Korako NukNUK KORAKO (National): Mauri ora e Te Mana Whakawā. I rise to speak on the Local Electoral (Equitable Process for Establishing Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill's first reading. What we have here to consider is something we seem to be seeing a lot of from the Opposition: a well-meaning but really quite unnecessary piece of legislation. The intention here is clear—to provide for more representation of Māori in local government—and I applaud that. We do actually have wide representation across many of our local authorities already but I sympathise with Marama Davidson who put forward this bill in wanting to see more of our people represented. After all that is one of the reasons I chose to put myself forward first for a seat on the Christchurch City Council and then for the Port Hills electorate. I want to represent the Port Hills electorate and what I am hearing on the doorstep at home suggests I have a very good chance of doing that. But I am also here to advance the cause of Māori and I personally believe that is something that complements the position I am seeking as an MP in a general electorate.I acknowledge those who are here representing Māori electorates—I really do. Despite our differing views on some issues I know that each of my Māori colleagues is here in this House for the right reasons: to advance the cause of our people. But there is more than one way to increase Māori representation. It does not have to be through Māori electorates or Māori wards but in many cases it will be exactly that. In this House we do have Māori seats although here in the National Party we are very much leading the way by bringing more Māori MPs to this House than any other party despite not currently standing any candidates in the Māori seats. For some local areas that may also be the right thing to do but that is not a decision I think should be made for them from this House. I certainly do not think it is a decision that should be made by a council without reference to its citizens—without reference to its citizens—or in fact against the wishes of its citizens. The evidence we see is that some councils will decide to initiate Māori wards. Under the current law citizens have the democratic right to challenge that decision and I think that there is a very important right. We have a representative democracy here in New Zealand and as MPs we make decisions every day on behalf of our citizens but there are certain constitutional changes where a referendum is appropriate. Take the flag referendum. This was an issue that most of us had an opinion on. I was personally in favour of the change and would have voted that way had it been a decision voted by the Parliament. But it was much more appropriate that a change like that be decided by a referendum. That referendum produced the right result—not the result I would have voted for not the one I wanted but the right result because it was the decision of the majority made in the most democratic way possible. How much more appropriate is it then that a referendum be used when a change is proposed that alters how we elect our representatives? In fact the current law does not even require such a referendum. The presumption is not that the referendum will be held; rather if the community feels strongly enough about the issue it can gather the required number of signatures for a referendum to be held.As we have seen some communities will accept the addition of Māori wards and some will reject it. I make no judgment on the reasons for those decisions. They are local matters and the situation in regard to Māori representation and involvement in the local authorities' processes will indeed differ from place to place. We could make all sorts of assumptions about the reasons communities reject Māori representation. I am sure that communities where there is less of an understanding of the Treaty relationship and the actual added value that involving iwi in decision making can have for local authorities will be more likely to vote against the measures—against the measures. But I would also point out that representation around the council table is not the only way for Māori voices to be heard and for the partnership envisioned in the Treaty—in Te Tiriti o Waitangi—to actually be realised.Again these are decisions for communities to make for themselves and they are decisions that should be made in the most democratic way that they can be. The current law achieves that outcome actually—it achieves that outcome. It may not achieve the outcome that the member in charge of the bill wants or indeed the outcome that I would want in every situation but it achieves the outcome that local communities want and I find that really hard to argue against—I find that very very hard to argue against.I expect that in the future Māori representation on councils will increase—it will increase. I am sure that there will be other councils where that is through the establishment of Māori wards but I also expect that we will continue to see more and more highly - effective Māori candidates putting their names forward for general councils and also for representation in this House. You only have to look at National's candidates for the 2017 election to see that we have some of the most outstanding Māori choices like Hārete Hīpango and Adrienne Pierce who I hope will be elected and who I know will do an amazing job in their general electorates but also within their Māori communities as well. I do. I applaud councils and communities who are looking at how best to include Māori in decision making and also on how to increase Māori representation. Neither the current law nor the proposed bill provide a one-size-fits-all solution. They do not provide that. But I do think that the current law strikes the right balance in making this sort of constitutional change something that the community can choose to have its say on—that the community can choose to have its say on.Regardless of the outcome when communities do make their decisions we can be confident that Māori representation is increasing—Māori representation is actually increasing—and we will continue to see Māori leaders standing up and taking positions on their local authorities. Why would we amend or introduce a bill that goes against public wishes? Why would we do that? Voting has shown that there is no appetite for this—there is no appetite for this. There is the ability to set these wards up now absolutely—you can set them up now. There is the ability to do that but the wider public has not chosen to support it. It is not shown support for this—or the processes—and it also does not show any appetite for it whatsoever. Therefore I cannot support this bill nor can my colleagues from this side of the House. Nō reira e mihi atu ki a koutou katoa kia ora.