Greens want to dump referendums so they can force separate Māori wards

Several local bodies have failed in their attempts to impose Māori wards on their constituencies, with voters initiating petitions forcing referendums that subsequently voted strongly against separate democratic privileges – see Māori wards and democracy.

Undeterred by determination through the current democratic process, Green co-leader Marama Davidson is promoting “a movement”  for  “Māori wards right across the country”.

NewstalkZB: Green Party not giving up on Maori wards

Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson is refusing to give up the fight to create separate Maori wards, after Whakatane and Palmerston North both voted against the wards in binding referendums.

Davidson says it’s wrong for the majority to be setting the rules for minorities.

“Passing my law, which would have removed that referendum step and which would leave the decision in the hands of the elected councillors, is what is sorely needed.”

She has a law to take a means of democratic decision making out of the hands of voters.

Last year: Greens introduce Bill to make local wards process fair

The Green Party has today entered a Member’s Bill into the ballot that would make local government representation more equitable by ensuring that the establishment of both Māori and general wards on district and regional councils follows the same legal process.

“I’m really excited to be launching my new Member’s Bill today, which will ensure that the process for establishing Māori wards at a local government level is equitable and fair, and honours our commitments under Te Tiriti o Waitangi,” said Green Party Māori development spokesperson Marama Davidson.

Green Farm: ‘All votes are equal…but some vote should be more equal than others’.

“This unfair double standard in our electoral law works to limit Māori representation at local government level throughout the country.

Māori currently have the same opportunities for representation as everyone else. Davidson wants them to have separated representation. Davidson is promoting one standard for Māori the is different for the standard for everyone else.

Why just Māori wards? Why not women’s wards, LBGT wards, immigrant group wards, and white male wards?

“Removing this discriminatory provision is the right thing to do.

With a more discriminatory, less democratic provision?

“The Green Party has a proud history of standing up to honour Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This is a continuation of our work as the political leaders on advancing kaupapa Māori and honouring Te Tiriti,” Ms Davidson said.

By promoting separatist local body democracy. I’m not aware of Te Tiriti o Waitangi stipulating separate democratic rights. There are valid historical reasons for the establishment of the national Māori electorates, and there is no strong indications that voters want that changed – but there are strong indications in New Plymouth, Manawatu, Kaikoura and Whakatane that separate wards are not wanted.

Having lost out in the democratic process Davidson wants the rules changed so she can have what she wants. This is alarming from a party leader.

From the Green’s Open Government and Democracy Policy:

Vision

  • We have a proportional electoral system that is transparent and fair.

This refers to ‘a proportional electoral system’, not dual systems. Fair for all, or ‘more fair’ for some?

Key Principles

1. Key decisions on the shape of the nation’s electoral system belong to the people, not political parties.

And not councils. But Davidson wants this principle overturned so councils can ignore their constituents.

2. The votes of all electors are of equal weight in influencing election results.

Except Davidson wants added weight for a select minority.

6. The electoral system should encourage close links and accountability between individual MPs and their constituents or constituencies.

8. Active democratic processes require more than periodic elections and stronger mechanisms are needed for the ongoing engagement of informed citizens in the development and enactment of key national and local policies.

But Davidson wants to remove the right of local body voters to petition for referendums so they can have their say.

A. Changing the existing system

The Green Party will only consider supporting changes to the Electoral Act if:

1. The only effect of the change is to grant the right to vote to some group of citizens and permanent residents of Aotearoa New Zealand, who were previously ineligible to vote; or
2. The changes are adjustments to the existing electoral system that have been recommended by an independent commission, and that are consistent with our Key Principles.

Separate Māori wards are excluded by point 1. because Māori are already eligible to vote.

I’m not aware of any independent commission recommending Māori wards.

Māori wards are not consistent with Green Party Key Principles, but who needs to bother about principles when a party leader wants to override the current democratic systems?

Another Green democracy ‘vision’:

  • We are actively engaged in our democracy and are able to meaningfully participate in government decision-making.

That’s ok as an ideal, but you can’t make people actively engage in our democracy. Local body referendum turnouts were all close to 40%.

And Davidson wants to remove a petition/referendum means of meaningful participation because she disagrees with the democratic outcome.

Perhaps Davidson should try some meaningful participation and actively engage with Māori non-voters, and find out what would encourage them to engage and vote. That would be much better than trying to change the democratic rules when you don’t get the results you want.

It would be great if more Māori voted. It would also be great if more Māori  candidates stood, and if more Māori candidates were good enough to get voted on to local body governments.

B. Changing to a new system

The Green Party will consider supporting changing to a new electoral system only if:

1. The new electoral system is approved by a free and fair referendum of all people in Aotearoa New Zealand eligible to vote under the existing laws. The referendum should have the following characteristics:
a) The referendum process is determined by an independent commission not by members of parliament

Davidson wants to do the opposite.

Great to get more Māori  voting and standing and elected. But terrible for a party leader to try to change the rules to get what she wants.

Not only is Davidson promoting double democratic standards, she is promoting very different democratic standards to he party principles and policies.

51 Comments

  1. artcroft

     /  May 22, 2018

    Another reason not to vote Grween.

    • Gezza

       /  May 22, 2018

      I’d never vote for a party with a name like that anyway, arty. :/

      • Corky

         /  May 22, 2018

        Arty, these Gweens who have pink holsters, and oil their ”irons” with hemp oil, are an affront to the West…and our manly belief in natural selection.

        • Zedd

           /  May 22, 2018

          ho ho hum..

          • Corky

             /  May 22, 2018

            Talking of ho ho hum…where’s Robby Guyton? It’s not fair he’s missing out on a good kicking.

  2. David

     /  May 22, 2018

    Not sure what problem she is trying to solve there seems to be no basis in fact that if you are Maori people wont vote for you. Local government is achingly PC already and as far as I am aware there is equal access to water, footpaths and libraries.

    • David

       /  May 22, 2018

      “Not sure what problem she is trying to solve”

      A way to get more Green politicians permanent jobs.

      • Blazer

         /  May 22, 2018

        2 Davids are definately not better than…one.

        • High Flying Duck

           /  May 22, 2018

          And yet 2 David’s are infinitely better than 1 Davidson.

          • Blazer

             /  May 22, 2018

            as a Zionist…you are clearly…biased.

            • He’s a “Zionist”. Are you, likewise, a Hamas hugger?

              Labels – sheesh

  3. Geoffrey Monks

     /  May 22, 2018

    The majority setting the rules is a democratic process. The minority imposing rules on the majority is racism in this instance. It could be ‘niced’ up by calling it affirmative action but that also implies an adverse discrimination against the donor community.

    • Gezza

       /  May 22, 2018

      No, it’s not racism. From comments she’s made, I think Marama is a firm believer that the Treaty of Waitangi creates a partnership in which Maori & non-Maori have equal say.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  May 22, 2018

        Davidson is clearly a racist.

        • PDB

           /  May 22, 2018

          At the very least she is insinuating that if you don’t vote for Maori wards you are racist, as indeed Coffey did;

        • Corky

           /  May 22, 2018

          And thick, too. We know her views are held across the liberal spectrum. However, other Leftie politicians are more circumspect as to how they present their communist agendas.. It doesn’t bode well for our democratic process that Davidson can be so blatant about what she wants. Thirty years ago this type of crap would’ve been called for what it is.

          • Gezza

             /  May 22, 2018

            She’s really in the wrong party, imo. Best fit would possibly really be Mana Party. I think she’s going to end up pissing people off in the Greens & amongst potential undecideds (who at least will probably vote). I got the distinct impression she & JAG have a different attitude to participation by Maori. When they were interviewd together during the co-leadership contest Marama said she thought Maori members should have equal say in Party policy. JAG wasn’t going there.

            • PDB

               /  May 22, 2018

              The NZ Greens are now essentially the Mana party.

            • Gezza

               /  May 22, 2018

              Bags YOU go round to Hone’s, knock on the door, & tell him that! 😉

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  May 22, 2018

              Tamati’s husband is a Pakeha, he’s English.

              My neighbour is Pakeha. Her late husband was Maori, Some of her mokos are very Maori looking as one or two of her children (I know that one daughter did) married Maoris. Her grandson, who boards with her, looks entirely Pakeha.

              Good luck trying to sort out which wards they would all be in.

              In fact, there is immense inequality in Councils, as there is no consultation with Pakehas required.

              Two Maori men, friends of my late husband, one a kaumatua, one a long-standing member of the Health Board, were most unimpressed to hear that the meningitis warning posters at the hospital, at least the ones that I saw when I was there with a meningitis scare and lost myself in the corridors were only in Maori. They both said that this issue was too serious for such PCness and and H was going to do something about it.

  4. Geoffrey Monks

     /  May 22, 2018

    The posit that the Treaty created a partnership is fundamentally flawed and is no more than a intellectual device upon which a claim to a greater than equal share of the wealth of the ‘One People’ can be argued.

    • Gezza

       /  May 22, 2018

      Nonsense. Read the Maori version of the Treaty.

      • PDB

         /  May 22, 2018

        The Maori version of the treaty is supposed to be a carbon copy of the English one with only the odd word changed where Maori didn’t have a word in their language for the equivalent English word. Hence the issues with the word ‘sovereignty’ that had no direct translation in Māori and has been used by some Maori since to change history. There is only one version of the treaty in two different languages.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  May 22, 2018

          I’m confused as to why if the Maori thought they were signing one version of the Treaty and the English thought they were signing a different one why on earth the English are now forced to accept the Maori one.

          Obviously the Treaty is invalid if the two parties had different versions. Judicial activism is not constitutional or legal.

          • PDB

             /  May 22, 2018

            Common sense only leads back to the fact there is only one version translated into two languages – not two separate treaties with differences in meaning. The English version was the template for the Maori one therefore its meaning is the true meaning which includes Maori handing over sovereignty to the crown.

            That is why some Maori signed the English version (39 in all) and most others Maori versions as they were all meant to be exactly the same treaty saying exactly the same thing therefore it didn’t matter which version Maori signed.

          • Geoffrey Monks

             /  May 22, 2018

            Obvious when one thinks about it but it is seldom done. Perhaps it relates to our capacity for guilt and how that might be used to advantage. Having said that, entertaining diversion that it might be, there remains the fact that there was one agreement, reached after several days of heated discussion. There was then no doubt about was intended.

          • Gezza

             /  May 22, 2018

            I’m confused as to why if the Maori thought they were signing one version of the Treaty and the English thought they were signing a different one why on earth the English are now forced to accept the Maori one.

            It’s the contra proferentum rule, Alan.

    • Corky

       /  May 22, 2018

      ”The posit that the Treaty created a partnership is fundamentally flawed.”

      Not anymore. Ask any young person ( those who know what the ‘Treaty’ is) and they will tell you it’s partnership agreement between Maori and European.

      • PDB

         /  May 22, 2018

        Say something enough times and it becomes the new reality.

        • Geoffrey

           /  May 22, 2018

          That is ‘reality’ = perceived reality. It does not make it so. Folk genuinely and honestly thought that the world was flat for a very long time too. It turns out that it wasn’t. However, I take your point: if the majority allow the minority to insist that the Treaty is a partnership for long enough, then it is likely that it will be treated that way. Hence my position in defence of democracy.

          • PDB

             /  May 22, 2018

            Corky is correct – our education system, treaty lawyers, Maori & the MSM now in the main says the treaty was a partnership regardless what you and I might think and therefore that is the new reality.

  5. Geoffrey Monks

     /  May 22, 2018

    What Marama might or might not firmly believe does not sanitize her racist stance. It just determines whether she is a committed racist or a political racist.

    • Gezza

       /  May 22, 2018

      Now you’re just starting to rant.

    • Gerrit

       /  May 22, 2018

      She is racist seperatist. Happy she is the Greens co leader as it will drag the Greens forever further leftist to expose the racist red centre.

      Partnership agreement between the English crown and Maori has been superseded by the new concept of bi-culturalism between Maori and Tauiwi.

      As the old English/European Tauiwi influence wanes as the Asian/Indian Tauiwi increases, the treaty disappears into its own irrelevance.

      Most new Tauiwi don’t give a toss about the treaty.

      And no use saying that is why it must be taught in schools (like the language). Most new Tauiwi will use that time to study what is really important to them instead, during those classes.

      From a democratic view point and based on one person one vote, racist separatism cannot exist. Cant have a ruling minority going against the wishes of the people.

      One way to circumvent democracy to only allow the privileged view in the politburo to have voting rights. A politburo ruled by Maori separatist. Be wary and not allow that to happen for that is Marama Davidson agenda..

  6. Geoffrey Monks

     /  May 22, 2018

    Brilliant! If you can’t find an argument, chuck a rock. Goodbye.

    • Gezza

       /  May 22, 2018

      I wonder if you might be a bit overly-sensitive. 🤔

      Whatever. Ka kite ano, e hoa. 👋🏽

      • sorethumb

         /  May 22, 2018

        Hey cut the Maori curses!

        • Gezza

           /  May 22, 2018

          May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your underpants.

          Better? 😳

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  May 22, 2018

            How about ‘May God send you twice what you wish for me.’ ? (an old Jewish saying)

            Or ‘I hope yer chooks turn into emus and kick yer dunny down ! ‘ ?

  7. sorethumb

     /  May 22, 2018

    Perhaps Davidson should try some meaningful participation and actively engage with Māori non-voters, and find out what would encourage them to engage and vote.
    ………..
    They are trying to sell the idea that Maori have a unique world view. They claim it goes back thousands of years from NZ to the Pacific and beyond. They claim it is all linked into whakapapa , mythology and etc. Their problem is they can’t sell it to rationally thinking people, therefore they seek political power.
    This has been dug up and reprocessed but it is founded on post modernist anthropology and post colonial studies..
    That’s what biculturalism has done it has made the government act as though their are two nations with two separate cultures. They give resources to these people and they have developed a cultural bureaucracy. The government have made DOC, and other departments take it seriously.

    Consider the story quoted by early anthropologist Elsdon Best about the pukeko arriving in New Zealand on the Aotea or Horouta canoes. This is a good example of the sort of knowledge claim that might be put forward in a Maori science class. It is also empirically testable. Ornithologists will point out that although pukeko are indeed found though most of the Pacific, New Zealand pukeko belong to the Australian subspecies, not the Pacific. This is consistent with other facts, such as the ancestors of takahe being pukeko which settled here long before humans, and the number of other bird species that have arrived here from across the Tasman. It is not, however, consistent with matauranga.
    http://skeptics.nz/journal/issues/32/maori-science

    • sorethumb

       /  May 22, 2018

      Having the Māori voice on councils will allow for greater, richer and more inclusive decision making, it will ensure the Māori world view is acknowledged, respected and valued. Having Māori ward seats isn’t special treatment, its equal treatment. Keep in mind everyone is still elected, it remains one person, one vote. It is a question of representation.
      https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/103877750/the-case-for-mori-wards

      You can’t demand respect you have to earn it (although Andrew government is talking “real leadership = ignore the public (they are thick); just do it!).

      • sorethumb

         /  May 22, 2018

        Andrew Judd. – he’s not the government – praise the lord!

  8. Geoffrey

     /  May 22, 2018

    To PDB, the world is still not flat. This ‘Partnership” construct cannot possibly stand the test of time. Its temporary and unthinking acceptance by a substantial element will have done huge damage when the majority eventually wake up and get a whiff of reality. The restoration of the ‘oneness’ defined in Article 2 becomes harder by the day but it must eventually happen.
    On the other hand and as been hinted at elsewhere, perhaps massive migration from the North(?) will render interpretation of the Treaty of little more than academic interest. Who now looks at the arrangements agreed between the Vikings and the folk of York?

    • PDB

       /  May 22, 2018

      Plenty more juice to be squeezed from the treaty lemon yet Geoffrey…

  9. Zedd

     /  May 22, 2018

    “Kia Kaha Marama.. ka pai mahi e hoa” 🙂

  10. Corky

     /  May 22, 2018

    Mikey sparks up. As usual he’s right. And as usual being middlclass means he believes Maori think like most of us.

    http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/video/mikes-minute-vast-majority-dont-want-maori-wards/

    • Zedd

       /  May 22, 2018

      Hosking; the voice of the ‘wealthy extreme right’ NOT the middleclass..
      “WAKE UP Corky ?”

  1. Greens want to dump referendums so they can force separate Māori wards — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition
  2. Marama Davidson’s anti- democracy stance on Maori ward referendums examined | The Inquiring Mind