Some interesting parts that caught my eye:
- If the hearings are a good indicator of overall submissions, most submitters oppose this bill.
- Most of us can generally agree that the principles laid out in the Treaty principles bill do not accurately reflect what was written in the Treaty or te Tiriti, or the likely intention of those signing it.
- Just because it’s your bill, doesn’t mean you have to show up – Act Party Justice Committee members were no-shows for most of the subcommittee hearings into the Treaty principles bill.
- Being on the conservative side of politics doesn’t necessarily mean this bill will appeal to you, as displayed by submissions in opposition from Chris Finlayson and Dame Jenny Shipley.
- Media interest in these things can wane pretty quickly. On the first day of hearings, essentially every media outlet was in Room 3. In the final week, only Whakaata Māori and The Spinoff remained.
Tldr it seeks to enshrine Libertarian principles in how laws are made in NZ, including retrospectively. So it’s a constitutional change.
Here’s a good article explaining how its focus on protecting wealth and property would make it much harder to have any legislation that promotes social good or benefits the environment.
And here is a Maori perspective on how it prevents lawmakers from taking Te Tiriti into consideration.
It’s been around - and rejected - for years, having been first proposed by Roger Douglas. The fact that National agreed to make a worse version of it law is quite weird.
Hmm I think I have read that first article in the past. Man I hate the direction we are heading.
Me too, especially the undemocratic stuff, e.g. this bill’s having David Seymour pick a board of people who property developers etc can complain to about NZ’s existing laws.