Community-Based Social Sector Welcomes $190m Social Investment Fund – Calls For A Fair And Sustainable Approach
Te Pai Ora SSPA and the New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services (NZCCSS) welcome today's announcement from Social Investment Minister, Hon Nicola Willis of a new $190 million Social Investment Fund.
'This announcement is an exciting opportunity to take a longer term, sustainable focus on the work we do every day in communities' says Belinda Himiona, Chief Executive of Te Pai Ora SSPA. 'Every day through the mahi of providers, our sector turns around the lives of children and whānau. That's what this funding needs to support.'
Te Pai Ora SSPA and NZCCSS represent community-based social service providers across Aotearoa who are focused on improving outcomes for tamariki, rangatahi, and whānau.
'Social service providers are critical to a thriving Aotearoa. This Social Investment Fund is an opportunity to better recognise the work of our incredible social sector providers. We want to ensure that next steps for delivering this fund are done with community as partners and reflect the aspirations people have for themselves," says Alicia Sudden, Chief Executive Officer, NZCCSS.
'We're keen that the community sector is involved as the Social Investment Agency develops its approach,' says Belinda. 'What we want to see is a social investment model that truly understands and responds to community need – and that is fair, robust, and workable.'
The organisations say lessons must be learned from past processes. Both NZCCSS and Te Pai Ora SSPA believe commissioning needs to be done in good faith, guided by evidence, and with children and whānau firmly at the centre.
The potential of the new fund centres on the detail: 'The sector has the capability and experience to deliver early and effective support – but that work takes time, care, and trust. Our people work intensively with complex cases. That must be properly recognised in how the fund is rolled out.'
'We are pleased to see a stronger focus through this fund on preventative approaches, particularly in light of New Zealand's poor child wellbeing ranking in the recently released UNICEF Innocenti report, and NZCCSS hopes to see further positive budget announcements that will benefit the wellbeing and needs of children and whānau in the Budget next week," says Alicia.
As the Government looks ahead to Budget 2025, both Te Pai Ora SSPA and NZCCSS say the sector will be looking for long-term commitment to early support, prevention, and sustainable funding.
'This is a sector that shows up every day for communities. We're ready to work together on a social investment approach that's grounded in evidence, guided by community voice, and driven by a genuine commitment to improving lives,' says Belinda.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
25 minutes ago
- Newsroom
Parliament warned of dangerous precedent set by MPs' suspensions
'Vindictive', 'unprecedented', 'disproportionate', 'arbitrary' – some of the words used by opposition MPs to describe the punishment handed down by a majority of Parliament to three Te Pāti Māori MPs. The MPs' Treaty Principles Bill haka was 'utter contempt', 'orchestrated' and 'breaking the rules', Government MPs replied. Among the impassioned speeches and barrage of interjections was a considered warning from Labour Party MP and former Speaker of the House Adrian Rurawhe. In a rare speech to the House, the senior Māori MP urged those from National and Te Pāti Māori to change their positions or risk setting a dangerous precedent that would see parliaments of the future 'without a doubt' reach for extreme penalties to punish opposition MPs. On Thursday, Parliament's debate on the punishments recommended by the Privileges Committee resumed after being postponed during Budget week. Last November, a collection of opposition MPs performed the haka Ka Mate in response to the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill, while the party vote was being counted. During the haka, four MPs left their seats, and Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi, along with MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, advanced towards the Act Party. The behaviour was referred to the Privileges Committee, which considers conduct of MPs and recommends any punishments it deems necessary. Parliament then has to vote on whether or not to accept the recommended punishment. The committee has a tradition of reaching unanimous decisions – an acknowledgement of the influence of the committee, and the importance of reaching consensus on a decision that impacts the democratic process. But that didn't happen in this case. While the Government members – who hold a slim majority – recommended a seven-day suspension for Maipi-Clarke and 21-day suspensions for both Ngarewa-Packer and Waititi, the Labour Party, Green Party and Te Pāti Māori each put forward a differing view. Since then, opposition parties have questioned the rationale behind Government members – which include former deputy prime minister Winston Peters and Attorney-General Judith Collins – recommending this level of punishment (the longest previous suspension was three days). On Thursday, the unprecedented nature of the punishment was again a central feature of the debate, and Rurawhe warned those on the other side of the House about the dangers of using their majority to impose such a penalty on a minority, opposition party. 'It's demonstrably clear to me that it is the Government that is punishing the members today, not the Parliament,' he said, pointing to the lack of consensus. 'That is a dangerous precedent.' The interjections and barrage of retorts from across the House that had been a constant throughout the previous debates stilled as Rurawhe said the Privileges Committee would have a new precedent; a new range of penalties to use against members who erred in the future. 'You can guarantee that. You can also guarantee that governments of the day, in the future, will feel very free to use those penalties to punish their opponents.' The Labour MP warned members opposite him that just because they sat on the government benches today, did not mean they would be there in the future. They too, could face this level of punishment from the parliamentary committee, now the doors had been swung wide open. During Rurawhe's speech, Green MP Steve Abel could be heard yelling 'kangaroo court'. When it was his turn to speak, Abel referred to the suggested punishment as 'not only unprecedented—it is disproportionate, procedurally flawed and democratically dangerous'. Meanwhile, Greens co-leader Marama Davidson said the decision by the committee was a 'blatant power play', which was 'parading in disguise at upholding process'. 'These dangerously precedent-setting, convention-destroying, consensus-ignoring, Tiriti-trampling, racism-whistling, democracy-mocking, narrowly supported recommendations from the Privileges Committee bring this House into more disrepute than any haka ever has.' Throughout the debate, Labour went to pains to differentiate its position from Te Pāti Māori. Those who spoke from Labour – including leader Chris Hipkins, Duncan Webb, Willie Jackson and Rurawhe – acknowledged Te Pāti Māori had knowingly broken the rules they'd signed up to, and agreed they needed to face a punishment that involved suspension for the co-leaders, but decried the process and outcome that followed. As one of the two major centrist parties, Labour MPs called for moderation. 'I think, in order for this to move forward, two parties need to change their position: Te Pāti Māori and the National Party,' Rurawhe said. Meanwhile, Labour's Jackson – someone who was often unyielding and had been kicked out of the House as a result on more than one occasion – called on Te Pāti Māori to compromise and apologise. But Te Pāti Māori pushed back, with Ngarewa-Packer saying her party was not moderate. 'We are not the incremental party; we are the transformational party, because our people are hurting so much and so are our communities. We don't have the luxury of time to do this incrementally. We all came in and said that we would be the unapologetic Māori Party.' Later, Waititi said those in Labour were constrained by being part of a 'majority Pākehā' party, and 'chained' to party politics. Winston Peters talks tā moko and DNA Speeches from most Government MPs were subdued in comparison, with members of Act, National and NZ First calling for respectful debate, respect for the rules and respect for others in the House. Again, the Speaker of the House had ordered for the public gallery to be closed for the debate. Meanwhile, Acting Deputy Prime Minister and NZ First leader Winston Peters used his speech to call Te Pāti Māori MPs 'extremists who act with utter contempt and ignorance of the process that has been accomplished'. When senior National Party ministers cleared the front benches soon after the debate kicked off, Peters moved from his new seat across the House to occupy in the Prime Minister's chair. Christopher Luxon was not in the House on Thursday afternoon – as was his usual practice – and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour was in the UK to argue the moot 'no one can be illegal on stolen land' at the Oxford Union debate. On at least two occasions Peters alluded to the theory of blood quantum, asking both Tākuta Ferris and Ngarewa-Packer about their DNA: 'What is your DNA? Mr Ferris, what is your DNA, because it ain't by a majority Māori. Stop bull-dusting your people.' At one point, Peters referred to Waititi's tā moko in response to an interjection from the co-leader: 'The one in the cowboy hat who hates colonialism – the one that's shouting down there, with the scribbles on his face; the guy that's got half the South Island hanging around his neck – can't keep quiet for five seconds.' Waititi responded to Peters' comments, explaining his stetson belonged to his grandfather – a member of the C company or 'Ngā Kaupoi' (the Cowboys). 'And the scribbles on my face represent the many of our ancestors that have been the victims of state-sponsored terrorism from this House.' Then Waititi held a noose aloft in the House. The co-leader acknowledged the prop might be confronting, then spoke about the disproportionate and wrongful punishment faced by his ancestors. 'Our tīpuna endured muskets, land wars, the theft of whenua, and being beaten for speaking our reo – a 21-day benching is nothing on their sacrifice.' Rawiri Waititi and Winston Peters went head to head, with the Te Pāti Māori co-leader holding up a noose in the House. Photo: Laura Walters Government MPs said one of the aggravating factors in the haka performed by Te Pāti Māori was what they considered an attempt to intimidate other MPs and their belief that when Ngarewa-Packer pointed to the Act MPs, she was simulating a 'finger gun'. Both Ngarewa-Packer and Waititi said that was a misinterpretation; that the Government was perpetuating a myth of Māori violence. Labour leader Chris Hipkins has previously said he also believed that was what Ngarewa-Packer was doing. 'We haven't created the violence here,' Waititi said. 'We will not be silenced. We will not be assimilated. We will not be subjugated. And we make no apology for being absolutely unapologetically, unfettered, unbridled, Māori human beings.' The co-leaders, along with Maipi-Clarke, spoke to media both before and after the debate, saying they believed this process and the outcomes showed the Privileges Committee was no longer fit for purpose, adding that the Government had abused its power in the committee for political gain. It's not about haka Takuta Ferris was the first to speak on behalf of Te Pāti Māori, and did so in defence of the haka. The mana of taonga, like haka, would never be diminished, he said. 'Not by ignorance or bigotry, nor pettiness or spite; that the enduring heartbeat of our tīpuna, that pulses in the manawataki of every haka their descendants perform, will never be stopped.' But Ferris said the debate was not about haka. 'It is not about a suspension. It's not about the interruption of a vote. It is, at its heart, about the fact that this House continues to ignore Te Tiriti o Waitangi, that this House continues to ignore Māori sovereignty, and that this House continues to ignore all of the constitutional rights that flow forth from those two things,' he said. 'You see, deep down, under layers and layers of intergenerationally refined colonisation and assimilation, this debate is about the eternal struggle for the survival of the Māori people and the survival of those people as Māori.' Like Ferris, others agreed the debate was not about the haka. Act MPs Parmjeet Parmar, Nicole McKee and Karen Chhour said the debate was not about haka, but about respect – respect for other people and respect for the office MPs held, and the duty that came with it. 'When I came to this place and I took the oath, I promised to abide by the rules of this House,' Chhour said. 'I may not agree with all the rules of this House, but I agreed to that when I stood here four-and-a-half years ago and took that oath.' NZ First minister Casey Costello said the debate wasn't about haka, it was about the rules of Parliament, and Te Pāti Māori had knowingly broken those rules. 'Hana Maipi-Clarke is a glorious individual, but she was put forward in this issue … Choices were made in that. This was not a spur-of-the-moment issue. This was an orchestrated attempt, and that could have easily been facilitated within the rules of this House.' It's a bit about tikanga Meanwhile, Labour MP Arena Williams said the debate wasn't about haka, or even disorder, 'it's about that discomfort that happens when Māori protest in a way that the House hasn't learned to accommodate'. Williams said it was a dark day for the Parliament. The world, as well as MPs' families at home, were watching. 'This is not the standard that we hold ourselves to. But let it not be the unravelling either. Let's learn from this. Let's bring tikanga into our practice. Let's do our best to understand it, so that we can represent the people who need us.' The debate on the report took place against the backdrop of a broader discussion around the role of tikanga in Parliament. Te Pāti Māori argued in its written submissions to the Privileges Committee that tikanga needed to be considered when evaluating whether they had broken Standing Orders – the rules of Parliament. 'The haka that we performed in response to the introduction of the Treaty Principles Bill was not only a valid form of debate to this piece of legislative nonsense that sought to do violence to te Tiriti, it was also an action that was totally consistent with Tikanga Māori, the first law of Aotearoa,' Waititi, Ngarewa-Packer and Maipi-Clarke wrote in their joint submission. 'The coalition government laid the challenge to Māori first by taking this abhorrent piece of unconstitutional legislation to the vote. We responded to that challenge and we had a constitutional right to do so in the form of a haka as a taonga protected under Article Two of te Tiriti. The rules of this House, the Standing Orders and even the legislation passed by this house must all bend to the constitutional supremacy of te Tiriti.' MPs from the governing parties have pushed back against this argument, saying that while tikanga does have a role in Parliament, the standing orders don't allow for what Te Pāti Māori did – interrupting a vote. They have said it is the fact of interrupting the vote, not how it was done, that was the problem. Speaker Gerry Brownlee said he expected Parliament's Standing Orders Committee to look at how tikanga is reflected in Parliament, as part of its regular review of the rules. Photo: Marc Daalder 'One of [Te Pāti Māori's] arguments was that tikanga Māori and haka are not matters for the Privileges Committee to consider. On this the Committee agrees with them: it is not there to set or debate the rules of Parliament but rather to uphold the rules as they are, not as people may wish them to be,' committee chair and National Party minister Judith Collins said in her speech on the report before the Budget. 'It is not about the haka. It is not about tikanga. It is not about the Treaty of Waitangi. It is about following the rules of Parliament, that we are all obliged to follow and that we all pledge to follow.' Even Speaker of the House Gerry Brownlee, who called the proposed sanction 'very severe' and 'unprecedented', has grumbled about Te Pāti Māori's tikanga argument. 'It's hard to take seriously deep concerns about disrespect for the Treaty when there is such huge disrespect for the Parliament itself shown in that submission,' he told Newsroom in April. However, Brownlee has also indicated support for reforming Standing Orders to clarify how tikanga Māori, including haka and other actions, can be integrated into Parliament's rules. 'I don't think that any one group inside New Zealand should be insisting that their way of doing things is the most appropriate for all, and that's why, on that basis, it is worth looking at the Standing Orders to see what changes might be necessary to reflect that wider interest in the proceedings of Parliament,' he said. 'On that basis, I think there is some consideration that needs to be given to the way in which an adaptive Westminster system, which is what we have with MMP, and the way in which every Westminster-based parliament is slightly different to reflect more of a particular country's needs and requirements. It's not an unreasonable thing.' But there has been considerable confusion in the halls of Parliament about how, exactly, this reform might occur. Work to consider tikanga began in the Business Committee, which oversees the day-to-day logistics of running Parliament, but it was decided this was not the right venue for the conversation. Newsroom understands some parties expected Brownlee to set up a special group or committee to consider the issue, with many thinking Labour MP and former Speaker Adrian Rurawhe would (or was already) the chair. On Tuesday, however, Rurawhe told Newsroom he hadn't heard anything about the effort from Brownlee himself. 'The last I heard was there was going to be an invitation to go to Standing Orders Committee, but that hasn't happened yet. I think it's at more of an intent stage than actually progress being made. My name's been mentioned quite often, mostly incorrectly,' he said. However, previous attempts to extract information and context from Rurawhe, including on the work he is understood to have begun during his time as Speaker, had been rebuffed. Adrian Rurawhe – a former Speaker and senior Māori MP – has joined a debate he could no longer avoid. Photo: Marc Daalder The Standing Orders Committee oversees Parliament's rules and also reviews the full rule-set each term. It's not clear whether the work would be a standalone item of business or wrapped into the regular standing orders review, which has yet to begin. On Thursday, members of both the Green Party and Te Pāti Māori referred to a specific tikanga committee, while Labour's Jackson recommended Rurawhe be asked to lead the work in that space. However, they did not elaborate on this idea of a standalone group or sub-committee. Brownlee this week declined an interview on the matter, but a spokesperson said 'the work is progressing' and confirmed the intended venue was the Standing Orders Committee. But exactly what the confluence of Standing Orders and tikanga might look like is still up in the air. Moreover, this would be a big piece of work to get right and the clock was ticking with less than 18 months left in the Parliamentary term and a summer break in between. If a review of how tikanga was incorporated or better reflected in Parliament was to be completed this term, all six parties would need to come to the table. Given the tenor of the debate and the vast differences between party ideology, it was hard to see a scenario in which the whole of Parliament was able to agree on a constructive way to amend the laws of Parliament to reflect what the Supreme Court considered to be the first law of the land. The message from Labour's Jackson was that it couldn't, really. 'Te Pāti Māori want to express our culture when the reality is this: this is a tikanga Pākeha place. That's a reality. There ain't no tino rangatiratanga here,' Jackson said last month. Parliament was not the marae, but the challenge was to get Māori culture imbued in Parliament in order for tangata whenua to be accepted as a partner to the Crown. While last month, Jackson described this as a 'challenge' and a 'journey', on Thursday, he appeared resigned to the idea that this would never eventuate. 'The reality is if you want to kōrero Māori you can speak Māori all day and night. You want to sing, if you want to do the haka, you can do all of that. Is it enough? No, it's not enough. But in terms of tikanga Pākehā, I think we have to accept that that's the reality of this place.' Another vehicle for change In lieu of a committee, made up of senior MPs from all parties, hashing out a different modern-day version of a Westminster system that more authentically reflected tikanga, Parliament's youngest MP was working on another possible avenue. Last month – the day the Privileges Committee debate was supposed to take place – Maipi-Clarke submitted a member's bill to the ballot, which would include Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the Constitution Act, mandate that all MPs undertake training in respect to te Tiriti o Waitangi, and that Parliament develop and maintain a te ao Māori strategy. Speaking in the House on Thursday, Maipi-Clarke's described herself as 'a quiet person by nature'. She acknowledged that she had been largely absent from the debate on this issue since she initiated the haka last November. 'I came into this House to give voice to the voiceless,' she said – her voice catching with emotion. 'Is that the issue here? Is that the real intimidation here? Are our voices too loud for this House? Is that the reason why we are being silenced? Are our voices shaking the core foundation of this House, the House we had no voice in building?' Maipi-Clarke said it wasn't a 'left or right issue'. 'This is about getting the foundations right first, to move forward as a country.' Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke initiated a haka last November that set this six-month process in train. Photo: Sam Sachdeva On Thursday evening the 22-year-old MP picked up her packed bags and left the Parliamentary precinct alongside her co-leaders, MP Takutai Tarsh Kemp and party staffers and supporters. But before that, she said that until te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations were understood and entrenched Parliament would continue having this debate. The process has lasted more than six months, from when the haka was performed in November to when the members were referred to the Privileges Committee in December, through the hearing and deliberation process to when the report was released in May and then to the final debate and vote in June. In the final 45 minutes of the debate in Parliament, party members moved around the House with MPs and party whips from governing and opposition parties hunching beside seats, talking in hushed tones. If the debate had not concluded on Thursday, it would have resumed at the end of June. All parties decided they wanted to draw a line under this and move on. In the end, the governing parties voted to accept the committee's recommendations, without compromise.
Otago Daily Times
10 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Te Pāti Māori stand down confirmed
Parliament has confirmed the unprecedented punishments proposed for Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka in protest against the Treaty Principles Bill. Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi will be suspended for 21 days, and MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke suspended for seven days, taking effect immediately. Opposition parties tried to reject the recommendation, but did not have the numbers to vote it down. The heated debate to consider the proposed punishment came to an end just before Parliament was due to rise. Waititi moved to close the debate and no party disagreed, ending the possibility of it carrying on in the next sitting week. Leader of the House Chris Bishop - the only National MP who spoke - kicked off the debate earlier in the afternoon saying it was "regrettable" some MPs did not vote on the Budget two weeks ago. Bishop had called a vote ahead of Budget Day to suspend the privileges report debate to ensure the Te Pāti Māori MPs could take part in the Budget, but not all of them turned up. The debate was robust and rowdy with both the deputy speaker Barbara Kuriger and temporary speaker Tangi Utikare repeatedly having to ask MPs to quieten down. Tākuta Ferris spoke first for Te Pāti Māori saying the haka was a "signal of humanity" and a "raw human connection". He said Māori had faced acts of violence for too long and would not be silenced by "ignorance or bigotry". "Is this really us in 2025, Aotearoa New Zealand?" he asked the House. "Everyone can see the racism." He said the Privileges Committee's recommendations were not without precedent, noting the fact Labour MP Peeni Henare, who also participated in the haka, didn't face suspension. Henare attended the committee and apologised, which contributed to his lesser sanction. MP Parmjeet Parmar - a member of the Committee - was first to speak on behalf of ACT, and referenced the hand gesture - or "finger gun" - that Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer made in the direction of ACT MPs during the haka. Parmar told the House debate could be used to disagree on ideas and issues, and there wasn't a place for intimidating physical gestures. Greens co-leader Marama Davidson said New Zealand's Parliament could lead the world in terms of involving the indigenous people. She said the Green Party strongly rejected the committee's recommendations and proposed their amendment of removing suspensions, and asked the Te Pāti Māori MPs be censured instead. Davidson said The House had evolved in the past - such as the inclusion of sign language and breast-feeding in The House. She said the Greens were challenging the rules, and did not need an apology from Te Pāti Māori. NZ First leader Winston Peters said Te Pāti Māori and the Green Party speeches so far showed "no sincerity, saying countless haka had taken place in Parliament but only after first consulting the Speaker. "They told the media they were going to do it, but they didn't tell the Speaker did they? "The Māori party are a bunch of extremists," Peters said, "New Zealand has had enough of them". Peters was made to apologise after taking aim at Waititi, calling him "the one in the cowboy hat" with "scribbles on his face". He continued afterward, describing Waititi as possessing "anti western values". Labour's Willie Jackson congratulated Te Pāti Māori for the "greatest exhibition of our culture in The House in my lifetime". Jackson said the Treaty bill was a great threat, and was met by a great haka performance. He was glad the ACT Party was intimidated, saying that was the whole point of doing the haka. He also called for a bit of compromise from Te Pāti Māori - encouraging them to say sorry - but reiterated Labour's view the sanctions were out of proportion with past indiscretions in the House. Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said the debate "would be a joke if it wasn't so serious". "Get an absolute grip", she said to the House, arguing the prime minister "is personally responsible" if The House proceeds with the committee's proposed sanctions. She accused National's James Meager of "pointing a finger gun" at her - the same gesture coalition MPs had criticised Ngarewa-Packer for during her haka - the Speaker accepted he had not intended to, Swarbrick said it was an example where the interpretation can be in the eye of the beholder. She said if the government could "pick a punishment out of thin air" that was "not a democracy", putting New Zealand in very dangerous territory. An emotional Maipi-Clarke said she had been silent on the issue for a long time, the party's voices in haka having sent shockwaves around the world. She questioned whether that was why the MPs were being punished. "Since when did being proud of your culture make you racist?" "We will never be silenced, and we will never be lost," she said, calling the Treaty Principles bill was a "dishonourable vote". She had apologised to the Speaker and accepted the consequence laid down on the day, but refused to apologise. She listed other incidents in Parliament that resulted in no punishment. Maipi-Clarke called for the Treaty of Waitangi to be recognised in the Constitution Act, and for MPs to be required to honour it by law. "The pathway forward has never been so clear," she said. ACT's Nicole McKee said there were excuses being made for "bad behaviour", that The House was for making laws and having discussions, and "this is not about the haka, this is about process". She told The House she had heard no good ideas from the Te Pāti Māori, who she said resorted to intimidation when they did not get their way, but the MPs needed to "grow up" and learn to debate issues. She hoped 21 days would give them plenty of time to think about their behaviour. Labour MP and former Speaker Adrian Rurawhe started by saying there are "no winners in this debate", and it was clear to him it was the government, not the Parliament, handing out the punishments. He said the proposed sanctions set a precedent for future penalties, and governments may use it as a way to punish opposition, imploring National to think twice. He also said an apology from Te Pāti Māori would "go a long way", saying they had a "huge opportunity" to have a legacy in The House, but it was their choice - and while many would agree with the party there were rules and "you can't have it both ways". Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said there had been many instances of misinterpretations of the haka in The House and said it was unclear why they were being punished, "is it about the haka... is about the gun gestures?" "Not one committee member has explained to us where 21 days came from," he said. Waititi took aim at Peters over his comments targeting his hat and "scribbles" on his face. He said the haka was an elevation of indigenous voice and the proposed punishment was a "warning shot from the colonial state that cannot stomach" defiance. Waititi said that throughout history when Māori did not play ball, the "coloniser government" reached for extreme sanctions, ending with a plea to voters: "make this a one-term government, enrol, vote". He brought out a noose to represent Māori wrongfully put to death in the past, saying "interpretation is a feeling, it is not a fact ... you've traded a noose for legislation".
Scoop
10 hours ago
- Scoop
More Than Half Of Voters Back Proposed Penalty For Te Pāti Māori MPs, Poll Suggests
Article – RNZ The Privileges Committee proposed a 21-day suspension for three MPs over the Treaty Principles haka. , Political Reporter More than half of voters consider the proposed penalty for three Te Pāti Māori MPs over the Treaty Principles haka to be either appropriate or too lenient, polling shows, ahead of the debate on the matter resuming on Thursday afternoon. That debate – which had potential to become a filibuster – was cut short when Leader of the House Chris Bishop unexpectedly postponed it last month. The Privileges Committee – which recommends punishments for breaking Parliament's rules – proposed a 21-day suspension for the co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, and seven days for MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke. It means no pay, no ability to vote on legislation, and no presence in Parliament for the duration. The latest RNZ-Reid Research poll asked for voters' views on whether the punishment fit the crime. Overall, more people – 37.0 percent said it was 'about right'; while 36.2 percent said it was 'too harsh'; 17.2 percent said 'too lenient', and 9.6 percent said they did not know: a 54.2 percent majority then backing the punishment or thought it should be stronger, in line with the coalition parties' view. The result puts opposition parties – which all labelled the three-week ban disproportionate – in a difficult position. Broken down by voting preferences, more than half of Labour's supporters (51.2 percent) backed leader Chris Hipkins' view the suspensions were too harsh, but a sizeable number thought the punishment fair (29.8 percent) or too lax (8 percent). Greens supporters were more convinced with three quarters (75.3 percent) calling the punishment too harsh, but still 12.4 percent said it was about right and 3.8 percent too lenient. Surprisingly, 9 percent of Te Pāti Māori's supporters also labelled it too lenient, although a clear 80.8 percent called it too harsh, with just 6.2 percent saying it was about right. The results for the coaltion voters were more predictable, far more National, ACT and NZ First supporters saying it was too lenient, compared to those calling it too harsh. But Speaker Gerry Brownlee, of the National Party, appears to be in the latter camp – he called the punishments 'very severe' and 'unprecedented' when setting down the original debate on Parliament's calendar. He pointed out no MP found guilty of contempt had previously been suspended for more than three days. The Privileges Committee recommendation was also only backed by coalition parties, despite convention dictating the MPs on the committee should aim for consensus. Those responding to RNZ's questions may have known these facts from media reporting – or they may not. Bishop's postponement of the debate took the teeth out of opposition criticisms the government wanted to keep the punished MPs from commenting on the Budget – as it turned out, the co-leaders did not speak in the Budget debate anyway. Budget delivered, MPs return to the debating chamber to discuss the punishment after Question Time today. The length of the debate rests ultimately in Brownlee's hands, and he has signalled a willingness to let it continue until all views were thoroughly aired. Whether parties actually want to filibuster – given the poll, and the risk of voters' patience for politicians talking about themselves wearing thin – is far from certain. Hipkins says a few of his MPs will speak, but they will not be running down the clock with endless speeches. The Greens' co-leaders have said they think the MPs should not be suspended, and they plan to scrutinise the decision 'to the highest degree'. But Te Pāti Māori is eager to put the matter to bed. 'Just got to hurry up and get it over and done with and let's sort it out, otherwise we'll be hanging around here waiting and waiting and waiting. Just, they've made their verdict – let's just get it done,' co-leader Rawiri Waititi said. This poll of 1008 people was conducted by Reid Research, using quota sampling and weighting to ensure a representative cross section by age, gender and geography. The poll was conducted through online interviews between 23-30 May 2025 and has a maximum margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent at a 95 percent confidence level. The report is available here.
