8 Feb 2000 Address in Reply 261

[Therefore to you the Speaker of this House, these are the statements from home. I greet you and all of us.]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Waiata WILLIE JACKSON (The Alliance): I second the motion that a respectful address

be presented to His Excellency the Governor-General, in reply to His Excellency's speech.

A, tihei mauri ora! E tika tuatahi ki te mihi ki to tatou Matua i te rangi nana nei nga mea katoa. Ka mihi ki te Whare me Papa-tO.-a-Nuku, tena korua.

Ki nga mate haere. Ki te wairua o taku papa noho mai ra ki roto i te ringa o te Atua. Ki te Kaikorero, tena koe. Ki te Pirimia, ahakoa kua ngaro ia, tena koe. A, ki aku rangatira, Jim, Sandra, tena korua. Ki nga whanaunga, nga hoa i haramai nei ki te tautoko, tena koutou. Ki a koe Mita, kua ngaro hoki ia engari, nga mihi, nga manaaki ki a koe, Mita. Ki a koutou katoa nga mema, tena koutou, tena koutou, tena ano tatou katoa.

[Behold, the breath of life. It is indeed right that a greeting is extended firstly to our Father in the sky, as he created everything. A greeting is extended to the House and Mother Earth, greetings to you two.

To the dead, farewell. To the spirit of my father, remain there in the hand of God. To the Speaker, greetings to you. Greetings to you too, the Prime Minister, despite your absence. To my leaders Jim and Sandra, greetings to you two. To the relatives and friends who have come here in support, greetings to you all. Greetings to you, Mita-he has disappeared also, but never mind; regards to you, all the same. Indeed, to all members, greetings, greetings, and greetings again to us all.]

It is indeed a privilege to be seconding the Address in Reply. I believe that it is the first time that Maori have been accorded that honour.

I would like to express my thanks to some of my family and friends. First is my father, who is no longer with us. I thank him for being my best mate, my biggest critic, and my greatest influence. It is my biggest regret that he is not here today.

I would also like to thank my uncle Syd Jackson, who has been a great political mentor for me. He has never received the kudos that he should from Maoridom. He was protesting before it was considered trendy to protest.

I thank family and friends who have joined us here today. I say "Thank you" to my uncle Moana, who has also made a major contribution in coming along to support me, and to my uncle Brown, who was very close to my father. I thank very much my aunty, my grandmother, my aunties and uncles, my brother, my sister, my kuia--everybody who has come along .. I know I am not meant to say "Thank you" to this person, because we have an Andre Agassi type of contract-as in Andre did not say anything to Steffi-but I thank very much Tania Rangiheuea, who is very close to me. 4

Last, but not least, I thank my mother, June Jackson, who I think typifies very much the volatility of the Maori vote. On election night she said to me: "Son, I have two prayers: one is that you get in off the Alliance list" --obviously, she did not fancy my chances against someone in the back row here-' 'and the second is that Winston gets in.'' So there we go; that is an example of the Maori vote!

I come from an electorate that was reflected very much in His Excellency's speech. Manukau is an area where I formed and shaped many of my political ideals. It is an area with many distinct features, a couple of them being that it has the widest cross-section of racial and ethnic groups in this country, and, unfortunately, it also can claim to have the narrowest cross-section of income groups in New Zealand. We have the highest group of lower-paid workers in the country, many of whom are Maori. In many ways, Manukau should be seen as a challenge and a benchmark for this Government, which is intent on reducing disparities in the economic, social, and political areas.

It is an electorate that has been devastated by harsh economic policies. I have witnessed first hand the effects of those policies on our people in, for example, the unemployment area. We have intergenerational unemployment: fathers, sons, and their sons not getting work. There is an ever-increasing prison population, kids having kids- the worst statistics, which the Prime Minister talked about just the other day. The Government's clear signalling of its intention to reduce the gaps is good news for Maori,

262 Address in Reply 8 Feb 2000

not just in south Auckland but right around the country. The establishment of a Cabinet committee aimed at reducing those disparities as a priority is a positive start.

The Government's fulfilment of its article 3 treaty obligations is also a positive way of addressing disparities. Fulfilling article 3 obligations means, in simple terms, Maori receiving the same opportunity as Pakeha. I know that some people get a bit tired of this. There may even be the odd member who would scoff at this-I was going to say ''the odd party", but I will not go down that lane-and want this whole Maori thing to just disappear. They probably want us to settle on a time, a date, and an amount, and then we can all be one country again. Unfortunately, it is not that easy. Article 3 treaty obligations must be properly thought out and carefully addressed, the net result and resolution being a greatly improved relationship between Maori and Pakeha, and Maori and the Crown. The Government needs to properly engage with Maori on a long-term, planned basis. A single parliamentary term could yield some good incremental results, but it is the long-term gains that are important. Planning and partnership are the essential keys for success.

For an outstanding example of this we have only to look at a model set by three tribes: Ngati Raukawa, Ngati Toa Rangatira, and Te Atiawa. They have just reached the end of their 25-year planning cycle, which started in 1975. The Whakatupuranga Ruamano model is an inspirational example of Maori strategic planning by three tribes who are now planning for the next 1,000 years. Imagine planning like that! In 1975, they had very few Maori speakers. The economy was depressed, and theirs was a very depressed area, but through conscientious commitment to their plan, those tribes are now in a more viable and culturally enhanced position. They are now leading the way in terms of young Maori speakers.

There is every reason for Maori, as a collective, to work in a similar fashion with the Government over a long period. Changes in Government did not deter those tribes from realising their goals. The same level of commitment from Maori to a similarly developed and executed planning blueprint must be encouraged. We are at the beginning of a new millennium, and it is timely that Maori should prepare themselves well for the future. One of my aims during this term is to assist Maori to engage in long-term strategic planning for economic and cultural survival.

In the immediate term, Maori needs are exactly the same as those of Pakeha. We need jobs, and better housing, health, and education. However, we need a little bit more, for Maori have the responsibility of passing on a language and a culture to successive generations.

As board chairmaQ of the only Maori language secondary school in Manukau, south Auckland, I have witndsed first hand the struggle to maintain our language. In a school of this kind, one is able to judge how hard it is to keep the language alive. We have 180 kids, who are taught maths, science, geography--everything-in Maori, from the time they walk in until the time they walk out. It is a very hard environment. We have kids mirroring the actions of their Black Power or Mongrel Mob fathers, yet those kids are working away, and we support them as much as we can. Then they return to an impossible situation at home. They can barely communicate with their parents, because 99 percent of the parents cannot speak a word of Maori. Imagine how tough that is! Those problems are caused through language retention spanning only a single generation, yet those parents choose to send their kids to a total Maori-immersion school. The politics of doing so is directly related to their belief that to identify more fully as Maori one needs to hear and speak the language.

These problems cannot be resolved by a Maori language strategy in schools alone. We need a more comprehensive solution that is not a strategy based on having more Maori dictionaries or a television channel that no one can tune into. A comprehensive strategy that promotes language and culture through schools, and incorporates broadcasting, is what is required. Dual investment in the education and broadcasting sector promises a greater chance of preserving Maori language and culture. Culture, of course, must be distinguished; otherwise, we risk seeing everything Maori in just a linguistic context.

My aim is to have a professional Maori broadcasting system that is well planned, properly resourced, and capable of encompassing all facets of Maori language and culture.

8 Feb 2000 Address in Reply 263

The existing system of Miiori broadcasting is a patchwork of television and radio bloopers. The only Miiori television news programme, Te Karere, is on at midday-shunted there by the America's Cup; we had better win, I suppose. Miiori programmes are allocated to ghetto time-slots on Sunday mornings. We have a Miiori network and a Maori broadcasting authority that will not fund anything that is in English. We have an English authority, New Zealand On Air, that will not fund anything in Miiori . Basically, we have a mess, and 90 percent of Maoridom are missing out on their language and culture.

If we want to listen to programmes on contemporary issues, such as women's speaking rights on a marae, we are condemned to listening to John Tamihere's friend, John Banks, on Radio Pacific. And if we want to watch this issue on television, we have no other choice than to watch Paul Holmes or Susan Wood interviewing our people. We can, and should, have Maori programmes of the highest quality, in both Maori and English. Holmes, I suppose, could easily be matched by-I was going to say"Henare" for a minute; I do not know what came over me; I will not say "Fox", because his name is not too popular around here! There is no reason that Maori programmes cannot be presented in a positive manner, in prime time, on mainstream television. Maori programmes should not be restricted to ghetto time-slots on obscure television channels .

The current situation is catastrophic for Maori. The emphasis in broadcasting has become totally language focused, which effectively excludes the majority of Maori who cannot speak the language. The answer is for the Government to give Maori the necessary resources to develop a strategically integrated and complementary Maori broadcasting system-that is, radio, television, and print-that will reach all Maori. If the Government achieves this, then we will be going some way to fulfilling the Crown's article 3 obligations.

I want to finish with something very dear to my heart-the urban-iwi debate. It remains an issue of critical national importance, ;.;!though it has been the most divisive kaupapa in Maoridom for the past I 0 years. I accept that as a list MP I have responsibilities to all Maori across the iwi-urban Maori continuum. However, I stand for fair allocation of treaty resources to all sectors of the Maori community, where the basis of allocation avoids giving undue preference treatment to one group over another, and avoids the majority's interests being dismissed.

In the 1950s Maori left their tribal homelands in droves because of Government policies of urbanisation. My dad, Bob, left Hiruharama, a little place just outside of Ruatoria, in Ngati Porou, for the Gear freezing works and the bright lights of Wellington. Just about every other person in Wellington was a Ngati Porou. Ngati Porou dominated the clubs, the football fields--everything. In those days, of course, it was said that there were only two types of Maori-those who were Ngati Porou and those who wanted to be. It was no wonder we were known as "Ngati Blow". So my whole life was totally immersed in Ngati Poroutanga, and whilst I was not born under the tribal homeland or under the mountain of Hikurangi, Hikurangi was with me at all times.

I am sure my old dad did not for one moment think he would be penalised for moving to Wellington to work. There is no way he would have forfeited his Ngati Poroutanga, despite the so-called new rules saying he no longer had a property right when he left home, for implicit in the property right is the people's right, which he carried to his grave, and which is the essence of the urban Maori argument.

Thousands of Maori have found their identity through the efforts of urban authorities-their health needs, their financial needs, their every need; also their Maori language needs. Kohanga reo started in the cities, believe it or not. In many ways our organisations have provided, in a practical sense, a pseudo-tribal infrastructure for urban-based Maori. We have been fighting for far too long, and the only people who are making money are the lawyers. Economic and cultural imperatives must steer us towards a better working relationship between tribal and urban leaders, so that the lives of all Maori are enhanced. I respectfully ask the Prime Minister and the Government to treat this issue with the highest priority.

I have been thinking for some time now about how to wrap up this speech in the most dramatic of ways. I have looked back on previous maiden speeches and have noted that

264 Address in Reply 8 Feb 2000

previous members came out with profound statements from Bernard Shaw, to Robert Kennedy, to Martin Luther King. One almost found the cure for cancer in some of those speeches! So I suppose I should come out with a wonderful tauparapara, or Maori saying, summarising my whole speech, but to tell the truth I cannot think of anything suitably prophetic. However, I will say this: our leader, Jim Anderton, reminds us constantly that we might have only one chance in here, so for goodness' sake let us not blow it.

Na reira ki a koutou, koi na taku korero ki a koutou. Ki aku whanaunga, aku hoa, te iwi o Te Arawa, tena koutou, tena koutou, tena ano tatou katoa.

[Therefore, that is my address to you. To my relatives, my colleagues, and the people of Te Arawa, greetings, greetings, and greetings to us all.]

Waiata; karanga Rt Hon. JENNY SHIPLEY (Leader of the Opposition): I move, That the following

words be added to the address: ''this House has no confidence in the Labour-Alliance Government because of its total lack of a programme that will improve New Zealanders' lives by increasing New Zealand's economic growth rate or expanding our job market at recent rates; further, by inclusion of measures such as the repeal of ACC and ECA legislation and increased regulation of the economy, this Government will damage New Zealand's competitiveness and increase costs to business and social service agencies to the detriment of us all. ''

On 21 December 1999 we listened to a speech that outlined where this new minority Government intends to take New Zealand. It was the Government's vision for our country. It promised us a new economic and social direction. I have to say that that speech could have been delivered by Norman Kirk in the 1970s, and he would have been proud of it, because it had a whole series of tried and failed remedies that have no place in a small but successful country like New Zealand in this new century.

I want to remind the House and those listening of some of the things that the Labour-Alliance Government believes are innovations for a modern time. Who would have thought that nationalisation was again going to be presented as an innovation for New Zealand? Who would have thought that centralisation of services back in Wellington, under the control of Ministers in the Government, would be a future that we would want to offer our regions, our social services, Maori, Pacific Island people, or any other people? Who would have thought that a country that had experienced such freedom and success would then submit itself to unionisation, and to expansion of the restrictions driven by that system that we in this country have seen before? Who would have expected that we would see increased regulation and control, a new set of anti-competitive attitudes, and the overriding impression from the Prime Minister that the Government knows best?

It was a speech dripping with ideology. I say to the Government that when its members were in Opposition they locked themselves into some things that, clearly, today the Government would like to wriggle out of. I say to the Prime Minister it is no bad thing if, having said something in Opposition, she then finds when in Government that the advice she is receiving, or the submissions coming to her, are telling her that she is wrong, actually to say she will change it. I give that advice to the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister, but in particular I say to the back-benchers of the minority parties: "Don't let your leaders lock you into something that, based on advice and on what your constituents are saying, is clearly wrong.''

The National Opposition will vigorously oppose those things that we believe are wrong for New Zealand. If we think they will take this country backwards unreasonably, the Government can expect us to cause trouble for it. We will try to mobilise people outside, and we will certainly work with the Greens and New Zealand First to try to hold the minority group to account, and to ensure that they are not able to force through, by whipping, systems that clearly are wrong. If they add cost to business, if they reduce competition, if they unfairly favour or pander to interest groups, the Government can expect National to oppose them. If the Government is locked into ideological positions without any good explanation-and I will come to accident compensation in a moment-we will be appealing to the Government to get off that horse and give itself a

Jackson, Willie: Address in Reply [Sitting date: 8 February 2000. NZPD Volume: 581; Page: 261]