Act, which prompted the Bill and was the only party to support it yesterday, has lost this fight but while the Bill was voted down, the debate will continue.
Some 90% submissions to the select committee opposed the Bill but that doesn’t reflect public opinion.
The Facts have the results of a Curia poll which show that a majority of New Zealanders support the principles put forward in the Bill:
Click to view
Click to view
Based on this research by Curia, when it comes to the support : opposition ratios for each of the three proposed Treaty Principles:
- ALL NEW ZEALANDERS = 1.9, 1.7, & 4.4x more support than opposition for the three respective principles (average 2.7, median 1.9). This is consistent with the 2:1 support ratio shown in other polls.
- National voters overwhelmingly support all three principles 5.8, 3.1, 7.8x (average = 5.6x)
- ACT voters overwhelmingly support all three principles 2.6,7.9, 43.5x (average = 18.0x)
- NZ First voters overwhelmingly support all three principles 2.5, 1.9, 9.9x (average = 4.7x)
- Labour voters also support all three principles 1.2, 1.2, 3.2x (average = 1.8x)
- Green voters oppose the first two principles but support the third = 0.6, 0.5, 1.2x (average = 0.8x)
- Te Pāti Māori voters overwhelmingly oppose all three principles = 0.1, 0.5, 0.1 (average = 0.2x)
1. Given most Kiwis still support the Bill by ~2:1, why is this not reflected in mainstream media coverage?
2. Why has the National Party been so strong in its commitment to support the Bill only to the first reading when an overwhelming majority of their voters want it? Do they have a better solution?
3. Why has NZ First been so strong in its commitment to support the Bill only to the first reading when an overwhelming majority of their voters want it? Do they have a better solution?
4. Why has Labour been so opposed to the Bill when a majority of their voters support all three principles? Do they also have a better solution?
5. Why have the Greens been so opposed to the Bill when their voters are split on the issue?
6. Does the ACT Party have superior voter research skills/suppliers compared to the other parties, who seem to have misread the nation on this issue?
7. In general, how do we resolve disagreements around the Treaty/Te Tiriti to achieve greater social unity in New Zealand going forward?
The government will continue to remove references to the principles of the Treaty from, and tidy up lazy, legislation which will help to placate some of the majority who supported the Bill.
But the debate will continue because unlike Monty Python’s parrot, the issues raised haven’t snuffed it.
Ele Ludemann is a North Otago farmer and journalist, who blogs HERE - where this article was sourced.
6 comments:
This issue ( i.e. democracy or an ethno-state) produced the 2023 election result. National and, sometimes, NZF have disappointed in policy delivery to guarantee citizen equality.
This issue will dominate the 2026 election. Two dangers lie ahead:
i)if the Select Commitee was "spiked" (Luxon's term) , the election could meet the same fate.
ii) if the majority of NZers want equality, they will have to fight for this. The opposition forces will not accept an election victory. Current hysteria and theatrics will turn belligerent.
Ironically civil unrest could result from voting for democracy. Sadly this is a real prospect for NZ's future. Much will now depend on how NZers - themselves - finally react.
I voted for the TPB. However, most people are avoiding the biggest issue here (including Prime Minister Luxon). New Zealand is geographically millions of years old. No "group" owns New Zealand. We have different settlers over time and the only possibly way the first group could be given any advantage would be if they had already provided roading, schools, hospitals, financial institutions, housing and food for all the other groups arriving later. As it was a later group(The British and Europeans) who civilised the country, then there is no way that group should be relegated to second class citizenship. Nor any of the subsequent immigrants who add to the countries well being. We simply can't have leaders who don't see the simple logic in all this. David Seymour can.
For me, this is the most important issue that faces NZ, it must be addressed along with all other related subjects, the waitangi tribunal etc
As maori intended, the organised hikoi, greatly facilitated by the 50 million dollar encouragement of Insurrection Coordination Centres (marae), with the wild display of basic stone age animal aggression, apparently spooked Luxon. Personally I am more puzzled how Act MPs supported the Bill. Most also have wives and families they wish to keep safe and unmolested, and all wish to preserve their own futures from the devastation of cancellation. By dismissing any intention to readdress the issues in the Bill, Luxon, in the slight chance he survives, has committed NZ to a continued giant and growing Tribunal and endless artful re interpretation of the Treaty. The legal profession will be rejoicing the ensured eternal life of the cash cow. With advertising on a scale to match the maori communication network, the outcome of a secret ballot where all are free of cancellation threat, would have been overwhelming and free NZ for real progress.
True - but your view is based on logic, reason and facts Indigenization is woke-based: empathy/emotion, guilt, victimization and fiction.
If our MPs have the stomach and gonads, a referendum at the next election would be the only answer.. But for a bunch of scared children, who want to hide their mothers skirts, and won't publicly say what they don't like about the bill, the chance of a referendum is very low
Post a Comment