The bill on the principles of the treaty voted after general indignation

A controversial bill seeking to reinterpret the founding document of New Zealand, which established the rights of the Maori and non-Māori in the country, was defeated at its second reading.

The bill on the principles of the Treaty was elected 112 votes to 11, a few days after a government committee recommended that they do not continue.

The proposed legislation aimed to legally define the principles of the Waitangi Treaty of 1840 – causing a generalized indicative that saw More than 40,000 people participating in a demonstration Apart from Parliament last year.

The bill already expected failure, with most The main political parties have undertaken to vote.

The members of the right -wing law party, who deposited it, were the only deputies to vote for the second reading Thursday. The head of the Act, David Seymour, promised to continue to campaign on the issue.

“I believe that this bill or something like it will one day go because there are no good arguments against its content,” he wrote on social networks.

In November, tensions were raised in Parliament during a debate before the vote. Labor deputy Willie Jackson was invited to leave after refusing to remove a comment that he called Seymour a “liar”.

The head of work Chris Hipkins said that the proposed legislation would be forever “a task on our country”, while Te Pāti Māori (The Maori Party) MP Hana Rāwhiti Maipi -Clarke – which attracted international attention to Start a haka in parliament when reading the bill – said it was “destroyed”.

“Instead of dividing and conquering, this bill has returned against communities and United through solidarity (country) in solidarity for our foundation agreement and what it represents,” the co-leader of the Green Party Marama Davidson later said in a statement.

The second reading intervened after a limited committee, which had examined the proposed legislation, published its final report – revealing that more than 300,000 submissions had been made, the vast majority of which were opposed.

It is the greatest response to the proposed legislation that the New Zealand parliament has ever received.

While the principles of the treaty have never been defined in law, its fundamental values Over time, having been woven in different elements of legislation in order to offer a repair to the Maori for the wrong that is made to them during colonization.

The law proposed by law had three main principles: that the New Zealand government has the power to govern and parliament to make laws; that the crown would respect the rights of the Maori at the time of the signing of the treaty; And that everyone is equal to the law and is entitled to equal protection.

The party said that the bill would not modify the Treaty itself, but that “would continue the process of defining the principles of the treaty”. They believe that this would help create equality for all New Zealanders and improve social cohesion.

Among those who support, there were Ruth Richardson, former Minister of Finance of the National Party of Center-Directors, who declared to the restricted committee that the proposed legislation was “a bill from which the time had come”.

It argued that even if the treaty itself could not be challenged, the idea of ​​its principles was a “relatively modern matter” and that these principles had so far been largely defined by the courts rather than by parliament.

“There is a new imperative in New Zealand on the cultural front, the need to tackle and correct the overcoming of the treaty which is more and more and obviously become capricious and erroneous,” she said.

Opponents of the bill, on the other hand, believe that it would be detrimental to the Maori and would create greater social divisions.

Sharon Hawke, the daughter of the late activist Maori and deputy Joe Hawke, spoke to the restricted committee on behalf of the Ngāti Whātua ōrākei Hapū (subto) – telling him that the legislation “strips the fabric of the place where we are leading in the past three decades to improve our popular health (the capacity of Māori) to win, to gain a good health”.

She added that the bill “polluted” the idea that all New Zealanders had a future together.

“We will continue to show our opposition to that,” she said.

The key questions identified by the members of the public who have brought to the restricted committee understood that it was not consistent with the values ​​of the treaty, and that it had favored equality with equity – not taking into account social disparities, such as those created by the inheritance of colonization.

There were also concerns about the extent to which the bill had complied with international law and if it would have a negative impact on the reputation of New Zealand on an international scale.

The authors who supported the bill, for their part, refer to a current lack of clarity and certainty on the principles of the treaty and the importance of equality for all.

They also said that it was important to hold a referendum to facilitate a national conversation around the treaty – something that David Seymour still believes.

The bill on the principles of the treaty adopted its first reading in November, with the support of National – the dominant party of the Coalition Manager of New Zealand – which had promised to support it within the framework of a coalition agreement with Act, but no further.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, who is also the leader of the National Party, previously said that there was nothing in the bill he loved. He was not in Parliament for his second reading, but pointed out earlier in the day that it was time to move on.