ACT Party Leader David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill Raises Concerns Over Tino Rangatiratanga

In a recent interview on TVNZ’s Q+A show, ACT Party leader David Seymour acknowledged that Ngāi Tahu have rangatiratiranga over most of the South Island. This acknowledgement has sparked concerns among legal experts, who argue that Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill is unworkable.

Unworkable Treaty Principles Bill

Dr. Carwyn Jones, a senior lecturer in law at Victoria University of Wellington, said Seymour’s acknowledgment raises “a whole lot of questions.” According to Jones, the principles proposed in the Bill do not reflect Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the founding document of New Zealand’s relationship with its indigenous people.

“Historically, Treaty claims’ settlements resolve historical claims,” said KC Karen Feint. “It is wrong in principle to conceive of the Treaty partnership as being frozen at a moment in time or only backwards looking.” The Article Two guarantee of tino rangatiratanga applies to all iwi and hapū, not just some.

Expert Criticism of Seymour’s Statement

When pressed for confirmation on his previous statement that Ngai Tahu have tino rangatiratanga over 90 percent of the South Island, Seymour responded that this was a settlement that had been signed up to by previous governments. However, Jones and Feint argue that this interpretation is inconsistent with equal rights and liberal democracy.

“He said that was exactly what his Treaty Principles Bill did,” Seymour stated in a statement to RNZ. “The problem these legal experts have is that their interpretation…is inconsistent with equal rights and liberal democracy.” However, Feint counters that the Bill’s principles do not align with the guarantees of Te Tiriti.

Implications for Liberal Democracy

Seymour acknowledged that the implications of his finding would depend on different case law and what question was being asked at a particular time. However, Jones notes that Seymour’s understanding of tino rangatiratanga is inconsistent with liberal democracy and equality before the law.

“The principles proposed in the Bill do not actually reflect Te Tiriti,” said Feint. “David Seymour knows that they don’t reflect Te Tiriti.” This suggests that Seymour may be attempting to change the meaning of Te Tiriti, which raises concerns over the integrity of his Bill.

Conclusion

As the debate over the Treaty Principles Bill continues, it is clear that David Seymour’s interpretation of tino rangatiratanga has sparked intense concern among legal experts. The implications for liberal democracy and equality before the law are significant, and it remains to be seen how the bill will ultimately affect the lives of New Zealanders.