Much has been made of the "mana enhancing relationship" National and the Maori Party have enshrined in their relationship.
The term has predictably been used by sceptics of the relationship to mock it - "How mana enhancing is that?" Labour asked when the Maori Party's agreement on confidence and supply forced it to support tax cuts it did not believe helped low income Maori.
There were similar sneers when National introduced its 90-day probationary period for workers, and - on the other side of the relationship - after Hone Harawira voiced public support for his relatives facing court charges after Prime Minister John Key was jostled at Waitangi.
The Maori Party held its tongue.
It became clear why when the two Maori Party co-leaders Tariana Turia and Pita Sharples found out what their new responsibilities as associate ministers were last week.
The release of the delegations was barely noticed. But for the Maori Party, it delivered the mana they were waiting for. Up to that point, much of the focus on the Maori Party's agreement had been on the constitutional issues - the review of the seabed and foreshore law, Mr Key's decision to allow a Maori flag to fly on Waitangi Day.
But as fundamental as constitutional issues are to the party, it is on the social side of the ledger they will be judged, particularly at a time when Maori are vulnerable to the economic downturn. The delegated responsibilities give them a chance to do that.
The list is extensive and, critically, delivers distinct areas of responsibility and funding in social policy areas that affect the day to day lives of Maori.
Among them, Tariana Turia has responsibility for Maori and Pacific employment as well as the Govern-ment's overall strategy on family violence. In health, her focus is on Maori health, including provider development. But wider responsi-bilities include sexual health, diabetes, tobacco, communicable diseases and breast and cervical screening.
Pita Sharples is expected to find ways to address Maori over-representation in crime, as well as more effective rehabilitation of Maori offenders. In an area dear to his heart, he also gets responsibilities for Maori education such as kohanga reo and kura kaupapa.
In some ways they are more significant than their main ministerial portfolios of Maori Affairs for Pita Sharples and the Community and Voluntary sector for Tariana Turia.
Mrs Turia has talked about her desire to see government money spent on Maori by Maori. What was delivered is as close to the "partnership" model as she could have hoped, giving the party substantial responsibilities for how money is spent on delivering to Maori.
It brings with it some risks. Trying to deal with the specific social ills that so beset Maori - family violence, tobacco, diabetes, crime and rehabilitation - are now down in the names of Mrs Turia and Dr Sharples.
The challenge for the Maori Party is to deliver in areas it has long accused others of failing in. The expectation they must perform on them is crystal clear. To Mrs Turia falls the task not only of "addressing" family violence but of "reducing the impact" of it.
Mr Key puts a premium on performance - and his support parties are not exempt. He will expect the Maori ministers to toe the same line of accountability for how public money is spent, and Mrs Turia has already begun the process of finding a way to measure the effectiveness of each dollar.
By giving the Maori Party exactly what was asked for, Mr Key has put his faith in them to deliver on it.
It does not absolve National from responsibility, especially in funding and supporting the ministers. Funding will be allocated in the budget - and the Maori Party co-leaders have been warned, and acknowledge themselves, that the economic downturn will make it more a case of how the money is spent, rather than how much there is.
Often, associate minister responsi-bilities come simply in the form of a minister trying to offload insignificant parts of their main portfolio. However, those awarded to the Maori Party show National is paying more than lip service to its agreement with them.
Some cans of worms have been safely deposited at the back of the cupboard, at least for the time being. The Maori seats and status of the seabed and foreshore law will be bedded down in reviews for a while.
However, others are becoming apparent. The most immediate is whether National will agree to the three Maori seats the Royal Commission recommended for the Auckland Council, two elected by the Maori roll and one appointed by a "mana whenua" forum set up to advise the new council.
There is also the question of whether the Government will follow the lead of Australia, which yesterday agreed to formally support the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. New Zealand remains one of three countries not to have done so - including the United States.
There is an acute awareness within the Maori Party of the need to "stocktake" to ensure they are not "going soft" as Hone Harawira would put it. It comes in the weekly caucus meetings when the back bench MPs and party president Whatarangi Winiata can raise their eyebrows unobserved by outsiders.
In the public eye, Mr Harawira will perhaps be the best barometer for the party on when it is straying. Mr Harawira is the most uncomfortable with the relationship, although this suspicion would apply regardless of whether it was dealing with National or Labour. He has maintained a distance.
The two co-leaders are more constrained than before because of the confidentiality clauses that bind them in their agreement. The backbenchers are not and it is here that Mr Harawira is a critical link back to their more radical support base and a safety valve against accusations it has sold out.
But despite its origins in heat and anger, the Maori Party has a deep core of pragmatism driven by Mrs Turia and Te Ururoa Flavell, and acceded to by the more idealistic MPs such as Pita Sharples and Mr Harawira.
They've had some victories, sometimes to their surprise, such as the Maori flag. But they know they can't win them all and that while National's supporters have so far been delighted by the relationship, they can only be pushed so far on matters of core principle.
Hence John Key's immediate stake in the ground over ensuring public access to the foreshore and seabed when announcing the review team on that issue. He must decide soon on the Auckland Council seats - but he knows it could push National's supporters beyond what they are comfortable with.
The clauses allowing the parties to agree to disagree work both ways. The Maori Party has made the most of its freedom to do so and knows National has its own constituency to look after.
But their agreement was framed with the flexibility to allow the parties to speak out on matters such as these.
Those who think their natural differences make the relationship too fragile to withstand such disagree-ments need look only to those associate portfolio responsibilities. In them is the licence to put into place a Maori way in the party's key "whanau ora" [family wellbeing] social policy areas, such as health and education.
It would take a great deal for the Maori Party to jeopardise that. For the time being, it is enough to fight without winning. The Maori Party also knows that battles it can't win today will live to be fought again in the future.
- Claire Trevett is a New Zealand Herald political correspondent.
