🔗 Share this article

The count of guaranteed positions for Indigenous council members on NZ local authorities is set to be slashed by more than half, following a controversial legislative amendment that required municipal councils to submit the fate of hard-won Indigenous wards to a popular referendum.

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 choice to vote for a assured Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Initially, local governments were only able to establish a Indigenous seat by first submitting it to a community referendum in their area. Communities often devoted considerable time generating community backing and pushing their councils to establish Indigenous representation.

Legislative Shifts and Administrative Decisions

To address this concern, the previous Labour government permitted municipal authorities to establish a Indigenous seat without first requiring them to subject it to a public vote.

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

Referendum Results

The new legislation required local authorities that had created a ward under the previous policy to conduct decisive public votes alongside the local body elections, which concluded on 11 October. Out of 42 local governments taking part in the referendum, 17 decided to keep their wards, and twenty-five to disestablish theirs – showing many regions against guaranteed Māori representation.

These outcomes provided “a vital step in reinstating community self-determination.”

Opposition parties nevertheless have condemned the new policy as “discriminatory” and “against Indigenous interests”. After assuming power, the current administration has ushered in sweeping rollbacks to policies designed to enhance Indigenous welfare and political inclusion. The government has said it aims to terminate “ethnic-specific” approaches, and asserts it is committed to improving outcomes for Indigenous people and all New Zealanders.

Geographical Splits

The results of the referendums were divided down urban-rural lines – six of the seven cities required to vote supported Māori wards, while countryside areas leaned strongly towards removing them.

“It’s a real shame for the Māori wards that had only just come in – they’re only just starting to find their footing.”

Electoral Participation and Criticism

This year’s municipal polls registered the lowest voter turnout in over three decades, with under one-third of eligible voters participating, prompting calls for an overhaul.

This approach had been “a mockery”.

Comparative Treatment

Local governments are able to establish other types of electoral districts – including rural wards – without first requiring a public vote. The different conditions applied to Māori wards indicated the government was singling out Indigenous inclusion.

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

This statement concerned the 17 regions that voted to retain their seats.