The article delves into the ongoing political and ideological debate surrounding targeted Māori funding and policy initiatives in New Zealand. At the heart of this discussion is the stance of David Seymour, National Party leader and Minister for Social Development, who has been a vocal critic of separate Māori-focused funding and organizations like the Māori Health Authority (Te Aka Whai Ora). Seymour's perspective is rooted in the belief that such targeted funding can be seen as discriminatory and that a more dynamic, opportunity-driven economy is the best way to address disadvantage, regardless of ethnicity. Seymour argues for a 'dynamism' approach, where economic growth, innovation, and increased opportunity are the primary tools for lifting people out of disadvantage. He points to countries like South Korea, Singapore, and Estonia as examples of how dynamic economies can transform entire populations from states of destitution to prosperity. According to Seymour, the focus should not be on creating separate systems for specific groups but rather on building a more inclusive and opportunity-rich environment for all. On the other hand, Labour Party figures like Gaurav Gill and Louise Upston have defended the use of targeted Māori funding, emphasizing the historical and ongoing disparities faced by Māori communities. They argue that targeted funding is necessary to address the unique challenges Māori face, including overrepresentation in areas such as unemployment, housing, and health. Gill, for instance, highlights the importance of 'for Māori, by Māori' strategies in addressing gaps in Māori statistics and improving outcomes for Māori communities. The article also outlines recent policy changes under the National government, including the consolidation of Māori housing funds and the reduction of funding for Māori Trades and Training. These changes have been framed as fiscal decisions rather than philosophical ones, with ministers like Louise Upston stating that the focus is on funding initiatives that are proven to be effective in supporting people back into employment. Housing Minister Chris Bishop has also spoken about moving towards a more granular and evidence-based housing system, which includes working with Māori housing providers to deliver targeted solutions. Bishop acknowledges the role of Māori housing providers in delivering effective solutions, similar to the role of kura kaupapa and Māori health providers during the pandemic. The debate is further complicated by the ideological divide between the National and Labour parties. While National emphasizes a more unified and opportunity-driven approach, Labour continues to advocate for targeted funding and the potential reinstatement of the Māori Health Authority if they regain power. In conclusion, the article highlights the complex interplay between policy, ideology, and the lived experiences of Māori in New Zealand. It underscores the need for a nuanced approach that recognizes both the importance of addressing systemic disadvantages and the potential benefits of a more dynamic and inclusive economy.