“Apparently co-governance scares people so we might give it a new name.”
That prompted an online political attack from New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, who deemed co-governance equivalent to “separatist” and “racist”, echoing criticism Labour faced while in Government.
Jackson told reporters at Parliament today he accepted the concept wasn’t adequately explained before the last election and acknowledged there were instances where it got “out of kilter”.
“You can’t have co-partnership or co-governance stuff here, there and everywhere, right?
“You’ve got a rubbish contract, you don’t need a co-governance relationship but if it’s Māori health, it’ll pay to have a co-governance relationship with Māori, if it was Māori education, in certain areas, it’s particularly important.
“Sometimes entities can just get on with picking up the rubbish … who wants silly co-governance arrangements then?”
Jackson said co-governance should be explained as it applied to “major kaupapa” such as the management of lakes or parks.
“The National Party have always supported that, they brought that in, we would continue that.
“We do have to take that time out to explain what it actually means.”
Challenged on whether his Sunday comment sufficiently explained the concept, Jackson conceded: “Yeah, I probably could have done that better.”
Asked if Labour would publish a comprehensive co-governance plan before the election, Jackson said: “Yeah, I would like to do that”.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins, asked about a potential plan, referred to the party’s impending Māori development policy and said, “watch this space”.
He said the co-governance debate became a “dominant part” of discussions concerning water infrastructure and was a “distraction”.
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.