| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New Zealand Government article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
 | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
|
This article leans heavily into a what is arguably a minority interpretation of the founding of New Zealand and its constitutional relationship with Māori, pushed by groups like Hobson's Pledge, the publishers of Investigate magazine, and the ACT and NZ First parties. The opposing view is that Te Tiriti o Waitangi was a formal treaty between two sovereign powers, the British Crown and the confederation of iwi ("United Tribes") that had declared the independence of "Nui Terene" in 1835. That since sovereignty wasn't ceded in the Te Reo Māori version - and some iwi like Ngai Tūhoe never signed Te Tiriti - the enforcement of NZ government sovereignty over iwi is an illegal occupation under international law. This is much closer to the interpretation that has tended to guide NZ government policy - under either major party - since the 1980s. During which time as well as recognising iwi ownership of land and other resources, various governance powers have been devolved to Māori (a process both praised and condemned as "co-governance). The article needs to be rewritten to neutrally present both points of view, and to the degree possible, the level of support for each position. Danylstrype (talk) 06:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
