Seymour trumps Luxon with Treaty card

And trouble brews ahead of Ratana

The ACT Party’s Treaty Principles Bill hasn’t even been introduced yet and it’s already making headlines. The National–ACT coalition agreement only commits National to seeing the bill through to the select committee stage. And National MPs seem minded not to let it go further, on the grounds that it’s a ‘divisive’ proposal.

National’s deputy leader Nicola Willis agreed that the Treaty has been likened to a partnership between Māori and the Crown. She added: ‘The question then becomes well, what does partnership mean? And there’s been a lot of debate about that through the courts, through Parliament, by different people with different views on that.’

So, why not continue that debate in parliament and codify the nature of the partnership in statute?

The concept of the Treaty as a partnership was initially a judicial interpretation, back in 1986, but it’s been widely adopted – and more broadly interpreted – since then. ACT’s David Seymour claims that ‘partnership’ is a misinterpretation of the Treaty, however. He’d prefer to see ‘all New Zealanders’ under the same rule of law.

The select committee will presumably address this disagreement, and we can anticipate some unpleasant scenes. Te Pāti Māori’s co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer described the National-led government as ‘typical white supremacists’ who think they can ‘design Te Tiriti better for us’.

If (or when) National block the Treaty principles bill from going to a second reading, however, they’ll lose supporters to ACT. People on the right will criticise National for dropping a hot potato. ACT will argue, until the next election comes, that they were the ones who were willing to take a stand.

As the prime minister who signed the coalition agreement that launched this divisive debate, Luxon will get blamed by both the right and the left. And it’s an own goal.

Lots of people on social media, however, are evidently sure that they already know what the principles of the Treaty are. They say it’s all in te Tiriti, or it’s been sorted out in the courts, or it’s all in the heads of ‘experts’. If you don’t already get it, then apparently you need to be ‘educated’.

Given the vehement resistance to codifying ‘principles of the Treaty’ from the parties in opposition, along with National’s reluctance, the country as a whole will lose an opportunity to get statutory clarity. Constitutional uncertainty will continue, and the heated debate will carry on.

One option that the select committee could consider is to pass a Treaty principles bill anyway, but dispense with the ‘divisive’ referendum. That too could cause outrage, and the prime minister ruled that out.

Eventually the select committee should produce a report. But political leaders across the House look unlikely to negotiate – even in broad terms – any wording that would settle a matter that’s divided the country for so long.

There are, at least, some points that all parties seem to agree on: the Treaty is a founding document in the country’s constitutional history; it forms a basis for compensation for past injustices. Beginning with those points of consensus, the political parties could devise a general framework of ‘principles’ that would work for a majority of Māori and of non-Māori – and even be passed into law.

I believe it can be done, and that we’re underestimating ourselves if we insist it’s impossible. But, given the worsening polarisation, it’s very unlikely to happen for the time being. Instead, expect more trouble.