Zoran Rakovic: When the Crown Stands Alone

What if Treaty obligations returned to the Crown—where they belong? Explore why iwi may soon rush to settle, not because of impatience, but insolvency.

There is an unwritten maxim among distressed creditors: settle while the pot still has something in it. This principle, though rarely invoked by name in Treaty politics, may prove to be the most important yet unspoken factor in determining the pace and finality of Crown–iwi settlements in the years ahead. Māori iwi, long accustomed to protracted negotiations with the Crown, may discover that when the burden of Treaty obligations is reloaded back onto the Crown—where it legally belongs—rather than endlessly diffused among councils, businesses, and ordinary citizens, their incentive structure to hold out indefinitely will collapse. For as long as the Crown is permitted to socialise its fiduciary debts—to pay them not from its own coffers but through the energies, rates, and regulatory concessions of citizens—Treaty settlements risk becoming a perpetuity, not a closure. But if that circuit is broken, then economic logic, not cultural metaphysics, will shape the settlement timeline.

Zoran Rakovic: Te Tiriti Obligations Quietly Shifted Into the Backyards of Private Citizens

Opinion on why New Zealand’s Crown cannot legally transfer its Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations to private landowners under section 6 of the RMA.

Section 6 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) purports to set out “matters of national importance” to which all persons exercising functions and powers under the Act must “recognise and provide for.” Among these are matters such as the preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment, the protection of outstanding natural features and landscapes, and the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, wāhi tapu, and other taonga. Specifically, section 6(e) elevates Māori interests into a planning context that places regulatory burdens on private landowners through local council decisions made under the RMA. At first glance, this framework may appear as a principled reconciliation between land use regulation and the Crown’s Treaty obligations. 

Ele Ludemann: If the Crown doesn’t have sovereignty . . .

Robert MacCulloch says race activists in NZ should get over themselves & accept we’ll never know whether “sovereignty” was ceded in the Treaty of Waitangi.

Jack Vowles: The idea of ‘sovereignty’ is central to the Treaty debate......

.....why is it so hard to define?

The coalition government’s approach to Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) will inevitably set the scene for Waitangi Day next week, with the ACT Party’s Treaty Principles Bill already generating protest and ill will.

But ACT’s initiative, even if ill-conceived, could still open up a widened debate that is long overdue.

Michael Bassett: The challenges of Waitangi Day

With Waitangi Day coming up, it looks as if we are to receive another dose of nonsense about the meaning of the Treaty. The website Stuff carries an article by Julian Wilcox who, it seems, is to co-host Radio New Zealand’s Waitangi Day coverage. It is full of the usual muddle-headed material about how the Crown has failed Maori with its education and health policies. Wilcox relies on a 2019 Waitangi Tribunal finding that argues for a new set of Treaty principles for New Zealand.

I’ll leave aside the fact that the job of the Tribunal, as set out in law, is to deal with existing Treaty principles, not to dream up new ones. From my decade served on the Tribunal I recall many people keen to invent new responsibilities for the Crown. No one ever seemed to feel that Maori had any need to improve their level of response to the opportunities that were already on offer. For the Tribunal, and for Wilcox who parrots them, every improvement that is needed in Maori outcomes must come from the Crown and be funded by taxpayers. A cynic might think that it all sounds like a Maori expectation that all of them should have an armchair ride to equality with those who take education seriously, are prepared to work hard, improve themselves, and contribute towards the wider social advancement of our country.