Treaty bill won’t pass but the damage will be done

Opinion: When I wrote about the coalition agreements National had signed with NZ First and Act late last year, I expressed concern about how the coalition government would achieve the stated objective of national unity.  

It is almost as if we are expected to believe that a person’s ethnicity has no relationship to what happens in their life and that a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach will ensure equitable outcomes across the board. We know from bitter experience that’s not true.

Less than two weeks after the coalition deals were announced, Kīngi Tūheitia declared that a national hui for unity would be held in January to bring together the many voices of Māori.

A spokesperson for Tūrangawaewae Marae said they would provide “a space where Māori tikanga, Māori cultural values, and Māori cultural understandings would guide and empower conversation and deep thought”.

It was to be an opportunity for meaningful exchange kanohi ki te kanohi – face to face – building unity.

The response was phenomenal.

Although the media coverage was nowhere near as extensive as a 10,000-strong turnout would warrant, it was clear that the hui was hugely positive and achieved the unifying purpose that had been set.

I was not surprised as, having attended two tangi this year, I already knew that the intention was to build unity across the motu and to take a unified voice to Rātana and Waitangi. The sense of momentum was palpable, the sense of optimism strong.

I hope each of the coalition parties respond to this unified voice in the spirit of kotahitanga – the unity to which they say they are jointly committed.

Unfortunately, neither coalition agreement inspires confidence.

Legislating to make English an official language will change absolutely nothing. It is a complete and utter waste of time because English is in fact an official language of Aotearoa. It doesn’t need a law to make it so. Te reo Māori, on the other hand, had to be added by legislation, as it was in 1987, and NZ Sign Language the same in 2006. As a lawyer, NZ First leader Winston Peters knows this, but as a politician it seems he prefers to send a message that somehow the English language is not being treated equally. That is of course nonsense. 

The Māori Language Act 1987 was introduced after the Waitangi Tribunal held te reo to be a taonga that the government was obliged to protect under the Treaty of Waitangi. It also established the Māori Language Commission, which was renamed Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori, to promote the use of the language.

Promoting its use is the key here.

I remember hearing Sir Dryden Spring speak at a conference many years ago. As head of the NZ Dairy Board, he emphasised the importance of its overseas missions. He said that it had come to realise that it was vital its representatives could speak the local language. It wasn’t enough to rely on interpreters. In essence he said the only way through to the culture was through the language. Understanding that was essential to it success.

Consider that in relation to te reo Māori.

Until the mid-19th Century, it was the predominant language. To trade back then, the settlers had to learn te reo. That of course changed over time as the numbers of English-speaking settlers increased. The use of the language was gradually diminished, and then actively discouraged. It is tragic to reflect that it was in my father’s lifetime that Māori children were still being punished for speaking te reo in the classroom. The language was beaten out of them.

That too changed over time, but it was not until the 1987 law change that te reo Māori – the first language spoken here – could be used in any official setting as of right.

All over the world there is an increasing recognition that indigenous languages are precious, and they must be nurtured. They are a unique part of a nation’s identity.

It is frustrating to see Parliament’s time wasted on legislation that serves no purpose other than to incite division based on a false premise.

The coalition agreement to introduce a Treaty Principles Bill based on Act’s policy is another example of this.

It was accompanied by a commitment to support the referral of the bill to a select committee, and we have all heard loud and clear from National that this is all that they will do.

The Minister for Māori Development, Tama Potaka, was explicit in his rejection of a referendum on the Treaty principles – something he could not support.

This was backed up by Finance Minister Nicola Willis this week.

She said that for Act, having a debate about the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi was a priority and that National had agreed to support them having this debate at select committee.

With all due respect, holding a debate is not the function of a select committee. Making submissions is hardly a substitute for meaningful exchange.

Ultimately, the purpose of a committee’s consideration is to decide whether to recommend to Parliament that a bill be passed. From what is being said, I can’t see such a recommendation being made with this bill.

In the meantime, what damage is done, especially when the bill does not reflect what Te Tiriti actually says?

The ensuing polarisation will become the story instead of the Government seizing the opportunity to resource Māori to deliver effective solutions that our existing systems and practices have not been capable of delivering for generations.

It is this that lies at the heart of the challenges we face as a nation in terms of disparities between Māori and non-Māori. And until we recognise this, the promise of national unity will not be fulfilled.