An undeniable show of opposition to the coalition painted the streets of Wellington red, white and black, writes Stewart Sowman-Lund for The Bulletin.
To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here.
‘A Māori nation has been born’
They came in their thousands. Then a few more thousand more. And a couple of extra thousand to boot. The conservative estimate, provided by police yesterday evening, was that 42,000 people marched to parliament yesterday as part of the nationwide Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti. The Spinoff’s Joel MacManus, who was among the crowd, reported that the hīkoi was likely New Zealand’s largest ever protest. “But even if we could work out the exact number, it’s hard to express what that means on the ground. A crowd of 50,000 at Eden Park is incomparable to a crowd of the same size marching towards parliament.”
Whatever the final tally, it’s undeniable that the message was heard loud and clear (indeed, around the world). Stuff’s Glenn McConnell has written an illustrative report on how the day played out, writing that by the time the protest arrived at parliament it trailed back 1.8km to Te Aro park, with some attendees even riding horses at the tail end. Joel Maxwell, also for Stuff, embedded himself in the march and spoke to some of the tens of thousands that attended.
Ostensibly directed at the controversial Treaty Principles Bill, the hīkoi was ultimately about something far greater and less instantly definable. Mana whenua leader Helmut Modlik, reported Newsroom, told the assembled crowd that yesterday marked the “beginning of the end of unchecked rule over Māori by kawanatanga [government].” The hīkoi organiser, Eru Kapi-Kingi, simply said: “Today, a Māori nation has been born.”
Facing the hīkoi
MPs from across the spectrum either spoke to the crowd or were seen listening, reported Newsroom’s Laura Walters. Some, like Chris Hipkins, spent a considerable amount of time facing the hīkoi. Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke, who has become a global symbol in the wake of her performance in parliament last week, addressed the crowd directly. “This march is about us, walking, marching, side by side, generation by generation. This bill divides us as a country; the Treaty unites us, all ages, all races,” the MP said, reported Te Ao Māori News.
Others, like Act leader David Seymour, the man behind the Treaty Principles Bill, made only brief appearances. He led his entire caucus out onto the forecourt of parliament, using the opportunity to film a video for his social media.
Speaking to RNZ’s Checkpoint, Seymour said he did not consider the hīkoi to be”representative” of all New Zealand. When questioned over whether he considered the protesters to be “misinformed”, Seymour denied this but added that some had been given “bad information” on his proposed law. “For example, I saw someone this morning saying that they didn’t want to have the Treaty changed. Well, my bill doesn’t do that.” (What it does do, in case you are still wondering, is strictly define the principles as included in legislation – Māori legal scholar Carwyn Jones recently argued for The Spinoff that the principles are already clearly known and defined).
Those who did face the crowd were greeted by a sea of colourful flags and placards. The Spinoff’s Lyric Waiwiri-Smith has helpfully compiled some of the best.
Where was Luxon?
One person who did not front to the protesters was prime minister Christopher Luxon. While it is Seymour’s bill, many see Luxon’s decision to permit it to be introduced as part of a coalition agreement to be a sign of culpability. More broadly, as the Herald’s Audrey Young argued recently (paywalled), the Luxon-led government agreed to a raft of Māori-related policies “on a scale not seen in any previous coalition agreements”. In short, Act policy or not, the buck stops with the PM. So where was he yesterday? Inside the Beehive, mere metres away from the crowd. “I was open to [meeting hīkoi organisers],” Luxon told reporters. “But the reality frankly is that many of them are Te Pāti Māori affiliated.”
In analysis for ThreeNews, Jenna Lynch said that the PM won’t be able to hide away for the rest of the debate over the Treaty Principles Bill. “This will still be going on at the start of the year and the political calendar is traditionally kicked off with a number of Māori events. That is a problem for Christopher Luxon not to have it voted down by then, not to have it neutered.”
Luxon has repeatedly reiterated the bill will not make it past first reading. It’s practically impossible to see him breaking his word now. As The Spinoff’s Toby Manhire analyses this morning, his language has evolved dramatically since talk of a bill or treaty referendum was first floated.
What now?
Writing for The Post, Luke Malpass argued that the scale of the protest means it cannot simply be ignored by those inside the Beehive. It will likely benefit both Te Pāti Māori and Act, on the conflicting side of the debate, in the short term, but Malpass rightly questioned what it will mean on a bigger scale. “It is very difficult to tell just where the politics of it all will land once the bill is voted down. Will it hang round National’s neck or will it simply fade into the background 18 months out from an election?” NZ First minister Shane Jones, reported Politik’s Richard Harman (paywalled), believed yesterday’s demonstration went well beyond opposition to a single piece of legislation but instead tapped into “a sense of anxiety within Māoridom that their rights, their identity, are being imperilled”. As Harman wrote, many of the crowd were young and several of those who addressed the crowd noted this. Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi called on young people to enrol on the Māori roll.
Yesterday also coincided with the start of public submissions on the bill, with the justice select committee laying out criteria for those planning to share their thoughts. As Stuff reported, that includes a no swearing rule. Meanwhile, the aftermath of the haka that was felt around the world could see parliamentary rules changed. The Herald’s Thomas Coughlan has written an interesting opinion piece looking at the balance between breaking the rules and the benefits that can be gained from it.