The Treaty and democratic government

Ladley, Andrew

doi:10.26686/pq.v1i1.4170

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, in New Zealand, discussions concerning diversity and its relevance for public policy necessarily intersect as some point with the Treaty of Waitangi. Previous issues of the Policy Quarterly have already dealt in some depth with the nature, role and significance of the Treaty for contemporary policy-making (see Ladley, 2005;White and Ladley, 2005), so we will not discuss this matter in detail here. The question of how governments ought to respond to (increasing) diversity raises many issues.…”

Section: Diversity and Institutional Design Diversity And Institutional Design Diversity And Institutional Design Diversity And Institutimentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity and public policy

Boston¹,

Callister²

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Diversity and Institutional Design Diversity And Institutional Design Diversity And Institutional Design Diversity And Institutimentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity and public policy

Boston¹,

Callister²

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The common denominator in the cases arising from the transfer of Crown assets is that the basic arguments of the parties remained within the confines of section 9 of the State-Owned Enterprises Act. 142 Wider questions about the status of the Treaty in New 137 At [2]. 138 Zealand's constitutional structure were not raised.…”

Section: B the Treaty And Parliamentary Sovereignty In The Courtsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Past experience makes clear the inability of people of one culture to develop and implement policies for people of another culture and "get it 1 Te Runanga O Wharekauri Rekohu Inc v Attorney-General [1993] 2 NZLR 301 at 308-309 [Sealords case]. 2 Constitutional Advisory Panel "New Zealand's Constitution: The Conversation So Far" (Ministry of Justice, Sept 2012) at 35. 3 New Zealand Māori Council v The Attorney-General [1994] 1 NZLR 513 at 516 per Woolf LJ [Broadcasting Assets case] 4 A V Dicey Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1 ed, MacMillan, London, 1885;10 ed, MacMillan, London, 1959).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parliamentary sovereignty as a barrier to a Treaty-based partnership

O'Hagan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>The Treaty of Waitangi has repeatedly been affirmed as New Zealand’s founding document, yet our constitutional arrangements rest on the untrammelled principle of parliamentary sovereignty. This paper argues that the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty is contrary to the sharing of powers provided for in the Treaty, as it concentrates ultimate law-making authority in one body. New Zealand’s constitutional history is canvassed briefly, with a specific focus on the Treaty and the basis of British Crown’s acquisition of sovereignty over New Zealand. It is noted that the current place of the Treaty within New Zealand’s constitution is within the vast powers of parliament - the Treaty can only have legal effect to the extent that Parliament provides for. After looking at examples from statute and common law it is concluded that, rather than limiting parliamentary sovereignty, the current approach ultimately reinforces the absolute and indivisible power of parliament. As such, it is a barrier to a Treaty partnership between the Crown and Maori. To truly give effect to the Treaty a change in the way in which public power in New Zealand is configured and exercised is necessary. Three models for Treaty-based constitutional reform are therefore discussed. The current constitutional review provides Iwi and the Crown with an opportunity to look beyond the confines of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty and forge a unique constitutional system that gives effect to the Treaty as New Zealand’s founding document.</p>

show abstract

Māori and mining: Indigenous perspectives on reconceptualising and contextualising the social licence to operate

Ruckstuhl

Thompson‐Fawcett

Rae

2014

Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term 'social licence to operate' (SLO) is relatively new to public discourse in Aotearoa New Zealand. It is increasingly being used in the aquaculture, dairy and mining industries due to their rapid intensification and consequent impact on natural resources. For Indigenous New Zealanders, Māori, there has been contestation about land and water usage since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. Māori have struggled to have their voices recognised. However, since 1975, the country has been developing a process that recognises Māori rights. For Māori, the Treaty of Waitangi is the prime 'social licence'. In this paper, we contextualise the notion of SLO in light of the Treaty of Waitangi, specifically in the case of mineral extraction. We examine the extent to which Māori values, as expressed through Māori resource management plans, cultural impact assessments and submissions on legislation, articulate the Māori SLO and what, in turn, this offers the wider field of impact assessment.

show abstract

The Treaty and democratic government

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Diversity and public policy

Diversity and public policy

Parliamentary sovereignty as a barrier to a Treaty-based partnership

Māori and mining: Indigenous perspectives on reconceptualising and contextualising the social licence to operate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About