The PoO team, busily digesting news reports and opinions each day, inevitably encounters headlines that raise great questions about the way we are and should be governed.
That, in turn, raises questions about which party we should vote for.
An example pops up in The Post today –
If the Waitangi Tribunal is scrapped, who will do its job?
That triggers the more obvious question: what would happen if nobody does its job?
It is simply disbanded and its job is done.
The article was written by Roimata Smail, described as a Waitangi Tribunal lawyer, educator and best-selling author on Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
She has skin in the game: if the tribunal is scrapped and its work not done by some other organisation, we may suppose she will lose an income stream.
Taxpayers have skin in the game, too, according to the Taxpayers’ Union. It recently issued a media release headed Winding Up Waitangi Tribunal Saves Taxpayers Millions
Taxpayers’ Union spokesperson Tory Relf said the union welcomed ACT’s policy to complete outstanding historical Treaty claims and disestablish the Waitangi Tribunal once that work is finished.
“ACT’s plan would still allow the remaining historical claims to be completed, while ending contemporary inquiries that drag taxpayers into costly legal fights over the day-to-day decisions of elected governments.
“The Tribunal alone is budgeted to cost taxpayers $13.7 million in 2026/27. On top of that, taxpayers have spent more than $4.4 million on Crown legal fees for Tribunal inquiries in less than three years, while another $5.7 million a year is going towards claimant fundingfor historical Treaty settlement negotiations.
“Finish the job, wind up the institution, and stop the bills.”
A key issue highlighted by Roimata Smail is whether the tribunal is doing important work that would have to be done by someone else if the tribunal was disestablished.
That invites us to think about what happens to the reports generated by the tribunal and its resource-consuming hearings.
The short answer is not much, in recent years.
The Government might come up with a policy, a dissenter will spot a case for challenging the policy by invoking a contentious interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi, and the Waitangi Tribunal will have a job to do.
Researchers will delve, lawyers will submit, the tribunal will deliberate and – shazam – a report will be produced.
But Waitangi Tribunal recommendations are legally non-binding, the Government is under no statutory obligation to adopt them, and there is no central register which records exactly how many Waitangi Tribunal reports have been acted on.
Google AI nevertheless advised PoO that over the past three years, the record shows a trend whereby reports have been openly rejected or bypassed rather than implemented.
The Luxon government has pushed ahead with policies even though the tribunal has issued urgent critical reports which declare them to be in breach of Treaty “principles”.
Examples include repeal of Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act, changes to Maori wards on local authorities and the Treaty Principles Bill, although the Nats lost their nerve with that one and helped vote it down at its second reading in Parliament.
Never mind the electorate giving the Government a mandate to stem what had been the rapid spread of policies and programmes which encouraged so-called Treaty partnerships and co-governance while giving a minority of citizens greater political powers than those exercised by the majority.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE.
It is simply disbanded and its job is done.
The article was written by Roimata Smail, described as a Waitangi Tribunal lawyer, educator and best-selling author on Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
She has skin in the game: if the tribunal is scrapped and its work not done by some other organisation, we may suppose she will lose an income stream.
Taxpayers have skin in the game, too, according to the Taxpayers’ Union. It recently issued a media release headed Winding Up Waitangi Tribunal Saves Taxpayers Millions
Taxpayers’ Union spokesperson Tory Relf said the union welcomed ACT’s policy to complete outstanding historical Treaty claims and disestablish the Waitangi Tribunal once that work is finished.
“ACT’s plan would still allow the remaining historical claims to be completed, while ending contemporary inquiries that drag taxpayers into costly legal fights over the day-to-day decisions of elected governments.
“The Tribunal alone is budgeted to cost taxpayers $13.7 million in 2026/27. On top of that, taxpayers have spent more than $4.4 million on Crown legal fees for Tribunal inquiries in less than three years, while another $5.7 million a year is going towards claimant fundingfor historical Treaty settlement negotiations.
“Finish the job, wind up the institution, and stop the bills.”
A key issue highlighted by Roimata Smail is whether the tribunal is doing important work that would have to be done by someone else if the tribunal was disestablished.
That invites us to think about what happens to the reports generated by the tribunal and its resource-consuming hearings.
The short answer is not much, in recent years.
The Government might come up with a policy, a dissenter will spot a case for challenging the policy by invoking a contentious interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi, and the Waitangi Tribunal will have a job to do.
Researchers will delve, lawyers will submit, the tribunal will deliberate and – shazam – a report will be produced.
But Waitangi Tribunal recommendations are legally non-binding, the Government is under no statutory obligation to adopt them, and there is no central register which records exactly how many Waitangi Tribunal reports have been acted on.
Google AI nevertheless advised PoO that over the past three years, the record shows a trend whereby reports have been openly rejected or bypassed rather than implemented.
The Luxon government has pushed ahead with policies even though the tribunal has issued urgent critical reports which declare them to be in breach of Treaty “principles”.
Examples include repeal of Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act, changes to Maori wards on local authorities and the Treaty Principles Bill, although the Nats lost their nerve with that one and helped vote it down at its second reading in Parliament.
Never mind the electorate giving the Government a mandate to stem what had been the rapid spread of policies and programmes which encouraged so-called Treaty partnerships and co-governance while giving a minority of citizens greater political powers than those exercised by the majority.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE.
3 comments:
I am surprised that the operating cost of the WT is so modest. Far more is frittered on building/renovating Insurrection Coordination Centres (marae) each year.. WT findings are so predictable would seem to be an ideal task for AI. And with a little coaching from Act, responses in the long term inteest of NZ could also be provided by AI.WT claims could also be formualted by AI but it would threaten the whole vast Maori Studies industry
Waitangi Tribunal members are paid only for days/hours spent carrying out authorised Tribunal work. They are NOT paid a salary.
If I’m only paid when I’m actively considering a complaint then I’m always going to find a complaint to consider. Enough said.
Why are we waiting..........?
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.