[ad_1]
We are entering uncharted territory.
Waitangi Tribunal Stern mid-term report The Treaty Principles Act, which fiercely criticized the bill.
This passage comes from a direct transmission letter to the Cabinet, which is probably unprecedented. From the judgment:
On the Treaty Principles Bill policy, we found that the Crown’s unilateral agreement to pursue the policy obscured the existence of such a partnership. Despite the constitutional significance of defining Treaty Principles in legislation and its importance to Māori, the Crown agreed to pursue the policy without any engagement or discussion with Māori. Māori did not want this policy and, in fact, many strongly opposed it from the outset. We found in this report that the Treaty Principles Bill policy, as required by the Coalition Agreement, was “based on existing ACT policy” and was a solution to a non-existent problem; that there were no policy requirements to justify it; that its interpretation of the Treaty was “novel”; that it was built on a false historical narrative; that its policy rationale was untenable; and that its current text misrepresented the wording of the Treaty/Te Tiriti. Logically, this meant that the Crown’s constitutional and Treaty/te Tiriti obligations to Māori were not taken into account in implementing this plan. Senior officials gave clear advice to ministers on this and warned that it would damage the relationship between Māori and the Crown and risk undermining social cohesion.
This is so poignant. Here is an excerpt:
- “The Crown agreed to pursue this policy without any engagement or discussion with Maori”;
- The bill “is intended to solve a problem that doesn’t exist”
- “There is no policy requirement to justify this”
- “Treaty interpretation is ‘novel’”
- The bill is “built on a false historical narrative”
- The bill’s “policy rationale is unsustainable”
The report recommended that the Treaty Principles Act be abandoned and that the government take steps to repair relations with Maori.
Christopher Luxon was asked about the ruling. He said the decision was premature and that the issue had not yet been discussed by Cabinet. He also reiterated an earlier statement that the National Party would support the bill and submit it to the select committee and No other promises.
I just hope he makes it clear that National will reject the bill after the select committee process. Otherwise, there’s a good chance National will reverse its previous commitment and actually support the bill or some new version of it.
Seymour thought the report would be useful for debate. He wanted us to have a debate.
He also made a bunch of nice-sounding statements, suggesting that repealing the treaty was like the American civil rights movement. News No.1:
“New Zealand can have a bright future but it needs to move away from this divisive idea that the Treaty is a partnership between two New Zealanders with different rights.”
He said this was “not only untrue, but incompatible with the fundamental democratic value that all citizens are equal before the law.”
“We are all united by our humanity. Every human being has the same rights and dignity. This is what has fueled all the good movements in human history.
But Seymour and his party are not interested in true equality. You only have to look at who his supporters are and the party’s determination to increase the wealth of the rich. They have no interest in making sure we all have enough. They just want more of everything we have.
It is strange that a party that talks about the rule of law and the sanctity of property rights should be so keen on stripping rights from a group based on race.
It’s strange to think that Maori are privileged. I have plenty of statistics to prove that’s not the case.
Yes, let us debate one version of the Treaty that is described by pundits as being based on a dishonest historical narrative and another version that was crafted over time by some of the greatest legal and historical minds in this country.
Let us have a debate where one version is nothing more than thinly veiled red meat of a minority party’s racist base and is deeply insulting to Tangata Whenua.
If Luxon was the leader, he would find a way to veto the bill. But he is not. We will see.
Related articles
[ad_2]
Source link
