Here\u2019s the background and what could happen in the future.<\/p>\n
What are the M\u0101ori seats?<\/p>\n
The M\u0101ori seats are electorates that were established specifically for the representation of M\u0101ori in parliament. Until they were introduced in 1867, communal land ownership excluded M\u0101ori from voting<\/a>, as people had to hold land in individual title in order to vote. The seats were created as a workaround. These electorates are separate from the general electorates. Currently, there are seven M\u0101ori seats across the country.<\/p>\n How do they work?<\/p>\n While anyone can stand as a candidate for a M\u0101ori electorate, only those on the M\u0101ori roll are eligible to vote in the M\u0101ori electorates. Just like those on the general roll, voters in M\u0101ori electorates get one party vote and one electorate vote. People of M\u0101ori descent can choose whether to be on the M\u0101ori or general roll.<\/p>\n The number of M\u0101ori electorates is relative to the number of people on the M\u0101ori roll. The more people on the M\u0101ori roll, the more M\u0101ori electorates there are. Approximately half of all eligible M\u0101ori voters are currently on the M\u0101ori roll. If every eligible M\u0101ori voter chose the M\u0101ori roll, the number of M\u0101ori electorates would roughly double \u2013 to around 13 or 14 seats.<\/p>\n Why do some people want to get rid of them?<\/p>\n Since their inception, opponents have criticised the M\u0101ori seats<\/a> as undemocratic.<\/p>\n Words like \u201cracist<\/a>\u201d or \u201cseparatist<\/a>\u201d often get thrown around by right-leaning politicians and citizens.<\/p>\n The seats were initially established to ensure fair representation for M\u0101ori in a parliament operating under rules and regulations that favoured non-M\u0101ori. However, their existence was only ever meant to be temporary. The seats were expected to last only five years until M\u0101ori met the property qualifications for the general roll.<\/p>\n There are currently 33 MPs of M\u0101ori descent in parliament<\/a> \u2013 the highest number in history. They make up about a third of all MPs, nearly twice the proportion M\u0101ori represent within New Zealand\u2019s overall population. Critics argue<\/a> this is proof there is no longer a need for separate M\u0101ori seats.<\/p>\n They also say<\/a> M\u0101ori can win a seat in parliament just like any other New Zealand citizen. This criticism has strengthened under MMP, which people say effectively guarantees M\u0101ori fair representation in our House of Representatives.<\/p>\n Some argue that because many M\u0101ori choose the general roll, the separate seats do not represent the majority of the M\u0101ori population. However, proponents of the seats say this is because M\u0101ori are placed on the general roll by default, something which some have campaigned to change<\/a>.<\/p>\n Why do others want to keep them?<\/p>\n Supporters argue that M\u0101ori were guaranteed equal partnership under te Tiriti o Waitangi, which equates to guaranteed representation<\/a> in parliament, if not equivalent representation. Those in favour of the seats say there is an ongoing need for them to ensure M\u0101ori are adequately represented in parliament.\u00a0<\/p>\n Despite having the highest number of MPs with M\u0101ori descent in our nation\u2019s history, advocates argue it does not necessarily translate to proper representation of the M\u0101ori population. The argument is that the need for the seats remains due to differences in political alignment, the nature of representation, and ideological disagreements over how M\u0101ori should be represented.<\/p>\n Proponents say having dedicated M\u0101ori voices at the table leads to better, more inclusive, and better-informed decisions that benefit the entire community, not just M\u0101ori. The seats help correct historical under-representation of M\u0101ori in governance, a legacy of colonisation, and ensure that MPs are directly accountable to a M\u0101ori constituency, ensuring issues like systemic inequality are addressed. They also allow for the representation of unique M\u0101ori worldviews and perspectives.<\/p>\n Why does the issue come up at every election?<\/p>\n The M\u0101ori seats can be polarising. Taking a stance can be seen as a way to win over undecided voters<\/a>, who feel strongly, or even convince people who would otherwise not vote to support a party for their stance on a single issue.<\/p>\n