Article Summary
The Waitangi Tribunal, a New Zealand institution established to examine grievances between Māori and the Crown, is undergoing its first formal review in almost 50 years. The review was announced by Māori development minister Tama Potaka to assess the tribunal’s scope, processes, and legislative mandate due to a growing workload and the approaching completion of historical settlements. Opposition parties have criticized the review, while others argue that it is necessary to address bureaucratic hurdles and misconceptions regarding the original intent of the tribunal’s mandate.
What This Means for You
- Be prepared for changes in the Waitangi Tribunal’s scope, processes, or legislative mandate as a result of the review.
- Stay informed about the different opinions on the review and consider its potential impact on historical Treaty claims and current grievances.
- Engage in discussions and debates surrounding the future of the tribunal, emphasizing the need for a balanced, well-informed perspective.
- Understand the importance of addressing bureaucratic hurdles for the full implementation of the tribunal’s findings.
- Be cautious of sensationalized rhetoric about the tribunal and maintain a critical view of political claims and framing.
Original Post
The government says its review will help the tribunal navigate the coming decades. Critics say it’s an ideological attack in disguise, writes Catherine McGregor in today’s extract from The Bulletin.
To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here.
A half-century check-up…
The Waitangi Tribunal is undergoing its first-ever formal review, nearly 50 years after the body was established. Announced last week by Māori development minister Tama Potaka, the review aims to examine whether the tribunal’s scope, processes and legislative mandate remain fit for purpose. Potaka stressed the review would not predetermine the tribunal’s future but was necessary due to a ballooning workload and the near-completion of historical settlements. The four-person (two Māori, two Pākehā) Independent Technical Advisory Group, chaired by Bruce Gray KC, is due to provide recommendations by September, with legislative proposals expected before the end of the year.
… Or a political ambush?
Opposition parties have rushed to condemn the review. Labour’s Willie Jackson said it was outrageous that “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”. The Greens’ Māori development spokeswoman Hūhana Lyndon called it a “disgrace” while Te Pāti Māori’s Tākuta Ferris said he was “absolutely disgusted” by news of the review.
Others offered more nuanced perspectives. Speaking to Te Rina Kowhai for Te Ao Māori, former Treaty negotiations minister Chris Finlayson said a review was long overdue, but it should focus on the many bureaucratic hurdles to full implementation of the tribunal’s findings. Writing in the NZ Herald (paywalled), Audrey Young argued that accusations of a “hatchet job” were premature: “To suggest any organisation is above review is not remotely realistic in 2025.”
Also speaking to Te Ao Māori News, Treaty law scholar Carwyn Jones agreed the tribunal must evolve but warned the government’s framing of the review as a return to “original intent” – as promised in the NZ First-National coalition agreement – was misleading: “It seems … they think the original intent of the tribunal was to look at historical claims” when that was never the case, he said. At the time of the Waitangi Tribunal’s establishment in 1975, it only heard claims relating to current government actions. The historical claims process began in 1985, after the Lange Labour government expanded the tribunal’s mandate to investigate grievances dating back to 1840.
Act says the quiet part out loud
While Potaka has maintained a measured tone,
ORIGINAL SOURCE:
Source link
