Bob Edlin: Prime Minister's position on Maori seats.....

How the PM wriggles when asked to declare his position on the future of the Māori seats

Can the PM support something which he regards as senseless?

The answer is yes, when it comes to supporting the Māori seats.

An RNZ report in January 2023 was headed

Māori seats don’t ‘make a lot of sense’ – Christopher Luxon

The text immediately beneath those words said:

Fresh off using his platform at this week’s Rātana celebrations to criticise the government’s approach to co-governance with Māori, National Party leader Christopher Luxon is taking aim at Parliament’s Māori seats.

But despite saying their existence “doesn’t make a lot of sense”, National will still be looking at standing candidates in “at least one or two of them”.

Morning Report host Guyon Espiner asked Luxon about the Māori seats, which (RNZ explained) are open to candidates of any ethnicity but since their creation in 1867 have been intended to guarantee some level of Māori representation in parliament.

“Historically, that has been something that we’ve said – look, one person one vote – that doesn’t make a lot of sense in our view,” Luxon replied.

“But the reality is, being quite pragmatic… the Māori seats have been present in our system for some time. They’re not going away.”

Fair to say, Luxon expressed himself clumsily on what doesn’t make a lot of sense.

The Māori seats? Or one person one vote?

The RNZ report noted that eligible voters actually have two votes in New Zealand general elections – one for a party, the other a candidate – and being on the Māori electoral roll doesn’t actually entitle someone to more votes than a voter on the general roll.

This ducked the matter of the racial basis of those seats.

The RNZ report went on:

Luxon said the National Party’s historical opposition to Māori seats in parliament and local government was the “logical conclusion” of believing in “one person, one vote, all equal under the law”.

But he said the “pragmatic” move this year was to stand candidates in them anyway, and denied this was inconsistent with opposition to co-governance.

“It is utterly consistent.”

A bob each way, by the looks of it.

Or ducking and diving.

His gymnastics were on display again when the Māori Party’s Debbie Ngarewa-Packer asked him in Parliament yesterday if he supported the continued existence of the Māori electorates.

He should have anticipated the question, because on February 12 his coalition partner, Winston Peters, said New Zealand First will campaign on a referendum on the Māori seats this year.

Te Pāti Māori said it was “race baiting” and “rage baiting” and Labour said it was a “cheap and cynical” attempt to gain votes.

Luxon said in reply to the question in Parliament:

Well, that is something that we haven’t given consideration to.

He would be advised to give consideration to it, because he will face much more questioning about it – and related Treaty-based constitutional issues – before the general election.

He was given a warm-up session yesterday.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does he agree that Māori electorates represent a constitutional recognition of Te Tiriti o Waitangi?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I understand they’ve been a feature of New Zealand’s political system for some time, but I also understand that what Māori voters want and what the Māori public want is a Government that’s on their side actually delivering improved outcomes for them, and that’s what this Government’s doing.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Is the Prime Minister aware that the number of Māori enrolled on the Māori roll has increased by over 13,000 since the 2023 election?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that may well be the case, but the important thing is they have representation with the biggest Māori contingent in Cabinet of any Government in recent times. They have a Government that’s on their side making sure that they are raising immunisation rates for under-twos. They have a Government on their side making sure that their kids are getting off to a great start in education, and particularly around new entrants and phonics.

Then – inevitably – came the moment when he was called on to declare his position:

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Will he rule out supporting a referendum on the Māori electorate so long as he remains Prime Minister?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that is not Government policy.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Is that a no?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, I’ve just said to the member it’s not Government policy.

Peters – who no doubt is as keen as Ngarewa-Packer to learn where Luxon stands – came to the rescue by focusing attention on the Māori Party.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: If the Māori seats were worth defending, why is it that the people who preside in the Māori seats have spent less time in Parliament than somebody who has been overseas for 206 days and yet has spent more time in Parliament than the Māori Party seats altogether?

Rt Hon CHRISTOPHER LUXON: Well, that is an important question. I think voters on the Māori electorates have been poorly represented in this Parliament.

Ngarewa-Packer raised a point of order, calling for “that particular member” to rescind his comment because “he cannot prove that that is correct”.

“In fact, the stats show that this member was in the House and spoke more than he did. It is factually incorrect, what he has proposed.”

The Speaker declared that the only point he would make is that the Prime Minister has no responsibility for Māori Party MPs.

PoO can report an update.

Winston Peters announced today that New Zealand First has introduced a Member’s Bill to ensure a binding referendum on the Māori seats is held in conjunction with the 2026 election.

We have recently announced our intention to campaign on a binding referendum on the future of the Māori seats – we are saying we have legislation ready to go right now.

We don’t have to wait until after the next election. If we have the support of other parties in parliament, we can get this referendum completed at no extra cost, and no wasted time, if we hold it in conjunction with the general election in November.

It is a simple referendum question: ‘Should there be separate Māori seats in the New Zealand Parliament?’ With a simple YES or NO answer.

New Zealand First insists this decision should be put to a binding referendum, not made unilaterally, because it contends that in our democracy the issue needs to gain a true mandate from the people of New Zealand “so we can move forward together, united, as one”.

We have put forward this bill today to show that the House of Representatives has the chance to involve the New Zealand people in deciding the future direction of our country together.

Peter Williams has written about the future of the Māori seats and National’s obfuscation HERE .

Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.