ACT leader David Seymour says the earlier-than-expected introduction of the Treaty Principles Bill is simply routine and that the intense response is “much ado about nothing.” Initially, the bill’s introduction was anticipated for November 18 but was rescheduled for Thursday, December 7, sparking public and political attention.
Seymour, the Minister responsible for the bill, clarified that the timing shift is not unusual. “This happens all the time as we go through policy decisions, Cabinet processes, and scheduling in the House,” he said. “Introduction dates for bills often change for various reasons.” According to Seymour, the Waitangi Tribunal had requested a date for the bill’s introduction, which the government provided, though that date was later adjusted. He dismissed the notion that the introduction had been “brought forward,” characterizing the reaction as an exaggerated response to a normal procedural shift.
The Waitangi Tribunal has expressed serious concern, with its interim report describing the bill as potentially the most significant breach of Te Tiriti in modern New Zealand history. This concern has spurred opposition, including a hīkoi (march) planned to travel from both the northern and southern ends of the country to Parliament in Wellington to protest the bill. Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi condemned the timing of the bill’s introduction as “undermining, deceitful, and vindictive,” rallying supporters against what he views as a disregard for proper process and respect.
However, Seymour rejected any suggestion that the timing was manipulated to avoid coinciding with the hīkoi’s arrival in Wellington. “Changes in bill timing are routine. People generally wouldn’t pay much attention to them, but now it’s being framed as a significant issue. It’s not the ‘smoking gun’ some political opponents want it to be,” Seymour commented, suggesting that the procedural shift has been exaggerated by critics.
On receiving the Waitangi Tribunal’s interim report just the previous night, Seymour refrained from detailed comment but criticized the Tribunal for what he described as a breach of government trust. “It’s unfortunate that the Waitangi Tribunal has once again broken the government’s trust. They requested information, like the introduction date, but it was made public hours after they received it. Mutual respect is important,” he said.
In response, the Waitangi Tribunal noted it cannot produce reports on legislation once it has been introduced in Parliament. With a limited timeframe for its assessment, the Tribunal had to notify the lawyers involved of the updated introduction date as soon as it learned of it. The Tribunal was informed by the government through an official memo, which it then forwarded to the lawyers working on the case.
The government’s memo explained that the Cabinet had reviewed the bill earlier than initially planned. The Cabinet Business Committee considered the bill on October 29, with formal Cabinet confirmation on November 4. According to the memo, “Crown counsel are informed that the intention is for the Bill to be introduced on 7 November, though this timeframe is subject to change.”
Seymour’s comment reflects his frustration with what he sees as a breach of confidentiality and trust, though the Tribunal acted within its obligations to inform relevant parties. Seymour’s statement underscores the government’s view that the Waitangi Tribunal overstepped by sharing this procedural information quickly, while the Tribunal asserts that it followed due process.
The introduction of the Treaty Principles Bill has been met with significant resistance, with opponents fearing it undermines the Treaty of Waitangi and the rights of Māori under Te Tiriti. Critics argue that the bill would further complicate Māori relations with the Crown and could lead to longstanding repercussions.Waitangi Tribunal’s interim report has amplified these concerns, leading to calls for transparency and scrutiny over how such bills are handled.As the Treaty Principles Bill nears its introduction, both government officials and Māori leaders remain deeply divided on its implications and the processes involved.-TIN Bureau