Submissions

To: Justice Select Committee
Date: January 2025

Purpose

This submission’s core purpose is to strongly oppose the Bill and recommend its withdrawal. DPA argues that the Bill is founded on a fundamental misunderstanding of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, that it would amount to a breach of Article 2, and that it would have a disproportionately negative impact on tāngata whaikaha disabled Māori and disabled tāngata Tiriti. DPA also highlights how the Bill's consultation process itself undermines disability rights related to accessibility and participation.

Summary of DPA submission

DPA strongly opposes the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill 2024 and emphatically recommends its immediate withdrawal. DPA asserts that the Bill is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, Hobson’s document, and existing Treaty Principles, and that if enacted, it would constitute a full breach of Article 2 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, drastically altering its practical application. DPA aligns with the 42 Kings Counsel who argue that the Bill misrepresents Te Tiriti by undermining Article 2 and actively supports the existing, robustly studied Treaty principles of partnership, active protection, equity, and redress.

DPA underscores the disproportionately negative impact this Bill will have on tāngata whaikaha disabled Māori. With one in three Māori having an impairment, DPA asserts that upholding Te Tiriti o Waitangi is integral to upholding the rights of tāngata Whaikaha disabled Māori, whose rights as Indigenous Peoples are inherent and derived from their whakapapa.

DPA highlights historical and institutional discrimination against Māori, which has led to death and disability, and emphasizes that Te Tiriti, the Waitangi Tribunal process, and existing principles have been essential mechanisms for advocacy and redress for Māori, particularly disabled Māori.

The submission argues that the Bill runs counter to disability rights outlined in the UNCRPD and the New Zealand Disability Strategy. DPA specifically criticizes the timing of the consultation—scheduled over the Christmas-New Year period—as undermining UNCRPD Article 9 (Accessibility) and Article 21 (Freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information). This timing limited the ability of disabled organisations to produce accessible materials for disabled individuals to prepare their responses, particularly given the lack of support worker access during holidays.

DPA also expresses concern that the Bill represents an attempt to limit the scope and application of Te Tiriti o Waitangi to facilitate greater environmental exploitation and development. This is alarming for the disabled community due to the disproportionate impact of climate change and disasters on disabled people, and the consistent lack of accessibility in new developments.

DPA maintains that Te Tiriti and the Waitangi Tribunal provide essential safeguards against such exploitation and denial of accessibility. Furthermore, DPA argues that the Bill fails to clarify Treaty principles or its constitutional role, and instead promotes social division and misinformation, directly contradicting its stated objectives and the goal of social cohesion.

Key Recommendation/Finding:

DPA strongly opposes the proposed Treaty Principles being put to referendum and recommends that the Bill be withdrawn.

Supporting Statement 1:

"By recognising Māori rights only when incorporated into Treaty settlements with the Crown, this proposed principle also attempts to exclude the courts, which play a crucial role in developing the common law and protecting indigenous and minority rights."

Supporting Statement 2:

"Tāngata whaikaha Māori have diverse identitiesand experiences, but as tangata whenua they share an inherent connection through whakapapa to whānau, hapū and iwi as well as to whenua, maunga, awa and taiao"