🔗 Share this article

The count of guaranteed positions for Māori representatives on NZ local authorities is set to be cut by more than half, after a divisive legislative amendment that forced municipal councils to submit the future of hard-won Māori seats to a public vote.

Background Information on Indigenous Representation

Indigenous electoral districts, which may have multiple councillors based on local population numbers, were established in 2001 to provide Indigenous voters the choice to vote for a guaranteed Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Originally, councils were only able to establish a Indigenous seat by initially putting it to a community referendum in their area. Communities often spent years building community backing and urging their councils to establish Māori wards.

Policy Changes and Government Actions

To address this concern, the previous Labour government allowed municipal authorities to establish a Indigenous seat without initially mandating them to put it to a popular ballot.

However, this year, the right-wing coalition government overturned the policy, saying communities ought to determine whether to establish Indigenous representation.

Referendum Results

The coalition’s law change mandated local authorities that had created a electoral district under Labour’s rules to hold decisive public votes concurrently with the local body elections, which concluded on October 11. Out of 42 local governments taking part in the public vote, 17 voted to retain their seats, and 25 to abolish theirs – showing numerous areas against reserved Indigenous seats.

These outcomes represented “a vital step in restoring local democratic control.”

Critics however have condemned the government’s law change as “discriminatory” and “against Indigenous interests”. After assuming power, the current administration has implemented extensive reversals to measures intended to improve Indigenous welfare and political inclusion. Officials has stated it wants to end “race-based” policies, and asserts it is committed to enhancing results for Indigenous people and every citizen.

Urban-Rural Divide

The results of the public votes were divided down urban-rural lines – most cities required to vote supported Indigenous seats, while countryside areas skewed heavily towards removing them.

“It's unfortunate for the Indigenous seats that had recently been established – they’re only just starting to find their footing.”

Voter Turnout and Concerns

The recent municipal polls registered the smallest electoral participation in over three decades, with under one-third of eligible voters participating, leading to demands for reform.

This approach had been “a mockery”.

Differential Standards

Councils are permitted to create other types of wards – such as countryside seats – without first requiring a public vote. The different conditions applied to Indigenous representation suggested the government was targeting Indigenous inclusion.

“Well, they failed. Numerous localities have given the government a middle finger response.”

This statement concerned the 17 areas that voted to retain their wards.