Act Party leader David Seymour wants to safeguard any debate on a potential referendum on the treaty's principles. Photo / Mike Scott
Act Party leader David Seymour wants to safeguard any debate on a potential referendum on the treaty's principles. Photo / Mike Scott
Act leader David Seymour says he would recommend that Parliament take longer debating definitions of the Treaty of Waitangi principles, a policy that is central to his party’s campaign.
He also supported seeking guidance ahead of initiating that legislation and holding a referendum in the hope it would safeguard thepublic debate from the racist rhetoric Seymour accepts the topic can prompt.
That guidance was unlikely to come from iwi leaders, according to Seymour, who claimed the National Iwi Chairs Forum was “not interested” in discussing a potential referendum on the Treaty principles.
Forum spokesman Te Huia Bill Hamilton says iwi leaders would engage with the party leader as long as he “brings his ears and not just his mouth”, following a tense interaction between the pair last year while discussing the Treaty.
Act’s policy for Parliament to discuss the principles and put them to a referendum was at the heart of the party’s approach to addressing division in New Zealand, alongside its opposition to co-governance and the delivery of public services with race as a determining factor.
The policy’s future was uncertain given National leader Christopher Luxon has said publicly he doesn’t support a referendum.
National leader Christopher Luxon in his campaign bus while it stops at some roadworks near Te Puke on Thursday. Photo / Mike Scott
Seymour, of the Ngāpuhi iwi, claimed Act didn’t have top priorities heading into potential negotiations with National, and perhaps New Zealand First.
He added the proposed referendum wouldn’t be a top priority because he believed one might not be necessary if legislation defining the principles were agreed to by other parties - something that appeared very unlikely given Seymour has been criticised heavily by Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori for pursuing the policy.
In recent media interviews, Seymour has accepted discussing the Treaty could prompt racist rhetoric that was unhelpful to public debate.
Asked how he would look to safeguard that debate, Seymour said he would hope to do so through his leadership, any guidance he sought, the “phrasing of the debate” and the question posed in the referendum.
He said was open to working with organisations to ensure any public debate was robust but safe.
“If it goes ahead, then you’re going to see a whole lot of people brought to the table to discuss it,” he said.
He also suspected any bill on the topic would take longer to go through Parliament, as his End of Life Choice Act did.
“I actually think our Parliament has been going too fast, I think, to get laws right. It should be prepared to listen more.”
"End Division by Race" is one of the Act Party's slogans. Photo / Paul Taylor
Seymour said he was disappointed not to have engagement with the iwi leaders forum on his policy, saying a discussion was had about a year ago but that the forum was “not interested”.
However, Seymour said it didn’t concern him much.
“I’m not sure that they are the organisation that they once were, they used to be a lot more constructive and ready to meet in the middle, but there are other leaders within Māoridom who are very worthwhile talking to and who I think we can find common ground with.
Hamilton told the Herald he contacted Seymour’s office in May last year requesting a conversation about the treaty in light of the party leader’s public comments on the topic.
When the pair met over Zoom it didn’t go well, according to Hamilton.
“All of the stuff he talked about about the Treaty was really, really difficult for me to listen to and we couldn’t find a common ground.”
Hamilton, of Ngā Rauru, Ngāti Kahungunu and Ngāti Raukawa, said at that point he “terminated” the conversation.
Te Huia Bill Hamilton (right), pictured in 2018 opposing seabed mining.
Asked what was so challenging about Seymour’s kōrero, Hamilton believed the Act leader was very dismissive of his view, despite him being a Treaty educator for three decades, and he thought Seymour also doubted the validity of Māori concepts central to the Treaty.
Since their interaction in May, Hamilton claimed Seymour had been repeatedly invited to events hosted by the forum, but either hadn’t been able to attend or hadn’t responded to the invitation.
Hamilton said the pursuit of a referendum on the Treaty without significant consultation with Māori would be considered a breach of the Treaty.
Noting that not all iwi leaders might agree, Hamilton did say he wanted to engage with Seymour on his policy as long as the engagement was genuine.
“As long as he brings his ears and not just his mouth.”
Adam Pearse is a political reporter in the NZ Herald Press Gallery team, based at Parliament. He has worked for NZME since 2018, covering sport and health for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei before moving to the NZ Herald in Auckland, covering Covid-19 and crime.
