Church leaders want to protect the Treaty “covenant” – but the PM would breach coalition covenant if he took their advice
The Waitangi Tribunal, more than 400 church leaders who signed a letter to all members of Parliament (above) and the many other critics of a proposed bill which none of them has seen have suffered a setback. Cabinet has agreed to the next steps for the Treaty Principles Bill.
Click to view
The government’s official website records the decision in a statement from Associate Justice Minister David Seymour.
First, he said the Treaty Principles Bill provides an opportunity for Parliament, rather than the courts, to define the principles of the Treaty. This should be welcomed in a democracy, you might think.
Then he reminded us of Parliament’s introducing the concept of Treaty principles into legislation in 1975 – but it failed to define them. That has paved the way for divisiveness.
Cabinet has agreed for the following principles to be included in the Bill which Seymour is promoting:
First, he said the Treaty Principles Bill provides an opportunity for Parliament, rather than the courts, to define the principles of the Treaty. This should be welcomed in a democracy, you might think.
Then he reminded us of Parliament’s introducing the concept of Treaty principles into legislation in 1975 – but it failed to define them. That has paved the way for divisiveness.
Cabinet has agreed for the following principles to be included in the Bill which Seymour is promoting:
1. Civil Government: The Government of New Zealand has full power to govern, and Parliament has full power to make laws. They do so in the best interests of everyone, and in accordance with the rule of law and the maintenance of a free and democratic society.
2. Rights of Hapū and Iwi Māori: The Crown recognises the rights that hapū and iwi had when they signed the Treaty. The Crown will respect and protect those rights. Those rights differ from the rights everyone has a reasonable expectation to enjoy only when they are specified in legislation, Treaty settlements, or other agreement with the Crown.
3. Right to Equality: Everyone is equal before the law and is entitled to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination. Everyone is entitled to the equal enjoyment of the same fundamental human rights without discrimination.
Seymour’s colleagues meanwhile were getting on with the job of announcing initiatives and developments within their respective portfolios.
Science, Innovation and Technology Minister Judith Collins announced a programme to drive Artificial Intelligence (AI) uptake among New Zealand businesses.
She referenced a prediction that AI will contribute $76 billion to the New Zealand’s annual GDP by 2038.
Collins also announced the pilot of GovGPT, intended to make it easier to access reliable government information and support for businesses and people wishing to interact with government agencies.
“Reliable government information” – we suppose – will be the stuff the government does not try to hide – for example, by showing a cavalier disregard for the requirements of the Official Information Act. Or by muzzling state servants:
Nearly 70 staff at Health NZ / Te Whatu Ora have signed non-disclosure agreements since the end of November – almost double the 38 who have signed one at the Ministry for Environment.
The two initiatives announced by Collins will be run by Callaghan Innovation.
Three ministers pitched in tell us about the release of the independent rapid review into the Wairoa flooding event on 26 June 2024. The signatories to the statement are Environment Minister Penny Simmonds, Local Government Minister Simeon Brown and Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell.
The review found the flooding was caused by a combination of factors leading to the river backing up and overflowing, driving a mix of fresh and salt water into the low-lying areas of the town.
It recommends the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council partner with the Wairoa council and community to develop a Wairoa River Bar Operational Plan.
To read the report, visit: Review of the management of the Wairoa River bar | Ministry for the Environment.
Small Business and Manufacturing Minister Andrew Bayly has set about the worthy task of persuading government agencies to pay their bills more promptly.
He drew attention to data released today which shows the payment times of each central government agency. This data will be published quarterly and serves as a benchmark for agencies to track their progress.
Bayly said:
“Given 97 per cent of all businesses in New Zealand are small businesses, it is important for our wider economic success that we promote prompt payments times.”
The government payment times data is now updated quarterly on the MBIE website.
Latest from the Beehive
11 September 2024
Associate Justice Minister David Seymour says Cabinet has agreed to the next steps for the Treaty Principles Bill.
Science, Innovation and Technology Minister Judith Collins today announced a programme to drive Artificial Intelligence (AI) uptake among New Zealand businesses.
The independent rapid review into the Wairoa flooding event on 26 June 2024 has been released, Environment Minister Penny Simmonds, Local Government Minister Simeon Brown and Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell announced today.
The Government is sending a clear message to central government agencies that they must prioritise paying invoices in a timely manner, Small Business and Manufacturing Minister Andrew Bayly says.
Speech
Speech in the House acknowledging the passing of Kīngi Tuheitia Pootatau Te Wherowhero VII.
The Treaty Principles Bill is the announcement that seems likely to foment the most robust – if not vituperative – debate.
Because Parliament’s introduced the concept of Treaty principles into legislation in 1975 without defining them, Seymour said,
“… the Waitangi Tribunal, and the public service have developed a set of principles to justify actions that many New Zealanders view as contrary to the principle of equal rights, including co-governance in the delivery of public services and even ethnic quotas within public institutions.
“The principles of the Treaty are not going anywhere. Either Parliament defines them, or the courts will continue to venture into an area of political and constitutional importance. The purpose of the Treaty Principles Bill is for Parliament to define the principles of the Treaty, provide certainty and clarity, and promote a national conversation about their place in our constitutional arrangements.”
A Bill will now be drafted and Cabinet will consider it before it is introduced to Parliament later this year.
Once the Bill has had its first reading, every New Zealander will have the opportunity to make a submission and suggest changes at the select committee stage to a group of MPs from across the political spectrum.
“The Bill will not alter or amend the Treaty itself. It will be used to assist with the interpretation of legislation where Treaty principles would normally be considered relevant, in addition to legislation that refers to Treaty principles directly.
“Far from being a divisive document, the Treaty is a powerful guide for New Zealand’s future, establishing that all New Zealanders have the same rights and duties, and that the government has a duty to protect those rights.
“I am looking forward to this important national conversation about the place of the Treaty in our constitutional arrangements.”
But a group of church leaders is among the many critics who want to stifle the conversation.
Reverend Jay Ruka, Taranaki Cathedral dean and author of a book about the Treaty and Christianity, Huia Come Home, said the bill was dangerous.
“It is beyond grievous that David Seymour is intentionally pitching the sacredness of Te Tiriti O Waitangi and the significance of democracy against each other,” Ruka said.
“He is tricking New Zealanders into thinking that to honour our founding contract is to demerit democratic representation. This is a lie. As a Christian leader, I steadfastly oppose this falsity. The Treaty Principles Bill is holding our nation in contempt.”
It is highly arguable that anything Seymour has said shows an intention to dishonour the Treaty.
It is much more apparent that the church leaders want Prime Minister Chris Luxon to dishonour his coalition agreement with ACT.
Luxon is resisting the pleas they have made in their letter:
Responding to the letter, Luxon said people were “entitled to their views” and he needed to honour National’s coalition agreement with Act. Both of Act’s coalition partners, National and NZ First, say they will not support the bill past the first reading.
“I have a coalition agreement commitment, I honour those commitments,” Luxon said.
“We have a coalition agreement, very clear, went to the election, we have an MMP system, people voted, those are the cards they gave us.”
Hobson’s Pledge has noted that while church leaders were welcome to “hold and speak their views” the open letter sought “to shut down debate, discussion, and dialogue”.
“Their call to ignore democratic parliamentary processes should be of deep concern to all New Zealanders. Using the same language of others who seek to cancel and de-platform, they talk of social cohesion and potential harm from people talking about ideas.
“These church leaders appear to have little faith in New Zealanders’ ability to think, discuss, and debate issues of importance to them.”
The open letter from the Christian letters describes the Treaty as “as sacred covenant”.
A covenant is a formal agreement or promise between two or more people, or a decision or arrangement between groups or people.
The coalition agreement which Luxon declines to break comes into that category, although perhaps it falls short of being “sacred”.
Sacred is an adjective used to describe a person or thing worthy of worship or declared holy. It usually appears in a religious context, but an object or place set aside for a particular purpose can also be sacred.
It’s up to you to decide if that covers the coalition agreement.
Point of Order is a blog focused on politics and the economy run by veteran newspaper reporters Bob Edlin and Ian Templeton
3 comments:
2. "Rights of Hapū and Iwi Māori: The Crown recognises the rights that hapū and iwi had when they signed the Treaty. The Crown will respect and protect those rights. Those rights differ from the rights everyone has a reasonable expectation to enjoy only when they are specified in legislation, Treaty settlements, or other agreement with the Crown".
WTF?? What rights??
In the original one and only MAORI language Tiriti o Waitangi it was agreed by the signatories that they give up entirely to the Queen of England FOREVER all the governments of their lands, and in return the Queen of England arranges and agrees to give to the chiefs and hapus and ALL THE PEOPLE OF NEW ZEALAND, the full chieftainship of their lands, their settlements and their property.
This was an arrangement for the consent to the government of the Queen, and in return the Queen of England will protect ALL THE MAORIS OF NEW ZEALAND, and all rights will be given to them the SAME as her doings to the people of England.
So when the STATE stops digging this apartheid hole it has dug for itself, can they explain to ALL THE PEOPLE OF NEW ZEALAND what “rights” the chiefs and hapus have that the rest of us don’t have?
If this is the best the STATE can do, they can take these “non -existence” principles that they created and stick them where the sun don’t shine.
Dead right, anon@6.05. By changing it this way (although we don't know the final wording), but it immediately creates doubt and argument that by its very mention suggests Hapu and Iwi had or have something more than the rest of us. We should be all EQUAL, period. Anything else just creates room for further dissent and division, and with our partisan Waitangi Tribunal and Judiciary, two classes of citizenship are almost a certainty. Shove it, indeed!
Agreed @ anonymous. Rankled me mightily too, it defeats the purpose of the bill. But upon reflection( whilst digging furiously in the garden) perhaps this was what Seymour had to do to get cabinet approval. Bring on the select committee! We have to submit in droves and counter every lame piece of BS that is being spouted by the troughers and wokesters.
Post a Comment