The democrats were outnumbered and the Hastings District Council – 33.3% of its members of Maori descent – voted to fortify iwi influence by appointing four members of the Maori Joint Committee to the council’s four standing committees.
This was decided after a debate which the NZ Herald curiously said became “divisive”, apparently because four councillors argued the decision should be taken to a public poll – a suggestion which, given the constitutional implications of the issue, had a great deal of merit.
This is especially so in a district where the citizens already have voted against a proposal to create a race-based electoral system by introducing Maori wards.
The four councillors who voted against the deliquescence of their democracy (a process insidiously spreading through the country’s local authorities to the accompaniment of cries of “partnership”) were Rod Heaps, Simon Nixon, Kevin Watkins and Malcolm Dixon.
Waatea News reported news of the vote under the heading Hastings to hear Māori voice.
This mischievously implies a Maori voice has not previously been heard in that part of the country, contrary to a council press statement which Waatea News only partly quoted. It notes:
- The Maori Joint Committee was established in 2005 (it comprises the mayor, five councillors and six appointed members from tangata whenua).
- Five members of the elected council (a mayor and 14 district councillors) have identified as being of Maori descent.
- This means 33.3% of elected councillors are of Maori descent in a district where 25% of the population is Maori.
Not good enough, apparently.
The council’s press statement says the prospect of greater tangata whenua representation in council decision making has been under discussion for at least two years and has been the subject of several workshops between councillors and the council’s Maori Joint Committee.
So what’s wrong with the representation provided by the five councillors with Maori ancestry?
The press statement amplifies a council fixation with race when it explains the five “were elected on their wider merits, rather than on a solely Maori mandate”.
Oh dear. They represent the whole community, not just a part of it,
There was another consideration: the council says “there were also no guarantees what the make-up of the council would be beyond the next election cycle, and a more permanent and robust model for Maori representation was considered necessary“.
In other words, voters are not to be trusted to make the right choices.
The tears and singing which followed the vote was understandable: it means the four members who will be appointed to standing committees – Evelyn Ratima, Ngaio Tiuka, Tracee Te Huia and Te Rangihau Gilbert – don’t have to bother with the cumbersome process of campaigning for electoral support, as other local body politicians must do.
Mayor Sandra Hazlehurst proudly led the charge towards establishing a governance arrangement even less democratic than the one rejected by the citizens when they were given a chance to have their say.
Her voice cracked as she started her speech, saying, through tears, that she was proud to speak against the motion suggesting the decision should go to a public poll.
“I have loved my journey with the Māori Joint Committee for six years.
“This is how we can have a council which we’ve agreed to be more inclusive, a council which hears the voice of our iwi partners, Te Ao Māori perspective, for us to learn from.”
More inclusive, perhaps – but less democratic.
This was recognised by Councillor Simon Nixon, who moved the motion to take the decision to the public.
“What we are talking about here is democracy, the principle of one man, or one person, one vote, and it is my opinion this does not meet that criteria.”
This Nixon bloke reportedly said it was an attempt by a small group to muscle in, or gatecrash.
Now let’s wait to see how the appointees will flex their muscle.
An element of acculturation seems likely.
Mayor Hazlehurst said the decision meant the council would be more inclusive, and the representatives would bring valued knowledge from Te Ao Māori – the Māori world.
“These representatives will bring valued skills, knowledge and experiences which will allow us to learn from the Maori worldview.”
Tiuka, a Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Inc director, underscored this, saying:
“As a nation the intolerance of Te Ao Māori or the Māori world view is obsolete and needs to be ignored.”
The Hastings District Council’s four standing committees each provide oversight and policy direction in a certain area.
All councillors sit on the standing committees but any decision made at committee level must be ratified at a full council meeting.
The four iwi representatives are not receiving remuneration for sitting on the committees
Under Section 41 of the Local Government Act, only elected representatives may vote at the full Council meetings.
Under Schedule 7, however, council can appoint a person or persons to a committee or subcommittee if, in the opinion of the local authority, that person has the skills, attributes, or knowledge that will assist the work of a committee or subcommittee.
Citizens will be going to the polls later in the year, of course.
Afterwards – the mayor acknowledged – any new governance arrangements and all committee representations will be reviewed.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor
for the Point of Order blog HERE.
1 comment:
Battle of Hastings.
Thank you Bob for illustrating what should have been blazoned across our Media as a further attempt to devalue our democracy. Although with present scarcity of Independent journalism in New Zealand, this is understandable.
The Iwi claim of co-governance is a blind for their final objective; namely “Total Iwi Governance”, helped for decades by weak unprincipled politicians and L.G. councillors. Not to mention that our Local Government has succumbed at long last with pressure from central government, to what is in reality, nothing more than a surrender to apartheid.
The rot in our Local Government started way back with the 1984 Lange Government’s amendments to the Local Act. This gave away the old control method which prevented unlimited spending by Councils. Now we have local bodies spending ratepayer’s money on items which are not related to our failing infrastructure. This has been at the expense of core services.
Hence we see prolific spending on Entertainment centres, Sports centres. (Shades of the Roman Caesars,) with Gladiatorial Combats and the erection of expensive Coliseums. Alas, unlike the original, not built to stand the test of time!
There was in the U.K. an old saying in Local Government, that it was very hard for a “Town Clerk” or CEO. to find a Mayor/Chairman willing to open a new sewerage works. But a line up of dignitaries when it was a new Town Hall.! Read Civic Centre in modern jargon.
Priorities and reality have given way to public events that glamorise and give kudos to both Politicians and Councillors alike; but then they serve the purpose as always, of distracting the public!
Our officials have learnt well from the lessons of MMP, and the demise of democracy.
Note. Harold’s Saxons lost the Battle of Hastings by a subterfuge..a military trick much copied since.
That sort of trick in our day can be phrased in two words “Citizen Apathy”
Good Article Bob.
Brian
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.