FACT CHECKING DAVID SEYMOUR

I was interested in David Seymour's public presentation of the Justice Select Committee's report after the submissions to the Treaty Principles Bill.

I noted the arguments he presented and fact checked him. I welcome corrections and additions to what I have written but want to keep the responses concise.

1. The Treaty of Waitangi does not represent a partnership.
   WRONG: Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a foundational document of New Zealand, establishing a relationship of partnership between the Crown and Māori. The principle of partnership, which requires the Crown and Māori to work in partnership in the governance, design, delivery, and monitoring of services, is a key aspect of the Treaty.
   
   
2. All kiwis should be equal in their human rights before the law.

   DELIBERATELY MISLEADING: The Treaty of Waitangi is New Zealand's own unique statement of human rights. It includes both universal human rights and Indigenous rights. At a basic level of human rights we are treated the same, however, Seymour presents the idea that only Māori have different rights. There are many groups or demographics that have ‘different’ rights. Over 65s have a Gold Card that gives them different rights or privileges. Those who own property have specific rights. Farmers currently have different rights to other GHG emitters under our climate legislation. It is a fact that treating every one equally under the same set of rights, depending on who determines those rights, doesn’t produce equal outcomes.
3. The weight of submissions is not proportional to public opinion and can be ignored

   MISLEADING & WRONG: A majority of public opinion is not always the most appropriate way of decision-making. When 82% of our population who are not Māori decide what is best for Māori you have a tyranny of the majority. When making decisions around human rights, the education curriculum and health treatments based on public opinion does not necessarily deliver the best outcomes. As we know through the likes of Brexit in the UK, disinformation can swing public opinion as is occurring here with the Treaty Principles.
4. Māori did cede authority to the crown- some Rangatira refused to sign at the time because they believed that was what Te Tiriti would do.

   WRONG: This is a misrepresentation of history. There was a good deal of debate amongst Māori at the time with a range of opinions expressed. To identify a couple of views as representing all is duplicitous. Te Kēmara, as one example, did not trust the English to treat him and his people fairly and only signed Te Tiriti because his believed mana and sovereignty would be protected and he would not be subservient to the Crown. Te Tiriti o Waitangi was preceded by the 1835 He Whakaputanga – Declaration of Independence. This included the asserted that sovereign power and authority in the land resided with Te Whakaminenga, the Confederation of United Tribes, and that no foreigners could make laws. Te Whakaminenga was to meet at Waitangi each autumn to frame laws, and in return for their protection of British subjects in their territory, they sought King William's protection against threats to their mana. It is unlikely that Māori would reverse this approach and relinquish sovereignty.
5. Parliament has the right to make laws in New Zealand

   YES, BUT WITH CONSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS. The New Zealand Parliament, while possessing the power to create laws (parliamentary sovereignty), operates within a framework of constitutional principles and checks, including the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (BORA) and judicial review, ensuring laws align with fundamental rights and freedoms and The Treaty of Waitangi.

   
   
6. Parliament must be able to pass laws for social and economic stability and there must be one set of laws for all.

   PARTLY RIGHT. Parliament has the important role of establishing laws within the constitutional constraints. The New Zealand Parliament has also signed in good faith the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP). These recognise that within any laws of a nation that there should be consideration for differences in how rights are to be determined.
7. The concept of twin sovereignties is anarchistic as was revealed through the hijinks created by Te Pāti Māori acting against the bill.

   WRONG. Colonisation and assimilation are the failed concepts. Calling Te Pāti Maori action against the principles bill 'hijinks' is a disrespectful and condescending dismissal of their right to peacefully protest and ignores the fact that many non-Māori supported the protests that were amongst the largest this country has seen.

   

   Activation in Invercargill, huge support across the motu

   
   
8. Parliament as a representative body should be able to define the principles of the Treaty and to block that from happening will disenfranchise New Zealanders from deciding their future and create disunity.

   WRONG. Te Tiriti o Waitangi is an agreement between the Crown and rangatira of hapū. The only way that the principles can be redefined legally and in good faith is through agreement between the signing parties. This is basic contract law.
9. Parliament must remain the highest court in the land.

   WRONG. Parliament is not New Zealand's highest court; the Supreme Court of New Zealand (Te Kōti Mana Nui) is the highest court and final appeal court.
10. The fact that other countries like Canada have included indigenous rights in their constitutional setup does not logically mean NZ should do the same.

    WRONG. Canada’s recognition of indigenous sovereignty is part of an ongoing journey and is an important process to achieve equity and address past and ongoing injustices and discrimination. New Zealand was following a similar positive journey before it was disrupted by David Seymour and Act.
11. The fact that currently mana whenua has to be specifically consulted in legislation gives them ‘special’ rights not given to others.

    TRUE, BUT DELIBERATELY MISLEADING. Having different rights in some circumstances is provided to many groups and individuals in legislation. You could view Māori rights as similar to the rights of property owners when decisions are being made regarding their property or sovereign rights as supported by DRIP.
12. There does not need to be specific protections for Māori culture and language via a treaty to ensure its survival.

    WRONG. The growth of te reo and greater appreciation of te ao Māori has benefited greatly through recognition in legislation and in school curricula. When te reo Māori became an official language in 1987 only 3.7% of the population were speakers. In the 2023 census 30% of our population can speak more than a few words or phrases. The fact that the current government is actively removing the use of te reo in multiple forums and are removing references to the Treaty in legislation, supports the need for protections.
13. Charter Schools provide the ability for the language and culture to be taught for those who want it.

    MISLEADING. We already have Kura Kaupapa Māori and all children should be taught our official languages and understand the indigenous culture of Aotearoa. It is through education that we build understanding and tolerance.
14. The fact that the ‘bureaucracy’ (courts, Waitangi Tribunal) opposed the new principles carries no weight, they ‘invented’ the current principles and this goes against the idea of a liberal democracy.

    WRONG. A true liberal democracy still has to operate within the law and there are limitations of power on elected representatives. If there were no legal constraints and all power was provided to parliament it would allow an autocracy to occur. There has to be checks and balances on power. Legal decisions built over many years and decades, through learned consideration and input, should not be able to be discarded overnight by ignorant ideologues. The power structure that Seymour envisages is not dissimilar to Donald Trump’s.
15. The bill hasn’t created division in our society, it has revealed division.

    WRONG. The current divisions are being fuelled by Seymour’s disinformation and supported by ideological fringe groups like Hobson’s Pledge. They are based on pseudohistory. While some divisions did exist before, they have been greatly fuelled by this bill.
16. Those in parliament who oppose this bill are opposed to equal rights. WRONG. Seymour is deliberately using a simplistic presentation of human rights to ignore the concepts of equity and inclusion. His vision of equal rights is the imposition of rights determined by his own cultural perspectives. This would support the process of assimilation which would force conformity to the dominant culture and loss of cultural identity for many. The process of inclusion celebrates diversity and unique contributions. Diverse thinking applied to decision-making and governance make decisions more robust and supports stronger communities.

Seymour does not want diverse thinking and inclusion in decision making as it will create barriers for the operations of the corporates and multinationals he supports. In many instances our obligations under the Treaty are the only remaining protections we have for our indigenous species and natural environments that Seymour does not value. His approach to school lunches reveals much about his agenda and values.