This second column on the whistleblower and media allegations against Manurewa Marae, Waipareira Trust and Te Pāti Māori examines accusations of “treating” and bribery for votes at the marae during Election 2023.
The writer’s inquiries find that critics use incorrect data in questioning the validity of Te Pāti Māori’s win in Tāmaki Makaurau. They also do not consider important factors regarding variances in booths across Tāmaki Makaurau, Manurewa’s high Māori lower socio-economic demographic profile, Māori strategic voting, voting at marae booths, Manurewa’s single-booth double-electorate shape, the absence of Marama Davidson standing in Tāmaki Makaurau, the swing against Labour in Aukland, and the nationwide Māori electorate and special vote swing to Te Pāti Māori.
Allegations
Treating
Phillip Crump in an otherwise balanced column wrote that there were seven complaints against Manurewa last year claiming the marae rewarded those who voted for Te Pāti Māori with refreshments and comestibles (PlusZB,7 June).
Section 217 of the Electoral Act 1993 states that anyone who provides food, drink or entertainment is liable for prosecution for “treating” if done to corruptly influence a person’s voting. The marae did provide refreshments. Crump deduces this was treating.
This overlooks that election rules allow refreshments if more than 10m from voting booths (Candidate Handbook – Election 2023). An Official Information Act (OIA) email from an Electoral Commission staff member at the booth estimated the kai provision was “more than 30m from the voting booth” and “could not be seen from the booth”.
Moreover, the Electoral Commission has already investigated and dismissed the complaints saying in February this year, “It appears food was being generally available without reference to voting or voting for Te Pāti Māori or its candidate”.
Other relevant OIA observations include that the staff who manned the polling booth were Electoral Commission employees. None worked for Manurewa Marae.
In the main, electors first voted and then partook of the victuals. This is after the fact, no one saw how they voted, nor could they. In all, constituents voted for 17 different political parties. There is no evidence that those who voted for Te Pāti Māori received tea and cake, and those who voted for the other 16, water and a wafer.
Brian Tamaki
On social media, Brian Tāmaki reported whistleblower claims that “Free Hangis, free donuts, free coffee, free ice creams, free hats, free entertainment and more were consistently used to bribe Māori to vote for Te Pāti Māori” (BrianTamaki.com, 5 June).
The accusation is preposterous. In addition to the Electoral Commission investigation above, social media promotions show that voting was open to everyone. Manurewa also offered free rides to vote, clearly for whomever they supported. Nothing encourages voting for Te Pāti Māori.
Election Impropriety
Andrea Vance suggested impropriety in the voting at Manurewa because “Polling booth data reveals that Kemp beat former Minister Henare by around 2.6 to 1 (478 votes to 185), while across the electorate the ratio was 1.004 to 1 (10,068 to 10,026)” (The Post, 5 June).
The numbers are wrong. They compare advance voting at Manurewa against the final result in Tāmaki Makaurau (all advance, election day and special votes), which exaggerates the ratio.
Comparing single booths against a final electorate vote is always unhelpful given variations in socioeconomic and cultural profiles, urban-rural status, and the extent of each party’s machinery on the ground.
Te Pāti Māori had stronger ground teams in Tāmaki Makaurau than Labour. Advance voting for Te Pāti Māori was therefore higher and the ratio at Manurewa 2.6 to 1. Labour performed better on election day and the ratio at Manurewa was a tighter 1.4 to 1. The final booth result was 2.3 to 1 for Te Pāti Māori.
While that might excite Pākehā, it proves nothing. Such variances are common. Te Pāti Māori won Woodlands Park School (4 to 1), Mission Bay (5 to 1) and Auckland University (6 to 1). None were marae. Similarly, Labour won Waterview Primary School (3 to 1) and Farm Cove Intermediate (4 to 1) and kept Te Pāti Māori to zero at Ponsonby School, Somervell Presbyterian Church, and Christ the King School.
Advance and Election Day Voting
David Farrar (Kiwiblog, 5 June) and Bryce Edwards (Democracy Project, 5 June) also suggest irregularity claiming advance and election day voting at Manurewa was respectively +39% and +16% higher for Te Pāti Māori than for Labour in “two” other booths in the Clendon area.
The numbers incorrectly confuse results from several different booths. There were five booths in Clendon not three. Manurewa took advance and election day voting. The Community Centre and Pak’nSave were only open for advance voting. Roscommon School and Te Mātauranga School were only open on election day.
A correction based on the final counts shows Labour won the highest and lowest margin booths, Te Pāti Māori won the second highest and lowest, and Labour won one down the middle.
Edwards and Farrar said one would expect booths in the same suburb to have similar votes. Obviously, this is not true. Farrar also said, “The numbers might mean nothing”. That is correct. One might ask why 34.8% for Te Pāti Māori proves wrongdoing but 40.0% for Labour somehow does not.
Strategic Voting not Corruption
High Voter Turnout
Manurewa, Pak’nSave, and Westfield Manukau were new booths last year. Being well-situated, they processed the largest number of votes in South Auckland. Manurewa processed more than Pak’nSave and Westfield because both were closed on election day.
The marae was also a main centre of Māori voting because Manurewa has the largest Māori population in Auckland (Census 2023). We also know that Māori increasingly prefer voting at bilingual and marae booths because of historical discriminatory treatment of Māori at voting places (Northland Age, 19 Sept 2017; NZHerald, 18 Sept 2023; Te Ao Māori – Te Karere, 11 Oct 2023).
Tāmaki Makaurau
Māori voting was strategic, not corrupt. Te Pāti Māori won the candidate vote at Manurewa by 34.8% but the party vote by just 6.0% as voters supported their candidate and encouraged a coalition with Labour.
This pattern played out across South Auckland. Te Pāti Māori won the candidate vote across a belt of lower-socioeconomic area marae by larger margins than they won the party vote. Papakura sent the strongest message, the candidate vote going to Te Pāti Māori and the party vote going to Labour. A massive win at Ihumātao reflected the well-known 2019 confiscated land protests. In a tight contest, Labour retained Papatūānuku.
Urban marae in lower socio-economic areas were the rēwana and kūmara of the Te Pāti Māori campaign. In Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, Te Pāti Māori lost the Uepōhatu Marae booth in the rural heartland of Ngāti Porou by a massive 85% but won the urban marae booths in Wainuiomata and Lower Hutt whose socio-economic demographic profiles mirror Manurewa.
The Manurewa General Electorate
If corruption were at play, one would have expected a better result for Te Pāti Māori in the Manurewa general electorate which straddled voting at the marae.
The Te Pāti Māori candidate, who was also the chair of the marae, lost the candidate vote by a wide 39.2%. Te Pāti Māori also finished third (9.6%) in the party vote behind National (12.4%) and a huge 51.4% behind Labour (61.0%).
How Tāmaki Makaurau was won
The Marama Effect
The absence of charismatic Green Party co-leader, Marama Davidson, was influential in deciding Tāmaki Makaurau. The Greens dropped 2080 votes from the previous election. Labour lost 230. A total of 2310. Te Pāti Māori gained 970 votes and National who stood a candidate for the first time in over a decade took 1275. The election was done right there.
The Auckland Swing Against Labour
The swing to Te Pāti Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau mirrors the swing against Labour in the red-belt general electorates losing Mount Roskill, Maunga Kiekie and New Lynn and large majorities evaporating in Mount Albert and Te Atatū. There is no surprise therefore in Te Pāti Māori winning Tāmaki Makaurau or the vote at Manurewa.
National Swing to Te Pāti Māori
The swing between Election 2020 and 2023 to Te Pāti Māori in Tāmaki Makaurau calculated by votes Labour lost (230) and Te Pāti Māori gained (740), a total swing of 970, mirrors a larger nationwide swing in the Māori seats. Even in losing Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, where Labour increased its candidate vote by 105, the swing to Te Pāti Māori was a healthy 3280.
Special Votes
Labour won all candidate special votes in six of the seven Māori electorates in 2020. In 2023, Te Pāti Māori won the special votes across all seven seats, because they had larger election teams on the ground. Labour had virtually no team in Waiāriki, legions of rangatahi Māori turned out in Hauraki-Waikato and many of Labour’s 2020 Te Tai Hauāuru team defected to Te Pāti Māori.
Te Pāti Māori also won overseas special votes by a ratio of 2.5 to 1, higher than the 2.3 win at Manurewa. There is no evidence that Te Pāti Māori delivered Uber Eats to bribe voters in Britain, the Middle East, Indonesia, the United States and Antarctica.
Summary
The criticisms of the vote at Manurewa for the Tāmaki Makaurau electorate lack substance. In a frenetic search for data to pin Te Pāti Māori, the accusations predicate thinly veiled prejudicial assumptions based on weak data.
Electors cast a total of 3289 votes at Manurewa Marae of which 2057 or 62.5% were not for Te Pāti Māori. Everyone could enjoy a cup of tea. After all, manaaki is tikanga, and the electoral rules encourage kindness.
