Introduction:
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s initial stance on the Treaty Principles Bill was one of cautious support, promising to back it through to its first reading only, as part of the coalition deal. However, recent developments in his languaging of the circumstances indicate a shift in his position, raising questions about his commitment to upholding the Treaty.
The Bill, has sparked debate over its potential impact on the relationship between the government, the Māori community, and the broader public. However, historically, due to an inability (by the NZ Crown) to reconcile with the actual articles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the Treaty Principles, was initially invented to address historical injustices from a NZ Crown perspective to ensure a partnership between Māori and the Crown. However, the current iteration of the Treaty Principles Bill has been rewritten to give “tino rangatiratanga,” or sovereignty, to all New Zealanders, a move that contradicts the original intent of the principles.
Luxon’s initial pledge was met with mixed reactions. While some lobby groups welcomed his willingness to engage with the issue, the wider community expressed skepticism, given the National Party’s history of opposing similar initiatives.
Hobson’s Pledge:
Hobson’sPledge, a powerful lobby group with a history of influencing legislation, has been vocal in its support to the original Treaty Principles Bill, focusing on the potential impact for individual liberties and free-market principles, that are in conflict with Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and Indigenous collectivism.
Luxon has since clarified his position, stating that National will not support the Bill beyond its first reading. This decision has been met with criticism from the likes of groups like Hobson’s Pledge, and others who believe the Treaty Principles Bill deserves more than a symbolic gesture.
The debate surrounding the Treaty Principles Bill has highlighted the complexities of navigating the relationship between the government, the Māori community, and the broader public. Luxon’s flip-flopping stances underscores the political pressures he faces as he attempts to balance competing interests and upholding his commitment to Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
While Luxon has maintained that his government is committed to limited support for the Bill making it to the first reading only. This article raises questions about the sincerity of his pledge, given his penchant for re-evaluating positions based on non-sensical, yet deliberate dialogue, whilst considering the political weight that will be brought to bare on him by external forces that include the Atlas Network using political arm twisting tactics, to seemingly coerce him into changing his mind
Given the coalition’s goverments current focus of removing any legislation that benefits and upholds the wellbeing of Māori, the future of the Treaty in New Zealand remains uncertain, and Luxon’s actions will be closely scrutinized as he navigates this complex and sensitive issue.
Conclusion:
The rewriting of the Bill to include “tino rangatiratanga” for all New Zealanders has further complicated the debate, raising concerns about the potential dilution of the Treaty’s original intent and the impact on Māori rights and interests. The debate surrounding the Treaty Principles Bill is likely to continue, with Luxon’s commitment to the Treaty facing further scrutiny from all sides as he navigates the political landscape.
