Everything you missed from day 11 of the Treaty principles bill hearings, when the Justice Committee heard 14 hours of submissions across two sessions.

Read our recaps of the previous hearings here.

It’s the penultimate edition of the Justice Committee’s hearings into the Treaty principles bill, and to avoid wasting time on getting through the last of 80 hours of oral submissions, simultaneous hearings were held in Room 3 and via Zoom (with the Act Party yet again missing the latter) today (Thursday). It was the last hearing day for Room 3, with tomorrow’s final hearing taking place entirely over Zoom.

“We are living in a clown world,” lawyer and Hobson’s Pledge trustee Thomas Newman told the committee in Room 3. Submitting in support of the bill, Newman criticised the insertion of the Treaty into what he deemed to be unnecessary sectors such as health, and questioned why the likes of pharmacists should consider their understanding of the Treaty on the same level as their understanding of medicine.

When it came to questions, the Greens’ Kahurangi Carter told Newman, “I see it is hard for you to honour the founding document of our country, and I just want you to know, if you need a hug…” Her offer earned a laugh and a “I wouldn’t say no” from Newman, but a scolding from Meager showed he was less impressed.

Alternatively, academic Leonie Pihama saw the bill as hinged on a “colonial myth” of equality in Aotearoa. Submitting against, she told the committee the idea of equality had been built on “the oppressive invasion and occupation of Māori land, the theft of our land, the denial of our sovereignty, the imposition of colonising systems, [which] ensured there would never be equality”.

“You cannot steal all the resources of a people and then claim we’re equal,” Pihama said.

Individual submitter Jack Slater (Ngāpuhi) also opposed, and told the committee his disabled community were “set to lose whatever faith they have left in society” if the bill passed. He said the bill’s focus on ensuring New Zealanders received equal rights undermined how long the community had – and continued to – fight to be seen as equal.

Rangimahora Reddy, CEO of Rauawaawa Kaumātua Charitable Trust, opposed the bill as she feared it would remove key protections for elderly Māori if enacted. She said that as Aotearoa becomes a “super-aged society”, pressures on housing and healthcare (especially chronic illness) will become more evident, and kaumātua will need Māori-led services to meet their specific needs. “Our kaumātua thrive when they lead, and this bill takes [away] that ability,” Reddy said.

Also submitting against, educator Mahina-a-Rangi Huata-Harawira told the committee that at home in the Hawke’s Bay, the birthplace of Aotearoa’s first Mongrel Mob chapter, her kura kaupapa see many tamariki whose lives had been impacted by gangs. She said she had seen one pathway to recovery that had consistently worked for these tamariki: reconnection to te ao Māori. “We are pushing, pushing for these children to connect, to be a part of, and to be consumed by their own mauri to help heal themselves,” she said. “Te ao Māori is changing their lives … or, shall I say, rehabilitating.”

Individual submitter John Robinson, an author belonging to the controversial Tross Publishing group (“Television New Zealand … called [me] racist”), supported the bill, for fear there was an “apartheid” happening in Aotearoa and that we must “speak out clearly for equality and racial division”. The next submitter, Paula-Maree McKenzie, spoke directly to Robinson’s submission in hers against the bill.

“Our people have been continually represented as bottom feeders, gravy-train elites, violent gangsters and criminals … Apartheid supporters, primitive descendants of cannibals,” she said. “This bill is just another road to more harassment and aggression we are currently getting.”

Rueben Taipari, submitting against on behalf of Nga hapū o Ahipara ki Te Rarawa, beamed into Room 3 from Lake Rotokākahi, and told the committee that confrontation with police on the grounds had shown they were “kūare” about honouring the Treaty. During questions, Taipari shared a robust conversation with Act’s Simon Court – asked whether Māori had “different rights”, Taipari told him the tikanga Māori approach to equality is to make sure everyone is uplifted.

“I wish you well on your journey to understand te Tiriti o Waitangi,” he told Court. “We’ve got the potential for a great future together.”

Lily Hall Butcher submitted against the bill, with evidence that the level of air pollution on her marae in Mount Maunganui, which she said had killed an estimated 130 people in the last 10 years, had shown a breadth of ignorance to the rights guaranteed to her tīpuna under the Treaty. The air quality was so bad that kaumātua were often forced indoors with the windows closed, she said, and cultural practices such as speaking on the paepae are halted on days when the air pollution is too heavy, and preparing hāngī is now unsafe with heavy metals in the soil.

Hall Butcher said the heavy industry causing the air pollution had been allowed to “act with impunity” on her tūrangawaewae due to the lack of status given to te Tiriti. Children were still being poisoned today, she said, because her tīpuna were ignored when the area was first marked for development by noxious industries in the 1940s.

“Undermining the exercise of Māori rights by changing the meaning of the Treaty principles will have devastating consequences for us all,” she said.

Justice subcommittee B

Vanessa Cole of Public Housing Futures said the history of state housing in New Zealand was inextricably linked to the history of colonisation. “We know that the lands on which some of our state housing was built and the resources that construct them were the result of land displacement and confiscation.” She said te Tiriti offered a way forward to more equitable housing.  

George Riley, the chief executive of Te Runanga o Te Rarawa, referenced a whakataukī that translates as “clay will not stick to iron, when the sun shines upon it, it will fall away”. He described te Tiriti and He Whakaputanga as iron that would remain long after this bill. 

John Huria of the New Zealand Council for Educational Research said the bill was based on a serious misreading, and specifically cited the line in the third article of te Tiriti, “Ngā tangata maori katoa o Nu Tirani”, which the bill interprets as applying to all New Zealanders. “Those who are historically literate know this phrase refers to Māori.” He said the Treaty must be read as a whole because each article balances the other. “We say read the whole lot, all the words. It’s only three paragraphs long.” 

Ngāti Tarāwhai Iwi Trust chairperson Cyrus Hingston said he was speaking from a position of demonisation. “It is the demonisation of Māori by the supporters and sponsors of this bill, a concentrated, coordinated attack against Māori in parliament, mainstream news and social media.” 

Spencer Webster, representing Ngā Pōtiki ā Tamapahore Trust, spoke about his tribal maunga which was taken under the Public Works Act to be turned into a quarry, and a historic pā site was completely obliterated as a result of the quarrying. This showed why it was so important for hapū to have input into local government decisions, he said. 

Jonathan Harman zoomed in on his phone from the garden section of a Mitre 10. Submitting in support of the bill, he began by asking if anyone on the committee did also. “There’s no Act Party member on this committee,” Labour’s Duncan Webb said. “They don’t bother, mate,” the Greens’ Steve Abel added. 

Matthew Tukaki of the National Māori Authority criticised the “very, very sad” submission by Ruth Richardson on Wednesday. She had “horrible words to say about the people she shares the land with”, he said. 

Matt Turner zoomed in from his car and spoke in favour of the bill. He said te Tiriti was a document that New Zealand should be rightfully proud of, but “it shouldn’t usurp all the other rights that New Zealanders hold true”. He finished well before his time limit, but none of the MPs wanted to ask him a question 

Rinad Tamimi, who was born in Hebron on the West Bank, spoke on behalf of Palestinian Youth Aotearoa. “We understand that Indigenous people from all walks of life have a mutual struggle. It is our very existence that defies those who try to erase us,” she said. “We are here today to stand up for our Māori whānau against similar tactics to deny their existence as indigenous people.”

Afghanistan-born Nadir Shafad represented The Refugee Alliance. He moved to New Zealand three years ago after the fall of Kabul. He said te Tiriti was a welcoming document for refugees like himself and said the bill was “an erosion of trust to communities, especially refugee communities”.

“In Afghanistan, we had a constitution which was the best in the region. It recognised the diversity of Afghanistan, the individual and civil rights and the separation of powers. But our politicians could not uphold the provisions of that constitution. Gradually they lost the trust of the people and when the time came people did not support the government and it collapsed,” he said. “We understand how important social cohesion is for a country, we cannot take that for granted.”

Bridget Bell spoke for Te Hiiri Marae trustees and said it was “delusional” to think that her tīpuna would have ceded sovereignty. “The promoters of the bill have exploited ignorance, deceitfully manipulated the public, and leveraged the lack of education,” she said. “This has emboldened some of the most hateful and hostile attacks on te iwi Māori.”  

Kawerau district mayor Faylene Tunui said the bill was “unhelpful and unconstructive” to the work her council was doing to rebuild trust with local iwi. 

Former Hutt City councillor Chris Milne, submitting in support of the bill, said he had one grandchild with Māori ancestry and another on the way with none. “How do I explain to them that all grandchildren are not born equal?” he said. “I look forward to the day where my family is not split between those who are Treaty partners and those who are not.” 

Katherine Nordmeyer, a lawyer with Māori and Pākehā ancestry, admitted that she grew up thinking that “Māori were going to take all of our beaches and that learning more about my whakapapa and te reo Māori was a waste of time”. She said she wanted “to be able to explain to my children and grandchildren that I did what I could to oppose this bill and its racist foundations”.

High-profile lawyer Mai Chen made similar points to other legal experts, saying that the bill had conflicting views on how te Tiriti should be applied and would lead to conflict and uncertainty.  “It puts the courts on a collision course with parliament,” she said.  

Rangitiaria Tibble spoke to the committee wearing her kapa haka kākahu, having just performed on stage at Te Matatini with her ensemble Te Kapa Haka o Ngāti Whakaue. She referenced the 1880 Rotorua Township Agreement. “Our ancestors went into this in good faith and we continue to try to honour that today.” Te Kapa Haka o Ngāti Whakaue have performed internationally and had received “nothing but positive and enriching feedback”, but she worried that the bill would impact how they were perceived overseas.