So who makes up the 32 MPs. Let's break it down by the six parties.
Labour – Nine MPs out of 34 (26%). Labour has seven List MPs who are Māori, one Māori seat and one Māori MP who won a general seat.
Greens – Six MPs out of 15 (40%). Five List MPs and one Māori MP who won a general seat.
Te Pāti Māori – Six MPs out of six (100%). Six Māori seat MPs.
national – Five MPs out of 48 (10%). All five won general seats.
NZ First – Four MPs out of eight (50%). All List MPs.
ACT – Three MPs out of 11 (27%). One Māori MP who won a general seat and two List MPs.
This shows that there is no unified view on behalf of Māori. Five of the six parties have a greater proportion of Māori MPs than the adult population, and one has slightly fewer.
National is the party that is most successful at selecting Māori candidates in general seats.
Te Pāti Māori of course holds the most Māori seats.
Labour has the most List MPs who are Māori.
NZ First has the highest proportion of their caucus Māori, after Te Pāti Māori.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
Greens – Six MPs out of 15 (40%). Five List MPs and one Māori MP who won a general seat.
Te Pāti Māori – Six MPs out of six (100%). Six Māori seat MPs.
national – Five MPs out of 48 (10%). All five won general seats.
NZ First – Four MPs out of eight (50%). All List MPs.
ACT – Three MPs out of 11 (27%). One Māori MP who won a general seat and two List MPs.
This shows that there is no unified view on behalf of Māori. Five of the six parties have a greater proportion of Māori MPs than the adult population, and one has slightly fewer.
National is the party that is most successful at selecting Māori candidates in general seats.
Te Pāti Māori of course holds the most Māori seats.
Labour has the most List MPs who are Māori.
NZ First has the highest proportion of their caucus Māori, after Te Pāti Māori.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
11 comments:
An analysis we all suspected . Clear evidence that the former Labour Party ideological policies supporting maorification of everything were divisive and abusive to taxpayers and NZ citizens
What's a Maori.
If that is not acompelling case fro abandonment of the maori seats what is?
All of which serves to demonstrate that race based seats are not needed in NZ, and they simply create a space for racist and radically separatist politicians to find their way into parliament despite tiny constituencies, or into local body politics where they regularly create significant conflicts of interest - irreconcilable because Iwi sit on both sides of the regulatory fence; the stuff of a banana republic. As Farrar’s stats show, Maori are quite capable of political representation without the help of race based seats.
You have just made a case for abolishing the Maori seats?.
Now lets define what is a Maori?
Only in NZ - where apathy reigns supreme - would it be possible for Te Pata Maori to take the Maori electorates to loud msm acclaim.... because these electorates were not abolished as recommended under MMP. Impossible to reverse this now.
Had that step been taken, today's story would be very different.
Surely this demonstrates once more that the Treaty has long outlived its relevence. Why do we need to continue locking ourselves into a nearly 200 year old agreement that was not intended to have the longevity it has acquired. Will we still be debating its meaning - and/or reinventing it - in another 200 years? At what point does it cease to be relevant? At what point do we all agree that New Zealnders are one people and there is no need for separatist policies that benefit so few.
We don't need a referendum on Treaty principles - it just needs to be put away in a cupboard and consigned to history. And lets not forget that no other ex-British - or indeed any - colony has such an agreement between the natives and the settlers.
Once the Chiefs had given up their individual governments to the Queen and become British subjects, the TOW had achieved its purpose and was filed away.
From 30th July 1839 until 3rd May 1841, New Zealand was under the jurisdiction and dependency of New South Wales.
The TOW was superseded by Queen Victoria's 1840 Royal Charter/Letters Patent dated 16th November 1840. This Royal Charter separated New Zealand from New South Wales, made NZ into a British Colony with a Governor and Constitution that set up NZ's political, legal and justice systems under one flag and one law, irrespective of race, colour or creed on the 3rd May 1841.
Our 'democractic' Governments over the years have completely ignored our Royal Charters/Letters Patents, which has allowed a 'filed away treaty' to be considered our founding document, and subject to outrageous and unfounded translations and interpretations by Maori, our Government and the Waitangi Tribunal.
Maori seats are a condescending insult to every Maori MP or councillor who has ever won a general seat (Parliament or local council) by being the best person for the job.
It was changed, I recall back in the 1970s from 'to be Maori you had to be 50%' to 'if you have one Maori ancestor'. I don't really care how Maori you have to be to be Maori, because race doesn't matter when the rules are the same regardless.
Nicely done David 👍
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.