🔗 Share this article

The count of reserved seats for Māori representatives on New Zealand councils will be cut by more than half, after a controversial legislative amendment that required local governments to put the future of hard-won Indigenous wards to a popular referendum.

Historical Context on Indigenous Representation

Indigenous electoral districts, which can include multiple councillors based on demographic data, were created in 2001 to provide Māori electors the option to elect a guaranteed Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Initially, councils were only able to create a Māori ward by initially submitting it to a community referendum in their area. Communities frequently devoted considerable time generating local support and urging their local governments to establish Māori wards.

Legislative Shifts and Administrative Decisions

To remedy the issue, the former administration permitted local councils to establish a Indigenous seat without first requiring them to put it to a public vote.

However, this year, the current administration overturned the policy, stating communities ought to determine whether to establish Indigenous representation.

Voting Outcomes

The coalition’s law change required councils that had created a electoral district under Labour’s rules to conduct binding referendums concurrently with the municipal polls, which ended on 11 October. Of 42 councils participating in the referendum, 17 voted to keep their seats, and twenty-five to abolish theirs – showing numerous areas against guaranteed Māori representation.

The results provided “a vital step in reinstating local democratic control.”

Opposition parties nevertheless have criticised the government’s law change as “discriminatory” and “anti-Māori”. Since taking office, the coalition government has implemented sweeping rollbacks to measures designed to improve Māori health, wellbeing and representation. Officials has stated it aims to terminate “race-based” policies, and says it is dedicated to improving outcomes for Indigenous people and every citizen.

Urban-Rural Divide

Outcomes of the public votes were split down urban-rural lines – most urban centers required to vote supported Indigenous seats, while rural regions skewed heavily towards removing them.

“It’s a real shame for the Indigenous seats that had recently been established – they’re just beginning to hit their stride.”

Voter Turnout and Criticism

This year’s local government elections recorded the smallest electoral participation in over three decades, with under one-third of eligible voters participating, prompting demands for reform.

This approach had been “a farce”.

Differential Standards

Councils are able to establish other types of electoral districts – including rural wards – without first requiring a public vote. The disparate requirements placed on Māori wards indicated the administration was singling out Indigenous inclusion.

“Ultimately, they were unsuccessful. Numerous localities have given the government a middle finger response.”

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