🔗 Share this article

The count of guaranteed positions for Indigenous council members on New Zealand councils will be cut by more than half, after a controversial law change that required local governments to put the fate of hard-won Māori seats to a public vote.

Background Information on Māori Wards

Māori wards, which may have multiple elected officials based on demographic data, were established in 2001 to provide Māori electors the option to vote for a assured Indigenous council member in local and regional authorities. Originally, councils were only able to establish a Māori ward by initially putting it to a public vote in their region. Local populations often spent years generating local support and pushing their local governments to create Indigenous representation.

Legislative Shifts and Government Actions

To remedy the issue, the former administration permitted municipal authorities to set up a Māori ward without initially mandating them to subject it to a public vote.

But in 2024, the current administration overturned the policy, saying communities should decide whether to introduce Indigenous representation.

Referendum Results

The new legislation required councils that had established a electoral district under the previous policy to hold binding referendums alongside the municipal polls, which ended on 11 October. Out of 42 local governments participating in the public vote, 17 decided to retain their seats, and twenty-five to abolish theirs – revealing many regions against reserved Indigenous seats.

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

Critics nevertheless have criticised the new policy as “racist” and “anti-Māori”. Since taking office, the current administration has ushered in sweeping rollbacks to policies intended to enhance Indigenous welfare and political inclusion. Officials has stated it wants to terminate “race-based” policies, and says it is committed to enhancing results for Māori and all New Zealanders.

Geographical Splits

The results of the public votes were divided down urban-rural lines – most cities mandated to hold referendums supported Indigenous seats, while rural regions skewed heavily towards disestablishing them.

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

Electoral Participation and Criticism

This year’s municipal polls registered the smallest electoral participation in over three decades, with under one-third of citizens casting a vote, leading to calls for an overhaul.

The process had been “a mockery”.

Comparative Treatment

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

“Ultimately, they were unsuccessful. Many communities have expressed strong opposition.”

This statement concerned the 17 areas that chose to keep their seats.