Mackey Moana: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
Mackey Moana: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6420] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 I am very happy to follow on from my colleague from Gisborne David Garrett. I think the most telling thing about that speech on the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill was that Mr Garrett really disproved his own point. He could not remember the Maori guy’s last name so how would he be able to vote for him? He met someone who inspired him so much but he disproved his point exactly: he came to the ballot paper and could not remember the guy’s last name because it was Maori. I think that quite aptly shows some of the issues that Maori have in terms of representation. The reality is that no sane person can look at the history of Maori representation on the Auckland councils and say that it has been fair. They cannot because there have been eight Maori elected to council in nearly 150 years. If Mr Garrett thinks that that shows the system is working A-OK then I think that says something about the ACT Party. 
I also work in the Bay of Plenty. There are Maori seats on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. You know the sky did not fall in! Racism has not exploded in the Bay of Plenty. There are no racial divides over there. I want to remind members what the National Party said about that legislation which was put up by my colleague Mita Ririnui and about the Local Government Act which allowed councils to have Maori seats if they decided they wanted them. I have picked two quotes from the Hon Dr Nick Smith. These quotes show that none of us really should be surprised that at the end of the day the National Party went with the ACT Party and decided to say no to the 7000 people who marched in Auckland saying they wanted representation on the council. The Hon Dr Nick Smith said: “Then we have the separatism provisions: the way in which we are to change a long-term 160-year tradition in the way we elect local members by introducing apartheid. I say to the Minister in the chair the Hon. Chris Carter who proudly boasts that he protested against apartheid in South Africa—but he is going to introduce it into New Zealand—that he should get on his feet and defend that … What is separate representation if it is not apartheid?”. That is what the Hon Dr Nick Smith said. He also said: “This damn law we are being required to pass is nothing less than apartheid and I cannot believe members opposite want to impose this sort of obscene provision. It offends against National’s principle of one standard of citizenship.” When one considers those quotes one sees how little has changed. 
Those of us who support Maori seats in Auckland see the value that those seats will bring. We see that in the Bay of Plenty. Another concern the National Party always raises is that it will mean Maori members will only focus on Maori issues. Well that has not happened in the Bay of Plenty. The Maori members focus on everything. The other members focus on everything as well. It is actually about representation on the ground. We have a number of councillors who probably do not go on to marae a lot. Hui is not their preferred form of contact with their constituents so they simply would not go there whereas the iwi representatives on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council do. They go to the hui they hold the hui and they consult with their constituents. One would find if we did not have these seats that a whole portion of our society would not get the same level of representation. So having these seats is about equality. 
Imagine if we were to say to some of our Pakeha constituents that we would not go to their meetings. We would say that we expect them to come to the marae we expect them to come to the hui we expect them to speak in Maori and then they will get representation from their elected representatives. They would say that was not fair and they would be right. So why is it OK to say to Maori constituents that they will have to come to our meetings we will not come to the marae we will not hold the hui we will not hold the hui in Maori and they will just have to live with that? Why are two standards OK to the National Party? That is what we are talking about. 
We are talking about representation on the ground for the Maori people of Tamaki-makau-rau. I want the next National speaker to stand up and say what is so offensive about requiring equality of representation. It is still the one person one vote principle. They do not get to vote twice. They do not get to vote for two people. They still get to vote for one representative. What is so wrong about ensuring that every citizen of Auckland gets equal representation equal contact with their elected representatives on the city council in the biggest city in New Zealand our most important city and the city where it is crucial that we get it right? Why is that so offensive to the National Party? To me it seems to be common sense. 
Mr Garrett raised the issue of Gisborne and said some very unkind things about Atareta Poananga. Two or three councillors out of 12 on the Gisborne District Council are Maori in a population where 45 percent are Maori. 
David Garrett 
: How did they manage to get on the council? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: How did they manage to get on the council? Oh!