“Parliament introduced the concept of the Treaty principles into law in 1975 but did not define them. As a result, the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal have been able to develop principles that have been used to justify actions that are contrary to the principle of equal rights. Those actions include co-governance in the delivery of public services and ethnic quotas in public institutions.
“The principles of the Treaty are not going anywhere. Either Parliament can define them, or the courts will continue to meddle in this area of critical 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.
“Cabinet has agreed to make one change to an earlier version of the principles. The wording of principle two has been narrowed to provide that the rights of hapū and iwi differ from the rights everyone has a reasonable expectation to enjoy only when those rights are agreed to as part of a Treaty settlement. This has occurred because the previous wording was too broad.
“Once the Bill has had its first reading, every New Zealander will have the opportunity to provide their views on the Bill at the select committee stage. . . .
That last point seems to have escaped those opposing the Bill, including the Māori Party co-leaders who tried to have it withdrawn without debate:
RAWIRI WAITITI (Te Pāti Māori—Waiariki): Point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate that this House honours Te Tiriti o Waitangi and withdraws the Treaty principles bill.
SPEAKER: Sorry could you—I didn’t hear what you said. You need to say it just slightly slowly, and just bear in mind that until I call it, no bills are tabled at this point.
RAWIRI WAITITI: Can I continue?
SPEAKER: Yeah.
RAWIRI WAITITI: I seek leave to move a motion without notice and without debate that this House honours Te Tiriti o Waitangi and withdraws the Treaty principles bill.
SPEAKER: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There appears to be objection. Those bills are set down for first reading.
DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Te Pāti Māori—Te Tai Hauāuru): Point of order, Mr Speaker. According to Standing Order 116, the House must take into account the constitutional relationship between the legislative and judicial branches of Government. The Treaty principles bill being proposed violates this constitutional relationship by overriding decades of judicial decisions.
SPEAKER: Well, there’s two points here. Firstly, there is, obviously, longstanding convention around that particular provision. The position that you’re putting to me today is very much an opinion and not something that the House can act on or that I can act on.
RAWIRI WAITITI (Te Pāti Māori—Waiariki): Speaking to the point of order, the Treaty principles bill also violates the constitutional relationship between the Crown and Māori and undermines the legitimacy of this House.
SPEAKER: Well that might be—[Disturbance in public gallery] I’ll tell you what: the next person who calls out like that will be asked to leave. This is, obviously, an important matter, and it’s fair that you raise as many points as you want to. But the reality is that this is a bill that is set down for first reading and is not in contravention of what the House may do.
DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Te Pāti Māori—Te Tai Hauāuru): Point of order, Mr Speaker. The introduction of the Treaty principles bill without consulting the Governor-General is a violation of Standing Order 119, as it disrespectful to the King’s representative.
SPEAKER: Well, the member who’s raising that clearly forgets what was in the Speech from the Throne at the start of the Government’s term late last year. I would suggest that these points of order need to come to a conclusion fairly swiftly.
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Speaking to the point of order—
SPEAKER: You’re not speaking to it; I’ve ruled on it.
DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Te Pāti Māori—Te Tai Hauāuru): Point of order—new point of order. The introduction of the Treaty principles bill without consulting King Charles is a sign of disrespect and brings the House into disrepute.
SPEAKER: With respect, you’re now trifling with the Chair, because, as I’ve said, when a Government reads its Speech from the Throne at the beginning of the Parliament and mentions its intentions, that is considered to be the consultation—particularly when the Speaker takes the reply to that address down to the Governor-General so that the Sovereign is fully aware of what’s going on. . .
Opposition to the Bill isn’t confined to these two, but why do they fear debate?
That both National and New Zealand First have said they won’t support the Bill past its first reading make that fear even more inexplicable.
Those who oppose the Bill have the opportunity to submit on it and put their case against it and those who support it have the same opportunity to make their arguments in favour of it.
Could fear of debate be because they know they represent a very small minority of people who share their separatist view and who want preferential treatment and that this could be made clear in the consultation process?
While, regardless of the weight of submissions, the Bill won’t pass a second reading, strong support for defining the principles will lay a foundation for the debate to continue and for the need for parliament, not the Waitangi Tribunal or courts, to make the law on equal rights for all citizens.
Ele Ludemann is a North Otago farmer and journalist, who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced.
3 comments:
Why do they fear debate? Because debate would be about what is best for NZ, and that threatens their taxpayer funded gravy train.
Yes they are very afraid of any public discussion of their precious treaty which magically evolves to grant never ending entitlements. This bill is a masterstroke from Seymour. Its opponents must explain why the government having sovereignty and equal rights for all are so objectionable. The vast majority of NZers will support it and National will be drawn in.
Fear of debate exists because debate shines sunlight upon false arguements.
The ones who fear this debate fear it because once the spotlight finds its target the public will be enlightened and the Tribunal, the elites, the acitivists and the accomplices will be found out to be false and the victim industry will be destroyed.
Post a Comment