🔗 Share this article

The count of reserved positions for Indigenous council members on New Zealand local authorities will be slashed by more than half, following a controversial legislative amendment that required local governments to put the fate of hard-earned Indigenous wards to a public vote.

Background Information on Indigenous Representation

Indigenous electoral districts, which may have multiple councillors based on demographic data, were established in 2001 to provide Indigenous voters the choice to elect a guaranteed Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Originally, councils were only able to establish a Māori ward by initially submitting it to a community referendum in their area. Communities frequently devoted considerable time building community backing and pushing their local governments to establish Māori wards.

Legislative Shifts and Administrative Decisions

To address this concern, the previous Labour government allowed municipal authorities to establish a Māori ward without initially mandating them to put it to a public vote.

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

Referendum Results

The new legislation mandated councils that had established a electoral district under the previous policy to hold binding referendums concurrently with the municipal polls, which ended on 11 October. Of 42 councils taking part in the public vote, 17 voted to keep their wards, and 25 to abolish theirs – showing numerous areas against guaranteed Māori representation.

These outcomes provided “a crucial move in restoring local democratic control.”

Critics however have condemned the new policy as “racist” and “anti-Māori”. Since taking office, the coalition government has implemented sweeping rollbacks to measures designed to improve Māori health, wellbeing and representation. Officials has said it wants to end “ethnic-specific” approaches, and says it is committed to enhancing results for Indigenous people and every citizen.

Geographical Splits

Outcomes of the referendums were divided down city-country divisions – six of the seven urban centers mandated to hold referendums supported Indigenous seats, while countryside areas leaned strongly towards disestablishing them.

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

Voter Turnout and Criticism

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

This approach had been “a farce”.

Comparative Treatment

Councils are able to establish other types of electoral districts – including rural wards – without first requiring a community ballot. The disparate requirements placed on Indigenous representation indicated the administration was targeting Māori representation.

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

This statement referred to the 17 regions that chose to keep their seats.