respectful and inclusive environment.
"The Awards respect and honour te ao Māori and we were proud to support Stan with his vision for his powerful rendition of Māori Ki Te Ao ."
Bishop's comments led to backlash from other performers, including Don McGlashan, who was seen on video confronting Bishop.
But the National MP said the irony was he is a "huge" Don McGlashan fan.
"I love the Mutton Birds. But Don McGlashan is a noteworthy non-supporter of the National Party.
"People might remember the 2008 election, in which he expressed some frustration at Anchor Me , which is a great Mutton Birds tune, being used by TVNZ on the election night coverage," Bishop said.
"His political views are quite well-known. But look, it is what it is - he's entitled to his views in the same way I'm entitled to mine."
Arts, Culture and Heritage Minister Paul Goldsmith, who was also at the awards, brushed off whether the performance was controversial.
"There's always controversy at music awards. It goes without saying."
Māori Crown relations minister Tama Potaka said he disagreed with Bishop's comments, but they were for the minister to respond to.
"I absolutely love Stan Walker and his commitment to te reo, and the mahi that he does particularly in his engagement with Ratana, the hāhi. I don't agree with Minister Bishop's comments, however those are a matter for him to comment on," Potaka said.
Labour's Māori Development spokesperson Willie Jackson said Bishop, as a music fan, should know that music had always been political.
"He should know music better than anyone. Look around the world, people have been doing that for years. Whether it's Bob Marley, Bono, whatever, it's been happening, it's not like something new.
"He should talk to his Shihad heroes, 'cos the lead singer there's got pretty good politics too."
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told RNZ's Morning Report programme today he was comfortable with Bishop's response, and had spoken to him over the weekend.
"I just got his side of the story about what he said and it was exactly as reported. He corrected it well before I got to him... he just acknowledged he should have kept his thoughts to himself.
"The bottom line is, your listeners aren't losing a lot of sleep over what a politician sharing his opinion on some music was about."
Labour leader Chris Hipkins said Bishop's behaviour was disappointing, but it was for Luxon to bring his ministers in line.
"You've got to remember when you're a government minister that you're on public display all of the time."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
16 minutes ago
- NZ Herald
60 emergency calls in upper North as wild weather hits
Chris Bishop frustrated by 'politicalised' Music Awards performance Senior Government minister Chris Bishop says he was frustrated by the politicisation of Stan Walker's performance at the Aotearoa Music Awards, when he said 'what a load of crap".
The Spinoff
2 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Ruth Richardson's state honour is a slap in the face for the poor
The architect of 1991's 'mother of all budgets', who was made a Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit in the King's Birthday honours this week, did immense damage to the country's poorest and most vulnerable, writes Max Rashbrooke. In the early 1990s, two Porirua preschoolers burned to death when their state house was set alight by a candle their family had begun using after the power was cut off. They had been forced to this extremity by a National government that, obsessed by 'market forces', had decided to remove their housing subsidy and require them to pay market rents instead. This sharp rise in costs had left them unable to pay their power bill; hence the candle. Labour MP Graham Kelly caused an uproar in parliament when he attributed these deaths to National's policies – but even allowing for imponderable factors, like whether a candle falls over or not, he was in the broadest sense right. Policies that target the poor always have consequences in the end. And no one targeted the poor harder than Ruth Richardson, who on Monday was made a Companion to the New Zealand Order of Merit. Alongside the market-rent reforms, Richardson is most notorious for the 1991 'mother of all budgets', which cut the benefits of some of the poorest and most vulnerable New Zealanders by up to one-quarter. In a move familiar throughout history, she decided that the burden of tackling New Zealand's (admittedly severe) budget deficit was to fall disproportionately on the poor, rather than those better able to bear it. The result was immediate: a doubling of the number of those living in the most extreme poverty – that is, on less than 40% of the typical income – from 4% in 1990 to 8% two years later. Most policies are much slower to show their effects; Richardson is among a select few who can claim to have doubled poverty overnight. The effects of this stark rise, quite apart from the pain and misery inflicted on families, have spread right throughout New Zealand. Food banks used to be virtually unknown in this country; in the 1990s they became commonplace. Unable to afford to heat their homes, or indeed pay the rent, multiple families began living under one roof, enduring the cold or huddling together for warmth. Mould and damp proliferated. Diseases like rheumatic fever, long since eliminated in other developed nations, flourished in these conditions, wrecking childhoods and ending lives prematurely. A sharp uptick in the hospitalisations of children for medical conditions – from 50 per 1,000 to 70 per 1,000 – began in 1992, just after Richardson's budget. While she was not, of course, the sole author of these misfortunes, she undoubtedly wrote much of the script. Child poverty leaves scars that later affluence never really erases. Children born into hardship have, in adulthood, twice the rate of heart conditions of those born into wealth. They also have far lower reading scores and educational results. Quite apart from being devastating in their own right, these deficits create colossal financial costs: the annual bill from child poverty in this country is estimated at anywhere between $12 billion and $21 billion. This is particularly ironic because Richardson's legacy on the right is one of financial rectitude: she is seen, in particular, as the author of the 1994 Fiscal Responsibility Act, which aimed to improve the transparency and long-term management of the government's accounts. But not only is this relatively small beer compared to the appalling damage poverty inflicts on people's lives, the long-term economic costs of increased hardship are an example of massive financial irresponsibility. Not that Richardson has ever been able to acknowledge as much. Interviewed by the academic Andrew Dean a decade ago, she denied her policies had resulted in any wider harm: 'Over time, was there a social cost? No, there was a social benefit.' That, then, is the person the New Zealand state decided to honour this week: someone who not only did immense damage to the country's poorest but is also quite disconnected from the realities of that harm. The puzzle is less – as some commentators suggested – that it took so long for her to be recognised, but rather that she has been recognised at all. Maybe, though, we should not be surprised. Over in the UK, a similar strategy of slashing government budgets and benefit payments took place under the Conservatives between 2010 and 2024. This austerity cut access to the social services on which ordinary people rely, reduced ambulance services, and sparked poverty-related 'deaths of despair'. All up, it is conservatively estimated by researchers to have caused 190,000 preventable deaths. The man most responsible for this social devastation, former chancellor George Osborne, nonetheless occupies a gilded position in British life, having moved smoothly into editing the Evening Standard newspaper and pontificating on global politics. Inflicting misery on the poor is, in short, socially acceptable as long as it is clothed in the classic establishment rhetoric of taking 'difficult' choices, 'balancing' the books and fiscal 'responsibility'. The poor may be, as the Christians say, always with us, but that does not guarantee that their lives will ever be accorded the proper respect.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Kea Kids News: Haka shows love for MPs facing suspension
Reporter Sinembali is on the Parliament steps, where supporters have turned out for 3 MPs facing possible suspension for their haka in opposition to the Treaty Principles Bill.
