Can The Constitution Save Hone?

The Maori Party is suffering from TPS (Third Party Syndrome) or as Derek "The Silver" Fox put it on television tonight FDC "fairly dysfunctional caucus". ACT can't laugh, we had TPS and FDC ourselves last year when dissenters were in the ranks. It is not easy to deal with and I commiserate with the Maori Party but it is their own fault.

Large parties such as Labour find this stuff far easier to deal with. Chris Carter threw a hissy and could be isolated, contained and exterminated within their rules. They had no option but to expel him. Heather Roy was demoted from her Cabinet position, and stays within ACT after accepting a lesser role, lesser party members were disciplined using the rules of the Party. National have had a dream run of it in their term but if the ship every looks like sinking they'll have a rat in the ship for sure. The Greens hug trees and Peter Dunne can't reach a quorum.

It is easy and pretty to claim free speech as a right to dissenting MP's and members but at a practical level there is free speech then it crosses a line to outright blatant and deliberate public dissent and disrespect or in Maori terms - mana shrinkage. The Leadership of any party can never win either way. Critics say they are either not showing strong leadership or acting to suppress free speech.

The Maori Party however are in the position ACT was in, they have to act this time against Hone. He's done this all before, hui, co-leaders talking to him, round and a round in a pass the parcel all hoping Hone would improve. He hasn't and he won't. All four caucus members are opposing Hone this time. To not expel him would be a sign of utter weakness which in politics is a cardinal sin.

Hone wants out and thinks it will be beneficial to himself to be a martyr to the cause. So call his bluff and boot him. See how he handles it without Party support and expertise around him.

The Maori Party seem hell bent on stuffing this up so have called in not an elder or even a Maori lawyer to assist, they have sort the services of Mai Chen, a female Taiwanese born, and then raised New Zealander to interpret their own bilingual constitution.

Chen is to consult on the constitutional process. All I can say is that will cost many hectares of forest, not trees for paper, I'm talking land.

The Maori Party constitution seems prima facie pretty clear for expelling Hone. The document is online.

Hone can be disciplined under Part 2, 11.2

"in any other way wilfully (sic) brings the party or its members into public disrepute" or
"refuses to comply with the Party Constitution"

He is then referred to a Committee at Part 2, 11.4.

But this is where it gets fascinating as I cannot see an operative insertion where votes are taken by this committee or by anyone, just a vague reference to "resolution". In context of that section it must refer to resolving the conflict, rather than a corporate board voting style resolution. That is, where and who gets to vote? On what grounds can they vote?

"and that the dispute is resolved on the basis of the kaupapa of the Party".

This decision on discipline is not taken by a clear popular vote but by kaupapa.

"Kaupapa" is an interesting word that we've had a google for. In general it seems to be rather fluid sort of waffly Lord Cooke of Thorndon one-man legislator word used to describe principles and ideas that build behaviour and customs. Not in the English sense of theory of course, we couldn't possibly understand what it really means (sigh).

Kaupapa Maori is a plan created for Maori by Maori to express Maori aspirations, values and principles. So reverting to Part 1 of the Maori Party constitution we can see what sort of troubles Hone and the Maori Party are in thrashing this out.

Based upon these words in 1. Manaakitanga, Hone appears toasted.

The Party must endeavour to express manaakitanga towards others, be they political allies or opponents, Māori and non-Māori organisations, taking care not to trample mana, while clearly defining our own.

iv. to ensure that members agree to work together, treat each other with respect and act with integrity in their party work.

Lets have a look at 2. Rangitiratanga. Hone may have a reasonable argument here.

As an organisation, the importance of walking the talk, following through on commitments made, integrity and honesty is demonstrated. As a people, rangatiratanga is reflected in the promotion of self-determination for Māori, and an expression of the rights defined by Mana Atua, Mana Tupuna and Mana Whenua.

The Maori Party it could be argued campaigned not to prop up a National government. It walked differently than it talked. Hone's column addressed this specifically:

The other day I was reading through our speeches from 2005-08 and some of them were mighty impressive. Very pro-Maori, very strong on workers' rights and the rights of the poor, opposed to free trade agreements, supportive of the environment, anti-whaling and very much focused on kaupapa Maori.

A few months back I actually got told off for suggesting that we were voting more with National than before, so I checked up. In 2005-08 we voted 30% with National and 70% against, but in 2008-10 we voted 60% with National and 40% against.

Hone should simply call a democratic vote of the membership as to how they feel the Party has walked the talk. If he can get his supporters to vote, that vote may be a tad uncomfortable for Turia and Sharples.

4. Kotahitanga is another inclusion that the Maori Party may live to regret in their waffle coated drafting.

"All are encouraged to make a contribution, to have their say and then together a consensus is reached". The problem with this is that the drafting is silent as to whether this "all" is the parliamentary wing or the wider membership.

ii. to avoid taking decisions and approaches that lead to division and disharmony within the organisation;

There can be nothing more divisive or lacking in harmony than to expel Hone Harawira as a member and MP. Well perhaps than keeping him there!

6. Mana Whenua. Again Hone looks pretty set here.

iv. to develop a parliamentary team that will take advice and guidance from Māori in the first instance;

Hone again wrote his column specifically with this in mind. And "from Maori". What Maori? Members or any Maori on the street at the time?

And it seems that it just doesn't matter where I go in the country, I am being constantly told by Maori in the street, in the shops, on marae, at the airports, and even in the cemeteries at tangi, that the Maori Party is coming off the rails – usually accompanied with a comment that I should keep speaking out, because none of my mates are.

And, most importantly, go back to the people. We used to get out on the road a lot, particularly on the big issues. Since we've been in coalition with the Nats, though, we haven't done any tours, and it's not as if there haven't been any big issues to deal with – National's Marine and Coastal Areas bill is a classic example. Somehow, though, it seems that we've become too busy to tour any more. I suggest we get "un-busy" real quick, and start reconnecting with the people who put us into parliament.

Hone is backing himself to be the voice of Maori.

7. Kaitiakitanga - again Hone's column covered off part of this.

"It promotes the growth and development of the Māori people in all spheres of livelihood so that Māori can anticipate a future of living in good health and in reasonable prosperity

ii. to promote the achievement of wellness and well-being for Māori;
iv. to create a clean, safe and healthy environment by promoting the protection, restoration and enhancement of mauri within our natural environments"

Going back to Hone's column he referred directly to this:

The downside of being in government with National is having to put up with all the anti-worker, anti-beneficiary and anti-environment (and therefore anti-Maori) legislation that comes as a natural consequence of having a right-wing government.

Tobacco was an excellent start. Simple and positive health and education initiatives and programmes to assist the poor are obvious starters as well.

In essence Hone's column read alongside the Maori Party Constitution was his challenge of the application of his colleagues to it. On closer inspection he appears to be the greatest fluke artist ever or he has written every word on purpose. His entire defence is actually the column he/his advisor wrote. His/advisor's best piece of work is actually challenging the dipshit drafting of documents that may at some point require sanctions and punishment, using "principles" and vague discipline notes as to how the process will actually take place.

Mai Chen will be able to bill six months of lost income from 2010 dealing with this. It really is a cluster fuck of the highest order and again why "principles" left undefined are inherently dangerous in the wrong hands. You simply cannot have a constitution without firm rules and clear ideas. A bunch of intangible principles cannot form a coherent document without a framework for dealing with all situations that you can imagine at the time. Even of more importance is drafting a constitution for a political party. The nature of politics is an extreme environment of personalities, conflicts and differences. Leaving such to chance and "principles" is naive.

Other blogs seem to be wetting their knickers at the prospect of a new left wing political party consisting of Hone's electorate seat, poor loser Sue Bradford (who ran off in a sulk when the Greens preferred mad Metiria Turei for leader) and by his own admission, the gravely ill Matt McCarten with feminist, marxist, radical law lecturer, Jane Kelsey on the list. Chasing the votes of the dirty, smelly underclass. All you really need to top that bunch of rag-tag proponents of left-wing hate speech towards those good hard-working taxpayers who literally pay for the food on the table of the beneficiaries is to elect Martyn Bradbury as its President.

"There are 338 000 beneficiaries and 2 376 480 voters in the 2008 election, that means beneficiaries represent about 14% of the vote - the numbers are there for a new left wing party". Yes 338,000 bludgers to vote themselves an income stirred up with the random left-wing hate speech that thou shall steal more from the workers to pay for the bludgers. Isn't modern-day democracy fabulous? No taxation and you get representation that you can vote yourself an income for sitting on your backside.

But Hone is pure and he won't want a bar of that. He thinks you lot are losers. He is a Maori and wants to be in a Maori Party and environment.

The question is whether the Maori Party caucus will roll him or keep him? If they keep him this time, hug and make-up, I can't WAIT for the next column.

It is Hone. He will not be able to help himself.

I will make the call now Thursday NZ time that based on having a Constitution of recycled air, once again Hone will get away with this and live his 10th life causing embarrassment to the Maori Party caucus.

Based on the "rules" of the Maori Party and that they've turned to Mai Chen to insert 20 odd pages of Chen Palmer opinion into those principles, I cannot see he has actually done anything wrong.