A thirst for changing law

Tissue. oday the concept of cogovernance or legislatively enshrined political powers for tangata whenua is a contentious

There have been earlier instances in New Zealand history where Maori votes have had an impact on political outcomes disproportionate to their numbers.

The sale and/or consumption of alcohol in the King Country is one such instance.

Prohibition in the King Country dated back to 1884 when Ngā ti Maniapoto chief Wahanui Huatare forged a wider deal with premier Robert Stout to allow Railways access to the region.

However much the Crown reneged on other aspects of this arrangement, keeping the King Country ‘‘dry’’ came to be thought of as a ‘‘sacred pact’’.

In 1949, after 65 years of sly grogging and other semi-legal practices undermining prohibition, the first Labour government decided to follow the recommendations of a Royal Commission on Licensing and hold a referendum on the issue in King Country itself.

Maori and Pakeha were polled separately.

Both groups favoured abolishing alcohol restrictions. In the Pakeha poll the margin was 7737 to 1884. The Maori vote was considerably closer, with 1550 ‘‘wet’’ votes and 1537 ‘‘dry’’.

These results were insufficient to change the law. A three-fifths majority was required across both groups.

In effect, 3421 votes in the wowser cause trumped the 9287 of the thirsty.

The Royal Commission, whilst critical of the notion that the Stout/ Huatare deal had determined prohibition for ‘‘all time’’, argued that Maori should determine the future of alcohol sales in King Country.

The new, first National government did not agree, the majority of its MPs deciding instead that at the next general referendum on prohibition the Maori and Pakeha results in the region would be considered as one, with a 60% majority sufficient to effect change.

The Labour opposition opposed this change, electing to apply the whip to an issue conventionally thought one of conscience, all but one of their parliamentarians voting against it.

In 1954, the King Country liquor laws were brought into line with those of the rest of the country, with 13,614 in favour of imbibing and 3534 voting for the status quo.

Prohibition in the King Country dated back to 1884. In 1949, after 65 years of sly grogging and other semi-legal practices undermining prohibition, the first Labour government held a referendum on the issue in King Country. But the vote was insufficient to change the law. It wasn’t until 1954, the King Country liquor laws were brought into line with those of the rest of the country, with 13,614 in favour of imbibing and 3534 voting for the status quo.