Local Electoral (Repeal of Race-Based Representation) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Local Electoral (Repeal of Race-Based Representation) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:639;Page:9880] 
Local Electoral (Repeal of Race-Based Representation) Amendment Bill 
First Reading 
Debate resumed from 22 November 2006. 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I want to speak to this bill and to explain why the National Party has brought this bill into the House and I want to do it in the context of Northland. It is ironic that in an area like Northland—in many of the areas particularly in the far north and the Hokianga—the citizens are predominantly of Maori descent. Indeed I think in the far north now the make-up of 60 percent of the population is of Maori descent. [ 
Interruption 
] My colleague Hone Harawira says he is doing his best along with a number of his whanau. Therefore it is ironic that a place like Northland would even need to contemplate a bill like this. In fact one of the ironies I guess given that Hone has spent a great deal of his life speaking for the minority is that if this bill is not passed then I assume that he will want to introduce a bill to ensure there is proper representation of non-Maori in the far north on local government—if he iintends to stick to his convictions and I know he does. 
Hone Harawira 
: He has many convictions. 
JOHN CARTER 
: He has many good convictions might I add. But I make the point that race-based representation is absolutely unnecessary. There is only one local authority to my knowledge that has taken it up—the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: That was done before this legislation. 
JOHN CARTER 
: That is right. So it has not actually been picked up. But actually the representation is causing problems and it is now causing problems amongst Maoridom in that local authority as well. It has become the case that this bill has now become essential to assist and I hope that the House feels that it can support it. 
One of the ironies is that because of laws like this where maybe the intention was right but the outcome is wrong Maori can often become disadvantaged by it. I am one of those people who is a strong believer in saying that if I take what I know of the far north and indeed of Northland that Maori have the ability to stand on their own feet. They are just as good at putting their point of view as anybody else. They are quite capable of getting the support of the people whether they be Maori or non-Maori. In Northland we pride ourselves on the fact that we have good representation right across the whole region. It is not based on race it is based on the fact that people have ability and are capable. 
Indeed when I was a servant in the Hokianga as the county clerk the local authority there had a predominance of Maori councillors—not because they were Maori but because they were people who were supported by the people. They did not stand there and say: “You have to vote for me because I have Maori blood and I have some reason that I need to have extra support.” They were good competent and capable people who were able to express their view and to put their point of view across and attract the support of the people of the Hokianga. I have seen the same thing happen on school boards in Northland. I have seen it happen at a number of elections. 
One of the good things that I feel happens in Northland is that whoever it is who is standing for whatever position that person is not judged on whether he or she is Maori or non-Maori but on his or her ability. This bill is all about that. I hope that the House has the good sense tonight to support it. What it shows is that our nation is growing. It will show if this bill is supported that we have come to recognise that people regardless of their race have ability have the opportunity and can contribute to our nation. All of us should be encouraging that to happen. I hope that this bill gets passed tonight. I certainly will support it. 
DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
: 
 I take this call to confirm on the record that I oppose this bill the Local Electoral (Repeal of Race-Based Representation) Amendment Bill and I confirm that the entire Labour caucus also opposes this bill. I have three reasons surrounding that position but firstly can I say that the debate this evening has been about the acknowledgment of our history and our nationhood. It has been about identifying our tipuna our marae and the place of Maori within the history that has formed our nation. 
The first point I want to make is that this bill undermines the very essence of our national identity. The sponsor of the bill argues that there should be no racially based electoral representation in local government. It is my view that that is a modern-day contemporary attack against local democracy. We must ensure that within local government there is a level of representation that does reflect our communities. 
In looking at some of the history surrounding this bill I reiterate that Judge Peter Trapski conducted an inquiry into Maori representation on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and the establishment of the Maori wards. Over a 9-year period leading up to the year 2000 the people of the Bay of Plenty the Bay of Plenty Regional Council its councillors all 33 iwi and the four tribal confederations including 133 hapu within the Bay of Plenty area met to discuss the problem surrounding the lack of Maori representation at local level. In terms of a large group or a mandate I do not think one could get a better mandate from those groupings to discuss that issue. They all concluded that it was necessary to support an Act—a bill at the time—to encourage Maori representation within local government. 
The Local Electoral Act 2001 enables councils to make a decision as to whether provisions for Maori representation are appropriate for their community. For instance the people of the Bay of Plenty chose to have Maori representation on their regional council in 2001. I think that was great. I think that provided the platform to ensure that at the very least there was a level of Maori representation at that level. We are so used to hearing that currently there is a level of Maori representation through various functions that are held by councils within their areas and that representation generally is by holding a powhiri at various functions—that is our kaumatua and kuia getting out and supporting the powhiri for those functions within those areas. It is time that we supported and encouraged the opportunity for Maori to move into the positions where decisions are made. I am talking about the positions on a council itself. So that is the first reason why I think it is important to oppose this bill. 
The second reason is that we have to think why this bill has been presented in the way it has been to abolish or repeal race-based representation. I think that that is the precursor leading to the policy of abolishing the Maori seats in general and I think that is unacceptable. 
The third reason I oppose this bill is that I think it is important that the sponsor of the bill and its supporters listen to today’s society. Today’s society is saying that it is acceptable to ensure that people and groups within communities are represented on local bodies and central government. So we must ensure that we support and encourage every way possible to ensure that that happens. Kia ora. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (NZ First) 
: 
 I have to say that I endorse very much the comments made by John Carter the member for Northland in terms of the experience of Northland and Northland local government. I mention people like Kahu Sutherland who is on our local council who is not only steeped in Maoridom but he has made an enormous contribution to and is held in extremely high respect in Whangarei. He would be able to run against anybody and beat that person hands down in his own right because he has the essential strengths to be able to do the job and do it well. We had a mayor for example who was Maori—Stan Semenoff which sounds a bit Russian obviously. Our regional council chair for many years was Maori—a certain Jim Peters. Our mayor at the moment happens to be a Peters also. 
So New Zealand First has always believed from the time the Bay of Plenty bill came in—which we resisted quite strongly as members may remember—that creating this situation which is a quota system is patronising to Maori. Until the Maori Party came into this House New Zealand First had the highest proportion of caucus members who were Maori. They believed that Maori could achieve as well as anybody else as they have achieved on the sporting fields and in fields of endeavour such as the armed forces etc. and they can equally achieve in this particular area and Northland is one such area. We also had a guy by the name of Isopo Samu who was Tokelauan. He was voted in by the citizens of Whangarei because of the sterling work he had done within the community and the respect he was given. He gained the support of the people there. 
Therefore New Zealand First will be supporting this bill. We do not believe race-based representation is needed. In terms of the Maori seats at national level as members well know New Zealand First does not put up members to fight those seats. However we are not saying that we would abolish them; we actually believe there is a process that needs to be gone through that requires the consent of the Maori people in the first place before those seats are abolished. But in fairness to the position that we hold we do not put up candidates for those particular seats. Yet we still have managed to have very high levels of Maori representation within our party. Therefore we say that this bill is unnecessary. 
John Carter made an interesting point. Since this legislation was put in place which gave capacity to local governments to put in place seats based upon an ethnicity not one council has actually taken it up. They have not taken up the offer. The only situation that exists is the one in the Bay of Plenty after a special bill was put through by Mita Ririnui and the effect of that was to reduce the number of Maori members on that council from three to two. That was the actual effect of that legislation going through. 
I want to finish off because pretty obviously New Zealand First will be supporting this particular bill. We support the notions and the concepts behind it. We believe that Maori are capable of achieving in their own right without the necessity of having these sorts of protectionist mechanisms. A couple of years ago Mahara Okeroa and Dave Hereora came to Whangarei to open a Ko Tawa presentation at the Whangarei Museum. There was an absolutely fantastic presentation of stuff that had been collected by Colonel Mair. Mahara Okeroa as an Associate Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage made—I would have to say—a very impressive whaikorero and I thought “This guy’s really got it.” But when it came to doing the waiata he turned round and looked first at Dave. It ended up with the Pakeha boy from Northland having to do the waiata on behalf of Dave Hereora on that occasion. 
Hone Harawira 
: Shame shame shame! 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: Yes that is exactly right. So I make the point that not only can Maori do as well as Pakeha but in some cases Pakeha can do as well as Maori. New Zealand First will be supporting this legislation. 
SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. I stand to take a short call on this wretched bill put forward by Mr Ryall trying to foster discord no doubt in the Bay of Plenty. There is something very interesting in the general policy statement of the bill. It states “At present the Local Electoral Act 2001 provides the option of Maori wards and constituencies at district council and regional council levels and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Maori Constituency Empowering) Act 2001 mandates such seats in that region.” There is something very important here surrounding the word “option”. 
The people in Te Moana-a-Toi mai i Nga Kuri-a-Wharei ki Tihirau of course Mr Ryall is completely oblivious of. We see it every day when he is feeding some half-baked mix of a toxic diet to the people of the Bay of Plenty. Well we are not going to have it not for the iwi and the tangata whenua of that area. They deserve a far better mix of ideas and leadership which is why I follow with a great deal of confidence my friend Mr Hereora and my Pakeha kaumatua from Tai Tokerau Mr Donnelly. I stand with Mr Hereora to condemn and consign this piece of irrelevancy to the dust heap of history. We only hope that Mr Ryall soon goes in that direction. 
The notion of an option is that people in that region decide what is best for that region; they have a shot at choosing what is going to suit their circumstances. Why is it that he single-handedly should believe that this House would want to support him in overwhelming the goodwill the common sense and the vision of the vast majority of the people of that part of Aotearoa who want Pakeha Maori and whoever else that is there to live harmoniously? They do not want to see his divisive plots littering the floor of this Chamber. That game was run by Mr Ryall and a few in  
The Hollow Men 
. Of course in that book it was evident that Mr Ryall had his knickers in a twist or as I said that the ladder in his intellectual stocking was well and truly evident. No we will not have any of that. We will not allow that type of poor thinking and those kinds of ill-conceived ideas. It is almost as if something lurks there hiding. No we cannot allow that to intrude upon these matters of national identity and regional leadership on questions of identity in Te Moana-a-Toi Bay of Plenty. 
Despite the best efforts of Mr Carter reciting a potted history of social relationships in Tai Tokerau aided by Mr Donnelly a part of what they say is inaccurate because they overlook the word “option”. That lies at the pith of why this side of House sees no drama no angst and no danger in initiatives of this nature. The people in that region have the choice as to how they believe their community can be strengthened and enriched so that the representatives not only have to speak for the majority culture but come via different conduits and speak for the entire region. 
It is a region with a great deal of potential despite the nature of its current representative. It is a region that deserves the scope and the latitude to make its own decisions about matters that are at the grass roots—the flax roots. The less we hear from Mr Ryall about these matters of sensitivity— 
Hon Member 
: Scratching the itch. 
SHANE JONES 
: No I will not go there on the question of itch. He knows exactly what he is doing and the sooner we dismiss this bill and rule him completely out of order on matters to do with race relations the better. Kia ora tatou. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 Mr Speaker— 
Bob Clarkson 
: Tell us about Hone Heke. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: Hone Heke was a great warrior and he came from the north not from the Bay of Plenty. 
Bob Clarkson 
: And he’s pronounced Hone Heke! 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: He was a great warrior. He did not come from Mauao where people put up grand racetracks and ignore the rights as they still do of local Maori. 
It is imperative that at local government level there is representation that reflects our communities especially in the Bay of Plenty. If we recall Judge Peter Trapski conducted an inquiry into Maori representation on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and also into the establishment of Maori wards. Mr Ryall has a very selective memory because over 9 years all the iwi all the hapu and all the straight-thinking Pakeha and councillors got together in the Bay of Plenty and agreed there should be specific representation in relation to the Maori seats. 
So it is a nonsense when we hear the platitudes in the House foisted on us by Mr Ryall and by Hone Carter that this is a distant damaging factor in the relationships of us forging together as a nation. Remember that the Treaty was signed by two people—those people who were visitors then who have etched their way into this ground going forward and the people who were already here us Maori. It is a known fact that Maori are under-represented on local bodies. They make up 5 percent of the participants. That is shocking. 
People are saying in this Chamber tonight: “Hear hear!”. Mr Ryall and co. would like us to go back to the old-fashioned days when councils and authorities of governance were just mirrorings of the counties of England and a person used to run around the town ringing the bell going “Hear hear!”—the town crier. That is exactly what Mr Ryall has done. 
Eric Roy 
: Hear ye hear ye! 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: Hear hear! That is exactly what Mr Ryall has done—hear hear no place for these Maori leave them out. It is disgraceful. Most Maori representation on councils over the last 20 years has been via secondments—you know put a bit of Maori on there get a Maori advisory group. It is shocking. 
Let us cut to the chase about the Bay of Plenty. Nearly 53 percent of the land is owned by Maori. The biggest owner of fish assets in that area is Maori so it would be common sense for those who want to imbue a good strong commercial base to enable Maori to participate. Certainly what is important in my mind is that dealing with that under-representation needs to be supported as my learned colleague Shane Jones said rather than foisting and placing toxic views on something that is a serious way forward for our people in this country. 
It is so exciting that at the moment we have a Chinese Mayor in Gisborne who has taken the time to learn a third language the language of the tangata whenua in this country. He is Chinese and is living on Maori whenua with a whole lot of Pakeha constituents. That is what I believe is great stuff in relation to local authorities. If they have that asset if they have the desire to be part of the councils then why at the end of the day do we have this bill in the House placing this nonsensical issue before us? 
We will be supporting the holding of those seats because it is more than a right; it is more than being fashionable; it is about Maori who have the assets in that place who have a major percentage of the population and who are not represented on those councils. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Why not? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: It is because some people calculate out how to block and make sure that Maori do not get on there. At the end of the day it takes a great effort and there are those issues that are relevant to making sure that Maori get a say—not people who are given tokenistic roles in parties and who foist platitudes on other people or culture as we say and do nothing for their people; nothing whatsoever. 
 We will be supporting the retention of those seats and it is a wise and wonderful thing to do. If we are serious about nationhood and about Maori having a standard then what is so wrong about this? Do not let that sneakiness come out in the sense of stiff kaki whero those people who preach and leech on about the place that Maori should not be. People preach and leech about how it is no good having Maori in there and say: “Let us just use their assets let us just get them to come and do the haka for us we will just let them be at our beck and call.” Well those seats need to be there. Kia ora. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the 
 Local Electoral (Repeal of Race-Based Representation) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
Ayes 56 
New Zealand National 48; New Zealand First 7; Independent: Copeland. 
Noes 62 
New Zealand Labour 49; Green Party 6; Maori Party 3; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independent: Field. 
Motion not agreed to.