Audrey Young: John Key should be worried
Prime Minister John Key. Photo / File
John Key was treated like a rock star over in Australia last week by strangers who wished he was their Prime Minister.
He gets back home and his friends in the Maori Party are throwing rocks at him.
After getting back from his Aussie trip he breezed into the Breakfast studio for his regular Monday TV interview and was asked factual questions about the case.
Yes, he was stating fact when he said in answer to a question that the Government could "ignore" the recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal on the water claims.
That was quickly translated as Key saying he ''would" ignore the recommendations.
He repeated the facts yesterday on TV3 but toned them down considerably, saying the Government wasn't legally bound to follow the recommendations but that he would consider them.
The change was lost in the heat of it all.
If Key had ever attended a tribunal hearing or realised the respect, even reverence, in which the tribunal is held by many Maori, he would have chosen his words more carefully.
When Tariana Turia said she found the comments insulting, that is not political posturing.
There may not be widespread respect for the claim but there is respect for the tribunal. Key bound up the claim and the tribunal in the one insult.
The statement issued yesterday by Turia and co-leader Pita Sharples about how disappointed they were in what Key said about the Waitangi Tribunal is stronger than any other they have made in their up and down relationship.
Key should be worried by its tone and content.
"We will not tolerate any suggestion that the mana of the tribunal can be undermined," they said.
"It is of utmost concern in so far as it threatens the very heart of the treaty relationship."
That is the part that should really worry John Key.
The Maori Party doesn't operate like other parties. It is less predictable. If the Maori Party withdrew its support on confidence and supply, Key could still govern with Act's John Banks and United Future's Peter Dunne.
But unless the Maori Party abstained, the Government's majority would then be only one - a heart-beat away from none.
He most certainly does not have any scruples when it comes to following the agenda of his government, to partially sell the state owned enterprises. Even the fact that it makes little or no economic sense to proceed with the mixed ownership privatisation, does not concern Key and most of cabinet.
It is a core part of National's ideological philosophy to reduce state involvement in such enterprises, to cut back on public service expenditure, to sell and privatise whatever may be considered suitable for this.
The Maori Party leaders and the 3 remaining MPs it has in Parliament also have proved in the past, that they do not necessarily walk the talk, and rather give in to Key and National, simply to remain at the table so to speak.
Even if the Maori Party withdraws its support for the government, Key still has Banks and Dunne to fall back on.
In a few months, Mighty River Power will be put up for partial sale to the public.
Now, a large part of this company's profits come from electricity generated through river water flowing through their power turbine generators. So, how much does this company pay for the right to use this water? Nothing I believe (if I'm wrong - please let me know).
This seems reasonable if the company is owned by the state, but put it in private hands and it seems very wrong. Why should a private company (built on the back of public money) generate profits using a public resource without paying a cent?
So, the options available seem to be:
a. It continues to pay nothing and a private company controls the flow of water through our rivers.
B. It pays a fee to the Government to use and control the water resource.
Now, if it pays a fee, does it all go to the Government, or do iwi groups, as signatories to the Treaty of Waitangi also deserve a cut?
This is the issue to me, everything else at the moment is just politics and hyperbole.