🔗 Share this article

The count of reserved positions for Māori representatives on NZ local authorities is set to be cut by more than half, following a controversial law change that forced municipal councils to submit the fate of hard-earned Māori seats to a public vote.

Historical Context on Māori Wards

Indigenous electoral districts, which can include multiple elected officials based on local population numbers, were established in 2001 to give Māori electors the option to elect a guaranteed Indigenous council member in municipal and provincial governments. Initially, local governments could only create a Indigenous seat by first submitting it to a public vote in their area. Local populations frequently devoted considerable time building community backing and pushing their local governments to establish Māori wards.

Policy Changes and Government Actions

To address this concern, the previous Labour government permitted local councils to set up a Māori ward without initially mandating them to put it to a public vote.

But in 2024, the current administration overturned the policy, stating local residents should decide whether to introduce Māori wards.

Referendum Results

The coalition’s law change mandated local authorities that had created a electoral district under the previous policy to conduct binding referendums alongside the municipal polls, which ended on October 11. Out of 42 local governments taking part in the public vote, 17 voted to keep their seats, and twenty-five to disestablish theirs – showing many regions against guaranteed Māori representation.

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

Opposition parties nevertheless have condemned the government’s law change as “racist” and “against Indigenous interests”. Since taking office, the current administration has ushered in extensive reversals to policies intended to improve Māori health, wellbeing and representation. Officials has said it aims to terminate “race-based” approaches, and says it is dedicated to improving outcomes for Indigenous people and every citizen.

Geographical Splits

Outcomes of the referendums were divided down city-country divisions – most cities required to vote supported Indigenous seats, while countryside areas 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.”

Electoral Participation and Concerns

This year’s municipal polls recorded the lowest voter turnout in 36 years, with less than a third of citizens participating, prompting demands for reform.

The process had been “a mockery”.

Comparative Treatment

Local governments are able to establish other types of electoral districts – such as countryside seats – without first requiring a public vote. The different conditions applied to Indigenous representation indicated the government was targeting Indigenous inclusion.

“Ultimately, they were unsuccessful. Many communities have expressed strong opposition.”

This statement referred to the 17 regions that voted to retain their wards.