Democracy requires us to vote

Want to promote your business or idea?

We Support Local

Written by

Flemming H Rasmussen

Published on

August 26, 2025

Looking at the referendum for Maori Wards.

PREAMBLE

On 31 October 2023, our Mayor and seven (7) Councillors rushed to adopt a remit of: “Approve Option 2—To establish one or more Māori wards for the 2025 and 2028 triennial elections” (Cr Morrisey moved, Cr Connell seconded). In favour: Crs Revell, Giri-Percival, Gotlieb, Sinclair, Rodley and the Mayor. Absent: Crs Grant and Walker.

They did it without any consultation; none of them had campaigned on the issue. They did it barely two weeks after the 15 October 2023 General Election, before a new government was formed, when everyone knew Labour would not be returning as a majority government.

Further, to disguise their rushed decision, it was incorrectly recorded as “a unanimous decision”. It was not. It was 8-0. A full Council was not in assembly (10 votes).

In life, many would sometimes like a second chance. Our Mayor and Councillors got the opportunity to right a wrong, to rescind their hastily taken decision, when the new coalition government forced their hand by passing law requiring TCDC to either rescind the October 2023 decision, or, if they reaffirmed it, mandating TCDC to go back and ask us, the electorate, if we want a Māori Ward, by holding a binding poll (ss 10(2) and 29(1) of the Electoral Legislation and Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Act 2024).

On 3 September 2024, our elected members met and declined that second chance. They voted 7-1-1-1 to establish a Māori Ward, forcing a binding poll. In favour: Crs Giri-Percival, Connell, Gotlieb, Morrisey, Sinclair, Rodley, and the Mayor. Against: Cr Grant. Abstaining: Cr Walker. Absent: Cr Revell.

Democratic reasons why the electorate should have been deciding this in the first place are:

1. Democracy requires genuine consultation and due process

In the law, we often state, “rushed law is bad law”. The same is true about rushed democratic decisions that alter foundational democratic decision-making processes.

Deciding if we have, or do not have, one or more Māori Wards is foundational to democratic decision-making.

A genuine and transparent consultation, underpinned by due process, is non-negotiable when considering proposed structural changes to democracy and the representation system.

2. One person, one vote and equal vote weight – a foundational democratic principle

The democratic principle of giving equal weight to each person’s vote (voter parity) is a foundational concept underpinning electoral fairness and representation.

The right that every citizen’s vote counts equally is enshrined in statute, electoral practice and case law. It is a principle that wars have been fought over. A great many people have paid the ultimate price to defend it. Our legislation safeguards against both overrepresentation and underrepresentation in our electoral systems.

2.1 Legal Basis for this Principle: New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA), the Electoral Act 1993 (general elections) and the Local Electoral Act 2001 (local elections).

2.1.1 NZBORA – s12: Every New Zealand citizen aged 18 years or older has the right to vote in parliamentary elections. Section 19: Protects the right to freedom from discrimination, including geographic location (over- or under-representation).

Sections 12 and 19 together imply each vote must have relatively equal influence (“voter parity”).

2.1.2 Electoral Act 1993 (parliamentary elections) – Electorate boundaries are drawn so each electorate contains roughly the same number of people. A ±5% population tolerance applies to general electorates to ensure no vote in one district is significantly “heavier” or “lighter” than another (s35(3)).

2.1.3 Local Electoral Act 2001(local elections) – s19V requires, when a council divides a district into wards, that: “The population of each ward divided by the number of members to be elected by that ward must produce a figure within ±10% of the population per member ratio for the district as a whole.”

This “±10% rule is a legal mechanism for equal local body elections representation. Any exceptions require special justification and approval by the Local Government Commission.

2.1.4 Binding (authoritative) Legal Precedence: Attorney-General v Taylor [2018] NZSC 104 upheld importance of universal suffrage and equal participation as democratic cornerstones.

West Coast United Council v Prebble [1987] 1 NZLR 314 affirmed disproportionate representation [could] breach democratic principles.

3. A perverse outcome (potentially)

Te Tara o Te Ika Māori, the TCDC Māori Ward, had 1,732 resident electors registered (30 April 2025). For that, they get to elect one (1) Councillor. (Source: p.3 “Candidate Information Handbook” 2025 Local Elections”).

In Whangamata/Pauanui/Tairua (S-E Ward), it requires almost double (1.74x) as many resident electors to elect one Councillor (3,021); Mercury Bay (2,513) (1.45x); Thames (2,487)(1.44x), Coromandel/Coleville 2,169 (1.25x).

We face a potentially perverse outcome whereby our Mayor and a meagre six (6) Councillors have forced upon us a general Māori Ward for the 2025-28 election period, without the voice of the electorate being heard, and potentially rejecting it.

TCDC prides itself on compliance and (allegedly) local community involvement. Metaphorically, we consult on everything – we have recently consulted on something as “important” as one versus two weekly rubbish collections for part of the year for part of the district.

Not consulting on a change to a foundational democratic principle smacks of arrogance, ignorance, or, as some argue, a deliberate and cynical act. Either way, it should be a concern to us all!

CONCLUSION

I am not concerned whether you vote for or against a Māori Ward. You will have your reasons, all of which are very good and legitimate. However, I do care that you vote. Democracy and this decision are too important to be left to a few individuals to decide.

I will be voting in favour of voter parity – every citizen’s vote counts equally. I will be voting against Te Tara o Te Ika Māori, in its present form.

Flemming Rasmussen s a local, independent lawyer. Standing for Mercury Bay Councillor in the 2025 Local Government Elections.

PREAMBLE

They did it without any consultation; none of them had campaigned on the issue. They did it barely two weeks after the 15 October 2023 General Election, before a new government was formed, when everyone knew Labour would not be returning as a majority government.

Further, to disguise their rushed decision, it was incorrectly recorded as “a unanimous decision”. It was not. It was 8-0. A full Council was not in assembly (10 votes).

Democratic reasons why the electorate should have been deciding this in the first place are:

1. Democracy requires genuine consultation and due process

In the law, we often state, “rushed law is bad law”. The same is true about rushed democratic decisions that alter foundational democratic decision-making processes.

Deciding if we have, or do not have, one or more Māori Wards is foundational to democratic decision-making.

A genuine and transparent consultation, underpinned by due process, is non-negotiable when considering proposed structural changes to democracy and the representation system.

2. One person, one vote and equal vote weight – a foundational democratic principle

The democratic principle of giving equal weight to each person’s vote (voter parity) is a foundational concept underpinning electoral fairness and representation.

2.1 Legal Basis for this Principle: New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA), the Electoral Act 1993 (general elections) and the Local Electoral Act 2001 (local elections).

2.1.1 NZBORA – s12: Every New Zealand citizen aged 18 years or older has the right to vote in parliamentary elections. Section 19: Protects the right to freedom from discrimination, including geographic location (over- or under-representation).

Sections 12 and 19 together imply each vote must have relatively equal influence (“voter parity”).

This “±10% rule is a legal mechanism for equal local body elections representation. Any exceptions require special justification and approval by the Local Government Commission.

2.1.4 Binding (authoritative) Legal Precedence: Attorney-General v Taylor [2018] NZSC 104 upheld importance of universal suffrage and equal participation as democratic cornerstones.

West Coast United Council v Prebble [1987] 1 NZLR 314 affirmed disproportionate representation [could] breach democratic principles.

3. A perverse outcome (potentially)

Te Tara o Te Ika Māori, the TCDC Māori Ward, had 1,732 resident electors registered (30 April 2025). For that, they get to elect one (1) Councillor. (Source: p.3 “Candidate Information Handbook” 2025 Local Elections”).

In Whangamata/Pauanui/Tairua (S-E Ward), it requires almost double (1.74x) as many resident electors to elect one Councillor (3,021); Mercury Bay (2,513) (1.45x); Thames (2,487)(1.44x), Coromandel/Coleville 2,169 (1.25x).

We face a potentially perverse outcome whereby our Mayor and a meagre six (6) Councillors have forced upon us a general Māori Ward for the 2025-28 election period, without the voice of the electorate being heard, and potentially rejecting it.

TCDC prides itself on compliance and (allegedly) local community involvement. Metaphorically, we consult on everything – we have recently consulted on something as “important” as one versus two weekly rubbish collections for part of the year for part of the district.

Not consulting on a change to a foundational democratic principle smacks of arrogance, ignorance, or, as some argue, a deliberate and cynical act. Either way, it should be a concern to us all!

CONCLUSION

I am not concerned whether you vote for or against a Māori Ward. You will have your reasons, all of which are very good and legitimate. However, I do care that you vote. Democracy and this decision are too important to be left to a few individuals to decide.

I will be voting in favour of voter parity – every citizen’s vote counts equally. I will be voting against Te Tara o Te Ika Māori, in its present form.

Flemming Rasmussen s a local, independent lawyer. Standing for Mercury Bay Councillor in the 2025 Local Government Elections.

Share this article:

More Stories