Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu Kaiwhakahaere Justin Tipa. Photo / Supplied
Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu Kaiwhakahaere Justin Tipa. Photo / Supplied
Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu kaiwhakahaere (chair) Justin Tipa says David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill is politically clumsy and causing fear and frustration among the tribe as officials and the public ready for six months of Parliamentary select committee debate.
Tipa said Ngāi Tahu supported “an open and good-faith debate”about what the Treaty means, but Seymour and his party, Act, were not equipped to lead such a discussion.
“David Seymour and Act are misconstruing history. You can’t have a reasonable debate with a person or party who distorts the truth,” he said.
It will however go before a Parliamentary select committee for six months.
Act leader David Seymour. Photo / Marty Melville
Seymour is proposing redefining the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi by replacing the many principles that have been developed by the courts over several decades with three new principles.
He believes Parliament, not the courts, should define the principles.
“The purpose of the Treaty Principles Bill is for Parliament to define the principles of the Treaty, provide certainty and clarity, and promote a national conversation about their place in our constitutional arrangements.”
But the kaiwhakahaere of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu is not convinced. He says the six month select committee process would be a “pointless, divisive, and expensive discussion”.
“Our people are hurt, they’re frustrated, and there is an element of fear there, like where this could end up.
“There’s a real fear that, while we have had a commitment from the Prime Minister (and) New Zealand First that they will not be supporting the bill past its first reading, it’s the potential for all those submissions that come through the select committee process.
“It’s easy to say things are going to be thrown out, but actually there is a process to be run and that’s not without due risk, and that’s what really scares our young people – it’s hearing the rhetoric and divisive language and it is often really vocal minority that mobilise. It’s just dangerous.”
Tipa said Act “could not handle the idea of iwi exercising authority over their own affairs, something that by its very nature reduces reliance on central government”.
“The Treaty Principles Bill is a great example of why the Act Party is not equipped to lead us in important conversations about our identity as New Zealanders, or where we are heading as a country. Seymour’s efforts are naïve, politically clumsy, and ultimately unproductive for New Zealand.
“The Treaty is an agreement between the Crown and iwi and hapū. There is an honour and dignity to that agreement that needs to be respected. It is not something that should be subject to the present-day whims of a minor political party.”
He said political policies and public discussions like that surrounding the Treaty Principles Bill were starting to have “quite an impact on our young people.”
“It’s just a sense of frustration that, particularly down here in Ngāi Tahu, we’ve worked really hard to take the whole community and the whole island on a journey. We’ve been building relationships since settlement 25 years ago.”
Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu Kaiwhakahaere Justin Tipa. Photo / Supplied
But Seymour says his Bill would present principles that were “more closely linked to what the Treaty says” that we all have “the same rights and duties”.
“All New Zealanders have tino rangatiratanga, the right to self-determine. On this version, every child growing up in New Zealand deserves the same respect and dignity, including equal rights before the law.
“Charter schools – which may be run independently from the state system by Māori authorities – are an example of tino rangatiratanga in action.
“What is controversial to – and opposed by – many New Zealanders is any interpretation of tino rangatiratanga that delivers different groups different political rights based on ancestry. Act believes this is wrong, and inconsistent with a multi-ethnic liberal democracy.”
Māori rights lawyer Roimata Smail said principle one “just does not reflect what was agreed in 1840, and instead pushes absolute Crown control” while principles two and three “were clearly a step back in the face of widespread opposition.”
She said of the current, original principles – tino rangatiratanga, kawanatanga and partnership were the most important to remember. Treaty principles are ways of representing the intent of the Treaty of Waitangi in legislation.
“Britain and Māori only discussed and agreed that the Crown would govern British people in Aotearoa. This is the principle of Kāwanatanga.
“(In the Treaty) Māori retained their tino rangatiratanga that they had always had. This is the principle of tino rangatiratanga. This is not controversial.
“The Waitangi Tribunal said (...) the spheres of tino rangatiratanga and kawanatanga were equal, and Māori and the Crown needed to agree as equal partners how the relationship would work in practice. This is the principle of partnership.”
Julia Gabel is a Wellington-based political reporter. She joined the Herald in 2020 and has most recently focused on data journalism.
