Maori TV apologises for reference to 'foreshore confiscation'

By RUTH BERRY

In a sign of continuing Government sensitivity over the foreshore bill, it has successfully demanded an apology from Maori Television after one of its reporters referred to it as the "confiscation bill".

But the broadcaster has refused to acquiesce to a series of other "remedies" sought by the office of Waiariki MP Mita Ririnui, whose staff member laid the complaint.

Mr Ririnui is the chairman of the Government's Maori caucus, most of whom are understood to have supported sending the complaint.

Labour's Maori MPs have privately grumbled that the coverage of the issue on the channel, state-funded and set up by the Labour Government, and on iwi radio stations has been biased against them.

Associate Maori Affairs Minister John Tamihere went public with those accusations at the weekend, after a Marae-DigiPoll survey revealed the Maori Party was ahead of Labour in the Maori seats electorate vote.

"You would be silly not to accept that [the Maori Party] is a threat. The Maori Party has had all the running. They run all the iwi stations and Maori TV. We haven't been able to get balance."

The complaint related to coverage of the foreshore select committee hearing in Auckland on August 25, when Ngati Kahu chairwoman Professor Margaret Mutu warned of civil war. It centred on the reporter referring to the bill as "te pire raupatu taku taimoana" - translated as "the foreshore confiscation bill".

The complaint said this reflected the personal bias of the reporter and it breached broadcasting standards guidelines.

It also said the reporter admitted intending to reflect that bias in the item and that in her view the legislation was a confiscation.

Accordingly, the reporter should not be working in the newsroom and other senior staff who had checked the script should also be censured.

An apology on air and a written apology to Mr Ririnui and other MPs on the foreshore committee were also sought.

A Maori Television spokeswoman said: "We have acknowledged it was an error that should not have occurred and we have accepted the concerns expressed."

But she said the service had presented 25 items on the legislation and as the mistake had been made only once, it was a "one-off".

"We have not been able to confirm that there was any intent behind it."

Although a number of remedies were sought, "as far as we are concerned what it required was a written apology from us and advice to the complainant that it was an error and it was nothing more than that".

Mr Ririnui said last night that he would not take the matter further.

He had raised it because "we expect professional standards from our Maori reporters as the integrity of the industry is important".