Political parties welcomed the late King’s message, often invoking his name as they preach unity which has the useful bonus of appearing in lock-step with one of the most influential figures in Māoridom.
So two years on, are politicians walking the talk? What would Kīngi Tūheitia have thought if he’d been watching the developments from Waitangi this week?
There’s enough to suggest he might have taken a dim view.
The late Kīngi Tūheitia at the 2024 Waitangi celebrations. Photo / RNZ
Te Pāti Māori has, by some distance, shown itself to be as far from unified as it has ever been.
Co-leader Rawiri Waititi’s olive branch on the paepae yesterday to the man central to his party’s dysfunction sent a stir among Ngāpuhi that months of mudslinging was about to end.
That’s what makes the haka that followed Waititi so disappointing – the party built to carry a uniquely Māori voice wanting to return to that mission but in the end causing more division.
Ngāpuhi’s decision to effectively withdraw its support for Te Pāti Māori after Kiri Tamihere-Waititi’s display aimed at Eru Kapa-Kingi and his mother Mariameno was done for the same reason that likely inspired the haka; protecting one’s own.
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi was seen to deliver an olive branch to resolve his party’s inner turmoil. Photo / Jason Dorday
Unfortunately, building the walls higher around your own camp does little to help build bridges.
It’s a challenge Waititi seems to accept: “This kotahitanga, unity, it is difficult. If it was easy, our ancestors would have accomplished it themselves.”
Ngāpuhi elder Hone Sadler agreed while addressing Parliamentarians yesterday: “It is not an easy task.”
Labour and the Green Party did their best through a joint media stand-up, intended to stand in contrast with a “chaotic” coalition.
But that too was upended with what became a quite sad exit from politics for Peeni Henare.
Much has been speculated on what has prompted the MP of 12 years, a man touted as a possible leader, to suddenly leave Labour and in such an untidy way.
Labour has done its best to starve the kumara vine of gossip but it hasn’t been able to shake the impression Henare’s differences with the leadership at least partly informs his decision.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins and senior MP Willie Jackson speak to media. Photo / Jason Dorday
Henare has hardly made it easy for the party, leaving Chris Hipkins with egg on his face by allowing his decision to spread online without giving his party a heads up. It strikes as odd given Henare’s defence of Labour in his subsequent interviews, but perhaps that reflects where his loyalties lie.
Putting to one side the obvious contradiction of claiming to be the vision of unity in those circumstances, the saga evoked a real sadness from Henare’s Ngāpuhi whānau.
All spoke of Henare as a much-loved figure in the north and to exit in such a way tarnished what should have been a welcoming home for one of the north’s favourite sons.
Labour’s political opponents needed no encouragement to amply any sign of dissent in the ranks.
But neither of the three parties have shown themselves to be perfect examples of kotahitanga.
Winston Peters’ final message in a heated address on the marae was to declare all those questioning his eventual success to either get on board now or face the consequences; hardly the most collegial approach.
National’s Christopher Luxon has been at pains this term to convince the public disagreement within his coalition is perfectly normal. It was the same argument Hipkins made as he stood next to Green co-leaders campaigning to take over his tax agenda.
Both are completely right; no one should expect alignment on everything. But if voters are to accept that, they need clarity, particularly in the context of coalition negotiations.
Luxon swears until he’s blue in the face Act’s Treaty Principles Bill and everything it represents is a dead duck.
Leaders of the coalition Government listen during the Parliamentary pōwhiri. Photo / Jason Dorday
Seymour, however, dismisses the bill’s defeat as a “pyrrhic victory”, claiming the need to redefine the Treaty’s principles will be inevitable reform.
Whether that occurs through its opponents having a change of heart, as Seymour suggests, or through the horse-trading of coalition politics is anyone’s guess. It’s likely voters will be none the wiser should Luxon and Seymour return to Auckland’s Cordis Hotel in nine months’ time for another round of talks.
There is much about Waitangi that does lend itself to unity and collaboration.
Luxon doesn’t have much time for what takes place on the marae, but he relishes the conversations behind the scene where he feels he can make tangible progress.
It’s not as if he doesn’t have willing partners, as Ngāti Hine’s Waihoroi Shortland articulated yesterday.
“If we don’t want to talk to the Crown, who can we talk to?
“The trees won’t give it back to us. The birds sing a lovely song but we’re not on the same page.”
If political parties can leave the “histrionics” at the door, as Luxon would put it, perhaps they’re a chance of fulfilling the future Kīngi Tūheitia envisioned.
Adam Pearse is the Deputy Political Editor and part of the NZ Herald’s Press Gallery team based at Parliament in Wellington. He has worked for NZME since 2018, reporting for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei and the Herald in Auckland.