Treaty Minister Paul Goldsmith says he was uncomfortable with what he called “constitutional adventurism” after negotiations over a Treaty settlement were halted over an “agree-to-disagree” Crown sovereignty clause.
Goldsmith, a senior National MP, sat down with Q+A for a wide-ranging interview across his ministerial portfolios this morning.
He was asked about the settlement with East Coast iwi Te Whānau-ā-Apanui that was halted at the final hurdle after Goldsmith said he became uncomfortable over a clause to “agree to disagree” over whether sovereignty was ceded between the iwi and the Crown.
“All of those settlements up to now have not referred to this issue. They’ve been silent on this issue. They’ve focused on historical claims,” the Treaty Negotiations Minister said.
“The Te Whānau-ā-Apanui one was the first where it was directly responded to with an agree-to-disagree clause. I didn’t feel comfortable with, ultimately, constitutional experimentation through a Treaty settlement, or constitutional adventurism, in a sense, and so that’s why we didn’t go forward.”
He added that the “novelty” was introduced during the previous government.
“This is the first time that it’s been done, and we weren’t comfortable going forward on that basis,” Goldsmith said.
“If you’re doing a full and final settlement, handing over money to a group that, in the deed, doesn’t accept that the Crown actually has — the way you could read it was the Crown doesn’t have the authority to do this, because they’ve never ceded sovereignty and they’re still sovereign. And so there’s a disjuncture between those two things.”
In a landmark 2014 ruling, the Waitangi Tribunal concluded the rangatira who signed the Treaty of Waitangi did not cede sovereignty to the Crown.
When asked specifically about the issue, Goldsmith said: “It’s impossible to know, of course, what was in the mind of somebody in 1840. And so historians can argue about that all day, and what people were actually thinking in the moment.”
Opposition party leaders support the view that iwi did not cede sovereignty when signing the Treaty, with Labour’s Chris Hipkins noting “that doesn’t mean that the Crown doesn’t have sovereignty now” during controversy over the issue last year.
‘Pressure’ on public sentiment about clause – Goldsmith
In the Q+A interview, the minister was also questioned about the Crown’s stalled efforts to strike a Treaty settlement with Ngāpuhi, and whether the Government would meet a goal aiming to have all settlements finalised by 2035.
Goldsmith conceded that he believed the sovereignty clause could put “pressure” on public support for settlements, and that it was part of his decision-making.
“That’s one of the key factors I’ve got in the back of my mind everywhere, is that we want to maintain public support for the Treaty settlement process,” he said.
Asked if he had been worried about a revolt in public opinion to the process, he replied, “it puts pressure on public support. New Zealanders have been broadly supportive of the Treaty settlement processes, and I want to keep that, and we want to get to an end.
Shane Jones’ has proposed forcing New Zealand’s largest iwi into a single commercial for a Treaty settlement. (Source: 1News)
“Everybody’s impatient. We’ve been going for 30 years. We want to see a resolution to this, so that we can move together as New Zealanders.”
In his Q+A interview, Goldsmith was also asked about his Cabinet colleague Shane Jones’ plans for a member’s bill to force Ngāpuhi to the negotiating table.
“I get on very well with Shane, and we work very collaboratively. He’s impatient. He wants to see things happen for Northland,” the minister said. “It’s all part of coalition politics.”
Watch the video above for the full interview
Q+A with Jack Tame is made with the support of New Zealand On Air
