I’ve often written that with six co-bloggers focusing on New Zealand there’s no point in me doing the same, and in any case I find US politics far more interesting because ideas that are considered “settled” in NZ are still being fought over there, plus new ideas about how a society should be organised.
But there are times when an idea begins to emerge in New Zealand that is controversial and worth fighting over, and “co-governance” is it.
Up until now I’ve figured that it would have to be fought over at the 2023 election; that Labour could not continue to push forward in the face of growing public alarm and falling polls over a range of issues that might see co-governance as the straw that breaks Labour’s back into the low twenty percent range or even lower. Labour would be forced to either dump it or make the arguments in public as part of an election so that whichever way it goes, we can at least say that a democratic decision was made on the future of the country.
But I’ve concluded that this is not how it’s going to proceed and the reason has to do with comments I saw quoted from none other than former National MP and TOW Negotiations Cabinet Minister, Chris Finlayson.
When I first saw these quotes on Kiwiblog I found it hard to believe that they could have been uttered by a former National Party MP and minister; a person that I effectively voted for over several election cycles and that I thought was an intelligent and compassionate man devoted to rectifying the sins of past colonialisation. Sure, there was grumbling on the Right about some of these deals and the fact that Finlayson had gone from being poacher to gamekeeper on the issue.
So I checked out the Radio New Zealand podcast referred to, The Detail and its episode Co-governance: Time to get on with it?, and discovered they were true quotes:
But as former Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Chris Finlayson explains, the concept itself is nothing new.
…
Finlayson takes The Detail back to the ground-breaking signing of the Treaty settlement between the Crown and Tainui in 1995, and explains how the settlement over raupatu claims led to the formation of the Waikato River Authority.It became the genesis of other co-governance arrangements, giving iwi an opportunity to participate directly with local or regional government to provide advice or take part in the management of a particular resource.
As he describes them, those past settlements that he was heavily involved with were not really about righting wrongs via the Waitangi Treaty tribunal process. No, they were about building small but permanent foundations for an entirely new way of governing this nation; a way that has now sprung into life via the supposed “opposing” party, Labour, backed by The Greens and naturally the Maori Party, with the He Puapua report, Three Waters and so forth.
And it gets better:
“I simply say to people, one, there’s a new regime, get with it folks; two, Rome wasn’t built in a day.”
While he says there’s room for robust debate about the co-governance model between the Crown and iwi and hapū, Finlayson’s advice for dealing with the “sour right” behind the racist, resentful rhetoric: “We’ve just got to leave those losers behind and move on. They don’t like tangata whenua. They dream of a world that never was and never could be,” he says.
Two words Mr Finlayson.
Fuck
You.
My Scottish and Irish ancestors lived for hundreds of years tugging their forelocks to Irish landowners and Scottish Lairds, escaped that, and neither I nor my kids are going to repeat that process with the likes of Prince Willie Jackson and Princess Nanaia Mahuta.
And the thing is that Finlayson fits in so perfectly with them and their born-to-rule arrogance. That wealthy Khandallah childhood; the Latin and French majors; the LLM and mixing in the highest echelons of our legal and political circles, not to mention the leaders of our various great iwi. No wonder National lapped him up and loved him. He could elegantly stick it to Labour and others on these issues.
While all the time he was basically on the same side as them.
And now in keeping with that Olympian attitude of superiority, in his mind the issue has already been decided by The Powers That Be – meaning the political elite of both National and Labour, plus our academic and legal communities – and now it’s just a matter of getting on with it.
Elections? Democracy? Pfft. I would not now be at all surprised if he uttered the same phrase as Willie Jackson about this nation, that “We’re in a consensus-type democracy now. This is not a majority democracy.” Consensus is one of those words which, when I hear it, tells me I’m about to be lied to.
The final question I have, and frankly I think it’s rhetorical now, is how many more like him are there in the National Party? I’m betting enough to push this through eventually under some guise or other:
My prediction, there will be a substantial empowering of iwi in education, heath, housing supply and social policy in the next few years. National will go along with most of this once they are back in government, just as they have done so since 1990.
In that sense Don Brash was a bit of an aberration, one that National is not keen on repeating.
No Minister 
Tom …. to answer your question and I repeat again, with due deference to Chris Finlayson who I think was hugely unrated as a Minister, that co-governance is not the answer and is in fact a stupid question. The need surely is to focus on outcomes by effective targeting acknowledging the needs of differing cohorts. You don’t need co-governance to achieve that nor do you need a bureaucracy centric, Wellington driven, one glove fits all approach.
National has already made a commitment to repeal Three Waters and has made it clear that a separate Maori Health Authority will be axed. But equally there needs to be an understanding that reinforcing failure is hardly an intelligent way forward.
I’m sorry Vet but in the wake of these comments I just don’t trust you guys anymore on this issue. I liked Finlayson for his smarts, his self-described “oddball” persona and what seemed like a genuine decency to all sides around the TOW negotiations, even as I hesitated to vote National repeatedly for other reasons.
Now this. This is a total betrayal.
This guy isn’t just showing a contempt for the process of voting, indicating that it really doesn’t matter, he’s actually spitting on those who voted National but opposed this stuff in good faith. I’ve written many times about the RINO’s in the US who cynically play to the base while secretly sneering at them – a lot of whom were exposed in the last few years. This feels like that.
And I will repeat my suspicion that there are more than a few in National who think as he does, including about their own voters; people who chuckled quietly into their G & T’s when Finlayson at drinks unloaded some quiet piece of snark along these lines.
How glad he must feel to be free of appealing to sour right losers from the stump. Anymore of this talk and I will have to assume that National is glad to be rid of them too.
It was a no betrayal. The idea of co-governace on issues such as the Waikato river or the Whanganui River was an intended outcome. It was obvious that the river iwi had a specific interest in the river beyond that of the general public. So a specific role for iwi was an appropriate outcome.
Obviously the concept should not apply to everything, but there are many areas where it should. Rahui of specific fishing areas for instance.
I am pretty confident that National who hardly made it a secret in the past will apply the concept in future TOW settlements.
I also think National will ultimately accept the Maori health authority, though no doubt will modify it somewhat. No overall vet for instance. As you have noted it is Nationals’s practise to asses whether it is one of those things you examine after it has been established and decide whether it is just better to live with it.
Anyway, you don’t vote National (at least not recently) and given your overall views it is best you don’t.
“I also think National will ultimately accept the Maori health authority, though no doubt will modify it somewhat”
Of course they will and accept every other bitter pill Labour will bequeath us. Labour Lite in all but name only and reality. With people like Wayne and Findlayson infesting National they always will.
Without people of courage the country will continue further into third world status.
What a horrible future we leave for our kids and grand kids.
You are right there OC.
Wayne and this fink are just NIMO’s (National in Name Only) without the guts to join Labour.
Its all bullshit. The focus should be on growing the cake, not changing the flour from White to Brown, or the baking soda to woke shit so the cake doesn’t rise.
When you understand business, finance, and economics you realize how far are relative fall from grace is going.
Why do I think National will accept the Maori Health Authority?
To begin with, it will have already been established and will be in action. In my view, it will be able to show some successes. Second, the idea is not that much different to Whanau Ora. Third, it can be readily modified, so that it easily fits within the broad public health system. Fourth, abolishing it will generate huge amount of ill will and will make it harder for National to deal with broader crown iwi issues.
I don’t see the Maori Health Authority as a co-governance issue, anymore than kura kaupapa schools or Whanau Ora. It is simply a bespoke way of delivery health services to those Maori who want to deal with it. Many won’t, anymore than many Maori don’t go to kura kaupapa schools.
It is very different to Three Waters, where co-governace is at its heart.
Can we really believe they will actually carry through. We have been disappointed so many times in the past.
Finlayson’s comments on this signal everything that’s wrong with National. Way too many in the parliamentary party who like the left a bit much, starting with the leader.
Vet there is a definite lack of trust with people who would normally vote National and comments like that from Finlayson are apt to “scare the horses” so to speak.
It needs to be addressed.
I will certainly vote National in the electorate but probably ACT for party as an insurance although Seymour tends to be a bit of a goose himself.
The danger is with comments like Finlayson’s out of the born to rule elite will start to make Winston look good–God forbid.
And Maori wards when they’ve been rejected by the electorate? And all the other special treatment for Maori? Why do my Maori grandchildren get treated differently from the others? And note that the Maoris are university educated and in well paid jobs (unlike some of their cousins). How about a once and for all definition of what the Treaty means? And if you want an example of why we should all be concerned see the article in Newsroom this morning on what the ToW really says. We are on a steep descent to separatism in this country and simply undoing some of what Labour does isn’t going to be enough to stop it.
South tried race based “co-governece” for about half of the twentieth century.
It’s really just form of socialism where vast sums of money were devoted to economic outcomes which aligned with ideological ones.
So… 1/2 (hardly any), 1/4, 1/8th, 1/16th, 1/32nd,1/64th, 1/128th 1/256th, 1/512th.
All the same? No. Because there is a corresponding opposite.
Just picking and choosing.
So the whole time he was doing his job as a sworn Minister of the Crown he was batting for the other side ?
Interesting approach to ethics, honesty and a nice line in deceit.
He certainly made a fool of Key I guess
Batting for both sides obviously.
The whole point is to disenfranchise the majority of New Zealanders Tom – something that was actually accomplished many years ago now
Democracy in the so called “free world™” has long since become a total farce
As they say New Zealand is a nation of sheep, sheep being fleeced while waiting to get their throats cut
Finally something we can agree on Andrei.
I’ve seen at least one comment from Finlayson over the years that has caused me to double-take.
Not surprised, really, with this one.
I’d seen stuff from him that caused some concern too, but it always seemed to to slowly fade away and I’d think, Ok! No biggie.
But this. Very rarely do I get angry about frigging politics, given my low, low, core-of-the-earth low expectations, but this has seriously fucked me off.
I guess now I know how a Labour voter must have felt circa 1988.
National, just like Labour, have been working away at all our democratic protections for a while now. Years ago, this too would have been a blip. But today? Blip instead recasts all past actions in a completely different light. So for me, this doesn’t annoy me to the extent that you are annoyed, but I can certainly understand it. I’m on the acceptance stage of the process now (on the seven stages of grief scale), after months of on and off again, intense anger that started last year.
Its kinda bizarre behaviour dont you think?
Attention seeking?
A snout looking for a trough?
Positioning for a consultant with the weak as water Chris Luxon
Missing the world of the 3 piece pinstrip suit, which in its self went out of fashion 10 years ago?
Small man not enjoying being anonymous ?
Reminding wee Willie Jackson he needs payback for his services?
Anyway saw that joker in a cafe on Hutt Road on Monday, wearing these bizarre baggy flannel shorts which would be suitable at a gym if you wanted to show off your equipment, and were 25 years younger to boot but in a fashionable French Cafe….ummmm simply weird.
There is nothing so ex as an ex MP. Both Finlayson and Mapp, both of whom I respect, fall into that category. I repeat again … National is pledged to repeal Three Waters; there will be no separate Maori Health Authority. That pledge from National’s number three ranking caucus member in Kerikeri just ten days ago. I can understand why Actoids might not want to accept that … its in their interest not to. But it doesn’t change the situation one iota. Co-governance ain’t the answer and its idle/wrong to suggest it is.
You think a politician’s pledge can be relied upon? You are old enough to know better.
“But it doesn’t change the situation one iota. Co-governance ain’t the answer and its idle/wrong to suggest it is”
You are very right about that Vet but you must admit that when National party luminaries speak in favour of what Labour is doing is apt to make people nervous.
They really need to shut their pie holes.
I can understand being their irrelevant after feasting in the trough must be hard for then. But really????
We really need National to win so we don’t need these fools opening their silly mouths.
Finlayson is working with Ngai Tahu on fresh water legislation so he is bound to say this because its co-management. Different from Three Waters where a maverick pair of Ngai Tahu involved in the fresh water managed to black mail the Dunedin City Council its accepting Three Waters. Mavericks? because Ngai Tahu had no formal policy on Three Waters.Finlayson following the money
Finlayson elevates his status in the Ngai Tahu settlement. The lead lawyer was Nick Davidson, astute and not a motor mouth
The demon leeches wriggle their way to the top, in a relentless swarm to join the upper echelon of ruling class. Right and left, Labour and National seem defunct. Perhaps this is how political power works now, or has always worked. It cuts against “The populist delusion”. A new book to chew through. Better we be a disruptive organised minority, than a disorganised majority, to affect change in such a blind system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_theory
I have been saying for years that National are a left wing party and this supports that. I will be party voting Act and electorate voting someone probably not affiliated to a main party unless Act stand a candidate in Selwyn.