🔗 Share this article

The count of guaranteed positions for Indigenous council members on New Zealand councils is set to be cut by over 50%, after a controversial legislative amendment that required municipal councils to put the future of hard-earned Indigenous wards to a popular referendum.

Historical Context on Indigenous Representation

Māori wards, which can include multiple councillors based on local population numbers, were created in 2001 to give Indigenous voters the choice to vote for a assured Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Originally, local governments could only create a Indigenous seat by initially putting it to a public vote in their area. Local populations frequently devoted considerable time building local support and pushing their local governments to establish Māori wards.

Legislative Shifts and Administrative Decisions

To remedy the issue, the former administration allowed local councils to set up a Indigenous seat without initially mandating them to subject it to a popular ballot.

But in 2024, the current administration reversed the change, saying communities ought to determine whether to introduce Māori wards.

Referendum Results

The coalition’s law change mandated councils that had established a electoral district under the previous policy to hold decisive public votes concurrently with the municipal polls, which concluded on 11 October. Out of 42 local governments participating in the referendum, 17 voted to retain their wards, and 25 to disestablish theirs – revealing many regions against guaranteed Māori representation.

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

Critics however have condemned the new policy as “racist” and “against Indigenous interests”. After assuming power, the coalition government has ushered in extensive reversals to policies designed to enhance Indigenous welfare and political inclusion. Officials has stated it aims to terminate “race-based” approaches, and asserts it is committed to improving outcomes for Indigenous people and every citizen.

Urban-Rural Divide

Outcomes of the public votes were divided down urban-rural lines – six of the seven urban centers mandated to hold referendums backed Indigenous seats, while rural regions skewed heavily towards disestablishing them.

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

Electoral Participation and Concerns

The recent local government elections recorded the smallest electoral participation in 36 years, with under one-third of citizens casting a vote, prompting calls for an overhaul.

This approach had been “a mockery”.

Comparative Treatment

Local governments are permitted to establish other types of wards – including countryside seats – without initially mandating a public vote. The different conditions placed on Māori wards suggested the administration was targeting Indigenous inclusion.

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

This statement concerned the 17 regions that voted to keep their wards.