Election 2023: What’s on David Seymour’s mind as final vote counts determine next Government

David Seymour hopes the results of the special votes count will mean National and Act will not need NZ First to form a Government. Photo / Jason Oxenham

Originally published by Māori Television

With special votes from last week’s elections yet to be counted to fully determine the next government, Act party leader David Seymour weighs in on the possible coalitions between his party, National and New Zealand First.

The latter party’s leader, Winston Peters, and Seymour have not seen eye to eye during their respective campaigns, which could jeopardise coalition talks with National.

Seymour hopes the special votes, once counted, will mean National and Act won’t need New Zealand First to form a Government.

“I’ve only ever told the truth,” Seymour says. “You’ve got a party that’s been in government four different times and has never done a second term in a row. Each time there’s been a resignation, a sacking, a Serious Fraud Office inquiry, there’s always something.

“A lot of people got upset about putting those facts on the table, but let’s accept the facts. We just have to do the best we can for the people that voted for us.”

And even if a National/Act coalition is realised, the minor party’s bottom-line policy of having a referendum on the Treaty of Waitangi is not a priority for National, potentially making coalition talks more difficult.

Winston Peters's NZ First Party is a potential partner in a coalition Government with National and Act. Photo / Sylvie Whinray

No plans to reconsider settlements

Basing his reasons for a Treaty referendum on an “incorrect” interpretation of the Treaty principles, Seymour is advocating for universal rights for all who live in New Zealand.

That is despite the Treaty signifying the partnership between Māori and Pākehā/the British Crown.

Seymour said he supported Article 2 of the Treaty but, when asked if that meant he would look at reopening the settlements to ensure a fairer compensation, he said that if the question meant private property being handed over. he didn’t agree.

He called Treaty settlements “full, fair, and final”, and had no plans to look into more land redress for iwi while in office.

“We would never support [private and redress], and I would put it to you that in a society where the Government can take your land, that is not going to be good for anybody.

“The reason we’re in this situation is because the private property title was overwritten unfairly. I don’t think you’re going to correct that by continuing the same wrong that got us into the situation.”

He says his referendum question would be, as he says, “Do you confirm that the Treaty Principles Act be passed into law?”