A controversial bill that seeks to radically change how New Zealand’s treaty between Māori and the Crown is interpreted in modern times will be introduced to parliament on Thursday, nearly two weeks ahead of its initial schedule.
The Treaty of Waitangi is considered New Zealand’s founding document and is instrumental in upholding Māori rights. The bill will be tabled in parliament by the libertarian Act party, a minor partner in New Zealand’s coalition government, which has regularly called for an end to “division by race”.
The time change has drawn criticism – it was scheduled to be introduced on 18 November, the day before a large protest against the bill was due to march to parliament – though the government rejected suggestions that the move was calculated.
The bill proposes to get rid of a set of well-established principles that guide the relationship between Māori and ruling authorities in favour of its own, redefined principles. Act believes Māori have been afforded different political and legal rights and privileges compared with non-Māori, because of the way the Treaty of Waitangi has been interpreted.
The proposal has sparked widespread criticism from lawyers, academics, politicians and the public who believe the new principles will weaken Māori rights, remove checks on the Crown and drive anti-Māori rhetoric.
The bill has prompted protests, nationwide meetings of Māori leaders, and warnings from ministry officials about its risks to Māori rights. The coalition government’s broader policy direction for Māori – including sweeping rollbacks to policies designed to improve Māori health and wellbeing – has also prompted strident criticism.
The treaty was signed in 1840 between more than 500 Māori chiefs and the Crown, to form a nation state. The principles of the treaty – broadly defined as partnership, protection and participation – have been developed over 50 years by courts, the Waitangi Tribunal (a commission of inquiry that investigates breaches of the treaty) and successive governments, in order to smooth out differences in interpretations of the treaty.
In a report provided to the Guardian on Wednesday, the Waitangi Tribunal said “if this bill were to be enacted, it would be the worst, most comprehensive breach of the Treaty… in modern times”.
“If the bill remained on the statute book for a considerable time or was never repealed, it could mean the end of the Treaty.”
It said the bill’s proposed principles were based on flawed policy rationales, was “novel” in its interpretations and would limit Māori rights.
In a statement, Act’s leader, David Seymour, said the bill provides New Zealanders with the opportunity to have a say on what the treaty means, rather that the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal.
“Did the Treaty give different rights to different groups, or does every citizen have equal rights? I believe all New Zealanders deserve to have a say on that question.”
On Tuesday night, news broke that the date had been brought forward, after local media viewed an internal Waitangi Tribunal memo indicating the change.
The government later confirmed the bill would be introduced on Thursday. Seymour’s office said the bill’s initial timeline was indicative and its introduction depended on cabinet signoff, which occurred this week.
But that has not deterred criticism from politicians who view the sudden time change as calculated.
Speaking to supporters during a livestream on social media, Te Pāti Māori (the Māori party) co-leaders, Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, said the government was afraid of the protest march.
“This is not accidental,” Ngarewa-Packer said. “They are fearful that you are coming.”
Posting to social media, the organisers of the hīkoi (protest march) said the change in date would not deter their plans.
“We always knew a shuffle like this would come along, this is not unexpected from this coalition,” said Eru Kapa-Kingi, the hīkoi spokesperson. “Bills come and go, but [the treaty] is infinite and so are we – our plans will not change.”
Seymour’s office said accusations that a change in timing was deliberate was “baseless speculation”.
The introduction of the bill formed part of Act’s coalition agreement with National – the major centre-right part. Both National and the third coalition partner, New Zealand First, have ruled out supporting the bill beyond the first reading and select committee process, meaning it is likely doomed to fail.
But the bill has already been disruptive and damaging, says Carwyn Jones, the head lecturer in Māori law at Te Wānanga o Raukawa, an Indigenous tertiary education provider.
“It is increasing misinformation about the treaty, it is already having an impact on the relationship between Māori and the Crown, and on social cohesion.”
Jones said the bill needed to be viewed within the wider context of the government’s “hostile” policy direction for Māori.
“It is having a real impact on many Māori, in terms of feeling under attack. For lots of younger Māori, this is a really distressing situation.”
