7
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by lightnegative@lemmy.world to c/newzealand@lemmy.nz

Im quite surprised by this, isn't Parliament a crown/british concept? And Te Pati Maori are usually quite opposed to Crown concepts.

Regardless, I think as much hate as ACT gets for this - it seems obvious that clarity on the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi is required so that every New Zealander knows where they stand (legally speaking) and we can move on as a country.

The different interpretations from different groups are distracting from the real issues because the solution gets muddied.

Should we establish group-specific organisations that all do the same thing, just for different segments of society - or should we pour our energy and resources into making organisations work for all New Zealanders?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rangelus@lemmy.nz 4 points 5 months ago

But the ambiguity comes from the crown ignoring the original, Te Reo document, in favour of the translates English version, then ignoring that as well.

[-] TagMeInSkipIGotThis@lemmy.nz 2 points 5 months ago

A lot of folks don't understand that the recent more moderate approach by the Crown is still not following the Te Reo version of the treaty which means the approach still does not meet international legal standards for which version matters.

this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
7 points (76.9% liked)

Aotearoa / New Zealand

1651 readers
23 users here now

Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general

Rules:

FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom

 

Banner image by Bernard Spragg

Got an idea for next month's banner?

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS