Councils have been moving quickly to establish Māori wards after the Government itself fast-tracked the removal of ‘racist’ restrictions – but officials were less keen on such a swift process.
The Government’s decision to streamline the process for new Māori wards for next year’s local body elections came against the advice of officials, who warned skipping a full policy development and public consultation process could prove controversial and undermine progress on the changes.
In February, a law change went through Parliament under urgency, removing the ability of voters to effectively veto a council’s decision to create a Māori ward via a public poll.
With just five percent of voters in a council’s catchment having to sign a petition that would trigger a binding vote, and the provision applying only to Māori wards and not general wards, critics argued the rules were racist and unreasonably prevented councils from improving engagement with iwi.
However, opponents of Māori wards have accused the Government of inhibiting democratic processes such as binding referenda, and creating greater division.
In a November 2020 briefing to Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta, obtained under the Official Information Act, the Department of Internal Affairs cautioned the Government against trying to change the Māori wards process in time for next year’s local body elections.
Such a fast-tracked timetable would “prevent full policy development being completed to identify the best alternative to the current poll option, rule out any substantive external consultation, including with tangata whenua, prior to introduction of the bill, and mean the legislative stages would need to be completed under urgency without any select committee scrutiny”, officials said.
“If the process for this significant change to the local democratic process has no opportunity for consultation and public scrutiny, it is likely to be very controversial and the criticism could undermine progress on these changes.”
“The fact that many communities over a long period of time had already exhausted avenues to establish Māori wards but they failed because of these polls, I didn’t feel it was a new issue.”
– Nanaia Mahuta, Local Government Minister
Instead, the department suggested either enacting changes within the current term of Parliament but not having them come into effect until 2023 (meaning any newly established Māori wards would be in place for the 2025 local elections) or reviewing the Māori wards process as part of broader, longer-term local elections reform.
Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta told Newsroom the Māori wards problem had been an established concern for some time, and was “one of the very first issues” Local Government NZ had raised with her when she took on the portfolio after the 2017 election.
“I said to LGNZ last term, because of the nature of our coalition agreement, it will be difficult to try and get that issue going forward.
“However I believe that it was a natural consequence of having dedicated Māori seats for central government elections… to try and do more in this space.”
In considering but acting against officials’ advice, Mahuta said she focused on the “very immediate conversation” which had to take place given next year’s elections.
“Obviously the public education campaign undertaken by [former New Plymouth mayor] Andrew Judd, the fact that many communities over a long period of time had already exhausted avenues to establish Māori wards but they failed because of these polls, I didn’t feel it was a new issue.”
The Government had also opted to take a two-stage approach to reform, with officials currently developing advice for a longer-term fix on Māori representation and related issues.
Mahuta said a number of councils had already started the journey towards Māori wards following the law change, while others were opting to have a longer conversation as they could.
“I know that for some communities or some members in some communities, the creation of Māori wards is quite confronting and challenging. However, I strongly believe that it will lead to greater inclusion and participation of Māori in local government processes because they have as much interest in seeing their communities and regions thrive as anybody else.”
ACT leader David Seymour, whose party voted against the law change, said he agreed with officials’ concerns and believed the fact they were ignored “shows a mania on the part of the Government to do reforms without worrying about the long-term political and policy consequences”.
There were two reasons why it was important to get this right, he said. “One is that any kind of change to the plumbing and wiring of our democracy should be done by consensus: you shouldn’t be able to change the way that democracy works on the basis of having won one election …
“But the second thing I’d say is that I think a lot of people over the last couple of weeks have become quite uncomfortable about the amount of race discussion in our politics – I would count myself amongst them – but the reason for that is that the Government is unleashing an avalanche of initiatives with race at the centre.”
“You had a series of things…that actually all just said, ‘Hey, listen, take your time, actually go away, think about it, build the case, spend your political capital, make your arguments to the New Zealand people, and actually engage them around it’ and that just didn’t happen.”
– Chris Luxon, National
Seymour said the fact that there had been public debate about Māori wards in the past did not justify skipping public consultation or a full select committee process, as the same argument could apply to many issues which went before Parliament.
National Party local government spokesman Chris Luxon said his main concern with the Māori wards legislation had been the way the Government had disregarded numerous pieces of advice arguing for a more thorough consultation process.
“From my point of view, you know, irrespective of what you think about Māori wards, good idea, bad idea, the key issue was this is serious constitutional reform and change.
“You had a series of things…that actually all just said, ‘Hey, listen, take your time, actually go away, think about it, build the case, spend your political capital, make your arguments to the New Zealand people, and actually engage them around it’ and that just didn’t happen.”
Some iwi, like Ngāi Tahu, had indicated they wanted higher-level strategic partnerships with councils rather than ward representation, Luxon said.
‘Piles of white people marching down the roads’
LGNZ is extremely pleased with the Government’s decision, a spokesperson said, as its members had for some time been lobbying it to have the poll provisions removed.
“It was really problematic in terms of community relationships, having piles of white people marching down the roads trying to stop these sorts of things – it’s also expensive and does nothing for the reputation of local democracy.”
While the timing left little time for councils to undertake representation reviews, the law change did not oblige them to create Māori wards but merely made it easier to do so.
“For us, the issue wasn’t whether Māori wards were good or bad, or helpful or not helpful, because it’s all going to be contextual depending where you are and the views of local iwi and Māori and existing levels of representation – it was just the fact that the poll provision was a really divisive issue and really made a joke of the council’s decision-making processes,” the spokesman said.
The Far North District Council and Palmerston North City Council are among local bodies to have taken advantage of the law change and created Māori wards for 2022, with previous efforts having either fallen short at the council table or been overturned by public poll.
However, the Manawatū District Council sparked anger last week when it voted 6-4 to hold off on a decision until 2024, citing the fear of a public backlash if such a change was introduced so close to next year’s election.
* This article initially said the public poll provision applied only to Māori wards and not other representation changes. While it is correct that the provision did not cover the creation of or changes to general wards, a separate section of the act is still in effect, allowing a poll to be triggered regarding the electoral system to be used at a local body’s elections.
