Maori wards ‘simply fairness’

The claim that Maori are trying to gain some extra advantage by having Maori electoral wards is misleading. The justification for Maori wards is simply fairness.

 In sport, fairness is important, so competitions for men and women are separate. An equal competition would be unfair to women.

In council elections non-Maori voters outnumber Maori by about four to one, which is unfair to Maori candidates because non-Maori voters mostly vote for non-Maori candidates. This is not racism. It is just familiarity. So Maori candidates have not been elected, and the Maori section of our bicultural community does not participate in council decisions. They are excluded.

Maori wards are a way of including the Maori community. They are not separatism, divisive, or undemocratic. They are inclusive. The present system favours non-Maori candidates.

Maori wards do not give Maori candidates any extra advantage. They remove the unfair advantage that non-Maori candidates have under the present system. Councillors who voted for Maori wards appreciate the difference between equality and fairness, and voted for fairness. 

P Dey, Welcome Bay.


tutae, the justification is fairness

Posted on 12-02-2018 10:30 | By Peter Dey

tutae, the present electoral system is unfair and shuts the Maori community out. A Maori ward system would be totally democratic, not racist, cost no more, not separatist but inclusive or integrated, not a privilege to Maori just removing unfairness, and making no difference to anybody else.

tutae, NZ is a bicultural nation based on the Treaty of Waitangi

Posted on 12-02-2018 09:12 | By Peter Dey

Maori are Treaty partners. The Western Bay council should be willing to use a more fair electoral voting system to include representatives from the Maori community, who are 20 per cent of the voters, but with no representatives on council.

tutae, people get elected because they are more capable

Posted on 12-02-2018 08:43 | By Peter Dey

tutae, it is just common sense that the people we elect as leaders are more capable than ordinary voters, not based on any statistical evidence, just common sense.

tutae, you do not refute the letter

Posted on 12-02-2018 08:05 | By Peter Dey

tutae, the original letter makes the point that the present electoral system is unfair. You do not refute that. You are misinformed about the Treaty. Treaty court judges have made it clear that the Treaty is a partnership agreement between the government and Maori. Reading both the English and Maori Treaty versions it is clear that the Treaty was with Maori only and not anybody else. That is what court judges have ruled.

@ waxing

Posted on 11-02-2018 17:06 | By Captain Sensible

Lame. Just the answer I expected. Jealous...... so resorts to name calling! Priceless!

peter dey. rubbish again

Posted on 11-02-2018 16:54 | By tutae.kuri

Firstly your statement that Councillors have more wisdom than joe blogs who elected them in the first place is arguable on many points. That surely is a crazy statement and I would be interested in your research on the subject. Secondly, the Treaty was between all the people and The Crown.This has morphed into an agreement between Iwi and The Crown. Wrongly in my opinion.Thirdly Local Bodies are not the Crown and represent all the people who pay rates. Where is the justification for separate representation??

@ private / petty officer

Posted on 11-02-2018 15:37 | By waxing

Rank doesn’t impress me or preoccupy me like it clearly does with you. I work on the basis of those I respect, regardless of rank. I think the answer in terms of you is obvious.

@ NZer

Posted on 11-02-2018 15:33 | By waxing

Democracy in NZ, and indeed NZ itself, is based on the Treaty of Waitangi. It is a treaty between Maori and the Crown. All settlers that have come here, regardless of their race, are tangata tiriti. Maori are tangata whenua. They were not conquered. It was a treaty between two parties guaranteeing Maori rights and property. Now you obviously don’t like that. I do. It gives us a special place in the world and Maori a special place in NZ. For too long they have been ignored and neither consulted nor represented at community level. Local government legislation requires that they be. Cr Lalley in his opposition to Maori wards won’t tell us if he consults with Maori and if so how. A classic example of local representation failing. It works with the BOPRC. It can work with WBOPDC. Why are you so scared of it?

Captain Sensible, decided by a majority of elected representatives

Posted on 11-02-2018 12:25 | By Peter Dey

Captain Sensible, 9 out of 12 councillors voted in favour of Maori wards. They got elected because voters respected their wisdom and ability. Elected representatives generally have more wisdom than ordinary uninformed voters. It was a democratic decision of democratically elected representatives.

NZer, you still misunderstand democracy

Posted on 11-02-2018 10:12 | By Peter Dey

NZer, here it is: Democracy: a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. Our elected representatives in parliament have approved Maori electoral wards, so they are totally democratic. This is not whinging just correcting misunderstanding.

@ waxing

Posted on 11-02-2018 09:32 | By Captain Sensible

Still waiting for you to reveal what amazing rank you got to. I’m sure we will all be impressed!

@ Peter Dey

Posted on 11-02-2018 09:13 | By Captain Sensible

"...democratically approved by a majority of councillors" Hahahahahahaha....are you for real Peter?


Posted on 10-02-2018 17:54 | By NZer

Look it up in the dictionary mate... no misunderstandings there.... keep on whinging mate!!

NZer, not whinging just correcting wrong information

Posted on 10-02-2018 12:44 | By Peter Dey

NZer, the whingers are the people wanting to spend $70,000 on a poll to stop Maori wards which were democratically approved by a majority of councillors. You still have not refuted the points in the letter.

NZer, our democratic parliament has approved Maori wards

Posted on 10-02-2018 12:39 | By Peter Dey

NZer, you misunderstand democracy. Our parliament is democratic and they have approved Maori wards. Democracy is rule by the majority through elected representatives in parliament, and parliament has approved Maori wards.


Posted on 09-02-2018 15:29 | By NZer

The answer is quite simple. Kiwis dont like race based seats on any Goverment. People vote on policy not race. Simple really.

Peter you misuse the word democracy

Posted on 09-02-2018 15:26 | By NZer

Where in the meaning of the word democracy does the meaning ever say special wards for any minority group. You misuse the word democracy Peter. You think because one group has a treaty It grants them special rights which is does not. You may not like democracy which is what NZ is based on but it is the law. Get over it Peter. Life is not always fair. I can imagine you as a child being the one always whinging its not fair. Unfortunately you have never grown up.

NZer, you misunderstand fairness

Posted on 09-02-2018 09:06 | By Peter Dey

NZer, you seem to think that the Maori community not being represented on the council even though they make up 20 per cent of the voters is fair. Explain that.

NZer, democracy allows for Maori wards

Posted on 09-02-2018 08:08 | By Peter Dey

NZer, there is nothing undemocratic about Maori wards. They would not be available if they were not democratic. Many democratic election systems are possible. Some are more fair than others. A Maori ward system would be more fair than our present system, and still democratic.

NZer, NZ is based on the Treaty which connects only two cultures

Posted on 09-02-2018 08:04 | By Peter Dey

NZer, our nation is based on the Treaty signed between Maori and the government. Other minorities do not have the same position as Maori. Everything in the letter above is credible evidence that I believe in fairness, and fully understand the meaning of the word. An election system that shuts out the 20 per cent of Maori community voters is unfair.

Peter you are biased to one race. That is not being fair

Posted on 08-02-2018 17:20 | By NZer

If you were really worried about fairness you would advocate special wards etc for all minority races. Not just yours. Peter you misuse the word fairness and provide no credible evidence that you are a fair person.


Posted on 08-02-2018 17:13 | By NZer

Democracy is fair. Thats how NZ works. Im sorry if you find it unfair Peter but to quote your own words thats the law.. I knew your own words would come back to haunt you lol.

@ NZer

Posted on 08-02-2018 16:25 | By waxing

I was talking about parliament. The issue of Maori wards is about local government where there is no question that Maori are under-represented and not consulted. I see at Waitangi Day here, a Maori ward councillor for the BOPRC talked about how well Maori wards has worked for them and has improved things for Maori and non-Maori. I don’t understand when we have such a good example near at hand why people can’t see the benefits and support them. I can only assume that there are other motivations going on.

NZer, being fair is not racist

Posted on 08-02-2018 09:52 | By Peter Dey

NZer, the letter simply points out that non-Maori candidates are getting an unfair advantage. You provide nothing to refute that point. Recognising the Maori community is not something racist or divisive. It integrates us as a bicultural community.

Captain Sensible, you use the word separatism wrongly

Posted on 08-02-2018 09:43 | By Peter Dey

Every voter is either on the general roll or the Maori roll, so your comment about other races is irrelevant. Separatism would be a separate Maori council with their own funding. That is not what Maori wards would be so they are not separatism. You provide no credible evidence to refute that point.

Captain Sensible, you use the word privilege wrongly

Posted on 08-02-2018 09:41 | By Peter Dey

The letter above simply points out that the present election system is biased in favour of non-Maori, and that Maori wards would remove that bias. Removing bias is not a privilege. You provide no credible evidence to refute that point.

NZer, Read the letter again. It is fairness.

Posted on 08-02-2018 09:39 | By Peter Dey

NZer, you ask why we need Maori wards. At present the Maori community is shut out of the council by a biased election system, which is unfair. Maori wards would include the Maori community and be more fair while changing nothing else for anybody else.

Democracy rules

Posted on 08-02-2018 08:53 | By NZer

Thank god we have democracy and the people of New Zealand vote by democratic law. New Zealanders will not be racist like the likes of Bell, Dey and Waxing who represent a small minority who wish to divide kiwis along racial lines and when cornered can only quote a treaty which gives them the same rights as all New Zealanders. If Dey and Bell thought they are right they would stand for election, instead they choose to whinge and whine about the past, as they no no New Zealander would ever vote for them!


Posted on 07-02-2018 20:01 | By NZer

Why do we need Maori wards? Waxing has already pointed out there are at least 7 Maori MPs in parliament and they got their on their own merit proving You wrong that democracy is indeed fair and Maori dont need special privilege.

@ waxing

Posted on 07-02-2018 17:14 | By Captain Sensible

Resorting to name calling. Rather childish I think. BTW what is the highest rank you achieved? Didn’t get one? Thought so!

Private may be a bit harsh, waxing.

Posted on 07-02-2018 17:06 | By R. Bell

I think a more appropriate demotion for the cap’n, may be to "petty" officer. Robin Bell.

@ P. Dey

Posted on 07-02-2018 16:06 | By Captain Sensible

What candidates could the Chinese, Indians, Africans, South Americans etc vote for? No wards for them? Why not? Are they also not Kiwis? Are you saying they are not as kiwi as a maori? Maybe I would like to vote for a maori candidate but I won’t be allowed to vote for him/her. Your desire for separatism and special maori privileges is obscene and shows how anti democratic and greedy your sense of entitlement goes. Your sense of reality is so far off the mark with your "them and us" which you hilariously claim is not separatist!!

@ private

Posted on 07-02-2018 15:59 | By waxing

Private is more appropriate for you than Captain. But now you say naval Captain, I understand you even better since you are 100% at sea with your comments!

Crazyhorse, local iwi asked for Maori wards

Posted on 07-02-2018 15:09 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse I am not speaking for Maori. Local iwi leaders have asked for Maori electoral wards. The present electoral system is biased against Maori candidates, and a Maori ward system would be fairer, not undemocratic, not separatist, not divisive, and not an unjustified privilege. Local Maori have never suggested a racist, separatist agenda of Maori sovereignty at all levels of government.

Captain Sensible, no competition is eliminated by having Maori wards

Posted on 07-02-2018 15:00 | By Peter Dey

With Maori wards, Pakeha voters would vote for Pakeha candidates. Maori voters would vote for Maori candidates. Every voter would still have the same equal voting rights as before. Maori would get no extra advantage. Pakeha candidates would lose their unfair advantage.

Crazyhorse, you talk as though the Treaty Act 1975 never happened

Posted on 07-02-2018 14:54 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse, your comments about the Treaty are delusional because parliament passed the Treaty of Waitangi Act in 1975 that committed the government to honouring the Treaty and working in partnership with Maori. That is now the law. It is delusional to act as though that did not happen.

@ waxing

Posted on 07-02-2018 14:30 | By Captain Sensible

By calling me a "private" you are showing even more ignorance. They do not have "privates" at sea. What else are you getting wrong?!!


Posted on 07-02-2018 13:56 | By NZer

How would you know who voted for Maori candidates? Have you seen everybodys votes?

@ private

Posted on 05-02-2018 20:32 | By waxing

Just to confirm then, you don’t see your wedding contract as a partnership?

@ private

Posted on 05-02-2018 20:10 | By waxing

A contract can be changed by the agreement of both parties. But even more important is the issue (often tested in courts for contracts) is the meaning of a contract and how it was understood by both parties at the time of signing. The treaty poses the difficulties it does because the chiefs signed the Maori version, The English translation has of course been shown to have a number of problems. But the intent of the British crown is as clear in the Preamble as it was in Queen Victoria’s instruction: "You will honourably and scrupulously uphold the treaty". Unfortunately, right from the start, the settler government did not do so and the greed of many others have seen them behave subsequently in the same way right through to recent times

For goodness sake Murray

Posted on 05-02-2018 20:02 | By waxing

I thought you were better than this Murray. Of course Maori voting in a ward would not get an extra vote to vote in another ward. For Pete’s sake - you know how the Maori wards function with the BOPRC. Why are you scaremongering now? And STV is simply a system of voting used for our hospital board elections. If the TCC decided to change to at large voting, they would then decide whether or not to retain Maori wards. I hope they would, to ensure proper Maori consultation and representation. But again, where do you get this ridiculous idea that Maori would have an extra vote. They would only vote in a Maori ward, unless they chose to go on the general roll when they could only vote once "at large" and not in a Maori ward.

Conveniently forgetting the Maori seats tutae.kuri?

Posted on 05-02-2018 19:50 | By waxing

How convenient of you not to mention that 7 of the Maori MPs in parliament are only elected by Maori, not by Pakeha. And of the others, you also conveniently forget the List MPs not elected by any voters. And a number of the others would never be seen anywhere near a marae or a caucus of all Maori MPs.

@ Captain Sensible

Posted on 05-02-2018 17:14 | By crazyhorse

It doesnt matter what the treaty troughers "want" the TOW to say, the truth is it only matters what it meant in 1840, and no it is not a living breathing document, it did not mention partnership, water, airwaves or the right to blame everything from being fat to smoking on "us" the TOW is by far the most abused document in NZ history.

@ P. Dey

Posted on 05-02-2018 14:12 | By Captain Sensible

It is illegal, not to mention immoral, to alter the meaning or wording of a signed contract, especially after all signatories are dead. There was no partnership. There were no principles. What was signed is the deal. Nothing more, nothing less. BTW, in 1840, remind us what the word "maori" meant!

Crazyhorse there is no Treaty trough

Posted on 05-02-2018 09:20 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse, compensation for Treaty breaches has taken 150 years to be carried out, and then less than 10 per cent compensation. Tauranga Maori have received $50 million for land worth over $500 million wrongfully confiscated. That is not a Treaty trough. You are a prisoner of your own propaganda unable to discuss objectively.

Please P Dey, for mis-leading look in the mirror!

Posted on 05-02-2018 08:50 | By Murray.Guy

So, let’s assume a local authority, say Tauranga City, puts in place a Maori Ward. Will Maori Ward voters be denied the right to vote in ONE of our existing three ’geographical wards’ OR will they get an EXTRA VOTE? Again, hypothetically, If, say Tauranga City with it’s 3 geographical Wards and say ONE Maori Ward, decided to do away with Wards, choosing STV AT LARGE representation, would the Maori Ward also go, OR would it be retained, giving the Maori voter an additional vote, greater representation opportunities! We have many ’minority groupings’ within our community, and I it seems P Dey does NOT advocate multiple minority Wards, so clearly P Dey is advocating a race based bias and benefit for Maori. So many questions that P Dey and like-minded folk refuse to answer!

Rubbish, P Dey

Posted on 04-02-2018 17:47 | By tutae.kuri

You are on a hiding to nothing on this subject. Anyone can become a councilor, they just have to put their names forward and convince enough people that they are worthy of a vote. To say that Pakeha won’t vote for Maori is absolute garbage.Have you counted the number of Maori in Parliament ? There are more than the 15% population content. Who voted for them ?You have not chosen a good subject to make a stand on and neither has your supporter R Bell in his post.


Posted on 04-02-2018 16:28 | By waxing

Private "sensible" and crazyhorse would prefer a situation where Maori are not represented at a local body level. They know how few Maori are supported by Pakeha for election to councils. They know how little consultation occurs by Pakeha councillors with Maori. They are happy with this as this is the way they want it. Somehow they call it democracy. But the world is changing and Wairoa has already overturned its 2012 poll and will have Maori wards. Many councils now have Maori on key council committees with full voting rights - there are after all a number of different ways Maori can be consulted and represented. But they won’t have a bar of it. Fortunately they are part of an aging generation that does not represent New Zealand’s future.

Captain Sensible the Treaty of Waitangi is partnership not competition

Posted on 04-02-2018 16:28 | By Peter Dey

Captain Sensible you seem to be suggesting that allowing for both Maori and Pakeha is competition. What we have in a bicultural society is integration and cooperation of two separate cultures, not competition. You seem to see it as competition because you see Maori progress as a threat to Pakeha culture. That is a very outdated mono-cultural point of view.

Crazyhorse, parliament has judged the Treaty a partnership

Posted on 04-02-2018 16:15 | By Peter Dey

Crazyhorse although you choose not to accept the fact, parliament, which makes our laws along with court judges, has ruled that the Treaty is a partnership requiring the government to deal with and consult with Maori in good faith. It is a partnership because it was signed between two partners. That seems self evident, and applies to all modern legal agreements. A legal partnership agreement does not have to include the word partnership.

Dey dreamer

Posted on 04-02-2018 12:19 | By Captain Sensible

Dey says..."Maori wards do not give Maori candidates any extra advantage" !!!! Well of course he is telling porkies eliminates competition on the grounds of bloodlines which is a despicable way of eliminating anyone from a contest.

do maori want

Posted on 04-02-2018 10:35 | By crazyhorse

The result of the Far North District Councils referendum on the establishment of maori wards was a resounding No The result is even more notable because nearly 44 percent of the Far North District is of maori descent well above the national average of around 16 percent. The Northland result is consistent with the result of a referendum in the Wairoa district in 2012, where their councils Maori ward proposal was defeated in spite of Maori constituting 46 percent of their electoral population, does the "average maori want "separatism" or just the elite that feed from the trough of the NZ taxpayer?. Ron Mark and Georgina Beyer a transsexual became mayors of Carterton, voted in by the majority, mostly non- maori, maori wards are for treaty troughers not maori or anyone else, remember that!.


Posted on 04-02-2018 10:24 | By crazyhorse

Do not want to be defined by race. The only people who want to divide the country by race are a small but vocal minority of tribal activists and supporters supporters like Mayor Andrew Judd in New Plymouth, who has called for a law change to require half of all local authority council representatives to be Maori because theyre our treaty partner, fact!, there is no mention of partner or partnership in the TOW,While sovereignty advocates know that reinventing the Treaty of Waitangi to claim that Maori are equal partners with the Crown is the key to achieving electoral privilege, the public can see through this cultural veil. They believe that if iwi want representation on their local council, then rather than demanding special privileges or seats based on race, their candidates need to work hard and stand on their own merits.


Posted on 03-02-2018 08:50 | By crazyhorse

The only people wanting to divide the country by race are a small but vocal minority of tribal activists and their supporters, who will stop at nothing less than Maori sovereignty at all levels of government. It is this racist, separatist agenda that we all need to stand against, Pete talks as though he is speaking for all maori, he’s not! the majority of maori don’t want a "bar" of this path to apartheid, Pete’s argument breaks down badly when the facts are looked at, have Maori candidates been put up by the people who want this, have the people that want this gone to local maori and asked for a mandate? Ron Mark and Georgina Beyer a transsexual became mayors of Carterton, voted in by the majority, mostly non- maori, maori wards are for treaty troughers not maori or anyone else, remember that ""FACT""!.

Leave a Comment

Sorry, Sun Media is no longer accepting comments on this article.

Opinion Poll

Should the speed on SH2, between Katikati and Bethlehem, be reduced to 80km/h?