Thinking Of Standing? First Māori Seats In Spotlight Ahead Of Council Elections And Referendum
Article – Moana Ellis – Local Democracy Reporter
The October elections will be the first time Mori in Whanganui will have the option of voting in councillors for the districts new Mori ward.
An information evening for people thinking about standing in this year's local body elections will have a strong focus on the Whanganui's first two Māori ward seats.
The October elections will be the first time Māori voters will have the option of voting in councillors for the district's new Māori ward.
Whanganui District Council will hold a candidate information evening at Te Ao Hou Marae on Friday 16 May at 5.15pm.
The event will feature New Plymouth District councillor Dinnie Moeahu and Manawatū District Māori ward councillor Bridget Bell sharing insights about their experiences in local government.
Both councillors are members of Te Maruata, the Local Government New Zealand network supporting Māori elected members.
The Whanganui council's deputy electoral officer and democracy services manager, Anna Palamountain, said the event would be a chance for people to hear about the reality of being a councillor and learn about the rules for standing for election.
Nominations open on 4 July and close at 12 noon on 1 August.
'So, if you haven't already, now is the time to be thinking about standing up and representing your community as a councillor – or shoulder-tapping others who you think would be well-suited for the role,' Palamountain said.
'Even if you're not personally planning to run for council, this event will be a great chance to learn how Whanganui's new Māori ward will work.'
Māori wards for councils are similar to Māori electorates in Parliament. Voters on the Māori electoral roll elect Māori ward councillors, and general roll voters elect general ward councillors.
Whanganui will have one Māori ward with two councillors, 10 general ward councillors, and the mayor.
Council chief executive David Langford said Māori ward councillors, just like general ward councillors, would represent the whole community and take an oath to serve all residents and ratepayers.
'The idea behind having a Māori ward is to increase Māori representation at local government level, as despite making up nearly a quarter of our district's population, people of Māori descent have historically been under-represented in Whanganui in terms of elected members,' Langford said.
The Māori ward referendum being conducted as part of the 2025 local elections will also be discussed.
'At the same time as they vote for councillors and mayor, voters will be asked whether they support the continuation of a Māori ward in our district or not,' Langford said.
The council decided in October last year to introduce Māori Wards. During community consultation, 53% of submissions supported Māori Wards.
Langford said the referendum was imposed by central government and could cost ratepayers $45,000.
The first information evening at Te Ao Hou Marae on Somme Parade is free to attend, with all welcome.
A second information event will be held at the War Memorial Hall on Monday 16 June, covering the election more broadly.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
14 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Legal action over changes to resource teaching roles 'possible'
By Rachel Helyer Donaldson of RNZ The country's largest teaching union is considering legal action against the government's decision to cut resource teachers in primary schools, confirmed last month as part of the Budget. Ministry of Education documents from February show that 84 schools employed resource teachers for literacy support, 40 employed resource teachers for Māori and three schools employed both. Nationally, there are a maximum of 121 full-time positions for Resource Teachers of Literacy (RTL) and 53 for Resource Teachers of Māori (RTM). Minister for Education Erica Stanford said that was a small number of teachers for the country's 2000 primary schools, and, during a consultation process in March, schools had told her the current system was "not equitable". Stanford said funding was now in place for 349 structured literacy teachers, who would provide support within classrooms - rather than driving from school to school as was the case under the current system - and she encouraged literacy resource teachers "who are amazingly well-qualified and passionate people" to consider applying for those roles. NZEI national secretary Stephanie Mills said the union was waiting on more information from Stanford about how she came to the decision, and then it would decide next steps. "We've said from the beginning of the consultation process that we will explore all options to keep those resources intact. It's not about getting rid of a certain number of positions, it's a service that's been built up over time." 'Disrespected and gaslit' Mills said NZEI had requested details about how Stanford reached her decision via an official information request. The union had asked to see the consultation document prior to the announcement and was told that would be provided a fortnight in advance, but confirmation the roles would be defunded came as part of the Budget. Teachers felt "really disrespected and gaslit" as a result, she added. "These teachers are some of our most experienced and skilled, and they're not being treated in a good way." Mills said many of the current resource teachers were working in rural places and she feared those schools would no longer get the same support. "It will be quite a different role in the new system. The [same] service won't exist and the jobs won't exist." Mills said it was an "irony" the literacy resource roles were being cut, "when the government wants structured literacy". Meanwhile RTMs were, in many situations, the only frontline support for kaiako and tamariki Māori. "Māori RTs are like a taonga." Not a cut but 'a reinvestment' Stanford said she would not be commenting on what action the resource teachers might take. The move was about schools and students, not the teachers, she said. "It's about the way we deliver the service, and this advice was given to me by the sector itself, by schools saying 'the way the model is being delivered it's not equitable and many schools are missing out' ... The ones who are getting the service may not have the greatest need, so it's very inequitable. "What we are doing is shifting that model to an in-class delivery - small groups, intervention teachers, in school." Stanford said the NZ Resource Teachers Literary Association had had "clear information and met multiple times with ministry officials" and they had been "very clear about the reasons, about the opportunities for them in other roles, and they've met a number of times and they have been given that information". The move was not a cut but a "reinvestment", Stanford insisted. "We've already resourced 349 Tier 2 structured literacy intervention roles, over and above the 100 literacy positions that there currently are, so it is not a cut, it is a reinvestment into a better delivery model."
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Māori Tamariki And Rangatahi In The Oranga Tamariki System Are Still Being Failed
Press Release – Ihorangi Reweti Peters It is crucial that both Oranga Tamariki and the New Zealand Police invest in adequate partnerships with Iwi, Mori and community initiatives that support tamariki and rangatahi Mori that are in care of Oranga Tamariki and with care experience, Mr … The outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi Māori and their whānau in the Oranga Tamariki system report, found that tamariki and rangatahi Māori and their whānau are still over-represented and drastically let down within the system. The first report on the performance of the Oranga Tamariki system for Māori was published today by Aroturuki Tamariki the Independent Children's Monitor. State Care survivor and advocate, Ihorangi Reweti Peters, who grew up in the Oranga Tamariki system, says this report shines a light on the performance of the Oranga Tamariki system and that Māori tamariki and rangatahi are still being failed by the very system that is supposed to be caring for them. 'The Independent Children's Monitor found that Oranga Tamariki and NZ Police have strategies in place to address inequality and over-representation but there are barriers to making progress. It is crucial that both Oranga Tamariki and the New Zealand Police invest in adequate partnerships with Iwi, Māori and community initiatives that support tamariki and rangatahi Māori that are in care of Oranga Tamariki and with care experience,' Mr Reweti Peters says. 'These partnerships need to be increased so that our whānau, tamariki and rangatahi Māori have a safe and reliable organisation to raise concerns with. Oranga Tamariki is known to have multiple partnerships, sometimes these partnerships are not the best. 'The report also found that Oranga Tamariki is not always taking action to respond to reports of concern at the earliest opportunity. They found that almost half of the reports of concerns, resulted in a decision to take no further action. The reporting period 2023/24 showed that 52% of the reports of concerns received by Oranga Tamariki were for tamariki and rangatahi who identified as Māori. 'Early intervention is key to responding to reports of concern and supporting these whānau and making sure that our tamariki and rangatahi Māori remain out of Oranga Tamariki care. Ngā Maata Waka and Oranga Tamariki were working in partnership to provide community-led initiatives that responds to reports of concern. This successful initiative no longer operates due to a lack of funding and the roll-out of a new National Contact Centre localised response. 'This initiative was crucial for Māori whānau as it was a by Māori for Māori approach – where tamariki, rangatahi and whānau can engage in the ways that they want to respond to the report of concern. If this service is not reinstated our whānau will continue to fall through the cracks and not receive the right support that they are entitled too. 'I welcome the report today by the Independent Children's Monitor and I hope that Oranga Tamariki, in the interim, will improve the outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi Māori. However, Oranga Tamariki is still in no place to care for some of Aotearoa New Zealand's most vulnerable children and young people. I echo the calls from survivors, academics and whānau, that Oranga Tamariki needs to be dismantled and Iwi, Hāpū and Whānau need to take over the provisions of caring for our tamariki and rangatahi,' says Mr Reweti Peters
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Experts Warn Regulatory Standards Bill Threatens Future Public Health Laws
Article – RNZ One of the experts said it would have a 'chilling effect' on public health measures. , Reporter Public health experts are worried the government's proposed Regulatory Standards Bill will act as a disincentive for future law-makers to limit harmful industries. A group of scholars in health and policy have worked together on a briefing, titled 'Regulatory Standards Bill threatens the public interest, public health and Māori rights'. It's authors are Jonathan Boston, Michael Baker, Andrew Geddis, Carwyn Jones and Geoffrey Palmer. The Regulatory Standards Bill was introduced to Parliament in May, and is now being considered by the finance and expenditure committee. It would set up a Regulatory Standards Board to consider how legislation measures up to the principles. It was part of ACT's coalition agreement, and in putting the bill forward, party leader David Seymour said: 'In a high-cost economy, regulation isn't neutral – it's a tax on growth. This government is committed to clearing the path of needless regulations by improving how laws are made.' The bill wants politicians to show their workings, he said. 'This bill turns the explanation from politicians' 'because we said so' into 'because here is the justification according to a set of principles'.' But Baker said the bill had prompted a large number of concerns, not least from a public health perspective. He said it was problematic that the bill failed to mention public harm in its ethical framework, which was needed to balance out private benefits. Another issue was the 'takings or impairment principle'. The bill in its current form would allow commercial interests, such as the tobacco or alcohol industries, to seek compensation – paid with public money – if any future legislation caused them to lose money. Baker explained this would have a 'chilling effect' on public health measures. He said it would make it less appealing for governments to create any new legislation aimed at protecting public health which could negatively impact harmful industries, which might then seek compensation. This could include the denicotinisation of cigarettes, alcohol restrictions like sponsorship bans, controls on unhealthy food and drink such as limiting marketing to children, and clean air provisions such as mandating emissions reductions by industry. This bill would mean taxpayers paid to compensate these businesses for the money lost because of moves to protect public health. 'And that's going to make it very difficult for any groups – even governments – promoting new public health laws and regulations, that are intended to protect the public interest.' The briefing notes that, rather than this being a by-product of the legislation's overall goal, it 'appears to be the Bill's intention'. Seymour response Seymour accused Baker of 'alarmism'. 'What the bill actually says is that if a politician or government department wants to pass a regulation that infringes on your private property rights, they'll need to justify why. Inconsistency with the principles does not prevent any new legislation from being passed. All it requires is transparency to the taxpayer. That's not radical, it's democratic accountability. If a policy is justified, it will stand up to scrutiny.' 'The Regulatory Standards Bill will help New Zealand get its mojo back. It requires politicians and officials to ask and answer certain questions before they place restrictions on citizens' freedoms. What problem are we trying to solve?' Seymour asked. 'What are the costs and benefits? Who pays the costs and gets the benefits? What restrictions are being placed on the use and exchange of private property?' 'This Bill turns 'because we said so' into 'because here's the evidence'.'
