M ÄO R I R E P R E S E N TAT I O N I N L O CAL GO VE R N M E N T There had also been some progress on Mäori wards, and particularly on effective Mäori participation, by some of the outgoing Auckland councils, including Waitakere City, Manukau City and Franklin District. Waitakere City, for example, chose not to adopt Mäori wards, even though its Taumata Runanga group supported them. Waitakere City did, however, submit to the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance that Mäori wards should be established for the new Auckland Council. What were the reasons given for not implementing Mäori wards or constituencies? Responses ranged from a brief "yes, the council has considered this issue", with no further information supplied, to more fulsome responses that outlined detailed consultation processes with either the community at large and/or iwi and Mäori organisations within the district, city or region. Here are some examples of responses and reasons given for not introducing Mäori wards or constituencies: Council resolution to maintain status quo "The establishment of specific Mäori wards creates an electoral privilege which is not regarded as being in the best interests of the city’s cultural development. The establishment of Mäori wards has the potential to create confusion for electors as to how and for who they can vote ... There is a preference to continue discussion with Mäori individuals and Mäori organisations to engage the Mäori community within council activities and decision-making." (Hamilton City Council) "Council resolved not to establish Mäori seats for the 2010 local authority elections for the following reasons: council had a good perspective of Mäori issues from their input under the current arrangements; a single Mäori representative could potentially reduce Mäori participation; [the council] has had Mäori elected members in the past election through the general election issue." (Tauranga City Council) Outcome of representation review following consultation hui with Mäori groups in the district Initial points raised at the hui included "1. There would be a perception that someone elected to a Mäori ward would hold a ‘second class’ position. 2. People on the Mäori electoral roll wanted to be able to vote for all the candidates available, not just those standing for a Mäori ward. 3. Mäori people wanted representation in their own right, on merit, against all comers." The groups involved favoured either or both the establishment of a special advisory committee or participation on standing committees of council. (South Waikato District Council) "The [Iwi Liaison] Subcommittee believed, and this was supported by individual comment at the time, that a Mäori ward(s) would not be representative of the district’s hapu, whereas the subcommittee includes representatives from all hapu." (South Taranaki District Council) "[The council] held a number of meetings with local Mäori on the issue in 2008. Presentations were held from other local authorities on different methods of representation. The outcome of this was that most of the local iwi were in favour of a committee structure instead of Mäori wards. In 2009, [the council] set up a District Mäori Council [sic]. This consists of three representatives from each of the three local iwi and three from [the council], including the mayor. The iwi were asked to nominate their representatives to the council. One group from one of the iwi have decided not to be part of the committee, so two seats remain empty at present. This group would prefer Mäori wards." (Ruapehu District Council) 31