Garth George: What shall we do about the Treaty?

What on earth are we going to do about Waitangi Day?

More to the point, what on earth are we going to do about the Treaty of Waitangi, which has wormed its way into almost every economic and/or social interaction in the country?

This whole Treaty business seems to have got right out of hand and if something isn't done about it fairly quickly, we will end up a nation more divided than we already are.

It's long past time to lay down some ground rules when it comes to Treaty matters. And a good start would be for the Supreme Court to be asked to once and for all define what is meant by "Treaty principles".

For instance, the latest ruckus is about clause 9 of the State Owned Enterprises Act which the Government wants to drop out of any agreement for partial privatisation of state assets.

Clause 9 reads: "Nothing in this law shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi." But what those "principles" have never been defined.

Yet it was used by the New Zealand Maori Council to mount the notorious Lands case of the late 1980s, aided and abetted by a decision of the Court of Appeal which in 1987 declared the transfer of assets to be unlawful because it did not have any system to determine if the transfer was inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty.

And on and on it has gone since then, with hundreds of millions of dollars being awarded to Maori tribes, and still there is no legal definition of the "principles of the Treaty".

Lord Cooke's Court of Appeal decision simply established the principle of "partnership". Yet his judgment began by saying: "This case is perhaps as important for the future of our country as any that has come before a New Zealand court."

He was prophetic, because since then it seems that Maori have claimed "partnership" in damn near everything, up to and including mountains, forests, lakes, foreshore and seabed, radio waves and just lately water.

Has all this money lifted Maori out of poverty and ignorance as it was intended to do? So far there is no real evidence of that. So Whanau Ora was set up by Maori for Maori to deal with disadvantaged Maori families.

And what do we read this week? That more than $5 million has been spent on "whanau integration, innovation and engagement", including $6000 to a Wellington businessman to organise a family reunion.

My whanau is spread from Perth to Melbourne, to Sydney, and from Auckland to Christchurch. Some of us haven't seen one another for decades; the younger ones haven't seen some of us at all. I would certainly appreciate it if the Government was to give me enough to organise a full-scale reunion.

It would come as a pleasant surprise to the youngsters of my whanau to visit their turangawaewae (Southland) and to become aware of their whakapapa, to connect with their relatives and be given the means to identify themselves as part of a family continuum.

As for Waitangi Day itself, it is evolving, thank the Lord, with more celebrations being held throughout the land. In Rotorua this year the celebrations were widely enjoyed not just by Maori and Pakeha but by all and sundry.

That's how it should be. The traditional functions at Waitangi have been irretrievably spoiled by mindless fools and its organisers should be left to do their own thing.

Helen Clark got it right. John Key, rudely shouted down by idiots this week, should not give his imprimatur to this observance any longer, and go somewhere else on the day. Leave Waitangi to the Governor-General.

In the meantime, would somebody please define once and for all what is legally meant by "Treaty principles".

garth.george@hotmail.com