All new legislation should have a section referencing its effect on the Treaty of Waitangi?
On average, everyone disagrees with significant nonconsensus between 409 voters. |
|
Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
All new legislation should have a section referencing its effect on the Treaty of Waitangi
You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.
Reasons To DisagreeSeperatist politics is a loosing game for everyone 25 March 2006
There is absolutely no need. There is no such thing as "THE TREATY" - there are multiple treaties - all different. 20 May 2006
no its not the old treaty there are just trying to get more land for free 10 November 2006
There is no need to complicate legislation in this way. 5 May 2007
What are the principles, just a pointless political statement to cause issues! 21 June 2007
I disagree wholeheartedly. The treaty's mere existence is enough. It doesn't need to be mentioned in any new legislation because it is already in force. Infact, I question the motives of any group who try to give the treaty any more meaning than it already has - seems to me that one racial group is using it as a lever to gain advantage over all other racial groups that make up New Zealand. Really, the treaty should be put to bed - it was a crude document that has served it's purpose but is no longer relevant. What we need today is a new constitution that secures the rights of all New Zealanders regardless of race. Anything less than that is racist. 17 July 2007
The treaty is irrelevant; all those involved in it are long dead 27 August 2012
All the Treaty said is that (1) the chiefs agreed to UK sovereignty (2) the government promised to protect land and other valuable from theft by enemy tribes, or other criminals and (3) the government promised to treat NZ natives as UK subjects. The Treaty says nothing about "partnership" or any other of the alleged "principles". 6 July 2013
one law for all with no racist references. 21 August 2014
|
Reasons To AgreeThe treaty is for all new zealanders, giving them all the same rights, right to your land, right to equality, right to participation. These should be rights that can not be taken from the individual (or in the case of maori, from the individual tribe) 19 September 2005
Absolutly! 11 January 2006
The treaty was the document signed by sufficient numbers of people agreeing to abolish slavery and abitrary rule and adopt the Westminster system where an elected house of representatives and government by convention held power over the imperialist Monarchy since the signing of the Bill of Rights to William of Orange/Protestants over James 11/Catholics to end a 400 year struggle between the Parliamentarians and the Monarchists 3 February 2006
The Treaty of Waitangi is a very specific law written for the original inhabitants of New Zealand who existed when the British commenced settlement there. 9 March 2011
Seek section 9 when decisions are being made to sell off assets without first consulting 'all citizens of NZ'. There is nothing the Greens do today that the Treaty hasn't demanded since the day of inception. Anti apartheid was drawn from this document because the Maori allowed colonisers to share the same space, anti nuclear was also initiated in the Treaty for environmental etc blah blah. If you don't see the obvious then you are ignorant and beyond my educating anyone. Perhaps civil unrest is preferred here. 10 February 2012
|
Reasons for Remain Neutral
I think the Constitution Act or Bill of Rights Act provides this anyway?
depends who is defining what that reference actually means. my interpretation of te triti o faitangi is probably very different to yours.
My View
You can make your comments once you have voted.
You need to register a voting profile or login before you can vote.
Back to all voting categories
or
Back to "Treaty of Waitangi"