MPs Katie Nimon and Catherine Wedd. Photo: Florence Charvin
MPs Katie Nimon and Catherine Wedd. Photo: Florence Charvin

Given that four of our HB councils have just reaffirmed decisions to create or maintain Māori seats, with impressive leadership from the four women heading those councils, BayBuzz set out to determine whether our local MPs might be speaking up on the issue.

A fool’s errand.

Ask MPs Catherine Wedd or Katie Nimon whether they like dogs, and you’d certainly get a resounding and safe Yes, supported by a joint media release with confirming photos of their adoring pets.

Ask them if they preferred dogs to cats, and they’d demur, needing to check with National bosses on the party line before responding. And then replying along the lines of ‘both have their virtues’, complete with a heartwarming photo of dog and cat.

Nevertheless, in the case of Māori seats we thought, maybe watching the leadership provided by Mayors Hazlehurst, Wise, and Walker and HBRC Chair Ormsby, our MPs Wedd and Nimon would be emboldened to provide the same.

Fat chance.

We asked: 

Do you believe this is an issue on which you should provide personal leadership?

Answer: “It was a government decision to the Local Government Act to reinstate polls on Māori Wards, and as members of the government, we support this decision. This change is simply returning to the law that Helen Clark put in place in 2001 and stood until 2021. Decisions around representation should be left to the constituents. The way people vote at referendum is a personal decision, and that is true localism.”

Short answer: No.

We asked: 

Do you personally support Māori wards?

(Non) Answer: “Yes, we support local communities being able to make this decision for themselves.”

Actual answer: We’re not saying. Not our job to have values.

Although our main intent was to surface possible leadership from our MPs on this critical issue – and clearly we failed – we also asked two additional questions.

Question: To avoid a potential ‘patchwork’ outcome — potentially some districts supporting, others not — would you support a ‘dispensation’ allowing HB to conduct one region-wide referendum?

Answer: “Local government by nature is a patchwork. The intention of this bill is for each community to decide what suits them. Regionalising a referendum undermines the intention of the bill.”

Hmmm … then maybe we need even more granular measurement of patchwork community sentiment? Voters in Greenmeadows might feel much differently than those in Ahuriri or Poraiti. Or Akina versus Arataki.

Question: “Would you support the Government bearing the cost of the Māori wards referenda it has mandated?”

Answer: “The Government has required referendums to be undertaken alongside the next local government election in order to reduce costs for councils.”

Hmmm … Thank you for that savings tip, but this is just another classic case of central government mandating to local government: You do this … and you pay for it. A not inconsiderable driver of rising local rates.

So there you have it. Leadership local MP-style.

Share



Join the Conversation

23 Comments

  1. Leadership????? Seems to be anything but. Those responses are pure ‘toeing the party line’ — if they were true local representatives they would at the very least have a local perspective and wouldn’t be afraid to express it – the way our Mayors have already done. Sad, but I guess Central Government doesn’t allow independent thinking or opinions and our two MP’s don’t have the internal fortitude to stand up for their constituents

    1. What’s the problem with democracy?
      We the ratepayers have a right to vote for our electoral system whether it’s STV,MMP, or Maori Wards.
      Having elected councillors who have vested interests making the decision for us is bending the rules and undemocratic
      If HB want Maori Wards then we’ll vote for them

      1. Bang on Matthew.
        If there is widespread agreement to these wards which the mayors and councils are indicating, then the referendum will vote them in.
        I suspect they are wrong, but time will tell and we will all have a change to make our vote count.

  2. My disappointment very probably stems from different reasons than your own. Most citizens don’t realize that universal suffrage is a very recent phenomenon and that it took around 1000 years of struggle by ordinary people to achieve. That universal suffrage is being given away for any reason is an enigma to me. I believe the first duty of Parliament and Parliamentarians is the preservation and protection of democracy. Definitely a fail from me.

  3. Good article. Rather than representing Hawkes Bay in Wellington, these two MPs are representing Wellington in Hawkes Bay.

  4. they are politicians for a Govt. coalition calling for national ( excuse the pun) referenda on Maori wards. You’re being naive , Tom, if you expected them to suddenly become activists and give your answers that suited you..cheers

    1. Rob, I understand the politics of hiding behind the process for fear your views might offend some part or another of your constituency. They are supposed to be leaders … they were elected by huge margins to do what? Look concerned in the back row when their ministers come to town? Run marathons for safe causes? And otherwise play dumb? Tom

  5. Neither of these two have done anything of note for Hawkes Bay since the election. To everyone who voted for them you get what you voted for and the region is suffering. The question they were asked weren’t that hard. They have failed miserably in their answers.

  6. Katie and Catherine are being deliberately dishonest when they say “This change is simply returning to the law that Helen Clark put in place in 2001 and stood until 2021.”
    It didn’t just overturn the 2021 law that prevented lobby groups like Hobson’s Pledge gathering signatures to force a referendum on Maori wards – it removed that step, making referendums compulsory.
    In effect, central Government is acting as Hobson’s Pledge in this matter.
    It’s partly that clear demonstration of partisanship/ bad faith that has pushed naturally conservative local councils to investigate a mass refusal to hold these referendums. And also because they’re expensive, unnecessary, contrary to other legislation and Te Tiriti – and a little bit racist.

  7. The Treaty includes both Māori and Non-Maori, so for this coalition Government to ditch Māori Wards is not only wrong, racist but is a breach of the Treaty.

  8. Well, Tom you full well know what happens when you don’t follow the agreed, by the “majority party line”. And you try swimming against the tide? You get thrown out, as you, yourself, and other’s have!
    So, I for one, do Not blame either of them, for Not answering your, what I would term to be purely a mischief making question.
    After all, I found it could sometimes be far more productive pissing out.of the tent, than simply keeping on pissin up.against it! Going nowhere!
    Just saying.

    1. > mischief making
      personally i don’t think journalists should avoid asking questions just because it makes politicians look bad, that’s kinda the point

  9. A referendum on such a highly charged subject as Maori Wards is a very blunt instrument, given people are unlikely to be provided with or seek out the necessary information to make an informed decision.
    If a community is being required to make such a decision, then it would be far more democratic to hold a citizens’ assembly in each local body area. This process selects a representative group (much like a jury selection within the Justice system) who are then provided with information by experts in the subject matter of the referendum. For further information about this process refer to:
    *https://informedfutures.org/citizens-assemblies-give-hope-for-reinvigorating-democracy/
    * https://www.complexconversations.nz/

  10. Vanessa, the second link worked, but sadly that first link was not live, and even when I copied and pasted it into my browser it still said the page could not be found.
    Still, I agree with your suggestion that we need new ways to engage and make decisions on these complex issues. Thank you for sharing some examples of what this could look like.

  11. A major benefit of Maori Wards is that they mitigate the “two wolves and one sheep voting about what to eat for dinner” problem with the “majority rules” primary school level understanding of democracy. The referenda are letting two wolves and one sheep decide whether or not to keep mitigating that problem.

  12. Well said Tom. Such a difficult task managing a coalition. However, we need to watch for dictates from Government that require Regions to pay the cost.

  13. Tom,
    you wanted them to say they support the referenda, that the coalition successfully campaigned on, so that you could then beat up on them for this view. They were too sharp to fall for that.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *