Bob Edlin: How Jones passed the ball to ACT on co-governance.....

How Jones passed the ball to ACT on co-governance – and watched them score – by trying to nobble a Far North councillor

New Zealand First’s Shane Jones was desperately striving to recover lost ground when he despatched an email to team supporters and the media late in the week.

The email landed in PoO’s office while we were digesting the publicity Jones had won when he stumbled and put the ball into his own goal while – it seems – trying to score political points in two separate constituencies.

Playing on his own home turf, he called for an ACT politician to be penalised for daring to challenge the tribal takeover of an influential Far North District Council committee.

This suggests he hoped to win the admiration of local Maori voters by excoriating a critic of co-governance.

In the national arena, on the other hand, he was reassuring the party faithful that he remains a stanch member of the team which opposes co-governance.

ACT is bound to have gained a higher position on the ratings table as a consequence.

Signs of Jones’ confusion are evident in a New Zealand Herald report headed

Shane Jones calls Far North councillor Davina Smolders’ co-governance complaints ‘perverse’, ‘pathetic

The report noted that Far North by Bay of Islands-Whangaroa ward councillor Davina Smolders had kicked things off by sparking “a social media firestorm”.

She had done this by drawing attention to proposals to stack the Far North District Council’s liaison committee with unelected Māori appointees.

Smolders claimed in an interview with podcaster Duncan Garner that appointment of unelected members to its committees was “illegal” [apparently not, alas], “undemocratic” and “co-governance on steroids”.

Smolders called for Local Government Minister Simon Watts to appoint a Crown monitor, claiming Māori influence was “infiltrating every single decision” and was a “complete takeover” resulting in “two systems, two rules”.

Watts declined, saying the high threshold in law to intervene had not been met.

And at the council meeting during the week, nine councillors voted to dilute their authority.

The tribal representatives, once they have been appointed, will hold full speaking and voting rights alongside elected councillors on the committee, which is

… tasked with shaping Māori strategic relationships and embedding Te Tiriti-based partnership in council decision-making.

One councillor abstained from voting and only Smolders cast an opposing vote.

The great majority – some of them, at least – perhaps were intimidated by the mob which was howling for local Maori to be given power without accountability.

The Herald noted:

More than 100 people, many carrying Tino Rangatiratanga flags and homemade banners, gathered outside the council chambers in Kaikohe to support the plans and under-pressure Mayor Moko Tepania before yesterday’s meeting to finalise the committee’s membership.

Pressure?

From just one councillor?

It’s here that Jones seems to have forgotten which side he plays for because he tried to nobble Smolders:

New Zealand First Cabinet minister Shane Jones, who is based in Kerikeri and has long been an advocate for Northland, said Smolders’ complaints are a “bad look for the north” and shows she’s “probably not worthy of being a councillor”.

“I just think it’s pathetic that we can’t sort out local political issues locally,” he told Ryan Bridge TODAY. “I’ve met the lady once who has made the complaint, but she’s better off sorting her issues out as a member of the council.

“When you sign up to be a councillor, you take on certain obligations and to me, it’s quite perverse that she’s running to Wellington and wailing that somehow Wellington has to come up to Kaikohe and solve their problems.

“Not only does it show she’s probably not worthy of being a councillor, it’s a bad look for the north.”

The Herald drew attention to the legislation which allowed the mayor to have unelected committee members appointed and empowered.

The Local Government Act provides “principles and requirements for local authorities that are intended to facilitate participation by Māori in local authority decision-making processes” – and seemingly encourages what Tepania and the council are doing.

Rather than call for a review of the statute, Jones declared:

“I think our local mayor, love him or hate him, he’s an enthusiastic young man. He’s got a bit of a bad rap over the last week.

“But I just want everyone to be reminded, Rodney Hide created the Super City. Rodney Hide, the [former] leader of the Act Party, imposed on New Zealand the statutory Māori board. So if there’s half a dozen loose Ngāpuhi turning up at a meeting and eating too much, that’s hardly a major revelation or a capital crime.”

And so ACT – not co-governance – became Jones opponent.

Smolders told the Herald Jones would have a point if Far North voters had full control of the council.

“But the reason I’ve called for a Crown Observer is precisely because democratic control is being undermined by unelected appointees, and by co-governance, which I thought New Zealand First opposed”.

ACT Local Government spokesperson Cameron Luxton grabbed the scoring opportunity to embarrass New Zealand First and call on Jones to back a simple law change to protect democratic accountability.

“After an unusual attack on Councillor Davina Smolders, who stood up against co-governance by stealth at the far North District Council, Mr Jones now says he opposes co-governance after all. There’s an unmistakable signal he can send, if he’d like to support elected councillors like Davina, and reinforce his commitment to one person, one vote at every council in this country,” says Mr Luxton.

“He should be clear about whether he supports a straightforward change to the law that removes voting rights for unelected committee members.”

Luxton made much of the Far North District Council’s 9–1 vote to confirm unelected hapū representatives on a committee, with full voting rights, and a majority large enough to override elected members. He said this was

“ … just the latest example of creeping co-governance at the council level.”

His Member’s Bill would amend the Local Government Act so unelected members of council committees and subcommittees could not vote, and did not count toward a quorum.

It applies equally to anyone appointed rather than elected, whether they’re iwi representatives, youth councillors, or members of business or community groups.

And then came this kicker:

“ACT has been consistent on opposing co-governance, and upholding equal rights and the principle of one person, one vote. We’ve restored the right for communities to have a say on Māori wards, and we’re continuing to stand up for equal say at the council table.”

All 11 ACT MPs have signed their names to support the bill out of the ballot.

Luxton invited Jones and his New Zealand First colleagues to join them.

While PoO was reading about this challenge, the email from Jones arrived to reassert his opposition to co-governance.

Far North District Council “Pork & Puha” committee must not undermine local growth and democracy.

He acknowledged that the Far North District Council had a new ‘pork and puha’ hapu committee, but ventured:

This creation is being distorted by mischief makers.

He insisted:

Both Winston and I have been clear, New Zealand First does not support co-governance in any form, full stop. Our party has been consistent and vocal about fighting against co-governance.

My rhetoric is aimed at councils who cannot work together locally. It has been my view Northland must sort out local issues locally.

Getting Wellington to come North and intervene every time a council drops the ball means local democratic representatives are not serving their local communities.

The email included a statement from Winston Peters posted on X. 

Click to view

Jones then referred to economic infrastructural challenges, and said iwi priorities need to be aligned with the broader community.

An example is the need for a region wide Northern water infrastructure entity. A self-evident innovation.

The suggestion that there should be hapu representation on that board is cultural escapism. Our party will never consent to such wokeism!

Furthermore, the offensive suggestion that hapu still have their constitutional sovereignty is delusional. It will never be accepted or agreed to by us.

The depressing Nga Puhi claim is a blight upon the local leadership. It will be fixed however in the first 100 days of a future government that we may be privileged to serve in.

Jones reminded Far North District Council’s elected officials [he did not mention the unelected ones] that they have a duty to all ratepayers

Sadly, local issues can be manipulated and have a negative impact on a properly functioning council for our entire community.

The corrosion of democracy can easily emerge without vigilance from Papatoetoe to Kaikohe.

Jones then contended (“as our Leader Rt Hon Winston Peters reminded Kiwis today”) that this situation all stemmed from the time when the Independent Maori Statutory Board was set up with the Auckland Super City in 2010 by the National/Act/Maori Party government.

Unelected iwi representatives then had been given a seat at the table.

This is something that New Zealand First has been fighting against since day one.

It was an emphatic last sentence.

But by then ACT was making all the running.

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