David Seymour: Implications of Treaty Principles Bill | Q+A 2024

[@mynameis123456ish]

can’t believe jack actually tried to argue that USA Canada and aus were successful examples of indigenous rights. He needs to go spend some time on a reservation

[@colonelfustercluck486]

and Jack maybe sponsoring Swedish Reindeer herders to make NZ sucessful

[@Go_Home_British_Raj]

Anglicans and other Colonials Raped and Murdered thousands of brown kids to steal brown land there and here. Then make bs apologies and carry on

[@MrWillt100]

It's funny you talk about reservation cause the American Indian people see the same problems we are going through they follow what happens here because similar things have happened to them. Were you saying or trying to get at that things are bad on reservations and that Maori were not put on Reservations. If that's the case don't try to belittle us by saying our situation is not as bad because we are not on Reservations cause that argument that's a joke because Pakeha have used this kind of example before to once again make a joke that we are not that bad off.

[@helencockerell8047]

Has got a descent argument against anything in the Bill.

[@jackiebiggs7071]

@@MrWillt100 are you badly off? Wasn't the purpose of treaty settlements to address wrongs and enable iwi to be more self determining and enrich their iwi by making investments and thereby helping their people?

[@dennis-qu7bs]

This video highlights exactly why debate and clarification is needed. Without debate and clarity, this will go on frustrating generation after generation of New Zealanders.

[@poerava]

Dude that likes to text and send vids to 13 year old girls, can’t even pronounce ‘Māori’ correctly. I wonder if he thinks we can’t see through his paid shill work from the Atlas group that he worked for in Canada, trying to strip the rights of indigenous people to pump the oil and gas from the land, royalty free. It’s impressive to see him sit up straight, when he doesn’t have a backbone.

[@Arms26]

The only reason Principles exist in the first place is because the government does not want to honor the treaty they signed.

[@LauraTeAhoWhite]

Here is the clarification: The majority of Rangatira signed te Tiriti. They did not cede sovereignty to the crown nor give them permission to confiscate land, apply unequal rates, or breakup ownership of Maori land into individually owned blocks. Te Tiriti was authenticated by William Hobson. End of discussion.

[@poerava]

@ ‘Authenticated’ Bahahahaahhahahhahahahahaahhhahahhaahahhahahah

[@Arms26]

The Treaty has its own clarification written in black and white. The problem is the government don't like that clarification so they decided to come up with their own vague clarifications.

[@RonKen-gk9yj]

Appreciate Jack's willingness to have a decent discussion

[@mostpeople_]

Seymour just say the Treaty is inconvenient to your interests

[@toakasi6425]

This is a real debate big ups to you both but well done Jack on bringing up facts and logic rather then emotionally driven rhetoric this is where alot of woke tv presenters loose points and loose real people. The coalition DPs will not endorse passed 2nd reading i wish that our media and politicians would leave it alone its dead on the water but still they push and vouch which only creates more reactions and anger.

[@Brejamlyn]

2 Words for all of you to look up: Atlas Network

[@Kereru]

Our fundamental human rights are protected under the Human Rights Act 1993 and the Bill of Rights Act 1990. It's not the treaty's job to do that. The treaty is a contract between nations based on the same concept the UK was founded on ( in their case a treaty between Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England). I think we'd all agree that Scottish people desiring a certain level of autonomy as a separate identity and culture to the English isn't a controversial or negative thing, and that forcing "equality and unity" with England by making the Scots abolish their parliament wouldn't be a cute idea. Same principles apply here.

[@chrysallis317]

I agree!

[@barrygeary9362]

JACK TAME SAID U ARE Maori an i am not so why is he so biase

[@IkeAndoit]

They are their own countries, NZ is one country with two people

[@barrygeary9362]

Plus Maori are not Indigenous they came here in canoes

[@willryan5508]

@@Kereru the human rights act and BoR are unfortunately very weak and were not enforced during Covid years. When the going gets tough, those rights get thrown out.

[@Puzzledness]

It’s actually a terrible premise to say “where has this successfully worked” to put the burden of evidence on the people who actually haven’t had their way of life introduced to a system is ridiculous. The question is where has a system like the treaty of waitangi ever been introduced? I agree that clarifying needs to happen but not by this man. Let’s actually ask where the agreement hasn’t been met and what we’re going to do to address with the people of the land. If you’re wanting to create a constitution then do that. Don’t go tampering with a previously agreed upon contract.

[@harmzdethierry4043]

Mana Maaori Motuhake! Ka Ora Tonu Matou! Ake Ake Ake! ❤️🔥❤️

[@CITA7687]

Interesting fact... NZ has signed Free Trade Agreements that have specific clauses that protect NZ. They are Treaty of Waitangi clauses that allow Maori rights of consultation and limit the ability of international corporates to control our country. See what DS is up too for his overseas mates.

[@michelledavies2197]

Exactly, it's the ATLAS NETWORK

[@LeonieRomanes]

Yep, money talks.

[@agnz]

This is it, corporations have the rights of an individual in crown law.

[@tonganqueenb5517]

As an Australian, I can assure you that a treaty between the Crown and the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander people is an idea they can only dream of. They are the most disadvantaged group in society by community standards and not having a treaty in place has had a devastating effect. The Maori are leading the way by international standards when it comes to first nations people having self-determination and land rights protection. That is something to be proud of. Te tiriti o waitangi must be protected at all costs. Kia Kaha ✊

[@SB-Kiwi]

Kia ora! 👍🏼🙌🏼

[@saregama-r8td]

Wow Thank you for highlighting this.

[@lizlambert]

​ The Mabo case which established allodial land rights for Torres Strait Islanders was judged using the same Law of equal rights to all as Mr Seymour is talking about. Mabo is a decision that has been used to establish land rights of peoples at the time of European contact in NZ as well. I'm wavering on support now and prefer NZ First position Remove all references to TOW out of parliament made law Id love to see a case taken by South Islanders against Ngai Tahu - who never signed the ToW btw

[@whateverbro9002]

The Maori and aboriginal story are not the same.

[@mike-v7s]

Moari are the worst!

[@LauraTeAhoWhite]

Fun fact: The petition against this bill got more votes (288,023) than the ACT party did in the last election (246,473).

[@CosmicCompassionQuest]

Fun fact: millions of people voted in the election, the majority for parties other than ACT or TPM, who do support the principles Seymour sets out in this bill - meaning, one law for all. The ACT vote tally is neither here nor there.

[@Orincaby]

Fun fact: two options will have a lot larger polarity than sixteen.

[@djpomare]

Good stuff Laura

[@ravinayak3306]

@Laura Fun fact Laura, Put the bill to a referendum and then see how many people vote *For* it. Me no expert, but I suspect that it will garner 7 figures

[@OMGWTFFYA]

It's not just Act voters that support it 46% of New Zealanders do with 29% undecided.

[@Gray429]

I want to share more nuance to this debate, by analysing David Seymour’s opening statement from 2:32 to 5min. Read on if you’re interested. - He quotes the Waitangi Tribunal said this bill tramples over all Māori. I can’t find a single source online that says this. He references their report, I can’t see that statement in their public report. So this is either a direct lie by him to coax people into his perception of the Waitangi Tribunal, or he’ll need to actually provide evidence of that. Waitangi tribunal’s report specifies where this Bill goes wrong, I’d recommend reading it for yourself and not hearing a politician twist it to their advantage. - He uses previous policies as examples of how NZ is held back by ancestry alone. But doesn’t reference that these policies were attempts to redress historical grievances and meet our current Treaty Principles of Partnership and Protection. Painting this as solely a debate of ancestry is concerning and narrow-minded to the context of our country. - He mentions it’s a problem to have to consult with Māori and to have to take differences in perspective into account - ironic considering he is advocating for equal rights. This is an example of why politicians call this Bill overly simplified. His version of equal rights doesn’t seem to take into account differences people have by culture, but rather, that we become one NZ. It’s also overly simplified because the concept of equality vs equity is well known to most now. Equality is that everyone has shared value, a basic concept everyone knows. Equity is ensuring that everyone, no matter your start in life, will have the same equal outcomes. What looks like privilege to some e.g. Treaty settlements, scholarship for Māori, health funding and prioritisation for Māori, are part of trying to create equitable outcomes and redressing historical grievances as recent as the 1970s. Our parents or grandparents generations. It’s an effort to help Māori who are on the lowest statistics for health, education, incarceration etc be given the same outcomes as non-Māori. To add; the settlements allowed some Iwi like Ngāi Tahu to reinvest this money into their next generations and try and give them equitable outcomes e.g Māori scholarships, housing etc. Iwi organisations like this meet the Charity Tax bracket because of this. Some people will view this as a cultural privilege because they feel left out, but they are already born into and exist in a system that generally gave their grandparents, parents etc more support. Why has this Bill become divisive? Several things are happening here that’s causing an unnecessary racial divide, stoked by the manner of which this Bill has come about. There are processes in place to protect Māori rights and Crown-Māori relations e.g the Principles in the judicial system, the Waitangi tribunal. Their interpretations aren’t legislated, which keeps it adaptable and evolving to NZ across the decades. It’s in the Spirit of the Treaty. Along comes this government who repeals Te Aka Whai Ora, an organisation established o address disparities in Māori health outcomes, which pushes against equity. It attempted to rewound the use of te reo Māori in public service, which anyone who has been alive for more than a decade and been in Public Service, knows has been a huge help in gaining Māori trust back into government. This naturally feels like the government is going backwards on Māori, raising concerns. Then David Seymour drafts his own Bill with his own definitions that reinterpret the Treaty of Waitangi and how it will be legislated. Without consultation of Māori who are a signatory of that same Treaty. Without proper expert evidence or policy either. Ignoring decades of hundreds of lawyers, courts, Waitangi Tribunal etc advice, in fact, demeaning them as less than his own intelligence. You know. As a politician. And what does parliament do? It allows the Bill to be introduced to parliament as part of their coalition deal. That is such a huge slap to Crown-Māori relations in the last 50 years, to generations of people who protested, suffered, endured, learned how to come back to the table and work together and figure out a way moving forward together. That is why the Haka in parliament, as a challenge to this government’s irreverence. That is why the Hikoi saw tens of thousands of people. That’s why Māori, and other indigenous people are aggrieved (and for people who aren’t aware, indigenous people are cultures that existed pre-colonisation by the British Empire, as defined by the United Nations, which includes Māori, AND the Moriori who are indigenous to Chatham Island and Pitt Island - I recommend reading Moriori descendent Maui Solomon’s piece on Moriori: Still Setting the Record Straight as well.) What we have is a politician who knows how to speak and present himself in a way to lull you into feeling this is all quite reasonable. Please, don’t fall for this. A politician is a politician. I am also a critic of the left; before anyone assumes my own politics based on this. My intention is just to spread more awareness and context that’s coming behind this Bill. I do personally believe we should all have a debate, but not a referendum yet; and I agree the Bill shouldn’t be passed. NZ is a young country still figuring out its identity and values. My hope is that we can figure out a way forward that has equitable outcomes for us all, that we come to a place where culture IS protected and can’t be threatened by the government of the day. Otherwise, this country is on the fast track of looking A LOT like America.

[@freezing5]

I agree. Imaginary enemies is a tired narcissistic trick. Politicians do it in other countries, too when cornered.

[@Gray429]

If anyone is also interested on the key demographic David Seymour talks to; a recent article by Craig Ashworth, a Local Democracy Reporter from Taranaki, was at a small event where David Seymour was speaking a few days ago. The article ‘ACT’s David Seymour won’t ’bow down’ to his hāpu leader’ has a sensational title, but the rest of the article is good. People at this event said about Māori “they are like seagulls, if you feed them, more come and they start crapping on you” “there’s a self serving reinterpretation of the Treaty to benefit the Māori elite” “before Pakeha bought colonisation and war, Māori were killing each other anyway” and more on what percentage of Māori ancestry should count, and Māori organisations with charity tax status should be investigated. This audience was predominantly over 60 and applauded the loudest during Seymour’s speech, on the government cutting 6000 public servant roles - you know, some of the same people without jobs to support their families, who helped NZ through Covid, who helped support our healthcare system and others. Efficiencies need to happen? Of course. Applauding for 6000 people losing their jobs and affecting 6000 kiwi families? Yeah. Yeah no. Now. It’s important to note from this article that David Seymour did not say any of this. He just decided to speak to these people in a small gathering. But, when David Seymour’s iwi Ngāti Rēhia came out to support the Hikoi and that they oppose the Bill, iwi leaders met with Seymour in person that they have serious concerns that this Bill will hurt our people. As an aside, it already has. But Seymour went on to disregard them, with polite contempt, saying ‘if being Māori means I have to bow down and follow leadership, then that’s not a very attractive proposition’. Again, twisting what Ngāti Rēhia actually said and came to him with. Like a politician does. So, a reminder to everyone. When you hear David Seymour politely and ‘reasonably’ discussing equal rights or what his evidence is to the majority of NZ’ers, remember that he is a politician who knows the game.

[@ShoEnTeL1]

Agreed on all counts-thank you for the analysis and breakdown. And, yes: you do NOT want to end up like America. Full stop.

[@RaewynTairi]

Thankyou for your breakdown. 🥰

[@mickendzy8072]

Dude, such a good comment. Well said.

[@mcchoirboy]

When you go on a one day course and think you know it all

[@overover..]

The undeniable common sense of his message must be irritating to you

[@mcchoirboy]

@overover.. kzbin.info/www/bejne/i5e8g6mArtF0bZIsi=CJ8F2fdcoYovBdQb 😂

[@mynameis123456ish]

@@mcchoirboy I know right. Jack Tame looks like he’s a year 10 student, physically and mentally

[@jeromekerehi1580]

Seymour wants to take away Maori rights why is that a problem to pakeha

[@Matthew-g1f4f]

When you get suckered in by simple slogans that are impossible to disagree with, its quite telling. The only divisive thing around here is david

[@Deno-x9b]

I think Maybe other countries could look favourably on New Zealand because they have an actual treaty unlike Australia.

[@SamuelRoper-u5d]

Anyone who has read the Treaty (both English and contemporary Māori translation) would know that the principles (particularly principle 2) are fundamentally different to what was signed. The main distinction being that the Bill restricts Māori claims to their lands, waters, forestry etc to those that were settled in Treaty settlements. Basically this is saying "We already said we were sorry for colonising you, but now that 80% of people are non-Māori and 90% of land is not owned by Māori we're going to just forget about our colonial history (And all of the horrific transgressions of the 20th century)." I'm confident that the majority of people in support of this Bill have a nil understanding of New Zealand's history and how we got to where we are at now.

[@galleonseas4206]

No, you are imposing your own viewpoint and assumption.

[@christiancatchpole6614]

This bill isn't trying to discard moari owned land or moari significants in this country, it's saying that all people in this country are equal. History does indeed say that moari were disadvantaged and hard done by in some respects, but what history doesn't say is that giving different races different rights over one another is a successful endeavor. I believe that the treaty was definitely aimed at protecting maori, especially from foreign powers like France and Spain, but what the treaty intended, just like any other treaty around the world, was to recognize and agree on fundamental human rights and to give everyone a say. That's what the treaty propose was.

[@SamuelRoper-u5d]

@@christiancatchpole6614 If your understanding of history is limited to the signing of the Treaty then I don't think I can help you

[@christiancatchpole6614]

@@SamuelRoper-u5d the treaty was a testament to fundamental human rights, just like all treatys. It advocates peace and fairness, and if you can't see that, well then you should perhaps acctuelly pick up a history book and acctuelly read it. The things you say sound like nothing from a history book or anything. So no, I don't 'need you help' at all, in fact I think help is what you need, you clearly can't recognize or respect history.

[@smdh-ed7136]

"When people get preferential treatment for long enough, equal treatment seems like discrimination." -Thomas Sowell

[@davemonster2]

He knows about Canada because he worked for the Atlas Group there. And they want Native rights stripped to make it easier to for Oil & Gas, mining ect to come in

[@logicalanswer3529]

Which native rights specifically?

[@ms.weenie]

To the land ​@@logicalanswer3529

[@Hatunrumioc]

Try paying for all the free stuff NZs demand if you're not willing to raise the cash to pay for it. The same people who demand the most in free social services are the ones who often do the most to stop NZ raising the funds to pay for it all.

[@richiesoldger]

The rights off land & sea native rights given by the people who took control from them. Do your on homework lazy.

[@mooselee902]

@@Hatunrumioc Except NZ doesnt own it do they, if a multinational rolls in the people get piss all.

[@nanesnowie8012]

Look at what the big high corporate have done like rio tinto..mining and what did the people get..nothing..poverty ..same as here in Australia until the Aborigine went to courts etc there lands were reclaimed...

[@toddfraser374]

Well argued from both sides. I agree with David that we want to work as one to ensure our values are maintained and upheld but revising the treaty principals is not the avenue to do this in my opinion. The treaty was clearly in agreement / contract between the crown and Māori and therefore the principals should be left and interpreted as is. Great debate and a discussion well over due.

[@RaewynTairi]

I agree

[@ML-gg5ij]

What sort of interview is this? Interviewer asks a question, then immediately interrupts him as he's responding. Then asks a new question, interrupts again. Does this a few more times and then deliberately misinterprets what they mean to say. What is going on here?

[@Jaseva-o9t]

Thank you I thought I was the only one with eyes and ears in this comment section 😂

[@feesullivan3439]

This is what Jack does unless he’s interviewing anyone on the left. Watch his interview with Debbie. 🤦‍♀️

[@douglaschoong857]

One of the most unprofessional interviewers, J can't seem to listen to and respect his speaker who is answering his question. A waste of time.

[@zackysullivan2088]

Wrong

[@rhysrautjoki7207]

Jack was doing what all good journalists should do. Fact check a politician in real time when they start lying.

[@jinjaman101]

MAORI WERE TO STRONG IN NUMBER'S. THEY KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING!! THE QUEENS MEN NEVER EVER CONQURED MAORI. WON A COUPLE BATTLE AND GOT HULK SMASH WHILE DOING IT. MAORI GAVE THE MIDDLE FINGER, MAORI, WILL NOT LIVE UNDER ENGLISH RULE!! AND SAID SO!!

[@zenRichard]

David is calm, logical and rational.

[@stephenlennon7369]

Full of brainwashed slaves 😅

[@logicalanswer3529]

The opposite of the guy attempting (and failing) to push a victimhood mentality narrative.

[@raywheeler3135]

Except that he conveniently avoids ever stating that no treaty ever signed in the history of mankind was based on race.

[@barneyboy2008]

He's a weasel.

[@poerava]

And texts and send vids to 13 year old girls through snapchat

[@angusmcdonald4086]

Thank you Jack Tame yet again I am highly appreciative of your work. Helps me as a māori with limited understand get a better grasp on the conversation. Love your passion for truth.

[@sandypike2431]

Still operating under the notion that 'might is right' and harnessing as many as possible as a show of power to drive this home.

[@Generative_Midi_]

Divisiveness is dumb - stop it.

[@slayer5189]

​@@Generative_Midi_he started it Maori didn't just wake up and decide to debate TToW with Politicians it's got nothing to do with them this is simple for us Maori who believe in contracts and TToW is one of them

[@ms.weenie]

06:30 no one is being pulled OUT of other classes to learn Māori. It's an additional, separate class altogether. Do you know how much spare time you have at school? Where teachers just do whatever stuff to fill in the time? If i had time to learn basic french, spanish and NZSL in intermediate on top of everything else, I think Māori is fine.

[@xerosereify]

Also learning multiple languages at school as a requirement is super normal for the majority of the planet! It makes sense for us to learn all our national languages

[@geoffreywood279]

Why not mandate NZ sign language then? Its an official language and you claim that students are capable of learning many languages without detriment to their other subjects and that teachers stuff around a lot. Why not slot in flax work, how to dig a Hangi while we are there, perhaps traditional tattooing or navigating a boat by the stars, heaps of time right! Valuable skills in the modern economy.

[@ms.weenie]

@@geoffreywood279 Yes. Why not mandate NZSL? Since you care so much about equality? Maori is also an official language.

[@xerosereify]

@geoffreywood279 I would actually love to see NZ sign language be taught in the curriculum! It's actually a pretty useful skill for the population to have (most of use grow old and deaf eventually). Also hangi, flax weaving and even tattoo design would slot easily into prexisting subjects. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if there's home economics or art teachers out there that already have these modules. They would atleast make more sense then the entire term on "greeting cards" I had to do in year 9 lol. Also school isn't just about the economy. Its about producing intelligent well rounded citizens that don't vote like idiots in the elections.

[@gerradanania8270]

Yeah he's always lying, just so people (gullable) get a one sided view of Te Tiriti, painting a picture that is the reason Te Reo is being forced onto students. Little lier!!

[@rikardosnz]

Why not let the man talk his reasoning instead of cutting him off constantly 🤫

[@kelbatt7729]

Cause he is full of racist shit- that's why

[@410Hamish]

Because he's using his slimy political wording and avoiding asking the question haha

[@kpnz01]

because there isn't anything of value that he could add. His bill is trash.

[@dandie94]

It's literally a journalist's job to try and pin down the facts and true agenda of these political movements rather than to let a politician spin-doctor on their stage. Wisen up and pay attention

[@moniquebode1655]

So frustrating of Jack let the man speak

[@LauraTeAhoWhite]

The treaty is not an agreement between races, there wasn't a big giant referendum that all British and Maori citizens over the age of 18 took part in at the ballot box. The Crown is not a race of people. The Crown is a governing body that represents the British. Te Triti was signed between Rangatira (Maori leaders) and representatives of the Crown. It was an agreement between two groups of governing, sovereign bodies about who should govern what and how. David Seymour admits this without even realizing it @5:11.

[@rhysrautjoki7207]

Yes, Jack killed seymours dishonest arguments with this fact. That's why brother Willy was 100% correct calling seymour a liar in Parliament.

[@geoffreywood279]

Ahh yes, I agree, we should do what our distant ancestors said to do, not what we think is right in a modern context. You know I think my neighbor has some good land I could colonies right about now, its what my ancestors did after all and that makes it right.

[@rldrld7747]

@@LauraTeAhoWhite The crown hasn't been a governing entity for NZ for a very long time. We are sovereign to the British Crown and the Treaty is no longer instrumental to the way in which the government governs us.. Basically it's non binding by law and can only be acted upon in good faith.

[@rhysrautjoki7207]

@rldrld7747 you are mistaken. Wherever the Treaty or the principles of the treaty are mentioned in a statute, the government is bound by those statutes. And wherever the treaty is mentioned in a Court of Appeal judgement, the government is bound by the courts decision. The most famous example of this is the Maori Council case they won against the Attorney General(1987), which not only stopped Roger Douglas selling the country down the toilet, it was the independent judicial body that expounded the treaty principles. As part of the legislature and one of the party's to the treaty, it is dishonest and treasonous of seymour to try and change NZ's constitution for his own interests.

[@sativaknight9358]

Go live on a reserve

[@benebenefitfit5202]

One country one rule, one service, no discrimination. That’s the good idea. One law for everyone that’s brilliant idea.

[@rldrld7747]

@@RaewynTairi That was the original intention of the treaty, but given that no one can interpret it accurately that's never been the case. I think if the "experts" can't interpret it, then it may as well go to a public referendum.

[@leetawhara7103]

It's never been like that​@@RaewynTairi

[@RaewynTairi]

@rldrld7747 the experts can interpret te tiriti seymour cant. Why because he can't speak te reo. Tino rangatiratanga means self determination, sovereignty, independence autonomy. The term it's self is rooted in Maori world view, and there is no one english term that encapsulates it's meaning It doesn't mean goverance like seymour tries to make out it does

[@RaewynTairi]

@@leetawhara7103 yes your right. There's always been discrimination toward Maori, and it's always been one rule at the advantage of pakeha

[@ianwatson65]

@@RaewynTairi Baseless racist claims, the Maori didnt havea world view, they had no concept of the world. You were stone age people, It is your language that lacks complexity and nuance. Stop romanticising the past.

[@mrcamera420]

I think Jack had him on the ropes a bit with the questions about the courts being a neutral third party, and a Maori roll and general roll referendum being needed for it to be fair. Nice to see a good debate over this bill instead of emotionally charged rhetoric!

[@perryanderson9103]

Courts arnt neutral

[@cb3371]

Do you really think the courts are neutral. Let me remind you of the solicitor general who wanted Maori to be given softer sentences because of ancestry, sounds neutral to me….not!

[@gerradanania8270]

Yeah I enjoyed seeing seymour try and scorm his way out of it🤣

[@kiatupato182]

​@@cb3371If you care about equality of rights and responsibility... all who support the Bill need to do a couple important things first. Over 26,000 Hectares of Maori Land locked in perpetual leases right now. Maori owners not allowed to charge Fair market rates and make a Fair income for over 100 years. Thousands of acres of Maori Land on 99 year leases. Many not paying a Fair lease rate (many not paying anything) for decades now, which is reason enough to break lease. Some say 'but look at the improvements I have made' but you haven't paid a Fair Lease fee for decades, viewing it just as 'Maori Land'. Take the buildings and move onto other Land where you get Free or extremely low lease rates. Fair Treatment? Equality? These Lease agreements are modern day scamming and theft over a span of 50,60,70,80,90,100 plus years. Until these unequal Treatment of Maori get rectified, all who support the Bill are HYPOCRITES

[@GordyJosie]

Agree although I dear say that Jack would never tell the other party to the treaty, that they shouldn't have a say and leave it up to the courts.

[@Kiwiflyer71-o8w]

I’ll be voting ACT next election

[@logicalanswer3529]

Same. I believe National and Labour will lose a lot of votes to Act and New Zealand First next time.

[@wiremusoper5857]

Hahaha Te Pati Māori is gonna eat heaps at next election 🤪

[@christineoconnor5449]

Take the kiwi out of ur name and right English. If you aint here for our people then don't be using our Māori names for ur name.

[@christineoconnor5449]

Change your name to English flyer. Your not a kiwi flyer. You don't deserve to use our kupu when it suits.

[@qqszad]

National are in a lose/lose here. they losing votes on both ends. i feel bad for Luxon, he just wanted to focus on the economy but act started a shit show with no real change. this bill has been a winning move for David , mining company's will keep giving money to him in hopes it can get though next election and he has divided nz with him at as the banner-man for the white side. National will lose votes to labor and ACT for this. you will see labor win next election. ACT will have more power when making a deal with National. 2029 election this bill will return and National will be forced to pic a side.

[@MasterChief37]

There’s somewhere between 15-36000 Sami in Sweden. The Sami parliament is not sovereign, they are subservient to the Swedish Parliament. Sami people in Sweden don’t have co-governance nor are the Swedish govt forcing Sami culture and language onto the other 9m Swedes.

[@jenmahara7291]

DO THEY HOLD A TREATY WITH SWEDEN

[@MasterChief37]

@ why would Sweden have a treaty with Sami, Sami and the ethnic Norse population have both been living side by side for thousands of years. Sami weren’t colonised.

[@CITA7687]

That's why Sami attend the U.N with other indigenous people and are fighting through the U.N to have their lifestyles, culture and languages protected in the different countries they live in. The Sami are not sovereign because they're not allowed to be. In Northern Finland Sami reindeer herders are fighting forestry companies to try and keep their native forests, so that their reindeer will still have food. Apparently even white indigenous people have to fight to be treated equally under law. Of interest, Sami communities adopted the Maori concept of language nests to revitalise their own language dialects.

[@MasterChief37]

@ Sami languages are protected, what do you consider a Sami way of life, nomadic reindeer herding is not in any way economically sustainable. Sami who don’t herd reindeer live like every other Norwegian or Sweden. In Norway if the taxpayer didn’t subsidise reindeer herding the industry would have died out a long time ago. Have you ever been to Finland? The entire country is a forest, around 75% of the country is forest. I’ve driven from the border with Norway to Helsinki, its forest the entire way. I don’t know about Sweden since I live in Norway, at least 50% of Sami speak a Sami langage in Norway today, which is a far higher percentage than Māori who speak Māori. There’s about 10 different Sami languages spoken in Norway.

[@MasterChief37]

@ why should Sami be sovereign they haven’t lived there any longer then the ethnic Norse and Finnish populations they live amongst? They shouldn’t even be indigenous, they migrated from Siberia around the same time (or as much as 2000 years after, depending on source) as the Norse migrated north from Europe.

[@trihard3d]

David is a weapon... He's on his way to a knighthood in 30 years if he keeps this up

[@BattleScones]

He got wrecked on Article 2 though.

[@steviet3995]

David Seymour is right, a divided people in a country will not stand. Let all people of New Zealand decide how the country is run, and not these small minorities claiming to be the voice of all New Zealanders. We live in a democracy not a dictatorship.

[@sb7411]

So what you are saying is...Let us all be WHITE!!!

[@kiatupato182]

Well he certainly has divided the people, good and proper.

[@kiatupato182]

He talks like a Dictator.

[@CITA7687]

All of the people in NZ can decide how the country is run. Not all of the people in NZ have a say on Te Tiriti o Waitangi though, simply because not all the people in NZ were signatories of the treaty. Simple international law, the only people that can change a Treaty are the signatories, in the case of the Tiriti that's the Crown and Maori. To unilaterally (onesidedly) change a Treaty between two signatories would be undemocratic and probably illegal under contract law. Its certainly illegal under international treaty law.

[@roalddahl1623]

Isn't ACT a minority in Govt telling the majority he is right?

[@watzimagiga]

Impressed with how Jack handled that to be honest. He did great. He was researched and presented some solid arguments, better than any of the other attempts so far. He also actually let David speak uninterrupted to get his arguments across. Only criticism is he kept trying to take a sneaky last word and move on, but David stopped him and kept it going. Move on when the topic is done, not right after a sneaky jab.

[@antc5010]

21:00 Jack puts the mirror up to David, the English text of Article 2 and now David wants to run with his interpretation of Maori text. Again David, what are you? Maori or Crown? The key issue is that David has run a unilateral process to write this bill. The Treaty of Waitangi established a partnership between Māori and the Crown based on mutual respect and good faith. Defining Treaty principles unilaterally breaches this partnership and contravenes the Crown's obligation to act in consultation and collaboration with Māori. The lack of meaningful engagement with Māori violates the principle of rangatiratanga. Furthermore, consultation is not a courtesy but a requirement under the Treaty and this process appears dismissive of Māori voices, undermining the legitimacy of the proposed legislation.

[@RaewynTairi]

Well spoken

[@scubaguy1989]

Nah mate I don’t see the word partnership in the treaty, it ain’t there. Māori ceded the ability to govern, plain and simple. They wanted law and order and a better future, which is what they got. Radical minority of Maori now trying to dishonour the treaty, to renege on it. It ain’t gonna happen. Māori have no more right to this land than any other citizen. Māori aren’t indigenous, they pitched up here on a boat from from somewhere else, just as the British did.

[@Reformed1-e1c]

The Treaty doesn't state a partnership between Maori and the Crown. That was a poor interpretation by a judge during a ruling of a case in 1987. Partnership was never the agreement. If that was the case, Maori chiefs should've negotiated for a protectorate with the British.

[@kiatupato182]

Bill is flimsy and misleading. Was it written by school children? It is self righteous virtue signaling shallowly knowledged Bull Kaka.

[@kiatupato182]

If you care about equality of rights and responsibility... all who support the Bill need to do a couple important things first. Over 26,000 Hectares of Maori Land locked in perpetual leases right now. Maori owners not allowed to charge Fair market rates and make a Fair income for over 100 years. Thousands of acres of Maori Land on 99 year leases. Many not paying a Fair lease rate (many not paying anything) for decades now, which is reason enough to break lease. Some say 'but look at the improvements I have made' but you haven't paid a Fair Lease fee for decades, viewing it just as 'Maori Land'. Take the buildings and move onto other Land where you get Free or extremely low lease rates. Fair Treatment? Equality? These Lease agreements are modern day scamming and theft over a span of 50,60,70,80,90,100 plus years. Until these unequal Treatment of Maori get rectified, all who support the Bill are HYPOCRITES ❤

[@SouthlandSwimschoolSwimAcademy]

Legacy media at its finest , give the guest the respect he deserves and let him explain , rather than asking question after question. Before he can finish the first one . How are we supposed to understand the bill if he can’t explain .

[@amyfarrell8141]

What do you mean? Seymour just said the same thing over and over again.

[@Jkrofl]

I don’t think David said anything varying from 9 scripted lines he kept repeating

[@Nounou1810]

David sounded like a broken record any way. Also, not hard to do a quick Google search and read the bill yourself

[@jacobdavian651]

How very disingenuous, as expected. Note that there are no rights that individual citizens are getting, even in Seymour's words. On the right to be consulted - 'maybe not me, but the leaders of the hapu/runanga'... So the representatives of the group. I fear that Seymour is failing to make a distinction between the rights of individuals and the rights of groups. It's not impossible to respect both. We in the West have a tendency to forget that radical individualism is not the only way to think. Many cultures in the world with historical roots in a tribal or clan structure retain a belief that the group is more than the sum of its parts. The African concept of ubuntu works this way. Gaelic tanistry worked this way. The concepts of mana and tino rangatiratanga operate this way. The treaty doesn't give rights to individuals. It establishes the basis of the relationship between two peoples. Te Tiriti was and is an agreement signed between groups of equal status. Those two groups still exist - they don't just go away because some of us want to pretend we're American. Seymour's insistence on reinterpreting it through a lens of western individualism is to ignore the way the other party to the document understand themselves and the world - which is just to repeat the mistakes that landed us in all the conflict in the first place. Seymour's reaction to Tame crippling his 'interpretation' of tino rangatiratanga of calling it a 'cute argument' is really telling. He *wants* to translate it as 'self-determination' and equate that with the libertarian understanding of personal autonomy, rather than accepting that Maori understand it as a collective right to something more like sovereignty. So he wants to impose Western thought on Maori against their wishes in favour of the 'practicalities' of modern liberal democracy - except what he's describing isn't a modern liberal democracy. Modern liberal democracies understand that the rights of minorities (of any kind) have to be protected from the blunt instrument that is majority rule - almost always through the courts.

[@CosmicCompassionQuest]

I feel Seymour is acting in good faith and fairly representing the views of many new Zealanders irrespective of their political philosophy, who share in common a belief in the inherent unfairness and unsustainability of any system which privileges one group of people more than other on the basis of ancestry. There is no way to reconcile democracy with two sovereigns cohabiting and co-governing. This is literally a recapitulation of apartheid and will lead to nothing good for the people of new Zealand, who are not a biculture, but rather a multiculture, and increasingly so every day. 160000 immigrants from the Philippines, India and China in the past year. Race and other identity features are incidental aspects of being citizens of a healthy democracy in which all people are enfranchised and nobody is more favored than the other.

[@mugg99]

Pfft! Good faith? Did we just watch the same clip? So what’s your understanding of good faith because he didn’t even consult with Maori representatives on this bill? He just skirted around the answer when Jack asked him directly who was involved in writing this bill. And you do not speak for ‘many New Zealanders’ when you have no evidence of how many NZers are actually in favour of this bill. If I hung around in circles of people who only ever agreed with my view then I would be saying the same thing. Also, please tell me how Maori are privileged because I look at every single negative statistic in this country and its Maori who hold that so called ‘privilege’. And why are you being so hysterical and bringing apartheid into the conversation? do you actually even know what that means? You seem to be reaching so hard to make an argument but it just comes off as, well, baseless and speculative. Please stop.

[@Nounou1810]

Seymour? Acting in good faith? What a joke!

[@jacobdavian651]

@@CosmicCompassionQuest So there's a few things going on here that I think need highlighting . 1. I'm not going to touch the absurdity of the privilege claim, but I will note the parroting of Seymour's talking point about distinctions on the basis of ancestry. Indigenous populations everywhere are always based on ancestry. They have no choice but to define themselves in terms of ancestry because everything they have other than that has been taken from them. To try and imply that paying attention to that fact equates to some kind of divisiveness on the part of Maori is nothing but malicious political spin. The core promise of the treaty - even if you lay aside the sovereignty/tino rangatiratanga question (which you shouldn't) - is that the Crown guaranteed that Maori could stay Maori. What Seymour is arguing for is a rejection of that fundamental commitment. 2. The suggestion that there is no way to reconcile democracy with two sovereigns co-governing is simply false. That's what treaty arrangements are for. It's complex and difficult, but the framework for it is well established at this point. Seymour doesn't even actually make the argument that the co-governance doesn't work - he just argues that its inconvenient for business. All this consulting with the Maori about the use of land and natural resources that fall under their jurisdiction is awful!. We should be free to pillage as we wish! It's not like the Treaty promised Maori tino rangatiratanga over their lands - oh wait. That's exactly what Article 2 promises. Well we should just ignore that! For profit! 3. There is no suggestion of separations between races in the Treaty or in our society, so raising the spectre of apartheid is absurd. As noted the rights and responsibilities of Maori to collectively act as stewards of their ancestral home makes literally no difference at all to their rights as individuals. Article Three guarantees them, as individuals, all the ordinary rights of British citizens. We have equal rights as individuals. It's the group rights that are different, and even then its not a difference of possession, but of use. We don't have a need to defend our culture, land, or people, because we have all the power - but if we didn't we'd have the same 'extra' rights as Maori (unless our new overlords decided to be harsher than the Crown was). 4. Raising the increasingly multicultural nature of New Zealand is disingenuous again - new immigrants are new immigrants. They are not new indigenous peoples. They can join as citizens of the Crown and enjoy the same individual rights shared by us all under Article 3. Maori are different - they were here first. The Crown did sign the Treaty with them. To say Maori culture is no different than any other is to ignore that this is their homeland. It's to deny that any indigenous peoples have a right to claim a meaningful connection to their own land. Which is, again, to ignore the Treaty entirely. 5. Again, and this cannot be stressed enough, this is not and never has been about race. That is the way Seymour wants to frame it to get a rise out of people who get angry about race. This is about nations. It is about peoples. And it is about an enduring legal treaty between two peoples. To reiterate, the *only* reason that the Maori iwi and hapu are defined by ancestry is because Maori as a culture revere their ancestors. Whakapapa is a core cultural concept that is made all the more important because, as I've pointed out, our colonial ancestors took nearly everything else. They even tried for decades to stamp out the language and culture. Seymour's argument is an attempt to impose Western european values on the Maori people without their consultation and against their wishes by appeal to a simple majority vote. And he's even bold enough to let us know that it's in the interest of smooth business operations. Well damn, it's just so inconvenient that these annoying people have a treaty that causes us legal headaches. Suppose we'll just have to rewrite it for them so they can't get in our way! And we'll wrap it up in a nice "freedom" bow so that everyone who's not Maori won't notice that that "freedom" doesn't include the freedom to be Maori.

[@vicipiz]

Well there are individuals who benefit. I recently lost a govt contract to a Māori registered business. The agency must allocate a percentage of their work to Māori businesses. This had been my client for 10 years. So this individual who owns this Māori business has benefited in what isn’t a free market

[@Royalpurpledye]

Jack interrupts Seymour every minute of this interview, sometimes within seconds of asking him a question. David shows exceptional patience and dignity.

[@FelixTweezer]

Yup he is very rude and arrogant

[@Raynman755]

He’s sharp and ready . Seymour is teko gamon

[@ponowaikare489]

David is a joke, it's not based on race or ancestry it's based on sovereign rights

[@nica900]

David had plenty of time to bore us all to death with his repeated nonsense.

[@FelixTweezer]

@@nica900 fun fact: David Seymour is Māori. Does that annoy you? - bet it does.

[@Go_Home_British_Raj]

I DEMAND A REFERENDUM ON THE PRINCIPLES OF THE TREATY OF UNION. Because I am a Foreign Libertarian Lobby Group and they let me.

[@DavidWalter-gz8ue]

@@Go_Home_British_Raj No Referendum. Maori Culture matters, and the likes of you must not be allowed to wipe your arse with a treaty that Maori people died tooth and nail, with their blood to defend.

[@malcolmWaite-g4t]

@@DavidWalter-gz8ue its sarcasm, go home is against

[@turdbomitch9007]

It is frustrating having separate entities and the costs that come with it. This is a small budget nation, and if we are going to build it up to be better for everybody we just won't have the means if we are making separate entities. Unless those separate entities are self funded or funded by those who use them.

[@whenua1]

Great point, if we ever do go down a co-governace model or separate governments then those who want to be governed by one or the other then they should definitely pay for it.

[@gerradanania8270]

The crown doesn't care about anybody, just the crown! NZ along with all other Commonwealth states keep them propped up! Wake up NZ Te Tiriti is that one thorn in their side preventing them from total domination!

[@KerryTonga-n1m]

No they will be funded by all land thieving colonizers

[@sonnyawa6413]

@@whenua1 give all of the stolen land back then

[@raywheeler3135]

@@whenua1 Co-governance has existed since 1991 under Jim Bolger. It hasn't been a problem until Seymour manufactured a problem to pander to his racist voter base.

[@Loveyw00]

I find it very difficult to trust that a career politician actually cares about people's rights as much as David is professing. Just a thought based on historical norms in this country.

[@xerosereify]

He cares about people's rights as long as it makes him money. I don't think it's a coincidence this proposed bill undermines environmental legislation in this country

[@SoBlissedOut]

He cares about smoothing the path for resource extraction by removing Māori from the table.

[@NewZealandIsAlreadyGreat]

Thanks again Jack for bringing to the forefront many of the thing people need to hear. The bill should never be interpreted by Parliament, the courts are exactly the right place for that to happen. If people don't like it, it does not in any way change the principles of the treaty/Te Tiriti. Seymour might as well introduce a new bill to nullify the treaty for all this current bill is worth. Toitū te Tiriti!

[@mavisstewart2317]

That was the best protest I’ve seen in nz very proud they made a stand and yes you cauld feel the calling in those crowds I can’t stand looking an listening to David Seymour he should go an get lost

[@user-tc-s7r]

first protest worldwide for inequality and apartheid - go you guys

[@lizlambert]

Parliament is NOT the Crown

[@jackiebiggs7071]

We are no longer British subjects though we still belong to the commonwealth and 'the crown' is a Constitutional Monarchy that recognises the right of parliament to make laws.

[@rodriguezpavara5652]

Parliament very quietly made themselves 'sovereign' in 1986 under Lange. Very sneaky and unannounced, the fox decided it owned the henhouse and those who knew, did & said nothing.

[@NicodahJohnson]

😂 wake up retard

[@rldrld7747]

@@lizlambert NZ has been sovereign to the Crown since the early 1900s. We are an independent country so therefore the treaty is only a document to be held in good faith rather than law

[@colonelfustercluck486]

correct. The Government of the day is the Crown. Parliament is where they meet with all other parties and their MP's. As the Crown is made of 3 coalition parties. Mr Luxon, Seymour and Peters (in no particular order) are the leaders of the parties that are government, at this time. 2 of them are Maori, and Ministers of the Crown. That make them incredibly well qualified. Maori, Crown. Who were the signatories of the Treaty? Maori and Crown.

[@Double.S.02]

This comment is not about the Treaty Principles bill as such. The perspective Seymour is grounded in is a Libertarian doctrine. People might want to look up what libertarian ideology is all about and start asking how will it be good for me, more importantly our country? I suspect some people who are all on board with ACT might actually find that they are worse off under libertarian policies. The opportunity is there to take a look behind the talking points and consider the big picture and future implications. If you have done your homework and still like a Libertarian orientated future then so be it. There is a reason that 'big business' and the very wealthy back ACT.

[@mxvega1097]

Nice try. His political philosophy is far more classical liberal - see Adam Smith and John Locke.

[@rihipaeahughes9831]

Follow the money. Watch David in future he will be set up for life. FAFO seymour

[@xerosereify]

@mxvega1097 I don't think thats a gotcha you think it is. Classical liberalism is a farce that has proven time and time again to not work for the majority of people. The sort of people who advocate for it are so out of touch with reality that they think money actually bends the laws of physics.

[@rhysrautjoki7207]

​@@mxvega1097Wrong, he basically said he is a libertarian...

[@xerosereify]

@@mxvega1097 (also didn't John Locke advocate for child labour?!)

[@DrPaulaylay]

David Seymour just can't understand how New Zealand could be world-leading, or following his own argument, the world's first successful country with a founding document honoured by all the original parties.

[@GordyJosie]

I don't believe the British Empire would have signed a treaty that created a partnership or co governance. They would have known about the devision this would have caused. Not to mention they didn't do it anywhere else.

[@TheSpartacusBrown]

​@@GordyJosieTe Teriti was exceptional in that the Crown gave Maori the same rights as British citizens. They didn't do that anywhere else.

[@robertmariu6783]

He admits that qualified academics and judges are not as qualified as he and a group of rich backers are to reinterpret a contract which even with a majority cannot overturn simply because it displeases them !! The sad part is ; they're playing the tune !!!

[@chookiessss]

I don’t have a position on this because I don’t understand it entirely but I do I think the mainstream media’s failure to present this bill objectively is not helping a) honest, open conversation about the actual facts of a complex issue and through their bias are b) creating more division in this country. Whether you agree or not, the fact remains Seymour represents a significant number of kiwis that are in favour of this bill and they can’t feel as though their position is demonised (even if it is in fact wrong). It’s forcing people to feel more emboldened in their position.

[@matthewviliamu2679]

what is a significant number? Both sides have been represented in mainstream media and David has had more than his fair share of air time including uninterrupted in parliament. It is difficult to have an objective discussion when david is shamelessly putting a bunch of false statements out there

[@barneyboy2008]

The treaty has not just come up over the last 50 years. It was supressed and ignored by governments after it was signed for over 130 years. David wants to return to the european hegemony because it suits his backers. Maori will not be put back in their box David. Their rights under the treaty cannot be legislated away. These rights are perpetual whether you like it or not.

[@davey6907]

Simply clarifying the articles of te teriti

[@tonganqueenb5517]

Legalised land grab in the name of 'equality for all'.

[@Digmen1]

The treaty gave the government the right to rule (sovereignty), so why do they need to refer to it all the time? Maori were allowed to keep their land and property (note that word) unless they wished to sell them. Property (taonga) at that time meant possessions acquired by the spear ie stlen or taken by force! Clever lawyers and treaty activists are now trying to define treasures as meaning everything in New Zealand above and below and around us. That is pure chicanery!

[@barneyboy2008]

@@Digmen1 I see what you did there. Made a whole lotta assertions with no basis in fact.

[@barneyboy2008]

@@davey6907 according David.

[@johndee2171]

So this is all about money, property, and power. Got it 👍..

[@rihipaeahughes9831]

For the govt

[@rochford59]

Yes' let's face it,it's all about lining their pockets and feathering one's own nest❗

[@CITA7687]

since the beginning

[@kiatupato182]

Bill is a smokescreen. They desperately want to drill for Oil and sell assets. Consulting with iwi and Environmental groups is annoying. Couldn't even consult Iwi over the Treaty Bill.

[@FelixTweezer]

A simple mind I see

[@iMahonz]

This bill is not a threat to Maori or their Treaty rights. It offers security to all New Zealanders that full inclusive Democracy will prevail, that their rights and property will be assured, that they will be treated equally by the state and there will be no constitutional changes by Fiat, by KCs or by stealth without consultation. There is nothing in the Bill that a citizen of good faith could legitimately object to. Recent history makes it obvious that basic guarantees of this nature are missing for all Kiwis and are much needed if we are to progress together as a modern healthy democracy.

[@trentyz]

Nailed it!

[@robinharris1837]

But it is though. English part of the treaty states Tino Ranga Tira Tanga was granted to Māori over their land, forest and fisheries. Seymours bill is translating a Māori text that was created through translation of an English text previously. I don’t understand how you can create a translation in English if the original text it was translated from was English?

[@taua3645]

I'm a citizen of good faith. And I object to having a minor party impose their interpretation of the treaty via legislation without having any consultation or engagement with the other party. The said legislation will then guide any and all laws on how the treaty is to be referred to, once more putting Māori rights to tino rangatiratanga (As guaranteed by the treaty) out of reach.

[@iMahonz]

@ yet some people totally support the undemocratic antics of the minority Te Maori party and the minority interests of Maori in all things. My children and siblings are part Maori whose rights would be protected by both the Treaty and this bill or similar. If a minority status is a genuine concern here, that could be definitively established by a referendum which people of good faith such as yourself would be comfortable to support.

[@MrBlack_nz]

I live in Australia and guess what. David Seymour is right it doesn't work 😅

[@robinharris1837]

Australia and NZ can’t draw comparisons. One has a treaty and the other doesn’t.

[@matthewviliamu2679]

that is the irony of Jack's question and David's opposition to Australia, USA, Canada as examples. have actually adopted Seymour's more "we're all one people" approach after casting their indigenous aside. and Seymour clearly believes that hasn't been good

[@tieuri]

Thanks Jack for the interview and thanks Seymour for the transparency, The Treaty it’s an agreement between Maori and the crown it says that in black and white so leave it alone, Trust me when I say Kotahitanga is the message to all NZers as Maori move forward we’ll leave no one behind no matter what ethnicity you are wether your Asian,Indian,Muslim or catholic black or white we stand with all of NZers so what’s good for Maori is good for All.

[@argeniaparkinson3891]

Beautifully said, thanks so much! I think this is key, and needs to be said more. I think a lot of we non Māori are horribly misinformed, and worried about where we fit, and what sort of future we can look forward to. , So many haven’t had personal experience of pōwhiri, or the privilege of being warmly welcomed and been embraced as a part of a greater community that prioritises the common good of all people, all land, all waters, well into the future. It’s too easy to hear Māori this…Māori that… and not realise that the Māori world view benefits us and our grandchildren, also. Personally, I would love to live as one in a country led by Māori values. Toitu te Tiriti, with many thanks.

[@rochford59]

You've got to hand it to David Seymour,he's a gutsy bugger' he's standing his ground,you have to admire that,even against all odds🤔😉...especially the bloody woke N.Z. media😵

[@roalddahl1623]

Well done - if you don't agree or you are living in the past, it's WOKE! So handy to have a label to make sure you are right.

[@rochford59]

Go Woke🥺 Go Broke😉

[@bobsmith-lw7cy]

Jack is arguing that other systems of indigenous relations work where it is patently obvious that they don’t work. I lived in Aus for 25 years, some in the outback, and I saw the terrible conditions aboriginals struggled with. Alcoholism, abuse, housing… it was appalling. The Waitangi Tribunal is not a court of any standing . It has been hijacked by Māori activists and used for their own ends. If you really want to be totally blunt, activists are trying to create a South African style apartied state. They want control and separation and they want the white government to pay for it.

[@AholeAtheist]

Seek education.

[@moniquebode1655]

@bobsmith that's clear to see thats exactly what they want. Give them an inch they take a yard. No PM has had the guts to stop this and it's getting out of hand

[@kathrynclarke781]

well said.. I'm glad someone else here sees this for what it is.

[@iosefaandrews2351]

💯 and we are sleepwalking into apartheid. Nzs don't realise that a a two tiered system is exactly what the activists want and is what they're inching towards through the help of the nz public.

[@AholeAtheist]

@@iosefaandrews2351 You're poorly educated. Seek help.

[@FrankAhKuoi]

Keep speaking up David 👍

[@marielansit2975]

David Seymour for future Prime Minister

[@fl7907]

Good interview, Jack. Showed how one-sided the bill is. It's all about what he thinks the treaty should look like in todays world & unilaterally altering the meaning of Treaty for his purposes.

[@rhysrautjoki7207]

Jack lost it when he mentioned Canada, Oz, and the USA, but he got back on track when he remembered Sweden. Then all seymour could do was first try and ignore that Sweden been mentioned. Then, when Jack pushed Sweden again, seymour couldn't ignore it and obviously just started lying by saying Sweden was not a good example of where recognising indigenous rights works. Good work, Jack, by nearly losing it and then quickly exposing seymour as a dishonest liar.

[@mynameis123456ish]

It’s not about him it’s about ‘we’ all New Zealanders get a say

[@mynameis123456ish]

@@rhysrautjoki7207jack just chose the most obscure example knowing he probably wouldn’t be informed about them. If you look into it they have similar issues and is not a perfect system either as jack would want you to believe

[@argeniaparkinson3891]

⁠@@mynameis123456ish NO! The people who get a say are the people(and their descendants, as stated in the contract) who signed the contract. Why is that so hard to understand?

[@mynameis123456ish]

@@argeniaparkinson3891 what if I’m a descendant and I don’t agree with you or whoever these people are that think they can speak for me.

[@benmunckhof-swain4493]

Please tell me how these current principles of the treaty effect you in a negative way. Go:

[@vicipiz]

It has affected me in the last 2 months. I operate a small business in Auckland. We recently lost a government agency as a client to a Māori registered business. They had been our client for the previous 8 years. The agency must give a percentage of their contracts by quota to Māori registered business. This will be a big impact on myself and my family as replacing a client like this is hard in this market. It will be even harder given that any future proposals will be up against this same quota system favouring Māori businesses. (Hopefully when you said current u meant the ones in place now)

[@user-kiwikind]

Ok answer how the new bill will affect Māori negatively. If the current principles have no effect on people then changing them will not effect Maori

[@bubblesnz1059]

Ignoring the whole taking or wasting of non maori money aspect, the biggest one has to be partnership and participation. The need to have maori consult or get a cut and potentially veto nearly everything costs this country a ton in productivity and money

[@SamuelRoper-u5d]

Read a history book.

[@bubblesnz1059]

@@SamuelRoper-u5d lol 'educate yourself' is the universal social media code for 'I have no real argument against what you're saying, but im too childish to admit it' I'm more aware of the history than the majority of new zealanders.... but hey if you have a specific point you want to make, or book i should be reading then go for it

[@sammorton8160]

I'm pakeha and am with a Maori partner, split by race is decisive, Maori should not lose anything the have set in the agreement, if this continues it gives some Maori the self entitlement you hear used when committing crime(bad decisions) jack is a typical pakeha scared to push forward for every new zealander rather than just Maori, you could go on for days, I didn't vote for act and probably won't going forward but imagine if there was a pakeha party, it would be considered racist and there is already an element of that in parliament with the Maori party who previously were fair but under current leadership seem extremely racist to me.

[@terangiwalker7550]

Oh sorry I didn’t realise pakeha got colonised by Māori which would make having a party of pakeha for pakeha in government make sense

[@CatherineAugust]

The pakeha party is basically every other party. lol

[@Indy123-lol]

For the next 6 months every citizen gets to contribute their opinions and whether they’re in favour or not.

[@truegod9654]

Indigenous rights for Indigenous people is apparently controversial... for the 8%.

[@shanedevlin6714]

Equal rights under the law for all races, what a great fundamental way to govern any country

[@kiatupato182]

Bill is flimsy and misleading. Did school children write it. It's a smokescreen. They desperately want to drill for Oil and consulting with Iwi and Environmental groups is annoying. They couldn't even consult Iwi over the Treaty Bill.

[@nicktepuni3916]

But to accomplish that, you have to remove nga iwi Maori rights to have their treaty honoured.

[@shanedevlin6714]

Well how wrong is that? That in 2024 no matter what race, age or culture we can’t have equal rights.

[@kiatupato182]

@@shanedevlin6714 how dumb are you? The only special treatment my whanau has received is having over 600 acres of our family land stolen of us in the 1950s. Stop it with the self righteous virtue signaling shallowly knowledged Bull Kaka.

[@nicktepuni3916]

@@shanedevlin6714 So nobodies contracts would matter anymore? Sweet. Goodbye mortgage. Unless you're advocating that it's only contracts with nga iwi Maori which don't need to be honoured?

[@gideonporter537]

It is very difficult for myself (as a Māori/iwi/hapū member) - even with all the goodwill in the world - to understand how this is anything but an example of Mr Seymour wanting "the greater New Zealand populace" (prediminantly caucasians) to be able to use parliament as a tool to decide for the "lesser New Zealand populace" (Māori), what their rights will/won't be - which in essence amounts to "whatever we say they are." And therefore, as things stand today, what the Treaty says is subservient to that ethos. It just sounds like Mr Seymour is saying "well now that 97% of lands now belong to non-Maori, and 80% of the population are NOT Māori (and we live in a democracy) - we (non-Māori) therefore get to make up new rules - which we promise will "guarantee" the rights of Māori as "equal" New Zealanders. That does seem a little "judge, jury and executioner" surely? And for the life of me, I can't find the word democracy in any version of the Treaty/Tiriti.

[@sbeehre]

What are Maori going to loose if this bill was to go through?

[@vladimirmanza5839]

​@@sbeehrejust our home, Nothing major. This also allows the government to sell off NZ assets without the consultation of the people that have ties to that place, it opens the door to the same treatment we were receiving before the Springbok tour, as second class citizens. This is a push for conformity, not unity.

[@gideonporter537]

@@sbeehre I believe the problem with your question is that you (like most non-Māori, and a fair few Māori) don't understand enough historical context - but I'm more than willing to apologise if I am wrong. Having said that let's give it a go. The Treaty Principles Bill effectively says , we are now a democracy (where we are all equal), and therefore we (the majority) get to decide what are your rights (the Māori minority) - and as such, "your" rights are okay, as long as they don't affect the rights of any other New Zealander. Which sounds great - but that isn't what the Treaty says - which comes down to "do you keep your word, or just forget about it because things have changed"? Anyway - What rights do we lose? Well, the right to self-determination (because the Treaty Principles Bill is adamant Māori ceded their sovereignty, and there will be no debate about it, no matter how justified that might be), future rights to Treaty Settlement packages (for past wrongs) will be heavily watered down because of the "as long as it doesn't affect the majority of all New Zealanders" Bill, and never again will "ancestry" count. Its a bit like telling Samoans, Fijians, Tongans and any other polynesian people that the minute you combine with pākeha, you can no longer be you - you have to be what "we" say you are... and in this case "New Zealanders" where we all hold hands and sing Kumbaya. If pākeha never bother to understand the Māori viewpoint - start by reading just ONE Treaty Settlemendt for context - hell just the summary of ONE settlement is a great start. But will you? Will you ask others to do so? After that, PLEASE get back in touch with me. Nga mihi

[@sbeehre]

@@gideonporter537 Thank you for taking the time to reply because i have not seen or read much else except David Seymour and the government are racist. I have some questions about what you have said because you talk about things like the Māori viewpoint but you also acknowledged that many Māori don't see things the way you do, so its hardly a unified Māori front that opposes the principals bill. I'd also like to ask why you don't think you have self determination now? I do so why wouldn't anyone else in NZ not have that? Now for the ceding sovereignty issue well the way i see it is that Māori did cede sovereignty in order to be afforded the same rights as British subjects at the time... even if they didn't well that was 184 years ago so why is it such a problem for some Māori now? The end game to all this seems to be some sort of separate governance depending on race and that's just not going to work in a modern society in my opinion. Also as Māori don't seem to unified on this issue how would you deal with that if we went down the separatist Route? only some would do it and others wouldn't? sounds like a recipe for disaster to me! I think we need to deal with the outstanding treaty claims then close the whole thing down stop looking to the past and look to the future as one people not Māori and non Māori.. as much as some people dont seem to like it its no longer 1840 and all this looking backwards just stops NZ from moving forwards.

[@gideonporter537]

@@sbeehre okay, look, I think you say yourself you have not looked into this much. I ask you to read ONE Treaty Settlement for context - then come back to me. Hell, I'll give you my phone contacts so we can talk directly. 🙂

[@kevineverett6362]

If only Jack would shut his mouth and let the person speak. We do not want to hear you Jack. We want to hear the answers to the questions asked. This was a waste of time like all your anti center right interviews. Only people I have seen getting a chance to talk are TPM, Greens and Labour. National and Act cannot get a word in. Pretty pathetic. David was trying to counter your claims which you never gave him the opportunity. You are supposed to be unbiased which you are clearly not if you are preventing the people of NZ getting both sides of the issue.

[@inquizitive1]

How dare he question his answers on Q and A 😂

[@thenamesgould]

National have said the bill is a load of bollocks

[@iosefaandrews2351]

Agreed. Jack gets paid to be argumentative and a general pain in the backside. But you know the media's always left leaning and kissed aderns feet to no end. Look at how the US elections were covered? Unbiased reporting is dead. People don't know enough about the treaty - not what politicians say, not what the courts decide or the tribunal or the media but what actual historical records show.

[@MrDmunk]

Great stuff David 👏

[@PeteThecurious100]

HT for allowing comments. It was a helpful civilised discussion. People can be cute with words but one can't help feeling David's commonsense plan will win out in time. We can look forward to "one people, one law, one flag."

[@DezciiXx]

i think David Seymour is doing the right thing~!! i mean im born and raised in new zealand, so was my parents and my grandparents and so on for the last 200 years, we see new zealand as our home, if we were to be deported because we're not maori we would have no place to go! and theres millions of kiwi that are non-maori that would feel the same too. I think its time that by law we are considered equal and we all should have equal rights no matter our race. Born a kiwi, Always a kiwi. And the government should have the power to make new laws in the best interests for all citizens, heck we complain about how poor our law system and justice system is in courts, how criminals get a slap on a hand and let out free, even for commiting murder. Well This bill will help them have the power to make the law and justice system even better and make this country even more safe from criminals.

[@freddyfaasua3841]

Who said you'd get deported??? 🙃 dramatic! A kiwi is a native animal that's cute but please you're no kiwi you're a pakeha in NZ /Aotearoa. And How is this about criminals and making Nz more safe 🙃 more tough on crime to this govt means more ppl in jail what do ppl do in jail they connect and commit to more crime when out. It's not a flick of a pen that will make this country crime free. this is more about Maori input and their seat on the table ..to be able to help decide on legal and foreign affairs and rewriting a legal document between two parties the crown and Maori not the parliament of the day and whoever is on the land for the day/year. It's basically to cut corners irrespective of tangata whenua. This doesn't affect us as u claim it does (people who are not indigenous).

[@x.Rhymiie.x]

I have some questions to ask, #1 why do you fear being deported? who told you that was going to happen? #2 how is one meant to be equal in a country they aren't even recognized in? Anything that promotes equality is looked upon as privilege when the reality is anything foreign is privilege in NZ. We look after many cultures here yet Māori get stumped on. All these culture who live in Aotearoa have a place where that culture thrives, to Māori, that is meant to be New Zealand. #3 Have you learnt the history of New Zealand and Māori? Land Wars etc? People fear so much but have zero base knowledge on what the fight Māori have with the govt and honouring te tiriti.

[@MrMahazestar]

I think the issue is not that Maori have different rights to everyone else, it’s the fact that Pakeha have the same rights as everyone that is not Maori.

[@gouldmcclay]

False maori have seperate rights and funding regardless of your dna percentage , its called grifting

[@RaewynTairi]

So your idea of separate rights would be something like if Maori do something wrong media have the right to say Maori, where as if a pakeha does something wrong the media has the right not to say pakeha. We both know thats been happening. Or Maori got paid out 2.1 billion for confiscated land, and landlords got paid out 2.9 billion. I could go on. But theres others i need to educate. Goodbye​

[@shanedevlin6714]

@@gouldmcclay met someone last year (previous government) who was told they had to wait 6 months for a cancer operation, however if Maori 4 weeks to operation. This looked like separation of rights on race.

[@MrMahazestar]

@@gouldmcclayand they should as indigenous people of the land. The treaty protects these rights, to just give it up because they have become a minority in population is ludicrous. This is colonialism in 2024.

[@gouldmcclay]

@@MrMahazestar you don't know the treaty articles at all because Maori seeded sovereignty and they are not indigenous as some would have you believe they 2 were colonisers just ask the moriori

[@Ffn23]

David the only one keeping a level head in all these reporter interviews

[@FelixTweezer]

Based on the historical records, the Māori invaders from the Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama tribes committed severe atrocities against the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands in 1835. The actions included: • Killing approximately 300 Moriori in the initial invasion • Enslaving the survivors • Forbidding Moriori from speaking their language or practicing their culture • Forcing Moriori to desecrate their own sacred sites • Banning Moriori from marrying or having children with each other • Ritually killing around 10% of the population, including staking out women and children on beaches to die • Cannibalism of some victims The invasion and subsequent treatment led to a drastic reduction in the Moriori population, from around 1,700 in 1835 to only 101 survivors by 1862. This event is now recognized as a genocide that nearly wiped out the entire Moriori people and culture.

[@nadinefay1560]

Wake me up once this nightmare is over, at that point let me know what the rules are.

[@tequilasunset4651]

The new rules won't have much to do with personal rights, they'll simply be to exploit the land for resources like never before -- expand quarries, mine the seabed, drill for oil and gas, expand into conservation land, don't worry so much about protecting freshwater quality. At least that's what's been greenlit so far.

[@grant6895]

Surveys across all Political parties show 2 out of 3 New Zealanders support Seymours bill.

[@warwickcarpenter3630]

NO they Don't. They show about 40+ for 30+ anti & the rest undecided. Show me your Facts & Maths. Or obviously, you did your schooling under National Standards, introduced by National. Must have affected your English Comprehension as well. BrittArse (yeah from the comedy Brittas Empire), was repeatedly hypocritical, diffuse & lying. I think, No BrittArse, I don't think that at all. Jack Tame Caught him out. For all you right wing conspiracy theorists out there, you be happy to know the Atlas Foundation is behind this. You'll be unhappy to know it's not about you, It's about Them!

[@Gray429]

@@grant6895 was this from the Curia poll? Scoop reported on it I think. The poll was taken of just 958 New Zealanders from only 3 October to 7 October. It’s hard to tell when it’s not clearly explained what demographics were polled for it (or atleast, I can’t see where they polled it). It’d be interesting to see what the poll numbers would say after the hikoi and now that the Bill is public for debate.

[@RaewynTairi]

@grant6895 I looked into that. It only involved 1000 volunteers and 15 000 Randoms. Not the whole of nz

[@RaewynTairi]

@grant6895 I looked into that. It involved 1000 volunteers and 15 000 Randoms. Not the whole of nz

[@kiatupato182]

Why couldn't they consult with Iwi first. That is the biggest insult.

[@ubuntuscorpious]

Can't believe people in NZ are arguing AGAINST equal rights.

[@kiwikiwi223]

It's not about equal rights it's changing an agreement

[@Amsterdampardoc1]

@@kiwikiwi223yeah but there was discrimination happening in the last govt based on race. This would stop that from happening.

[@ianwatson65]

@@kiwikiwi223 It is about removing resource allocation based on race, and giving it based on needs. Poor Maori will still get help, but so will poor Islanders, poor iNdians, poor Asians, and dare I say it poor whites. If you consider this bad then I feel sorry for you

[@kiwikiwi223]

@Amsterdampardoc1 they only want to get rid of consent from maori when it comes to resources and land. That way they can sell off our country to overseas businesses. Wake up

[@xerosereify]

@ubuntuscorpious Seymour isn't pushing for equal rights, that's just the pretty way he is dressing up legislation designed to gut environmental protections.

[@maxxamiss5386]

@16:38 He said some. The ones he mentioned are not the ones driving this. He started working on this well over a decade ago when he was in Canada with atlas network

[@KahurangiHippolite]

@David Seymour, the present and past governments of NZ have ALWAYS governed and made laws because we as a country are a democracy, nobody said that we HAVE to think the same, who is trying to change that? Every week your agenda or argument for the Treaty Principles Bill has changed but definitely become more long winded and you are telling alot of porkies on top of what you were saying in the previous weeks. Debate all you like and with whoever you like but don't expect everyone to agree with you! You created a Bill without the other partner so that partner doesn't want anything to do with it, which is in plain simple english, do we need to constantly tell you that? We will be waiting for your racist regional meetings just like the Julian Batchelor ones although I am not sure if it will be worth attending since the National and NZ First parties (your Coalition partners) have said that they won't support your Bill any further so won't become law. Seems all to be a waste of taxpayers money and time!

[@cb3371]

Jack needs to ask questions and let them be answered. If he interjects with his own answer to his own question then he should just say this is his position and not ask it as a question.

[@etkbruze5526]

He wasn’t wrong though? Jack clearly stated the legitimate interpretations stated on the treaty and Davids purposefully misinterpreting it to suit the initiative of the bill which effectively will help Atlas strip and bypass cultural land laws to pave the way for off-shore mining, the reaping of this lands resources and so many other terrible things all for the purpose of financial gain and total control of Aotearoa by the crown. How many times do New Zealanders have to be presented with something that looks like it’ll be the right thing to vote for and enact, only to find out after it’s all said and done that we’ve been lied to for financial gain by rich people? He’s not letting this man spout bullshit through his teeth and regardless of how you feel, it’s the right bloody thing to do.

[@user-tc-s7r]

David wins again - yes lets get this passed

[@galleonseas4206]

What a useless interviewer... asks questions on top of questions and cuts off every answer

[@etkbruze5526]

You have to be deaf dumb or blind if you’re unable to see that DS is manipulating the way we look at the treaty and race relations in nz. He’s a clever man. I mean you’d have to be if you’re affiliated with atlas network, an organisation comprised of people with the knowledge and power to strip and bypass cultural land laws held by indigenous peoples the world over for the purpose of financial gain by means of mining, reaping natural resources and many other questionable acts. But you already knew all that.

[@thenickman26]

I’m another with David.

[@svetlanadavis2793]

I know one crazy grandfather who attacked a neighboring country 3 years ago. A country that is of the same blood as this jerk . His main motivation is that his nation is the greatest, his language is the greatest and you have never been before us. This grandfather does not want to talk to anyone and negotiate with anyone because he is the greatest. He is also sure that the world can be made to love him if the world is afraid of him. Does it remind you of anything in New Zealand today?

[@RaewynTairi]

Sure does

[@ianwatson65]

The thing is the British Empire was the greatest, and Maori were realtively nothing. Without the British Empire the world would be a very diffeent place, without maori, no one would have noticed.

[@cvrjourneyjourney]

Jack Tame's proposal that division has worked in countries such as Sweden, America, Canada and Aus shows his ignorance about those countries. His style of interview is not constructive and it does not bring out the best in those he interviews. Regardless of anyones opinions on David Seymour's position, I applaud him for having the courage to present it. I personally am in favour of a unified nation. And I would love to see a more competent interviewer.

[@sambo4441]

The countries mentioned typically have indigenous people who are worse off than the race that assimilated them. supposedly they have different legal rights, David would definitely argue they have more rights as he has with Maaori, yet as we can see in nearly all examples these indigenous groups are represented highly in nearly all negative demographic measurements. How does a new false sense of equality solve this issue? if everyone gets the same thing then societal differences are perpetuated. the poor stay poor. how is it that maaori supposedly have more rights but do worse off by nearly every measure? Treating everyone the same is great if you're dumb enough to pretend systematic racism doesn't exist Btw both examples David gave were extremely flawed: Iwi representation blocking housing - David supports wealthy NIMBYs doing this exact thing. Sacrificing Maths and Science for Te Reo - This literally doesn't ever happen he's just lying

[@slayer5189]

Jack knows we lead the world in indigenous rights it's was to show the state isn't a failure because of indigenous laws but comprehension isnt so bright is it?

[@matthewviliamu2679]

that's cos Jack's question and point is too smart for you to understand lol

[@Gray429]

19:00 - 23:35 if anyone just wants to watch 4 minutes of this 31 min interview because they don’t have the time, watch this. This part is key. In short, David Seymour’s Bill reinterprets article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi to his own definition. Jack reads both the English and Te Reo Māori versions of the Treaty. Te Tiriti promises Māori chieftains and people’s, and any descendants of them, Tino Rangatiratanga (self determination and governance) over their lands, estates, forests, fisheries and other properties. David Seymour says Tino Rangatiratanga SHOULD be meant for all of New Zealand. When Jack asks him what he thinks Tino Rangatiratanga does mean though, David Seymour says he does not know what it is or means. He deflects to say that no one does - inaccurate, again. The courts only debate on how it is applied in legislation today, not the definition. The definition was clear in the Lands Case of 1987 and also Ngāti Apa vs Attorney-General 2003 case. It’s also in our current Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, which has been developed by the courts, Waitangi Tribunal, governments, and other key experts, and used by the Courts today. So, to be clear. A politician who does not know what Tino Rangatiratanga means, is using this Māori cultural word to create a version of it for his Bill based on what he thinks it should mean, without proper consultation with Māori. ….that’s rather colonial, isn’t it. Jack and David go back and forth on their moral high grounds here, and that’s all fine. Jack does bring up an important point that the Bill of Rights Act 1990 already protects individual freedoms, free expression, freedom from discrimination - though I wish he pressed more on this. What I think is important here to note what David Seymour’s Bill is trying to do. The Bill’s own Principles would be the applied interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi into legislation and our laws. ACT party’s approved definitions, developed without Māori consultation. It would replace our current Principles which have been developed over decades of debate from Māori, the Waitangi Tribunal, the Courts, and other experts. While Waitangi Tribunal, King’s Counsel and other experts have already come out publicly to say whats wrong with the Bill - this interview has shown part of it in plain sight. David Seymour shouldn’t be going near anything to do with the Treaty without a full understanding of what it means in the first place, and he shouldn’t be reusing a cultural term out of its cultural context when he doesn’t understand what it is either. That’s why we have experts. Now while that would seem rather reasonable to any person, David’s response to Jack’s excellent critique is an attempt to infantilise and demean Jack with “that’s a cute argument”. Interesting way to save face.

[@deborahbrown1270]

Best honest comment. Thank you

[@nibiru379]

We love David. More power to him

[@sativaknight9358]

Your a separatist

[@stefsmith47]

Article 2 in Te tiriti actually mentions all the people of NZ.

[@vicipiz]

Can u explain to me how tino rangatiratanga mean that Māori should get 50% control of water assets that everyone paid for?

[@mrmyers91]

Jack let David finish his answer - constantly interrupting when he tries to reply. You never do this when it’s involving certain ethnicities.

[@rhysrautjoki7207]

Fact checking a politician's lies in real time is the most important and fundamental job of a good journalist.

[@RaewynTairi]

Probabl because he can see through seymours misleading lies

[@RubyDoobieScoo]

He's doing him a favour, every time David speaks he makes himself look more like an unhinged autist.

[@matthewviliamu2679]

Jack literally did this to Debbie in the very next interview

[@kiatupato182]

If you care about equality of rights and responsibility... all who support the Bill need to do a couple important things first. Over 26,000 Hectares of Maori Land locked in perpetual leases right now. Maori owners not allowed to charge Fair market rates and make a Fair income for over 100 years. Thousands of acres of Maori Land on 99 year leases. Many not paying a Fair lease rate (many not paying anything) for decades now, which is reason enough to break lease. Some say 'but look at the improvements I have made' but you haven't paid a Fair Lease fee for decades, viewing it just as 'Maori Land'. Take the buildings and move onto other Land where you get Free or extremely low lease rates. Fair Treatment? Equality? These Lease agreements are modern day scamming and theft over a span of 50,60,70,80,90,100 plus years. Until these unequal Treatment of Maori get rectified, all who support the Bill are HYPOCRITES

[@RaewynTairi]

@@kiatupato182 Well spoken

[@chongo1979]

The 1/36th Maori between these two men is fighting for its life in this debate.

[@The_Rachel_A.M.]

The courts are the best place to review contracts, not parliament. This bill is a pebble, representing an impending landslide of legislation to sell off more land and water assets to foreign interests at the cost of all NZers. If this government is concerned with providing housing, perhaps they can sell off some of their personal excess realty to enable more first-home buyers to own? Perhaps they could return to the concept of the Capital Gains tax? Perhaps they could limit landlords to owning no more than 2 properties? Perhaps they could introduce legislation that prevents NZ from being considered a tax haven for overseas investors? We’ve seen this type of government in NZ, enough times before to know that they don’t care about social policy: they only care about lining their own pockets and those of lobbyists and cronies. Gross.

[@xerosereify]

Well said!

[@christineoconnor5449]

Toitu Te Tiriti ❤️ 🤍 🖤

[@rhysrautjoki7207]

Ake, ake kia kaha e...

[@sunstar1630]

David Seymour is a New Zealand HERO. Equal rights for all New Zealanders do not appear to be the Maori WAY of being Just and fair. WHY???

[@miloguichard9179]

Good exchange ! Jack Tame has turned into a solid interviewer. He’s grilled politicians of all stripes so I respect that. David is very articulate about this issue.

[@I_Extinguish_I]

Ah, the Treaty Principles Bill-the legislative equivalent of a wolf in sheep’s clothing, except the sheep is wearing a three-piece suit and muttering ‘democracy.’ Let’s not beat around the bush: this bill isn’t clarifying Te Tiriti o Waitangi. It’s gutting it, erasing Māori tino rangatiratanga, and calling it equality. It’s a masterclass in spin, where the fine print screams, ‘Māori voices not included,’ while David Seymour waves the flag of fairness like a magician pulling a rabbit out of an empty hat. Take the so-called principles. Civil Government? A thinly veiled power grab that turns kāwanatanga into unchecked authority, conveniently skipping over the actual deal Māori agreed to-a partnership. Rights of Hapū and Iwi Māori? A relic-painting exercise that freezes Māori rights in 1840 while ignoring modern obligations. And the Right to Equality? A feel-good phrase masking the erasure of equity, framing co-governance as ‘special treatment’ rather than a necessary fix for 183 years of systemic failure. But let’s not stop there. Follow the money trail to groups like the Atlas Network, quietly bankrolling deregulation and privatisation agendas. This isn’t a bill for everyday New Zealanders-it’s a corporate playbook designed to open the door for big business while sidelining Māori as decision-makers. It’s not co-governance that’s the threat; it’s corporate greed disguised as democracy. So, New Zealand, do we really want to swap the promise of Te Tiriti for a corporate auction house?

[@kiatupato182]

Yes, the Bill is a smokescreen. They desperately want to drill for Oil and sell assets. Consulting iwi and Environmental groups is annoying. So they incite hatred toward Maori, to distract everyone of their Greed at play.

[@Ced_GT]

There should be no special privileges for one race over another. Equal rights for all New Zealanders are fundamental for a fair and just society.

[@Matikemai2040]

Why did you make this statement

[@RaewynTairi]

@@Ced_GT give Maori their land back first

[@veragreen9725]

You should be embarrassed with that statement ... I would remove it if I were you ...

[@kiatupato182]

Bill is self righteous virtue signaling shallowly knowledged Bull Kaka.

[@kiatupato182]

Maori get treated unfairly by the laws of NZ, not you.

[@jasonpoihegatama1347]

Principle 2 of Davids bill Give Māori rights to historical treaty claims so this gives Māori rights to any claims regarding matters before 1840. Im not sure but haven't most of those claims been settled? And the settlements were done at the time Māori believed they still had or would have the full rights under the treaty. So will this mean all settlements made will have to be resettled to acknowledge the fact all other rights the Māori have under the treaty is no more? Then it will be only right to add if new historical settlements can not be reached between Maori and the crown in 1 year then all land sold or leased or gifted to the crown after 1840 be return to Maori . And the crown forfeiture any governance in NZ.

[@mrsANGRYh]

Time to end the settlements, it’s gone long long enough.

[@jasonpoihegatama1347]

@@mrsANGRYh My sander had a 3 year warranty but thats now long long gone

[@itsjustweard2328]

Someone had to bring it up someone had to have the conversation. The country is sadly divided. You can't have different rights for one person And different rights for another. It doesn't work. Look at other countries that are fighting. Why can't I have the same rights as you

[@MrGamerxpert]

And you lost...

[@itsjustweard2328]

@MrGamerxpert And your racist

[@MrGamerxpert]

@@itsjustweard2328 You're*

[@Mel-x9x]

Tame acts like an interrogator rather than a journalist

[@x.Rhymiie.x]

You have to when dealing with Politicians.

[@leetawhara7103]

The treaty was between the crown and Maori.

[@ruthnamoa277]

David with the common sense 🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼

[@georgemiller1307]

Australians have common sense too. But indigenous there, ain't got nothing and still have the highest rates of imprisonment🤦‍♂️💯

[@Arms26]

David with the racism.

[@RaewynTairi]

Nah lights on and no one's home with seymour

[@Tupunaforever]

Let's fight for another 200 years about which version of the treaty say's what FFS let's move on Jack, EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL NEW ZEALANDERS

[@j_Creator]

Are you specially inclined? This is not some ancient language no one knows, learn the treaty, or stfu because you don't know what you are talking about. Learn the difference between tangata tiriti and a kiwi.

[@nica900]

What you mean is the majority gets to decide what rights an indigenous minority should have, and going on form, it will essential boil down to repression.

[@Tupunaforever]

@nica900 minority, I'm maori gay and a kaumatua, I was brought up to be a victim until I realized what a sad life I was leading and others were succeeding, so guess what, I rolled up my sleeves, took personal responsibility, had a tangi for my victimhood, and became a success. Our family just finished our papakainga, our own money blood sweat and tears and planted an ecosystem on Maori land, our maori land. Everybody wins, you wanna cry about repression, that's not my whanau's reality.

[@andrewoh1663]

@@nica900 indigenous? Really?

[@badchefi]

@@Tupunaforevereven worse that you throw what your ancestors fought for down the drain -

[@sylviagrace3600]

Referendum cant be soon enough David Seymour 100 %