Dear Editor,
The claim that Maori did not cede sovereignty to the Crown by the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, and therefore compensation is due because the colonists subsequently stole the land, is no more plausible than a claim that the Anglo-Saxons never ceded sovereignty to the Norman invaders in 1066 so the French colonists currently owe the English big time.
Even if you think the Frogs do indeed owe the Poms a great deal, that has more to do with winning the world wars in the twentieth century than it has to do with any unceded sovereignty after a small war in the eleventh.
But, back in the present day in New Zealand, the ‘non-cessation of sovereignty’ claim by a small radicalised group within the Maori community and tribal elites, is immaterial.
In passing the Constitution Act 1986 (effective 1 January 1987), in which we “unilaterally revoked all residual United Kingdom legislative power”. New Zealand, as of 1987, is a free-standing constitutional monarchy whose parliament has unlimited sovereign power.
The Parliament that unanimously approved the act was made up of a Labour majority of 56 seats, National 37 and Social Credit 2. Among these MPs, six specifically identified as Maori, although by current definitions there may have been more, so it is indisputable that a representative cross-section of New Zealand society voted for this legislation.
From that date, whether or not sovereignty was ceded in 1840 became irrelevant. And remains irrelevant until a parliamentary majority in excess of 75%, or a general referendum declares it otherwise.
JD
