This is a well considered article. I am baffled by the Waitangi Tribunal arguing that NgaPuhi never ceded sovereignty, as this fatally undermines the essential basis of Treaty settlements - that Māori surrendered sovereignty/the full powers of government, but in return had their lands guaranteed by that government. If that government is no longer legitimate (in the eyes of the Tribunal and the various Margaret Mutus) then that same government’s liability is also reduced.
Well written, Liam. I'd like to add two points. 1. The Treaty has an acknowledged role in NZ's constitutional history, but it was a treaty between foreign peoples, and not in itself a constitution. 2. Any community on these islands that rejects the Crown's assumption of its sovereignty today weakens any claim they may make for compensation from the Crown in future. Indeed, they may be forgetting that the Waitangi Tribunal was a creature of a parliament that had sworn loyalty to the monarch.
Basically, to put it in an old fashioned way, based in the realities of humanity’s past: Might is Right (which in our more enlightened times has morphed in my opinion to The Majority Calls the Shots
I have been meaning to write something like this, but knew I couldn't really do it justice. Thank you for doing so.
That means a lot to me. I actually feel like printing that comment out and framing it.
I agree fully with this comment. Thanks Liam!
This is a well considered article. I am baffled by the Waitangi Tribunal arguing that NgaPuhi never ceded sovereignty, as this fatally undermines the essential basis of Treaty settlements - that Māori surrendered sovereignty/the full powers of government, but in return had their lands guaranteed by that government. If that government is no longer legitimate (in the eyes of the Tribunal and the various Margaret Mutus) then that same government’s liability is also reduced.
Well written, Liam. I'd like to add two points. 1. The Treaty has an acknowledged role in NZ's constitutional history, but it was a treaty between foreign peoples, and not in itself a constitution. 2. Any community on these islands that rejects the Crown's assumption of its sovereignty today weakens any claim they may make for compensation from the Crown in future. Indeed, they may be forgetting that the Waitangi Tribunal was a creature of a parliament that had sworn loyalty to the monarch.
Basically, to put it in an old fashioned way, based in the realities of humanity’s past: Might is Right (which in our more enlightened times has morphed in my opinion to The Majority Calls the Shots
An excellent and wise contribution to the debate but it is a shame that this sort of argument is rarely found in mainstream media.
Coming from such a learned professor, especially from my alma mater, means a lot. Thank you for making my morning.