Harawira forces tough choices on party

BY COLIN ESPINER IN PARLIAMENT

Has Hone Harawira left the Maori Party? Or has it left him?

As Parliament reconvenes this week after a recess in which the renegade Te Tai Tokerau MP was the only political game in town, that's the question the Maori Party should be asking itself.

For amid the vilification and outrage heaped on Hone Harawira in the wake of his admittedly intemperate remarks about white people and a fairly boastful attitude towards his unscheduled day off in Paris, an important point has been somewhat forgotten.

Harawira has only said and done what he and a substantial number of Maori Party members hold to be entirely true: That Maori have been shafted by generations of Pakeha, who stole their land and spirit, subjugated their people and created the underclass of the 21st century.

Co-leader Tariana Turia also believes this.

She said as much when she too was a firebrand, comparing the colonisation of New Zealand to the Holocaust (and suffering similar opprobrium to Harawira).

And when Harawira said of Labour's Foreshore and Seabed Act: "They stole it. We're going to get it back," he was merely reflecting the same determination the rest of the party feels to overturn what his other co-leader, Pita Sharples, has himself described as the biggest land grab in the nation's history.

So is the difference merely Harawira's use of the vernacular?

Certainly that's what has upset many people, judging by the flood of complaints to the Race Relations Commissioner and the deluge of angry calls to talkback radio and letters to the editor. Turia shed some light on the Maori Party's thinking at a press conference on Friday, when she said: "This is not just about a jaunt to Paris or bad language. It's been an ongoing issue and it's reached its end, very sadly."

So Harawira's outbursts were a symptom, not the cause of the Maori Party's current disarray.

This is a more serious situation than a foul-mouthed MP, because it indicates deeper forces are at play.

The extent of this internal angst is now becoming clear.

The seeds of the current dispute with Harawira were sown when the party signed on the dotted line with National one year ago yesterday.

The MP's disillusionment with this deal was obvious yesterday, when he questioned - in a national newspaper - whether National had done, or was planning to do, anything for the betterment of the Maori people.

Harawira also questioned whether Sharples and Turia had become "mainstream thinkers" rather than Maori leaders. It's a searching question.

There's little doubt the Maori Party's co-leaders have reined in the rhetoric since becoming ministers of the Crown, and adopted a softly, softly approach. Part of this has been out of necessity.

Having agreed to enter the tent, they were obliged not to start knocking it down. The Maori Party's decision to join with National was seen by some as a risk, but by others as a mark of political maturity beyond its years - a maturity the Green Party has been unable to find.

And Sharples and Turia can argue significant policy success from their approach.

They have found Prime Minister John Key to be a reasonable and accommodating man. Certainly, there's no way the Foreshore and Seabed Act would be poised for repeal if the Maori Party was merely shouting from the sidelines.

Yet, it is an approach to politics that Harawira finds difficult to stomach, and the big question is how many others in the Maori Party feel the same way?

A recent Marae-DigiPoll found 66 per cent of Maori Party supporters were comfortable with the deal with National.

That's not bad, but it still leaves a third who are not.

Maori commentator Willie Jackson has warned that any move to kick out Harawira could lead to an internal upheaval that could spell the end of the Maori Party.

It appears as if Sharples and Turia believe this is a risk worth taking, if the flipside is risking a race row such as the one that consumed the country five years ago.

Clearly, the leadership has been rattled by the extent of the anger of Pakeha (and Maori) New Zealand directed their way.

They fear the gains they hope to make for Maori in terms of government policy will be put at risk if a self-avowed "hothead" like Harawira creates enough political problems for John Key that he can no longer be seen to be dealing with them. Already Key has been edging away from Harawira, declaring that as an independent MP, Harawira would have no place in the Government.

And so the Maori Party finds itself at something of a crossroads.

Down one road lies the path of activism and resistance, of separate development and tino rangatiratanga.

Down the other, lies compromise and co-operation, of incremental gains won by working within the system.

It is Harawira's firebrand politics and outspoken rhetoric that have brought these two different fault lines, already rumbling beneath the surface, into stark relief.

Ironically, it is not Harawira who wants to tear the party apart.

As he said yesterday, it is not him who opted for the "nuclear" option.

Harawira wants to be the "sharp edge" of the radical wing of the Maori Party, and to be able to represent those elements within a broad church.

But perhaps this is wishful thinking on his part.

The idea that all, or even most, Maori aspirations could be encapsulated within a single political entity was always a long shot - any more than one Pakeha party could represent the views of most European New Zealanders.

Harawira is still indicating he has no plans to resign from the Maori Party and any move to expel him could create major problems.He has been told not to return to Parliament this week, and it will be interesting to see if he obeys this directive.

Even if he does, though, the bigger issue isn't whether he can keep his mouth shut for a week or two.

It's what sort of party the Maori Party wants to be.

- © Fairfax NZ News