Isaac Freeman

Tagged “media”

  1. My submission on the Treaty Principles Bill

    I've submitted the folloiwing to the New Zealand Parliament on the Treaty Principles Bill.

    I/We wish to make the following comments #

    E rere taku manu ki te tihi o Kahukura. Rere iho taku manu mā te awa o Ōpawaho. Tau ana taky manu ki te whenua o Ōtautahi. Ko Kai Tahu te mana whenua, te iwi whakaruruhau. E noho ana au i te rohe o Te Hapū o Ngāti Wheke.

    I am a Pākehā New Zealander. I do not whakapapa Māori, but throughout my life I have been enriched and informed by Te Ao Māori, and I have always understood that relationship to be at the core of this country's culture. Like many others, I wish to express my opposition to a Bill that seeks to legally impose an interpretation of Te Tiriti o Waitangi that is ahistorical, unjust, and alien to my understanding of the values of this country.

    The proposed bill aims to define in law three new principles.

    The first proposed principle asserts that the the Government of New Zealand has full power to govern. This directly contradicts Article Two of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which guarantees Māori continued tino rangatiratanga. The idea that the Māori signatories of Te Tiriti, five years after many had signed a declaration of independence in He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni, could have intended to cede all sovereignty to the Crown strains credulity. It has been tested repeatedly without success. The Waitangi Tribunal provided a definitive interpretation of the historical evidence in 2014, which affirmed that "rangatira did not cede their sovereignty in February 1840". The bill aims to override this considered legal determination by imparting the force of law to an unjustified and implausible interpretation.

    The second proposed principle aims to nullify Te Tiriti o Waitangi by asserting that it has no application except where it has been replaced by legislation, settlements, or other agreements with the Crown. It uses the past tense "had" implying that Māori no longer have the rights they had when they signed Te Tiriti. It is not explained how these rights supposedly evaporated.

    The third proposed principle seeks to assert that everyone is equal under the law. This is a classic rhetorical flourish, appealing to high-minded principles to distract from context and history. The contract between Māori and the Crown embodied in Te Tiriti o Waitangi was repeatedly and systematically breached by the Crown at many points in New Zealand's history. In the context of the bill's denial of tino rangatiratanga and any continuing rights of Māori to retain rights that are specifically guaranteed in Te Tiriti, it is hard to interpret the third principle as anything other than an attempt to erase Māori as a meaningful party to Te Tiriti. We are to ignore that our modern nation's founding document was a contract between two parties.

    There is a long history of trying to define principles derived from Te Tiriti. Some of these have been made with good intentions, others have been attempts to disregard the meaning and intent of the text and replace it with move conveniently vague ideas. It is better to understand Te Tiriti directly for what it is: a binding contract between the Crown and Māori, providing for continued independent sovereignty of Māori within the British imperial system. That is how it was understood at the time of signing, and it remains the most straightforward and pragmatic way to understand it today.

    This bill aims to replace Te Tiriti with arbitrary principles that do not derive from the text.

    Further, the proposed principles contradict Te Tiriti.

    Further, they have been proposed without any consultation with Māori.

    This is clearly not a good-faith attempt to interpret Te Tiriti. It is an attempt to nullify it.

    I believe the underlying reason for this attack on the meaning and relevance of Te Tiriti o Waitangi is corruption. Continuing Māori sovereignty according to Te Tiriti requires that iwi and hapū be involved continuously in the management of New Zealand resources. This prevents the enclosure and control of resources by private companies, and I believe that the financial interests of those companies are of more concern to the current government than the sovereignty of any New Zealanders, Māori, Pākehā, or other tauiwi. This belief has been bolstered by the lack of any significant consultation with Māori prior to introducing the bill.

    I/We wish to make the following recommendations #

    I recommend that the bill be withdrawn.

    I further recommend that interpretation Te Tiriti's application to legislation remain the domain of the Courts, as it would be for any other treaty. There is a considerable body of well-tested legal precedent, and it is considerably better informed by relevant expertise.

  2. Who's the main character?

    When a progressive political party launches a policy, it's worth paying attention to who gets centred as the main character in news articles.

    You would think that this would be straightforward. If the Green Party has launched a housing policy, you'd write an article saying ‘Greens launch housing policy’. Describing the policy would be the main point, then you might get some context from independent experts in housing to help people decide what they think of it.

    What you more often see is ‘Landlords attack logic of Green housing policy’. Before the reader knows what the policy is, they're told that there was a negative response and invited to dismiss it as unworkable. Somehow it's more important to tell you the self-interested opinion of a landlord than it is to give you accurate information about the policy itself. You’ll see this pattern all the time, and it reflects poorly on the news organisations that use it.

    It's not that the opinions of people affected by a policy are irrelevant. They could be included further down the article, or be spun out into a whole separate article. But if they're presented as the most important thing to know, that’s an attempt to discourage you from making up your own mind.

See all tags.