Changes likely for Rotorua’s election bill amid concern it’s undemocratic
A controversial bill which introduces specialist seats to the Rotorua District Council, with a focus on increasing MÄori representation, is likely to face changes after the attorney-generalā said it presented an unjustified disadvantage to non-MÄori.
TÄmati Coffey, the Labour MP who sponsored Rotorua District Councilās bill, said the council was considering the attorney-generalās concerns and was speaking to the Ministry of Justice about potential fixes.
The bill would see Rotorua District Council comprising 10 councillors and the mayor. Of the 10 councillors, three would be elected by voters on the MÄori roll and another three would be elected by voters from the general roll. The other four, and the mayor, would be elected by the voters at large.
The concern is that of Rotoruaās residents, the general roll has more than double the number of voters than the MÄori roll ā at 55,600 to 21,700 voters.
I think the Rotorua Council redesign of 1-person-1-vote value democracy RIGHT WHEN Labour are trying to deflect right wing claims that co-governance creates special privilege for MÄori is the kind of political incompetence that would see you unable to get laid in a monkey brothel wearing a banana suit.
I mean come on!
Greens and Labour all voted for it on first reading! What part of 21700 on the MÄori vote equals almost 55600 on the general roll didn’t they appreciate?
I fear the tiny Wellington bubble world of militant pronoun signalling and Te Reo pronunciation correcting snark is a tad rich for the blood of most Kiwis.
They will not understand why 21 700 get the same say as 55 600.
They will suspect ACT and National are correct when they hint at some secret collusion to rob them of something intangible like representation on the local fucking council!
Rawiri attacking David Parker probably isn’t helping either…
Attorney-General David Parker deeming the Rotorua Lakes District Council’s proposed MÄori ward restructure is discriminatory has earned him a rebuff from Waiariki MP Rawiri Waititi.
Waititi, the MÄori Party co-leader, has accused Parker of “caucasity” for his comments over the District Council Representative Arrangements Bill, which would give 21,700 MÄori roll voters three seats – the same number as the 55,600 general roll voters.Ā
…at a time when Polls suggest the MÄori Party might be Queenmaker, Rawiri might think about how attacking David Parker is just giving National and ACT ammunition, but that would require a level of strategy beyond yelling ‘bingo’.
Hilariously it is actually David Parker’s caucasity that Rawiri should be appealing to rather than denigrate.
One person one vote is an important value in Democracy, B-U-T it’s not the only value!
Rawiri just needs to look at the rich history and tradition of white democracy to win David over!
We already have one person two votes in NZ for MMP.
In America the Senate isn’t one person one vote, neither is the Electoral College!
Even in England, the home of our Westminster system, they have an Upper House with the House of Lords!
There are plenty of examples of Rawiri’s hated caucasity that actually support his desires for a democratic process that enhances and enshrines broader values of democracy beyond one-person-one-vote.
If he wasn’t so busy denouncing them, maybe he’d learn something from the caucasity of Western Democracy.
The MÄori Party needs John Tamihere’s leadership right nowĀ and the Greens and Labour have got to stop shooting themselves in the foot every 5 minutes! Willie Jackson has kicked the issue to touch, but this could have been handled far better and sold using exisiting examples from other Democracies.
This was a needless forced error.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, soĀ if you value having an independent voice ā please donate here.
If you canāt contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
Labour definitely had an entire manifesto going that they never advertised, never campaigned on and his away from as many prying eyes as they could.
3 Waters, Co governance, now this. What else?
Labour are burning through the trust factor rapidly!
Really XRAY? One minute they are a disorganised headless chicken now they are apparently Chancellor Palpatine about to execute order 66.
The Rotorua situation is a local bill from a local council. Three waters is not coming from the same place at all.
Yes. The difference is considerable.
Well, they’re moving ahead with this one:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/three-waters-reforms-nanaia-mahuta-and-grant-robertson-announce-next-steps/HUFOZTAW37DCOILDVS5KEWNMRM/
The knew because itās their bill.
We all heard Jackson say it, they want to ātweakā democracy.
I donāt think so.
“Just one little tweak” in democracy, like “Just one little nuke” in the Baltic.
You know Labour are utterly fucked when all the comments on THIS blog post are against them!
And deservedly so. People are waking up.
Being against a particular policy is not being against the Party.
You’re happy with Nationals $2 a week tax bribe Andrew?
National = tax bribe.
“… a needless UNforced error.” ??
What has been proposed by some in The Rotorua Lakes Council for a re-structure of heightened voting rights for MÄori, is not just undemocratic but down right cringe worthy and naf, in that itās a blatant form of tokenism and takes away the mana from those who have been elected on there own merits and credentials, who have served or are serving there peoples /community to the best of there abilities.
Whatās next, raced based sports teams whereby you are picked on tribal affiliations not on oneās own skills!
Shame on those for supporting such a tunnel visioned proposal.
“One person one vote is an important value in Democracy, B-U-T itās not the only value!”
One person one vote is the sine qua non of democracy. Without that, it isn’t democracy. The notion that people have greater electoral rights and influence because of skin colour (or in truth heritage, in NZ) is the sort of system which prevailed in apartheid South Africa, and in pre-civil rights US, particularly in the southern states.
“In America the Senate isnāt one person one vote, neither is the Electoral College!”
The senate is indeed one person one vote. The electoral college comprises voters and is convened to confirm (or otherwise) the appointment of a newly-elected president. Who’s also elected by popular vote.
“Even in England, the home of our Westminster system, they have an Upper House with the House of Lords!”
Many British people see the house of lords as a priori undemocratic. And they’re right: there’s no point in its continued existence. There’s a long-standing campaign to disestablish it, I believe. But that’s being resisted by the Establishment.
Caucacity: oh good grief…. Does that fellow Waititi even know what it means? I’ll bet he doesn’t. It’s a term which comes out of black America. Completely irrelevant in the NZ context.
Right DāEsterre but one man one vote didnāt help Al Gore did it. He won the popular vote but lost in the college system. I think Martyn has a point.
Wheel: lest we forget, here’s what actually happened:
“The Florida election recount of 2000 was a period of vote recounting in Florida that occurred during the weeks after Election Day in the 2000 United States presidential election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. The Florida vote was ultimately settled in Bush’s favor by a margin of 537 votes when the U.S. Supreme Court, in Bush v. Gore, stopped a recount that had been initiated upon a ruling by the Florida Supreme Court.
Bush’s win in Florida gave him a majority of votes in the Electoral College and victory in the presidential election.”
That’s from Al Gore’s own Wiki page: he didn’t “lose” in the electoral college system. And it’s what I remember of that situation. Quibble all you like about the Florida recount, that was the Supreme Court’s decision. The rest, as the saying goes, is history. And it was democracy in action. Both Gore and Bush were elected under the “one person, one vote” system. It came down to a recount in Florida. Nobody paying attention then could forget the “hanging chads”!
D’Esterre I am not quibbling about anything. You are right Bush won the electoral college vote. You don’t have to go to Al Gore to know that, in terms of the popular vote across the US, Gore got about half a million more votes than Bush did. Clearly that didn’t help in the college vote
Wheel, Bush won the EC vote because the Florida recount had been stopped by the supreme court. And there was a recount because the margin of votes between Bush and Gore was very narrow. Nothing whatever to do with “one person one vote”. Anybody paying attention at the time will remember the furore over the “hanging chads”. That result in no way indicates a need to “tweak” democracy.
This seems ludicrous to be even happening in Rotorua. 42% of population in Rotorua are Maori. Just stand some decent maori candidates and then get out the maori vote if people want to vote along a racial divide. Its notable that the number of maori on the maori roll in Rotorua is much less than the number it could be. Also if maori dont turn out to exercise their democratic rights isnt really a reason to get rid of the equality of one man one vote. The bill that was put forward could br called maori supremicist. Accusing someone of “caucasity” is as racially offensivensive as saying “dumb maoris” I hope he was made to apologise and retract the statement in parliament. Never the less there are 15,800 maori kids at school in Rotorua and only 15,000 kids of all other ethnicities. So in a generation or less maori will be the democratic majority if they were all to vote on racial lines. And that may be the issue democracy may never provide the desired result for those maori pushing for cogovernance and more “maorisity” because they may not have the backing of those maori who back meritocracy.
So is it correct to say that with Local bills, a Bill of Rights analysis is not undertaken until the bills appear at select committee? Apparently with other bills this analysis occurs before first reading? As Martyn says Rotorua District/Lakes Council prepared the bill and it was sponsored by Coffey.
If this is the case have the government really “tried to slip it through”?
The cats out the bag –
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/04/revenue-minister-david-parker-s-investigation-into-tax-share-of-top-earners-slammed-as-waste-of-time-during-university-q-a.html
Clearly a capital gains tax is on the cards again next time, not they I trust Labour to implement it even if God himself commanded it (if there was one). This means that Jacinda will not ‘be available’ next time, remember she banned any thought of bringing fairness to NZ. The smiley cardboard cut out must be heading to the UN after all. Gordon Browns turn?
I’d give it Trevor
Why is there a need for this bill in Rotorua. I could understand the requirement in some other parts of the country where maori are an actual minority and are subject to the tyranny of the majority or are not of a significant enough population to have the representation to force a consensus. This is not the case in Rotorua where 42% of the population is maori. Why do Rotorua Maori need special wards when its possible to stand decent Maori candidates, get out the Maori vote and achieve potentially achieve democratically 40-50% Maori representation on the council. I say 50% representation because there are a bunch of Pakeha who have no hesitation in voting for good Maori candidates ie. they are not racist.
Meanwhile Rotorua council sponsors a parliamentary bill to scrap “one man one vote”. I am a life long supporter of Labour because they seemed to be social democratic party not communist “once cadre one vote” or capitalist “one dollar one vote” Party.
Anyway the word in Labour Party circles is co-governance (which scraps one man one vote) is a done deal. The radical implementation of this policy is being done with Roger Douglas like stealth and we all know how that neo-liberal experiment turned out. Prediction, co-governance will mean a number of gravy train technocrats become Alan Gibbs size wealth Rangatira.
Labour kissed goodbye to the idea of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” a long time ago, now that idea is seen as just another bit of “caucasity”.
And Bomber as a labour voter and some time critic and TDB donor (just saying) it would be good to comment here so The Party can get some feedback without being moderated (free speech de-platformed).
Why is there a need for this bill in Rotorua.
Because there are a large number of homeless there, and by far the majority (at least 90%) are people who, by their ancestry, should be living securely on that land.
Just a few years ago there was a lovely man going out of his way to provide a roof over the heads and a bed / matress for the night for the homeless, – or for homeless men. So on the cold nights (and Rotorua can be VERY cold in winter) – they at least had some shelter.
And the bloody COUNCIL said, “Nawww… It’s not a good look… Can you say “tourists”.. etc etc (Wide paraphrase š but the general gist is there.
That bloke had been paying for it all himself, and raising what little money he could, to help those men. He was distraught for them, – the anaemic counsellors in their warm comfy beds wouldn’t hack it.
(There are news refs – I don’t have time – look it up if you want.)
Yes, I remember that. But scrapping one man one vote won’t fix it and probably less likely to fix it.
I remember that lovely man, I wonder if he is still there? He did ultimately get some help from somewhere in the end.
ā¦..there are a bunch of Pakeha who have no hesitation in voting for good Maori candidates ie. they are not racistā¦.Well said Joseph and here in Rotorua there has been no shortage of MÄori who have represented our fair town with pride and mana, who hold the respect of all people. Indeed, there is a current councillor within RLC who I would wager will be our first MÄori Wahine prime minister !
?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/rotorua-daily-post/news/rotorua-lakes-councillor-peter-bentley-resigns-during-fiery-exchange-with-mayor-steve-chadwick/4BNUQAZRQQ7LPHUDOWCZBW5PBE/
Comments are closed.