Maori - Legal Definition
Although some predicted a decline of the Maori population, it did not occur; instead levels recovered. Despite a substantial level of intermarriage between the Maori and European populations, many Maori retained their cultural identity. A number of discourses developed as to the meaning of "Maori" and who or who is not Maori.
Prior to 1974 ancestry determined the legal definition of "a Maori person". For example, bloodlines determined whether a person should enrol on the Maori or general (European) electoral roll; in 1947 the authorities determined that one man, 5/8 maori, had improperly voted in the European seat of Raglan.
The Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1974 changed the definition to one of cultural self-identification, which technically means that a person with no Maori ancestry can enroll and vote in a Maori electorate.
Cultural self-identification is now the usual way of defining who is and is not maori. Where money (for example scholarships or Waitangi Tribunal settlements) becomes involved, the relevant authorities generally require some demonstration of ancestry and/or cultural connection, but no minimum "blood" requirement exists.
This sometimes causes controversy. For example in 2003, Christian Cullen became a member of the Maori rugby team despite having, according to his father, about 1/64 Maori ancestry.
A former Parliamentary leader of the National Party, Don Brash, also caused controversy by alleging that since most if not all Maori have some non-Maori ancestry, Maori do not comprise a distinct ethnic group. Many Maori angrily denied this claim, arguing that Maori identity has more to do with culture than with genetic lineage.