The Honour the Treaty! slogan on many banners during the Tuesday 5 December Maori Party-orchestrated gatherings and at the earlier “Stop Co-governance” presentations organised by Julian Batchelor.

By Roger Childs

Do the people who marched and gathered last Tuesday in protest at planned government policy changes, and given lead item coverage by the Leftist Mainstream Media, know what is actually in the Treaty?

The 1840 document – the only valid treaty – was a very far-sighted agreement at the time which guaranteed British sovereignty and protection; the rule of law; the protection of property ownership, and equal citizenship rights for all New Zealanders. In other words – democracy, equality and fairness. However, the process would only be complete when voting rights for all adults, with the exception of Chinese, came in 1893. (Chinese first voted in 1952.)

Nowhere else in the world did native peoples gain equality at this time. So New Zealand natives, later called Maori, won equal rights, but not special rights, in the 1840 Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

By instituting the rule of law, “Maori” society was saved from possible extinction because

• inter-tribal warfare was forbidden
• slavery, the killing of war prisoners, cannibalism and female infanticide were outlawed.
• Breaches of the law were to be settled by discussion or in the courts.

Do the Maori Party and agitating elites, iwi leaders, politicians, academics, journalists and their non-Maori fellow travellers explain these realities and truths to their followers? 

 Fundamentally, the new government wants equality and democracy. 

What did the 1840 Treaty say?

In Article One, the native signatories ceded sovereignty (Kawanatanga) forever to Queen Victoria and her heirs. Some chiefs didn’t — showing their understanding of what they would be giving up — but the majority did. Well over a hundred chiefs endorsed relinquishing sovereignty to the Crown twenty years later at the Kohimarama Conference and emphasized the value of the protection of the monarch thorough the governors and the New Zealand governments. 

In Article Two. Chiefs and Tribes and all the people of New Zealand were guaranteed the possession of their lands, dwellings and all their property (taonga). (There was no specific mention of “Forests and Fisheries”.) Chiefs could sell land through the government.

In Article Three in return for granting sovereignty, the people on New Zealand would be granted the rights and privileges of British subjects.

There was no mention of partnership, principles or co-governance. In constitutional law the British Crown cannot enter into a partnership with a section of its people. 

Does the Maori Party and its followers understand this?

Te Tiriti o Waitangi was translated into the Nga Puhi dialect from an English draft formulated by James Busby. The Busby draft is the English version of the document, sometimes known as the Littlewood Treaty, and it is located in New Zealand Archives in Wellington.

So there is no different English version of the 1840 Treaty. The Littlewood document has exactly the same wording as Te Tiriti. How many people know this? The Waitangi Tribunal, if it does understand this truth, does not acknowledge it. 

Fake treaties: Freeman’s, Kawharu’s, Waitangi Tribunal’s mish mash

James Freeman was Hobson’s Secretary, and when a treaty for signing was needed at Waikato Heads and Manakau, he took it upon himself to write his own. (Hobson was sick at the time.) 

His Treaty in English excluded the reference in Article 2 to “all the people of New Zealand” and he added “Estates, Forests Fisheries” to the possessions list in the same article. 

Freeman sent his copy to the Governor of New South Wales. 

His treaty was un-authorised and nobody signed it as the text was never read to chiefs at Waikato Heads and Manakau. 

Professor Hugh Kawharu’s 1989 version changed the meaning of three crucial words:

• Kawanatanga meant “sovereignty” in 1840, Kawharu made it “government”.
• Rangitiratanga appeared in the original preamble but not in the articles. In 1840 it meant “possession”. Kawharu translated it as “chieftainship”. 
• Taonga meant property, however controversially Kawharu widened the meaning to “treasures” which opened the floodgates for claims to the Waitangi Tribunal.

The Waitangi Tribunal uses a mix of the Freeman and Kawharu versions. Kawharu served on the Tribunal for a time and was also a claimant. Why the Tribunal doesn’t use Te Tiriti and the Littlewood English version is beyond belief.

 Maori Party-led protest spectacles – of limited impact?

The actual turnout around the country on Tuesday was modest and did not come up to Maori Party expectations. TV Channel News First made the planned gatherings its top story on Monday and had locations beeping red on their New Zealand map. Then on Wednesday The Post made only a few passing references to what happened. 

The Maori Party gained only 3.08% of the overall party vote in the October election and wouldn’t have any representation in Parliament if the undemocratic seven special seats for Maori didn’t exist. It will be interesting to see if the National-led Coalition is prepared to abolish this glaring example of inequality and favourtism.