Opposition to Māori ward move ‘archaic’
Councils across New Zealand operate under a legislative environment under the mandate of central government.
Every six years all councils across New Zealand are required by the Local Electoral Act, as part of their representation reviews, to give consideration to Ma¯ ori wards for electoral purposes.
In 2017, every council was required to consider and make a decision on this matter and every council did.
Councils are also required to meet statutory obligations under the Local Government Act to foster the development of Ma¯ ori capacity to contribute to local council decision-making and the Resource Management Act, to establish and maintain processes to understand the relationship of Ma¯ ori and their culture and traditions, especially in relation to ancestral land, natural resources and the environment.
In February 2017, when our council started the discussion on Ma¯ ori wards, this very prescribed legislative process gave us several options as to how we could consult on this issue. We chose to consult with those members of our community to be affected by this decision and that was Ma¯ ori.
Electors registered on the general electoral roll are not affected by this decision. At the next election they can nominate, stand or vote for the people of their choice in the ward in which they live, as they always have.
If a Ma¯ ori ward for electoral purposes is established, the only people whose voting options alter are those electors registered on the Ma¯ ori electoral roll.
This issue was discussed at length at council committee Nga¯ Manu Taiko and members of the public and councillors were welcome to attend these discussions.
A candidate elected in a Ma¯ ori ward by Ma¯ ori electorate voters has the mana to represent Ma¯ ori and present a Ma¯ ori perspective to council issues. A person elected via voters on the general roll, even if of Ma¯ ori ethnicity, does not have that mandate.
In November, Nga¯ Manu Taiko’s recommendation to establish a Ma¯ ori ward was put to the council vote and was democratically passed with six for, including the mayor, and four against, with one absent.
I am disappointed that the group of opponents working with Don Brash and the Hobson’s Pledge lobby group to call for a poll in an attempt to overturn the council decision is not informing those they approach for signatures, the bigger picture of the legislative environment that councils are required to operate under.
To promote a view that a Ma¯ ori ward will deter the council from effective decision-making is actually archaic, repressive and undemocratic.
Those Manawatu¯ District councillors who voted for a Ma¯ ori ward voted for progress, partnership and greater understanding with Ma¯ ori.
The Hobson’s Pledge opponents should address their issue in the right place. Their issue is the legislation of central government.
For the Manawatu¯ District Council, a formal poll to all voters would cost $80,000 to $100,000.
That’s an absurd waste of ratepayers’ money to overturn a democratic council decision. The money a poll would cost ratepayers would be far better spent on roads and footpaths.
Alison Short is a Manawatu¯ District councillor and the chairwoman of the council’s marae consultation committee, Nga¯ Manu Taiko.