KEY POINTS:
May you never forget your responsibilities to the Maori people, for when you forget this, your government will fall.
This was the warning Wanganui religious and political prophet Tahupotiki Wiremu Ratana gave to his Labour Party ally Michael Joseph Savage.
That was in 1936, and it's still a very modern curse, as the Maori Party, led by another Wanganui politician, Tariana Turia, enters the final weeks of the election campaign with the scent of a grand slam of electorate seats in her nostrils.
The conundrum for the Maori Party is that, while the fall of Labour may be delicious short term utu for such sins as the Foreshore and Seabed Act, will their supporters be better off in the long term if their leaders cuddle up to the National Party?
This is a party, after all, that pledged to abolish the Maori seats after 2014, which will not repeal the Foreshore Act anyway and represents the opposite end of the economic divide to that occupied by most Maori voters.
Rank and file Maori voters get this. Recent polls show most Maori Party voters have retained their underlying Labour leanings, and with the benefit of MMP, plan to have a bob each way in the upcoming polls.
On Sunday, a Marae DigiPollsurvey gave Mrs Turia 78 per cent support in her seat and her Labour rival 15 per cent. But 42.5 per cent said they would give their party vote to Labour; only 7.7 per cent opted for National.
Similarly, a Maori TV/Baseline poll in Tamaki Makaurau gave Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples 80 per cent support as electorate MP, but they scored only 36 per cent for the party vote compared to Labour's 42 per cent and National's 11 per cent.
A previous nationwide Maori TV/Baseline poll showed 52 per cent would give the party vote to Labour, 20 per cent to Maori and 15 per cent to National.
This reflects the 2005 general election where the Maori Party received 49 per cent of electorate votes but only 28 per cent of the party votes - the Labour Party being the main beneficiary of this strategic voting.
Despite this grassroots message, Maori Party leaders continue to play silly buggers, fancying themselves as kingmakers in the Winston Peters mould, ransoming the big parties off against each other. It's a dangerous game. Look what happened to the Greens last time.
If ever there was a time for the parties of the broad left to realise the symbiotic nature of their success, it's surely now, with their main player, Labour, trailing National by, depending on which poll you believe, 10 or more per cent.
Sticking to one's pure beliefs and nursing past wrongs is all very noble - and oh so left wing - but if it consigns you to a permanent seat on the back benches, where's the benefit?
The Greens accepted this on Monday by ruling out a post-election deal with National. "On the whole National would take New Zealand in the wrong direction," said co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons.
Without declaring a formal marriage with Labour, she said "the Greens would prefer to work with Labour to form a Government as their policies are more closely aligned with ours."
As you would expect, Ms Fitzsimons' quid pro quo for a coalition with Labour was a dowry of policy concessions "that advanced green policies on a number of fronts".
This was all stating the obvious, but as part of the foreplay of MMP coalition building, it needed to be said. Just as it's time the other partners in this ritual started signalling their intentions as well.
And not only the Maori Party but Labour as well. In the final weeks of the campaign, voters need a bit of open flirtation between parties they fancy to give them a steer on what effect their votes could have.
In Australia's preferential voting system, parties do this by publicly ranking their rivals in descending order of preference. Here, electors are supposed to do the calculations by osmosis. It doesn't seem a very smart way to go.
Canterbury University political scientist Therese Arseneau noted recently that since 1999 there has been "a seachange in party identification" among New Zealand voters.
Victoria University pre-election surveys going back more than 30 years showed that since 1999, more New Zealanders now identify themselves as "Labour" supporters than National.
Presumably this "core" support, even if it strays from Labour, is likely to drift to one of the other parties on the liberal/progressive end of the spectrum.
But to take advantage of this core majority, it has to stay together. As the old union chant goes, united we stand, divided we fall.
If Labour and the Maori Party and Greens want to play a part in governing this country after November 8, publicly holding hands now might be a smarter move than waiting until the votes are in.
