Im quite surprised by this, isn’t Parliament a crown/british concept? And Te Pati Maori are usually quite opposed to Crown concepts.

Regardless, I think as much hate as ACT gets for this - it seems obvious that clarity on the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi is required so that every New Zealander knows where they stand (legally speaking) and we can move on as a country.

The different interpretations from different groups are distracting from the real issues because the solution gets muddied.

Should we establish group-specific organisations that all do the same thing, just for different segments of society - or should we pour our energy and resources into making organisations work for all New Zealanders?

  • Rangelus
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    But the ambiguity comes from the crown ignoring the original, Te Reo document, in favour of the translates English version, then ignoring that as well.

    • TagMeInSkipIGotThis
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      A lot of folks don’t understand that the recent more moderate approach by the Crown is still not following the Te Reo version of the treaty which means the approach still does not meet international legal standards for which version matters.