Table of Contents
Summarised by Centrist
New documents reveal the government is considering rewriting Treaty clauses across multiple laws, lowering the legal standard to simply “take into account” Te Tiriti, a move officials warn could weaken its practical force.
Ministry of Justice advice, filed with the Waitangi Tribunal, says the changes could have a “significantly harmful” impact on Māori-Crown relations.
The proposal stems from the National–NZ First coalition agreement to review all legislation referencing Treaty principles and either replace or remove them. Under the draft approach, stronger obligations, such as “give effect to,” would be replaced with the softer “take into account” standard across a range of Acts.
Legal academic Luke Fitzmaurice-Brown said the shift would effectively place “a very low ceiling” on how much weight decision-makers can give the Treaty, limiting it to one factor among many rather than something that must be prioritised.
Several major laws are in scope, including the Education and Training Act, Land Transport Management Act and Smokefree Environments Act, while others would be amended or have Treaty references removed entirely.
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the goal is to make Treaty provisions more “specific and consistent,” arguing current wording across legislation is often vague and uneven.
The deeper issue is constitutional. Treaty clauses are what give Te Tiriti legal effect in practice, since the Treaty itself is not directly enforceable unless referenced in legislation. Changing the wording changes the weight.
The proposal is still in consultation with iwi leaders and is expected to go through a full select committee process, but it is already shaping up as a quieter, more technical front in the broader Treaty debate, one that could carry consequences on a scale similar to the more visible Treaty Principles Bill.
Editor’s note: Finlayson is not a neutral observer in Treaty politics. As Treaty Negotiations Minister, he played a key role in New Zealand’s 2010 endorsement of UNDRIP and was central to embedding co-governance through major Treaty settlements, including arrangements involving the Waikato River Authority and the Te Urewera Board. He has consistently defended Treaty-based governance models in law and policy and has publicly pushed back against efforts to roll them back.
Even with softer wording such as “take into account,” courts and decision-makers retain broad discretion over how much weight to give the Treaty, which may limit the effectiveness of these changes in practice and leave them largely symbolic.
