1. Question No. 1—Prime MinisterDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori) to the Acting Prime MinisterORAL QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Prime Minister1. DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori) to the Acting Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government's statements and actions?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Acting Prime Minister): Yes in the context in which those statements were made.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Will he commit to abandoning New Zealand First's ongoing policy to repeal or remove references to the Treaty from legislation just as he has committed to voting against the ACT Party's Treaty principles bill which is essentially the same thing?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: My response to that is they are not essentially the same thing. We rely upon the expertise of a famous man called Ngata and before him a man who became the Deputy Prime Minister for many months called Carroll very famous for being the first Māori to win a general seat as well so much he was admired in this country. The second matter—Hon Willie Jackson: Ugh!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well you can yawn Willie because you don't understand but your mother used to. She was much brighter. She was much more intelligent. But on the second matter we have not resiled from the Treaty of Waitangi where it applies but we're not going to have as we've seen since 1987 when five judges couldn't work out what the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi were that being decided by woke media or dare I say it woke academia and by younger Māori who don't know what happened yesterday at all.SPEAKER: This is a pretty serious matter. So some of the general groaning and other such goings-on from the other side of the House are not particularly edifying for public consumption. Can we have Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Kia ora. Does he agree with the statement made by his deputy principal—sorry Deputy Prime Minister—on 20 August 2024 that There are no principles of the Treaty of Waitangi—it's a three clause document."?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The reality is that those who have apprised themselves of the thesis upon which that is based 102 years ago understand precisely that matter—as do leading jurists like Judd who is very very clear on that matter—and will prevail in the end because it's based on the facts not fiction.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does he believe that Te Tiriti o Waitangi is made up of principles or articles that assert Māori rights?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Most definitely the Treaty of Waitangi is based on articles which set out Māori rights to be preserved and looked after and they're as clear as daylight as explained by the famous lawyer become politician joined by famous doctors becoming politician Pōmare and Buck when he set those articles out and explained them with precision followed by Ngāti Porou and all Māori around this country including Ngāpuhi who are a very difficult group of people to try and get alongside any great academic debate. But even Ngāpuhi the biggest iwi in the country believe that as well only to have it redefined by lesser minds in this Parliament.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does he then accept that the current Treaty principles are a watering-down of the rights guaranteed to Māori in the articles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi to allow Crown to avoid honouring the Tiriti o Waitangi itself?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Again the member in her question discloses her innocence so to speak or unlearnedness on this matter. How can there be a set of principles when they were never defined in the articles and never defined by the expert Māori—at the time the Māori chiefs who they now gainsay and say "They didn't know what they were signing up to." That is not the truth of the matter. The reality is where the Treaty applies it'll be honoured. Where it does not—where it is a fiction made up of modern jurisprudential activism—it will not be honoured.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Does he agree with the international law principle that states "Where two documents conflict the indigenous-language text takes precedence."?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: That would sound like a brilliant argument until you realise that if you're talking conceptually about ideas and thoughts then how the language is framed is critical. Much that was being said back in 1840 where the English language was concerned was never in the Māori mind either there or in the Pasifika in terms of its comprehension or understanding. But it was explained at the time and what that member is actually saying is having it been explained to the chiefs they knew far less than she all these years later understands.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: On what grounds does he believe that Māori ceded sovereignty to the Crown?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: As the learned Apirana Ngata set out—Chlöe Swarbrick: Here we go!Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —it's in article 1—yeah there I go Chlöe because he knows something and you know nothing about this issue. Your audacity knows no bounds. Here's this person who ran for the mayoralty when she was a teenager virtually. Thinks she could run the Auckland city as a teenager. Now is laughing at Ngata. Well you're not laughing at him while we're here.Ricardo Menéndez March: Point of order—point of order.SPEAKER: Point of order—Ricardo Menéndez March: Mr Speaker—SPEAKER: When you're called. Ricardo Menéndez March.Ricardo Menéndez March: Thank you. We've just heard you commenting on the groans from the Opposition in relationship to the answers from the Acting Prime Minister and how they were not edifying of this place. I would ask you to reflect as to whether the style of answers that the Acting Prime Minister is giving are edifying whatsoever of the conduct that we should expect here in Parliament.SPEAKER: I will reflect on that. But before I do so I'd certainly offer an observation that comments such as the Acting Prime Minister just made come as a result of interjections from the floor. That's always been something that's been allowed in Parliament and it won't be changing now.Chlöe Swarbrick: Sorry. Point of order Mr Speaker. I offered the comment "Here we go!" I don't think that quite so much opens the door to the personal reflections and attacks from the Deputy Prime Minister just then.SPEAKER: I think you'd be pretty thin-skinned to say that was a personal attack. The second point I'd say is—[Interruption] That is a view that I've expressed in here. Remember that this is a dynamic environment. The second thing is that the statement "Here we go!"—it depends on the inflection in the voice and it could almost mean "I don't believe you." So I'm not going to take this any further.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: Here we go. [Interruption]SPEAKER: Well I'll tell you what Ms Ngarewa-Packer. Just wait for a few minutes while the House draws a bit of breath and gets itself ready to listen to your question. When you're ready.Debbie Ngarewa-Packer: And here we go. If he cannot determine on what grounds Māori ceded sovereignty to the Crown what gives the Crown the right to overrule the courts to entrench the confiscation of 95 percent of our coastlines as admitted by his Minister of Justice?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: With the greatest respect that is a total misrepresentation of the facts. But I'd remind that member that some of us were around when a person called Whina Cooper was so moved by the protests that we were raising about land being taken off us—that's namely Ngāti Wai being taken off us by the Crown on the Whangārei County Council—that she said in 1975 at a meeting "I know what I'll do. I'm going to have a Māori land march." When it was over she said "We signed the Treaty so that we could become one people." I'm listening to her not that member.Darleen Tana: With all that he's experienced and shared with rangatira hapū and iwi leaders of late what does he make of the odds that Māori will relinquish any of their mana tuku iho let alone be coerced into accepting customary marine title of the order of 5 percent?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: I make of it that in 2004 and 2005 in consultation the person you're talking about is talking to you now with every coastal tribe in this country including Ngāi Tahu. They agreed with the foreshore and seabed legislation. Every coastal tribe did. That's what I make of it. Because back then they realised what a fair deal was.Darleen Tana: Does he think that perhaps Māori should feel thankful since 5 percent is a 250 percent increase on what they've been given to settle with anyway?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: That's a rather extraordinary statement from a member when you look at it. Māori have 50 percent of the fishing resource of this country. We've made enormous progress because back then people saw that we had to start at a lower level—it was about 20 percent at the start—but now it's 50 percent. I must thank my colleague on my left who headed the fishing industry called Shane Jones. Here we have got people who've done the mahi so to speak not all talk.Hon Shane Jones: Can he confirm that the proposal to restore the wording of the 2011 Takutai Moana legislation was actually the handiwork of the Māori Party kahurangi Tariana Turia and Dr Pita Sharples in agreement with the then Minister of Treaty settlements Christopher Finlayson?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Alas I have to confirm that."