Mutually-agreed distance is key

OPINION: Anyone paying attention to the rumblings of the Maori Party may be forgiven for the thinking the Government is on a less-stable footing than it is.

But there’s a trend to the Maori Party’s positioning and its members will only strive to appear more independent and vocal about it as the September election encroaches.

To an extent, National will help them with that; the stronger the Maori Party, the weaker Labour and the easier National will find it to form a government.

Prime Minister Bill English’s new line that they are a ‘‘challenging but constructive’’ support partner gives leeway for the Maori Party needs to justify its seat at the Cabinet table.

His comments around the deal struck between the Maori Party and Mana – which would give a clear path for Hone Harawira to reclaim Te Tai Tokerau in exchange for a free run at the six remaining electorates – were designed to leave the door ajar without waving all participants through.

Which makes English’s fluffing around questions, over whether National will stand candidates in the Maori seats, or whether National’s policy to abolish the Maori seats even remains on the party’s books, all the more strange.

The Maori Party is National’s only chance to have a hand in the Maori seats, and a general aversion to ‘‘hikois from hell’’ – astutely voiced by English’s predecessor, John Key – still stands.

But English errs toward the non-committal if he’s not across every aspect of detail, or he’s personally not that enthusiastic about the position he has to argue.

The difference between Key’s comments on the Maori seats and English’s, is English is the one who put it on National’s books in 2003.

In likelihood, nothing has changed in respect to the last election. Yes, the policy to abolish the Maori seats is still on National’s books, but no, they won’t be pushing it.

Yesterday, English hacked at questions over whether he still held the view he voiced in 2003 that the Maori seats had ‘‘outlived their purpose’’.

‘‘The clearly do [still hold a purpose], they meet the needs for Maori to feel represented.’’

Read: As long as Maori want them, then they serve a political purpose.

Where English gained surety, was in stoking the fire ignited by claims from Labour leader Andrew Little that the Maori Party was not kaupapa Maori – perceived as patronising by many.

‘‘The Labour Party bitterly resent any Maori who doesn’t believe they have to vote for Labour.’’

So expect more tussle from the Maori Party, and qualified vagueness from the prime minister as the election draws near. It’s an essential element that the Maori Party does kick against National every now and then.

Otherwise, why are they there?