Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith confirmed that officials have completed policy work reviewing Treaty-related provisions in 28 laws.
Rather than using an omnibus bill, changes will be introduced one by one, with options ranging from retaining existing clauses to clarifying or removing them where they are considered unnecessary or unclear.
Goldsmith says that too many past laws have included vague Treaty references “without much thought,” creating legal uncertainty for courts, councils, and businesses. The aim now is to ensure all Treaty references are purposeful, proportionate, and aligned with the intent of each law.
Changes are also being considered to the Waitangi Tribunal’s scope. The coalition agreement with New Zealand First proposes refocusing the Tribunal’s role to better reflect its original intent, especially as historic claims begin winding down. Some in Cabinet now suggest the Supreme Court’s recent ruling may remove the need for immediate changes to the Marine and Coastal Areas Act, which remains under review.
Treaty law academic Luke Fitzmaurice-Brown argues these moves are “insidious” and fears they will “water down” Māori protections in legislation. But Goldsmith insists the Government is balancing respect for Treaty commitments with the democratic principle of equal treatment under the law.
“It’s not about disrespecting the Treaty,” he told Newsroom. “It’s about making sure it’s applied appropriately.”
Read more over at Newsroom
The Centrist is a new online news platform that strives to provide a balance to the public debate - where this article was sourced.
Goldsmith says that too many past laws have included vague Treaty references “without much thought,” creating legal uncertainty for courts, councils, and businesses. The aim now is to ensure all Treaty references are purposeful, proportionate, and aligned with the intent of each law.
Changes are also being considered to the Waitangi Tribunal’s scope. The coalition agreement with New Zealand First proposes refocusing the Tribunal’s role to better reflect its original intent, especially as historic claims begin winding down. Some in Cabinet now suggest the Supreme Court’s recent ruling may remove the need for immediate changes to the Marine and Coastal Areas Act, which remains under review.
Treaty law academic Luke Fitzmaurice-Brown argues these moves are “insidious” and fears they will “water down” Māori protections in legislation. But Goldsmith insists the Government is balancing respect for Treaty commitments with the democratic principle of equal treatment under the law.
“It’s not about disrespecting the Treaty,” he told Newsroom. “It’s about making sure it’s applied appropriately.”
Read more over at Newsroom
The Centrist is a new online news platform that strives to provide a balance to the public debate - where this article was sourced.
9 comments:
'Luke Fitzmaurice-Brown' - you have to be taking the 'p**s', surely. Leave Luke and Maurice alone.
If National had backed Seymour and defined the Treaty Principles (or reverted to pre 1975 changes) the need for ongoing uncertainty would have been averted and possibly without a referendum.
More fun and money for the lawyers; and further deterioration of race relations. Silk purse and sow’s ear comes to mind.
I think many of us are a bit sceptical about this approach. The ordinary public would rather have a bill that defines our equality. The government needs to be much more transparent, for who of us goes through each piece of legislation reading each and every clause? The problem is, as so many say, "when a group is used to preferential treatment, equality is no longer acceptable".
New Zealand is millions of years old. Different colonists have arrived here. No one group owns anything, be it our sea, lakes, rivers or mountains. To say they do is utter fabrication. I still think the Foreshore and Seabed legislation needs to ensure Crown ownership to ensure the protection of all New Zealanders.
This process will take years and many governments........and how many protest hikois when Maori do not like a particular law change ? It is yet another way for He Puapua/tribal rule to advance in the background ...... National is very good at this.
The pro-separatist and 2- tier society group - who will do anything to stop a referendum with a clear outcome based on the views of citizens - seem to be winning again.
Yes, this govt should revert our law to the 2004 version and ditch the Key abomination.
The coalition government is now moving ahead with a broader programme to review how APARTHEID Treaty clauses are used across dozens of existing laws, with options ranging from retaining existing APARTHEID clauses to clarifying or removing them where they are considered unnecessary or unclear?
Another dealing with the “effects of” and not the “root cause of” previous and current government treason against ALL the people of New Zealand.
When you browse the 28 pieces of legislation they ALL refer to the Principles of the Treaty .
What principles Mr Goldmith and PM Luxon?
They all say consultation , but only confirm consultation with Maori interests. National is making a bad situation worse and in the Sea bed and Foreshore (Takutai Moana) it should revert completely to the Crown. Helen Clarke when PM was actually correct .
Enough with the weasel words and performative appeasement. We aren't fooled. For the sake of this nation, let the public speak - stop hiding behind your arrogance and scripted spin.
Post a Comment