In a video released this week, Luxton walked viewers through the Commission’s official site, vote.nz, where voters might naturally expect impartial information on upcoming local elections and referendums. When clicking through to a section titled “about Māori wards and constituencies,” users are redirected to another page.
That page, however, is not operated by the Electoral Commission at all. At the bottom of the site, it is revealed that the content is managed by Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) and Taituarā, Local Government Professionals Aotearoa. Both groups have publicly opposed allowing referendums on Māori wards and have actively campaigned to entrench them without voter approval.
The page in question presents Māori wards in a distinctly positive light. One highlighted section states:
The page in question presents Māori wards in a distinctly positive light. One highlighted section states:
“Establishing Māori wards and constituencies provides an inclusive and democratic avenue for councils to collaborate with Māori, fostering positive relationships and ensuring decisions benefit the entire community.”
Luxton argues this is not impartial information but advocacy, and worse, it is being promoted through the Commission’s trusted platform. “This site looks official. It uses the Commission’s orange colouring, but at the very bottom we find out the page is not part of the Commission’s website,” he said.
The ACT MP has written to the Auditor-General, calling for the Electoral Commission to remove the link and for a full review into whether its neutrality obligations have been breached. At the time of his statement, Luxton had not received a response.
The issue strikes at the heart of public trust in election authorities. Voters expect the Electoral Commission to remain above politics and provide balanced information, not redirect them to organisations with a clear agenda. By promoting LGNZ and Taituarā as “trustworthy sources,” critics argue the Commission risks undermining confidence in the democratic process.
The controversy comes at a time when debates over Māori wards remain deeply divisive across New Zealand. While supporters argue they strengthen representation and uphold Treaty commitments, opponents like myself say voters should retain the right to decide the matter through referendums.
For Luxton, the principle is simple: “Are voters getting impartial information on Māori wards referendums? Apparently not, at least not from the Electoral Commission.”
The response from the Auditor-General, and any changes by the Commission, will determine whether this latest challenge becomes a minor controversy or a serious credibility problem for the body tasked with safeguarding New Zealand’s elections.
Matua Kahurangi is just a bloke sharing thoughts on New Zealand and the world beyond. No fluff, just honest takes. He blogs on https://matuakahurangi.com/ where this article was sourced.
9 comments:
No surprise - the Electoral Commission, the Local Govt Commission etc ..... all infiltrated and charged with passing under the radar pro-HP messages. These persons have massive
" skin in the game" interests but are largely faceless.
As I said against the other post above on this: Regarding 4 Oct: ACT Forces Electoral Commission To Remove Link To Pro-Māori Wards Messaging. I went and read the full article which concludes with "The link still appears to be present on the Te Reo Māori language version of the site." This is duplicitous and precisely why we should do away with this dual language folly.
I e mailed the commission, asking them to remove clause 8. My e mail is here :-
"I am a long term resident of New Zealand.
I am very concerned that “Treaty Clause 8” in the above document is wrong, because it is quite simply racist and would force every councillor to bow to a race-based political ideology dressed up as Treaty ‘principles.’
Councillors are elected to represent all of their communities – not to deliver on the demands of one group.
Clause 8 must be removed.
Douglas Longmire"
I got the following reply:-
Kia ora,
Thank you for your feedback on the Commission’s draft standardised code of conduct.
The Commission will consider this feedback as part of finalising the code.
Ngā mihi,
The Local Government Commission
It's good that this has been discovered but how many people have already -diverted to the LGNZ site and have believed that Maori wards are democratic, as it states?
I think it's about time a few heads rolled.
I’ve been posting Christian messages of support for Matua, but they are being censored. This blog isn’t the democracy I voted for, it’s censorship! Its outrageous! Shame!
Sending someone the message 'Jesus loves you' is hardly on topic. Nor is it a 'message of support' in the sense of expressing support for the case being made. If you want to proselytise, do it elsewhere.
>" This blog isn’t the democracy I voted for"
I must have missed something. When did Breaking Views hold elections and for what?
Off-topic comments are littered all over this site. The mods are selective and anti-free speech, censoring views they don’t agree with. Practice what you preach or wallow in hypocrisy.
Off-topic comments that are let through are those that are embedded in on-topic commentaries (unless they are libellous or otherwise potentially actionable).
Breaking Views is under no legal or moral obligation to publish anything and everything that people submit to it. The point of the Comments section is to get readers engaging in discussion and debate. Comments that have no bearing on the matter at hand are rejected because they add nothing to the discussion.
Post a Comment