Estimates Debate — Vote Māori Affairs

Tēnā koe. It is a privilege to speak to the Appropriation (2006/07 Estimates) Bill, particularly in terms of the bill asking that $156.990 million be appropriated for Vote Māori Affairs. I want to preface my contribution to this debate by making mention of former colleagues of mine in the Department of Māori Affairs, because this will provide the tenor of my contribution to this debate. In that regard I want to mention Jim Pou, Herepō Harawira, Oti Te Rangi, Hilda Busby, Hei Rogers, Taku Trotman, Barbara Devonshire, Matarēhua Wikiriwhi, John Dargaville, Moana Raureti, Boy Tōmoana, Anne Delamere, and Bill Herewini, all former Māori welfare officers who I believe would be turning over in their graves if they could see the plight of Māori in the year 2006.

A recent report entitled New Zealand Living Standards 2004, published by the centre for social research at the Ministry of Social Development, highlighted the plight of many New Zealanders, not least of all Māori. It makes for sobering reading, even though some in this Committee proffer the excuse that the report is somewhat dated, in that it covers only the period 2000-04. However, the events of recent weeks—in fact, recent years—with regard to the abuse and eventual death of young children suggest that the period of 2005 to the present is no better. Sadly, the situation is more pronounced among Māori. A cursory glance at the social indicator statistics confirms that Māori are still clustered at the bottom of the heap.

I would like to reflect today on the sad reality of 21st century New Zealand and suggest some ways that those statistics might be turned around. Māori social statistics are an embarrassment to New Zealand, and until they improve we cannot, in all honesty, say that we live in an egalitarian society. Overall, it is a pretty grim picture. The reasons for this are complex and cannot be separated from the wider context of economic and social conditions.

Employment tells a similar story. Recent employment figures show a disturbing disparity between ethnic groups. At the present time 2.5 percent are unemployed in the European-Pākehā group while the unemployment figure for Māori is 7.6 percent. That, of course, is 7.6 percent too much. I remember some of the employment programmes during the 1970s and 1980s under the responsibility of the then Department of Māori Affairs that were successful in training young unemployed people and many young Māori in skills that employers were looking for. Such programmes, I believe, offered the salvation from long-term unemployment, and all the negative consequences of that. We need more of them. It is not good enough that, in times of high employment, significant numbers of people are missing out. The unemployed need to be encouraged into the Modern Apprenticeships programme, and more programmes need to be implemented to ensure that none of our young are left behind.

There has been much ado about the Minister of Māori Affairs not seeking extra funding in this year’s Budget, and I ask myself why. For me, what was more important was the suggestion that this signals. Is it because his ministry underspent last year, or because there are no new programmes intended for this year, or is there a failure of the current projects that his ministry is responsible for? What happened to the programme Local Level Solutions? I understand that this is now being replaced with a new programme called Realising Māori Potential. What about those Local Level Solutions projects that were considered, commenced, and not yet completed?

What has become of the findings and recommendation from that much-touted gathering here in Wellington that was to provide economic policy for this Government in terms of Māori development? I believe the Hui Taumata itself was a good thing. But what has come of it? It was a good thing for Māori to be able to participate and to express their views. Unfortunately, the results have meant a request for extra funding of just over $2.5 million to allow a group to travel around the country reporting to Māori the outcomes of Hui Taumata. I tell the Minister that there are more important issues confronting Māori than having a small and well-paid group repeat what was said at that Hui Taumata. While it may have seemed laudable for Māori to have this Hui Taumata, the fact is that people were asked to pay to go to that hui to give their advice, and so many months down the track we have yet to see the fruits of that hui.

What needs to be considered is a return to the old programmes that were once the responsibility of the Department of Māori Affairs. Therein we had a programme called “community services” where experienced staff were allowed to go out amongst the community to make contact and deal with the issues that were confronting Māoridom at that time.

💬 Hon Member: Back to the old ways.

I heard the comment “the old ways.” Well, perhaps if we look at the old ways we will get the answers for the issues that are confronting Māori today. I want the Minister to seriously consider the programmes that once were the responsibility of the Department of Māori Affairs, to address the social and economic issues that are confronting our people today.

As has been said in this Committee earlier today, any criticism of the social indices that affect Māori not only bears some weight on members of the Government but all Māori members of this Parliament. I am sick and tired of being tarred by that brush when, in fact, I know that the solutions facing our people can be well dealt with in a way that was once a successful and very profitable programme for our people. Serious consideration needs to be given to revisiting those programmes, but I believe there has to be a political will, and I ask the Minister to consider those programmes seriously. I am glad that the Minister also now has an Associate Minister to help him with the problems that are confronting the Māori people. Kia ora.

Tēnā koe, Mr Chairperson. Obviously I stand to speak in favour of the recommendation in the appropriations in respect of Vote Māori Affairs. It is good to see that the Ngāti Hine health budget is working, because although there was some physical distance between my whanaunga from Ngāpuhi, and the Minister and I talking very quietly up here while he was on his feet, he heard part of what we said. However, the part of the Ngāti Hine health budget that deals with his sight needs improving, because he mistakenly referred to our other Ngāpuhi whanaunga, Mr Simich, by the wrong gender term.

I follow on from Pita Paraone and his words about Te Puni Kōkiri and this particular vote. Firstly, let us bear in mind that the Māori population is, comparatively speaking, a youthful population. As we wander forward as a country, never quite knowing where we will end up on race relations, we are being dragged to the side and dragged backwards by the Opposition, which has no clear sense of where it is taking the country. Unfortunately a large number of confused voters belonging to the Brethren church and other such obscure sects fell for the rhetoric.

💬 Dr Wayne Mapp: They didn’t vote.

They did not vote, but who did they fund? Did they waste their money funding a leader who today decided that because he cannot make any traction in here, he will go out and insult every democratically elected local government official? I will have more to say on that later. We have a very clear policy. The policy is in relation to the advancement of our people—Māori voters; iwi—who are going forward, economically speaking, and are major and welcome contributors in relation to identity. That is something we have never heard from Opposition members.

Where do they want Māori to fit, in relation to our overall identity? They want them in the outhouse. They do not want them to enjoy a position of pride or a position showing forward thinking—no, they want them to the side and forgotten about. Fortunately, a vast number of voters saw that this was a backward, divisive, stigmatising, negative way to think about the future, which is why those members are in Opposition, and long they will be there. They sought to demonise the most vulnerable members of our modern society, of our modern economy, and they were tossed out.

Opposition members have been unable to recover from that mortal blow. They have fallen upon themselves. Not only are they destroying the person who thought he could idly walk from the Reserve Bank into this House and claim the top prize, but also they have taken the toki to him. He is history, and now they have got the mere out—no, the mere is for the high chief, and there are no high chiefs over there. They have taken a bit of four-by-two—[Interruption] Yes, Pita Sharples gave them a mānuka stick, and our voters will have much to say about that in the future. They will regret the day they gave a sliver of support to Pita Sharples, who immediately raced over to that side of the House and signed an ill-fated document, of which we have a copy. They seek to deny it, but it will surface in good time.

But let us go back to why this is a reasonable programme. Although it is attacked by Tau Henare and others, it shows that the officials, and the Minister in particular, were willing to get a better return for the same amount of money. That is excellent thinking that is reflective of a very prudential approach to using the available amount of money.

While members opposite rail about wastefulness, the Minister has come with a programme that is a reprioritisation. The first one is rawa. Rawa means resources, but rāwa also means to choke, and Opposition members are choking on it. The second thing is whakamana, which means to uplift and to ensure that people enjoy self-esteem and are held in a position of esteem, which is something that members opposite have failed to advance. Fortunately the result of the election demonstrates that they have much more heartache to come.

Mātauranga is the name of our vessel. It is the third point. Mātauranga, knowledge, is the final reprioritisation. Who, with a sliver of intelligence, could argue against the Minister’s fine reprioritisation in giving knowledge and education top billing? Not only is it education that will enrich the whole country but we must focus on young people. By and large they will be a hugely more important proportion of New Zealand’s working population in the future. Knowledge will ensure that they are not trapped in the Kāhui end of town. Rather, they will enjoy the fruits of bilingualism, they will have enterprise and industriousness, and they will be supported. That is why the manaaki tauira reprioritisation was very clever thinking. Mr Ron Mark had a fantastic success for the Wairarapa landless natives, or whatever they are called in that part of the country. They have a fantastic scholarship scheme; they do not need to fall back on the taxpayers and get further money.

So the manaaki tauira was reprioritised to deal with the third-formers, the fourth-formers, the fifth-formers, and the sixth-formers, because unless we prevent them from slipping through the cracks, there is no point in just growing the number of university students.

So I say to all the people who unwisely, unfairly attacked the Minister over the reprioritisation of manaaki tauira that we are investing in the area of secondary school students, which is where, unfortunately, we have all inherited an enduring problem. Nigh on 30 percent of all Māori school leavers continue to leave without adequate qualifications. I say to our Māori and Pākehā colleagues on the other side of the Chamber that such a statistic must not be used, as it was in the recent election, as a device to divide people. We should all join in common purpose to ensure that young Pacific Islanders and, in particular, young Māori men are not only adequately skilled but are endowed with the right education so they do not represent a social problem of the future but are a key economic ingredient.

I think it is a very sad day whenever we proceed to talk about Māori affairs or race relations. The standard response from the Opposition is a very negative one. It is based on a rather devious and quite sinister agenda, which is to choose people who can be demonised and stigmatised, and make them, and the population, feel that they are responsible for a whole host of amorphous, ill-defined woes. I am happy to say that this approach—not only through Te Puni Kōkiri but at a wider level throughout the Government—is challenging that and is going to stand against that. It was a bleak day when our political opponents chose a type of politics—I understand that it is called wedge politics—to drive a wedge between good, keen, hardworking Kiwis and tried to convince everyone that Māori are the authors of their own problems, that Māori have nothing constructive to contribute, and that the sooner that both the Treaty and Māori are moved by them to the margin, the sooner the country will be enriched. That failed; it always will fail. The Minister has brought a very clever reprioritisation forward. Admittedly, the budget is not as large as the Māori Party would like, but there are significant resources available through other Government departments to deal with the enduring problem of Māori under-achievement. Kia ora tātou.

Vote Māori Affairs agreed to.

Vote Justice agreed to.

Vote Local Government