The tikanga Maori and sociological points are intertwined.
How do we get to a point in society where we have a family demanding that they be able to stay in a state home? This rankles mortgage-paying ratepayers who perhaps feel no one has a right to feel a sense of "ownership" of a state house.
The tikanga aspect adds another level of discussion. This family have buried placenta in the grounds of the home, they may even consider it their turangawaewae, their standing place. There is an attachment to the home that is beyond the emotional attachment many non-Maori have to their land.
And yes, some of the family are gang members.
But there doesn't seem to be a lot of noise being made about criminal activity at the house or vandalism. As for Whangarei MP Phil Heatley's observation that he can't comment on the case because he is the Housing Minister and electorate MP and that presents a conflict of interest ... it sounds like a cop out. That he is both means Mr Heatley has the intimacy of knowledge to sort the situation out, not back off.
HNZ will not want to be bullied into doing what the family wants but given the Dunns are likely to end up in another state house, it seems some sort of bureaucratic pragmatism is required.
If this was a family that ticked all of HNZ's boxes and they were model tenants, would there be a problem? If they tick the right "qualification" boxes for a HNZ property, give them the blimmin house they are in.
