The current pressure on the Maori Party over water rights is symptomatic of wider tensions within Maori society. The party's 'will they or won't they leave' dramatics are characterised by Gordon Campbell as 'that of a battered spouse, a pitiable creature who will swallow any indignity in return for the few crumbs of what the relationships once promised to offer' (see Tariana Turia is facing a Katie Holmes moment) but the issues go beyond parliamentary fortunes.
The fundamental question of who represents Maori interests and can negotiate with the Crown is at stake. This has been an issue ever since Europeans arrived and continues to be a major source of conflict that can takes years to resolve, even with smaller treaty claims. John Key doesn't have that sort of time to spare (although he should have seen this coming some time ago). The Government has shown a clear preference for dealing with the Iwi Leaders Group, but that strategy is being openly challenged, not just by the Maori Council, but by individual Hapu leaders like Pouakani chairman Tamati Cairns, who says he was recently turned away from a meeting discussing water rights: '"Now I'm not against iwi leadership, don't get me wrong, nor am I against the Iwi Leaders Group, but it's the issues that start pulling us apart." Mr Cairns says when one group decides one thing, and another group decides another, Maori are in trouble' - see Radio NZ's Maori 'pulled apart' by Crown's approach.
The claims to Maori leadership have grown more complex recently. Politically the Maori Party, Mana and Labour all claim to represent Maori interests in Parliament while the Maori Council's statutory role as a nationwide representative body is under threat from the Iwi Leaders Group. Morgan Godfrey looked at the overlapping roles in a recent post, advocating a merger between the Council and the Leaders' Group - see: Merging the Maori Council.
Joshua Hitchcock at his M?ori Law and Politics blog takes a pragmatic view. He says the Maori Council's claim is a mistake as it openly threatens a core government policy which will make a settlement harder. He advocates settlement by negotiation with the Iwi Leader's group. Hitchcock also has a very clear explanation of the legal issues behind the claim - particularly the difference between Tikanga M?ori and British Common Law - see: Q&A: Maori Council Water Claim and Asset Sales.
Not giving the Crown a chance to divide and rule is a big motivation to speak with one voice but it assumes that all Maori have the same interests, an assumption that might not survive this process.