Jacinda Ardern appears to be under the misapprehension that her plan to give Maori separatism in most areas of government is a partnership. I am undecided whether this use of the word came from a misinterpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi, whether she misunderstood it from the dictionary or perhaps she just dreamt it up? Whatever the reason, the fact of the matter is the legislation she is proposing in this regard has absolutely nothing to do with a partnership.
So when she screams at Judith Collins in Parliament, “Why is it so hard for the member to use the word partnership?”, the answer is quite simple. Because there isn’t one. I have looked at meanings of the word which, in most dictionaries, describe it in a business sense, i.e. partnerships in a commercial enterprise. Even if you use the word more loosely it still doesn’t get to the meaning as proposed in the legislation. There are words like union, collaboration, alliance and others but none fit the description of what the government is proposing.
With regard to the Treaty, we have an even clearer picture. According to the One New Zealand Foundation Inc there is no partnership between Maori and the Crown. The Tiriti of Waitangi, the Statute of Westminster, and the New Zealand Coat of Arms gave One Sovereignty, One Law to all the people / citizens of New Zealand, irrespective of race, colour or creed; therefore, “There never was a ‘Partnership’ between Maori and the Crown.”
A ‘bogus’ treaty text creates the “partnership”. The 1987 Court of Appeal, in the case of the New Zealand Maori Council vs the Attorney-General, stated: “The Treaty of Waitangi has been primary interpreted in the New Zealand Courts and this Appeal was significant in establishing the modern views of the Principles of the Treaty.” The Court also stated the Treaty was a “Partnership” between Maori and the Crown.
The One New Zealand Foundation goes on to say that on page 663 of the appeal document we find, instead of using an “official” text of the Treaty, the Court used an “unauthorised” text by Sir Hugh Kawhura, which he calls his “Attempt at a reconstruction of the literal translation of the Maori text”. So the Court decided to use a text by a man representing the people who had most to gain from its outcome, the Court stating “It was put before us on behalf of the applicants. The Crown likewise accepted it for this case”.
The One New Zealand Foundation says that here we have the New Zealand Courts accepting a ‘bogus’ translation to interpret the Treaty and establishing the unfounded “Five Principles of the Treaty” and a “Partnership between Maori and the Crown”. The Court of Appeal’s findings were a sham based on a ‘bogus’ translation and must be ruled out of order. Geoffrey Palmer who instigated the “Five Principles” later admitted, “I was wrong. I made a mistake.” There was never a “Partnership” between Maori and the Crown. The One New Zealand Foundation quotes a past Race Relations Conciliator, Mr John Clark, as saying “Maori today are a people with Maori ancestry as one sees in legislation”. Maori today are in name only, they are first and foremost New Zealand citizens.
Jacinda Ardern can talk about partnership all she likes but, in terms of her legislation, it doesn’t exist. A figment of her imagination it may be but that’s all it is. In reality, according to both any English Dictionary and the Treaty of Waitangi, the use of the word partnership in this context must indeed, like the ridiculous haka in Parliament, be ruled OUT OF ORDER!!
Please share this BFD article so others can discover The BFD.