The Week in Politics: The PM's Koroneihana minefield

Analysis: When Prime Minister Christopher Luxon arrived at Tūrangawaewae Marae for the annual Koroneihana celebration of Māori King Tūheitia, he must have known what he was in for.

It's not normally a political occasion, but this time there were just too many grievances.

Māori leaders are seriously upset about government policies that have disestablished the Māori Health Authority, mandated referendums on Māori wards on local councils, the attitude to te reo Māori and numerous other issues.

"We've watched your government dismantle everything that is meaningful to Māori in this country," Tukoroirangi Morgan told Luxon. "You've thrown Māori under the bus and run them over."

The Waikato-Tainui leader wasn't the only critic, but he was the strongest and the most widely reported. The media made headlines out of "Māori thrown under the bus".

When his turn to speak came, there wasn't a lot Luxon could say about the specifics of the policies causing upset. He instead took a broader and more generalised view, as he has in the past, saying his legacy for Māori would be about improving outcomes.

"I have been talking with iwi leaders and have had some incredibly constructive conversations," he said.

Luxon didn't seem fazed by the hostility, and the next day even managed to describe the event as "awesome" when he appeared on TVNZ's Breakfast programme.

Although Māori have a long list of what they don't like about the government, the stand-out item enraging them the most is ACT leader David Seymour's Treaty Principles Bill. It isn't in its final draft and won't be introduced to Parliament until at least November, but its intentions have been clearly set out - define the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and put them to a referendum so they can be written into law.

That's not going to happen because National and NZ First are committed to only allowing its introduction and select committee stages, but it's going to be an almighty debate all the same - and a highly divisive one.

Allowing it to go through the first two phases of its process was part of ACT's coalition agreement with National, what Luxon has described as an uncomfortable compromise that satisfied neither party.

Morgan has previously made his view known, describing Seymour as "a political idiot" who was trying to create a document that would nullify the signing of the Treaty.

There was more along those lines at the celebration, and when Luxon and NZ First's Shane Jones spoke they were careful to deliver unambiguous statements of their party positions.

Luxon: "I want to be clear here today that the National Party will not support the Treaty Principles Bill beyond first reading."

Jones: "The Treaty Principles Bill will not be voted for by New Zealand First beyond its introduction into Parliament."

Seymour hasn't accepted those positions as final in the past, and he still doesn't.

"The legislation hasn't even finished drafting so they haven't seen it, neither have they seen the public reaction," he told RNZ after the ceremony.

He said he believed the bill, when it was produced, would be "a lot more positive and popular than has been made out by some actors". He has previously expressed that belief, and has said his coalition partners could change their minds when they see the extent of public support for it.

The chances of that happening must now be zero although, as RNZ's political editor Jo Moir reported, Winston Peters has muddied the waters and "cast some doubt" on Luxon's position.

The NZ First leader and deputy prime minister was in Parliament on Wednesday, standing in for Luxon who was busy meeting the leader of Qatar.

Answering questions from Labour leader Chris Hipkins about the process for the Treaty Principles Bill and the government's position on it, Peters said: "It's clearly in the coalition agreement, but I think one is entitled to believe that despite all previous statements, if there was prevailing compelling evidence to change one's mind, as a famous economist once said, when the facts change I change my mind. What do you do?"

Answering further questions, he said he didn't think that would happen in this case.

If that's so, why say it at all? Doing so makes it appear NZ First might be hedging its bets in case there's a huge groundswell of public support for the bill with thousands marching in the streets. If that happened, National and NZ First would be in a difficult place politically and might very well think about changing their minds.

It's not likely to happen - there just doesn't seem to be enough non-Māori public interest, awareness or concern about the principles of the Treaty. Māori have already marched in their thousands and are planning public demonstrations to show their opposition to the bill when it is introduced to Parliament.

Power struggle

The news this week that a sawmill and a pulp mill were planning to shut down because of the huge increase in the cost of electricity brought the energy crisis into sharp focus and put the government in an invidious position.

"The government is staring an energy crisis in the face with very few levers it can pull," Richard Harman wrote on his website Politik.

"The Electricity Authority and Transpower are preparing for the worst and now have a plan for power cuts if the industry cannot generate enough power."

Harman has been paying more attention to this than most media, and previously warned of the impending crisis. He said the immediate problem centred on industrial users exposed to the electricity market's wholesale prices.

"Two years ago, these averaged $62 a megawatt hour (MWh)," he said. "Last week they dropped from a peak of $781 MWh to $438 MWh. That rapid and huge increase has led to the decision to mothball the central North Island timber and pulp mills, which will cost 230 jobs."

Harman said the reason for the price increase was simple: "There is no water in the North Island or South Island hydro lakes. At the same time there are only limited supplies of gas to supplement the water."

Harman said the obvious answer to that sort of price jump could be some sort of price control, and NZ First might be expected to advocate for it. He went on to quote Shane Jones, who is regional development minister as well as being an associate energy minister, speaking on Checkpoint and "hinting that he might support such a move".

Harman quoted Jones: "I think that we should intervene in the market to ensure that there is not any scope for activity which favours the stakeholders such as the gentailers (generator-retailers) to the detriment of the other providers who represent competition."

Jones also spoke on Morning Report, saying manufacturing and industrial companies were being put in "a perilous position" by gentailers who showed no regard for the country's interests.

Jones said the announcement from the mills was "hideous news" that came in the same week as "stupendously high energy dividends" were being announced by the power generating companies.

"The energy costs in New Zealand for manufacturing and industrial firms are ridiculously high and it is imperilling the viability of industry and manufacturing in regional New Zealand."

Responding to a calls for a subsidy to help the mills stay open, Jones said there was no such proposal in front of him. He said the acid was on the energy companies, which had the option of doing a deal like one supplier had with the Rio Tinto aluminium smelter.

Jones targeted Meridian Energy, saying that while the government recognised the country was facing an energy crisis the power company didn't even believe there was one.

"How on earth does a politician or does industry have any effect on a company that believes there is no crisis?" he said.

On Wednesday Jones issued a warning after meeting the Electricity Authority, RNZ reported.

"I said this is not the time for a pedestrian approach, and I really want them to man up and use their authority or they'll end up as roadkill," he said. "There is no point maintaining an electrical authority which is a key regulator if it's unwilling to flex its muscles or use the full powers in the legislation."

Greens seeing red

Any doubts about the intentions of former Green MP Darleen Tana were dispelled this week when she sent a formal letter to the party leaders in response to one of their own, in which they told her that staying in Parliament distorted its proportionality.

That letter from Chloe Swarbrick and Marama Davidson started the process for using the waka-jumping legislation to force Tana out of Parliament - if the Greens decide to use it.

Tana's reply, reported by RNZ, said she was not distorting proportionality and the legislation could not be reasonably invoked.

"I was fairly elected during the 2023 general election. I have done nothing which would require the Speaker to expel me from the House and I have mahi to do, so I will not be resigning," she said.

Tana argued that the high standard for determining disproportionality had not been met.

Since resigning from the party, she had instructed Te Pāti Māori to cast her proxy vote in alignment with the Greens' vote, so the Greens' voting strength was not affected.

The Greens will hold a special meeting of party branch delegates on 1 September to decide whether the waka-jumping law should be used.

Law professor Andrew Geddis said Tana was "grasping at straws" when she argued she was not distorting proportionality. By resigning from the party, Tana had caused it to have one fewer MP than it was entitled to, he said.

"On the Supreme Court's reading of the law, the proportionality of Parliament has been distorted," he said. "If an MP leaves their party, then that is grounds for the party to use the party-hopping law to have them kicked out of Parliament."

Geddis thought Tana might not have realised the consequences of what she was doing when she resigned.

He said if the Greens did vote to use the legislation, Tana could go to court and ask for an injunction to stop it going through. However, that would be extraordinarily expensive and Tana would have to fund it herself.

New ministry's big spending

There was another interesting story this week involving David Seymour which had nothing to do with his Treaty Principles Bill.

"Big salaries for 'red tape' staff," The Post reported in a front page lead.

Andrea Vance's report said the average salary in Seymour's new Ministry for Regulation was more than $150,000 and it was hiring 91 staff.

"That's despite ACT, and coalition partner National, campaigning to reduce the public sector wage bill, make 15,000 public servants redundant and slash 'wasteful spending' in the sector," Vance said.

The figures for the new ministry came out through replies to written Parliamentary questions from Green MP Francisco Hernandez, which revealed a median salary at the ministry was $154,500, well above the public service median of $84,800,

The new ministry has three deputy chief executives earning up to $350,000 and five staff are on between $196,000 and $257,000. The salary of chief executive Grainne Moss was not disclosed.

Seymour's office had not responded to questions, Vance said.

No retirement for Winston

The last word this week goes to Shane Jones: "We're absolutely certain that our rangatira Winston will be standing at the next election."

Jones, quoted by Stuff's Tova O'Brien, appears to have shut down speculation about whether Peters will mount up for another rodeo.

* Peter Wilson is a life member of Parliament's press gallery, spent 22 years as NZPA's political editor and seven as Parliamentary bureau chief for NZ Newswire.