A Maori academic who says that immigration by whites should be restricted because they pose a threat to race relations due to their “white supremacist” attitudes, is leading an Independent Maori Working Group on constitutional reform.
According to Iwi Chairs Forum member Margaret Mutu, the group will develop a constitution to be given to the Crown as a model for New Zealand.
She claims that their working party has the blessing of Maori Party leader Pita Sharples and National Party Leader and Prime Minister John Key.
Dr Mutu, a Professor of Maori Studies at Auckland University, is outspoken in her belief that New Zealand belongs to Maori and that all non-Maori are guests in this country. That someone with such extreme ideas is leading a constitutional review on behalf of Maori tribal authorities should serve as a warning to every New Zealander concerned about the future of this country that radical forces are driving the constitutional change process.
Threat to Democracy
In effect, the Constitutional Review, a joint initiative of the Maori Party and National, represents the greatest threat to our democracy in recent times.
If the promoters of the review get their way, the Treaty of Waitangi will become the foundation for a new constitutional framework.
As a result, New Zealand will end up with a constitution that enshrines superior rights for Maori. That means that our fundamental democratic principle of equality under the law for all citizens will be lost.
And if you think such a notion is far-fetched and could not possibly happen here, think again. The Maori Party’s desire to have the country’s foreshore and seabed taken out of Crown ownership and privatised to the Maori tribal elite was seen by most New Zealanders as a fanciful demand driven by race-based greed.
But all it took was a whisper in the ear of the Prime Minister for it to happen.
To make matters worse, when Mr Key realised that the law change would gain little backing from non-iwi, he promised New Zealanders that it would not go ahead unless there was widespread public support.
It soon became clear however that this was a promise he had no intention of honouring. In spite of overwhelming public opposition, Mr Key pushed the law change through Parliament.
Costly support
That our Prime Minister was prepared to put the covetous demands of his coalition partner ahead of his loyalty and commitment to the New Zealand public, does not bode well for our future.
With Ms Mutu and the other iwi leaders now having the ear of the Prime Minister, if the polls are correct and National wins the election, they will be putting the hard word that a new constitution enshrining the Treaty of Waitangi and the Maori seats is the price of the Maori Party’s support.
Given National’s recent record, it is highly likely they will agree, unless there is public uproar forcing them to back off.
The reality is that there is absolutely no reason for a change to our constitution, which is working well. The only reason for change is that the Maori Party and the powerful iwi that they represent are lusting for greater power and control.
The constitutional review was part of the Confidence and Supply Agreement between the Maori Party and National.
It states, “Both parties agree to the establishment (including its composition and terms of reference)… of a group to consider constitutional issues including Maori representation. The Maori Party will be consulted on membership and the choice of Chairperson, and will be represented on the group.”
The terms of reference for the Constitutional Review Panel (established in August 2011) include a number of general issues such as the size of Parliament and the length of a Parliamentary term. But more importantly, it focuses on the future of the Maori Electoral Option and the Maori seats in Parliament and in Local Government as well as the role of the Treaty of Waitangi within New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements.
Central to all of this of course is whether New Zealand actually needs a new constitution.
Fancy Call
Over the last few years, it has become popular to call for a new constitution as a means of rectifying some of the country’s perceived wrongs.
There is a somewhat romantic idea that a new constitution enshrining equal rights has to be better than our present system, which is increasingly supporting Maori privilege.
However, now that the country is formally considering constitutional reform, it is time to dispel the myths.
Contrary to popular belief, a new constitution would not be the panacea for the ailments suffered by New Zealand. It would be a mechanism to pass lawmaking powers from Parliament to unelected judges.
Under a written constitution, judges have the freedom not only to administer the law but also to create it.
This should ring warning bells. New Zealand has already suffered immeasurably over the years from the damaging consequences of activist judges overstepping the mark by going further in a law-making capacity than Parliament ever intended.
The above is the edited version of the views expressed by Dr Muriel Newman, Director of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research, in her web-based free weekly Newsletter, NZCPR Weekly. For full text, visit www.nzcpr.com
