Why was Parliament in New Zealand suspended?

Written by Robyn Macarthur

Recently, Parliament was suspended in New Zealand after a Haka was staged by Maori MPs during a preliminary vote on a controversial Bill which (if passed) would affect their rights - rights which have been enshrined in law for hundreds of years and are arguably foundational to the constitution of New Zealand.

What happened and what lead to this point?

David Seymour (leader of the ACT New Zealand party) unveiled the controversial Bill in question with the view of introducing a narrower interpretation of the Waitangi Treaty (more on this treaty below). This was immediately met with opposition, predominantly by the indigenous Maori people - who make up approximately 17.3% of the total population of New Zealand - stating that this Bill would undermine their rights.

During the Bill’s preliminary vote, Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke (opposition party member from the Te Pati Maori political party) ripped up a copy of the Bill and started a Haka when asked if her party supported the Bill.

Following these events, a Hikoi (a peaceful protest) was organised by a Maori rights group and started heading towards the New Zealand capital and Parliament building. This protest was (evidently) opposing the Bill and the group staged rallies in each town that they passed as they headed South. It was estimated by police from a town just north of Wellington (the Capital) that about 10,000 individuals had joined the march - only to be met by thousands more once they reached the Parliament building. The protesters urged lawmakers to reject the proposed Bill - something which seemingly was effective as numerous parties have now voted against it.

What is the Waitangi Treaty?

In 1840, the Waitangi Treaty was signed between the British Crown and 500 Maori chiefs. It contains principles which talk about co-governance between indigenous and non-indigenous New-Zealanders. Moreover, it is still an influential document in modern-day law and policy making. The treaty was written in both English and Maori, naturally this has lead to discussion over how it is defined and interpreted.

The sections encompassed by the Treaty seek to protect the Maori community, their interests, role in decision-making and relationship with the British Crown. The courts have used these sections to remedy the disparities that Maori individuals face on a social and economic level.

Arguably, we can see the fundamental importance that this document has. This being said, the fact that some parliamentarians have taken steps to introduce a narrower approach to interpretation is concerning. Questions around what this means for the Maori community, especially in regards to their rights, may arise.

However, David Seymour has stated that he does not wish to change to text of the Treaty but thinks that the principles should be defined and be accessible for all New-Zealanders not just Maori.

Concluding comments

As stated above, numerous parties have voted against the proposed piece of legislation - meaning that it is now unlikely that it will be passed. Will Seymour go away, revise the Bill and propose a different incarnation of the Bill? No one can say and only time will tell. However, one hopes at least, that if he were to try and introduce a “revised” edition of the Bill, it would be met with a similar response.