Happy to disagree - but I do like the style

I am scaring myself. Far to often recently I find myself smiling at the output of Maori Party members. Hone Harawira's speech in the opening debate was, how shall we say, 'a hum dinga'. It always lightens my mood to read an official manuscript (typically peppered with platitudes and generalisms) that is completely ruminative of the actual view of the speaker without pomp, ponce or ceremony.

Try this passage (the new way to politely let your Parliamentary colleagues that you think they 'may have acted with the best of intentions - but during the course of the expedicious carrying out of these official functions, may have inadvertently perverted the subtext of your initial purpose') - or as Hone puts it:

So - Mr Horomia, Mr Ririnui, Mr Okeroa, Ms Mahuta, Mr Samuels, Mr Hereora, Ms Mackey, Ms Beyer, Mr Jones, Mrs Pettis - I have to ask - did you actually know that your government had abandoned its commitment to Maori?

Did they tell you about it? Or did they just ignore you like they ignored you when they announced they were going to steal our foreshore and seabed?

Honestly guys - what exactly is the Labour Maori Caucus' response to these crippling statistics, and these on-going attacks on Maori?

Or are you saying that the Labour Maori Caucus has no plans to oppose this government's continued trampling of Maori rights?

It's enough that you tell yourselves you're right when your people are telling you otherwise - but how do you tell them that Labour is doing anything for them when you know that they ain't?

Guys - this isn't a personal attack on you. This is not an attack on your mana. Nor am I trying to belittle you in this house.

But in this House we are accountable for the positions we take.

Honest? Yes. Robust? Absolutely. 'Parliamentary'? I think so. Aggressive or confrontational? Absolutely not.

As I have said (on a number of occasions), I think the Maori Party is a good thing. I can't see myself voting for them - they don't represent my views. But the way they have represented thiers has been good form thus far.

(Disclaimer - elsewhere in his address he argues that removing reference to 'the principles of The Treaty of Waitangi constitutes a betrayal of sorts - on this point we are as far apart as an Amish Priest's and the Osboures families Friday night in....)