Te Pāti Māori MPs will not attend Privileges Committee hearing, citing lack of fairness and disregard to tikanga
Te Pāti Māori's Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, performs a haka, during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill, in Parliament, on 14 November, 2024.
Photo:
RNZ/ Samuel Rillstone
Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, along with MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, have again declined to turn up to a privileges hearing over their haka protest in Parliament, but this time they have lodged a written submission in their absence.
The three, along with Labour's Peeni Henare, were referred to the committee for
their involvement in a haka and protests in the House in November
, at the first reading of the contentious Treaty Principles Bill.
The hearing was
scheduled for Wednesday morning
.
In a document provided to RNZ, the three MPs said in their written submission, that they declined to appear due to a "lack of procedural fairness," after several requests - including to hold a joint hearing, submission of evidence from tikanga expert Sir Pou Temara, and the ability for their counsel to make legal arguments on tikanga - were denied "without providing any reasons."
"We are gravely concerned with the Committee's lack of good-faith engagement with our Counsel about the tikanga of this hearing, as tikanga is indeed at the very heart of the matters that are before the Committee," the submission said.
The MPs argued that the haka was a form of constitutionally protected political expression and a response to what they called "the worst potential legislative breach of Te Tiriti in our generation" - a reference to the ACT Party's controversial
Treaty Principles
Bill which
was voted down on its second reading
, on 10 April.
"The level of disrespect for Te Tiriti encapsulated in this Bill was unprecedented in modern times. It was an attack on Māori that has not been seen since the Tohunga Suppression Act in the early 20th century. This was an exceptional circumstance which sparked an exceptional response."
The submission also read that Maipi-Clarke had already been removed from the House for her involvement in the protest - having been stood down for 24 hours - and argued that further punishment would amount to double jeopardy.
"We ask the Committee to remove Hana from this process without any further sanction, as she has already been punished by the Speaker for her participation."
In the written submission, the three Te Pāti Māori MPs said there was a "constitutionally significant issue at play" with respect to the complaints filed against them.
"That issue is the rightful place that Tikanga Māori should have within the House of Representatives as a taonga that is guaranteed to us under Article Two of Te Tiriti o Waitangi."
They said the House was "lagging behind the rest of government and society at large" regarding the recognition and incorporation of tikanga Māori as part of its obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
"Those failings could, and should, be remedied by this Committee through taking a Tikanga-based approach to the present complaints."
Members of Te Pāti Māori do a haka in front of Act Party members in Parliament, on 14 November.
Photo:
VNP/Louis Collins
The MPs argued haka is a critical part of the identity of Aotearoa, and since the performance of Ka Mate in 1888 by Joseph Warbrick's Māori All Blacks team, had become synonymous with New Zealand's sporting teams, general identity and nation.
"But the vast expanse and depth of Haka as an art form is so much more than this,"
"Haka is a tool of debate, argument, political discourse and cultural expression that has been used by our people since mai rā anō. It is an expression of our whakapapa and the connections to our ancestors, and a taonga for us to use in modern society to express our collective conviction on the kaupapa of the day."
They argued that this was exactly what they did.
"The Haka that we performed in response to the introduction of the Treaty Principles Bill was not only a valid form of debate to this piece of legislative nonsense that sought to do violence to Te Tiriti, it was also an action that was totally consistent with Tikanga Māori, the first law of Aotearoa."
In the submission, the MPs said that the coalition government laid the challenge to te iwi Māori first.
"We responded to that challenge, and we had a constitutional right to do so in the form of a haka as a taonga protected under Article Two of Te Tiriti."
The MPs also rejected claims that they did not seek permission to perform the haka.
"We firmly reject such assertions as permission was indeed sought and granted in accordance with tikanga. The performance of "Ka Mate", our most famous haka and a living taonga of Ngāti Toa, was discussed with Ngāti Toa Rangatira and their permission to perform their taonga haka was granted. Members of Ngāti Toa attended in the public gallery on the day to perform their haka with us, again in accordance with tikanga, to tautoko the protest against this vile piece of legislation," the document read.
"We also sought permission and were granted permission to perform the haka from Te Āti Awa who hold mana whenua as acknowledged by the MOU signed on 19 December 2024, with Parliamentary Service and Office of the Clerk."
They also referenced multiple occasions where haka was performed in the House, following Treaty settlement legislation, during maiden speeches and acknowledgement of retiring politicians.
"None of these Haka resulted in complaints of contempt deemed worthy of investigation by this Committee."
The MPs said that the Committee should consider what message it will send to the 270,000 people
who submitted
in opposition to the Bill, if they decide that they acted in contempt by performing Ka Mate.
"We expressed a collective conviction on behalf of our electorates, our people, and all of the tangata Tiriti who stood with us against the Treaty Principles Bill,"
"We will not be apologising for acting in accordance with the first law of Aotearoa," the submission said.
More to come...
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter
curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
28 minutes ago
- Otago Daily Times
Legal action over changes to resource teaching roles 'possible'
By Rachel Helyer Donaldson of RNZ The country's largest teaching union is considering legal action against the government's decision to cut resource teachers in primary schools, confirmed last month as part of the Budget. Ministry of Education documents from February show that 84 schools employed resource teachers for literacy support, 40 employed resource teachers for Māori and three schools employed both. Nationally, there are a maximum of 121 full-time positions for Resource Teachers of Literacy (RTL) and 53 for Resource Teachers of Māori (RTM). Minister for Education Erica Stanford said that was a small number of teachers for the country's 2000 primary schools, and, during a consultation process in March, schools had told her the current system was "not equitable". Stanford said funding was now in place for 349 structured literacy teachers, who would provide support within classrooms - rather than driving from school to school as was the case under the current system - and she encouraged literacy resource teachers "who are amazingly well-qualified and passionate people" to consider applying for those roles. NZEI national secretary Stephanie Mills said the union was waiting on more information from Stanford about how she came to the decision, and then it would decide next steps. "We've said from the beginning of the consultation process that we will explore all options to keep those resources intact. It's not about getting rid of a certain number of positions, it's a service that's been built up over time." 'Disrespected and gaslit' Mills said NZEI had requested details about how Stanford reached her decision via an official information request. The union had asked to see the consultation document prior to the announcement and was told that would be provided a fortnight in advance, but confirmation the roles would be defunded came as part of the Budget. Teachers felt "really disrespected and gaslit" as a result, she added. "These teachers are some of our most experienced and skilled, and they're not being treated in a good way." Mills said many of the current resource teachers were working in rural places and she feared those schools would no longer get the same support. "It will be quite a different role in the new system. The [same] service won't exist and the jobs won't exist." Mills said it was an "irony" the literacy resource roles were being cut, "when the government wants structured literacy". Meanwhile RTMs were, in many situations, the only frontline support for kaiako and tamariki Māori. "Māori RTs are like a taonga." Not a cut but 'a reinvestment' Stanford said she would not be commenting on what action the resource teachers might take. The move was about schools and students, not the teachers, she said. "It's about the way we deliver the service, and this advice was given to me by the sector itself, by schools saying 'the way the model is being delivered it's not equitable and many schools are missing out' ... The ones who are getting the service may not have the greatest need, so it's very inequitable. "What we are doing is shifting that model to an in-class delivery - small groups, intervention teachers, in school." Stanford said the NZ Resource Teachers Literary Association had had "clear information and met multiple times with ministry officials" and they had been "very clear about the reasons, about the opportunities for them in other roles, and they've met a number of times and they have been given that information". The move was not a cut but a "reinvestment", Stanford insisted. "We've already resourced 349 Tier 2 structured literacy intervention roles, over and above the 100 literacy positions that there currently are, so it is not a cut, it is a reinvestment into a better delivery model."
Newsroom
2 hours ago
- Newsroom
Anne Salmond: What's wrong with the Regulatory Standards Bill
Opinion: The Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) is a dangerous piece of legislation, inspired by libertarian ideas that seek to free the flow of capital from democratic constraints. In a number of respects, it expresses a contempt for collective rights and responsibilities, public goals and values, and liberal democracy. First, it lacks a strong democratic mandate. At the last election, Act was the only party to put forward such a proposal, and it won only 8.6 percent of the vote; 91.4 percent of voters did not support that party. This bill cannot remotely be taken to express 'the will of the people.' Second, the majority party, National, agreed behind doors – despite its prior opposition for almost two decades – to support this proposal from a fringe party during coalition negotiations. Like the Treaty Principles Bill, this undermines the principles of proportionality and accountability to the electorate on which the MMP electoral system is based. That, in turn, corrodes trust in democratic arrangements in New Zealand. Third, the bill seeks to put in place a set of principles, largely inspired by libertarian ideals, that would serve as a benchmark against which most new and existing legislation must be tested. These principles focus on individual rights and private property while ignoring collective rights and responsibilities and values such as minimising harm to human beings and the wider environment. Fourth, this legislation is to be applied retrospectively, applying to all existing laws as well as most new laws and regulations. Rather than upholding sound law-making processes in New Zealand, it radically undermines them. Fifth, the structures and processes this bill seeks to put in place are profoundly undemocratic. It aims to establish a 'Regulatory Standards Board' selected by the Minister for Regulation, the Act leader, and accountable to him, with the legal right to initiate inquiries into all laws and regulations, past and present, that offend against Act's libertarian ideas. This attempt to gain ideological oversight over the legislative and regulatory activities of all other ministers and government agencies constitutes a naked power grab. Such an arrangement is repugnant to democracy, and must not be allowed to proceed. Sixth, as the minister's own officials and many others have pointed out, this bill is unnecessary. Structures and processes to monitor and enhance the quality of laws and regulations already exist. These are accountable to Parliament, not to a particular minister, as is right and proper. They may be strengthened, as required, and must remain rigorously independent from any particular political party. Seventh, there is little reason to trust the integrity of Act's professed intentions in relation to this bill. Although it is claimed the Regulatory Standards Bill is designed to promote robust debate, rigorous scrutiny and sound democratic processes in law making in New Zealand, in practice, Act ignores these at will. The retrospective changes to pay equity legislation it promoted is a recent case in point. Eighth, New Zealand already has too few checks and balances on executive power. The fact this bill, with its anti-democratic aspects and lack of an electoral mandate, is in front of a select committee demonstrates why constitutional reform to protect citizens from executive overreach is urgently needed. Ninth, and perhaps worst, the practical effect of this bill attempts to tie the hands of the state in regulating private activities or initiatives that create public harm, by requiring those who benefit from laws or regulations to compensate others for the losses of profit that may arise. As many experts have pointed out, under such an arrangement, taxpayers may be required to compensate tobacco companies for regulations that reduce their profits by seeking to minimise the negative health and economic impacts of smoking; mining, industrial forestry and other extractive industries for regulations that seek to minimise environmental harm and damage to communities; and many other activities in which capital seeks to profit at the expense of others. The accumulation of wealth and power by the few at the expense of the many is precisely what is undermining other democracies around the world. It is inimical to the very idea of democracy as government 'of the people, by the people, for the people,' in which governments are supposed to serve the interests of citizens, not of capital or corporations. As social cohesion is undermined by radical inequality and an over-emphasis on private property and individual rights, the danger is that it tips over into anarchy; and by removing limits on the right to accumulate wealth and power at the expense of others, into oligarchy. We are seeing something like this in the United States at present. Around the world, democracies that were once strong are collapsing. It is the responsibility of our Parliament to ensure that this does not happen here. Act's attempt to paint this bill as an innocuous attempt to promote good law-making in the interests of citizens is disingenuous, and should be recognised as such. Rather, this is a dangerous bill that attacks the fundamental rights of New Zealanders, and democratic principles. It must not be allowed to pass.
Scoop
15 hours ago
- Scoop
Māori Tamariki And Rangatahi In The Oranga Tamariki System Are Still Being Failed
Press Release – Ihorangi Reweti Peters It is crucial that both Oranga Tamariki and the New Zealand Police invest in adequate partnerships with Iwi, Mori and community initiatives that support tamariki and rangatahi Mori that are in care of Oranga Tamariki and with care experience, Mr … The outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi Māori and their whānau in the Oranga Tamariki system report, found that tamariki and rangatahi Māori and their whānau are still over-represented and drastically let down within the system. The first report on the performance of the Oranga Tamariki system for Māori was published today by Aroturuki Tamariki the Independent Children's Monitor. State Care survivor and advocate, Ihorangi Reweti Peters, who grew up in the Oranga Tamariki system, says this report shines a light on the performance of the Oranga Tamariki system and that Māori tamariki and rangatahi are still being failed by the very system that is supposed to be caring for them. 'The Independent Children's Monitor found that Oranga Tamariki and NZ Police have strategies in place to address inequality and over-representation but there are barriers to making progress. It is crucial that both Oranga Tamariki and the New Zealand Police invest in adequate partnerships with Iwi, Māori and community initiatives that support tamariki and rangatahi Māori that are in care of Oranga Tamariki and with care experience,' Mr Reweti Peters says. 'These partnerships need to be increased so that our whānau, tamariki and rangatahi Māori have a safe and reliable organisation to raise concerns with. Oranga Tamariki is known to have multiple partnerships, sometimes these partnerships are not the best. 'The report also found that Oranga Tamariki is not always taking action to respond to reports of concern at the earliest opportunity. They found that almost half of the reports of concerns, resulted in a decision to take no further action. The reporting period 2023/24 showed that 52% of the reports of concerns received by Oranga Tamariki were for tamariki and rangatahi who identified as Māori. 'Early intervention is key to responding to reports of concern and supporting these whānau and making sure that our tamariki and rangatahi Māori remain out of Oranga Tamariki care. Ngā Maata Waka and Oranga Tamariki were working in partnership to provide community-led initiatives that responds to reports of concern. This successful initiative no longer operates due to a lack of funding and the roll-out of a new National Contact Centre localised response. 'This initiative was crucial for Māori whānau as it was a by Māori for Māori approach – where tamariki, rangatahi and whānau can engage in the ways that they want to respond to the report of concern. If this service is not reinstated our whānau will continue to fall through the cracks and not receive the right support that they are entitled too. 'I welcome the report today by the Independent Children's Monitor and I hope that Oranga Tamariki, in the interim, will improve the outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi Māori. However, Oranga Tamariki is still in no place to care for some of Aotearoa New Zealand's most vulnerable children and young people. I echo the calls from survivors, academics and whānau, that Oranga Tamariki needs to be dismantled and Iwi, Hāpū and Whānau need to take over the provisions of caring for our tamariki and rangatahi,' says Mr Reweti Peters
