Flavell Te Ururoa: Treaty of Waitangi (Principles) Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Treaty of Waitangi (Principles) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:629;Page:1428] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker tena tatou katoa. E ki ana te korero ma te Tiriti o Waitangi ano ana korero e kawe. There is a saying: “The Treaty of Waitangi conveys its own message but it may mean different things to different people.” 
We are pleased to see the House giving consideration for Te Tiriti o Waitangi to guide the nation as its founding document. This bill seeks to give greater clarity to the phrase “the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” which is included in more than 30 different statutes by specifying what those principles are. We welcome the new lease of life from our colleague Mr Hide to ensure that Te Tiriti o Waitangi is preserved and maintained as a taonga for nation building as well as ensuring power-sharing between tangata whenua and the Crown. To do that we must ensure that Te Tiriti o Waitangi is fairly represented in the constitutional and legislative framework and in the minds and actions of all peoples of Aotearoa. I commend Mr Hide for his courage in bringing this bill to the House and his commitment to ensuring that New Zealanders gain exposure to and acquisition of sound knowledge about Te Tiriti o Waitangi and our history. 
The Maori Party strongly supports the need to see Te Tiriti o Waitangi as a recognition of indigenous rights. It recognises that through Te Tiriti o Waitangi those rights would be further enhanced and guaranteed by the Crown. At its core the Treaty acknowledges Maori existence as the Minister of Foreign Affairs confirmed yesterday. He said that Maori have been here for over a thousand years prior to the formalising of a compact between the Crown and Maori. The Treaty is a blueprint to guide the nation; a blueprint on which we are pleased to see parties on all sides of this House place value. The Prime Minister described the Treaty as “providing the foundation of this nation” and her Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Mita Ririnui has said in this House that the possibility that “the Crown should simply walk away from its duties under the Treaty of Waitangi … [is] both deliberately ignorant and morally repugnant.” The National spokesperson on Treaty of Waitangi issues and Maori affairs Mr Gerry Brownlee has raised the prospect of changes to his party’s existing Maori policy. Maybe that is a softening of approach. So now we welcome our friend Mr Rodney Hide to this new environment of enlightenment—and thank him for his kai this evening. 
However sadly this bill does not do it. Amongst our people there has always been caution about the involvement of politicians in rewriting and redrafting the principles of the Treaty. They have seen this obsession with nailing down the principles as an opportunity for the Crown to reinterpret the Treaty to suit its own needs. We have seen a time line of change in the acknowledgment of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. It started with Te Tiriti o Waitangi which stated that the settlers could govern themselves. That was in response to the lawlessness of the settlers at the time. There was an absolute acknowledgment that Maori retained rangatiratanga—absolute authority over our resources. It is interesting to reflect that conservative population estimates tell us Maori numbered around 200000 at that time which was in stark contrast to the 2000 settlers. Now what do members think possessed those 200000 people to permit 2000 strangers to rule them? Does that not sound rather stupid? 
Finally article 3 referred to Maori having the same rights as British citizens and the ability to practice our own tikanga. Of course the nub of the issue is wrapped around which of the Treaty versions that one might abide by. I am sure that all members of this House are aware of the notion of contra proferentem where the Treaty in the indigenous language is the document that takes precedence when treaty versions are in conflict. But successive Governments have for political convenience referred only to the English version where Maori were said to have ceded sovereignty. That is a staggering view. 
Moving quickly through history I remind members that the Lange Government of the 1980s introduced a new animal called the “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi”. That confused the public even more. It was an attempt by politicians simply to appease Maori protest. And here we are again giving piecemeal debate to what is clearly a very important discussion. 
Although the Maori Party will vote against the bill we commend the member for bringing te Tiriti debate to the fore where it should be once again and we in the Maori Party will rise to the challenge of keeping this constitutional discourse on the agenda for sure.