Latest news with #TePuniKōkiri
The Spinoff
15-05-2025
- Politics
- The Spinoff
Waitangi Tribunal hears evidence against another ‘dangerous' principles-based bill
An urgent hearing into the Regulatory Standards Bill saw lawyers representing more than 18,000 interested parties argue against the legislation that some fear is as 'dangerous' as the Treaty principles bill. A soon-to-be-introduced piece of legislation has been likened to 'constitutional warfare', with the potential to be as 'dangerous' to Māori-Crown relations as the Treaty principles bill. More than 18,000 New Zealanders signalled their opposition to the Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) by registering their support for a claim to the Waitangi Tribunal led by Toitū te Tiriti, which was heard on Wednesday, a week after the bill's architect David Seymour announced it would be taken to cabinet to be approved for introduction to parliament by Monday, May 19. Originally scheduled for June 6, the Wai 3470 claim was brought forward in an urgent hearing this week following the announcement from Seymour, the minister for regulation, that the bill would be read by cabinet sooner than expected. The tribunal loses jurisdiction to consider bills once they are introduced to parliament. After cabinet approves the bill on May 19, it will be introduced to parliament and, if passed as expected, would come into effect by January 1, 2026 – with changes expected to create a framework that would undermine the application of Treaty principles, the tribunal heard. The bill's stated aim is 'to improve the quality of regulation in New Zealand so regulatory decisions are based on principles of good lawmaking and economic efficiency'. It sets a number of regulatory principles that all regulation should comply with, with an emphasis on personal liberty and property rights. A cabinet minute on the bill was released on Tuesday, with feedback included in the document from Te Puni Kōkiri that the current proposal 'does not recognise either the rights or interests of iwi, hapu and Māori' under the Treaty, nor does it consider the importance of the Treaty – a sentiment repeated in the cabinet paper by the Ministry of Justice. The Ministry for the Environment also noted the proposals 'conflict with the principles of New Zealand's environmental and climate systems which focus on balancing short-term and longer-term interests, and collective, rather than individual, interests'. Tamaki Legal lawyer Tania Waikato, acting as counsel for Toitū te Tiriti and multiple other claimants, appeared first before the tribunal with the message that the bill 'will create one of the most fundamental constitutional shifts in our legal history by elevating the RSB principles' into a position of 'constitutionally superior law' above Treaty principles. Waikato said her claimants' core concerns with the bill came down to two 'prongs': the first being that her claimants 'are prejudiced, and likely to be prejudiced' by the bill, as it 'will alter the constitutional arrangements between the Crown and Māori under te Tiriti by stealth, and without the consent by Māori as Treaty partner'. The second prong, Waikato said, was the 'fundamentally flawed' consultation process for the bill. She said the failure to meaningfully engage with Māori was 'defective, deceptive and inconsistent with te Tiriti and the principles of te Tiriti. 'These breaches are so deeply entrenched into the fabric of the RSB, that they cannot be remedied by simply inserting a Treaty principle into the RSB,' Waikato told the tribunal. 'The entire framework as a concept … must be rejected in its entirety.' Waikato read evidence from senior law lecturer Carwyn Jones, who wrote that the Crown's actions in drafting this bill had breached the Treaty in a matter that was 'as serious and as dangerous as [the Treaty principles bill'. That bill, alongside the draft proposals being considered by the tribunal, represented a 'combined legislative pincer movement' with the proposed legislation seeking to finish 'what the Treaty principles bill started', Jones said. Otago law professor Andrew Geddis also submitted evidence read by Waikato. Geddis highlighted the bill's first principle of the rule of law, that 'every person is equal before the law', arguing that 'may cause it to be applied in order to remove legislative clauses that provide different provisions for Māori, particularly Treaty provisions'. Geddis noted that there were 'often good reasons where differential treatment under the law not only is justifiable but actually morally required', as noted by the Human Rights Commission. Evidence from Hinemoa Elder specifically pointed to the Mental Health Act, and concerns that the passing of this bill would remove Māori mental health provisions under the RSB's equality principle. Filmmaker Chelsea Winstanley also submitted written evidence outlining her concerns that this principle would affect funding for te reo Māori and Māori-specific films. Speaking on behalf of Māori health leader Lady Tureiti Moxon, lawyer Roimata Smail argued the bill would entrench a 'health system that is institutionally racist'. Lawyer Tom Bennion, representing Te Roopu Waiora Trust, told the tribunal that Seymour was 'hostile to all differential treatment for Māori'. The minister's law would have the potential to 'wipe hundreds of millions of dollars off the value of historic settlements' if the law in practice failed to acknowledge disparities for Māori, Bennion said. Whāia Legal's Jamie Ferguson told the tribunal that while the bill was concerned with equal rights, there was no provision to ensure the act would not adversely affect the rights and interests of iwi and hapū. Asked by tribunal member David Williams about his experience in representing Māori legal issues, Ferguson said he had witnessed a change from 'good faith' engagement with Māori to simple 'box ticking'. 'I personally have a malaise and melancholy about it all,' Ferguson said. 'It's a tragedy. There's no other word for it.' Crown lawyer Jason Varuhas said arguments the tribunal had so far heard 'often proceeded off an unsustainable degree of certainty as to the adverse affects' of the bill. While it was correct that the Crown had not relied on expert evidence, it did not accept the opinions relied on by claimants as 'it is in the nature of opinion evidence, not primary fact', Varuhas said. Concerns of Treaty breaches do not amount to an actual breach, Varuhas noted. He quoted former prime minister Geoffrey Palmer's description of Aotearoa as the 'fastest law-maker in the west' – New Zealand has unique legislative powers which allow parliament to pass laws more quickly than other developed countries, and the government has the authority to use these processes. On concerns of prejudice against Māori, Varuhas said the bill 'cannot be analogised' as having as much power as the Bill of Rights Act, a constitutional statute. 'The Crown's position is the Regulatory Standards Bill does not invariably, or likely lead, to breach of the Treaty,' Varuhas said, 'or likely or invariably lead to prejudicial outcomes for Māori.' Williams asked Varuhas whether the Crown had acted in good faith by bringing the bill to cabinet ahead of the hearing's original June 6 date, to which Varuhas replied the Crown had acted as directed, but acknowledged that the tribunal and claimants' need to 'mobilise in such haste has not been ideal'. 'That's good faith?' Williams asked. 'We would say, for the reasons that we've given, that the Crown has acted in good faith,' Varuhas said. Lawyer Darrell Naden of Tamaki Legal responded to the Crown's comments at the end of the hearing, dismissing the claim that the RSB 'would not confer or impose on any legal rights or duties, or affect the validity of legislation'. Naden highlighted a requirement of the RSB that all law be measured against it as evidence of its intended scope. 'Why all the effort, the expense, so on and so forth, the haste to introduce this to the House, the haste to enactment … all points to how important this legislation is to the Crown. 'The claimants, despite hearing from the Crown today … continue to maintain that what is sought here is an ending of this RSB folly for the sake of a decent society, for the sake of future relations,' Naden said. The tribunal is expected to submit its findings today.
RNZ News
10-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Māori Development Minister Tama Potaka assures outcome of Waitangi Tribunal review won't be predetermined
Māori Development Minister Tama Potaka. Photo: RNZ / Reece Baker The minister for Māori development says the government will not predetermine the outcome of a new review of the Waitangi Tribunal . The review is set to refocus the "scope, purpose and nature" of the tribunal's inquiries back to its "original intent", Tama Potaka said on Friday. It is part of the coalition agreement between New Zealand First and National, and will be led by an independent technical advisory group and supported by Te Puni Kōkiri. This audio is not downloadable due to copyright restrictions. Potaka - the chairperson of the ministerial group coordinating the review - told Saturday Morning the government would wait for feedback before making any decisions. "Our intention of course is to of course make sure it operates effectively within a system that's coherent and sustainable, and we will take a look at structural matters such as the jurisdiction, how claims are categorised and what practises it adopts." The Waitangi Tribunal was established in 1975 to investigate breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. Originally it could only hear claims about current government actions, but in 1985 Parliament allowed the tribunal to investigate events dating back to 1840. Potaka did not say whether the tribunal would return to only investigating current breaches. He did say the "government will determine the future of the tribunal", but it was not a predetermined outcome. "I am certainly not predetermined, and this government is not predetermined over this outcome - we will await the feedback, recommendations from the technical advisor group." Potaka said he was looking forward to seeing their engagement, and ensuring it was suitable for making the recommendations needed to Cabinet. "Certainly in my view there's a lot of mahi that the tribunal still needs to close out." Potaka said many of the historical claims had been carried out, with only five historical regional claims remaining. Labour MP Willie Jackson. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Labour MP Willie Jackson - who was Māori development minister for three years - told Saturday Morning the review was "like a comedy". "The most anti-Māori government I've seen in my lifetime is now conducting a review of the watchdog that at least keeps a lot of Māori, a lot of New Zealanders safe." He said ACT leader David Seymour and NZ First MP Shane Jones' comments about the tribunal were "just disgraceful". Jackson said the tribunal did not need a review - it needed support. "A review is needed of David Seymour and Shane Jones, and they should be reprimanded by the prime minister for undermining a tribunal." He said although he was comfortable with the inquiry panel's members, he questioned the level of independence it would have. Engagement with Māori was scheduled to begin mid-2025, and proposals would be made before the end of the year. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
09-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Government announces review into Waitangi Tribunal, Seymour calls it 'activist'
Māori Development Minister Tama Potaka. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone The government says it will launch a review into the Waitangi Tribunal to refocus the "scope, purpose and nature" of the Tribunal's inquiries back to its "original intent". The review is part of the coalition agreement between New Zealand First and National and will be lead by an Independent Technical Advisory Group (ITAG), supported by Te Puni Kōkiri. The Waitangi Tribunal was established in 1975 to investigate breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi, originally it could only hear claims about current government actions but in 1985 Parliament allowed the Tribunal to investigate events dating back to 1840. Māori Development Minister Tama Potaka said given the progress of historical claims and settlements and concerns around the Tribunal's workload, a review into the legislation that determines its inquiries was "timely". The Tribunal has accepted seven urgent inquiries into government policies since the coalition was elected. "Over the past 50 years, the Tribunal has made significant contributions to the Māori Crown relationship and informed the settlement of both historical and contemporary Treaty claims impacting generations of whānau across the country," Potaka said. "A review of the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 will ensure the Tribunal continues to effectively meet the intent of the legislation - considering claims relating to breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi - and providing timely, well-reasoned findings." The ITAG will be chaired by legal expert Bruce Gray KC and include senior public servant Kararaina Calcott-Cribb, lawyer David Cochrane, and Māori leader Dion Tuuta and is tasked with looking at whether the whether the Act provides clarity around the Tribunal's jurisdiction, how different types of claims are managed, and how the legislation aligns with other legislation. "The ITAG will engage directly with peak Māori and Iwi entities, Treaty law experts, and current and former Tribunal members to ensure that the right voices and perspectives are reflected in the recommendations they provide to ministers at the end of their review," says Mr Potaka. "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." Potaka said. In a media release, Act leader David Seymour welcomed the review. Act leader David Seymour. Photo: RNZ / Calvin Samuel "Act supports the completion of full and final historic Treaty settlements as a pragmatic way to resolve past injustices, but the Waitangi Tribunal has gone well beyond its brief and has become increasingly activist. "It's tried to become a source of authority in its own right and appears to regard itself as a parallel government that can intervene in the democratically elected government's policymaking process - like during the Treaty Principles Bill debate." He said it was time to put the Tribunal "in its place". Engagement will begin in mid-2025 and advice will be provided to ministers, including Shane Jones, by September. Proposals are intended to be introduced before the end of the year. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
30-04-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
Te Puni Kōkiri reveals new Whānau Ora commissioning agencies
Whānau Ora Minister Tama Potaka. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone The four new agencies that will commission Whānau Ora services from the first of July have been named, following a contract shakeup signalled last month. The Whānau Ora Minister Tama Potaka said the chosen agencies will expand the reach of Whānau Ora, and the change is about "moving in an elevated and refreshed direction". Whānau Ora was created in 2010 by the late Dame Tariana Turia in an effort to improve social and health services for Māori. In a major overhaul of the system, the three original Whānau Ora commissioning agencies - the Whānau Ora Commissioning Agency, Te Pūtahitanga o Te Waipounamu and Pasifika Futures - were informed by Te Puni Kōkiri (TPK) in early March their long-held contracts would not be renewed. Up to 1000 jobs could be affected. Te Puni Kōkiri opened the contracts up to other providers, the first time it has done so since Whānau Ora started in 2010. The contracts enabled it to administer Whānau Ora funding to local providers across the country, and all three incumbent agencies have held the contracts since 2014. Previously, North Island commissioning agency chair Merepeka Raukawa-Tait told RNZ it was strange Te Puni Kōkiri would open the contracts up to other agencies given the current agencies' good track record . "I have to say that - and it's a word that I don't normally use - but I will say that I was gutted when I heard." Despite the change in direction, Potaka said it wasn't a "shakeup". "It's pretty standard practice for government to conduct and undertake procurement processes after five years," he said, but it has been a "ten year stint". "Te Puni Kōkiri has now undertaken a procurement process to see who is suitable to not only continue the good mahi but also move in an improved and elevated direction." The new agencies are: Potaka said Te Puni Kōkiri selected these agencies to deliver on the government's focus to provide better public services. For example, Potaka said the agencies would have "better data engagement aligned with social investment" and "a greater number of navigators", and "introduce greater participation from local communities in decision-making". As for the potential job losses, Potaka said he did not know the specific details but he expected many of the providers that were engaged with the incumbent commissioning agencies would continue under the new commissioning arrangements. Potaka also welcomed the Court of Appeal decision - Te Pou Matakana Limited v Secretary for Māori Development and others 2025 - which "cleared the way for this progress". "The case unsuccessfully challenged aspects of the procurement process - it wasted time and created uncertainty for whānau and service providers." Potaka said the coalition "backs Whānau Ora", as seen by the commitment in last year's Budget - "$180 million". "But we are moving in a refreshed direction." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
