The libertarian minor party, ACT, has introduced a divisive ‘Treaty Principles Bill’ which threatens to undermine the NZ constitutional order (founded on the Treaty of Waitangi). I submitted to the select committee against this bill.
It is quite unfortunate that the ACT leader, David Seymour, used to work for the Manning Foundation in Calgary, and so we Canadians have some responsibility for how he turned out. Also the Atlas Network.
I did not say in my submission that the Treaty of Waitangi helps protect NZ against corporate takeover. I didn’t think it would help in that context. But it’s an important reason to honour the Treaty.
Related context:
The solicitation for input has two parts.
I wish to make the following comments
I strongly oppose the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill.
I was granted a New Zealand resident visa in 2022 and have tried to learn how Aotearoa New Zealand works. As I understand it, this bill very much contradicts the actual principles of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi as they have been worked out in New Zealand jurisprudence and in the popular understanding over the past few decades.
The Bill never should have been introduced in the first place, but through its unequivocal unpopularity with a vast array of stakeholders, has at least shown the centrality of Treaty of Waitangi in the New Zealand constitutional framework. I am inclined to believe the 42 KCs and the Waitangi Tribunal in their strong negative opinions about this bill, rather than a fringe libertarian party with goals that are not in the public interest.
Furthermore, the 42,000+ people who showed up in Wellington at the Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti show that this bill is very much out of touch with what many people in Aotearoa New Zealand want. I was privileged to be able to be one of those thousands of tangata tiriti. Toitū Te Tirti.
The wording of this bill and the statements of David Seymour in support of it are disingenuous in the extreme. It is not an attempt to start a discussion. This bill is an attempt to push reasonable-sounding talking points, e.g. purportedly in favour of equality, in a way which does no such thing.
I am from Canada. I have been heartened by the official support for Te Tiriti in New Zealand—treaty obligations are taken more seriously here, even if the situation is not perfect—and feel that it is my obligation to speak in support of it and against this abhorrent proposal.
I wish to make the following recommendations:
The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill must be abandoned.
I wrote that New Zealand is better than Canada at recognizing treaty obligations, but it is not perfect.
We must honour Te Tiriti in its original te reo Māori text, guaranteeing the collective rights of iwi (a concept which is universally recognized, including in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) to have tino rangatinatanga over taonga. I very much value the unique taonga of Aotearoa and am grateful that Māori are there to help exercise kaitiakitanga.
We absolutely must not proceed to a divisive referendum as proposed in the bill. While I generally do have faith in the wisdom of a well-educated populace, this is not an appropriate topic to have a referendum on: Te Tiriti was negotiated between the Crown and the rangatira. The premise of this Bill* is that the Crown can unilaterally decide the terms. What kind of contract is that?
Just raising the question has damaged Crown-Māori relations. The appropriate next step is to withdraw the bill and commit to ongoing reconciliation and honouring of Māori perspectives and collective rights.
* note: corrected in this version from “treaty” to “Bill”