🔗 Share this article

The number of reserved positions for Indigenous council members on New Zealand 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-won Māori seats to a popular referendum.

Historical Context on Māori Wards

Māori wards, which can include one or more councillors based on local population numbers, were established in 2001 to give Indigenous voters the choice to elect a assured Māori representative in municipal and provincial governments. Initially, councils could only create a Indigenous seat by first submitting it to a public vote in their area. Local populations often devoted considerable time building community backing and pushing their councils to create Indigenous representation.

Legislative Shifts and Government Actions

To remedy the issue, the previous Labour government allowed municipal authorities to set up a Indigenous seat without first requiring them to subject it to a popular ballot.

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

Referendum Results

The new legislation required local authorities that had established a ward under Labour’s rules to conduct decisive public votes concurrently with the municipal polls, which ended on October 11. Out of 42 local governments participating in the referendum, 17 voted to keep their wards, and twenty-five to abolish theirs – revealing many regions against reserved Indigenous seats.

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

Opposition parties nevertheless have criticised the government’s law change as “racist” and “anti-Māori”. After assuming power, the current administration has ushered in extensive reversals to measures designed to improve Māori health, wellbeing and representation. The government 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 split down city-country divisions – most cities mandated to hold referendums backed Indigenous seats, while rural regions skewed heavily towards disestablishing them.

“It’s a real shame for the Indigenous seats that had recently been established – they’re just beginning to find their footing.”

Electoral Participation and Concerns

The recent local government elections registered the smallest electoral participation in over three decades, with less than a third of citizens casting a vote, prompting demands for reform.

The process had been “a farce”.

Comparative Treatment

Councils are permitted to create different electoral districts – such as countryside seats – without first requiring a community ballot. The different conditions applied to Indigenous representation suggested the administration was singling out Indigenous inclusion.

“Well, they failed. Numerous localities have expressed strong opposition.”

This statement concerned the 17 areas that chose to retain their wards.