🔗 Share this article

The count of guaranteed positions for Māori representatives on New Zealand local authorities will be cut by more than half, after a controversial law change that required local governments to put the future of hard-earned Māori seats to a popular referendum.

Historical Context on Māori Wards

Māori wards, which can include multiple councillors depending on demographic data, were established in 2001 to give Indigenous voters the option to elect a guaranteed Indigenous council member in municipal and provincial governments. Initially, local governments could only create a Indigenous seat by initially submitting it to a community referendum in their area. Communities often devoted considerable time generating local support and urging their local governments to create Māori wards.

Legislative Shifts and Administrative Decisions

To address this concern, the previous Labour government permitted local councils to establish a Indigenous seat without first requiring them to put it to a popular ballot.

However, this year, the right-wing coalition government reversed the change, stating local residents should decide whether to introduce Māori wards.

Referendum Results

The coalition’s law change required local authorities that had established a electoral district under Labour’s rules to hold binding referendums alongside the local body elections, which ended on 11 October. Out of 42 local governments taking part in the public vote, 17 decided to retain their seats, and 25 to disestablish theirs – showing many regions against reserved Indigenous seats.

These outcomes provided “a crucial move in reinstating community self-determination.”

Critics nevertheless have condemned the government’s law change as “racist” and “anti-Māori”. Since taking office, the current administration has ushered in sweeping rollbacks to policies designed to improve Indigenous welfare and political inclusion. The government has stated it wants to end “ethnic-specific” policies, and asserts it is committed to enhancing results for Indigenous people and all New Zealanders.

Urban-Rural Divide

Outcomes of the public votes were divided down city-country divisions – six of the seven urban centers required to vote supported Indigenous seats, while countryside areas leaned strongly towards removing them.

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

Electoral Participation and Criticism

This year’s local government elections recorded the lowest voter turnout in 36 years, with under one-third of citizens participating, leading to demands for reform.

This approach had been “a mockery”.

Comparative Treatment

Councils are able to create other types of electoral districts – including countryside seats – without first requiring a public vote. The different conditions placed on Indigenous representation indicated the government was targeting Indigenous inclusion.

“Well, they failed. Numerous localities have given the government a middle finger response.”

This statement referred to the 17 areas that voted to keep their seats.