Chris Bullen

Since I became a journalist in 1961 I have reported on and attended the meetings of councils throughout the North Island – hundreds of committee and full council gatherings.

The list includes Wellington, Lower Hutt, Upper Hutt, Porirua, Petone, Eastbourne, Napier, Hastings, Taradale, Havelock North, Auckland, North Shore and Manukau, as well as Whakatāne, Kawerau and Ōpōtiki. Quite a few of those are no longer with us.  I also worked for the Wellington City Council for three years prior to becoming a journalist.

From 1984 to 2000, I attended almost every Whakatāne District Council meeting and committee meeting on behalf of Radio 1XX.

I think that qualifies me to write about councils and in particular the pros and cons of Māori wards, on which we have a referendum at this year’s local body elections. And I have to say, I have modified my views. Although I never had a strong opinion one way or the other (and as a journalist have never advocated for or against) now, in retirement, I want to pass on how I see things.

I used to think that Whakatāne didn’t need Māori wards, as through one election cycle to the next it always seemed to have a number of Māori or part-Māori councillors. But in all that time, councillors were mostly called upon to action matters from a European or Pakeha standpoint. They may have thought they were taking Māori perspectives into account, and may have tried to do so, but the underlying motivation was doing things the European way.

Nothing wrong with that, but as we all know, or should know, Māori often see things differently.

I well remember an occasion when the full Whakatāne District Council was considering the proposed harbour training wall, and one member commented that they hadn’t hadn’t had a reply from Ngāti Awa. Ted Butt (a very forthright and popular Māori) opened his eyes and said,” Yes you have. That’s a Māori ‘no’”. Saying nothing, in that case, meant saying ‘no’.

A reminder that sometimes, different races see things differently, and does one viewpoint have more importance than another?

We could go on in the traditional way, with staff writing their reports and proposals in English, which subtly emphasises the European aspect, and council adopting them. After all, 66 percent of the district’s population is European (compared with 74 percent for the whole country). So, their views should prevail, right? But the Māori proportion is rising and in the next few years is likely to reach 50 percent.

Do we continue focusing on the European way of doing things or do we look to become more inclusive of Māori perspectives?  If so, one way of giving Māori more say is to have Māori wards. We can’t guarantee it will lead to better or even different decisions, but we can say it should give Māori more opportunities to present their views.

The previous government forced councils to adopt Māori wards, which upset a lot of people. The challenge now is to vote for them because they are wanted, for better balance. Local government needs to be local, and to represent everybody.

There may be differences of opinion but where is the harm in that? We need the best decisions for the greatest number of residents.

And it would be far better for residents to make the decision on Māori wards than to have it forced upon them.

So far, I have not referred to historical matters, but they cannot be ignored. In 1806 the Crown confiscated 181,000 hectares of land belonging to Ngāti Awa, Ngāi Tūhoe and Te Whakatōhea. Had that not happened, Māori would have been substantial ratepayers today. The respective iwi were compensated to some extent in Treaty settlements but never got the voice in local government that confiscated land would have offered.

We now have the opportunity to redress that.