blue moon

Statements by Pita Sharples at the opening of an international conference on international development in Whakatane yesterday state the importance of the indigenous worldview. The speech is linked on TV3 and well worth a read. Within the speech are outlines of the maori party positions and also a good overview of many aspects such as the foreshore and seabed act, the colonisation process and the role of the maori party as Pita sees it.

From TV3 - quotes from the speech linked on TV3

We are not the Crown’s Treaty partner. As a parliamentary political party, we are part of the kawanatanga – the Crown side of the Treaty. All MPs swear an oath of allegiance to the Crown.

So it is not our role to be settling the foreshore and seabed issue. We are not a customary owner, and the Maori Party should not be making decisions for the owners. Tangata whenua must make their own decisions based on their own circumstances, and negotiate their own settlements with the Crown.

Yes the maori party are advocates for tangata whenua but they must reflect the views of the people not try to get the people to reflect their political solutions.

Pita also talks about the role of indigenous peoples

We have a responsibility and a duty to promote our culture of “sharing” community rights, and community ownership. It is important that all indigenous nations must accordingly rise up, and promote those communal sharing and caring values.

Indigenous cultures mean communal support and sharing – not user pays, not individual free enterprise, but enterprise that feeds back to all members of the community, of the society, of the nation, of the world.

We indigenous people of the world must survive and promote our sharing values within all nations. We have responsibility to do so – we can save the world from its own self destructive consumption, non sustainable, individualistic pursuits.

Well I can't argue with that but i do wonder if the compromises made by the maori party and the negative effect of those on maori nullifies the fancy words somewhat. "a prominent expert" in Maori culture and history Senior lecturer in Maori Studies at the Auckland University of Technology, Dr Paul Moon takes a swipe at Pita's speech

But a prominent expert in Maori culture and history says this is "outdated, 1970s-style thinking", lacking in specifics.

"To imply indigenous people across the world have a shared view of things is perhaps outdated," he says.

"When you start talking about indigenous world views, you're presuming indigenous people have one way of thinking, that there's no pluralism."

Thanks for that mr prominent expert - we now know what we already know - that maori have different views and different indigenous cultures have diferent views - quick hold the front page!!!

Moon didn't say if he considered that indigenous viewpoints could offer hope to the world - maybe he has a speech coming up where he can get a bit more facetime on TV.

whanau ora lemonade

I am strangely pleased that the amount of funding for whanau ora is so low compared with what was expected. It is better to pilot this and iron out any areas that need it. That way will lead to better results. I believe in providing holistic help to whanau and families when they need it and I want whanau ora to deliver on its potential but i don't want it to lead to nepotism or jobs for the boys. This result is also good for the people who fear whanau ora to be the thin edge of the privatisation sword. It could very well be, we must be vigilant and keep a very close eye on the program. The modest funding will ensure a uncontrollable beast is not created. I still support this kaupapa because i believe that it doesn't matter what the neocons think they are trying to do, maori will morph the program into something that works for maori and for others.

From TRACY WATKINS - The Dominion Post

"The much-anticipated Whanau Ora programme has been scaled back to a $134 million programme over the next four years - well short of the $1 billion cost bandied around in its early stages.

There will be 20 Whanau Ora "providers" contracted in the first round and Mr Key said they would be held accountable for results.

Mrs Turia said the $134 million in funding over four years would enable Te Puni Kokiri, the Social Development Ministry and the Health Ministry working together to help families.

While the government shied away from labelling its initial investment a pilot programme, Mrs Turia confirmed that up to $20 million over four years would be spent researching, evaluating and monitoring the implementation and results.

This is a good approach because the only way to make it work it is to be flexible and adjust where necessary. You can only do that if you know what's going on.

whanau ora - some pitfalls

What are some of the pitfalls of whanau ora?

Idiot/Savant at No Right Turn covers some of them very well

"On the negative side, there are real privacy and human rights concerns here. One of the reasons for the silo mentality among delivery agencies is because (to pick a random example) how well a family's kids are doing at school is none of Housing New Zealand's damn business. Ditto your sexual history and the police. Whanau Ora would either share this information, or concentrate it in the hands of the single contact point. There are also concerns about the privacy and rights of individuals against members of their own families (the report recognises this in cases of pregnancy). This could easily turn into an Orwellian nightmare, in which every family has its own paternalistic dictator, acting with state power to make decisions based on their own moral views rather than the wishes and needs of the family.

Secondly, the scheme's "Whanau goals" are very prescriptive, to the point of social engineering. For example, it seeks to promote not just self-management, health, and participation in society, but also participation in te ao Maori and "Whanau cohesion". To point out the obvious, whether I speak to my mother is no business at all of the government. Neither is what culture you participate in. These things are great for people who want them, but they should not be dictated by the state.

The biggest problem, however, is governance. Using an independent trust will mean that policy advice and the management of the programme is deliberately and consciously divorced from public service norms of professionalism, transparency and accountability. It means the staff overseeing the scheme will not be bound by public service neutrality, that contracts will not be subject to the usual public service rules (freeing up space for "relational contracting", by which they mean favouring certain regular providers rather than having a level playing field), and their decisions, contracts and advice will not be subject to the Official Information Act (note that by contracting out actual delivery, service provision is already insulated from the jurisdiction of the Ombudsmen. WINZ has to be fair and reasonable; contracted services don't). And that is simply unacceptable.

I hadn't noticed the point within the second point - "...it seeks to promote not just self-management, health, and participation in society, but also participation in te ao Maori and "Whanau cohesion"."

I like that - seeks to promote participation in te ao maori and whanau cohesion - isn't that what we need to do?

brownwash or empowerment - whanau ora

Is this a genuine attempt to empower maori or is it brownwash to help hide the neocon privatisation objectives of national? Whatever the answer - maori will find out.

from Stuff

"Prime Minister Key has appointed Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia as Minister Responsible for Whanau Ora."

I wonder who will get Minister of Foreshore and Seabed?

"... a new Whanau Ora trust would draw on money currently spent through the Government's housing, health, education, justice and social welfare agencies and report to a dedicated minister."

This will be closely scruitinised so I cannot see any bullshit going on. Both the left and the right want this to fail, or work, for the wrong reasons - it is only maori who want it to work for the right reasons.

"Whanau Ora Governance Group will oversee the roll-out and progress of the policy. The group is: Rob Cooper (chair) who is chief executive of the Ngati Hine Health Trust, a Maori-owned provider of social services in Northland; Professor Sir Mason Durie, who chaired the Whanau Ora Taskforce; Nancy Tuaine of Te Atihaunui a Paparangi (Whanganui) who is the manager of the Whanganui River Trust Board and a member of the Whanganui District Health Board; Leith Comer, chief executive of Te Puni Kokiri; Peter Hughes, chief executive of the Social Development Ministry and Stephen McKernan, the director-general of Health.

Is this bunch all 'yes' men and women?

"Mr Key has said the May 20 Budget will include money for the whanau ora policy, but that the Government has not accepted all the report's findings."

Trust key? Only if you want to lose your hand.

I am keeping an open mind on this one and will be watching carefully. But i really hope it works and that maori are better off because of this program - shit could they be worse off?

weaving whanau ora

It is interesting to note labour's response to news that "The Ministry of Maori Development, Te Puni Kokiri, not the Ministry of Social Development, will be responsible for the Whanau Ora social services policy." as reported in the NZH

"Labour social development spokeswoman Annette King said that making TPK the lead agency "makes a mockery of John Key's claim that Whanau Ora is for all New Zealanders".

TPK was set up to provide services for Maori so for an agency to be running a programme that is for everybody would be problematic, she said."

A pretty weak attack on key, and there is no evidence that the forthcoming experience of rolling out whanau ora to maori and then replicating that for other groups cannot be coordinated by TPK. The only problematic part is politicans playing political football with maori aspirations.

"The policy seeks to address families in need in a holistic manner."

Seems worthwhile to me. Good luck to TPK.

whanau ora

Whanau Ora has been getting the blowtorch recently.

I came across this editorial from the Listener and it covered a number of bases quite well. Go here to read the whole editorial.

What is the overall concept behind Whanau Ora

"It’s that a return to traditional tikanga, and in particular the embracing and supporting nature of whanau – over the greater Pakeha emphasis on individuals and nuclear families – will in itself go a long way towards helping many Maori out of the lifestyles of ­deprivation and disengagement."

That is a kaupapa i agree with.

"The aim, as Turia has described it, is to stop the scenario of five Toyota Corollas in the driveway – one each for the Plunket nurse, the truancy officer, the social worker, the probation officer and the district nurse.

Instead, the approach should be from one or two agencies investigating the fundamental problem with a whanau that prevents its members from achieving as they should, and then determining the most effective interventions to improve their circumstances and chances of success. Of course, that will also cut the administrative and compliance costs of helping families.

Won't it be great when there are NO Toyota Corrollas in the driveway because the needs of the family and whanau are being met.

"A Maori child is not better off in a poorly run kohanga reo than in a well-run “Pakeha” kindergarten."

I don't agree with this because it depends upon the outcomes that people are after and the sentence is judge-mental. By what measure is a judgement being made that determines 'poorly run'? Are the cultural considerations of maori going to be added to that judgement regime? If development of tikanga is considered one of the most valuable outcomes, then that could still occur in a "poorly run kohanga reo", especially if the measurement of that does not consider the cultural aspects. 'Poorly run', however, could mean that the tikanga is not correct and therefore the teaching is faulty.

"In the end, however, Whanau Ora will be effective only if it is empowering. In most families, the foundations of success are educational achievement, good health and economic and social engagement, as well as unconditional love and support for family members through all of life’s many highs and lows.

The people in the Corollas can help, but so too can a stronger community, because all of us are better off if we eschew exclusivity and engage with each other. We all share responsibility for whanau because our collective well-being as a nation is just that – collective."

Stronger community is indeed the answer, unconditional love for family members and collective responsibility for our collective well-being. These are good sentiments.

I believe the whanau ora model is the way to go. There is a lot of work to go in developing effective delivery and systems but that is okay. It can be adjusted as we go, if necessary. I also believe it is a maori solution to a maori problem and that this should not be watered down. By the same token all people should have access to these holistic approaches to the very big issues facing all of us - but that shouldn't be whanau ora - it should be developed, with whanau ora as a model, with the target group in mind. Too often we try the one size fits all approach, and sometimes the intent behind it is not so positive.

I also struggle a little with grouping people into the traditional poor, middle class and rich. To me there is a lot of subtle distinction, where people overlap those catagories or just don't fit into them. I don't want to get into the injustice olympics but there is something especially saddening when considering poor indigenous populations.