🔗 Share this article

The count of reserved positions for Indigenous council members on NZ councils will be slashed by over 50%, following a controversial legislative amendment that forced municipal councils to put the future of hard-won Māori seats to a public vote.

Historical Context on Indigenous Representation

Māori wards, which can include multiple elected officials based on demographic data, were created in 2001 to provide Indigenous voters the option to elect a assured Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Initially, councils were only able to create a Indigenous seat by first putting it to a public vote in their region. Local populations frequently spent years building community backing and pushing their local governments to establish Indigenous representation.

Policy Changes and Administrative Decisions

To address this concern, the former administration permitted 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 local residents ought to determine whether to introduce Māori wards.

Referendum Results

The coalition’s law change required local authorities that had established a ward under Labour’s rules to conduct decisive public votes alongside the municipal polls, which concluded on 11 October. Of 42 councils taking part in the referendum, 17 decided to retain their seats, and twenty-five to disestablish theirs – revealing many regions against guaranteed Māori representation.

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

Critics nevertheless have criticised the new policy as “discriminatory” and “anti-Māori”. Since taking office, the coalition government has ushered in sweeping rollbacks to measures intended to enhance Indigenous welfare and political inclusion. Officials has said it wants to end “race-based” approaches, and asserts it is dedicated to enhancing results for Māori and all New Zealanders.

Urban-Rural Divide

Outcomes of the referendums were divided down urban-rural lines – most urban centers mandated to hold referendums backed Indigenous seats, while countryside areas leaned strongly towards disestablishing them.

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

Voter Turnout and Criticism

The recent municipal polls recorded the smallest electoral participation in over three decades, with less than a third of eligible voters participating, leading to demands for reform.

The process had been “a farce”.

Comparative Treatment

Councils are able to establish other types of wards – such as countryside seats – without first requiring a community ballot. The disparate requirements placed on Indigenous representation indicated the administration was singling out Indigenous inclusion.

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

This remark referred to the 17 areas that voted to keep their wards.