🔗 Share this article

The number of guaranteed seats for Māori representatives on New Zealand councils is set to be slashed by more than half, after a divisive legislative amendment that forced municipal councils to put the future of hard-earned Māori seats to a public vote.

Historical Context on Indigenous Representation

Indigenous electoral districts, which can include one or more councillors depending on local population numbers, were established in 2001 to give Indigenous voters the choice to elect a guaranteed Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Initially, local governments could only create a Indigenous seat by initially submitting it to a community referendum in their area. Local populations often spent years building community backing and pushing their local governments to establish Indigenous representation.

Policy Changes and Government Actions

To address this concern, the previous Labour government permitted local councils to establish a Māori ward without initially mandating them to put it to a popular ballot.

However, this year, the right-wing coalition government overturned the policy, saying local residents should decide whether to establish Māori wards.

Referendum Results

The new legislation required councils that had created a ward under Labour’s rules to conduct decisive public votes alongside the municipal polls, which ended on October 11. Out of 42 local governments taking part in the referendum, 17 voted to keep their wards, and 25 to abolish theirs – revealing many regions against guaranteed Māori representation.

These outcomes provided “a crucial move in reinstating local democratic control.”

Opposition parties however have criticised the new policy as “discriminatory” and “anti-Māori”. After assuming power, the current administration has ushered in extensive reversals to measures designed to enhance Māori health, wellbeing and representation. Officials has stated it wants to end “race-based” approaches, and says it is dedicated to improving outcomes for Indigenous people and every citizen.

Geographical Splits

Outcomes of the referendums were split down city-country divisions – six of the seven urban centers mandated to hold referendums backed Indigenous seats, while countryside areas skewed heavily towards removing them.

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

Electoral Participation and Concerns

This year’s municipal polls registered the smallest electoral participation in 36 years, with under one-third of eligible voters casting a vote, prompting calls for an overhaul.

The process had been “a farce”.

Comparative Treatment

Councils are permitted to establish other types of wards – including rural wards – without first requiring a community ballot. The different conditions placed on Indigenous representation indicated the government was targeting Indigenous inclusion.

“Well, they failed. Many communities have expressed strong opposition.”

This statement referred to the 17 areas that chose to retain their wards.