Minister of Maori Development
28 February 2025
Dear Minister,
After careful consideration I must resign as a Member of the Waitangi Tribunal. The treaty is not just our founding document, it makes New Zealand unique. Two peoples peacefully agreeing to form a nation.
After careful consideration I must resign as a Member of the Waitangi Tribunal. The treaty is not just our founding document, it makes New Zealand unique. Two peoples peacefully agreeing to form a nation.
Over the summer I have been reading Tribunal reports and doing my own research. The treaty is very clear.
The Crown offered its protection, guaranteed property rights and extended the rights and privilege of British citizenship.
In return Maori ceded sovereignty, agreed to the Crown having a right of preemption and accepted the duties of citizenship.
The Tribunal has ruled it is not bound by rulings of previous Tribunals that sovereignty was ceded. The tribunal also claims not to be bound by the courts.
The Tribunal has declared there are two treaties, one in English and another in te reo, that are not translations of each other.
Accordingly the Tribunal has ruled,
• Sovereignty was not ceded
• The Crown pledged to enhance the Chiefs’ authority
• The Crown promised to govern in partnership
• It is for Maori to decide what is to be decided by Maori
• The Crown promised Maori economic equality.
The tribunal says the only thing Maori agreed to was that the Crown would control settlers.
The Tribunal, like Humpty Dumpty, says words in the treaty mean what I say they mean.
No chief, including Hone Heke who may have regretted signing, ever said that sovereignty had not been ceded.
Letters written by chiefs who signed the treaty to governors complaining the treaty was not being honoured ever denied that they had ceded sovereignty.
Partnership is a 20th century invention.
The Crown offered its protection, guaranteed property rights and extended the rights and privilege of British citizenship.
In return Maori ceded sovereignty, agreed to the Crown having a right of preemption and accepted the duties of citizenship.
The Tribunal has ruled it is not bound by rulings of previous Tribunals that sovereignty was ceded. The tribunal also claims not to be bound by the courts.
The Tribunal has declared there are two treaties, one in English and another in te reo, that are not translations of each other.
Accordingly the Tribunal has ruled,
• Sovereignty was not ceded
• The Crown pledged to enhance the Chiefs’ authority
• The Crown promised to govern in partnership
• It is for Maori to decide what is to be decided by Maori
• The Crown promised Maori economic equality.
The tribunal says the only thing Maori agreed to was that the Crown would control settlers.
The Tribunal, like Humpty Dumpty, says words in the treaty mean what I say they mean.
No chief, including Hone Heke who may have regretted signing, ever said that sovereignty had not been ceded.
Letters written by chiefs who signed the treaty to governors complaining the treaty was not being honoured ever denied that they had ceded sovereignty.
Partnership is a 20th century invention.
Having a tribunal claim it does not have to obey the courts and can ignore its own findings and reinterpret the country’s foundation document is inherently politically unstable and unsustainable.
Article Three that granted the rights and privileges of being British subjects has been reinterpreted to be a promise that successive governments will ensure economic equality, the socialist dream.
Governments can deliver equality before the law, the right of British citizens.
No government ever, anywhere, has ever delivered economic equality.
The Tribunal has created an endless grievance that can never be met.
I recently received a copy of the Tribunal’s proposed ten-year strategic plan. The Tribunal correctly identifies it will be very busy hearing claims that society is not equal.
The tribunal is conducting a review of the constitution.
This is not an appropriate role for a tribunal headed by Maori Land Court Judges.
Maori Land Court Judges are well equipped to adjudicate on competing hapu and iwi claims, a significant proportion of the tribunal’s work.
The judges and members are people of integrity and sincerity but they are turning a tribunal into a constitutional court answerable to no one.
I note that in the coalition agreement National and New Zealand First have agreed;
“Amend the Waitangi Tribunal legislation to refocus the scope, purpose, and nature of its inquiries back to the original intent of that legislation.”
I recommended the government implement its coalition agreement and upgrade the Tribunal by appointing a senior High Court judge, as was the original appointment to the Waitangi Tribunal.
The treaty as currently interpreted has become a socialist manifesto and a source of never-ending grievance.
I am not willing to carry out the Tribunal’s proposed strategic plan.
Please accept my resignation
Regards,
Hon Richard Prebble
Cc Chief Judge Dr Caren Fox
The Honourable Richard Prebble CBE is a former member of the New Zealand Parliament. Initially a member of the Labour Party, he joined the newly formed ACT New Zealand party under Roger Douglas in 1996, becoming its leader from 1996 to 2004. This article was sourced HERE.
Article Three that granted the rights and privileges of being British subjects has been reinterpreted to be a promise that successive governments will ensure economic equality, the socialist dream.
Governments can deliver equality before the law, the right of British citizens.
No government ever, anywhere, has ever delivered economic equality.
The Tribunal has created an endless grievance that can never be met.
I recently received a copy of the Tribunal’s proposed ten-year strategic plan. The Tribunal correctly identifies it will be very busy hearing claims that society is not equal.
The tribunal is conducting a review of the constitution.
This is not an appropriate role for a tribunal headed by Maori Land Court Judges.
Maori Land Court Judges are well equipped to adjudicate on competing hapu and iwi claims, a significant proportion of the tribunal’s work.
The judges and members are people of integrity and sincerity but they are turning a tribunal into a constitutional court answerable to no one.
I note that in the coalition agreement National and New Zealand First have agreed;
“Amend the Waitangi Tribunal legislation to refocus the scope, purpose, and nature of its inquiries back to the original intent of that legislation.”
I recommended the government implement its coalition agreement and upgrade the Tribunal by appointing a senior High Court judge, as was the original appointment to the Waitangi Tribunal.
The treaty as currently interpreted has become a socialist manifesto and a source of never-ending grievance.
I am not willing to carry out the Tribunal’s proposed strategic plan.
Please accept my resignation
Regards,
Hon Richard Prebble
Cc Chief Judge Dr Caren Fox
The Honourable Richard Prebble CBE is a former member of the New Zealand Parliament. Initially a member of the Labour Party, he joined the newly formed ACT New Zealand party under Roger Douglas in 1996, becoming its leader from 1996 to 2004. This article was sourced HERE.
11 comments:
It would be wondeful if all modern communication was equally succinct. And especially for matters involving maori.
Maybe they could ensure some economic equality by passing out the billions of dollars held by Maori elite corporations onto their people.
“The Tribunal has declared there are two treaties, one in English and another in te reo, that are NOT translations of each other”?
And just who benefits from that, especially when we have an official 1869 back translation of the original Maori language treaty and Busbys final draft dated the 4th February 1840 (and found in 1989) that DO agree with each other.
So, we have the original Maori language treaty, the 1869 official back translation of the original and Busby’s final draft used to ‘construct’ the original Maori language treaty ALL agreeing with each other, and the Waitangi Tribunal refuse to recognise them?
1. There is only ONE treaty, and that is the one written on dog skin in the Maori language and signed by 52 chiefs on the 6th of February 1840.
Governor Hobson considered “this instrument to be de facto the treaty, and all signatures that are subsequently obtained are merely testimonials of adherence to the terms of that ORIGINAL document”. He never made or AUTHORISED an English version of the treaty to be signed by the chiefs.
2. There is NO English language treaty. The governments “English text version of the treaty" used today is NOT the final draft and NOT a back translation of the original and has nothing to do with the original treaty the chiefs signed at Waitangi on the 6th February 1840.
In fact, this document had another life before being ‘hijacked’ and held up as the “true English version of the treaty” by the government. It was one sheet of a two-sheet wax sealed official Hobson endorsed document known as “Maunsell’s make do Maori language treaty”. Its history by Martin Doutre is documented here.
https://www.treatyofwaitangi.net.nz/TreatyDocuments9.html
The Tribunal exists solely by virtue of the sovereign power that created it. By disavowing that very authority, it severs the foundation of its own legitimacy. Thereby, it has not only overstepped its mandate but has essentially committed administrative mutiny - defying its creator and transforming itself into a law unto itself. Given the apparent entrenchment of this new ideology, and that it, absurdly, will not be bound by its previous findings, surely the only appropriate solution now is its complete disbandment?
First of all - There was never Māori Sovereignty. It did not exist and has never existed.
Glaringly obvious when you consider the multitude of signatories that were required because each was representing their own tribe. Noone represented all Māori as a sovereign state.
And the reason why the treaty was never legally recognized by international law as a Treaty between sovereign states.
Secondly - The threat of French rule has been all but forgotten by the Tribunal.
Lastly the Tribunal is delusional if it believes the crown was not going to control the warring, murderous environment and slavery that existed inter-tribally.
Precisely, so why on Earth does our Government continue to allow this fraud to be perpetuated? Subsequent politicians and public servants (that's a joke init!?) have avoided any correction to this. I for one would like our so called leadership to step up to the plate and fix this once and for all.
Oh and Potaka responds to this by says "Okay, I'll just go find another mug (maybe when he made the original selection he mistook a Prebble for a Poodle?) - No Mr Potaka - read his lips - go and fix the problem at source and stop phaffing about!
How rare, sadly. A man of principle.
At what point does the system wake up.
Richard's letter of resignation is all the proof that this corrupt organization like all things Maori have been disingenuous from the start.
50 years of extracting taxe money from hard working kiwis to line the pockets of self obsessed, racist traitors, intent on using that money to fund the overthrow of our democracy.
How f******ing stupid are we.
He has probably achieved more with his succinct easily understood and widely publicised exit statement then if he had persisted. He would have been lambasted by all other WT members and the myriad well paid dependant staff. He would have been targeted by uncouth Waititi, Packer and the rest of Te Pati, and by all the usual insurgency activists; Sykes, Tait, Moxham, Jackson, Tamihere etc, who moderate their invective toward Seymour in case it encourages votes. Wilcox and Forbes would have been sure to contribute artful scorn.. With such concerted calls to opposition and with most couched in the usual rabble rousing language, and considering the number of irrational maori nutters, Prebble would have been in considerable danger. Quite apart from his life being made a cancellation misery.
In common with Robert above, I hope that time will show that the manner of and clarity of reason provided by Richard with respect to his resignation acts as a catalyst for coalition action (long overdue) to rein in the renegade Waitangi Tribunal. Frankly I want to see it gone as its usefulness is all but spent. Further, that degree of rational conclusion would be hard to squeeze out of our current politicians who are scared of their own shadows when it comes to all things Maori. When and if someone with the calibre of leadership needed to pull this Country back from the brink of apartheid anarchy appears, I suspect there might be a very loud cheer - trouble is - all I hear at the moment is the sound of silence.
Post a Comment