In contrast to Act’s claims, their proposed treaty principles are not fully faithful to either the text or intent of the original Treaty of Waitangi. They’re revisionist. When Act says “the intention of the Treaty Principles Bill is to establish in law that the principles of the Treaty are what the three articles of the Treaty actually say”, it’s outright political theatre.
What Act’s critics appear to be unaware of is that their preferred treaty principles – the “status quo” principles – are equally revisionist. When Toitū Te Tiriti says their opposition to the proposed principles referendum is to affirm “the mana of Te Tiriti o Waitangi as enduring and everlasting”, it’s also political theatre.
How so? Well, no treaty principles exist that are not revisionist. The very idea that we need to say things that the treaty does not actually say to make the treaty more faithful to itself is illogical.
This is a very important point – all principles that people claim are Treaty principles are revisionist.
For a nation to have principles to live by requires ongoing, good faith debate and consent to live by outcomes fairly reached. That’ll never happen so long as all sides do not deign to acknowledge that there is a debate at all and instead of claim to be the sole champions and interpreters of a perfect truth set in stone in 1840.
Act’s three proposed treaty principles are that the government has the right to govern, that the authority and ownership of land and property of all of us is protected, and that all of us are equal under the law.
The real question is not whether that’s what our tīpuna established in 1840, it’s whether that’s what we want for Aotearoa New Zealand now.
I like ACT’s three principles. However I don’t think the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. I think they are principles of liberal democracy and would support them being in an entrenched Bill of Rights.
David Farrar runs Curia Market Research, a specialist opinion polling and research agency, and the popular Kiwiblog where this article was sourced. He previously worked in the Parliament for eight years, serving two National Party Prime Ministers and three Opposition Leaders.
6 comments:
I agree - it is illogical to spend time & our money on creating a law to dispel nonsense.
But it is worth noting that NZF is trying to the same with their bathrooms bill as apparently women’s human right to discriminate against men is not suffice.
So maybe this is what we’ve come to - creating laws to state the obvious & shutdown what has become an ideological snowball.
What David is doing is good and necessary simply because there is a solution in all this somewhere. The most important thing being that a solution is found and is implemented ASAP.
Exactly, David.
Seymour's "principles" are common sense principles of civilised society.
All other "Treaty principles" that the multiple activist revisionists have dreamed up are quite simply works of fiction.
They are FALSE.
The Treaty of Waitangi has a written text, which is easy to read.
There are no NO "principles" in the Treaty.
NO "partnership"
Very sensible and laudable. However the Bill of Rights has no teeth and is routinely ignored . Unless the Treaty Principles are legislated loudly and separately nothing will change the constant korero from Maori. Surely by now David you will have come to understand Maori will never stop undermining and destroying our democracy until they have total control. They are racists.
Please for goodness sake . The Bill has NOT been tabled. The Bill will be argued publically and at Select Comittee when we have read it . Until then we should be demanding National confirms that NZ democracy is worth preserving and allow the bill past Select Committee or suffer the backlash at the next election
Dead right, Basil. Winston's (and Liam's) comments provide NO SOLUTION and somewhere along the line we must either retract all law referring to "Treaty Principles" (fat chance); define the suckers (a distinct possibility); or, create some new legislation that overrides the existing situation, whatever we decide to call it (also a possibility). We simply cannot go on as we are, although our PM, activist Maori (including obviously the WT), and a bunch of snouts in the trough lawyers would all beg to differ because of their vested interests. Do nothing, and NZ society and its race relations will continue going on down the toilet, along with our productivity, education system, and remaining resident intelligence. (On the latter, I'm beginning to wonder if there's much left?) For goodness sake, let's have the discussion and let democracy rule.
Post a Comment