Chris Hipkins makes the case for putting more power in Māori providers’ hands

OPINION: Chris Hipkins’ argument for giving Māori providers more authority to make decisions on the frontline rests on a clear premise. Wellington can set national policy, while local providers are better placed to understand what their communities need.

In the Te Ao interview with Moana, Hipkins pointed to the COVID-19 response as an example of what can happen when government gives Māori providers more flexibility, funding and responsibility. He said providers were told what outcomes were needed, then given room to work out how best to achieve them.

This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.

Hipkins argued that lessons learned from pandemic-era care showed the same model could be used more widely across health and education.

There is evidence supporting that part of Hipkins’ case. A Ministry of Health monitoring report Ministry of Health monitoring report found Māori providers funded during the Delta and Omicron responses delivered more than double the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses to Māori compared with sites without targeted Māori funding.

The ministry also said providers identified flexible, high-trust commissioning as an important reason they were able to reach their communities effectively.

That does not mean services should simply be handed over with no oversight. Public money still requires goals, auditing and accountability. Different providers will have levels of capacity, and what works in one region may not translate neatly to another.

This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.

The more significant point is that devolution does not have to mean government walking away. It can mean government setting the outcome, funding it properly and allowing people with local relationships and knowledge to decide how the work is done.

Image: Chris Hipkins says Labour would not restore Te Aka Whai Ora, instead backing greater decision-making and direct funding for Māori health providers through existing structures such as Iwi Māori Partnership Boards. (Te Ao interview with Moana)

Hipkins also made clear he is not proposing to restore Te Aka Whai Ora. Instead, he pointed to Iwi Māori Partnership Boards and direct funding of Māori health providers as mechanisms that could carry more responsibility. That distinction matters because it shifts the debate away from whether national structure should return and towards how much decision-making power sits closer to communities.

Labour’s 2026 policy platform includes Māori-led training delivered through marae, iwi trusts and Māori providers, suggesting the same approach is being applied beyond health.

The real test is measurable outcomes. If devolved funding produces better access, stronger engagement and better results, it becomes a model that can be tested against evidence.

Hipkins’ interview put the central question plainly: who is best placed to deliver services that work?

Help keep independent stories going

thisquality is an independent New Zealand platform committed to publishing engaging stories that remain free to read.

This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.

Every contribution helps us continue producing independent coverage and strengthens our place within New Zealand’s media landscape.

Advertisement

Advertisement Why this ad? Advertising revenue keeps articles free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

Advertisement