Treaty bill plays on ignorance

David Seymour’s Treaty principles bill is a deliberate manipulation of ignorance and fear, writes Catherine Delahunty.

 

I am not a lawyer or a historian, but I can tell when politicians are making a mess on purpose. Inducing paranoia gets votes in the Westminster system. Parties look for groups of voters who will keep them in power and the best we can hope for is that they won’t do active harm.

But the racist postcards in some of the letterboxes in my town are doing active harm. Some of the cards say “Māori are taking over the country”, one of the most ironic statements I have ever seen. People who don’t know their history can be easily hardened against justice for tangata whenua.

These cards are not funded by a political party but they mesh with messages and policies from the current coalition’s blitzkrieg of initiatives to scapegoat Te Tiriti and Māori. They are assisting the Act agenda. This is the ongoing practice of colonisation.

But are they winning? Last week, a spring moment blossomed across the country with the powerful kotahitanga of Kiingi Tuheitia’s tangi. Then, to the joy of many, his 27-year-old daughter was chosen to replace him. Those of us on the outside looking in may not have understood the full significance of these events, but the sense of unity was undeniable. Unity is not sameness, unity is not “one people”, unity is a commitment to work together without anyone having to suppress their identity.

Kotahitanga, from my limited grasp, is more than unity. It’s not a simple principle to sustain. Tina Ngata wrote a sharp essay last week on the complexity of kotahitanga and the political issues that are so much deeper than personality politics and hating on a single leader or government. We are in the shallow end of the chlorinated swimming pool of Westminster politics, paddling around in the short term, but are we ready to go deeper?

Last week, our local council voted to keep our one Māori ward. So did 45 other local authorities. Only two councils have opposed keeping their Maōri wards so far. Although the Act Party attacks Maōri wards, co-governance, and tino rangatiratanga, some tauiwi are moving past the kneejerk fear of power-sharing which was in our upbringing. We are learning to unpack words like “equality” and recognise the global propaganda against Indigenous people as it finds pockets of fertile ignorance in our own backyard.

Of course, Māori wards and co-governance are still at the shallow end of the pool. They are not part of Te Tiriti o Waitangi — they are baby steps that won’t necessarily lead to honouring Te Tiriti. But even a baby step is an opportunity to create fear and loathing in the minds of some. What’s interesting is how few people who’ve actually experienced Māori wards or co-governance, want to oppose them.

The Treaty Principles bill is next-level scaremongering. At this moment in time, nobody except the Act Party has agreed for it to pass through the House. However, a small vocal constituency is keen to see Te Tiriti redefined while claiming it’s just about “the principles”.

A recent article by Professor Jane Kelsey lays out the disturbing history of the “principles”. She notes that the profound constitutional question of the alleged ceding of sovereignty has now become a question in the House.

However, like most questions in the House, it wasn’t followed by a debate that revealed  inspirational leadership. What the discussion mainly revealed is how uninformed the centre-right and far-right political elite appear to be about our history.

Christopher Luxon thinks tangata whenua ceded sovereignty. Chris Hipkins says they didn’t but nevertheless the Crown is now sovereign. Act thinks everyone is equal under one government and if we just accept individualism in the free market we’ll live happily ever after. What New Zealand First stands for can look like Act one day and the Young Māori Party of the 1900s on another, but they do admit they’re not keen on David Seymour’s bill.

Whatever happens to the bill, are we really having an informed debate? No, because parliament is not the place to decide Te Tiriti issues. The Crown can’t legitimately hold this debate without the other parties — the hapū and iwi of Aotearoa — and they haven’t been included.

The Treaty principles bill is a hot mess for many reasons and widespread ignorance is certainly one of the factors being manipulated.

For a start, the whole “principles” concept is confusing. Evolved legal principles have centred the Crown view that sovereignty was ceded, so defending the principles creates contradictions. Secondly the “principles“ that Act has dreamed up are, in fact, a total rewrite of three of the actual Treaty articles.

Act is also seeking to write an interpretation of kāwanatanga, tino rangatiratanga and ōritetanga (equality) into law to legally end the issue of sovereignty. That is just wrong. Their new Article 2 “principle” says anyone who owns property is a chief. This goes to the heart of their argument — that private property ownership is sacred. They are claiming that collective whakapapa-based rights are racist, but we are all chiefs. My highly complex technical response to this notion is “bollocks”.

Act is now saying they’ll add in a token reference to “hapū and iwi”, but how does that substantially change the mess they’re drafting?

Inside the bill (the text of which we haven’t seen) there is rumoured to be a Tiriti referendum clause. We don’t know what it’s calling for but any referendum on Te Tiriti makes my skin crawl.

In Te Tiriti workshops that I run, there are always people who have goodwill and mean well, but whose level of understanding is basically nil. There are so many New Zealanders who have learned nothing of substance about Te Tiriti at school or work, or from the media they use. These are both older and younger people, and they will definitely vote in a referendum. If you ask these people if they want “equality under the law” or “fairness for everyone”, versus honouring Te Tiriti — well, that might sound pretty good. Referendums minus information and critical thinking are so easily manipulated into populism.

Even if the bill fails after a first reading, a citizens-initiated referendum could still be required so long as 10 percent of the eligible voting population sign a petition in favour of it. These referendums are non-binding but can be very useful to the interests they promote.

Remember the Voice referendum in Australia? Remember how initial widespread support was sabotaged by the “if you don’t know, vote no” message? Get ready for the next postcards in your letterbox.

All the while this circus is performing on the high wire of Te Tiriti politics, serious damage is being done to te taiao via the Fast Track legislation, to tamariki via the Oranga Tamariki Act, to prisoners’ rights through the removal of cultural reports, to tangata whenua equity in health, te reo and much more, including proposed amendments of the Marine and Coastal Areas Act which further undermine customary rights.

The situation is not hopeless, but the arc of history doesn’t bend towards justice without our deeper analysis of the causes of the current injustice, and the willingness of those of us with privilege to be visible champions of Te Tiriti-based change.

Kill the bill.

 

Catherine Delahunty is a Pākehā activist in environmental, social justice, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi issues. She is a writer and a tutor on social change issues, and a grandmother. Catherine was a Green MP for nine years and lives in Hauraki.

E-Tangata, 2024