Fox MaramaMARAMA FOX (Co-Leader—Māori Party): Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. I am a little bit bemused. In fact I wonder at this House in 2016—how we can continue to bathe in the lack of understanding and ignorance that engulfs our country in respect of the Treaty. For all of these people to stand up and say: It is not necessary; it's in the law. It's not necessary; we don't understand what the principles are." Educate yourself. We have been told by the Hon Chris Finlayson that he has clearly articulated it for the benefit for all New Zealand and we are eternally grateful!Mr Pita Paraone there is no substance to your argument in not supporting this bill tonight. Your argument is in fact more critical and political than anything of any substance.Mr Nuk Korako stood up and said: "I'm committed. I'm committed to carrying out my duties in accordance with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi." So then let us take an oath to say so. Despite the fact that it is enshrined in the law until 1975—as pointed out by my colleague Mr Rurawhe—there was great debate about whether or not we should even recognise the Treaty. It was declared a nullity in the law. So now we have it and the true expression of rangatiratanga for the people who are partnered to the Treaty should be allowing them to take an oath to do so. But people say it would confuse us. Well tell me what is not confusing about swearing an oath on the Bible or swearing an oath to God? Tell me how many Christian religions there are who argue about the face of God and what that might look like? Yet how do we uphold that? We stand up here and swear an oath of allegiance—doing so—and that is not confusing? We do not hold somebody to a standard different to someone who does not swear an oath to God. We do not stand up here and say: "But the Queen is higher than God therefore you can admit God but not the Queen." And we do not find that confusing? The ignorance that this House continues to be bathed in just defies belief.This country is held up as a beacon to the rest of the indigenous peoples of the world as a way forward because it is founded on a treaty. Today I gave an interview on Sky TV in Australia as they debated whether or not the Aboriginal people in Australia should have a treaty. They go: "Look at you New Zealand you have one—aren't you great? Haven't you come so far." Well obviously not far enough—not far enough. I am disappointed by Nuk. In fact I think that he must have choked on his words—Mr Korako—as he struggled to say them today.My colleague Jo Hayes whom I sit next to talked about the confusion of those who might and those who will not and yet confusions over the interpretations of the Bible exist. Do you know that the Judicature Modernisation Bill is about to come up? In the modernisation of that bill they wanted to take out the Treaty clause. Because we as a party of independent Māori voices uphold the principles of the Treaty we went to the Minister and implored her to retain that clause to ensure that anything relating to this in that bill does relate to the Treaty. She has put the clause back in. Imagine if we were not here to do that—imagine if we just left it because "it's in the law; we don't need it."We do need it. We need to show that we are progressive. We need to show that we are committed. I challenge every member of this House who has sworn to vote for this bill—the next time when they come to swear an oath of allegiance—to stand up and do so to the Treaty whether or not we are thrown out for it. It is abhorrent to me that we cannot do this simple thing. I am disappointed in this House and its continual bathing in ignorance."