🔗 Share this article

The count of reserved seats for Indigenous council members on New Zealand local authorities is set to be slashed by over 50%, after a divisive legislative amendment that forced local governments to put the fate of hard-won Māori seats to a public vote.

Historical Context on Indigenous Representation

Māori wards, which may have one or more councillors based on demographic data, were established in 2001 to give Māori electors the option to vote for a guaranteed Māori representative in local and regional authorities. Initially, local governments could only create a Indigenous seat by first putting it to a public vote in their area. Communities often spent years generating community backing and urging their local governments to create Māori wards.

Legislative Shifts and Government Actions

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

However, this year, the right-wing coalition government reversed the change, saying local residents should decide whether to introduce Indigenous representation.

Referendum Results

The new legislation mandated councils that had created a ward under Labour’s rules to hold decisive public votes concurrently with the local body elections, which ended on October 11. Out of 42 local governments taking part in the referendum, 17 voted to keep their wards, and twenty-five to abolish theirs – revealing many regions opposed to guaranteed Māori representation.

These outcomes represented “a crucial move in reinstating local democratic control.”

Critics however have criticised the government’s law change as “racist” and “against Indigenous interests”. After assuming power, the coalition government has ushered in sweeping rollbacks to measures designed to enhance Indigenous welfare and political inclusion. The government has stated it aims to end “ethnic-specific” approaches, and asserts it is committed to enhancing results for Indigenous people and every citizen.

Geographical Splits

The results of the public votes were split down urban-rural lines – six of the seven cities mandated to hold referendums supported Indigenous seats, while rural regions leaned strongly towards disestablishing them.

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

Voter Turnout and Concerns

This year’s municipal polls registered the smallest electoral participation in over three decades, with less than a third of citizens casting a vote, leading to demands for reform.

This approach had been “a mockery”.

Comparative Treatment

Councils are permitted to create different wards – including countryside seats – without initially mandating a public vote. The disparate requirements applied to Indigenous representation suggested the government was targeting Māori representation.

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

This remark concerned the 17 areas that voted to keep their seats.