'System just sucks': Political scientist says Māori being deterred from voting
RNZ / Sarah Robson
A Māori political scientist says reports people have been removed from the electoral roll or shifted off the Māori roll could discourage some Māori from voting.
Political scientist at Victoria University Lara Greaves was blunt in her assessment of New Zealand's voting system, calling it difficult to navigate, particularly when it comes to updating or changing enrolment details.
"This system just sucks," she said.
Past surveys have shown that a significant minority of people don't have a good understanding of the electoral system at all, she said.
"So I think this whole system is set up in a way that is quite confusing, quite hōhā and quite bureaucratic and a bit annoying overall."
Over the last several days social media has been awash with people checking their voter details only to find they are no longer enrolled or that they cannot find their enrolment details.
Lloyd is a voter on the general roll, he checked his enrolment status on Thursday was unable to find his details and had to reenrol. He told RNZ it was like there was no record of him at all.
"It just seemed very inflexible considering you want everyone to vote ... I hope they get on [and] start advertising and telling people 'please just go and check and you may have to do this from scratch and we're sorry' or something."
Lloyd said he has been voting for about 30 years and last checked his voting details prior to the last election in 2023.
Adding extra steps to the enrolment process just makes it that much harder, he said.
"I just think they should fix the system so it's a little bit smarter and easier."
Lloyd's kōrero follows that of Taryn Utiger, who told RNZ she had been put on the dormant roll despite updating her enrolment details three weeks prior.
"They were like, yup ka pai you're on the Māori electorate roll, everything's good to go you will be able to vote in the local body elections and the referendum. I was like cool, thought that was the end of it, everything confirmed. Then I logged in last night and nothing."
Lara Greaves.
Photo:
Supplied
Greaves said there are realistic barriers between Māori enrolling to vote, including a lack of knowledge among poll workers about the Māori roll and a legacy of colonisation that has discouraged Māori from participating in the electoral system.
"We know that there are barriers out there, and the barriers and perception of barriers do cause lower trust, lower trust in democracy. We go back decades and we can see that there have been a lot of barriers for Māori voters," she said.
"All of this is contributing to a culture where people think 'hey why would I even bother voting they don't want my vote.'"
Greaves said as the facilitator of New Zealand's democracy the Electoral Commission needs to be sufficiently staffed, especially in its IT department.
"Could we just invest in an IT system, could we invest in a computer system, could we invest in more people on the ground and get better results. Democracy does need money, it does need investment, it does need personnel to run it and that doesn't seem to be the case at the moment."
When a system has inequities those inequities tend to affect Māori, Pacific people and migrant communities more, she said.
The Electoral Commission have said there were no technical issues with their online system.
Its deputy chief executive of operation Anusha Guler said it was likely some people had been moved to the "dormant roll" because they had not got in contact with the commission for sometime.
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.
Between 31 July and the 2023 election day, just under 78,000 people moved from dormant rolls to the main roll.
Speaking to media yesterday, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said he was also concerned but the Electoral Commission had said there was no issue and if people were experiencing them, they should contact the commission directly.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Spinoff
3 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Nope, no way, we haven't already zoned for enough housing in Auckland
Critics are saying the government is bullying Auckland Council into allowing unnecessary new housing intensification. They fail to mention that dense housing remains banned in the places where it makes the most sense. Christine Fletcher's voice took on a tinge of exasperation as she explained her thoughts on housing development to Ingrid Hipkiss last week. The Auckland councillor insisted she wasn't a zealot. She just wanted a good, lengthy, potentially infinite process of deliberation. 'I'm not opposed to intensification,' she said. 'I'm very much in favour of it, because it should be along our transport routes, but this is being done with indecent haste and really needs to be thought through.' Her moderate stance might have been a surprise to those who attended Auckland Council's planning committee meeting in November 2021, where Fletcher likened legislation aimed at making the council allow for housing intensification to 'gang rape '. Now here she was on RNZ's Morning Report on Thursday to talk about a column she'd penned for the Herald with Troy Churton, an Ōrākei local board member best known for complaining about the police Eagle helicopter 169 times in eight months and also comparing development to rape. They were opposing the government's updated housing legislation, which will force the council to allow for hundreds of thousands of new homes and businesses, primarily around train stations and rapid busways. The column eschews comparisons between desperately needed housing and violent sexual assault to argue the new legislation is unnecessary and harmful to Auckland's character and community spirit. It's riddled with statistics, which might make it seem factual and dispassionate. The council, it explains, has already zoned for 900,000 new homes through its Unitary Plan. That sounds impressive, but these sorts of numbers can be deceiving. Technically the entire world's population could fit in a square box with 1km-long sides in the middle of Manhattan. Build The Cube, urbanists like to say. Their more serious point is that planners could just zone for The Cube and say they've released enough housing capacity for the next few millennia. Auckland has its own version of The Cube. Fletcher and Churton are right that its Unitary Plan allows for thousands of new houses, but they fail to mention that most of them are in far-flung and slightly dystopian places like Milldale, Millwater, or even Howick. Development is cut off in many of the most accessible, desirable and wealthy parts of the isthmus. The Unitary Plan locks 41% of all land within 5km of the city centre under so-called 'character protections' designed to preserve the city's heavily renovated and eye-wateringly expensive villas in amber. In some suburbs, like Grey Lynn central and Ponsonby west, dense housing is banned on more than 90% of the land. Despite councillors like Fletcher raising the prospect of sprawl into places with inadequate infrastructure if they're forced to allow for intensification, the most meaningful restrictions on development in Auckland right now are in places with good access to jobs, where pipes, roading networks and busy public transport routes are already in place. Auckland's planners and politicians like to keep this sort of stuff under wraps. They talk about the 'compact city', pretending the Unitary Plan upzoned primarily around town centres and public transit. An elaborate system has been set up to maintain the ruse. When planners send councillors reports on development patterns, they use a flattering 1,500-metre walking catchment, meaning anything within 1,500m of the rapid transit network, to determine which homes have been built in the places that make the most sense. That measure has the upside of taking in huge amounts of the city, meaning lots of development that isn't that well-connected gets tractor-beamed into the council's self-aggrandising statistics. Lately though, the government has been asking the council to please stop taking the piss and actually allowing dense housing near the new train stations and rail lines it's spent billions of dollars upgrading. Housing minister Chris Bishop has demanded that councillors like Fletcher allow at least 15-storey developments around stations like Kingsland and Maungawhau. Faced with the distressing prospect of actually following through on its compact city goals, the council has decided that outside of the city centre, the walking catchment for rapid transit is actually 800m. Even with that reduction in place, Fletcher, Churton and their supporters still aren't happy. They worry about an 'oversupply' of housing and make shows of concern about a collapse of our 'suburban and cultural diversity'. But if the government is able to force Auckland Council to zone for an abundance of new housing, the most noticeable change to the city will be that its wealthiest, most well-connected suburbs are no longer an exclusive enclave for Fletcher, whose property holdings are so valuable she once famously told her colleagues she pays $5,000 per month in rates, or her similarly well-to-do constituents. That's not a collapse of its cultural diversity. It's an expansion. It's not creating an oversupply of housing. It's finally allowing it to be built in the places where people want to live. Underneath all this apparent altruistic concern for the fabric of the city, you can hear the faint but unmistakable sound of a familiar refrain: not in my backyard.
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
Sweeping reforms to money laundering laws
Photo: 123RF The government has unveiled sweeping reforms to the country's anti money laundering laws to crack down on dirty money. Set to be in place by the next election, the changes to New Zealand's Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) regime aim to shut down dodgy deals, tighten financial loopholes, and take on the criminal underworld, while cutting unnecessary red tape for law-abiding citizens. It is estimated that a staggering $1.35 billion is generated from money laundering in New Zealand every year. The Detail talks to Lloyd Kavanagh, a financial services lawyer and deal maker from Minter Ellison Rudd Watts, about the changes, which include giving police greater powers to freeze bank accounts more quickly, banning cryptocurrency ATMs, introducing a more risk-based system for selling property from family trusts, and making it easier for parents to open bank accounts for their children. Kavanagh also welcomes efforts to streamline and simplify the system by introducing one supervision layer to oversee the rules. "Currently, we have three supervisors who supervise different segments of the market," he tells The Detail. "You have the Reserve Bank, who is the AML supervisor for banks, you have the FMA who oversees securities market participants broadly, and then you have the Department of Internal Affairs, who looks after casinos and everybody else... lenders, lawyers, accountants, real estate agents, and quite a wide range of smaller businesses. "What the government is proposing is... we should have a single supervisor so that they can be consistent in the guidance that they give to reporting entities, and have a total overview of what's going on in the sector. So that is one measure which I think will have a significant impact. "Some of the other measures ... are actually to relieve the administrative burden - one of them is, at the moment, you have to verify your customer's address, which proves to be really difficult for a lot of people.... so, the change will mean you only have to do that if you have got reasons for thinking it's a high-risk customer. "I am actually optimistic that by removing some of the mandatory bureaucracy, resources will get refocused in doing what I think, and I certainly hope all New Zealanders are keen to do, which is to use the pressure on what happens to the proceeds of crime to help us detect crime in the first place." He does have some concerns about giving greater powers to police - "I'm a little reserved about simply giving additional powers to the police if you don't have the right checks and balances" - and questions the ban on cryptocurrency ATMs, which are kiosks that allow users to buy and sell cryptocurrency using cash. "I'm somewhat puzzled by that inclusion because I haven't seen the evidence as to why that would be a particular priority." But ultimately, he believes the law changes will make a difference. "We all benefit if there is less crime in New Zealand. These people [money launderers] make business decisions as to which countries are easier to operate in and profitable to operate in. "And we know from the reports that have come from the government over the last year that New Zealand has an increasing level of drug abuse. We know that we are more and more connected in a world where there are all sorts of transactions going on. "What we need to do is just make ourselves a little bit harder to do bad things in. So, I think these [law changes] are positive steps." Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here . You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook
RNZ News
3 hours ago
- RNZ News
National pins re-election hopes on economy
Christopher Luxon is busy trying to convince people that National, not Labour, is the steady hand on the tiller amid choppy global waters. Photo: RNZ / Nick Monro Analysis: Saturday's National Party conference set out an early 2026 challenge to voters - stick with what we've got or risk it on who-knows-what. It's a line National used successfully in 2014 (remember Eminem-esque?), but that was a different National, and a different looking government. At roughly the same point in that electoral cycle, National was polling in the late forties. National in 2025 is struggling to get past the early thirties. Labour has emerged as the party New Zealanders think has the best handle on the cost of living, according to the Ipsos Issues Monitor. Of course, there is a long way to go yet. The prime minister knows this, and is counting on sunnier economic fortunes this time next year. But to borrow a well-worn Christopher Luxon phrase, the cost of living is the barnacle that won't get off the boat, and Luxon spent his speech - and much of the week leading up to it - trying to convince people that National, not Labour, is the steady hand on the tiller amid choppy global waters. The government is at pains to say it can't control global events, although it spent a lot of time criticising the previous government for blaming global events. The Trump administration's increased tariffs landed like a lead balloon on Friday, and prompted some late additions to the conference's run sheet. In his speech, Luxon acknowledged the tariffs, but said New Zealand can't just "batten down the hatch" and hope for the best. Trade minister Todd McClay took some time out of his rurals session to say he's already spoken to his US trade counterpart, and dispatched top trade diplomat Vangelis Vitalis to Washington. McClay will follow in the coming weeks. Domestically, National is still blaming the previous government for the economic conditions it inherited, and pitching that it needs a second term to truly sort it out. The party's putting a stake in the ground and saying next year's election will be all about the economy. Last Monday's 10-minute sermon from the podium , which set out the steps National had taken to address the cost of living, was a harbinger of what was to come at the weekend. Inside the cavernous National Air Force Museum, Luxon told media New Zealanders would have a "very simple choice" at the next election: "Do you trust the guys that actually crashed the economy and have no plan, or do you trust the guys in the government that's actually inherited a mess and is sorting it out and is making progress before that election?" Luxon did not mention the other "guys in the government" on Saturday. That's not unusual. This was, after all, a National Party event, full of National Party stump speeches. The party's deputy Nicola Willis, however, gave Luxon a shout-out for the "energy" it takes to keep Winston Peters and David Seymour under control. While joking he was targeting 100 percent of the vote in 2026, Luxon said after his speech that it was natural to disagree with his coalition partners, but they were aligned on the things that mattered. National leader Christopher Luxon speaks at the party's annual conference. Photo: RNZ / Giles Dexter National party supporters that RNZ spoke to were largely happy with how things were going, and how Luxon was keeping things in line. "We are very co-ordinated, very co-ordinated. We respect each other's policies and respect each other's decisions," said one member. "They're very aggressive people that he's in Parliament with, but he's handled it extremely well," said another. "It's like you're the mother in the house, and you have to herd two cats, who do co-operate sometimes, and other times they've got other agendas. From a managerial point of view, I think he's doing excellently in the light of the type of political system we've got." Some expressed wariness of what Peters would do next year, others sung from Luxon's songsheet that this was the maturity of MMP on display. "It's taking some managing, but it's all good. It's what MMP is about." "Everybody's looking at next year's election again, and obviously they want to get back in. So there's a bit of leverage, and nobody's got more experience at that than Winston." They were also convinced the country was going in the right direction, and that Luxon was the right person to steer it there. "We're starting to turn the corner. The last 18 months has been the clean-up job, and we're actually getting ready to turn the tank around now." "It just takes time, and people have got to be patient. They're doing everything that they possibly can, it's just a timing issue. Everybody's impatient." National's membership thinks the polls will firm in their favour as the public look more critically at the alternative. A Labour Party bereft of policy, juggling the niche demands of the more extreme Greens and Te Pāti Māori. Luxon wants the country to "say yes" to more. More mining, more infrastructure, more housing, more tourism, more growth. Opening up more concessions on Department of Conservation land, and charging international visitors to visit some DOC sites is part of that "say yes" strategy. Twenty to forty dollars is not a large sum to fork out for people who have paid thousands to come here, and it adds $62m to the conservation estate that New Zealanders won't have to pay for. There are still some implementation issues to work through. It remains to be seen whether New Zealanders will have to take a passport or bank statement to Cathedral Cove to get out of a fee. It's a small change, and one the government did not campaign or consult the public on, or put in its latest quarterly plan. There will be more to come as parties start to differentiate themselves and sound the election battle drums. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
