# Question 100: I'm a Māori parent in a working household. I want to compare household costs and local services, and I also care about Te Tiriti and Māori participation in decisions. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on Te Tiriti obligations and Māori participation in public decisions?

Collected 2 November 2026

[NZ Election 2026 · Edition 8 study](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/8)

## ChatGPT

Answer ID: 4385dda5-b962-467c-b4ac-768ae4431731

# Te Tiriti and Māori participation: comparing New Zealand political parties in 2026

For the 2026 general election, an important distinction is that parties differ not only in what they say about Te Tiriti o Waitangi, but also in how they believe Māori should participate in governing Aotearoa.

There are two related but different questions:

1. Te Tiriti obligations: Should the Crown actively recognise and give effect to Treaty principles, including partnership, active protection, rangatiratanga and equity? Or should Treaty obligations be interpreted more narrowly and consistently across all citizens?
2. Māori participation in public decisions: Should Māori have dedicated representation, iwi and hapū consultation, Māori decision-making authority and Māori-led institutions? Or should participation primarily happen through the same democratic institutions available to all New Zealanders?

For a working household, it is also worth looking at how these positions translate into practical decisions about health, education, housing, employment, local services and household costs.

## 1. How the major parties differ

The following reflects published 2026 policies, public statements and governing records available as at 1 November 2026. It distinguishes election promises from actions already taken in government.

| Party | Approach to Te Tiriti | Māori participation in decisions |
| --- | --- | --- |
| National | Recognises Te Tiriti as a founding document but supports greater consistency and narrower wording of Treaty clauses in legislation. | Emphasises equal treatment and community-wide decision-making. Its government introduced local polls on Māori wards and made other changes to Māori-specific institutions. |
| ACT | Emphasises parliamentary sovereignty, equality before the law and a more restrictive interpretation of Treaty obligations. | Opposes race-based representation and supports removing Māori seats in Parliament. Proposes restricting the Waitangi Tribunal's role and eventually closing it. |
| New Zealand First | Recognises the Treaty and historical settlements but opposes expanding general Treaty principles and co-governance. | Supports a referendum on retaining the seven Māori parliamentary seats. Opposes what it considers ethnicity-based decision-making and proposes closing the Waitangi Tribunal after historical claims are resolved. |
| Labour | Supports Te Tiriti as a founding document and opposes reducing Treaty obligations. | Supports partnership, participation and some Māori-specific decision-making arrangements. Previously established Te Aka Whai Ora and co-governance arrangements. |
| Green Party | Supports a stronger constitutional role for Te Tiriti and recognition of the Māori text as authoritative in law. | Supports iwi and hapū exercising rangatiratanga as partners in government, stronger Māori representation and more authority for the Waitangi Tribunal. |
| Te Pāti Māori | Supports constitutional transformation with Te Tiriti at its centre. | Advocates stronger Māori political authority, binding Treaty accountability, a Te Tiriti commissioner and greater tino rangatiratanga. |
| The Opportunity Party (TOP) | Supports strengthening Te Tiriti's role and reviewing recent reductions in Treaty protections. | Supports Māori autonomy and greater Māori involvement in health and justice services, alongside a national conversation about constitutional arrangements. |

Sources: The Spinoff's August 2026 party comparison and Undecided's October 2026 policy comparison. [Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi](https://thespinoff.co.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi)[What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?](https://undecided.nz/issues/te-tiriti-and-representation/)

## 2. The differences that matter most

Rather than looking only at general statements about partnership, there are five practical policy areas worth examining.

### A. The Waitangi Tribunal

![Waitangi Tribunal meets at Ōrākei | Record | DigitalNZ](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/rq0bJ0c9yLzZdXwV9-OJ7IchyqjvQvdOcMhSrEQy6CTD4_ZZK7FdyexTaUXhmSYjZRTqR6mYNXhHgiZzfXJEoThaz2tLU4YxVuksXTde_2HxjxTNJS4Iz2nQqX0heIMN4zV647kqArKsOAIUhmsoAfdFfw2g2f4SrGSABB_S4rc?purpose=inline)

[digitalnz.org](https://digitalnz.org/records/31936889?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

The Tribunal investigates Crown breaches of Te Tiriti and provides an important accountability mechanism.

The parties have quite different proposals:

- ACT: Restrict the Tribunal to historical claims and close it once eligible claims are resolved.
- NZ First: Abolish the Tribunal and establish a process to complete historical claims.
- National: Has undertaken a review of the Tribunal; a specific replacement policy is not clearly set out.
- Labour: Keep the Tribunal but retain Parliament's final decision-making authority.
- Greens: Strengthen the Tribunal and give it binding powers in certain land-return recommendations.
- Te Pāti Māori: Make Tribunal recommendations binding on the Crown, with court enforcement.
- TOP: Has not set out a comparable detailed Tribunal policy.

The key question is whether Māori should have an independent institution capable of holding the Crown accountable, and how much authority its recommendations should carry. [What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?](https://undecided.nz/issues/te-tiriti-and-representation/)[Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi](https://thespinoff.co.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi)

### B. Māori representation in Parliament

![New Zealand Parliament  | Activities & Day Trips in Wellington, New Zealand](https://images.openai.com/static-rsc-4/hX2rzuKH4FBuuacVeJNfMd8aDA9mYon_ggy2pdL0hcQNaXbf4ivS3poy8skrwnI1QKb6jQ4Srq8Vvp5e7hOs6nBWW6837sno_fg2AF3CaymQlUUH_k1Wk2Psu5kn57NIMWvkMryYnD4v-EZst7CsG3_O6i6X4U0gcG6vGf5g3W0?purpose=inline)

[newzealand.com](https://www.newzealand.com/nz/plan/business/new-zealand-parliament-/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

New Zealand currently has seven Māori electorates.

| Party | Position |
| --- | --- |
| ACT | Supports abolishing the Māori seats through legislation. |
| NZ First | Wants a referendum on whether to retain them. |
| Greens | Supports entrenching the Māori seats so they have stronger protection. |
| Labour | No specific 2026 policy commitment identified. |
| National | No specific 2026 policy commitment identified. |
| Te Pāti Māori | Supports Māori political representation and stronger Māori authority, but no specific entrenchment proposal identified in this comparison. |
| TOP | No specific position identified. |

This is a significant distinction between representation through dedicated Māori electorates and representation exclusively through general electorates. [What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?](https://undecided.nz/issues/te-tiriti-and-representation/)[What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?](https://undecided.nz/issues/te-tiriti-and-representation/)

### C. Māori representation in local councils

This matters because councils make decisions affecting everyday household life:

- Water infrastructure and charges.
- Public transport.
- Rubbish collection and rates.
- Housing development.
- Libraries and community facilities.
- Local environmental management.

The Greens support allowing councils to retain Māori wards without requiring local referendums.

The National-led government introduced requirements for local polls on Māori wards. NZ First has also proposed disestablishing Auckland's Independent Māori Statutory Board.

Labour, ACT, TOP and Te Pāti Māori do not have clearly identified specific 2026 commitments on the same local-government question in the comparison.

[What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?](https://undecided.nz/issues/te-tiriti-and-representation/)[Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi](https://thespinoff.co.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi)

### D. Co-governance and iwi/hapū decision-making

This is another major dividing line.

- ACT and NZ First: Oppose co-governance arrangements that they consider give different political rights based on ethnicity. They favour universal democratic decision-making and individual need.
- National: Emphasises equal citizenship and community decision-making. Its government has changed several existing Māori participation arrangements.
- Labour: Has previously supported co-governance, including in water reforms, and Māori-specific institutions.
- Greens: Supports iwi and hapū participating as Treaty partners, with rangatiratanga rather than simply advisory roles.
- Te Pāti Māori: Advocates substantial Māori decision-making authority and mana motuhake.
- TOP: Supports Māori autonomy and devolving some health and justice services to Māori.

The distinction is whether Māori are consulted before decisions are made, participate alongside government in making decisions, or exercise independent authority over particular matters. [Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi](https://thespinoff.co.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi)[Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi](https://thespinoff.co.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi)

### E. Treaty obligations in everyday government services

This is where constitutional debates can have direct consequences for families.

Consider:

| Service | Questions worth asking |
| --- | --- |
| Healthcare | Will Māori health providers have funding, autonomy and influence over service design? |
| Education | Will Te Tiriti and Aotearoa history remain part of education? Will Māori have influence over Māori education? |
| Housing | Will iwi and Māori organisations participate in housing development and decisions about whenua? |
| Employment | Will Māori employment and training initiatives receive dedicated investment? |
| Child wellbeing | Will whānau, hapū and iwi have a meaningful role in decisions affecting tamariki? |
| Local services | Will Māori communities have formal representation in council decisions? |

These questions help distinguish a party's constitutional position from its actual service-delivery commitments.

For example, a party may support universal access to healthcare while opposing Māori-specific institutions. Another may support Māori-led healthcare delivery as a way of addressing unequal outcomes.

Those are different approaches to achieving public wellbeing, not simply different slogans.

## 3. What the differences could mean for a working household

Te Tiriti policy and household affordability are not separate issues. They can affect who designs, funds and delivers services.

Here are some useful connections to examine when comparing party promises:

| Household concern | Te Tiriti and participation connection |
| --- | --- |
| Cost of living | Whether Māori economic development, employment and whānau support receive targeted investment. |
| Health costs | Whether Māori health providers have resources to deliver services locally. |
| Children's education | Whether Māori education, te reo Māori and culturally appropriate learning are supported. |
| Housing costs | Whether Māori land development and papakāinga housing are supported. |
| Council rates and services | Whether iwi and Māori representatives have meaningful influence over infrastructure and local spending. |
| Family wellbeing | Whether whānau-centred services are funded and Māori have authority in their delivery. |

A useful distinction when reading policies is between:

- Universal provision: Services available to everyone on the same basis.
- Targeted provision: Additional resources directed towards groups experiencing particular disadvantages.
- Māori-led provision: Services designed and governed by Māori organisations, iwi or hapū.

Parties can support one, two or all three approaches in different areas.

## 4. Important things to check before voting

There are some gaps between published positions and fully developed policy.

Undecided's October 2026 review notes that independent costings or official analysis have not been found for several significant proposals, including binding Waitangi Tribunal recommendations, constitutional changes and entrenching Māori seats. [What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?](https://undecided.nz/issues/te-tiriti-and-representation/)

I would therefore look beyond campaign announcements and ask:

1. What will this policy cost?
2. Who will fund it?
3. What authority will Māori actually have?
4. Will iwi and hapū be decision-makers or simply consulted?
5. What happens if a future government wants to reverse it?
6. What measurable improvements will whānau experience?

Also consider coalition agreements. A party's election manifesto does not necessarily become government policy if it needs coalition partners to govern.

## 5. Where to compare the actual 2026 policies

These are useful resources for checking the details rather than relying on campaign speeches.

- [Policy.nz – 2026 election policy comparison](https://policy.nz/2026/party-vote/policies/te-ao-maori?utm_source=chatgpt.com): Compare Te Ao Māori, housing, health, education, incomes and employment.
- [Undecided – Te Tiriti and Māori representation](https://undecided.nz/issues/te-tiriti-and-representation/?utm_source=chatgpt.com): Detailed comparison of Treaty clauses, Māori seats, the Waitangi Tribunal and constitutional proposals.
- [The Spinoff – Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti](https://thespinoff.co.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi?utm_source=chatgpt.com): Background on the parties' Treaty positions and records in government.

## 6. A useful way to approach your voting decision

You have two votes under MMP:

- Party vote: Determines each party's share of seats in Parliament.
- Electorate vote: Determines your local electorate representative.

You can assess these separately. For example, you might consider a party's national Treaty policy alongside an electorate candidate's record on Māori health, education, local government and community representation.

My suggestion is to compare three things together:

- Te Tiriti protection and Crown accountability.
- Māori authority and participation in decisions.
- Household affordability and access to essential services.

That gives you a broader picture of what a future government might mean for whānau, rather than judging parties on Treaty rhetoric alone.

A useful next step: I can put together a side-by-side comparison of National, Labour, Greens, ACT, NZ First and Te Pāti Māori covering both household costs and Māori rights, including housing, food, power, healthcare, education, wages and Te Tiriti.

 Compare household costs and Māori rights across the six parties

---

Worked for 13s

Searching the web

Searching the web

Searched 13 websites

## Gemini

Answer ID: e03237ea-c55d-457c-b1e2-48912d430e97

For a Māori parent in a working household looking toward the 2026 general election, understanding how political parties approach Te Tiriti o Waitangi and Māori participation in public decisions is vital. Parties across the political spectrum present deeply contrasting visions—ranging from constitutional transformation and legally binding obligations to a focus on universal public service delivery, individual citizenship, and standard parliamentary processes.

The major political groupings differ across several key dimensions:

---

### 1. Te Pāti Māori (TPM)
* **Te Tiriti Approach:** Advocates for constitutional transformation based on *Matike Mai* (the independent constitutional report). Their policy centers on making the Crown legally accountable to Te Tiriti. Proposals include establishing a $220 million fund for constitutional transformation, creating an independent Te Tiriti Commission with enforcement powers, and making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations legally binding. They also push for the full implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
* **Māori Participation:** Strongly champions *tino rangatiratanga* and mana motuhake. This translates to Māori-led systems in health, education, housing, justice, and disability support, where decision-making authority and funding are devolved directly to whānau, hapū, Iwi, and Māori organizations rather than managed through centralized government agencies.

### 2. The Green Party
* **Te Tiriti Approach:** Views Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the foundational constitutional document of Aotearoa and emphasizes honouring the partnership between tangata whenua and the Crown. Their policy frameworks (such as *Te Waonui a Tāne*) focus on strengthening marae and community resilience as anchors of local wellbeing. 
* **Māori Participation:** Supports co-governance arrangements, partnership models, and resourcing Māori-led solutions for environmental and social issues. They prioritize embedding Te Tiriti analysis across all areas of lawmaking and public policy, and expanding self-determination in areas like resource management, conservation, and social service delivery.

### 3. The Labour Party
* **Te Tiriti Approach:** Views the Crown's obligations under Te Tiriti as a commitment to active partnership, practical redress, and addressing socio-economic disparities. Labour generally supports embedding Te Tiriti principles into legislation and public sector agencies to improve outcomes for Māori, though historically through progressive policy reform rather than sweeping constitutional restructuring.
* **Māori Participation:** Favors structured collaboration, targeted funding, and Māori representation within public service frameworks. For instance, Labour has historically championed Māori health authorities or targeted entities (such as Māori health models or education initiatives) designed to shift service delivery closer to communities, while maintaining overall Crown oversight and public accountability through standard parliamentary mechanisms.

### 4. The National Party
* **Te Tiriti Approach:** Focuses on practical outcomes, economic growth, and public service delivery rather than co-governance or structural constitutional changes. National’s philosophy is anchored in universal citizenship (equal rights and responsibilities for all New Zealanders under a single law) and addressing socio-economic disparities ("closing the gap") through better-performing education, health, and economic management.
* **Māori Participation:** Emphasizes local, practical engagement and non-governmental or Iwi-provider partnerships where they deliver efficient public services (e.g., contracting out social services or healthcare delivery to Iwi/Māori organizations). However, they generally oppose broad co-governance mandates over public assets and national infrastructure, favoring mainstream public administration where all citizens engage through standard democratic processes.

### 5. ACT New Zealand & New Zealand First
* **Te Tiriti Approach:** Both parties strongly critique co-governance and the formal inclusion of "principles of the Treaty" in legislation, arguing that it creates constitutional division or undermines the principle of equal democratic citizenship. ACT, in particular, has campaigned heavily on redefining or legally clarifying the principles of the Treaty to emphasize equal rights for all citizens.
* **Māori Participation:** Rejects race-based public decision-making structures or dedicated co-governance arrangements. They support delivering public services based on individual need rather than ethnicity, and advocate for abolishing specific mechanisms like Māori wards in local government unless explicitly approved via local referendum.

---

### Connecting to Household Costs and Local Services

For a working household trying to balance the cost of living with local service access, these differing philosophies directly impact your daily life:
* **Left-leaning and Māori parties (Te Pāti Māori, Greens, Labour)** argue that improving household economic security and local service delivery requires structural transformation—delivering resources directly to Māori-led entities (like marae-based clinics, Māori housing initiatives, and whānau ora models) because tailored, culturally grounded systems are proven to work better for whānau.
* **Center-right and conservative parties (National, ACT, NZ First)** argue that the best way to help working households is through broad economic management—focusing on tax relief, lowering the cost of living, reducing inflation, and ensuring public services are distributed efficiently based on need rather than constitutional or ethnic distinctions.

As you weigh your vote for the 2026 election, the core question is whether you believe public decisions and Te Tiriti obligations are best honoured through **structural constitutional transformation and Māori-led self-determination**, or through **universal public service delivery and equal individual citizenship**.

Are there specific public services (such as health, housing, or education) or local decision-making spaces where you most want to see your voice and values reflected?

## Google AI Mode

Answer ID: 67f7bbd2-2255-4863-9a03-5cb5eba8c61e

As you weigh your vote for the [2026 New Zealand General Election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_New_Zealand_general_election), the spectrum of political parties offers starkly different visions for Te Tiriti o Waitangi, Māori Crown relations, and how indigenous participation in public decisions is structured.

The general landscape divides broadly into three approaches: parties focused on indigenous self-determination and constitutional transformation, parties supporting standard institutional partnership through a centrist lens, and parties advocating for formal equality under a single legal standard with a reduction in specific Treaty references.

* * *

1\. Te Pāti Māori & The Greens (Indigenous Rights and Transformational Partnership)

 * **Te Pāti Māori:** Focuses heavily on _tino rangatiratanga_ (self-determination) and independent Māori authority over resources like freshwater. They advocate for a constitutional transformation (such as a Matike Mai-based model), making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations binding, entrenching the Māori electoral seats, and establishing independent Māori governance structures separate from Crown oversight.

 * **Green Party:** Aligns closely with honoring Te Tiriti as a foundational constitutional document. They support co-governance arrangements, the return of indigenous lands, strong incorporation of _mātauranga Māori_ (Māori knowledge) in public policy, and resourcing iwi and hapū to lead local decisions and environmental management.

2\. Labour (Centrist/Institutional Partnership)

 * **New Zealand Labour Party:** Views Te Tiriti o Waitangi as a living agreement and a foundation for partnership between the Crown and Māori. Labour generally supports structured co-governance where appropriate (especially in conservation, health, and resource management) and the retention of Māori seats. Their approach emphasizes working through existing state mechanisms, public sector accountability to Treaty obligations, and investment in Māori-led social and economic initiatives (such as whānau Ora and te reo Māori regeneration) without pursuing broader constitutional overhauls.

3\. National, ACT, and New Zealand First (Defining and Limiting Treaty Principles)

 * **ACT New Zealand:** Advocates for a strict reinterpretation or removal of "principles of the Treaty" from legislation. They have historically pushed for a Treaty Principles Bill to redefine the Treaty in a way that emphasizes equal civil rights for all citizens over collective indigenous rights, and they support measures like introducing referenda on Māori wards/seats.

 * **New Zealand First:** Takes a populist-nationalist stance, opposing what they term "separatism" or dual-system governance in public services. They emphasize "one law for all," advocate for scaling back race-based or co-governance provisions in public administration, and scrutinize funding allocated specifically along ethnic lines.

 * **New Zealand National Party (Incumbent Coalition Leader):** While acknowledging Te Tiriti as an important founding document, National’s current governance approach has sought to limit specific co-governance mandates, remove or de-emphasize bilingual public service naming conventions, and align public service delivery strictly around measured social and economic outcomes rather than distinct structural co-management.

* * *

Exploring Further Resources

To review specific policy details, candidate lists, and compare individual party stances side-by-side as you finalize your decision, you can explore the comprehensive interactive tools on Policy.nz or check your voting details, electorate boundaries, and roll status via the Electoral Commission (VOTE.NZ).

## AI Overviews

Answer ID: f7a9de75-9575-435c-aa13-9a49fc88d362

For the 2026 New Zealand general election, political parties offer starkly different visions for the future of **Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations and how Māori participate in public decision-making**. These stances fundamentally shape how public services are designed, who controls local and national resources, and how your household interacts with the state.

The political spectrum on these issues divides broadly into three distinct approaches:

* * *

1\. Māori Sovereignty and Constitutional Transformation

These parties believe Te Tiriti guarantees _tino rangatiratanga_ (self-determination) and advocate for shifting power directly to Māori-led authorities to deliver public services.

 * **Te Pāti Māori:** Campaigns on systemic, Māori-led constitutional transformation. Their policies include establishing an independent Te Tiriti Commission, making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations legally binding on the Crown, and creating permanent, entrenched Māori electoral seats. They advocate for fully funded, self-governing Māori authorities to control local services like health, education, and housing.

 * **Green Party:** Explicitly treats Te Tiriti as a foundational governance framework. They support the entrenchment of Māori seats, restoring and protecting Treaty references across all legislation, and returning land and resource decision-making (such as freshwater management) to iwi and hapū. They advocate for co-governance models and strengthening local Māori voices in public life.

2\. Partnership within Parliamentary Supremacy

This approach supports specific Māori representation and partnership but maintains that final decision-making power must ultimately rest with the central government.

 * **Labour Party:** Supports the current dual-roll framework and protecting dedicated Māori seats in Parliament. While they oppose making Waitangi Tribunal rulings binding over Parliament, they support restoring Treaty clauses to public legislation and bringing back specific obligations on local bodies (like school boards) to ensure Māori voices are represented. They favour Māori-led solutions and targeted support for working whānau but have ruled out restoring full separate co-governing entities like the Māori Health Authority.

3\. Equal Citizenship and Universal Rights

These parties argue that public decisions and local services should be based on universal citizenship rather than Treaty partnerships, aiming to reduce or remove distinct Māori governance structures.

 * **National Party:** Focuses on the "status quo" for parliamentary representation by retaining the option for voters to choose between the general and Māori rolls. However, their governance approach focuses strictly on need-based public services rather than race-based or co-governed structures. They prioritise devolving service delivery to local community organisations (including iwi groups) but resist separate legislative authorities.

 * **ACT New Zealand:** Strongly campaigns on a principle of a single, universal general roll, actively advocating to abolish parliamentary Māori seats entirely. ACT seeks to legally redefine or scale back the use of Treaty principles in legislation, ensure courts cannot apply tikanga (cultural values) to legal decisions unless explicitly dictated by Parliament, and disestablish distinct bodies like the Independent Māori Statutory Board.

 * **NZ First:** Similarly opposes co-governance and advocates for a single electoral roll based on equal citizenship. They support sunsetting or abolishing the Waitangi Tribunal once historical claims are fully resolved.

* * *

Policy Comparison At-a-Glance

Party| Parliamentary Māori Seats| Waitangi Tribunal Status| Public Service Delivery Model
---|---|---|---
**Te Pāti Māori**| Permanent & Entrenched| Legally Binding Rulings| Autonomous Māori-led authorities
**Green Party**| Permanent & Entrenched| Highly Influential / Treaty-led| Co-governed public & iwi-led partnerships
**Labour Party**| Retain Current Dual Roll| Advisory (Parliament holds supremacy)| Crown-led with targeted iwi partnerships
**National Party**| Retain Current Dual Roll| Advisory (Focus on finishing settlements)| Centralised, need-based public services
**ACT New Zealand**| Abolish| Narrowly defined or wound down| Decentralised, strictly universal public services
**NZ First**| Abolish (Single Roll)| Abolish once historical claims are resolved| Universal services based on citizenship

* * *

If you want to look closer at how these platforms impact your day-to-day life, let me know if you would like to explore:

 * How these parties propose to address **household living costs** (like childcare, food, and energy prices).

 * Their policies on funding and managing **local services** like housing, public transport, and schools.

 * How changes to local council laws could affect **local Māori participation** in your area.