Waatea News: Māori Radio Station

North Shore Hospital emergency department staff say chronic understaffing and unprecedented overcrowding have pushed the service beyond breaking point, with NZNO delegate Jean Classey warning patients and exhausted health workers are being placed at unacceptable risk.

More than 100 nurses, healthcare assistants and other emergency department staff have taken the extraordinary step of declaring their own state of emergency, writing directly to Health New Zealand chief executive Dr Dale Bramley demanding urgent intervention.

The picture painted by frontline staff is confronting.

North Shore’s ED has reportedly operated at up to 300 percent capacity, patients have been treated in corridors, triage waits have stretched to 90 minutes and some people have remained in the emergency department for more than 50 hours waiting for a hospital bed.

For Classey, a charge nurse and NZNO delegate, the crisis is no longer simply about an uncomfortable winter surge.

It is about whether nurses have enough people, space and resources to safely care for everyone arriving through the doors.

The consequences of overcrowding are being experienced by some of the hospital’s most vulnerable patients.

Nurses have described elderly people being lined up in corridors without adequate privacy, while incontinent patients have sometimes remained in wet or soiled beds until staff can find somewhere suitable to provide care.

The nurses’ concerns also include delays to urgent heart scans, patients missing essential medications and staff attempting to monitor large numbers of people simultaneously across an overcrowded department.

North Shore and Waitākere hospitals together recorded almost 14,000 emergency department presentations during July, with Health NZ describing it as their busiest winter on record.

But staff reject any suggestion that winter demand alone explains the crisis.

Their letter argues the pressure was predictable and insufficient staffing has left the hospital poorly equipped to respond.

At the centre of the dispute is staffing.

North Shore ED nurses say Health NZ had identified the need for 25 additional nursing full-time equivalents, but recruitment has fallen well short of that figure.

Health NZ has since announced recruitment for 50 additional nurses across North Shore and Waitākere hospitals, including nine specifically for the North Shore emergency department.

A further centralised team of 10 nurses and 14 healthcare assistants is intended to provide additional flexibility across the hospitals during surges and unplanned staff absences.

North Shore ED staff say that response does not address the scale of the shortage they are experiencing.

They continue to seek the additional 25 nursing FTE they say are necessary to meet demand and provide safer care.

Behind the numbers is an increasingly serious workforce issue.

Emergency nurses are simultaneously treating their allocated patients, watching people waiting in corridors and waiting rooms, arranging assessments and treatments and responding to new emergencies arriving through the doors.

Experienced staff have described conditions as among the worst they have encountered during decades in nursing.

That raises concerns not only about immediate patient safety but about the longer-term sustainability of the workforce.

If experienced nurses become exhausted, leave emergency medicine or quit the profession entirely, already stretched departments face an even deeper staffing problem.

The crisis also raises a more fundamental question about what patients should reasonably expect when they enter a New Zealand public hospital.

Emergency departments will always prioritise the most critically ill patients.

But treating elderly people in crowded corridors, struggling to provide privacy and leaving patients waiting many hours for appropriate hospital beds are not simply questions of efficiency.

They are questions of dignity.

For Māori and Pacific whānau, who already experience significant health inequities and barriers accessing healthcare, confidence that the public system will be there when it is urgently needed is particularly important.

An overwhelmed emergency department risks adding another layer of difficulty to an already unequal health landscape.

Health NZ says its winter planning has helped treat more people in the community and improve patient flow through hospitals, but acknowledges demand has been substantially higher than in previous years.

The nurses’ decision to write directly to the chief executive shows how far frontline concern has escalated.

This is no longer an internal staffing disagreement.

More than 100 health workers have collectively put their names behind a warning that they believe current conditions threaten both patients and staff.

For Jean Classey and her colleagues, the immediate demand is straightforward: North Shore Hospital needs enough nurses to safely care for the people arriving at its emergency department.

The bigger question now sits with Health NZ and the Government.

When frontline health workers declare their own emergency inside one of the country’s major hospitals, how bad do conditions have to become before emergency staffing itself is treated as an emergency?

#JeanClassey #NZNO #NorthShoreHospital #EmergencyDepartment #EDCrisis #HealthNZ #TeWhatuOra #Nurses #NursingShortage #NurseStaffing #HospitalOvercrowding #PatientSafety #HealthWorkforce #Healthcare #PublicHealth #HealthCrisis #Waitemata #Auckland #TamakiMakaurau #Hauora #HauoraMaori #MaoriHealth #Whanau #HealthEquity #FrontlineWorkers #WinterHealth #NZHealth #Aotearoa #MaoriNews #HealthNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #hauora: “We’re at War”: North Shore Nurses Declare State of Emergency as ED Hits 300% Capacity appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

Ngāti Kahungunu Chairman Bayden Barber says improving the health of his people is fundamental to the future strength of the iwi, as work continues on an independent Kahungunu Health Authority designed to put whānau, tikanga and rangatiratanga at the centre of healthcare.

For an iwi population approaching 100,000 people, health is not simply another government service. Barber sees it as fundamental to whether Ngāti Kahungunu whānau can thrive, participate in their communities and realise the iwi’s ambitions for future generations.

Ngāti Kahungunu has a particularly young population, with an average age of around 26, but Barber says the iwi remains disproportionately represented in major health statistics including diabetes, asthma, cardiovascular disease and cancer.

Those inequities are helping drive one of the iwi’s most ambitious initiatives — the development of its own independent Kahungunu Health Authority.

Barber has placed particular emphasis on access to primary healthcare.

For whānau, the local doctor is often the first point of contact with the health system. If appointments are unaffordable, unavailable or culturally unsafe, people can delay seeking treatment until their conditions become considerably more serious.

Ngāti Kahungunu says effective general practice therefore needs to be both accessible and affordable, while recognising Kahungunu values and aspirations for wellbeing.

That means cultural competence cannot simply be an optional addition to healthcare.

The iwi wants services designed around the realities of the people who use them.

The proposed Kahungunu Health Authority represents an attempt to fundamentally change that relationship.

Ngāti Kahungunu says around half of its people are currently served by non-Māori providers, and the new model is intended to shift greater authority from a predominantly government-led system towards iwi self-determination in health.

The authority is being developed alongside Hauora Māori providers, regional Taiwhenua, Post-Settlement Governance Entities and the Tihei Takitimu Iwi Māori Partnership Board.

Importantly, it is not intended to replace Māori health organisations already working within the public system.

Instead, the Kahungunu Health Authority would operate independently outside it, providing greater freedom to develop new models of care, establish partnerships and mobilise iwi resources.

The kaupapa began taking shape publicly in 2025 following engagement with whānau, hapū and iwi through the wider Kahungunu 2050 strategy.

The concerns coming back from whānau were broad.

Kaumātua were experiencing loneliness and social isolation. Rangatahi were struggling with mental health. Other whānau were finding it increasingly difficult to access affordable healthcare when they needed it.

The response is an attempt to build something that does not simply treat illness after it appears.

The emerging vision includes stronger access to affordable healthcare, closer relationships between providers and services grounded in Kahungunu tikanga, kawa and values. Whānau feedback has also identified priorities including rongoā, te reo, culturally grounded care, health education and empowerment.

Central to the next stage is ensuring the new authority is not simply designed by institutions and presented to the community afterwards.

A working group of 25 whānau members who came forward through the wānanga process is helping shape the early design.

The intention is to ensure the structure reflects the aspirations and experiences of those it is ultimately supposed to serve.

Work is also progressing on governance arrangements that bring together expertise from health providers, iwi organisations and PSGEs.

For Barber, the kaupapa raises a bigger question about how iwi development should be measured.

Economic assets, settlements and commercial growth matter.

But prosperity means considerably less if whānau continue dying younger, living with preventable disease or struggling to access basic healthcare.

That makes health an investment in the future human capital of Ngāti Kahungunu as much as a response to current inequities.

A healthier generation of rangatahi is better positioned to learn, work, lead, raise whānau and contribute to the economic, cultural and social strength of the iwi.

And healthier kaumātua are able to continue passing whakapapa, mātauranga and tikanga between generations.

The Kahungunu Health Authority is therefore about more than creating another organisation.

It represents an attempt to test what happens when iwi has greater freedom to shape healthcare around its own population, values and aspirations while continuing to hold the public health system accountable for its responsibilities to Māori.

For Ngāti Kahungunu, the argument is that decades of persistent health inequity demonstrate the status quo has not delivered enough.

If iwi development is ultimately about ensuring future generations flourish, then hauora cannot sit on the sidelines. It has to be at the centre.

And for Bayden Barber, that means Ngāti Kahungunu taking a greater role in determining what good health looks like — for its whānau, across its rohe, and on its own terms.

#BaydenBarber #NgatiKahungunu #KahungunuHealthAuthority #TeTokaTuMoana #HauoraMaori #MaoriHealth #WhanauOra #Rangatiratanga #TinoRangatiratanga #ManaMotuhake #PrimaryCare #HealthEquity #HealthInequities #MaoriHealthProviders #TiheiTakitimu #HawkesBay #TeMatauAMaui #Whanau #Rangatahi #Kaumatua #TikangaMaori #RongoaMaori #TeReoMaori #IwiDevelopment #KaupapaMaori #MaoriLeadership #Aotearoa #RegionalNews #MaoriNews #HealthNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #hauora: Health Is the Foundation: Bayden Barber Pushes for Kahungunu-Led Future for Whānau appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

Is banning young people from social media an act of protection — or does it cross the line into paternalism? That question is emerging as one of the central issues in the debate over proposals to prevent children under 16 from accessing social media.

There is little disagreement that online harm is real.

Māori whānau, parents, educators and health professionals have seen the consequences of cyberbullying, harmful content, misinformation, predatory behaviour and digital platforms designed to keep young people scrolling.

But the growing political push for an age-based ban raises another question: should government decide that no young person under 16 can access social media, or should the focus instead be on making the platforms themselves safer?

That distinction matters.

Supporters of restrictions argue children need stronger protection from platforms whose algorithms can repeatedly expose them to harmful or inappropriate material.

Age limits provide an apparently straightforward response: if children cannot access the platforms, they cannot be exposed to the risks.

But critics argue the reality of the internet is considerably more complicated.

A blanket ban could restrict access without addressing the design of the platforms, the behaviour of adults online or the algorithms determining what young people see.

Waatea has previously examined warnings from legal experts that New Zealand has an opportunity to develop meaningful platform accountability, rather than relying primarily on excluding children from social media.

For rangatahi Māori, social media is not simply entertainment.

Digital platforms can provide spaces to learn and use te reo Māori, connect with whakapapa, participate in kapa haka and kaupapa Māori communities, access information and maintain relationships with whānau living elsewhere.

That does not erase the risks.

But it means policymakers need to consider what might also be lost if access is restricted.

For some rangatahi, particularly those geographically separated from iwi, hapū or wider whānau, online communities can strengthen rather than diminish connection.

The challenge is therefore finding a way to protect tamariki without assuming government automatically knows what every young person and whānau needs.

One of the strongest alternatives is shifting responsibility towards the technology companies.

Instead of asking only whether a 14-year-old should be permitted onto a platform, policymakers could ask why platforms are permitted to recommend harmful material to children in the first place.

That opens a much wider regulatory conversation.

Should algorithms serving young users face stronger rules?

Should platforms be required to demonstrate how their recommendation systems operate?

Should harmful content be more rapidly removed?

Should companies face greater responsibility when their systems repeatedly push dangerous material towards children?

And should laws targeting adults who groom, exploit or prey on children online be strengthened?

Those approaches place responsibility on both perpetrators and enormously powerful technology companies rather than primarily on rangatahi.

Age restrictions create another dilemma: how does a platform prove somebody is 16?

Effective age verification can require users to provide additional information about themselves.

That potentially creates a trade-off between online safety and privacy, particularly if millions of adults also need to establish their age before accessing services.

The policy debate therefore cannot stop at whether an age limit sounds attractive.

It must consider how verification works, what information is collected, who holds it, how securely it is stored and what happens when systems inevitably make mistakes.

There is also a strong argument for substantially greater investment in digital literacy and online-safety education.

Rangatahi need the skills to recognise grooming, scams, manipulation, misinformation and dangerous online behaviour.

Parents and whānau need practical information about changing platforms, privacy settings and emerging online risks.

Schools and kura need resources to teach digital citizenship in a world where artificial intelligence is making it increasingly difficult to distinguish authentic material from manipulated content.

A law may establish a boundary.

Education can help young people understand what to do when they inevitably encounter risks beyond it.

Perhaps one of the most important questions is whether young people themselves are being adequately heard.

Policies designed for rangatahi should not automatically be designed without rangatahi.

For Māori, that also means recognising the role of whānau and avoiding a debate framed solely around a relationship between the individual child and the state.

Protecting tamariki is a legitimate responsibility.

But protection does not necessarily require removing agency.

The debate therefore presents political parties with a choice considerably more complex than simply being for or against social media.

The real challenge is deciding where responsibility should sit.

With children?

With their parents and whānau?

With government?

Or with multinational technology companies whose platforms, algorithms and commercial models shape the online environment in which young people participate?

There may ultimately be a role for all four.

But an under-16 ban risks becoming an easy political answer to a much harder technological and social problem if it is not accompanied by meaningful regulation, enforcement and education.

Protecting rangatahi online should be the objective. The election debate now needs to determine whether banning them from the digital world achieves that — or whether Aotearoa should instead demand that the digital world becomes safer for them.

#SocialMediaBan #Under16SocialMediaBan #Rangatahi #RangatahiMaori #Tamariki #TamarikiMaori #Whanau #OnlineSafety #DigitalSafety #OnlineHarm #CyberSafety #PlatformAccountability #Algorithms #ArtificialIntelligence #AI #DigitalLiteracy #Privacy #AgeVerification #Cyberbullying #OnlineGrooming #TeReoMaori #Whakapapa #ManaMotuhake #Election2026 #NZElection2026 #NZPolitics #MaoriPolitics #Aotearoa #MaoriNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #socialmedia: Protecting Tamariki or Policing Them? Under-16 Social Media Ban Sparks Bigger Debate appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

A catastrophic flash flood has devastated communities along the Nepal-Tibet border, killing at least 98 people and leaving hundreds missing after a torrent of water, mud and rock swept away villages, roads, bridges and power infrastructure.

The scale of the disaster has escalated rapidly since the first reports emerged on Wednesday, with Nepalese authorities confirming at least 95 deaths, while Chinese authorities have reported another three deaths across the border in Tibet.

Hundreds of people remain unaccounted for, triggering a major international search and rescue operation across the Himalayan region.

Nepalese officials say at least 384 tourists and travellers have been reported missing, including hundreds of international visitors.

Authorities say the missing include travellers from countries including India, the United Kingdom and the United States, while South Korea has confirmed eight of its nationals working on a hydropower project are also missing.

Across the border, Chinese authorities say 265 people remain missing in Tibet’s Gyirong county, where the disaster has also destroyed roads and disrupted electricity and communications.

The full death toll remains uncertain as rescuers struggle to reach isolated communities.

The flood struck with extraordinary force through mountain valleys, sending enormous volumes of muddy water and debris downstream.

Homes, schools, bridges, highways and infrastructure projects have been destroyed, with reports of entire settlements being swept away.

The mountainous Rasuwa district, home to around 50,000 people, is among the worst affected areas.

Conditions have made rescue operations extremely difficult, with floodwaters preventing helicopters from landing in some communities including Syapru Besi and Timure.

Residents along the Bhote Koshi River have been told to move to higher ground amid continuing fears of further flooding.

Nepal has asked both India and China for assistance with the rescue operation.

The exact sequence of events remains under investigation, but emerging evidence suggests this was not a conventional rain-driven flash flood.

Climate and disaster specialists are investigating whether an ice-and-rock avalanche from a glacier crashed into the Lhende Khola river system, temporarily blocking water before unleashing a sudden destructive surge downstream.

Satellite analysis has also pointed towards a landslide of snow and rock triggering the debris-filled flood near the Nepal-China border.

That could help explain why some communities were caught by surprise despite there being no corresponding extreme rainfall immediately before the disaster.

Scientists and authorities are continuing to investigate the cause.

The destruction is also having major consequences for Nepal’s electricity system.

The Nepal Electricity Authority estimates around 430 megawatts of electricity generation capacity has been damaged, including hydropower and solar infrastructure.

Production, transmission and distribution facilities have all been affected, causing electricity disruptions.

Roads and bridges have also disappeared, potentially leaving some isolated communities difficult to reach for an extended period.

The emergency is now extending downstream.

Authorities in the northern Indian state of Bihar have begun evacuating people from six districts amid concerns rising waters could move from Nepal into India.

Thousands have already been moved as authorities prepare communities along vulnerable river systems.

The Bhote Koshi flows into Nepal’s Trishuli River before eventually reaching India as the Gandak River, connecting the disaster across national borders.

The disaster again highlights the extreme vulnerability of communities living beneath the glaciers and steep valleys of the Himalayas.

The same Bhote Koshi river system experienced a deadly flood last year that killed nine people, left 24 missing and destroyed the Friendship Bridge connecting Nepal and China.

That event was linked to the sudden draining of a glacial lake in Tibet.

Scientists have repeatedly warned that climate change is altering glaciers and increasing environmental risks across the Himalayan region, while extreme weather events are becoming more intense across parts of South Asia.

But determining exactly how climate factors contributed to this particular disaster will require further scientific investigation.

Nepal’s military has deployed helicopters and disaster-response personnel, while medical teams, the Red Cross and other emergency organisations have joined the response.

China has also mobilised hundreds of personnel and rescue vehicles on its side of the border.

For now, the priority is finding those still missing.

With roads destroyed, communities isolated and hundreds of people still unaccounted for, authorities fear the death toll could continue to rise.

For communities along the rivers of the Himalayas, Wednesday’s disaster arrived with devastating speed — turning rivers into torrents, sweeping away generations of homes and leaving families across several countries waiting for news of their missing loved ones.

#Nepal #NepalFloods #Tibet #FlashFloods #Himalayas #Rasuwa #BhoteKoshi #TrishuliRiver #Flooding #NaturalDisaster #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #Glaciers #GlacialFlood #ExtremeWeather #DisasterResponse #SearchAndRescue #India #China #SouthAsia #Bihar #ClimateResilience #InternationalNews #WorldNews #Aotearoa #MāoriNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #Disaster in the Himalayas: At Least 98 Dead, Hundreds Missing as Floods Tear Through Nepal and Tibet appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

Labour MP Willie Jackson is heading into the General Election facing a fundamental question for Māori voters: after three years of fierce political debate over Treaty rights, Māori representation and the Waitangi Tribunal, what would a Labour Government actually do differently if returned to power?

The future of Te Tiriti o Waitangi is emerging as a defining issue for Māori voters as the election campaign gathers pace, with Labour under pressure to clearly articulate not only what it opposes in the Coalition Government’s agenda, but what it would restore, strengthen or reform.

For Jackson, a former Māori Development Minister and one of Labour’s most prominent Māori voices, the challenge is to explain what Labour’s next chapter in Crown-Māori relations would look like.

That includes the future of the Waitangi Tribunal, the protection of Treaty rights, the place of Māori decision-making within government and whether Labour believes further constitutional change is required.

The current parliamentary term has seen Te Tiriti pushed firmly into the centre of national politics.

Debates over Treaty principles, co-governance, Māori wards, public services, resource management and the use of tikanga and Treaty clauses in legislation have created a markedly different political environment.

For Labour, opposing changes it believes undermine Māori rights provides only part of the answer.

The election campaign requires the party to explain what it would do with the machinery of government if voters returned it to office.

Would controversial changes made during the current term be reversed?

Would previous arrangements be restored?

And would Labour go further in strengthening the Crown’s obligations under Te Tiriti?

The future role of the Waitangi Tribunal is particularly important.

For generations, the Tribunal has provided Māori with a mechanism to investigate claims that Crown actions or policies have breached the principles of Te Tiriti.

Its inquiries have helped expose historical grievances, shaped Treaty settlements and increasingly examined contemporary Crown policy.

But its role has also become politically contested.

That leaves Labour needing to articulate whether it sees the Tribunal primarily as a mechanism for resolving historical grievances or as an enduring institution with an important role scrutinising contemporary government decisions.

For Māori voters, the distinction matters.

Historical settlements may address grievances of the past, but debates over freshwater, health, housing, whenua, environmental policy and public services continue to generate new questions about Crown obligations today.

Labour also faces a wider challenge.

Returning to government would not automatically mean returning Aotearoa to the policy settings that existed before 2023.

The political environment has changed.

Questions about the constitutional position of Te Tiriti, Māori representation and the balance between Crown authority and rangatiratanga have become more prominent.

That creates an opportunity for Labour to explain whether it believes the next phase of Crown-Māori relations should involve simply rebuilding previous policies or pursuing a more ambitious programme.

That could include questions around co-governance, Māori participation in public decision-making, the status of Treaty clauses and how rangatiratanga should operate alongside kāwanatanga in modern Aotearoa.

Jackson has long argued for Māori participation and representation within mainstream political power.

Election 2026 provides a test of how that translates into policy.

Māori voters will be looking beyond broad commitments to Te Tiriti and asking for specifics.

What would Labour protect?

What would it repeal?

What would it restore?

What new policies would it introduce?

And which commitments would Labour be prepared to defend when they become politically difficult?

Those questions matter because Treaty policy cannot simply be symbolic.

Government decisions influence whenua, wai, hauora, housing, education, te reo Māori, environmental management and the ability of iwi and hapū to participate in decisions affecting their communities.

Regardless of which parties form the next Government, the wider constitutional debate is unlikely to disappear after polling day.

The relationship between kāwanatanga and tino rangatiratanga remains unresolved in many areas of public policy.

Successive governments have approached that relationship differently, while Tribunal findings, court decisions, Treaty settlements and political reforms have continued to shape its practical meaning.

Labour therefore enters the campaign needing to explain where it believes that journey should lead.

For Jackson, the argument cannot simply be that Labour offers a safer home for Māori interests than the current Coalition.

The stronger test is whether Labour can describe a compelling destination of its own.

As voters prepare to make that decision, Te Tiriti is once again about more than history.

It is about the future architecture of Aotearoa.

It is about who participates in decisions, how Crown power is exercised and whether commitments made between Māori and the Crown remain meaningful when governments change.

For Willie Jackson and Labour, Election 2026 therefore presents a straightforward but significant challenge:

If Labour believes the Crown’s relationship with Māori has moved in the wrong direction, exactly where would it take that relationship next?

And perhaps most importantly for Māori voters:

Would a change of government simply stop the retreat — or begin a new period of progress for Te Tiriti, rangatiratanga and the institutions established to hold the Crown to account?

#WillieJackson #Labour #NZLabour #Election2026 #NZElection2026 #TeTiriti #TeTiritiOWaitangi #WaitangiTribunal #TreatyOfWaitangi #TreatyRights #CrownObligations #TinoRangatiratanga #Kawanatanga #ManaMotuhake #MaoriPolitics #MaoriVote #MaoriElectorates #ConstitutionalReform #CoGovernance #MaoriRepresentation #Iwi #Hapu #Whenua #Wai #HauoraMaori #TeReoMaori #MaoriPolicy #Parliament #NZPolitics #Aotearoa #MaoriNews #ElectionNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #Election2026: Willie Jackson Faces the Big Question — What Would Labour Do Differently on Te Tiriti? appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

New Zealand has an opportunity to move beyond simply locking under-16s out of social media and instead confront the technology companies, algorithms and platform designs driving online harm, with legal scholar Dr Jennifer Smith warning an age ban risks becoming a symbolic response to a much more complicated problem.

Dr Jennifer Smith from the University of Canterbury, who specialises in technology, regulation and online harms, says the current political debate provides Aotearoa with a rare opportunity to develop meaningful platform accountability.

The warning comes as National advances its Online Safety (Minimum Age and Child Safety Risk Assessment) Bill, which would require platforms including Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and Facebook to take reasonable steps to prevent children under 16 from holding accounts. Companies failing to meet their obligations could face penalties of up to 10 percent of global revenue.

But Smith says the central policy question should be bigger than simply determining the age at which someone can open an account.

Supporters of the ban point to growing concern about addictive platform design, harmful content, excessive screen time and the impact social media can have on sleep, education and wellbeing.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon says around one in three New Zealanders aged 13 to 17 spends at least five hours a day on social media.

But an age threshold does not address many of the underlying features creating those risks.

Algorithms can continue promoting harmful or extreme content.

Platforms can continue designing products around engagement and keeping users online.

Online predators do not disappear.

Cyberbullying does not end.

And a young person does not suddenly become immune to harmful design on their 16th birthday.

For Smith, that strengthens the case for regulation focused on how platforms operate, rather than relying predominantly on restricting who can access them.

Enforcement is one of the biggest challenges.

National’s legislation would put responsibility on technology companies rather than children or their parents. Age-checking options could include existing account information, formal identification, digital identity services and facial age estimation.

But verifying whether somebody is 15 or 16 potentially means collecting or analysing information from everyone — including adults.

That creates difficult questions around privacy, personal data, facial analysis and digital identification.

There is also the practical reality that rangatahi are often highly capable of navigating technology.

Research examining Australia’s under-16 regime found young participants were actively identifying and exploiting weaknesses in platform access controls, illustrating the difficulty of attempting to solve broader social and governance problems through technological age gates alone.

The issue has also exposed an extraordinary division within the Coalition.

Both ACT and New Zealand First oppose National’s proposal, despite sitting alongside National in Government.

ACT argues the ban will either be sufficiently intrusive to affect adults or too weak to make a meaningful difference, while New Zealand First has raised concerns about enforcement, digital identification and the Australian experience.

Labour has now moved in the other direction.

Labour leader Chris Hipkins confirmed yesterday that his caucus would support the legislation at first reading, while arguing it requires substantial improvement. Labour technology spokesperson Reuben Davidson has specifically called for greater emphasis on regulation and safety-by-design rather than concentrating overwhelmingly on age restrictions.

That means there is potentially significant cross-party support for stronger online safety regulation — even if politicians disagree over what that regulation should look like.

That broader regulatory approach could fundamentally change the conversation.

Instead of asking only whether a 14-year-old should be permitted on a platform, policymakers could ask whether platforms should be permitted to deploy particular design features to children in the first place.

Should algorithms be allowed to relentlessly recommend harmful material?

Should platforms have stronger duties to detect adults attempting to exploit children?

Should default privacy settings for rangatahi be significantly stronger?

Should companies have to demonstrate that products used by children have been designed with safety built in from the beginning?

And should regulators have sufficient powers to investigate platforms rather than relying on companies to police themselves?

National’s legislation does contain a broader child safety risk-assessment framework and a proposed regulator, meaning the debate does not have to be reduced entirely to the under-16 prohibition.

There is another important issue.

Young people themselves need to be involved in designing the rules.

Rangatahi use social platforms for considerably more than scrolling through videos.

They communicate with friends and whānau, access information, participate in communities, express identity and creativity and sometimes find support that may not be readily available offline.

Removing access therefore carries consequences as well as potential benefits.

Effective online safety policy needs to recognise both realities: social media can cause serious harm, and digital participation can also provide genuine connection and value.

For Smith, New Zealand’s opportunity is to avoid mistaking a politically simple solution for a comprehensive one.

There is widespread agreement that children deserve greater protection online.

The harder argument is about how to achieve it.

An under-16 ban provides a clear line politicians can point to.

Platform accountability requires something more difficult — regulating enormously powerful multinational technology companies, scrutinising algorithms, enforcing privacy protections and requiring safety to be built into digital products.

But that may also be where the greater opportunity lies.

The question confronting Aotearoa is not simply whether we can keep every 15-year-old off Instagram or TikTok.

It is whether we can build an online environment where technology companies are legally responsible for making their platforms safer in the first place.

#JenniferSmith #SocialMediaBan #Under16SocialMediaBan #OnlineSafety #OnlineHarms #PlatformAccountability #BigTech #SocialMedia #Rangatahi #Tamariki #ChildSafety #DigitalSafety #Algorithms #AlgorithmicHarm #AgeVerification #DigitalID #Privacy #SafetyByDesign #TechnologyLaw #TechRegulation #CyberSafety #MentalHealth #NationalParty #Labour #NZFirst #ACTParty #ChristopherLuxon #Election2026 #NZPolitics #UniversityOfCanterbury #Aotearoa #MaoriNews #TechnologyNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #socialmedia: Ban the Kids or Regulate the Platforms? Legal Expert Says NZ Has a Rare Chance to Get Online Safety Right appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

Years of work to restore two of Aotearoa’s most pressured freshwater systems could be undermined by Government planning changes, with Forest & Bird warning weakened pollution controls risk leaving the Waikato and Manawatū-Whanganui river systems carrying the environmental cost for years to come.

Forest & Bird Regional Conservation Manager for Taranaki and Waikato Elvisa van der Leden says proposed changes affecting freshwater planning threaten hard-won environmental protections designed to reduce pollution and improve the health of rivers.

At the centre of the controversy are Plan Change 1 in Waikato and Plan Change 2 in the Horizons region, both developed to tackle serious freshwater quality challenges.

Forest & Bird says weakening key elements of those plans during the transition to the Government’s replacement resource management system risks slowing progress just when communities should be seeing restoration accelerate.

The Waikato process has involved more than 14 years of work, bringing together communities, iwi, farmers, councils, industry and environmental interests to establish a pathway towards improving the Waikato and Waipā rivers.

Forest & Bird says more than $30 million of ratepayer money has already been spent through the PC1 process.

Van der Leden says moving to a new planning system should involve a carefully managed transition rather than effectively winding environmental protections backwards.

The concern is that years spent negotiating difficult compromises could be undermined before many of the anticipated improvements have had time to take effect.

The organisation is particularly concerned about proposals affecting prescribed nitrogen reductions under Plan Change 2 in Manawatū-Whanganui.

Excess nitrogen entering waterways can fuel algal blooms, degrade freshwater habitats and contribute to declining ecological health.

The consequences extend beyond environmental measurements.

Poor water quality affects whether communities can safely swim, whether native freshwater species can thrive and whether whānau can gather mahinga kai from waterways with confidence.

Forest & Bird argues replacing clear nitrogen reduction requirements with broader expectations of environmental improvement risks weakening accountability.

Without measurable and enforceable limits, it becomes harder to determine who is responsible for reducing pollution and whether sufficient progress is actually being made.

For the Waikato, freshwater restoration also carries particular significance for Māori.

The health and wellbeing of the Waikato River is central to Waikato-Tainui, and restoration of the awa sits within a wider framework of Treaty settlement commitments and Te Ture Whaimana.

That means the debate is not simply about environmental regulation or farming compliance.

It also concerns whakapapa, kaitiakitanga, mahinga kai and responsibilities to future generations.

If environmental improvements are delayed, mokopuna ultimately inherit that delay.

The Government has argued its wider resource management reforms are intended to reduce unnecessary regulation and provide greater certainty for landowners and productive sectors.

Farmers have also raised concerns about the cost and complexity of freshwater regulation.

Forest & Bird’s position is that those issues can be addressed without lowering the environmental outcomes communities have spent years working towards.

That distinction is important.

Providing farmers with workable pathways to meet environmental standards is different from weakening the standards themselves.

The challenge is creating rules that are practical enough to implement while remaining strong enough to deliver measurable improvements in water quality.

Van der Leden says the move towards a new planning system should not become an opportunity to abandon progress already achieved under existing regional plans.

Forest & Bird wants future planning arrangements to at least maintain the environmental outcomes sought through PC1 and PC2.

The organisation is also concerned that changes in Waikato and Manawatū-Whanganui could establish a precedent for freshwater protections elsewhere in Aotearoa.

That makes the debate considerably bigger than two regional plans.

It becomes a test of whether reforming the Resource Management Act means changing how environmental outcomes are achieved — or reducing the outcomes themselves.

Ultimately, freshwater policy can be measured against something considerably simpler than planning legislation.

Are the rivers getting healthier?

Can tamariki swim in them?

Can whānau gather kai?

Are native species recovering?

Is drinking water protected?

And will the next generation inherit waterways in better condition than the generation before them?

Forest & Bird says those outcomes must remain the bottom line regardless of what planning system Parliament creates.

After more than a decade of negotiation, millions of dollars of public investment and years of community effort, the concern is that rewriting the rules now could make river restoration easier to postpone — but it won’t make the pollution disappear.

#ElvisaVanDerLeden #ForestAndBird #Freshwater #FreshwaterProtection #WaikatoRiver #WaipaRiver #ManawatuRiver #Whanganui #PlanChange1 #PC1 #PlanChange2 #PC2 #WaterQuality #NitrogenPollution #RiverRestoration #CleanWater #MahingaKai #WaikatoTainui #TeTureWhaimana #TeTaiao #Kaitiakitanga #Whakapapa #Wai #Mokopuna #EnvironmentalProtection #RMAReform #FarmingNZ #ClimateAndEnvironment #Aotearoa #MaoriNews #EnvironmentNews #RegionalNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #nature: Freshwater Protections at Risk: Forest & Bird Warns River Recovery Could Be Pushed Back Years appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

Insurance is supposed to provide protection when disaster strikes, but new research is examining why many Māori remain underserved by the insurance sector despite recognising the importance of protecting whānau, whenua and community assets.

Financial Markets Authority Strategic Adviser Māori Hannah Chapman, who contributed to the research, says understanding the gap requires looking beyond whether Māori simply choose to purchase insurance.

The bigger issue is whether insurance products, providers and systems are designed around the realities of Māori lives, assets and communities.

For many whānau, insurance is understood as an important tool for protecting what matters. But affordability, accessibility, trust and whether conventional insurance products reflect Māori circumstances can all influence whether that protection is actually available.

Insurance provides households with a financial buffer when the unexpected happens.

A house fire, flood, vehicle accident, serious illness or natural disaster can create costs that are impossible for many whānau to absorb without some form of financial protection.

That importance is becoming even greater as Aotearoa experiences increasingly severe weather events and rising costs associated with repairing and replacing damaged property.

But recognising the value of insurance does not automatically mean people can afford it.

When household budgets are already stretched by housing, kai, electricity and transport, insurance premiums can become another expense competing for limited income.

The danger is that those least able to absorb a major financial shock can also be those most likely to be left without sufficient cover.

There is also a distinctly Māori dimension to the insurance challenge.

Whenua Māori, collectively owned assets, marae and other community taonga do not necessarily fit neatly into insurance systems developed primarily around individually owned homes and conventional property structures.

The value of a marae, for example, cannot simply be measured by the replacement cost of its buildings.

It carries whakapapa, history, mātauranga and generations of connection.

Similarly, whenua can carry cultural and collective significance far beyond its conventional market valuation.

That raises questions about whether mainstream financial products adequately recognise what Māori are actually trying to protect.

The relationship between Māori and financial institutions also matters.

Insurance can be complex.

Policies contain exclusions, excesses, definitions and conditions that can be difficult to understand until somebody actually needs to make a claim.

For providers, building stronger relationships with Māori therefore requires more than translating brochures or marketing existing products differently.

It means understanding whānau aspirations, listening to communities and designing services that are accessible, transparent and culturally responsive.

Financial capability is part of the equation, but so too is whether the financial system itself is capable of responding differently.

The insurance gap could become increasingly important as climate change alters the risk profile of communities across Aotearoa.

Flooding, coastal erosion, storms and other natural hazards are already raising difficult questions about where insurance will remain available and affordable.

For Māori communities with deep whakapapa connections to coastal and rural whenua, simply relocating away from risk is not necessarily a straightforward solution.

Whenua is not interchangeable.

That means conversations about insurance increasingly intersect with climate adaptation, housing, infrastructure, whenua and intergenerational resilience.

If premiums rise beyond what households can afford — or insurers retreat from particularly vulnerable locations — communities could face a growing protection gap precisely when climate risks are increasing.

The FMA research provides an opportunity to think about insurance through a wider lens.

The objective is not simply selling more policies.

It is understanding whether Māori have access to appropriate tools for protecting whānau and collectively held assets when something goes wrong.

That requires the insurance industry, regulators and communities to examine affordability, product design, accessibility, communication and trust.

For Hannah Chapman, the research contributes to a bigger conversation about whether New Zealand’s financial system is serving Māori effectively.

Because insurance ultimately exists for the moment when people are most vulnerable.

If Māori understand the importance of protecting whānau, whenua and community assets but remain underserved by the system designed to provide that protection, the question is not simply why Māori aren’t buying more insurance — it is whether the insurance sector needs to change what it is offering.

#HannahChapman #FMA #FinancialMarketsAuthority #Insurance #MaoriInsurance #Whanau #Whenua #WhenuaMaori #Marae #MaoriEconomy #MaoriBusiness #FinancialWellbeing #FinancialCapability #FinancialServices #InsuranceNZ #FinancialInclusion #EconomicEquity #WhanauResilience #CommunityResilience #ClimateChange #ClimateAdaptation #NaturalDisasters #Housing #TeAoMaori #MataurangaMaori #Aotearoa #MaoriNews #BusinessNews #FinanceNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #economy: Protecting Whānau, Whenua and the Future: Why Insurance Isn’t Working for Many Māori appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

After almost eight years leading Whakaata Māori, Kaihautū Shane Taurima is preparing to step down, closing a significant chapter in the evolution of Māori broadcasting that has seen the organisation confront funding pressures, changing audience habits and the rapid shift from traditional television towards a digital-first Indigenous media future.

Taurima’s departure provides an opportunity to reflect on an organisation that has undergone substantial change during his time at the helm.

The media environment Whakaata Māori operates in today looks markedly different from the one Taurima inherited.

Traditional television audiences have fragmented, global streaming and social platforms have transformed how people consume content, and Māori media organisations are increasingly competing for attention in a digital environment dominated by some of the world’s largest technology companies.

For Whakaata Māori, the challenge has been to evolve without losing sight of the kaupapa that sits at the heart of the organisation — te reo Māori, tikanga Māori, Māori storytelling and ensuring Māori continue to see and hear themselves represented through their own media.

One of the most significant changes during Taurima’s leadership has been the move beyond thinking of Whakaata Māori solely as a television broadcaster.

Digital platforms have become increasingly central to reaching audiences, particularly rangatahi who may rarely consume media through traditional scheduled television.

That transition requires more than putting television programmes online.

It means developing content specifically for social media, streaming and mobile audiences, strengthening digital news and finding new ways for Māori stories and te reo Māori content to travel across multiple platforms.

The result has been an organisation increasingly positioning itself as a digital-first Indigenous media platform, rather than simply a television station with an online presence.

Technology may have changed, but the fundamental responsibility has not.

Whakaata Māori exists within a wider Māori broadcasting ecosystem created to protect and promote te reo Māori and tikanga Māori while providing space for Māori perspectives often absent from mainstream media.

That responsibility becomes even more important as audiences migrate towards global digital platforms where Māori content competes with an almost limitless supply of international entertainment and information.

For Taurima, strengthening the organisation has therefore required balancing two objectives that cannot be separated — modernising how Māori media reaches audiences while maintaining the cultural purpose behind why that media exists in the first place.

The transformation has not happened without challenges.

Media organisations across Aotearoa are confronting declining traditional advertising revenue, rapidly changing technology and increasingly fragmented audiences.

Indigenous and public-interest media face an additional challenge because commercial measures alone cannot capture the value of their work.

A programme strengthening someone’s reo, preserving mātauranga, documenting kaumātua or telling a story from an iwi perspective may carry cultural value far beyond the audience numbers attached to it.

That creates an ongoing tension between public value, cultural responsibility, audience growth and sustainable funding.

It is a challenge that will remain long after Taurima leaves.

Another unfinished conversation is the future shape of the wider Māori media sector.

Whakaata Māori operates alongside iwi radio, Māori newsrooms, independent Māori content producers and digital platforms, all attempting to reach many of the same communities while operating within constrained resources.

As technology changes and funding pressures increase, questions around collaboration, shared infrastructure, content distribution and the future structure of Māori broadcasting are becoming increasingly difficult to avoid.

The objective is not simply keeping individual organisations alive.

It is ensuring Māori retain a strong, independent and sustainable media ecosystem capable of carrying te reo, Māori perspectives and our stories into another generation.

Taurima’s nearly eight years as Kaihautū have coincided with one of the most disruptive periods the media industry has experienced.

The measure of that leadership therefore extends beyond television ratings.

It includes whether Whakaata Māori has become better positioned for digital audiences, whether Māori content can reach people wherever they consume media, whether te reo Māori remains visible and accessible, and whether the organisation has built the foundations required for whatever comes next.

There remains unfinished work.

Digital transformation never really ends.

Audience behaviour will continue changing.

Artificial intelligence will reshape production and distribution.

Funding will remain contested.

And Māori media will continue confronting the difficult question of how to maintain sovereignty over our stories while distributing those stories through global platforms Māori do not control.

Taurima leaves his successor an organisation operating in a very different landscape from the one he entered nearly eight years ago.

The next Kaihautū will inherit both the gains made during that transformation and the challenges that remain unresolved.

But the kaupapa itself remains remarkably constant.

Māori stories told through Māori voices. Te reo Māori heard and seen. Māori perspectives represented. And an Indigenous media platform capable of adapting to wherever its audiences go next.

For Shane Taurima, stepping down marks the end of his time at the helm.

For Whakaata Māori, the transformation continues.

#ShaneTaurima #WhakaataMaori #Kaihautu #MaoriMedia #MaoriBroadcasting #IndigenousMedia #DigitalFirst #DigitalMedia #TeReoMaori #TikangaMaori #MataurangaMaori #MaoriStories #MaoriVoices #Rangatahi #IwiRadio #MaoriTelevision #MediaTransformation #MediaIndustry #PublicInterestMedia #IndigenousStorytelling #MaoriNews #Aotearoa #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #media: Eight Years of Transformation: Shane Taurima Reflects as Whakaata Māori Leadership Era Draws to a Close appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.

Māori psychiatrists are helping reshape the way mental distress is understood and treated in Aotearoa, combining specialist medical training with te ao Māori, whakapapa, tikanga and whānau-centred approaches to deliver care that recognises culture as part of healing rather than something separate from it.

Psychiatrists are specialist medical doctors trained to assess and treat mental illness, completing at least five years of specialist psychiatry training after their initial medical education. But for Māori working within the profession, clinical expertise can sit alongside another body of knowledge — mātauranga Māori and an understanding of hauora grounded in te ao Māori.

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists — RANZCP — says Māori have a right to mental healthcare that is culturally appropriate, accessible and effective. It also acknowledges continuing inequities in both mental health outcomes and access to culturally safe services.

Western psychiatry has traditionally placed considerable emphasis on symptoms, diagnosis and treatment of the individual.

Te ao Māori can provide a wider lens.

Mental wellbeing may also be understood through whānau, whakapapa, wairua, whenua, identity and relationships, meaning recovery can involve considerably more than reducing a set of clinical symptoms.

That does not require abandoning medical science.

Instead, Māori psychiatrists and clinicians can bring different knowledge systems together, allowing clinical medicine to work alongside cultural understandings of distress and wellbeing.

RANZCP says psychiatry services need to incorporate te ao Māori approaches and involve whānau in care, while supporting whānau leadership and autonomy around tangata whaiora.

A number of prominent Māori psychiatrists have helped advance this approach.

Professor Hinemoa Elder, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, researcher and author, has spent decades working across areas including rangatahi mental health and traumatic brain injury. Her contribution to Māori mental health and addiction was recognised this year when she received RANZCP’s 2026 Pirika Taonga.

Dr Rees Tapsell has also been a significant Māori voice within psychiatry and mental health service development, particularly in the treatment of people experiencing complex mental health needs.

Meanwhile, psychiatrist Dr Diana Kopua has helped pioneer an explicitly Indigenous approach through Mahi a Atua, using Māori pūrākau and cultural narratives to explore and understand human distress rather than relying exclusively on conventional psychiatric classifications.

That work challenges the idea that there is only one legitimate framework through which mental distress can be understood.

Cultural competence is no longer regarded as an optional extra within psychiatric training in Aotearoa.

Psychiatrists in training are assessed for cultural safety and are required to understand Te Tiriti o Waitangi and how participation, partnership and protection relate to achieving equitable mental health outcomes.

The College’s Takarangi Cultural Competency Framework is Māori-centred and places a Māori worldview at the heart of developing competency.

Importantly, RANZCP says cultural safety is ultimately determined by tangata whai ora and their whānau — the people receiving care decide whether that care feels culturally safe.

That changes the balance of the conversation.

It is not enough for a health professional to believe they understand Māori culture.

The experience of the person and their whānau matters.

There remains another major challenge — ensuring there are enough Māori psychiatrists and culturally capable clinicians to meet demand.

RANZCP has made strengthening the Indigenous psychiatric workforce a priority and is actively working to recruit Māori medical students, junior doctors and house officers into psychiatry while supporting Māori trainees through specialist training.

Its Te Kaunihera mō ngā kaupapa Hauora Hinengaro Māori brings together psychiatrists, trainees and Māori community members to advise the College on Māori mental health, clinical practice, training and cultural competency.

The objective is not simply to produce more psychiatrists who happen to be Māori.

It is to strengthen a workforce capable of influencing how psychiatry itself responds to Māori.

Professional development is also expanding beyond conventional medical training.

Wānanga focused on wairuatanga, cultural safety and Indigenous approaches to mental health provide opportunities for clinicians to understand concepts that may be deeply significant to tangata whai ora but difficult to accommodate within conventional diagnostic frameworks.

This matters because a clinical encounter can change dramatically depending on the framework being used.

An experience interpreted solely through a Western diagnostic model may be understood differently when whakapapa, wairuatanga, pūrākau and cultural context are also considered.

The objective is not to dismiss diagnosis or medication where they are appropriate.

It is to ensure they are not the only tools available.

Māori psychiatry demonstrates that clinical science and mātauranga Māori do not necessarily need to compete with one another.

A psychiatrist can understand neurobiology, pharmacology and evidence-based therapies while also recognising whakapapa, tikanga, wairua and the collective role of whānau.

The common objective remains recovery and wellbeing.

For a mental health system still confronting significant inequities for Māori, that distinction matters.

The future of Māori mental healthcare may not be found by asking tangata whai ora to leave their culture at the clinic door. It may instead depend on building a system where medical expertise and te ao Māori can sit alongside each other — treating not simply a diagnosis, but understanding the whole person, their whānau and the world to which they belong.

#MaoriPsychiatrists #MaoriMentalHealth #HauoraHinengaro #HauoraMaori #MentalHealth #HinemoaElder #ReesTapsell #DianaKopua #MahiAAtua #TeAoMaori #MataurangaMaori #TikangaMaori #Wairuatanga #Whakapapa #Whanau #TangataWhaiora #CulturalSafety #CulturallySafeCare #Psychiatry #MentalHealthWorkforce #RANZCP #TeKaunihera #Takarangi #TeTiritiOWaitangi #HealthEquity #Rangatahi #IndigenousHealth #IndigenousMentalHealth #Aotearoa #MaoriNews #HealthNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea #WaateaDigital

The post #hauora: More Than a Diagnosis: Māori Psychiatrists Bringing Te Ao Māori Into Mental Health Care appeared first on Waatea News: Māori Radio Station.