KEY POINTS:
I've never been able to see the point of unrequited love, those one-sided love affairs where one hankers after an indifferent other. I'm far too selfish. I want some return for my devotion.
Maybe that's why I see the relationship between the Labour Party and Pacific communities as somewhat saggy and one-sided - all unquestioning loyalty on the one side and waning commitment on the other.
Is it time the Pacific Island community took another look at its devotion to Labour? After last week's Cabinet reshuffle, even the faithful are beginning to wonder whether it's time to spread the love around.
I happened to be at a meeting of Pacific people when we got the news that Winnie Laban had been made the new Minister of Pacific Island Affairs. Laban was taking over from Phil Goff, who, though well-liked in the Pacific community, had been seen as too distracted by Defence and Trade to give the Pacific portfolio his full attention.
Unfortunately, the portfolio now sits outside Cabinet; effectively banished from the decision-making table.
I'm surprised the grumbling wasn't heard as far away as the Beehive. There wasn't much love in the room at that moment for Labour.
Laban is passionate about the portfolio, but she'll have to work hard to make an impact from outside Cabinet. And the fact that Clark promoted others over her head doesn't bode well.
The next day another group of Pacific leaders made their displeasure known to Radio New Zealand's Richard Pamatatau. Labour had deceived Pacific voters, the very voters whose loyalty had won them the election in 2005, said youth leader Efeso Collins. Dr Sitaleki Finau, Pasifika director at Massey University, said Labour had shown what it really thinks of Pacific people. Putting the portfolio outside Cabinet would marginalise any policy and strategy work for Pacific people, he said. Labour had forgotten that Pacific people helped them squeeze home in 2005.
I don't think Helen Clark forgets anything, but putting Pacific loyalties to the test is a risky move given the continuing divisions in the Pacific community over Taito Phillip Field, and the absence so far of any potential contender in Mangere capable of uniting Pacific Island voters.
In the last election, Don Brash was the bogeyman who galvanised Pacific voters to turn out in force for Labour. But, ironically, Pacific people bore the brunt of Orewa anyway.
That's because while Labour was busy condemning Brash's divisive policies on the one hand, it was busily backing down from so-called "race-based" funding. Its faint-hearted response to Orewa was to ditch a slew of programmes in favour of "needs-based" funding, which it has never clearly defined. Many of the abandoned initiatives were never picked up again, under any guise. Meanwhile, the needs haven't gone away.
The reversal affected both Maori and Pacific people - but unlike Maori, who could contest their rights in places such as the Waitangi Tribunal and Environment Court, Pacific people had neither a court, nor anyone to argue their case. So where was the ministry itself in all this? Struggling, and failing miserably, to be all things Pacific across government, without the firepower or the resources to do it. It's no secret that the ministry has under-performed to the point where its future is in doubt.
But it now has a new chief executive, Dr Colin Tukuitonga, whose impressive credentials include high-powered stints with the World Health Organisation and as Director of Public Health here. And if anyone can resuscitate the ailing ministry, it's Dr Tukuitonga.
But there is no doubt that the need for a specialist agency like the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs, operating efficiently, remains as great as ever. Pacific people, with needs distinct from other groups, need effective policy driven by an agency that understands the reality of their lives.
Both Tukuitonga and Laban have to demonstrate relevancy, and they have to do it quickly. That shouldn't be too hard, because while the ministry's been in slumber mode, no one else has picked up the slack.
Unemployment might be low right now, but Pacific families are under siege as low wages forces both parents, and sometimes older children, to work long and debilitating hours. There's evidence that not all Pacific families are getting their full entitlement under Working for Families. And there's much to be done in improving educational achievement rates for Pacific students.
There's no other ministry that could - if it had been doing its job well - have pointed out the shortcomings of Kiwisaver for Pacific people disadvantaged by low wages and a lower than average life expectancy.
Labour can't afford to sideline this ministry or its minister. Not because of the loyalty of Pacific voters, but because what's good for the Pacific community is ultimately good for New Zealand.
* Tapu. Misa@gmail.com
