Waatea News Column: So what does a Maori Parliament look like?

ByMartyn Bradbury

The Māori Party have launched an interesting idea of a Māori Parliament. When the universal provision of services fails Māori so much, providing them with the agency promised by the Treaty is an idea whose time is coming.

Various countries attempt to wrestle with the legacy of colonisation by providing some attempt at self-determination and control over local issues similar to a local council so the idea is not as radical as first sounds.

We need to fully fund universal services that cater for all NZers while also providing a resource to fund Māori centric and Māori controlled social services.

I argued in a Waatea column back in 2014 about how NZs wider political framework could work alongside a Māori Parliament to fulfil our Treaty obligations.

I imagine a NZ Parliament Upper House that has 50-50 representation between Maori and Pakeha. Having a 50-50 Upper House with the power to delay legislation that was not in the best interests of the Nation when it comes to Treaty issues would stop Government’s from fire sales of national assets and prevent things like the Foreshore and Seabed legislation from becoming law.

If we want to be serious about Tino rangatiratanga, then we need to start envisaging how to make it real within the current power structure so that it means something.

First published on Waatea News.

Similar Posts

3 Comments

  2. It’s a bit late to stop the sale of our assets. Did National leave any behind? Just rats and mice now.

  3. The upper house is a tricky thing I really support it but for every right wing policy it is able to delay and push back on there’s a left wing policy they’ll push back on.

    Mmp governments are barely able to reform anything due to coalition partners like uf and nzf acting as handbreaks to either side so when you finally get a center left parliament with a lab/greens or what have you you’d no doubt get a center right upper house elected because kiwis would no doubt want to keep govt on a short leash so you’d no doubt end up with bog standard centerist govts unable to move on anything and when they finally could the upper house would do everything in their power to ensure the other side doesn’t do anything.

    On the other side of the coin it does ensure that no authoritarian govt could take advantage of nzs lack of written constitution and far too centralized executive which is a damn good thing.

    I generally do think we’d elect upper house of the opposite side of the govt of the day and really nothing would get done though and mmp has provided 26 years of compromise dithering and putting necessary reforms in the too hard basket.

    Peaks and valleys

Comments are closed.