Politicians should give Maori TV a fair go
Maori Television's bid for the free-to-air rights of 16 games for the Rugby World Cup has caused a stir. I'm not a rugby follower so I don't have a personal interest in whether the games are broadcast or not but I think the attacks on Maori Television are out of line.
These free-to-air rights cover 16 games, including all the All Blacks' pool matches, the quarter- and semifinals, and the final while the whole cup competition comprises 48 games.
Most of the fuss is around the claim Maori Television is using taxpayer money to bolster their bid for the right to show the games. The station has obtained approval for $3 million from Te Puni Kokiri (the renamed Maori Affairs Department) with the blessing of the Maori Affairs Minister Pita Sharples. The money apparently comes from funds earmarked for Maori development.
Dr Sharples defended the taxpayer subsidy, saying the bid would create jobs, promote Maori businesses and help get New Zealanders to use Maori phrases in everyday conversation. He thinks the value to Maori development will show it's money well spent.
Labour and the Act Party are spitting tacks. Labour's World Cup spokesperson Trevor Mallard, never one to miss the opportunity for some Maori bashing, says the bid is "plain stupid". He says it would see public money used to create an unfair bidding platform and undermine a competitive commercial arrangement.
TV3 has echoed Mallard, saying public funding has skewed the tender process. Brent Impey, chief executive of Mediaworks, which owns TV3, says applying public money to a commercial event, competing against legitimate business interests, raised serious issues.
But these arguments don't hold water.
What is so precious about "competitive commercial arrangements"? And why should so-called "legitimate business interests" trump public provision of a sporting event?
I'm old enough to remember the days when the public right to watch the games of our national sport was cherished and all rugby was televised free to air on public television. There were howls of complaint from politicians when Sky won its first contract to broadcast games exclusively to a minority audience who could afford the satellite setup. Yes it was done with public money and what on earth is the problem with that?
Of far greater concern to the politicians should be that Sky, which delivers television to less than half New Zealand homes, has won the contract to broadcast all 48 games live. This means 32 games in the cup will be available exclusively to those who have a Sky dish. Trevor Mallard, Rodney Hide and John Key should tell us why they think a family should be forced to pay through the nose to Sky for the pleasure of watching two-thirds of the World Cup games live at home.
Why are these politicians silent about this private sector rort while complaining bitterly about MTS using public money to bid for 16 of the games to be shown free-to-air?
And why aren't they complaining about the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars going into staging the event in the first place? Mallard was keen to spend over a billion of our money on his waterfront stadium idea for his rugby mates. A mere $3 million spent by MTS is chickenfeed by comparison.
A more legitimate criticism is that Maori TV covers only 90% of the country whereas TV3 and TVNZ each effectively covers 100%. However, this argument would carry more weight if those making the biggest noise about 10% of homes missing out had also complained about 50% of New Zealand homes missing out on the two-thirds of the games going exclusively to Sky.
Rugby is our national game and if Te Puni Kokiri can put forward a valid case that their contribution will give a value-for-money boost to Maori development then there should be no criticism from politicians.
Maori use of taxpayer money should not be immune from public scrutiny and MTS spending this money should be able to be justified but the fact it gets more attention than, for example, how TVNZ spent its charter money is a sign Maori-bashing is never too far from the surface.
Follow NZStuffBlogs on Twitter and get fast updates on all Stuff's blogs.
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
I am Maori... technically.
To be precise I'm a 1/16 Maori, but because of the "you owe us something because of past injustices" attitude of some Maori, I am ashamed of my heritage.
I don’t even agree with a tax payer funded TV channel for a specific part of the population, based purely on race, nor do I agree with the plethora of government agencies and organisations which are in place to help Maori. As part of Te Tiriti O Waitangi settlements, Iwi were given hundreds of millions of dollars... why can’t they pay?
To give this TV hosting opportunity to a race based channel highlights the ugly fact that New Zealand is a racist country. We give money and opportunities to a specific area of society based only on race. Some will see my comments as Maori bashing and even racist, but may I point out that government agencies recognise people as Maori or non-Maori, not “New Zealanders”, I’m just following the trend.
How is showing rugby games "development" for Maori??? How about using that money to teach and educate as it should be? My complaint is not about the commercial viability of the bid, but rather what that money was earmarked for - improving the lives of Maori through education of issues and encouraging the use of the Maori language and pride for culture. I'm appalled to think that this is seen as a viable use of tax payer dollars.
John Minto said "Maori use of taxpayer money should not be immune from public scrutiny and MTS spending this money should be able to be justified but the fact it gets more attention than, for example, how TVNZ spent its charter money is a sign Maori-bashing is never too far from the surface."
The difference is that the TVNZ charter money is earmarked specifically for spending on television things. The money from Te Puni Kokiri is for spending on Maori development. This means things like health initiatives, books for children, employment schemes for Maori, tackling maori crime and so on... Not for the broadcasting rights to a rugby tornament.
@ Mike - well said, and I agree with John also. (Man, that was a little difficult to admit)
I think I need a cup of coffee.
Credit where credit is due - a good blog John :)
This is the first blog John has ever written that I agree with.
Maori TV has as much right as any other station to host the World Cup. TVNZ generally do a rubbish job so why not try someone new.I may be wrong but isn't TVNZ funded by the taxpayer also? Why is nothing being made of their bid?
A lot of Maori issues are things that divide the country and rightly so are debated. However this is not a race issue the media has just made it that. TVNZ have shown over and over that they are poor at hosting major sports events, lets try something new.
But will it help advance Maori culture? I don't think so. How will it create extra jobs? How will it help to promote Maori business. The ganes will not be broadcast outside NZ and all the visitors to NZ who are coming for the World Cup will be watching the games live or will be in the pubs and clubs watching the games on Sky. The vast majority of New Zealanders already know about Maori culture and business.
@Ian #2
hear hear! (i'm 1/4 maori and am embarrassed by the way some maori try and use ignorance to claim rights or perks that they shouldn't have and are just too lazy to get it themselves)
Ian #2 "I am Maori... technically. To be precise I'm a 1/16 Maori, but because of the "you owe us something because of past injustices" attitude of some Maori, I am ashamed of my heritage."
Are you ashamed of your other 15/16 heritage too Ian - I mean for people like Micael Laws and John Banks who give Pakeha a bad name? Or for the actions of criminals like Graham Capel or Peter Stewart and the 'family values' they uphold?
I mostly agree with Minto on this one.
I think Key was way out of line in his criticism. He should get on with getting broadband to everyone so we all have access to the future instead of worrying about a small minority that don't have satellite TV - most of whom probably don't have it because they are not interested in watching TV anyway.
Unfortunately, TVNZ and TV3 already get a huge suck on the taxppayers' teat. They are in no position to grizzle about competition.
Tension high as lethal log pile cleared
Police name Hawke's Bay crash victim
'Trail blazer' Carmen farewelled in Auckland
Vatuvei magic gives Warriors win over Souths
Black Caps overcome spirited Zimbabwe in T20
Quakes blow Wellington's benchmark
Usshers make it his and hers at Coast to Coast
Victim was holding bat, says witness
Deep south beats rest of nation in jobless
Farmer faces wait over 'useless' land
Stadium firm also designed CTV
I do like it when John shows a little common sense.
I agree - if hte $$'s aer given to help develop Maori, and it can be shown that this will do so, then it is a proper use of the money - seems like a fairly simple test to me, and one which can be measured afterwards.
If it works then more power to "them", and if it isn't effective then heads can roll......