At the last election, it was the only party to propose a referendum on this subject, and 91.6 percent of the electorate did not support them.

It had no democratic mandate to enact its ideas about the Treaty.

In the coalition negotiations that followed the election, both Act and NZ First (with only 6 percent of the vote) gained support for specific policies - from gun laws, far right economic policies, a Fast-track bill and smoking laws to a referendum on Te Tiriti - that won very little support from voters. In some cases, these policies weren't even put to the electorate.

This makes a mockery of the democratic process.

As the party that won the majority of votes in 2023, National must take responsibility for this breach of democratic norms.

To gain power, its leaders were willing to trade away positions on matters of national importance supported by centrist majorities in favour of policies and initiatives supported by fringe minorities.

As Sir Geoffrey Palmer has noted, "New Zealand is in danger of lurching towards constitutional impropriety. The Luxon government is driving a number of controversial issues rapidly through Parliament. Some of these policies are unfit for purpose, legally suspect, contrary to the public interest and inappropriate."

The previous Labour government must take some of the blame for this state of affairs.

Emboldened by an absolute majority, it also tried to enact controversial policies on Te Tiriti and other matters that lacked a democratic mandate.

At the same time, by rushing through a raft of ill-considered legislation under urgency, and trying to avoid proper scrutiny as they enact their backdoor deals, the National-led coalition Government is putting New Zealand's democracy at risk.

In his article, Sir Geoffrey examined Act's proposal for a referendum on the Treaty as a case in point. Again, his comments are apposite:

"New Zealand is likely to be internationally embarrassed if these policies prevail. The Act policy on this matter is polarising and dangerous to civil order.

"Sir John Key was right to speak out against it.

"The Treaty is binding on the New Zealand Government.

"It is binding because New Zealand is the successor to the obligations of the UK government which negotiated the Treaty, since we are now independent. And it is also binding on us because it is a valid treaty at international law."

In its draft Treaty Principles bill, Act has made an attempt to rewrite a document that was written, debated and signed in te reo, to mirror their own libertarian ideologies.

Much of their rhetoric, and that of their funders, has been inflammatory and divisive - a classic case of ‘pernicious polarisation.'

Libertarianism, which elevates individual liberty and private rights over notions of collective responsibility, is historically and culturally specific.

It traces back to strands in Greek philosophy and Christianity as well as philosophers like John Locke and John Stuart Mill.

Its support among the New Zealand electorate is slight, as indicated by Act's 8.4 percent share of the vote.

Libertarianism is also radically at odds with the framings of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

In 1840, te reo was the dominant language of the land, and relational thinking the dominant philosophy. In keeping with this kind of logic, Te Tiriti o Waitangi is framed as a chiefly gift exchange between the rangatira of the various hapu, and Victoria, the Queen of England.

In Ture / Article 1 of Te Tiriti, the rangatira give all the ‘kawanatanga' (governance) of their lands, absolutely and forever, to the Queen of England. In Ture / Article 2, Queen Victoria agrees with the rangatira and the hapu to uphold the tino rangatiratanga of their lands, dwelling places and all their treasures.

In Ture / Article 3, in exchange for the gift of kawanatanga, the Queen promises to protect the indigenous inhabitants of New Zealand, and gives to them ‘nga tikanga rite tahi' (tikanga absolutely equal) with her subjects, the inhabitants of England.

Act's attempt to rewrite Te Tiriti as a statement about individual liberty and property rights is presumptuous since they clearly can't read the original.

Through partial and misleading translations, they seek to erase the ‘tino rangatiratanga' (the term that Henry Williams used as a translation equivalent for ‘independence' in He Whakaputanga, Declaration of Independence in 1835) of hapu, although this is unequivocally acknowledged by Queen Victoria in Ture 2.

As a group of licensed translators of te reo has noted, Act's proposed Treaty principles are based on "additions, omissions and distortions of the original text," and are unethical and inaccurate.

Basing a referendum on this kind of misrepresentation would be an offence against the democratic process in New Zealand, and a betrayal of our best values.

Like tikanga maori, Western political philosophy is not purely about individual rights.

It also includes many strands of relational thinking - about collective rights and responsibilities, and democracy ‘of the people, by the people, for the people,' for example.

The same is true of the law, which is fundamentally about relationships among groups as well as individuals, and how these should be conducted.

Values including honour, truth and justice resonate closely with ideas such as mana, pono and tika.

The ‘scales of justice' remind one of the balanced, reciprocal exchanges in debates on the marae. This is the way in which discussions of the contemporary significance of Te Tiriti ought to be conducted. Continue reading

• Anne Salmond is a Distinguished Professor at the University of Auckland, and was the 2013 New Zealander of the Year. She became a Dame in 1995 under National, and was awarded the Order of New Zealand in 2020.

It comes after Prime Minister Chris Hipkins on Wednesday put several unpopular policies on the burn pile including the RNZ-TVNZ merger, hate speech reforms and the income insurance scheme. Read more

He's concerned about ACT Party leader David Seymour's desire to widen the End of Life Choice Act criteria. Seymour argues the change is necessary, as many who want assisted suicide are "missing out".

Seymour says this is mainly because those people don't have a terminal illness likely to end their lives within six months.

The six-month terminal prognosis requirement prevents those with chronic conditions or disabilities from being eligible.

Betty argues broadening the eligibility criteria would not improve equitable choice for those facing end-of-life decisions.

It should not progress in light of the current palliative care climate in New Zealand, he cautions.

Nor should it happen without careful analysis.

Despite its supreme importance to New Zealand's health system, palliative care is not well catered for, says Betty.

"There's no strategic plan as to what is going to happen with palliative care, there's fragmented services, lack of funding… the list goes on. It's not a situation we can allow as a first-world, caring society."

The contrast and imbalance of palliative care vs assisted suicide and euthanasia is sizeable and cause for concern, he says.

"We have one part of the system fully-funded and overseen in an apparently coherent way by the Ministry of Health (assisted suicide and euthanasia), and the other sector that doesn't even have a strategic plan in place, that is inequitably funded, and has no coherent overview of how to develop the service.

"Why don't we have the exact focus on palliative care, so anyone making the biggest decision of life can make an equitable, informed choice?"

It's remiss of the Government, politicians and the Ministry of Health, he says.

Betty says New Zealand's 5,500 GPs, specialist GPs, trainees and rural hospital doctors often provide palliative care to their patients free of charge.

That's because there is no funding available for end-of-life care - a serious failing of the system, he says.

"Palliative care is so dependent on local funding, which is traditionally done by DHBs, but there's a total lack of funding, resourcing and a national approach."

This, coupled with a growing workload and an increasing complexity in clinical patient needs, adds pressure to palliative care practices.

"The question becomes - why don't we have that exact same focus on palliative care," Betty says.

The Assisted Dying Service Data and Report from 7 November 2021 to 30 September 2022 says only about 80 percent of those choosing assisted suicide or euthanasia have access to palliative care.

Betty cautions against this analysis.

"It doesn't show perceptions of what is going on or the quality of care they are receiving," he says.

The data's effectiveness should be questioned when the Act is reviewed, he adds.

"Everyone is affected by death and dying. That is part of health. Good dying and having equitable choice is a fundamental part of the healthcare system we set up. It has to be given space and focus at this point."

Source

• Scoop
• NZ Herald
• 1News

A year after coming into force, the End of Life Choice Act is working well and opponents of the law change had "melted away," Seymour says.

"The figures overwhelmingly show a law that is working. People can and do get through the process to become eligible for assisted dying, some change their mind, some are assessed as not eligible. That is what we'd expect if the law was working."

In the year since the law was passed, 214 patients have been euthanased.

In all, 596 people have applied, and 294 have been deemed eligible and 120 people were turned down because they were not eligible.

Seymour says a third of the ineligible patients were declined because they didn't meet the criteria of having a terminal illness likely to end their lives within six months.

He says he suspects "some if not many have an illness that is terminal but without a certain timeframe."

Seymour says he agreed to the six-month timeframe to gain the Green Party's support to pass the bill.

"I fear that compromise is leading to people ... missing out on having choice and control, even though their long suffering is just as real as those with a more immediate terminal condition."

His original bill would have allowed non-terminal patients with "grievous and irremediable conditions" to get access to voluntary euthanasia.

The amended law, which was voted on in a public referendum, made it explicit that applicants could not get access to assisted dying on the basis of disability or mental illness alone.

Seymour says he will argue for the euthanasia law criteria to be broadened when the law comes up for review in 2024.

He is also concerned that one in six applicants had died of underlying conditions before they were able to get an assisted death.

"It's excluding people with long-term conditions, and that means a lot of suffering that may not be necessary," he says.

Better palliative care

While Seymour wants the law relaxed, health experts are calling for wider support for palliative care services.

Royal College of GPs says it's too early for any new legislation changes.

The College is calling for ongoing observation for the next 12 months.

The Royal College of GPs medical director, Dr Bryan Betty says he'd like more funding for palliative care services sector-wide.

"There is underfunding for hospice, there is underfunding for specialist palliative care services, and there's under-funding of palliative care to general practices which support patients who are dying."

Since December 2021, numbers seeking end-of-life treatment have risen from around 15 per month to around 20 in September 2022.

Source

• NZ Herald
• One News

"The Commission is a hard-left organisation masquerading as a government department," he says.

The Human Rights Commission today is calling for the new government to honour human rights. To this end, it has laid out 39 issues it wants politicians to adopt.

These include creating a written constitution that honours Te Tiriti o Waitangi, makes the minimum wage the living wage, creates more employment opportunities for disabled people, builds decent and affordable homes and formulates a national action plan against racism.

It also wants a national strategy to deal with family violence, an end pay discrimination, for police to collect hate crime data and to make the health and disability system work for all disabled people.

Chief Human Rights Commissioner Paul Hunt says human rights place responsibilities on governments and individuals "to embrace diversity, support vibrant communities and not be racist or homophobic."

However, Seymour says the manifesto shows the Commission is "no longer interested in helping real people with actual human rights issues, but simply advancing a left-wing agenda."

In his view the Commission has become "irrelevant, and even dangerous when it cannot defend our most basic human rights."

He sees it as a "highly politicised, left-wing organisation," that doesn't help people's human rights at all.

"Act sees no purpose for it and would abolish it completely," Seymour says.

The Human Rights Commission's 39 human rights issues were collected from the Chief Human Rights Commissioner Paul Hunt, Disability Rights Commissioner Paula Tesoriero, Race Relations Commissioner Meng Foon and Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner Saunoamaali'i Dr Karanina Sumeo.

Some of the items on the Commissioners' wishlist include:

• Everyone having a warm, dry, safe, decent home
• A community-based health system (physical and mental health) for everyone
• Public officials respecting the human rights promises governments have made to
  all of us
• A welfare system ensuring a secure and dignified life for everyone
• Honouring and implementing the growing partnership between kawanatanga (Crown) and
  rangatiratanga (hapü and iwi)
• Establishing a Human Rights Commissioner for Older People
• Respecting disabled people by upholding their dignity and celebrating their
  contributions
• Giving disabled young people a fair go in our education system
• Public information provided in ways, such as te reo Maori, NZ Sign Language, and
  braille, so that everyone can understand
• Collecting better information about disabled people so services can be better designed
  for them
• Ensuring government contracts have job targets for Maori, women, disabled people,
  55+, vulnerable youth, Pacific Peoples and ethnic minorities
• Making the minimum wage a living wage
• Eliminating modern slavery and exploitation in the workplace
• Establishing a National Action Plan Against Racism
• Teaching Te Tiriti o Waitangi, local histories and human rights in schools
• Police collecting hate crime data
• Making government systems work for Maori e.g. health, justice, education, Oranga
  Tamariki, welfare and housing.

Source

• NZ Herald
• Supplied
• Image: Howick and Pakuranga Times