OPINION
Here’s something in the new National-Act-NZ First coalition deals I’m not upset about: Government departments and other public agencies will have to use their English-language names.
Partly, this is because I think it’s true that when they don’t use English names, it can be confusing.
What’s Te Toka Tumai? Many of the people who get a letter from this organisation are vulnerable and frightened about what life is about to throw at them, and they need clear, simple information. Te Toka Tumai is Auckland City Hospital.
Mind you, I don’t think this should be overstated. It is perfectly possible for Māori names to be widely understood. Oranga Tamariki and Waka Kotahi both managed it with very little fuss.
And, to be clear, I hope to hear te reo words widely used in the news for as long as I have the strength to turn on the TV.
But there’s another reason to be cautious about slapping a Māori name on an organisation. It implies, or should imply, something about the organisation itself. That it is, perhaps, genuinely bicultural. Even that it operates on co-governance principles.
Government agencies don’t do that. Giving them Māori names but leaving the old hierarchies intact can be tokenist and misleading. The task is not to change the name of an organisation. The task is to change the organisation.
So. In the “war on woke” we now seem to find ourselves in, that’s one point to the anti-woke warriors. But 100 points against them, because they’re not trying to stop tokenism. They want an end to the entire historical thrust of progress towards a more just and bicultural society.
There are some other things I rather like about the new Government.
The ban on foreign buyers of property will help keep a lid on house prices, which is excellent.
The Regional Infrastructure Fund recognises that some parts of this country will die unless they receive planned financial support. It’s good for everyone if Tairāwhiti and Te Tai Tokerau can prosper, especially if they can do it without relying on industries that produce devastating quantities of timber slash.
This time around, fingers crossed the fund is not undermined by pork-barrelling.
It’s good there will be 500 more police, although they should not all be deployed walking the beat, which some people seem to think is the be-all and end-all of policing. White-collar crime, organised crime and especially domestic violence all need more attention.
And how nice to see that some of National’s sillier campaign promises have been quietly buried. Finance Minister Nicola Willis’ plan to give every household a “taxpayers’ receipt”, telling us how taxes are spent, is the standout there.
Although, hang on. Did National deliberately concoct a bunch of silly policies, just so it would have something to “give up” during coalition talks?
But, hoo boy, there’s some bad stuff. To my mind, they fall into four categories.
National doesn’t deny the dangers of climate change, the Zero Carbon Act remains and the new minister, Simon Watts, is relatively enlightened about the subject.
But he’s not in Cabinet. The Greens’ James Shaw wasn’t either, and that undermined his impact. But the climate crisis has become so pressing, we need a whole-of-government approach and Watts is not in a position to deliver it.
Instead, his Government is trundling off the other way. It will require little of farmers, while abolishing Auckland’s regional fuel tax, thus cutting off a $4.5 billion pipeline focused on public transport.
EVs will lose their rebate, EV drivers will be taxed and the rollout of charging stations will be slowed. Oil and gas exploration will restart, fare subsidies and funding for new public transport and cycleways will be cut, while new roads will be supercharged.
There are no green commitments around buildings or construction, nor is much help promised for climate adaptation. Councils will be allowed to abandon plans for greater density.
National doesn’t deny the dangers of climate change. But it does seem to deny there’s anything wrong with pretending to live in the last century.
In the name of economic improvement, the Productivity Commission will be replaced with a Ministry of Silly Regulations, with David Seymour in charge. Yes, it is Monty Pythonesque.
It would be a very fine thing if Seymour could develop a regime to get projects completed more quickly, more cheaply and still to acceptable standards. But his attacks on “back-room” bean counting suggest he will, instead, undermine the policy analysis and support services that front-line staff need to do their jobs well.
Besides, why aim for the status quo in 2017? That was our Year of Deplorable Infrastructure, the culmination of systematic neglect of hospitals, transport networks, schools and so much more. We’re still suffering from it.
This is a Government for employers, not workers; landlords, not tenants; the more-well-off, not the less-well-off. Is it “woke” to complain about this?
It’s not “woke” to want standards for rental properties, use tax to discourage property speculation or support fair-pay agreements. Does someone want to argue women actually should be paid less than men?
Where’s the fairness in not raising the threshold at which Working for Families is abated? National was going to do it, but Act said no - $555 million over three years that would have gone to low-income families will now fund tax cuts for the better off.
The new Government will look at controlling beneficiaries’ bank accounts: it calls this “electronic money management”. Why pick on beneficiaries?
Landlords who leave shops empty are effectively vandalising the street, so why not put them under electronic money management? There are business owners who don’t pay suppliers and who steal wages and KiwiSaver contributions: why not them?
They’re going to restore “balance” to the New Zealand history curriculum. That’s both petty and ignorant.
Services such as healthcare will operate on the basis of “need, not race”. This will safeguard already entrenched privilege.
Seymour did not get his referendum on the Treaty of Waitangi, but he will not be unhappy. A bill will be drafted and we will have the debate he wants so he can grow his party’s base.
The tragedy in this is that National has a better record of Treaty claims than Labour. This will be the first National-led Government not to build on that record.
And the most appalling coalition policy of them all? That would be the decision to repeal the Smokefree Environments Amendment Act.
This Act restricts the number of outlets that can sell tobacco and prohibits its sale to anyone born on or after January 1, 2009. The aim is to create a “smoke-free generation”. It’s a world leader and has just been copied by the Conservative Government in Britain.
Act and NZ First wanted the law repealed. Willis says increased tobacco levies will help fund tax cuts.
Lisa Te Morenga, co-chair of Health Coalition Aotearoa, calls the policy a “gut punch” that will cost thousands of lives. “Tax cuts for the rich at the cost of the lives of our tamariki is just vile,” she says. She’s right.
As it happens, the smoke-free law illuminates the “need, not race” debate. Māori and Pasifika rates of smoking are more than twice the “all-adult” rate. So while the law benefits everyone, in particular it benefits Māori, because they need it most.
Does that make it a race-based policy or a needs-based policy, or is it just an economic policy? Whatever.
As for Willis’s tax grab, she must know it’s illusory, because smoking puts an enormous burden on our health system.
Why did National agree to this? It’s unlikely to be related to senior minister Chris Bishop’s past life as a lobbyist for the tobacco industry.
Is it because dairies need tobacco sales? Why is that so, if cigarettes entice ram raids? Besides, the dairy argument belongs to the lobby group Save Our Stores, which admits it is funded by tobacco companies.
Yep, this debate quickly gets grubby.
Repealing smoke-free law isn’t just bad for public health. It trashes the reputation of Dr Shane Reti, the new Minister of Health, and it trashes the integrity of his whole Government. Buckle in.
Simon Wilson is an award-winning senior writer covering politics, the climate crisis, transport, housing, urban design and social issues, with a focus on Auckland. He joined the Herald in 2018.
OPINION: 'I might even just make up a news story - just to lighten the mood.'