Letters: Political expediency trumps massive public interest in Treaty Principles Bill

Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti protesters in Hamilton on November 14, 2024. Photo / Mike Scott

Letters to the Editor

Politics trumps public interest

David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill has drawn a record response, with 470,000 submissions from the New Zealand public.

Clearly this reflects a massive public interest in the bill and the meaning of the nation’s founding document, the Treaty of Waitangi.

If nothing else, the bill has triggered widespread interest, both public and political, as to what are the defining principles of the Treaty.

Based on this enormous interest, it’s a reasonable question as to why Parliament is simply going to discard the bill after the first reading.

The uncomfortable conclusion could be that the Government is missing an historic opportunity to tackle the highly polarising, multi-layered and complex task of defining the principles, solely on the grounds of a lack of political will and courage.

The Treaty of Waitangi will remain an enigma, lacking in clear, consensual definition, and the Waitangi Tribunal and the courts will continue to be given a free hand to simply soldier on with past rulings, interpretations and judgments as their guide.

Apologies to Mr Seymour, but this Government and likely all successive governments will have much more urgent matters to attend to. In the real world, political pragmatism and expediency will always win over ideology.

Bruce Eliott, St Heliers.

Economic elephants

“Go for growth” is Simon Bridges’ opinion (Jan 15), however, there are two elephants in the room which he does not mention.

The first is the housing market, which has sucked investment out of the productive sectors of the economy for decades. This has been enabled and incentivised by those in government who have prioritised re-election and their personal portfolios over equity.

The efforts of the last Government to partly address this have now been overturned. This has enabled people who are already “sorted” to make huge profits without equitable tax contribution and effort.

The second is the ludicrous concept of continual growth on a planet of finite resources. Where is the leadership that will address this reality? As can be seen by the climate-driven disasters here and globally, we may think we are “sorted”, but the reality is we are just good at ignoring elephants.

Margette Campbell, Waihi Beach.

Bill reveal

Congratulations to the Herald for bringing an appalling proposed piece of legislation into the wider public domain (“‘Alarm bells need to ring’: Concerns over Regulatory Standards Bill”, Jan 13).

It has been flying under the radar for some time. Now there is opportunity for wider debate and discussion and to shed light on who will benefit and who will not should this bill make its way into our legislation. There have been three failed attempts to introduce similar bills, in 2006, 2009 and 2011.

Let us make sure that this fourth attempt ends in a similar way.

Rewa Selmeci, Ōrewa.

E-scooter fallout

Thanks to correspondent James Gregory for his observations about e-scooters (Jan 14).

I would like to add that the CBD and the waterfront are not solely the preserve of the carefree young. I have also heard cruise line passengers complaining about the annoyance inconsiderate use of scooters can be.

Is the genie out of the bottle? Perhaps we can point to cities like Melbourne and Paris where the unmonitored use of scooters has been deemed a hazard to public safety, and their use curtailed.

Personally, I’ve always wondered about Auckland Council’s take in the business of granting licences to e-scooter operators.

Ellie Carruthers, Ponsonby.

Hand up v hand out

Correspondent Viv Allen (Jan 15) appears to believe I am “hiding under a bush” by asserting that it is primarily a parent’s responsibility to care for their families, rather than relying on taxpayers’ help.

I would encourage Ms Allen to reread my original letter. At no point did I suggest that people must plan their lives to avoid ever being poor or in need. Such an expectation is unrealistic and was never implied.

What I did state was that I acknowledge the importance of providing support where it is necessary – circumstances that, as she seems to suggest, may apply in her case.

Alan Walker, St Heliers.

Game of two halves

Thank you for the illuminating run through the numbers at the 2025 ASB Classic (Jan 14). My letter relates to the prize money received.

As I read the numbers, I thought that there must be some mistake. $36,000 for the women’s winner, $186,000 for the men’s! In round figures that’s five times!

As what I like to think of as one of the world’s enlightened democracies, how can such an anomaly occur? Perhaps the organisers can shed some light on this ridiculous situation.

Peter Blakey, Mairangi Bay.

Dangerous gamble

One has to question the morality of Lotto, knowing that for 38 years they have allowed minors to gamble. It is disappointing that a law has to be passed to stop this practice continuing. Good on the Government for bringing in laws to stop young people getting hooked on gambling.

Neil Hatfull, Warkworth.