Reynold Macpherson: Why Rotorua district does not have 50-50 co-governance

Between 2013 and 2023, Rotorua Lakes Council was prevented by Parliament and law from adopting a 50/50 co-governance model. In my view this outcome aligns with local preferences and broader trends in New Zealand and other democracies, such as the United States and Canada, where debates over governance models and minority and majority rights continue to evolve. 

This article outlines three key reasons for Rotorua’s reversion to pluralistic majoritarianism and situates them within the wider national and international context.

Co-governance, as explained by lobby group Democracy Action, is an emerging model in New Zealand designed to give equal decision-making power to representatives of local government and iwi. This system, which allocates 50/50 voting rights, aims to foster partnership and mutual respect. However, such co-governance challenges traditional democratic frameworks, which typically adhere to the “one person, one vote, one value” principle of equal suffrage. The introduction of equal partnership voting weights, regardless of population ratios, would fundamentally shift the distribution of decision-making power.

One of the main reasons 50/50 co-governance didn’t gain traction in Rotorua was a widespread preference among stakeholders for a system rooted in equal suffrage. This included many Māori community members who saw equal voting rights as essential to maintaining a democratic system. Although the Treaty of Waitangi and the Fenton Agreement affirm Māori rights and entitlements, neither explicitly calls for co-governance. In my view, many in Rotorua therefore viewed a more representative approach that maintains equal suffrage across the general and Māori populations as a fairer model, believing it better upholds democratic principles.

Legal constraints within New Zealand’s human rights framework presented a second, significant obstacle to co-governance in Rotorua. When a Local Bill was proposed to formalise a 50/50 co-governance structure, the Attorney-General blocked it, arguing it would contravene the Human Rights Act by discriminating against general roll voters. This legal judgment underscored the complexities of transitioning from a model of equal suffrage to one based on partnership. By preventing the bill from passing, the legal framework reaffirmed New Zealand’s commitment to democratic fairness and voter equality, safeguarding the rights of all citizens in the district.

According to the 2018 New Zealand Census, 42% of the population in the Rotorua District identified as Māori, though this figure includes those below voting age, impacting electoral representation. About 28% of eligible Māori in the Rotorua electorate were on the Māori Roll for the October 2022 local elections, and around 22% for the 2023 general election.

In 2015, the Rotorua Lakes Council established Te Tatau o Te Arawa, a Māori policy advisory committee that was carefully structured to formally represent the iwi in council discussions. Members of Te Tatau were appointed to significant subcommittees with voting rights, thus increasing Māori involvement in council decisions without changing the democratic structure of the council itself. Although the role of Te Tatau was generally supported, some community members expressed concerns about 50/50 co-governance, particularly as other issues — including around decision-making, financial policy, rising debt and rates take, and homelessness — began to reshape public opinion about council actions between 2016 and 2020.

The 2021 Representation Review intensified debates about governance when the council, working with Ngāti Whakaue (the largest hapū of Te Arawa), proposed a 50/50 co-governance model. The proposal met significant opposition, many arguing it was incompatible with democratic values and New Zealand’s legal framework. Te Tatau, along with groups such as the Rotorua District Residents and Ratepayers, advocated for a model that would uphold equal suffrage while still allowing for meaningful Māori representation. The majority of stakeholders felt the proposed model failed to reflect their vision of democratic governance.

In preparation for the 2023 local elections, the Local Government Commission introduced a new ward structure to allow proportional representation. Rotorua was divided into general, Māori, and rural wards, yielding a council of 10 members, including three Māori, six general, and one rural representative. This ward structure preserved equal suffrage while ensuring that diverse voices from across the community were represented in council decisions. It enabled greater inclusivity without the need for 50/50 co-governance, offering a more pluralistic form of representation that satisfied most local interests.

The Rotorua co-governance debate highlights an underlying tension between minoritarian and majoritarian governance. Minoritarianism describes a system in which minority groups wield disproportionate influence, sometimes at the expense of the majority. Majoritarianism, by contrast, prioritises the interests of the majority and upholds majority rule as a core democratic principle. While majoritarianism can sometimes overlook minority perspectives, it is often seen as fundamental to democratic governance.

In Rotorua, proponents of 50/50 co-governance appeared to favour a minoritarian approach, while many local stakeholders and council members felt that majoritarian principles better aligned with democratic governance norms, as outlined in New Zealand’s Local Government Act. These differing perspectives revealed a divide between Te Ao Māori (the Māori worldview) and Te Ao Pākehā (the European New Zealand worldview), making consensus on the issue challenging.

The Rotorua co-governance discussion echoes broader debates within New Zealand and internationally. In New Zealand, questions about co-governance often touch on the Treaty of Waitangi’s implications for governance and the nature of biculturalism. Recently, the National-Act-NZ First coalition’s decision to review legislative references to the Treaty’s principles suggests a shift toward a more majoritarian model, in which equal rights for all citizens may increasingly supersede partnership-based models founded on the Treaty. This shift represents an ongoing struggle to balance Māori self-determination with New Zealand Parliament’s sovereignty.

Similar debates are occurring abroad. In the United States, tensions between majority rule and minority rights manifest in issues such as voting rights and judicial decisions, where there are concerns that minority influence might undermine core democratic principles. In Canada, policies that give indigenous communities unique rights within a liberal democracy aim to safeguard cultural autonomy, though critics argue that such policies risk further dividing communities.

A pluralistic majoritarian model might offer a balanced path forward. This model respects majority rule while incorporating mechanisms that ensure minority perspectives are factored into decision-making. Unlike multicultural majoritarianism, which can allow a dominant culture to marginalise minority voices, pluralistic majoritarianism integrates minority viewpoints within a majoritarian structure, fostering a balance of inclusivity and democratic authority. Such a model could potentially help address concerns in diverse communities like Rotorua, preserving both democratic values and social harmony.

Reynold Macpherson was a Rotorua Lakes councillor from 2019 to 2022 and chairman of Rotorua District Residents & Ratepayers from 2013 to 2024.