Flavell Te Ururoa: Local Electoral (Maori Representation) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Local Electoral (Maori Representation) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11803] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Kia ora ano tatau e te Whare. Ka mihi atu ki te ahuatanga o nga korero kua korerohia a tino rata atu au ki nga korero kua puta i etahi. He kawa tonu te korero a wetahi engari he pai tera. 
[ 
Greetings to us once again the House. I acknowledge the tenor of the addresses presented. Some were very satisfying to me but some were somewhat distasteful. But that is fine 
.] 
I thank all members for their contributions tonight. They have pretty much covered the length and breadth of some of the discussion on the Local Electoral (Maori Representation) Amendment Bill. I do not intend to go back over all of those points but I will make a couple of points. 
The one person one vote principle is a great ideal but for Maori the aspiration of equality before the law has been a long time coming. When we look at the establishment of Parliament in this country we know that when the General Assembly met for the first time in 1854 Maori had no representation. That anomaly was because their property was in hapu ownership rather than individual title. As Ranginui Walker has pointed out that gave Parliament pretty much free rein to alienate and confiscate Maori land and to make war on Maori. Eventually 23 years later Parliament passed the Maori Representation Act to establish four seats in Parliament. That was all well and good but on a population basis in a House of 80 members there should have been 20 Maori seats. 
The issue of Maori representation has been with us a long time and it is likely to stay with us into the future. The whole crux of the bill that I have put before the House is to try on the basis of the Treaty relationship to find voice for Maoridom within local government having stabilised at least the position for Maori seats at the national governmental level. 
One thing I found interesting while doing some work on this bill was a thing called the ratepayer franchise. Most New Zealanders get to vote in the local body elections only where they live but a very special group of New Zealanders get to vote both where they live and where they own property. That means that those who can afford to have a property here and a property there get an extra vote. So I ask myself why people find that acceptable under the rules. For Maoridom we seem to struggle with the notion of allowing equal representation yet we have an anomaly of that sort. Why has nothing been done about that particular notion? 
Chester Borrows for whom I have a huge amount of respect talked about the notion that communities should decide. As we explained through the Auckland super-city discussion that is all well and good but the practical reality is that that is not how it happens. It cannot be left for councils to make the decisions on representation. Those councils are already likely to not have Maori representation so are they likely to support the notion of having Maori representation without going through the argument? I do not think so. Those councils will for ever hold on to that notion of power. 
When we talk about Maori representation—and indeed the Treaty of Waitangi—the problem for us and this Parliament is the whole question of understanding what the Treaty of Waitangi relationship stands for. In the last couple of years that I have been in this Parliament there have been times when members of this House have come up to me and for one reason or another all of a sudden realised that there is a Maori voice. That voice at this point in time happens to come from the Maori Party and some of the discussion that we have put on the floor of this House has been a real awakening for them and a new discussion that they had never ever heard. If that is reflective of the national Parliament of this country I wonder what hope Maori representation has at a local body level. 
I suggest that if I were to ask the members of the House how many of them have been to a marae and stayed over for a tangi for example it would be very few. That is not to say that going to a tangi is the greatest experience in one’s life but it means we must ask how those people will ever get to an understanding about the views the dreams and the aspirations of Maori people if they cannot see feel and be amongst the people. That is why Maori continue to demand a place at the decision-making table: because those who are at the decision-making table at this point in time in most cases will never ever be able to understand what we feel as a people and what our hopes dreams and aspirations are for our tamariki and mokopuna. 
In closing I say that I hope members who are not in the House in this point in time can reflect on that. At times when there are crucial decisions to be made when Maori would like to get next to our Treaty partners—as on issues such as the Tuhoe settlement and the foreshore and seabed legislation—it would be really good if we could come together and if Maori and Pakeha actually understood how Maori people feel about this country and issues and their desire to contribute. Hopefully at one point or another there will be that realisation that we can make a positive contribution; it would help if many members understood the dreams and aspirations of Maoridom in this country.