Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency Te Pūtahitanga o Te Waipounamu Farewells Staff
South Island iwi have been celebrating the successes of Whānau Ora commissioning agency Te Pūtahitanga o Te Waipounamu, as they farewell staff at a series of events around the South Island.
As of the end of June, the organisation will no longer provide Whānau Ora services after a change in Government direction, with Te Puni Kōkiri opening the contracts to other providers.
It means around 40 staff will be without jobs, and it's expected another 100 jobs from the partner navigator network will go.
Six poroporoaki (farewell events) have been held across the South Island, where staff and whanau have spoken of their devastation at the agency's closure, and celebrated the many success stories that resulted from its mahi.
Whānau Ora was created in 2010 by the late Dame Tariana Turia in an effort to improve social and health services for Māori.
Te Pūtahitanga o Te Waipounamu general partnership board chair Tā Mark Solomon said the agency worked on behalf of eight South Island iwi to determine the best ways to support whānau development.
Solomon recalled when he first heard about Whānau Ora, at a meeting with Dame Turia in Christchurch more than a decade ago.
"I stood up at the end and asked her, if I could get all the tribes of Te Waipounamu to come together, could we put in a bid for the Whānau Ora commissioning agency?
"She gave a bit of a giggle and said yes, if you think you can get the tribes together by all means."
Solomon said two meetings later, they were united. He said it was the first time in history that all the tribes of Te Waiponamu had come together to work collectively. They put in a bid for the contract and were successful.
An independent evaluation of the agency's direct social investment model hailed it as an "outstanding exemplar of an organisation delivering public services that actually work".
The evaluation demonstrated that the most conservative impact implied an economic benefit of $2.40 for every $1 of investment.
It also found that across 83 funded initiatives, almost 5000 Māori were positively impacted, with the value of increased life satisfaction combined put at $7.2m.
"Proud is an understatement. I'm absolutely in awe of what has been done and the good that it has brought to Te Waipounamu," Solomon said.
In the last five years, Te Pūtahitanga navigators had worked with 14,973 whanau and more than 8,000 people had been supported into employment within communities across the South Island.
The new provider, Solomon said, was working under a "totally different" framework.
"Whānau ora to me is families themselves determining what they need and what goals they need to set to change their life, it's not to be dictated by a government policy."
Te Taumata, the iwi shareholder council of Te Pūtahitanga, co chair and Ngāti Kuia representative Hina-i-te māra Moses-Te Kani said the poroporoaki in Ōtautahi on Thursday was an emotional celebration.
She said for the last 11 years, it had been given the opportunity to celebrate mana motuhake, self determination, with funding from the Crown.
It had supported countless business ideas through Tūātea, the social investment fund that gave whānau the agency to realise their own aspirations.
"Whānau would come to us with their dreams and aspirations and we had coaches and support people and champions who supported them to set up their organisations in the right way, to live the dream that they wanted to live... one of the outcomes was getting more people into jobs and we created thousands of jobs in this kaupapa."
Many of those businesses were focused on hauora, health and fitness, rongoā Māori, hospitality, art and design.
"We had a 12-year-old who wanted to be the leading poi manufacturer in the world and she achieved that at 14."
She said research showed that the agency had developed one of the most successful international indigenous commissioning models in the word, supporting whanau intergenerationally.
"It's one of the key celebrations for us - this is intrinsically kaupapa Māori all day, every day."
She was still in disbelief at the Government's change in focus, which was now directed at deprivation instead of self-determination.
"How could such a successful life-changing model - moving whanau from deprivation without even focusing on that - how could it be seen as not the right model?"
Moses-Te Kani said the iwi alliance across the South Island remained strong and the whanau ora movement created in Te Waipounamu would continue to shine through.
"I think that the legacy from Te Pūtahitanga will morph into something new and something brilliant and we won't completely disappear. What we have created here is like a beautiful flowing awa across the whole of Te Waipounamu and the next brilliant thing will turn up, maybe it'll be international money, or maybe it'll be somebody else's money that will support the kaupapa that we're doing."
Whānau Ora Minister Tama Potaka announced earlier this month that four new community-based Whānau Ora commissioning agencies will replace the three agencies that have led the scheme since its inception.
The South Island contract has been awarded to Te Tauraki Limited, a subsidiary of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu.
He said the agencies were selected to deliver on the government's focus to provide better public services, which were moving in a "refreshed direction".
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Spinoff
an hour ago
- The Spinoff
We keep measuring the Māori economy – but what are we actually counting?
New report after new report declares the growth and potential of the Māori economy. But what even is it, and why do we keep measuring it? Last week, yet another report was released outlining the prowess and potential of the Māori economy. 'The 'Māori economy' is thriving and diversifying,' the report from WEAll Aotearoa begins, following with many impressive figures and statistics: 'contribution of $32 billion… asset base of $126bn'. So what are these numbers, how are they measured, and what purpose does dissecting and analysing the Māori economy as a standalone sector of our capitalist system serve? What even is the Māori economy? Honestly, I couldn't tell you. In its most recent report on the Māori economy released earlier this year, Te Ōhanga Māori 2023 – The Māori Economy Report 2023, the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment states: 'Te Ōhanga Māori is not always a separate, distinct, and clearly identifiable segment of the Aotearoa New Zealand economy.' From what I gather, what we now call the 'Māori economy' was born not from Māori, but from a colonial lens – one that separated Māori economic activity from the broader economy of Aotearoa. Before colonisation, however, the Māori economy was the entire economy of Aotearoa. We cultivated and traded internationally, maintained thriving markets with our Pacific neighbours, and by the 1800s, were actively bartering with European and American markets. There's a quote from Mānuka Henare that often gets missed in these debates. He reminded us that the artistic flourishing of the 16th-18th centuries – the carving, weaving and tattooing – didn't come from scarcity. It came from a dynamic, thriving Māori economy. A creative economy rooted in relationships, surplus, and time to think, carve and dream. And then came colonisation… Bingo. Mass disruption and dispossession completely changed the face of the Māori economy. Christ came alongside capitalism – monocultural capitalism, to be exact. For the most part, Māori were excluded from participating in the settler economy, except as low-paid labour. The wealth of the British Crown in New Zealand was essentially built on the back of stolen resources and slave labour. This depleted the Māori economy of its capitalistic wealth. The cultural wealth of Māori was also severely depleted through tools of colonisation. Laws encouraging assimilation and prohibiting Māori from speaking our language and carrying out cultural practices amounted to cultural genocide. A majority of the Māori population was forced to shift to urban areas during the 1950s to the 1970s, taking wage labour jobs and being disconnected from whenua or collective models. During this time, Māori economic power was deliberately undermined. The Crown's policy was to assimilate Māori socially, politically and economically – not to support indigenous enterprise. Clearly things have changed. In the 1970s, we witnessed what's known as the 'Māori renaissance'. A key part of this was the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal and the treaty claims process. The first claim to be settled was the Māori Fisheries claim, also known as the Sealord Deal. This provided an economic basis for iwi authorities to begin rebuilding their economic wealth, albeit under a Crown-controlled capitalist model. Other large-scale settlements such as Ngāi Tahu and Waikato-Tainui provided iwi with capital and assets, although this was a comparatively minuscule amount compared to the total value of loss. However, this led to many iwi creating commercial entities like Ngāi Tahu Holdings and Tainui Group Holdings, which reinvested in property, farming, tourism, infrastructure and finance. These entities are often what gets counted in Māori economy stats today, via Māori authorities. So the Māori economy is just measuring how well settled entities are doing? Seems a bit narrow. Yes, for the most part. In 2002, the IRD introduced a tax rate specific to Māori authorities, aiming to modernise the tax rules for organisations managing Maori assets held in communal ownership. In 2012, Stats NZ began defining and measuring 'Māori authorities' – the entities that form the core of the so-called 'Māori economy'. This legally recognises post-settlement governance entities – not pakihi Māori. This is one reason the data often skews toward iwi corporations and not the thousands of small Māori-owned businesses or social enterprises. What was the point of measuring this data in the first place, especially with such a narrow scope? A friend half-jokingly said to me it's to illustrate how Māori are leeching from the Crown – as crude as it might sound, there is some truth in this statement. The state wanted to understand how the capital being returned to Māori via the settlement process was being used, how it might contribute to national GDP and how Māori entities could be integrated into broader economic policy and investment. Arguably, the Crown began tracking these measures to make Māori legible to the state – easier to understand, manage, and control – first through tax and compliance, then through economic policy, and now through investment lenses. It began as a state-driven interest in managing, taxing and tracking Māori collectives post-settlement. However, it has since evolved into a strategic economic conversation, which Māori are increasingly reframing to reflect kaupapa Māori values, collective aspirations and indigenous economic thinking. And what is it actually telling us? That we're outside the general economy? There is an argument that by measuring the Māori economy, we're saying we need to be tracked separately because we're not good enough to stand on equal footing. Personally, I don't buy the warm fuzzy intent. As mentioned above, I suspect it started as a way to quantify what Māori were 'costing' the nation – to calculate the burden, not the benefit. Even now, those numbers get weaponised: 'Look how wealthy Māori are. Why do they still need support?' It's a setup and it flattens the story. Success in a few iwi boardrooms does not always trickle down to every whānau struggling with rent in Māngere or Moerewa. Worse still, when handled carelessly, these metrics can reinforce the ceiling. They frame success as: 'That's a great Māori business,' instead of just, 'that's a great business.' As stated in the WEAll Aotearoa report released this week, 'too often the success of Māori businesses is conflated with the Māori economy, when it is more appropriately conceptualised as Māori businesses operating within a global capitalist economy.' But there are economic benefits to measuring this data, right? Progressive procurement policies, legislative support for indigenous businesses, etc. Yes – there are some real benefits, but they depend on how we measure. To truly deliver, data must be disaggregated – by region, by business type, and by iwi lineage – so we understand the diversity within Māori enterprise. Māori must be empowered to define what counts as success – both profit and wellbeing, GDP and cultural strength. To drive real change, we need public/private partnerships to fund business support, procurement pathways, and legislation shaped by Māori data. Measuring the Māori economy enables DEI strategies, justifies indigenous business support, fosters inclusive economic development, strengthens infrastructure, and reveals systemic gaps. But it only works when Māori are designing and owning the data narrative. The data has helped some of us unlock capital, attract co-investment, and push for equity in government policy. Measurement, if wielded wisely, can be a tool for mana motuhake.
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Rural economy is buoying Māori economy after Budget cuts to development funding
The first research, by Stats NZ, looked at 1450 Māori authorities and related businesses at the start of 2025. Like the rest of the economy, Māori businesses have suffered at the hands of this Government. The total number of filled jobs for Māori authorities was 11,870, down 170 jobs or 1.4% annually. The total value of earnings for Māori authority employees was $212 million, a decrease of $8.7m or 4%. This shows the reduction in hours occurring across the rest of the economy is also reaching Māori businesses. When examining the business sales data of Māori firms, the same problems observed across the wider economy are also present. Professional, scientific, technical, administrative and support services were down $18m or 13%. Meanwhile, primary industries were up $11m or 3% annually. The rural economy is supporting the Māori economy as much as primary industries' buoyancy is helping out anywhere else in Aotearoa. The second insight comes from ANZ's Te Tirohanga Whānui Report. That data confirms 2024 was a tough year for Māori businesses. However, it also confirms Māori businesses are 'performing better' than 'many of the country's largest listed companies'. Despite challenges, Māori businesses are performing better than many large companies, showing their resilience. Photo / Alan Gibson There is a resilience not seen in other parts of the economy. As ANZ notes, 'When the Māori economy grows, it strengthens the whole of the New Zealand economy.' Visit Whakatāne and see how Ngāti Awa has underwritten the local economy to the benefit of all. Given the increasing size of the Māori economy – its asset base having nearly doubled to $126 billion in 2023 – you'd think it would form a key part of the Government's economic agenda. But it's not mentioned once during the Minister of Finance's Budget speech. In the last Budget, $20m was cut from Māori economic development initiatives. The only new funding for the entirety of Vote Māori Development was $3m a year for Māori Wardens and the Māori Women's Welfare League. The Government's 'Going for Growth' economic development plan says the Māori economy is important – but that is it. There are no specific programmes to help it grow. There is nothing to help Māori businesses grow into new sectors or help capitalise on their intellectual property. In short, it is left alone. He Kai Kei Aku Ringa: the Māori-Crown Economic Growth Partnership – written initially in 2013 under National and revised in 2023 under Labour, was abandoned when the coalition took office. It looks increasingly likely that the economy is heading backwards again. The Reserve Bank is now forecasting that the economy declined 0.2% last quarter. You would think the Government would be pulling every lever to make sure there was new economic activity and new employment. But this is a Government that has a complete blind spot when it comes to anything Māori. Some $88m was cut in total from direct Māori funding at the last Budget, on top of $97m last year. There is an urgent need to change thinking. The Government is content with ever higher numbers of Māori being in prison, homeless or unemployed. That is not the 'growth, growth, growth' many were hoping for. It does nothing to support a unique and growing part of the New Zealand economy. Nothing to help enterprises and authorities that may be able to reach where other government actions have failed. It is time for a better plan – and one that recognises a remarkably simple fact. The scale of the opportunity in the Māori economy is not being grasped by the Government. We will have spent more on landlord tax relief over the next four years ($2.9b) than we have on the entirety of the Treaty settlement process to date ($2.8b). Budgets are about choices. Choices show values. The Government should value the Māori economy better. That way we all benefit.
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Voting on the pressing issues
As Dunedin prepares for the local body elections, voters have the opportunity to choose local politicians who align with their expectations of the future for Dunedin. While many issues are currently in the spotlight, such as the cost of living, flooding, and housing, these are often closely connected to climate change and sustainability — even if that link isn't always made explicit. There have been a number of reports that find an explicit relationship between the cost of living and climate change impacts. Earlier this year The Australia Institute released a report that found a direct connection between the rising cost of living and the climate crisis, now and into the future. The report identified that the particular sectors to be hit hardest will be insurance premiums, food prices and energy costs. And indeed the more the temperature rises, the worse conditions will get, that means that more weather events will increase insurance premiums and disrupt food production, pushing up costs further. However, much of today's public discourse relies on divisive sound bites that pit immediate concerns against longer-term global challenges such as climate change. This framing creates a false dichotomy. In reality, we can no longer afford to treat climate change as separate from the pressing issues we face — it is deeply interconnected with how we live, work, and make decisions on this planet. This is where I would listen carefully during the local body electioneering. For example, the adaptation report released this week from the Independent Reference Group on Climate Adaptation noted that we need a proactive approach to climate adaptation. The report concluded with three main points: There needs to be increased access to risk information and early planning because New Zealanders need clear, accessible information about natural hazard risks and planned responses to make informed decisions. Early understanding enables individuals, communities and businesses to reduce future costs through proactive planning and risk mitigation. There should be fair and targeted funding for risk reduction. A broad ''beneficiary pays'' principle should guide funding, where those who benefit most contribute more. It is suggested that central government should invest where national or Crown interests are at stake, and help support vulnerable communities with limited capacity to pay. People (and businesses) are going to need to take individual responsibility. People should understand and take responsibility for the risks they face, with property values and insurance costs reflecting changing climate risks. Long-term public buyouts should not be expected, though government should support those in hardship. Māori must be resourced and empowered to make their own local adaptation decisions. Consequently, considering the above recommendations and when thinking about local government actions in this space, consider: 1. How local government candidates prioritise making climate and natural hazard risk data accessible and understandable to the public. This includes supporting initiatives for open data, improved hazard mapping and clear communication strategies. How candidates commit to transparency and proactive public engagement on risk information — not just during emergencies, but in planning and development decisions. 2. How candidates explain how they intend to fund adaptation measures. The ''beneficiary pays'' principle suggests ratepayers, developers and beneficiaries of infrastructure should contribute, but it would be good to understand candidates' positions on the role of council advocacy for central government support, especially where community capacity is limited. Ask how candidates plan to balance fairness, fiscal responsibility and investment in resilience, especially for vulnerable areas. 3. How local leaders treat climate risk when discussing land-use decisions, property valuations and infrastructure planning. Ask for candidates to give their position on development in high-risk areas, managed retreat and the role of insurance and housing affordability in adaptation. Understand what might be the support shown for iwi/hapū leadership and resourcing for Māori-led adaptation. Voters should assess whether candidates recognise that long-term public buyouts are unsustainable and that adaptation will require behavioural, policy and market change. The coming local elections are a chance to assess whether candidates are ready to govern in an era where climate change is not a distant threat, but a defining consideration in local decision-making. Only by actively understanding the connections between climate change and the other key pressing issues can elected representatives on council begin to build a sustainable and resilient future for all people and businesses in our city. Sara Walton is a professor at the Otago Business School, University of Otago. Each week in this column writers addresses issues of sustainability.
