Electoral Commission Rejects Claims Of Māori Roll Tampering
His comments come amidst a flood of claims on social media from Māori who allege their enrolment details have been changed, or erased, without their knowledge.
Te Pāti Māori are seeking an explanation and has advised Crown Law it wants to look into the reports as part of a two-pronged legal action against the Electoral Commission.
Speaking to RNZ, the commission's top officer, Karl Le Quesne, said they have not and would not change anyone's details without their consent.
"I can give you an assurance that we are not moving people from the Māori roll to the General roll or the other way, unless they're requesting that we do that," he said.
The commission had been monitoring their online enrolment system "really" closely this week and had so far received 30,554 enrolments and updates - 92 percent of them made online.
"We understand some people are having some trouble, so if you are, we really encourage you to call us on 0800 36 76 56 and we'll help you resolve it." Le Quesne said.
It was likely those who could not find their details online were on the dormant roll, he said, echoing comments made by the commission's deputy chief executive of operations, Anusha Guler, earlier this week.
"When we check today, we've got 114,451 people on the dormant role."
According to the Electoral Commission 2023 General Election Report, the dormant roll contains voters who have been removed from the main roll for their electorate because they no longer live at an address and have not updated their enrolment details.
At the election, there were 96,406 people on the dormant roll, and of those, 86 percent were on the general dormant roll while 14 percent were on the Māori dormant roll.
Le Quesne said being on the dormant roll did not mean people had been taken off their main roll.
"We don't switch roles for them when they go on the dormant role. We just need an address from them so we can update their enrollment."
He said the system was designed to protect people's information, and getting your details "exact" was really important.
The "auto-fill" feature on some people's mobile phones and laptops could be messing with an online entry.
"We're really encouraging people to either turn off that auto-fill, or when it auto-fills, you delete it and try and find your address from the drop-down box, because that'll find the address that matches your enrollment record.
"I tried myself this morning, and the auto-fill on my phone put in one address, but it wasn't exactly the address that I was enrolled under."
People can go online to vote.nz to enrol, check or update their details, or call 0800 36 76 56.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Letters: Despite Donald Trump's tariffs, we continue to produce world-class meat, dairy and wine
So, in summary and even factoring in US state sales taxes, in totality, New Zealand is only marginally disadvantaged. Further mitigating factors both in favour of the American consumer and the New Zealand exporter is the ongoing strength of the US dollar and Donald Trump's recent big, beautiful tax bill, which will pass significant tax relief and buying power into the hands of millions of American consumers. Also front of mind should be that other countries and direct New Zealand competitors are facing similar, if not greater, tariff increases than New Zealand. Given we continue to produce world-class meat, dairy and wine products, it's unlikely, after a period of adjustment, that price increases at the retail level will have any meaningful impact on American consumers. Bruce Eliott, St Heliers. Voting changes People are criticising the Government for closing voting enrolments two weeks before the election. If you don't want to vote, that is fine. However, if you do, but can't be bothered to put in a small amount of effort to enrol over two weeks before an election, the problem isn't the system, it's you. If you want to vote, make an effort. Mark Young, Ōrewa. Electoral requirements If it is a legal requirement to be enrolled on the electoral roll, as stated by the Government on national television Q&A programme yesterday, why are all those on a benefit or Superannuation or in public services jobs not being checked by either employers or Winz? Who is responsible for checking that all New Zealanders are enrolled and are therefore not in breach of the law? Or does this Government not care about the 'dropkicks' or those who have been removed from the Māori roll? What happens to those who turn 18 on or near polling day? If the enrolment time is shortened, how will NZ Post guarantee that all New Zealanders are enrolled in time, and also the many thousands of Kiwi who have moved to Australia this past year who are still New Zealand citizens? Where is the democratic right for all New Zealanders? It behoves every Kiwi eligible to vote and all parliamentary parties to check the electoral roll in 2026 to make a concerted effort to gather those who are in breach of the law. Marie Kaire, Whangārei. Credit card fees So, the Government is banning credit card fees, whoop de do. Not all retailers charged extra anyway and the ones that did will recover them in some other covert way instead. A waste of Government time and energy all round. A.J. Petersen, Kawerau. Lions v Australia In a dead rubber, Australia won one test against the British and Irish Lions which, in spite of rugby's prevailing conflicting laws, held a passing interest. The game again was an eight-man-a-side wrestling contest with hardly any flowing seven-man backline plays. The tries scored were due only to individual opportunism, rather than teamwork. Once again, rugby was ... the loser. Larry Mitchell, Rothesay Bay. Jami-Lee Ross' political return Former National MP Jami-Lee Ross has said he is aiming for a political comeback, and will run for a seat on the Howick local board in the Flat Bush subdivision. No doubt he has weighed up the pros and cons of this move, but given the way the final chapters of his previous time in politics played out in the media, I'd suggest it would probably be best to give it a miss. He would open himself up for scrutiny, old controversies will be brought up, and his new venture, running an escort agency, will no doubt be 'grist for the mill' for his opponents. The message in Kenny Rogers' song The Gambler says it best: 'You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away and know when to run...' Lorraine Kidd, Warkworth.
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Facing prospect of election defeat, Government tries to change the rules
There's no good reason to remove election-day enrolment, which has been in place since 2020. And there's certainly no reason to remove the ability to enrol during the advance voting period. You've been able to enrol up to the day before election day since 1993. The idea that election-day enrolment was delaying the official results is also nonsense. Whether people update their enrolment details two weeks before the election or on election day, that form still has to be processed and their information updated. It's the same amount of workers' time, either way. The Government can just hire more people to do it after election day, rather than before, and the job will get done on time. Don't give me the 'well, they should sort out their enrolment details earlier' line. I thought National and Act were against bureaucracy? And now they're saying you should lose your right to vote unless you know about the bureaucracy of voter enrolment and tick the state's forms well ahead of time? We should be making it as easy as possible for people to exercise their right to vote. Aotearoa New Zealand has a good record in that regard. We were world leaders in votes for Māori, votes for women, removing the property-ownership test. We don't have people queuing for hours like in the United States. But now the Government wants to use bureaucracy to trip people up and stop them voting. Even Judith Collins has said it is wrong: 'The proposal for a 13-day registration deadline appears to constitute an unjustified limit on s12 of the NZBORA [the right to vote]. The accepted starting point is the fundamental importance of the right to vote within a liberal democracy. A compelling justification is required to limit that right.' The Deputy Prime Minister says you're a 'dropkick' if you don't get your registration sorted well before the election. But why shouldn't a person be able to come along on election day or in the early voting period, cast their vote, and, if their enrolment details need updating, do it at the same time? Why force us to use an inefficient, two-step process? Since when has the supposedly libertarian Act Party loved bureaucracy? Truth is, we know why the Government is doing this. It's a Government that's failing to deliver and fading in the polls. In most recent polls, Labour has been ahead of National. Forty-eight per cent of voters say it's time for a new Government. Only 38% want to give this Government a second chance. So they're trying to screw the scrum in their favour. David Seymour let it slip with his 'dropkicks' comment. Act MP Todd Stephenson put it even more bluntly: 'It's outrageous that someone completely disengaged and lazy can rock up to the voting booth, get registered there and then, and then vote to tax other people's money away.' Trying to make sure only the 'right' people are voting is dangerous, anti-democratic thinking. We all know this change is about setting up barriers for people who are young, Māori, disengaged or alienated from the structures of power and wealth in this country – because those people are unlikely to vote for a Government that works in the interests of the wealthy and powerful. The Government knows full well that these New Zealanders, who have the same right to vote as anyone else, are less likely to be familiar with the rules around registration. The Government also knows there will be many people, Kiwis not as politically engaged as you and me, dear reader, but no less worthy of the vote, who will turn up to a polling place on election day or during the advance voting period thinking that they can update their registration at the same time as they vote – because that's how it has been and they haven't heard about the change – and be turned away under this new law. Democracy is meant to be a contest of ideas. And it is fundamental to democracy that the voters choose the Government, not the other way around. If the Government wants to be re-elected, it should give people a reason to vote for it, not try to exclude voters it doesn't like.
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Comments On The Equal Pay Amendment Bill
The group's chair, Gail Duncan, said: 'The Social Justice Group have sent in their submission to the Peoples Select Committee on Pay Equity. This Select Committee was the brainchild of Marilyn Waring and we were very grateful to have the opportunity to submit ' The Bill was deliberately passed in full with no public consultation, no accompanying Regulatory Impact Statement, no exemption from the Ministry of Regulation, and did not meet Cabinet's requirements. Breaching all requirements with no regard to the long term impact on women or regard that these roles underpin the wellbeing of communities, ignoring that many women in these roles are the sole income earner for their families – they are the breadwinners - and all deserve appropriate recompense for their service and labour. Discrimination is what it is, and this Act embodies and perpetuates it, taking us backwards. The Government introduced the Equal Pay Amendment Bill to the house under urgency on Monday 5 May 2025 and it was passed on Wednesday evening 7 May 2025. The approach not only breached the Bill of Rights Act, but was inconsistent with the international Sustainable Development Goals requirements for delivery of fair pay for women. This government starkly says to New Zealand employers (including the government) that while we can't afford to pay women at pay equity rates, we can afford to deliver tax cuts to landlords and concessions to some industries such as the tobacco industry. The impact of this reduction in due process is being paid for by women across New Zealand as they strive to support themselves and their families. This Bill limits their capability to pursue claims by extinguishing existing cases and denying back pay. The removal of pay equity from the books has undermined the future prosperity of all women in New Zealand, particularly Māori and Polynesian, reducing the productivity and economic contribution of half of New Zealand's workforce. This in turn contributes to child poverty, holding back the next generation. Furthermore, it forces the women of New Zealand to sacrifice their pay equity claims to balance the books for Budget 2025. This, we submit, is unprincipled and ruthless. The National Party has always backtracked on any improvements to women's pay parity . It removed the Employment Equity Act, passed under the Labour government in 1990. That Act aimed to address pay equity and inequality in employment for women, Māori, Pasifika, and workers with disabilities. It also established the Employment Equity Office. The Act was repealed by the incoming National government later that year (1990). Again following Kristine Bartlett and the Food Workers Union Nga Ringa Tota winning the case for care workers in the Court of Appeal in 2014, and a pay equity settlement in June 2017 the National Party publicly stated that its intention was to write off the compensation from the ledger, and rewrite the Bill such that no woman would ever be able to make such claims again. In July 2017 the National Government introduced the Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill 2017 (284-1), to repeal the Equal Pay Act 1972, and create a process for raising pay equity claims within the structure of the Employment Relations Act 2000. The Bill lapsed following the general election. Source: In 2025 the Coalition Government has now achieved this intent with the Equal Pay Amendment Bill. The redacted Cabinet Paper 'Reviewing policy settings' (1 May 2025), justifies pay equity changes on the grounds of the Government's commitment to improve the quality of legislation, reducing complexity and costs. The Equal Pay Amendment Bill was promoted as providing a better pay regulatory framework for a pay equity process, based on the concepts of the Regulatory Standards Bill. New Zealand is not a basket case economically, New Zealand has head space. Policy decisions should enhance wellbeing across the population and this is not evidenced. Instead, the austerity measures being applied are counterproductively pausing the economy against public messaging that growth is the answer. The government is forging a pathway to hardship for hardworking New Zealanders. The Equal Pay Amendment Bill is one strategic part of these austerity measures and their ongoing plan to lower wages across the whole spectrum of workers. This began with the rescinding of Fair Pay Agreement Act, effective from 20 December 2023, by the Fair Pay Agreement Repeal Bill introduced on 12 December 2023 by MP Hon Brooke van Veldon, Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety. The same minister then reviewed the Equal Pay Act 1972, one of the most important pieces of legislation for women on the statute book in New Zealand. The Equal Pay Amendment Bill has set New Zealand back over 50 years, abandoning international obligations to ensure pay parity for women and is another contractionary measure. Treasury has already warned of a slowing economy, slowing spending and lowering business revenue leading to a reduction in the Government's tax take. Taking $12.8 billion out of the economy by reneging on obligations to value women's work appropriately will backfire. This government has introduced a new framework for the use of parties to assess whether there is sex-based undervaluation. The government has raised doubts about the comparison between jobs conducted predominantly by women and other roles of similar responsibility, and implied that prior claims had no merit and determined a reset is required. Differences in remuneration for reasons other than sex-based discrimination? The only one given is the employer will struggle to pay and the Government is threatening that it will reduce funding for those activities concerned. This is as bad as saying businesses and farmers will struggle to make changes to meet our climate change obligations, so we won't foist any requirements upon them. This is setting New Zealand up to fail. St Peter's on Willis Social Justice Group opposes the legislation which has passed giving Brooke van Veldon the power to adjust and further discriminate against women without consultation either publicly or with cabinet. To conclude, St Peter's on Willis Social Justice Group will justify our stance by quoting scripture, as we were asked in the oral hearing for the Regulatory Standards Bill. Jesus is clear about our need to care for the poor and disadvantaged, for instance: in Matthew 25:34-46. He is scathing about influential people who circumvent justice with trickery, for example in Matthew 25:23, 'But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees! For you tithe mint dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. It is these you ought to have practised without neglecting the others.' And Luke 11:46, 'Woe also to you lawyers! For you load people with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not lift a finger to ease them.' Using the words of Dr Martin Luther King, quoting Amos 5:24, 'Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.' This government is making decisions which put them on the wrong side of history. Basically, we must pay women what they are worth and reinstate the pay parity obligations lost in the passing of the Equal Pay Amendment Bill.
