Latest news with #BruceGrayKC
Scoop
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Waitangi Tribunal Already Doing Exactly What It Was Originally Intended To Do, Treaty Law Experts Say
Article – RNZ A government review announced last week the Tribunal will be refocused back to its 'original intent', but Treaty law experts say it's already doing that. , Māori issues reporter Treaty law experts say the Waitangi Tribunal is already doing exactly what it was originally intended to do. A government review announced last week – part of the coalition agreement between New Zealand First and National – is set to refocus the 'scope, purpose and nature' of the Tribunal's inquiries back to its 'original intent'. The review will be led by an Independent Technical Advisory Group of four chaired by Bruce Gray KC. The other members of the group are lawyer and former Waitangi Tribunal member David Cochrane, Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa chief executive Dion Tuuta and senior public servant and former chief executive of Te Kohanga Reo National Trust Kararaina Calcott-Cribb. Te Hunga Rōia Māori, the Māori Law Society co-president Natalie Coates said it would be a big task to conduct a wide sweeping review within the timeframe. Engagement on the review will begin in mid-2025 and advice will be provided to ministers by September. Coates was not adverse to an independent review taking place, given it has been 50 years, but she said there was a deep scepticism amongst the Māori community given the government's approach to te Tiriti and Māori issues in general. When the Waitangi Tribunal was set up in 1975, it did not have the ability to look backwards, so the original conception of the Tribunal was to respond to contemporary breaches of te Tiriti or Waitangi, she said. 'I guess I've been a little bit confused about that kind of wording or at least find it interesting and curious because I think what the Tribunal is currently doing is actually focusing on and doing what they were originally set up to do.' Coates said even though its recommendations weren't binding the Tribunal played a critical role as a check and balance on Crown power. 'It should be a good thing to know whether the Crown is breaching te Tiriti o Waitangi so that informed decisions can be made, and I think the idea being [thrown] around of them being activist is just not true. 'They're doing the job that they were set up to do, and they're doing so with the kind of the full intellectual rigour that applies in those spaces.' Treaty Law scholar Carwyn Jones said he hadn't seen the full terms of reference for the review beyond the statement's by Minister Tama Potaka, and what was contained within National and New Zealand First's coalition agreement to refocus the Tribunal back to its 'original intent.' 'I was always a bit confused by that because as far as I could tell, the Tribunal was doing exactly what was originally intended. 'Its original intent was that it would focus on current or contemporary crown actions or policy,' he said. The Tribunal had played a crucial role over this term of government in scrutinising Crown policy for its impact particularly on Māori, he said. 'What we see is that the government doesn't like the Tribunal asking questions about quite basic things around good government, about what is your policy intended to do, what's the problem you're trying to solve, have you looked at options, do you know what the impact of it is? 'All of these things the Tribunal is making transparent that the government has no answers to across a whole range of policy so of course the government doesn't like that.' That's a sentiment that Coates echoed. 'I mean, no government really loves the Tribunal because their whole purpose is to tell it what it's doing wrong on a treaty front,' she said. Jones said David Seymour's comments about the Tribunal becoming 'increasingly activist' showed that from the government's perspective, the Tribunal had been too effective in holding the government to account. 'We've seen that time and again through a whole range of government policy, whether it's the removal of section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act or whether it's through Māori wards or even this review itself, the government has not defined what the problem is… because all it is is this kind of 'government by vibe' this evidence free policy development.' As a permanent Commission of Inquiry, the Tribunal actually had a lot of flexibility about its own process and had been very agile and adaptive in changing to meet different needs across its 50 year history, he said. 'So the Tribunal itself is making those changes, it's constantly reviewing what it's doing and whether it's working. 'So I don't think it's particularly helpful for the government to be doing this, really all the Tribunal needs is more support and resources for it to more effectively deliver.'
Scoop
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Waitangi Tribunal Already Doing Exactly What It Was Originally Intended To Do, Treaty Law Experts Say
Treaty law experts say the Waitangi Tribunal is already doing exactly what it was originally intended to do. A government review announced last week - part of the coalition agreement between New Zealand First and National - is set to refocus the "scope, purpose and nature" of the Tribunal's inquiries back to its "original intent". The review will be led by an Independent Technical Advisory Group of four chaired by Bruce Gray KC. The other members of the group are lawyer and former Waitangi Tribunal member David Cochrane, Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa chief executive Dion Tuuta and senior public servant and former chief executive of Te Kohanga Reo National Trust Kararaina Calcott-Cribb. Te Hunga Rōia Māori, the Māori Law Society co-president Natalie Coates said it would be a big task to conduct a wide sweeping review within the timeframe. Engagement on the review will begin in mid-2025 and advice will be provided to ministers by September. Coates was not adverse to an independent review taking place, given it has been 50 years, but she said there was a deep scepticism amongst the Māori community given the government's approach to te Tiriti and Māori issues in general. When the Waitangi Tribunal was set up in 1975, it did not have the ability to look backwards, so the original conception of the Tribunal was to respond to contemporary breaches of te Tiriti or Waitangi, she said. "I guess I've been a little bit confused about that kind of wording or at least find it interesting and curious because I think what the Tribunal is currently doing is actually focusing on and doing what they were originally set up to do." Coates said even though its recommendations weren't binding the Tribunal played a critical role as a check and balance on Crown power. "It should be a good thing to know whether the Crown is breaching te Tiriti o Waitangi so that informed decisions can be made, and I think the idea being [thrown] around of them being activist is just not true. "They're doing the job that they were set up to do, and they're doing so with the kind of the full intellectual rigour that applies in those spaces." Treaty Law scholar Carwyn Jones said he hadn't seen the full terms of reference for the review beyond the statement's by Minister Tama Potaka, and what was contained within National and New Zealand First's coalition agreement to refocus the Tribunal back to its "original intent." "I was always a bit confused by that because as far as I could tell, the Tribunal was doing exactly what was originally intended. "Its original intent was that it would focus on current or contemporary crown actions or policy," he said. The Tribunal had played a crucial role over this term of government in scrutinising Crown policy for its impact particularly on Māori, he said. "What we see is that the government doesn't like the Tribunal asking questions about quite basic things around good government, about what is your policy intended to do, what's the problem you're trying to solve, have you looked at options, do you know what the impact of it is? "All of these things the Tribunal is making transparent that the government has no answers to across a whole range of policy so of course the government doesn't like that." That's a sentiment that Coates echoed. "I mean, no government really loves the Tribunal because their whole purpose is to tell it what it's doing wrong on a treaty front," she said. Jones said David Seymour's comments about the Tribunal becoming "increasingly activist" showed that from the government's perspective, the Tribunal had been too effective in holding the government to account. "We've seen that time and again through a whole range of government policy, whether it's the removal of section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act or whether it's through Māori wards or even this review itself, the government has not defined what the problem is... because all it is is this kind of 'government by vibe' this evidence free policy development." As a permanent Commission of Inquiry, the Tribunal actually had a lot of flexibility about its own process and had been very agile and adaptive in changing to meet different needs across its 50 year history, he said. "So the Tribunal itself is making those changes, it's constantly reviewing what it's doing and whether it's working. "So I don't think it's particularly helpful for the government to be doing this, really all the Tribunal needs is more support and resources for it to more effectively deliver."
RNZ News
13-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Waitangi Tribunal already doing exactly what it was originally intended to do, Treaty law experts say
Members of Te Rūnanga Nui, the Waitangi Tribunal and the Ministry of Education being welcomed onto Hoani Waititi Marae in 2023. Photo: Pokere Paewai / RNZ Treaty law experts say the Waitangi Tribunal is already doing exactly what it was originally intended to do. A government review announced last week - part of the coalition agreement between New Zealand First and National - is set to refocus the "scope, purpose and nature" of the Tribunal's inquiries back to its "original intent". The review will be led by an Independent Technical Advisory Group of four chaired by Bruce Gray KC. The other members of the group are lawyer and former Waitangi Tribunal member David Cochrane, Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa chief executive Dion Tuuta and senior public servant and former chief executive of Te Kohanga Reo National Trust Kararaina Calcott-Cribb. Te Hunga Rōia Māori, the Māori Law Society co-president Natalie Coates said it would be a big task to conduct a wide sweeping review within the timeframe. Engagement on the review will begin in mid-2025 and advice will be provided to ministers by September. Coates was not adverse to an independent review taking place, given it has been 50 years, but she said there was a deep scepticism amongst the Māori community given the government's approach to te Tiriti and Māori issues in general. When the Waitangi Tribunal was set up in 1975, it did not have the ability to look backwards, so the original conception of the Tribunal was to respond to contemporary breaches of te Tiriti or Waitangi, she said. Natalie Coates. Photo: Tania Niwa "I guess I've been a little bit confused about that kind of wording or at least find it interesting and curious because I think what the Tribunal is currently doing is actually focusing on and doing what they were originally set up to do." Coates said even though its recommendations weren't binding the Tribunal played a critical role as a check and balance on Crown power. "It should be a good thing to know whether the Crown is breaching te Tiriti o Waitangi so that informed decisions can be made, and I think the idea being [thrown] around of them being activist is just not true. "They're doing the job that they were set up to do, and they're doing so with the kind of the full intellectual rigour that applies in those spaces." Treaty Law scholar Carwyn Jones said he hadn't seen the full terms of reference for the review beyond the statement's by Minister Tama Potaka, and what was contained within National and New Zealand First's coalition agreement to refocus the Tribunal back to its "original intent." "I was always a bit confused by that because as far as I could tell, the Tribunal was doing exactly what was originally intended. "Its original intent was that it would focus on current or contemporary crown actions or policy," he said. The Tribunal had played a crucial role over this term of government in scrutinising Crown policy for its impact particularly on Māori, he said. "What we see is that the government doesn't like the Tribunal asking questions about quite basic things around good government, about what is your policy intended to do, what's the problem you're trying to solve, have you looked at options, do you know what the impact of it is? "All of these things the Tribunal is making transparent that the government has no answers to across a whole range of policy so of course the government doesn't like that." Treaty Law scholar Carwyn Jones. Photo: RNZ That's a sentiment that Coates echoed. "I mean, no government really loves the Tribunal because their whole purpose is to tell it what it's doing wrong on a treaty front," she said. Jones said David Seymour's comments about the Tribunal becoming "increasingly activist" showed that from the government's perspective, the Tribunal had been too effective in holding the government to account. "We've seen that time and again through a whole range of government policy, whether it's the removal of section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act or whether it's through Māori wards or even this review itself, the government has not defined what the problem is... because all it is is this kind of 'government by vibe' this evidence free policy development." As a permanent Commission of Inquiry, the Tribunal actually had a lot of flexibility about its own process and had been very agile and adaptive in changing to meet different needs across its 50 year history, he said. "So the Tribunal itself is making those changes, it's constantly reviewing what it's doing and whether it's working. "So I don't think it's particularly helpful for the government to be doing this, really all the Tribunal needs is more support and resources for it to more effectively deliver." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Newsroom
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Newsroom
Potaka launches review of Waitangi Tribunal
Public law expert Bruce Gray KC will lead a review of the scope of the Waitangi Tribunal's jurisdiction, Māori-Crown Relations Minister Tama Potaka announced on Friday. The review kicks off the process of fulfilling the commitment in the National-New Zealand First coalition agreement to 'amend the Waitangi Tribunal legislation to refocus the scope, purpose, and nature of its inquiries back to the original intent of that legislation'. 'Given the progress of historical claims and settlements and concerns about the Tribunal's current workload, it is timely to review the legislation that determines how it undertakes its inquiries,' Potaka said in a statement. 'The review will ensure the Waitangi Tribunal remains focused, relevant, effective and fit for purpose not just for today, but for the generations to come.' NZ First MP and minister Shane Jones told Newsroom the policy falls short of what his party wanted, but that the Government doesn't have the mandate to do away with the tribunal entirely. 'New Zealand First was lobbied, prior to coming back into power, to put a sunset clause down to get rid of the Waitangi Tribunal altogether. That obvious is not the policy of the Government,' he said. 'We all agree it needs a reset but we don't have a mandate to bury it. The reset is ensuring it remains dedicated where it has a genuine body of competence.' Jones didn't envisage a reduction of the temporal scope of the tribunal's inquiries. When it was established in 1975, the tribunal was limited to examining new breaches of the Treaty. A decade later, it was empowered to investigate claims of breaches dating back to 1840, when the Treaty was signed. Both functions should still be held by the tribunal, but with tighter 'guardrails' around what amounts to a breach of the Treaty, Jones suggested. The original, modern-oriented focus of the tribunal is what has consistently raised the ire of the governing parties since the coalition formed in 2023. 'I accept that for a lot of people, the Treaty is a living instrument. It's organic and its meaning needs to be recast as the economy and demography changes. The tribunal has risen to that challenge, because every policy that seems to be coming out of our manifesto that challenges the orthodoxies surrounding settled understandings of government policy, we've been dragged off to the Waitangi Tribunal to account for that,' Jones said. 'We need to get the balance right. The things we've brought forward, they've got their legitimacy from our democratic mandate. I personally have found it very, very frustrating.' He pointed to the tribunal's urgent inquiry last year into the disestablishment of the Māori Health Authority by the Government, which had been created two years earlier under Labour. 'That's not a Treaty issue. That's a decision that was made by [Labour's then-health minister] Andrew Little to reconfigure the structure of the health department and create a bespoke unit. To suggest that somehow [scrapping that] violates the Treaty, I think that's right off. Governments should be able to come and go and reset our public funds, either branded, badged or how they're used.' Alongside Gray, the review panel will include Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet deputy chief executive Kararaina Calcott-Cribb, Wellington lawyer and former tribunal member David Cochrane, and Te Ati Awa chief executive Dion Tuuta. A report is due back in September. Jones promised the review 'will be a very independent review' and didn't want to prejudge its results. However, he did lay out his vision for the tribunal's ultimate fate. 'If the tribunal is to survive, I suspect over time it'll morph into some kind of standing assembly, as opposed to a sort of litigator's paradise. Judge Eddie Drury [chair between 1980 and 2004] in the past ran it more as a standing forum, but more recently it's become incredibly litigious.' Jones and Act Party leader David Seymour were last year criticised by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon for threats they made against the Waitangi Tribunal. Jones had complained about the prosecutorial nature of the tribunal, saying it 'has no business running its operations as some sort of star chamber delivering pre-emptory summons for ministers to rock up and be cross-examined or grilled in some kind of wannabe American star chamber pulp fiction gig'. Seymour suggested the tribunal 'should be wound up for good', in response to the tribunal summonsing Childrens Minister and Act MP Karen Chhour as it investigated changes to the Oranga Tamariki Act. 'I think those comments are ill-considered and we expect all ministers to actually exercise good judgment in their communications on matters like this,' Luxon said at the time.
