Hide Rodney: Treaty of Waitangi (Principles) Bill — First Reading 
Hide Rodney: Treaty of Waitangi (Principles) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:629;Page:1421] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I move  
That the Treaty of Waitangi (Principles) Bill be now read a first time. 
 I expect everyone in the House to support this bill because what New Zealand has in its legislative structure is a glaring glaring hole that is causing strife uncertainty and chaos. It goes back to 1986 when the Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey Palmer inserted into the State-Owned Enterprises Act a section—section 9—that states: “Nothing in this Act shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.” It is one of those great phrases that lawyers use that sound great—that sound as though they mean a lot. 
Sir Geoffrey Palmer I think wanted to imply that. I am reliably informed that he told his Cabinet colleagues not to worry because the phrase was meaningless—that it could just sit there and mean nothing. Well of course it is very hard to pass a clause in a bill and then have judges say it means nothing. Lord Cooke of Thorndon got hold of this and it was like “make his day” because he was then in a position to decide what the principles of the Treaty were. There was no direction from Parliament no accountability to the people of New Zealand— 
Tariana Turia 
: Lucky for him. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Lucky for him. He was going to decide what all the principles of the Treaty were for all time. Well it was not for all time actually because the courts kept changing their minds as to what the principles might be— 
Christopher Finlayson 
: What did they do? 
RODNEY HIDE 
: In all sorts of ways— 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Give us a case. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Chris Finlayson is a bit lost on this. I could cite them. The first one of course was  
New Zealand Maori Council 
 v  
Attorney-General 
 [1987] in the Court of Appeal. It is in the  
New Zealand Law Reports 
 Volume 1 at page 641. I will send it to Mr Chris Finlayson who has not seen it. He can look at that and bring himself up to speed with this important bill. 
Then not to be outdone the Waitangi Tribunal too wanted to have a hand in what the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi might be. It started coming up with its own list—I ask members to bear in mind that no one votes the tribunal’s members in; they do not have any ability to make Acts of Parliament—and just invented them through the door Professor the Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey Palmer had opened. Then successive Governments both National and Labour have just inserted this happy little phrase into bill after bill. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Then why blame the judges? 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Well exactly. This is why we are here. Chris Finlayson makes a very good point. He asks: “Then why blame the judges?”. Actually I am not blaming them. That is why we are here in Parliament tonight. I know it is late for Mr Finlayson and that he would rather be tucked up with a good book. We are here in Parliament to put this matter right so that we do not blame the judges because it is Parliament’s mistake. Without knowing what it means Parliament put this phrase into 36 Acts of Parliament. It voted for it. I have to say that Mr Finlayson is in the happy circumstance—probably one of the few in this Parliament—of never having voted for one of those clauses. 
We then had the experience of the Rt Hon Winston Peters who not having a lot to do for days on end— 
Christopher Finlayson 
: Why bring him into this? 
RODNEY HIDE 
:—well I cannot resist—would stand up in this House day after day and ask Ministers of the Crown and the Prime Minister what on earth the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi were. If members think they have seen Ministers dodge questions thus far they have seen nothing compared with when Ministers get that question. They cannot tell us what the principles of the Treaty are so no one actually knows. Robin Cooke’s work was work in progress. The Waitangi Tribunal stuff is work in progress. It is the stuff that we will slowly evolve over time to some undefined purpose. In the meantime Maori do not know what their rights are— 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Yes we do. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: They say they do. They have to go to a court and convince Robin Cooke’s successor that they are right. No one knows what these principles of the Treaty mean. 
So here we are with the great ACT party. I am sure everyone will be supporting this bill because we are coming along—[ 
Interruption 
] Thanks Pita! Pita Paraone is saying that he will support the bill. I am very pleased because he knows it is very important. I will be proposing just for Pita Paraone that this bill go to the Finance and Expenditure Committee. Why? [ 
Interruption 
] They cannot even get a quorum—I would send it to the Maori Affairs Committee if its members could be bothered to turn up but I cannot trust them to turn up on any given day. We know that members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee all turn up and it is better off there because there are more members on that committee. At the Finance and Expenditure Committee every party in this great Parliament is represented bar Jim Anderton. Those are two pluses. Every party is represented on that committee bar Jim Anderton so the Finance and Expenditure Committee has to be the committee that considers this most important bill. 
I have had a crack at defining what I think the principles are and I am not saying that I have understood them perfectly. We could have the combined wisdom of Pita Paraone the Labour Party the Maori Party the National Party and Mr Chris Finlayson who could read till late then come down and help. But I want to tell members that I did an odd thing: I actually read the Treaty. I was quite surprised because in English it is as straightforward as anything. I cannot understand why there is all this confusion because I read the Treaty— 
Hon Member 
: That’s the problem. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Well it is a problem; it is so clear. I admit it was the English version. But again we are in Parliament. The select committee can get the Maori version and add in those principles then we will actually know for once what the principles are and Parliament can pass the bill. 
I want to know who in Parliament is against the first principle. It is actually just taken off the first article. The principle of the first article is that there is just one New Zealand—that sort of seems a bit obvious—one sovereign nation and the Crown exercises sovereignty on behalf of Maori and non-Maori alike. I say that people who vote against this bill are voting against having one sovereign nation in this great country. I hear the Maori Party say: “Yes”. Its members are against one sovereign nation so we know where they sit. Where do Labour members sit? Are they in favour of dual sovereignty? 
Brian Connell 
: Over on this side. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Brian Connell says that they sit over there with him. That may be so but it is he who has moved from his seat not Labour members. Brian Connell might want to sit over there with the Labour members but tell him that that is not good for his career. Mind you I have given up trying to help Mr Connell with his career. I have helped him a fair bit so far. [ 
Interruption 
] We might be a small caucus but we are safe. 
Then we come to the second principle. The principle of the second article is that the Crown has a duty to uphold citizens’ property rights and that no property may be taken by the State without good cause and full market consideration. That is what the foreshore and seabed legislation was all about. Of course that was a breach of the Treaty so there has to be a breach of the Treaty principles. That is why I have No. 2. I come to the third principle and I would like to know who in this House will vote against this. I will be counting and reporting. The principle of article 3 is that everyone in New Zealand who is a citizen has the same rights and obligations as every other citizen. Is Mr Paraone against that? 
Pita Paraone 
: I’m waiting. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: He cannot make up his mind as to whether he is in favour of every citizen having the same rights—the right to a fair trial to free speech to vote and to be treated equally before the law. 
This is a very very important bill. It sets the scene for what sort of a country we are. Are we to be a country that has one sovereign? Are we to be a country where property rights are held? Are we to be a country where every citizen is equal before the law? That is what this bill is about. I commend it to the House and look forward to its getting good support right across the House including from Mr Paraone.