Submissions on the Treaty Principle's Bill

Here are the submissions against the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill I wrote for myself, my family and my band. They're in this order -

1. personal submission
2. family submission
3. band submission

   ---

Personal submission on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill

Submission on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill from Indira Neville (pākeha). I have experience working in education, policy, the arts, media, and as a mother.

I oppose the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill in its entirety. I support te tino rangatiratanga and the unique position of Māori as tangata whenua of Aotearoa.

In 2023, pre-election, I read about and dismissed the Act party’s policy on changing the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. To me it was obviously flawed; a refusal to recognise Māori as tangata whenua, an ignoring of the constitutional foundations of our country, an attempt to undermine Crown efforts to redress Treaty breaches, a reinforcing of institutional bias, a promotion of privatisation, and a provocation for social divisiveness. 

The stance did make sense within Act’s excessively capitalist, neoliberal worldview but in the context of real-life it seemed a politically outlandish, regressive fantasy. And although it was likely they’d be part of the next government I wasn't too worried. I truly believed there was no way any other party would support such an extreme fringe position. So when the Treaty Principles Bill did materialise in the coalition agreement it was a genuine shock. 

Clearly I was naive, something that’s becoming more and more apparent as this government continues its anti-Māori legislative onslaught. No longer is Act’s position ‘fringe’ but rather a horrific central tenant for governing. The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill is simply the latest, most explicit example of this. I find it repugnant, distressing and disappointing, and it’s no exaggeration to say it makes my heart hurt. 

But I also object to the Bill for a multitude of less emotional, more concrete, submission-appropriate reasons. Here they are:

A treaty cannot be altered by just one of its signatories 
Treaties are a binding written agreement usually between sovereign states.Treaties confer on their signatories a set of rights, obligations and the authority to act upon them. Unless stated, they cannot be changed or nullified without the involvement of all relevant parties. Te Tiriti o Waitangi meets the criteria. It is a formal agreement, made between the sovereign states of the British Crown (represented by William Hobson) and Aotearoa (represented by approximately 540 rangatira). None of the rights, obligations and powers given by the Treaty allow either of these parties to make alterations (in content or meaning) without the other. The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill attempts to do just this.

(It’s also worth noting that Aotearoa is party to thousands of treaties and agreements with other sovereign nations. Examples include Closer Economic Relations with Australia and the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Arrangement, several international import and export restriction agreements, and various United Nations conventions. It is inconceivable that our government would attempt to unilaterally change any of them).

Māori did not cede sovereignty 
The Treaty’s original purpose was to control the lawlessness of European settlers hence it appropriately conferred on the Crown the right to govern. The Crown did not need sovereignty to fulfill its task and it rightfully remained with Māori. Te Tiriti did not however ‘give’ Māori tino rangatiratanga (they have had and will have it forever) it just made the status explicit. And Article two is clear about what this means, “...the unqualified chieftainship over lands, villages, property and treasures/taonga”. 

Through the Treaty Principles Bill the government is attempting to nullify and steal these rights. It’s using what is commonly known as the ‘english version’ of the Treaty as justification. This does provide for sovereignty but for various reasons is problematic. The sheet in english is not a Treaty ‘version’ but rather a ‘segment’. It is one of nine, signed by just 39 rangatira out of 560. It is a separate piece of paper but it is not a separate document, just like each page in a book is not a separate book (even if the pages are in different languages). 

There were also several rangatira who, for various reasons, did not sign the Treaty. Their hapu are therefore no way beholden to any ‘sovereignty’ the government may claim (although representatives from some of the relevant iwi have stated publicly they support Te Tiriti o Waitangi as a means for improving outcomes for Māori, exactly what the Treaty Principles Bill will rip away).

The Treaty Principles represent progress
Under the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act the Waitangi Tribunal, “...shall have exclusive authority to determine the meaning and effect of the Treaty as embodied in the 2 texts and to decide issues raised by the differences between them”. The Treaty Principles are the main tool for doing this. Partnership, Participation and Protection are the most well-known but there’s no definitive list. Instead they are contextual; ideas, phrases and words across both languages, identified by the Tribunal as best capturing the intentions of Te Tiriti in the content of specific laws. Improved social, cultural and economic opportunities for Māori grow from this.

For the reasons described above, i.e. Māori did not cede sovereignty nor are there two versions of the Treaty, the Principles are problematic. But they are valuable and represent important progress in Aotearoa’s journey to recognise te tino rangatiratanga and improve outcomes for Māori. The Treaty Principles Bill will destroy this progress. 

The Bill is fundamentally flawed
Undermining the Treaty Principles logically narrows the role of the Waitangi Tribunal. For now however it retains its mandate and under this released Ngā Mātāpono – The Principles: The Interim Report of the Tomokia Ngā Tatau o Matangireia – The Constitutional Kaupapa Inquiry Panel on The Crown’s Treaty Principles Bill and Treaty Clause Review Policies. The report found the Bill,

• lacked a policy imperative justifying its development
• was based on flawed policy rationales
• was ‘novel’ in its Treaty interpretations
• was fashioned on a disingenuous historical narrative; and
• distorted the text of te Tiriti o Waitangi 
  
  

The content of the Treaty Principles Bill is flawed because the policy development process was flawed, most significantly in its failure to engage with Māori (itself a Treaty breach). This was intentional, as was the flawed progress of the Bill’s first reading, designed to minimise opposition by changing the date and scheduling the submissions period over Christmas. 

The Treaty Principles Bill is also a flawed project in which to channel public resources. Bills take enormous time and effort; legislative bids, policy development, consultation, briefings, drafting, analysis, and advising. This Bill, even though it won’t pass its first reading (providing National and NZ First keep their promises) requires it all. It’s a shameful misuse of tax-payer money, particularly in a tight fiscal environment and a government directive to minimise ‘waste’.

Problematic leadership
That the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill exists at all raises questions about Aotearoa’s political leadership. Questions like why did the Prime Minister allow its inclusion in the coalition agreement (especially when David Seymour says it was not a ‘bottom line’)? Why is the Prime Minister supporting a bill he’s publicly described as divisive and damaging to Crown-iwi relations (albeit to first reading)? Why does the Act Party, with only 8% of the vote, seem to have such a disproportionate influence over government policy? How can the use of taxpayer revenue be justified?

To my knowledge the Prime Minister has failed to provide any answers. This is just one way he has acted in bad faith throughout the general progress of the Bill. Other examples include his refusal to meet with the hikoi (the majority of whom weren’t Te Pāti Māori members despite his insistence they were) and his decision not to attend Waitangi Day.

Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a physical taonga
The Treaty of Waitangi physically sits in He Whakapapa Kōrero, a specially constructed room at the the National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa. Also there are He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni (Declaration of Independence of the United Tribes of New Zealand) and the 1893 Women’s Suffrage Petition (Te Petihana Whakamana Pōti Wahine). The documents are presented as “...the three iconic constitutional documents that shape Aotearoa”. They are taonga.

He Whakapapa Kōrero is designed to protect and enhance their mana. A carved pattern of intersecting waves surround its entrance, representing the coming together of the cultures, ideas and people embodied in the documents. Outside are wai whakanoa, bowls of water for visitors to cleanse the tapu of the taonga after visiting. Tokotoko surround the room, carved with symbols of Tūmatauenga, Rongomaraeroa, Tāwhirimātea, and Tangaroa, radiating the energies of these atua. 

The structure is a clear, beautiful, powerful, proud, public statement of reverence and recognition. It’s a physical commitment to Te Tiriti, something concrete to grasp when its contents may feel opaque. And thousands of people from all over the world visit every year to look at, learn about and experience the taonga. When viewed through the lens of the Treaty Principles Bill however, its meaning changes. The mana of the documents does not dim but their home, He Whakapapa Kōrero, becomes dishonest; a pretty performative box and a monument to hypocrisy.  

A symbol of unity not division
Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a physical taonga, a practical taonga (through the use of the Principles in law) and a philosophical one. It gives us a way to think about living in Aotearoa and some guiding values t in doing so. For me two of the most important of these are belonging and unity.

My family and I have not always been here. Our history and whakapapa lie in other countries. But Te Tiriti allows us to call Aotearoa home, to truly say we belong. It is the country’s first immigration document, legitimising the presence of non-Māori and generously allowing us to share in the use and care of its resources. In this way the Treaty unites us. Proponents of the Treaty Principles Bill would have you believe otherwise, proclaiming Te Tiriti excludes and divides. They do this by using the word ‘equality’ a lot, as in ‘because of the Treaty we don’t have it and therefore our actions are justified’. Equality is indeed a positive thing but its definition in the context of the Bill is flawed and disingenuous. 

We already have equality and it’s provided by the Treaty. Article Three gives us ‘the protections and rights of British subjects’ and all it brings with it, like access to education, health and the right to vote. The Bill ignores this. It conflates ‘equality’ with ‘equity’, refusing to acknowledge that for many Māori access to the previous is more theoretical than real, and that an inherently discriminatory system of government is to blame. Instead a ‘level playing field’ scenario is promoted where individuals just have to ‘choose’ to ‘work’ for a better life. Social, cultural and economic status (historic and current) are deemed irrelevant and any attempts at equity are reframed as ‘special treatment’. In this way the Bill is divisive. It sets up a false ‘us’ and ‘them’ binary where ‘us’ are those who’ve ‘worked hard to make something of themselves’ and ‘them’ are a bunch of ‘resentful Māori, other freeloaders, and their woke allies’. ‘Us’ support the Treaty Principles Bill and ‘them’ don’t. 

Privatisation and the selling of public assets
David Seymour is skilled and relentless in his use of the ‘us’ and ‘them’ discourse. His favoured technique is to speak of ‘ordinary New Zealanders’ and to consistently point out those who aren’t, i.e. Māori, tangata Tiriti of all kinds, the Waitangi Tribunal, the Iwi Chairs Forum, government officials, lawyers, academics, educators, constitutional experts, union members, beneficiaries, the working poor, the disabled, members of the queer community, feminists, environmentalists, sympathetic religious organisations, local government, the opposition parties, ex-members of the coalition parties, supporters of Palestine, famous people who speak out, and everyone on the hikoi. 

When it comes to defining ‘ordinary New Zealanders’ however, David Seymour is more coy. He never really does it, just infers a kind of wholesome, hardworking mom and pop-type figure whose key characteristic is they’re missing out on stuff because of Māori. And he promises the Treaty Principles Bill will fix this. It’s a clever narrative that obfuscates those who will actually benefit. That is big, multinational investors, developers and corporations. The Treaty Principles, enshrined in legislation and protecting the rights of Māori are a barrier. The Bill removes it and public assets are up for grabs. Also the Principles Bill is just one of many working to advance Act’s privatisation and deregulation agenda, the Regulatory Standards Bill being an obvious example.

Recommendations
I object to the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill with both my head and my heart. Together they recommend:

• The Bill be rejected in its entirety
• The government acknowledge the Bill’s flaws, in particular its multitudinous undermining of Te Tiriti o Waitangi
• The government apologises for allowing the Bill to get as far as first reading
• The government follows any advice provided by the Waitangi Tribunal, the Iwi Chairs Forum and/or any other relevant organisation in revoking and redressing the harm caused by the Bill
• The government commitments to working to repair its relationship with Māori
• The government commits to work in genuine partnership with Māori to advance the rights guaranteed under the Treaty, including tino rangatiratanga

Family submission on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill

In the Neville-Danko family are Ponzo Danko (age 14, pākehā), Lucy Danko (age 20, pākehā), Tim Danko (age 57, pākehā/first-generation Australian immigrant), Stefan Neville (age 50, pākehā/second-generation Scottish immigrant), and Indira Neville (age 51, pākehā/second-generation Scottish immigrant).

We oppose the Principles of The Treaty of Waitangi Bill. We support tino rangatiratanga, mana motuhake and the unique position of Māori as tangata whenu of Aotearoa.

The members of our family have not always been in this place, our history and whakapapa lie in other countries. But we live in Aotearoa, and it is Te Tiriti o Waitangi that allows us to call it home. 

The Treaty is Aotearoa’s first immigration policy. It affirmed (affirms) tino rangatiratanga for Māori and legitimised (legitimises) the presence of non-Māori, most significantly by enabling the Crown to govern. The document was (is) an explicit commitment to partnership, an agreement between tangata whenua and tauiwi to lead and care for this country together. 

As we know the Crown betrayed this alliance, working through various governments to oppress and destroy via law, violence, education, religion, government and all the other trappings of colonialism. It has been a long, exhausting, brutal and traumatic process for Māori (and others) to undo this. The job is far from over, but considerable progress has been made.

Now however - through the Treaty Principles Bill - the Government is once again dishonouring Te Tiriti, attempting to fundamentally change its meaning, and doing so unilaterally with disregard for the literal definition of ‘treaty’. In doing this the Bill undermines all that has been achieved and legitimises future acts of oppression and destruction against Māori. 

The coalition Government is justifying its actions via ‘equality’. It is a convincing word that appears to be positive. In the context of this Bill however the use is flawed and (at best) disingenuous. It:

• ignores the existing ‘equality’ given to everyone under Article three of the Treaty. We already have ‘the protections and rights of British subjects’ and all this brings with it, for example access to education, health and the right to vote.
• Conflates ‘equality’ with ‘equity’, refusing to acknowledge that for Māori (and others) access to the above is more theoretical than real. And that this manifests in significantly poorer outcomes for Māori.
• Does not recognise that these inequities are due to discrimination inherent in colonial systems. These advantage the Crown and pākehā, and disadvantage Māori (and others). There is no ‘level playing field’.
• Does not recognise that strategies and actions to deal with Māori inequity are not ‘privilege’ but rather ‘redress’ for broken promises. They are also about restoration of the tangata whenua – tauiwi partnership and shared approaches to caring for Aotearoa.

The Bill refuses to address the above and in doing so promotes division (and undermines any possibility of a serious, constructive, honest Te Tiriti discussion). It creates a ‘them’ and ‘us’, ‘them’ being Māori (and anyone ‘woke’ and opposing the Bill) and ‘us’ being ‘ordinary New Zealanders’ (a meaningless term with tactical use only). 

And horrifyingly, the Treaty Principles Bill is only the latest in a series of legal and policy developments aimed at promoting the ‘them’ and ‘us’ binary. These include the repeal of Three Waters, disestablishment of Te Aka Whai Ora, the removal of Treaty clauses in legislation, and the Regulatory Standards Bill currently making its way through Parliament. All are based on a misleading definition of ‘equality’ as discussed above. 

The Neville-Danko family are proudly ‘them’. We are honoured to be tangata tiriti and willing to work to uphold Te Tiriti o Waitangi. We write this submission as part of that mahi.

We recommend the Government:

• Reject the Principles of The Treaty of Waitangi Bill in its entirety.
• Explicitly recognise tino rangatiratanga, mana motuhake and the unique position of Māori as tangata whenua.
• Acknowledge and apologise for breaching the Treaty by allowing this Bill to progress.
• Commit to working in genuine partnership with Māori to redress the existence of the BIll, and other Treaty breaches.
  
  

My kids rule

Band submission on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill

The Biscuits are a pop punk band based in Tāmaki Makaurau, Aotearoa. Its members are Brenda Dwane (Cook Island Māori), Brent Bidlake (pākeha) and Indira Neville (pākeha). The band’s been around for 20 years, played numerous shows, made numerous recordings and had some alternative radio chart success. 

The Biscuits oppose the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill. We support tino rangatiratanga and the unique position of Māori as tangata whenua.

In Aotearoa there is a long history of protest music focused on Māori pride and resistance. Some examples are Ka Manu By Rob Ruha, One Brotherhood by Herbs, E Tū by Upper Hutt Posse, and Ōrākau by Half/Time. These important songs - and many others – reflect and reinforce Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

The Biscuits do not make songs like this, our lyrics are not explicitly political. But te Tiriti o Waitangi is no less important to our band. It provides the context within which we make music, giving us the privilege to stand, perform, and send our feelings, ideas and sounds out into Aotearoa. In return we need to consider our actions, to figure out how in our performances and recordings we can honour the Treaty. 

Truthfully, the Biscuits have not been good at this. We need to do better. The Treaty principles – as they currently stand - offer us an accessible framework within which to do so. Concepts of partnership, participation and protection bring with them the following kinds of relevant questions:

• How can we as a band, fulfil our te Tiriti responsibilities? In this context what does it mean to support tino rangatiratanga? How can we use our energy, skill, craft, relationships, networks and resources?
• How does this differ from ‘supporting’ tino rangatiratanga as content and/or to advance our own careers?
• When considering applying for funding, are we the right band for the Project? Are we taking funding from others more deserving whose projects we could instead support? If we make money is there anyone we could share it with or initiative we could help fund?
•  What music communities do we belong to? Who are we accountable to? Who are we playing with, where are we playing, why are we playing?
• When we’re called to account, how will we respond? Will we own, apologise and learn from our actions, centring those harmed and trying to remedy things? Are we aware of behaviours that might get in the way, e.g. defensiveness and/or focusing on our own reputation.
• What kind of imprint does our music leave? Now and in the future?

These questions are important and useful. They are grounded in the Treaty principles and the Treaty principles compel us to answer them and to act upon our answers. The Biscuits need to do this.

The Biscuits also oppose the Treaty Principles Bill for the following general reasons:

A treaty – any treaty – cannot be changed unilaterally by any of its signatories. This is in relation to a treaty’s contents, established meaning, and/or social and legal enactment. 

The Bill ignores, undermines and insults the tino rangatiratanga of tangata whenua. While the Treaty does not ‘give’ this to Māori (they had and will always have it) the concept is codified in Article two. An attack on the Treaty is therefore an attack on Māori sovereignty and all the rights this confers.

The Bill was developed without the involvement of Māori. This is itself a breach of te Tiriti, and inadequate governance.

The Bill is just the latest and most explicit action in a series taken by the current government to roll back the hard-won rights of Māori. These have happened across health, education, justice, and the environment, and are all ‘re-breaches’ of te Tiriti o Waitangi. 

The Bill seeks to remove the ‘privileges enjoyed by Māori’. These are not ‘privileges’ but redress for breaches of the Treaty by the Crown, breaches which ‘privileged’ pākehā.

The Bill purports to provide ‘equality’ for all New Zealanders. It operates on the concept of a ‘level playing field’ where everyone is socially in the same place, and ‘success’ is determined only by individual action. This model is inaccurate, ignores issues of equity and comes from a place of privilege.

The Bill is a form of systemic racism. It has been enabled by those the system privileges (colonialism and all its trappings) and seeks to entrench this privilege further.

The Bill removes Treaty-based legislative protections on public and iwi assets, allowing for private sale and profit.

The Bill is the result of a party who won only 8% of the vote in the last general election yet it attacks our constitutional foundations and seriously effects everyone. The leader of ACT has said it was not a ‘bottom line’ in coalition negotiations. And the Prime Minister himself has called the Bill ‘devisive’. It is difficult to fathom how and why he allowed this Bill to proceed, and raises questions about leadership and transparency.

We know the Bill will not pass its second reading. The submissions process is therefore a highly questionable use of taxpayer money and public service resource (particularly given how stretched the public service now is due to the government’s savings requirements).

In conclusion; at a personal level the Biscuits value the Treaty principles. They provide a motivating, necessary and accessible framework within which to consider how our band activities reflect and respect te Tiriti o Waitangi.

At a broader level we urge the Government to honour the Treaty, commit to reconciliation, acknowledge and respect tino rangatiratanga. We also expect National and NZ First to keep their promises to stop the Treaty Principles Bill at second reading.