Tāmaki Makaurau byelection: Labour's Peeni Henare hits back at Te Pāti Māori claim of ‘greedy' byelection contest
Shortly after Te Pāti Māori last week announced former broadcaster Oriini Kaipara as its candidate aiming to succeed Kemp, Kiri Tamihere-Waititi – party media liaison, wife to co-leader Rawiri Waititi and daughter to Tamihere – wrote on social media how a vote for Henare was a 'wasted' vote and claimed it was 'greedy' of Labour to run an existing MP in the byelection.
Kiri Tamihere-Waititi published her views on social media. Photo / Andrew Warner
She encouraged voters to support Kaipara as it would mean two Tāmaki Makaurau-based Māori MPs were in Parliament.
Tamihere-Waititi's strategy proved an effective one for Te Pāti Māori in 2023 when Labour secured the largest party vote share in the Māori seats while Te Pāti Māori candidates won six of the seven electorate contests.
Henare, speaking from Parliament this morning, dismissed any claim Labour was being greedy.
'Every green seat in the House of Parliament is a contested seat, anybody who thinks a seat is going to be given to somebody is absolute folly,' he said.
'In the last election, I got over 10,000 votes. I owe it to them too to make sure that they're represented, and that's why I put my hand up.'
He noted Labour's Georgie Dansey, a wahine Māori, would enter Parliament if he won the byelection.
'Any suggestion that I'm curbing a Māori voice in Parliament is absolute folly and those kinds of reckons don't help what should be a good contest between two good candidates.'
Speaking to the Herald last week, Tamihere said Henare could risk leadership aspirations if he was unsuccessful.
Henare, who held Tāmaki Makaurau for three terms from 2014, described Tamihere's jab as a 'bit rich' and referenced the former MP's failed attempts to win the seat in 2005 and 2020, as well as an unsuccessful Auckland mayoralty bid.
Labour MP Peeni Henare speaking before select committee. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Henare clarified he had 'huge respect' for Kaipara, despite alleged efforts from Tamihere to 'drag me into the trenches for an all-out, toe-to-toe fist fight'.
Stating he would run a respectful campaign, Henare said he would be encouraging 'out-of-the-box thinking' to gain support as well as a stronger social media presence, which he admitted Labour could improve in the face of a formidable and established Te Pāti Māori online operation.
Henare and Kaipara were the primary contenders. Vision New Zealand leader Hannah Tamaki would also contest the seat. National, Act and New Zealand First were not entering candidates.
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson, who has run for the seat three times, confirmed last week her party would not contest the byelection as it was not a 'responsible use of our resources at this time'.
Tamihere had argued it would boost his party's support base but Labour's Māori caucus chair Willie Jackson believed support would go both ways.
'This is very much a 50-50 election. We're not over-confident at all, we respect Te Pāti Māori and the young movement out there, but we've got a long history with Labour.'
He claimed no backroom deals had been reached between Labour and the Greens about the latter not standing a candidate.
Jackson repeated Henare's assertion Labour would run a clean campaign, but also said he was up for a fight.
'If they want to have a fight, Te Pāti Māori, well, I'm up for it, there's no problems with that, but that's not how we're going to run this campaign, this is a respectful campaign.'
Labour MP Willie Jackson wants a clean campaign but won't back down from a fight. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Labour leader Chris Hipkins today confirmed Henare would not be given leave from his Parliament duties to spend more time campaigning in Auckland.
'[Henare] still has his job, he still needs to fulfil his responsibilities as a Member of Parliament.'
Hipkins maintained Labour would have a 'very, very active ground game' and believed Henare's experience in Parliament would benefit him in the byelection.
Luxon yesterday repeated his criticism of Hipkins for not further challenging the 2023 Tāmaki Makaurau result, indicating he would have pursued an election petition, which goes beyond a recount.
Hipkins today said Labour had been advised a petition was likely to have been unsuccessful, given Kemp's share of the vote increased after the recount.
Adam Pearse is the Deputy Political Editor and part of the NZ Herald's Press Gallery team based at Parliament in Wellington. He has worked for NZME since 2018, reporting for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei and the Herald in Auckland.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Thousands of Afghans win UK asylum after huge data breach
By Jo Biddle, AFP Photo: AFP Thousands of Afghans who worked with the UK and their families were brought to Britain in a secret programme after a 2022 data breach put their lives at risk, the British government revealed on Tuesday (UK time). Defence Minister John Healey unveiled the scheme to Parliament after the UK High Court on Tuesday lifted a super-gag order banning any reports of the events. In February 2022, a spreadsheet containing the names and details of almost 19,000 Afghans who had asked to be relocated to Britain was accidentally leaked by a UK official just six months after Taliban fighters seized Kabul, Healey said. "This was a serious departmental error," Healey said, adding: "Lives may have been at stake." The previous Conservative government put in place a secret programme in April 2024 to help those "judged to be at the highest risk of reprisals by the Taliban", he said. Some 900 Afghans and 3600 family members have now been brought to Britain or are in transit under the programme known as the Afghan Response Route, at a cost of around £400 million (NZ$900m), Healey said. Applications from 600 more people have also been accepted, bringing the estimated total cost of the scheme to £850m (NZ$1.9b). They are among some 36,000 Afghans who have been accepted by Britain under different schemes since the August 2021 fall of Kabul. As Labour's opposition defence spokesman, Healey was briefed on the scheme in December 2023 but the Conservative government asked a court to impose a "super-injunction" banning any mention of it in Parliament or by the press. When Labour came to power in July 2024, the scheme was in full swing but Healey said he had been "deeply uncomfortable to be constrained from reporting" to Parliament. "Ministers decided not to tell Parliamentarians at an earlier stage about the data incident, as the widespread publicity would increase the risk of the Taliban obtaining the dataset," he explained. A video grab from footage broadcast by the UK Parliament's Parliamentary Recording Unit (PRU) Britain's Defence Secretary John Healey making a statement to MPs in the House of Commons in London on 15 July, 2025. Photo: Supplied / AFP Healey set up a review of the scheme when he became defence minister in the new Labour government. This concluded there was "very little evidence of intent by the Taliban to conduct a campaign of retribution". The Afghan Response Route has now been closed, the minister said, apologising for the data breach which "should never have happened". He estimated the total cost of relocating people from Afghanistan to Britain at between £5.5b to £6b (NZ$12.3b to NZ$13.5b). Conservative Party defence spokesman James Cartlidge also apologised for the leak which happened under the previous Tory government. But he defended the decision to keep it secret, saying the aim had been to avoid "an error by an official of the British state leading to torture or even murder of persons in the dataset at the hands of what remains a brutal Taliban regime". Healey said all those brought to the UK from Afghanistan had been accounted for in the country's immigration figures. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has vowed to cut the number of migrants arriving in Britain. In 2023, the UK defence ministry was fined £350,000 (NZ787,000) by a data watchdog for disclosing personal information of 265 Afghans seeking to flee Taliban fighters in the chaotic fall of Kabul two years earlier. Britain's Afghanistan evacuation plan was widely criticised, with the government accused by MPs of "systemic failures of leadership, planning and preparation". Hundreds of Afghans eligible for relocation were left behind , many with their lives potentially at risk after details of staff and job applicants were left at the abandoned British embassy in Kabul. - AFP
The Spinoff
2 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Coalition rift opens over UN letter as Seymour defends rogue response
The Act leader's unilateral reply to the UN has exposed fresh cracks in the coalition – and created a clean-up job for Winston Peters, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Letter row underscores coalition strain David Seymour's fiery response to a United Nations letter has turned into a full-blown coalition controversy, exposing divisions over both diplomatic conduct and the ideological direction of government. In June, UN special rapporteur Albert K Barume wrote to the government expressing concern that Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill failed to uphold Treaty principles and risked breaching Māori rights. Without consulting his coalition partners, Seymour fired back, sending his own letter to Barume telling him his remarks were 'presumptive, condescending, and wholly misplaced' and branding the UN intervention 'an affront to New Zealand's sovereignty'. As RNZ's Craig McCulloch reports, prime minister Christopher Luxon yesterday described Barume's letter as 'total bunkum' but agreed Seymour had overstepped and should not have responded directly. What the UN said – and what Seymour wrote back In his letter, Barume said he was concerned about reports of 'a persistent erosion of the rights of the Māori Indigenous Peoples… through regressive legislations' that may breach New Zealand's international obligations. Seymour's response was uncompromising. 'As an Indigenous New Zealander myself,' he wrote, 'I am deeply aggrieved by your audacity in presuming to speak on my behalf and that of my fellow Māori.' He dismissed concerns about Māori exclusion from consultation as 'misleading and offensive', and accused Barume of misunderstanding both the bill and New Zealand's legislative process. While Seymour has since agreed to withdraw the letter to allow foreign minister Winston Peters to respond officially, he has refused to acknowledge any wrongdoing, insisting that 'we all agree the UN's criticisms are crazy' and that the official response would be essentially the same as his own. When asked if that was the case, Peters sounded aghast, reports The Post's Kelly Dennett (paywalled). 'That's not true,' Peters told reporters. 'Why would he say that?' The government's position would be made clear only after consulting all affected ministries, Peters said. 'We don't do megaphone diplomacy in this business,' he added acidly. 'Don't you understand diplomacy? You don't speak to other countries via the media.' Māori opposition to the bill runs deep Behind the diplomatic drama lies the more substantive issue: widespread Māori opposition to the Regulatory Standards Bill itself. Writing in Te Ao Māori News, former MP Louisa Wall says Seymour's claim that the bill doesn't weaken Treaty protections is 'demonstrably false'. In fact, she says, 'the Bill is silent on Te Tiriti. It elevates a monocultural legal standard based on private property and individual liberty while excluding Māori values like tikanga, mana motuhake, and kaitiakitanga. This is not neutral. It is erasure.' Wall also defends Barume's intervention, arguing that he was fulfilling his mandate to monitor Indigenous rights worldwide and that his concerns echoed those already raised by Māori leaders and legal scholars. 'Dr Barume is not imposing an external ideology,' she writes. 'His letter reflects what Māori across the motu already know: our rights are being undermined.' Coalition fault lines widen over Seymour's bill The clash over the UN letter comes at a tense time for Act's relationship with NZ First, which has made no secret of its discomfort with parts of the bill. Seymour has 'made it clear behind the scenes' that the regulatory standards legislation is 'as bottom line as it gets', writes Thomas Coughlan in a fascinating piece for the Herald (paywalled). Translation: '[Seymour] is willing to walk away from the coalition over it, bringing down the Government and triggering an election' if he doesn't get what he wants. While that's an unlikely scenario – especially since the coalition agreement commits the government to passing some version of the legislation – Seymour's passion for the bill speaks volumes about the junior coalition partners' divergent ideologies, writes Coughlan. 'Act is willing to risk short-term unpopularity, even losing an election, for long-term foundational change; NZ First is not.'
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: A new model for our power market is needed
Bryan Leyland, Pt Chevalier. The nuclear option As always during the winter months, our energy shortage issues are again brought up. But surely we have our head in the sand to some degree, by which I mean why can't New Zealand bury the past and re-evaluate the potential of nuclear energy. The technology has come a long way and is very efficient, so why not? It would be a game-changer but would call for some very definitive and brave decision-making from our politicians, which, unfortunately, is a rare event. Paul Beck, West Harbour. Indigenous people's rights Guy Body's cartoon (July 14) depicting our Deputy Prime Minister defending New Zealand's sovereignty with a toy sword and a trash-can lid while trampling on a Māori sovereignty flag against the United Nations headquarters adds a little humour to this important issue. Twice recently a UN Special Rapporteur has expressed their concern to our Government about the erosion of indigenous people's rights. The Government has responded with indignation, so this raises the issue of the role of the UN and what powers it should have to influence decisions of all nations. We live in global society, so if we wish to carry forward an ever-advancing civilisation, then we must solve the problem of just global governance. Consultation on this issue is the need of the age we live in as the problems of anthropogenic climate change and justice for indigenous peoples must be solved at a global level. The UN Security Council has the responsibility to ensure peace with justice and, as most people agree, needs the power of veto to be removed to function effectively. So why couldn't we, through our Government, lead efforts to ensure this happens? Consultation on UN reform is not as simple or sexy as ending bottom trawling but one can suggest it is far more important! Dennis Worley, Birkenhead. Anger at actions Antisemitism is not an appropriate term to describe many of today's protests. People are furious with Israel for what it is doing in Gaza. Israel is killing mothers and children. Protests, legal or not, are against what is being done to Gaza and its people. It has nothing to do with antisemitism. Christine Henare, Miranda. All we are saying is ... President Trump has warned nations that the United States will withhold miltary aid in future conflicts unless nations ramp up their defence spending. Nations across the globe have rushed to order weapons. Including Denmark, a peace-loving nation that will increase spending by about US$7 billion ($11.7b) over the next two years. The main beneficiary will be the US arms industry. Business has never been so good. The massive increase in defence spending is a colossal waste. Nations will have no money left to spend on infrastructure or hospitals or schools. When will this madness stop? Now is the time for people to insist that their leaders give peace a chance. Now is the time to negotiate. If peace is not given a chance, it will only take one person to press the button which will light a massive bonfire that could wipe out billions of lives. Johann Nordberg, Paeroa. Health system concerns Having listened to two highly respected doctors on the TV programme Q&A, it is very concerning to see the direction in which our health minister is driving. Basically, the doctors are saying that health will become Americanised with the private system taking control. It was obvious from the interview that both doctors were strongly in favour of a tax system that directly supported health and quoted several European countries that did exactly this. Conservative governments support a vision of less public service and more private enterprise but health is, or should be, one of their core responsibilities. Reg Dempster, Albany.
