Don't Wait – Feedback Submissions Close This Tuesday 7th January 2025

Have Your Say On The Treaty Principles Bill

For too long governments, courts, the Waitangi Tribunal, academics, and public servants have used their own interpretations of the Treaty of Waitangi to advance their own agendas.

Don't Wait – Feedback Submissions Close This Tuesday 7th January 2025 at 11.59pm
Download Feedback Template here: Word | PDF
ALL New Docuseries >>

Central Bank Digital Currency EXPOSED!

Uncover The Truth, Lies, And Misconceptions Behind The New “Programmable Money” Designed For Population Control

Enter Your Email Address To Access The Complete Docuseries & Get The Full Story...

"*" indicates required fields

Name
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Your Information is 100% secure and will never be shared without your express permission. You'll also be kept up to date with any related news and information. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Feedback Template

Below are some templated responses for you to use as a guide when providing your feedback.

Download a text copy of these template responses here: Word | PDF

Feedback Template

Here are some templated responses for you to use as a guide when providing your feedback. Click on a tab to reveal its content.

In this section, you can make comments on the Treaty Principles Bill. Here are some potential comments you could use:

General comments:

  • The Principles have expanded in scope beyond what the text of the Treaty says due to the interpretations of Judges, Academics, the Public Service and Waitangi Tribunal and are being used as the basis for unpopular policies like co-governance and Maori wards. There has been no democratic input into this expansion of meaning.
  • The Principles make it impossible to get anything done because Iwi/Hapu have to be consulted about everything at both a local and central government level.
  • The Waitangi Tribunal process is being abused and has turned into a “gravy train”.
  • I believe we do need to get a better handle on the ways the Treaty is used in New Zealand, however I do not think the TPB is the correct approach. I prefer NZ First’s approach to removing or clarifying all references to the Principles in legislation.
  • Although I oppose the current way the Treaty is being manipulated in New Zealand, I am concerned that the Treaty Principles Bill undermines New Zealand’s historic identity as a partnership between Europeans and Maori. The Bill and the ACT Party's narrative is that New Zealand is to be a modern multiethnic liberal democracy. This comes across as globalist language that buries the fact that New Zealand was founded by Europeans and Maori. The multiethnic talking point also feeds into a mass migration narrative where anybody can come and go, without care for New Zealand’s heritage/historic populations. 

Comments on Principle 1:

  • Maori agreed to the British crown being sovereign when they signed the Treaty.
  • Not all Iwi signed the Treaty and therefore not all approved of British sovereignty.
  • Article 2 implies that Iwi retained a degree of self-determination, which needs to be balanced against granting the British Crown the right to govern.
  • It is impossible for New Zealand to function properly with divided sovereignty.

Comments on Principle 2:

  • I believe Article 2 of the Treaty guarantees Maori continued ownership of their lands, exercise of their customary rights (e.g. use of fisheries), and a degree of “chieftainship” or self-determination over them.

Comments on Principle 3:

  • I believe that in addition to the rights in Article 2, Article 3 granted Maori the same rights as British subjects.

In this section, you can make recommendations about the TPB. Here are some recommendations you could use:

I support the Treaty Principles Bill.

  • Because the Bill’s description of what the Treaty means is much closer to a plain reading of the text than the current understanding of ‘The Principles’.
  • Because at present, ‘The Principles’ seem to just mean whatever Maori activists say they mean. They need to be clarified for the benefit of all New Zealanders.
  • Because I believe all New Zealanders need to be equal before the law.
  • Because at present it is impossible to get anything done in New Zealand due to the extensive consultation required with Iwi.

I support the Treaty Principles Bill with the following edits/amendments:

  • Amend Principle 1 to acknowledge that not all Iwi ceded sovereignty to the Crown.
  • Amend Principle 2 to explicitly grant Iwi a degree of Tino Rangatiratanga or self-determination should they wish to exercise it.
  • Amend Principle 3 so as not to preclude the idea of indigenous rights.

I oppose the Treaty Principles Bill

  • Because I prefer the New Zealand First approach of removing references to the Treaty Principles from legislation.
  • Because I don’t believe the Treaty has any ‘Principles’.
Download a text copy of these responses here: Word | PDF

Join The RCR Email List

Stay updated on developments on this topic.

"*" indicates required fields

Name
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Background To The Treaty Principles Bill

The Treaty Principles have become a political issue because successive governments, the courts, the Waitangi Tribunal, academics and public servants have expanded the definition of the principles in a way that is not clearly articulated in the plain text of the Treaty itself.
These expanded Principles have now been referenced in multiple pieces of legislation and it is standard practice in the public service for all policy advice to include a section explaining how the proposal relates to the Treaty Principles.
The Principles have thus taken on a quasi-constitutional status, yet the public have never had input into them.
They were used as the underpinning justification for several of the previous Labour Government’s most controversial and unpopular policy initiatives that the public explicitly rejected at the last election, this includes co-governance, three waters, Maori wards, the Maori Health Authority, they also influenced the development of the new New Zealand history curriculum and conservation land reforms.

The Different Approaches Of ACT & NZ First

Both ACT and NZ First managed to negotiate measures to address this issue which were included in the government’s coalition agreements:
NZ First’s approach is to identify and then either delete or clarify the meaning of all references to the Treaty Principles in existing pieces of legislation.
ACT’s approach is to introduce a Bill to define the meaning of the Treaty Principles in legislation. However, National and NZ First have agreed not to support the Bill past its first reading in Parliament.
These approaches are not mutually exclusive – i.e. it is not necessarily an either/or, they can both be pursued at the same time. David Seymour and ACT support doing both, but National and NZ First have only agreed to NZ First's approach in their coalition agreement. National has only agreed to support ACT’s Treaty Principles Bill until its first reading.

The Bill Defines The Principles As:

Principle 1

The Executive Government of New Zealand has full power to govern, and the Parliament of New Zealand has full power to make laws,—

  1. in the best interests of everyone; and
  2. in accordance with the rule of law and the maintenance of a free and democratic society.
Principle 2
  1. The Crown recognises, and will respect and protect, the rights that hapū and iwi Māori had under the Treaty of Waitangi/te Tiriti o Waitangi at the time they signed it.
  2. However, if those rights differ from the rights of everyone, subclause (1) applies only if those rights are agreed in the settlement of a historical treaty claim under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975.
Principle 3
  1. Everyone is equal before the law.
  2. Everyone is entitled, without discrimination, to—
    1. the equal protection and equal benefit of the law; and
    2. the equal enjoyment of the same fundamental human rights.

The Key Issues Are:

  • On Principle 1 much of the controversy has surrounded whether or not Maori really ceded sovereignty to the Crown at the signing of the Treaty.
  • On Principle 2 the controversy surrounds whether or not the Treaty grants Iwi a degree of self-determination or Tino Rangatiratanga over and above merely securing the property rights over their existing properties.
  • On Principle 3 the controversy surrounds whether the idea of equality before the law would preclude Maori from possessing indigenous rights over and above the rights enjoyed by non-Maori.

Have Your Say
Send Your Feedback