All issues
Te Tiriti, democracy and the constitution / Te Tiriti and Māori representation

What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?

Parties differ on the Waitangi Tribunal, Treaty clauses in laws, and the Māori seats.Te Tiriti o Waitangi, signed in 1840, is referred to in many laws, often as a duty to "take into account" or "give effect to" its principles. The Waitangi Tribunal, set up in 1975, hears claims that the Crown has breached Te Tiriti; its findings are generally recommendations the government does not have to follow. Seven of Parliament's electorates are Māori seats. Since 2023 the government has removed some Treaty clauses, planned changes to others, reviewed the Tribunal, and required local polls before councils can keep Māori wards. For the 2026 election, parties propose closing or replacing the Tribunal or making its findings binding; narrowing or restoring Treaty clauses; changing constitutional law in different directions; and abolishing, holding a referendum on, or entrenching the Māori seats. No independent costing was found for any of these proposals.

Uneven evidence. Some parties' plans have more published costings or analysis than others. Read what was found

As at 15 October 2026, no independent costing or official analysis was found for closing or replacing the Tribunal, making its recommendations binding, a Te Tiriti commission, a referendum on the Māori seats, entrenching them, or constitutional changes proposed by ACT, the Greens, Opportunity or Te Pāti Māori. The Treaty clause changes are the only proposal with a published official analysis and a Tribunal report, so the evidence sections for the parties that back or oppose those changes (ACT, Labour, National and NZ First) are fuller. Te Pāti Māori is the only party to put a cost on part of its plan. Labour and National have no Te Tiriti policy on their policy pages, so their entries rely on statements and their records; ACT's and Labour's stances on the Māori seats come from MPs' comments to media. This reflects what has been published, not a judgement on the plans.

ViewDepth
Party order is random for each visitor. Tap a party's answer for its full breakdown and sources.Order

Bottom lines on this question

What a party has publicly said it must get, or won't accept, to form or support a government after the election. Only the party's own statements count, quoted with their source. Parties marked Bottom line below have one on that answer.

  • Te Pāti Māori

    Entrench Te Tiriti in New Zealand's constitution.

    Speaking on Marae recently, party co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said entrenchment of te tiriti in the country's constitution would be a bottom line in any potential negotiations to form the next government.

    Party claimDebbie Ngarewa-Packer, Te Pāti Māori co-leader (the source's summary, not a direct quote), reported 25 Aug 2026 · The Spinoff
  • No bottom line on this question found: ACT, Green, Labour, National, NZ First, Opportunity (checked 17 Oct 2026)
  • Opportunity: Its bottom lines page calls upholding the Te Tiriti partnership "an approach we will bring to the negotiation table", not a bottom line. The Opportunity Party
  • Opportunity: Te Ao Māori News (6 October 2026) headlines that Qiulae Wong "signals Te Tiriti as non-negotiable in post-election talks", and reports the party has avoided naming a single specific policy as a formal bottom line. Wong said that if other parties put forward ideas that would jeopardise Te Tiriti, "then I think that gives us grounds to walk away." Te Ao Māori News

Every party's bottom lines, on all issues

This question is split into smaller ones. Under each, parties giving the same answer are grouped together.

Waitangi Tribunal

5 of 7 parties give an answer

Replace or close the Waitangi Tribunal2 parties

  • ACT

    Limit the Tribunal to pre-2008 historical claims, then close it automatically.The Tribunal would lose its role on current policy and close once eligible historical claims are heard; ACT sets no deadline but links finishing settlements to 2040.

  • NZ First

    Abolish the Tribunal; a Completion Commission finishes pre-2008 claims, then closes.Legislation within 100 days; current claims and Crown–Māori relations move to the Ministry of Māori Development.

Keep or strengthen the Waitangi Tribunal3 parties

  • Green

    More Tribunal funding and binding powers to return Crown and private land.The Tribunal could make binding recommendations to return land to iwi, hapū and whānau.

  • Labour

    Keep the Tribunal; would not make its recommendations binding; Parliament has the final say.Hipkins says Labour would keep the Tribunal and that Parliament must remain the final decision-maker.

  • Te Pāti Māori

    Make Waitangi Tribunal recommendations binding on the Crown, enforced by courts.Amend the Treaty of Waitangi Act and the Constitution Act so the Crown must follow recommendations.

  • Not part of its policy: National, Opportunity

Treaty clauses in laws

7 of 7 parties give an answer

Narrow or remove Treaty clauses in laws3 parties

  • ACT

    Cabinet must define Treaty interests in each bill; general Treaty clauses removed.General wording like "give effect to the principles of the Treaty" would stop, and clauses ACT calls "vague" would be removed when laws are changed.

  • National

    "Take into account" standard in 10 laws; Treaty clauses removed from seven.Cabinet decisions from February 2026; Luxon says the government remains committed.

  • NZ First

    Replace general Treaty principles clauses with specific obligations, or remove them.The Spinoff's summary of NZ First's position; the government's current review came from NZ First's coalition agreement.

Restore or strengthen Treaty clauses in laws4 parties

  • Green

    Make Te Tiriti the authoritative text in law; councils become explicit Te Tiriti partners.The Treaty of Waitangi Act would treat the te reo Māori text as authoritative, read with He Whakaputanga.

  • Labour

    Stop the Treaty clause review and restore Te Tiriti duties in education law.Labour would vote against and not progress the clause bill, and "restore commitments to Te Tiriti o Waitangi in schools".

  • Opportunity

    Review recent Treaty clause changes law by law, and make Treaty analysis public.Would amend recent changes where needed; Parliament and the public would see which Treaty obligations were considered in each proposal.

  • Te Pāti Māori

    A Te Tiriti impact statement for every new bill.New legislation would have to set out its Te Tiriti implications before Parliament passes it.

Constitutional law

4 of 7 parties give an answer

Change constitutional law4 parties

  • ACT

    Add Parliament's sovereignty and equality before the law to the Constitution Act.Three principles in the Constitution Act, a property right in the Bill of Rights Act, and limits on tikanga in courts; ACT says courts should use it only in cases such as disputes between iwi.

  • Green

    Fund a national conversation on constitutional change, guided by Matike Mai.A resourced national conversation on constitutional transformation based on He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti.

  • Opportunity

    Support a national, deliberative conversation on Te Tiriti's long-term constitutional place.Uses deliberative democratic processes, with Māori taking part as a Treaty partner; no outcome set.

  • Te Pāti MāoriBottom line

    Bind the Crown to Te Tiriti, with a commission; $220 million for constitutional talks.An independent Te Tiriti Commission could stop or suspend Crown decisions, and a Matike Mai Fund would pay for Māori constitutional talks aiming at 2040.

  • Not part of its policy: Labour, National, NZ First

Māori seats in Parliament

3 of 7 parties give an answer

Abolish the Māori seats or put them to a vote2 parties

  • ACT

    Deputy leader says ACT backs abolishing the Māori seats by law, not referendum.Brooke van Velden said in February 2026 that ACT supports abolition through an Act of Parliament.

  • NZ First

    Referendum on whether to keep the seven Māori seats; timing and question not set.The party says the seats could stay if enough voters back them, but has not said if the vote would bind.

Entrench the Māori seats1 party

  • Green

    Entrench the Māori seats and let Māori switch rolls at any time.The seats would get the 75% protection general electorates have, and Māori could switch rolls at any time.

  • Not part of its policy: Labour, National, Opportunity, Te Pāti Māori

Māori representation on councils

2 of 7 parties give an answer

Set the rules for Māori seats on councils2 parties

  • Green

    Let councils keep Māori wards without a local poll.Councils would regain the ability to keep Māori wards for their districts.

  • NZ First

    Member's bill to close the board and return its work to Auckland Council.NZ First says the board's "functions, property, and obligations" would return to the council in an "orderly transition".

  • Not part of its policy: ACT, Labour, National, Opportunity, Te Pāti Māori

Each party's whole answer, under the same headings for every party.

ACT

Close the Waitangi Tribunal after historical claims; remove general Treaty clauses from laws.ACT would limit the Waitangi Tribunal to historical claims lodged by 1 September 2008, end its inquiries into current policy, and close it once those claims are heard. It sets no deadline but links finishing settlements to 2040. It would add three principles to the Constitution Act: Parliament is sovereign, the rule of law is fundamental, and all are equal before the law. Tikanga could influence court decisions only where Parliament has expressly allowed it; ACT says courts should use it in cases such as disputes between iwi. Cabinet would have to state which Treaty interests a bill engages, and clauses ACT calls "vague" would go. Brooke van Velden says ACT supports abolishing the Māori seats by Act of Parliament. No cost is published. The biggest tradeoff: ACT says Parliament, not a tribunal, would have the final say, but no specialist body would hear Māori claims about current Crown actions.

Waitangi Tribunal
Replace or close the Waitangi Tribunal. Limit the Tribunal to pre-2008 historical claims, then close it automatically.The Tribunal would lose its role on current policy and close once eligible historical claims are heard; ACT sets no deadline but links finishing settlements to 2040.
Treaty clauses in laws
Narrow or remove Treaty clauses in laws. Cabinet must define Treaty interests in each bill; general Treaty clauses removed.General wording like "give effect to the principles of the Treaty" would stop, and clauses ACT calls "vague" would be removed when laws are changed.
Constitutional law
Change constitutional law. Add Parliament's sovereignty and equality before the law to the Constitution Act.Three principles in the Constitution Act, a property right in the Bill of Rights Act, and limits on tikanga in courts; ACT says courts should use it only in cases such as disputes between iwi.
Māori seats in Parliament
Abolish the Māori seats or put them to a vote. Deputy leader says ACT backs abolishing the Māori seats by law, not referendum.Brooke van Velden said in February 2026 that ACT supports abolition through an Act of Parliament.
Māori representation on councils
Not part of its policy

Green

Entrench the Māori seats, give the Tribunal binding powers, and make Te Tiriti's text authoritative.The Greens would amend the Treaty of Waitangi Act so the te reo Māori text, Te Tiriti, is the authoritative text, read alongside He Whakaputanga, the 1835 Declaration. They would fund the Waitangi Tribunal more and let it make binding recommendations to return Crown and private land to iwi, hapū and whānau, and explore a right of first refusal when private land is sold. They would remove "full and final" wording from the Crown's settlement policy guide, and iwi and hapū would take part in government decisions as partners. The Greens would entrench the Māori seats, let Māori switch rolls at any time, let councils keep Māori wards without polls, and fund a national conversation on constitutional change. No costs or start dates are published. The biggest tradeoff: firmer and more lasting Māori rights in law, but less room for future Parliaments and some private landowners to decide.

Waitangi Tribunal
Keep or strengthen the Waitangi Tribunal. More Tribunal funding and binding powers to return Crown and private land.The Tribunal could make binding recommendations to return land to iwi, hapū and whānau.
Treaty clauses in laws
Restore or strengthen Treaty clauses in laws. Make Te Tiriti the authoritative text in law; councils become explicit Te Tiriti partners.The Treaty of Waitangi Act would treat the te reo Māori text as authoritative, read with He Whakaputanga.
Constitutional law
Change constitutional law. Fund a national conversation on constitutional change, guided by Matike Mai.A resourced national conversation on constitutional transformation based on He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti.
Māori seats in Parliament
Entrench the Māori seats. Entrench the Māori seats and let Māori switch rolls at any time.The seats would get the 75% protection general electorates have, and Māori could switch rolls at any time.
Māori representation on councils
Set the rules for Māori seats on councils. Let councils keep Māori wards without a local poll.Councils would regain the ability to keep Māori wards for their districts.

Labour

Keep the Waitangi Tribunal, stop the Treaty clause review, restore Te Tiriti in schools law.Labour says it would "restore commitments to Te Tiriti o Waitangi in schools", after the government removed school boards' duty to give effect to Te Tiriti. It would vote against the government's bill to narrow or remove Treaty clauses in about 18 laws, and Chris Hipkins says a Labour government would not progress it. Hipkins would keep the Waitangi Tribunal and says a Te Tiriti commission could not overrule Cabinet; Willie Jackson says Labour would not support binding Tribunal recommendations or entrenching Te Tiriti. Labour's policy page has no Te Tiriti policy, and Labour has published no position on the Māori seats or Māori wards; MP Kieran McAnulty said in February 2026 that "it is Māori that should decide" on the seats. No cost is stated. The biggest tradeoff: existing Treaty clauses kept and schools commitments restored, with Parliament keeping the final say, but no binding Tribunal powers.

Waitangi Tribunal
Keep or strengthen the Waitangi Tribunal. Keep the Tribunal; would not make its recommendations binding; Parliament has the final say.Hipkins says Labour would keep the Tribunal and that Parliament must remain the final decision-maker.
Treaty clauses in laws
Restore or strengthen Treaty clauses in laws. Stop the Treaty clause review and restore Te Tiriti duties in education law.Labour would vote against and not progress the clause bill, and "restore commitments to Te Tiriti o Waitangi in schools".
Constitutional law
Not part of its policy
Māori seats in Parliament
Not part of its policy
Māori representation on councils
Not part of its policy

National

Limit Treaty clauses to "take into account" in 10 laws and remove them from seven.National has no Te Tiriti policy on its election policy page. Its ministers agreed in February 2026 to set a standard no higher than "take into account" for Treaty principles in 10 laws and remove Treaty clauses from seven, a review promised to NZ First in their coalition agreement. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says the bill will not pass before the election and the government will continue with it. A government review of the Waitangi Tribunal is unreleased. In government National brought in local polls on Māori wards; Luxon said in October 2025 that local communities should decide, and no 2026 position was found. No National position on the Māori seats was found. No cost is stated. The biggest tradeoff: a single Treaty standard across laws, but weaker Treaty duties in some laws.

Waitangi Tribunal
Not part of its policy
Treaty clauses in laws
Narrow or remove Treaty clauses in laws. "Take into account" standard in 10 laws; Treaty clauses removed from seven.Cabinet decisions from February 2026; Luxon says the government remains committed.
Constitutional law
Not part of its policy
Māori seats in Parliament
Not part of its policy
Māori representation on councils
Not part of its policy

NZ First

Replace the Waitangi Tribunal with a commission; hold a referendum on the Māori seats.NZ First would introduce a law within 100 days of the election to abolish the Waitangi Tribunal and replace it with a Treaty of Waitangi Completion Commission, which would finalise claims made before 2008 and then close. Contemporary claims and Crown–Māori relations would move to the Ministry of Māori Development. It would hold a referendum on the future of the seven Māori seats after the election; it has not said when, whether the result would be binding, or what the question would be. A member's bill would abolish Auckland Council's Independent Māori Statutory Board and return its functions to the council. NZ First started the government's Treaty clause review. No costs are published. The biggest tradeoff: NZ First's aim is one set of electoral, Treaty and council arrangements for everyone, but the Tribunal and the board would close, and the Māori seats could go if a binding referendum chose that.

Waitangi Tribunal
Replace or close the Waitangi Tribunal. Abolish the Tribunal; a Completion Commission finishes pre-2008 claims, then closes.Legislation within 100 days; current claims and Crown–Māori relations move to the Ministry of Māori Development.
Treaty clauses in laws
Narrow or remove Treaty clauses in laws. Replace general Treaty principles clauses with specific obligations, or remove them.The Spinoff's summary of NZ First's position; the government's current review came from NZ First's coalition agreement.
Constitutional law
Not part of its policy
Māori seats in Parliament
Abolish the Māori seats or put them to a vote. Referendum on whether to keep the seven Māori seats; timing and question not set.The party says the seats could stay if enough voters back them, but has not said if the vote would bind.
Māori representation on councils
Set the rules for Māori seats on councils. Member's bill to close the board and return its work to Auckland Council.NZ First says the board's "functions, property, and obligations" would return to the council in an "orderly transition".

Opportunity

Stronger Treaty checks in lawmaking, and a national conversation on Te Tiriti's constitutional place.The Opportunity Party would review recent changes to Treaty provisions in law, amending them where needed, and make Treaty analysis a visible part of lawmaking. It would support a national constitutional conversation about Te Tiriti's long-term place, using deliberative processes from its Citizens' Voice policy, with Māori taking part as a Treaty partner. It would honour existing settlements, complete outstanding historical ones, and match Māori decision-making to each issue, from consultation to independent decisions, with accountability for results. It opposed the Treaty Principles Bill. It does not list Te Tiriti among its bottom lines; leader Qiulae Wong says ideas that jeopardise it would give grounds to walk away from coalition talks. It has not stated positions on the Waitangi Tribunal, the Māori seats or Māori wards, or published costs. The biggest tradeoff: a Māori-partnered deliberative process and a law-by-law review, but no commitment on contested questions.

Waitangi Tribunal
Not part of its policy
Treaty clauses in laws
Restore or strengthen Treaty clauses in laws. Review recent Treaty clause changes law by law, and make Treaty analysis public.Would amend recent changes where needed; Parliament and the public would see which Treaty obligations were considered in each proposal.
Constitutional law
Change constitutional law. Support a national, deliberative conversation on Te Tiriti's long-term constitutional place.Uses deliberative democratic processes, with Māori taking part as a Treaty partner; no outcome set.
Māori seats in Parliament
Not part of its policy
Māori representation on councils
Not part of its policy

Te Pāti MāoriBottom line

Entrench Te Tiriti, make Tribunal recommendations binding, and set up a Te Tiriti commission.Te Pāti Māori would pass laws binding the Crown to its Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations, which it says would stop future governments easily undoing them, and calls this a coalition bottom line. Waitangi Tribunal recommendations would bind the Crown, with courts enforcing them where needed. An independent Te Tiriti Commission could investigate ministers and agencies and issue orders to stop or suspend a decision, which the government could challenge in the High Court; it could not strike down laws. Every new bill would need a Te Tiriti impact statement. The party would restore a national plan for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples within 100 days, and spend $220 million over four years on a Matike Mai Fund for constitutional talks with Māori, aiming at 2040. The biggest tradeoff: firmer protection of Māori rights, but limits on what elected governments can decide.

Waitangi Tribunal
Keep or strengthen the Waitangi Tribunal. Make Waitangi Tribunal recommendations binding on the Crown, enforced by courts.Amend the Treaty of Waitangi Act and the Constitution Act so the Crown must follow recommendations.
Treaty clauses in laws
Restore or strengthen Treaty clauses in laws. A Te Tiriti impact statement for every new bill.New legislation would have to set out its Te Tiriti implications before Parliament passes it.
Constitutional law
Change constitutional law. Bind the Crown to Te Tiriti, with a commission; $220 million for constitutional talks.An independent Te Tiriti Commission could stop or suspend Crown decisions, and a Matike Mai Fund would pay for Māori constitutional talks aiming at 2040.
Māori seats in Parliament
Not part of its policy
Māori representation on councils
Not part of its policy
Background and sources

The Waitangi Tribunal. The Tribunal was set up in 1975 to hear claims about Crown actions from that year; in 1985 Parliament extended its reach back to 1840. Historical claims had to be lodged by 1 September 2008, and the Tribunal aims to finish its remaining historical inquiries by 2030. Its findings are generally not binding. Since 2023 it has held urgent inquiries into the repeal of section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act, Māori council wards and the Treaty Principles Bill, finding Crown breaches in each; two of the three measures became law, and the Treaty Principles Bill was voted down 112 to 11 in April 2025 (1News). More than 2,500 claims have been registered since 1975 (Bloomberg via The Star). A review of the Tribunal promised in the National–NZ First coalition agreement is complete but unreleased; Māori Development Minister Tama Potaka said he does not support removing the Tribunal's ability to carry out its current kaupapa (thematic) inquiries (1News/RNZ).

Treaty clauses in laws. In February 2026 Cabinet agreed to limit Treaty principles duties to a standard no higher than "take into account" in 10 laws and remove Treaty clauses from seven, following a review started by NZ First under the coalition agreement (1News, Te Ao Māori News). A Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement found "limited evidence" that existing clauses cause uncertainty (1News). Te Ao Māori News reports one bill covering about 18 laws, out of about 28 that refer to Treaty principles (Te Ao Māori News). In a July 2026 report the Tribunal found the process breached the principles of partnership, active protection and good government and recommended pausing the reforms; the government said it would continue, and Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said the bill would not pass before the election (Te Ao Māori News). A separate Tribunal report in May 2026 found the same breaches in proposed changes to the Education and Training Act's Treaty provisions (Waitangi Tribunal).

The Māori seats. The first Māori seats were created in 1867. There are now seven, and 33 of Parliament's 123 MPs, about 27%, are of Māori descent (The Spinoff). The number of Māori seats depends on how many Māori choose the Māori roll. In August 2026 about 310,000 Māori were on the Māori roll, 55% of enrolled Māori and the largest gap between the two rolls since 2013 (The Spinoff). A government bill before Parliament in 2026 would hold the number of Māori electorates until at least 2032 (The Spinoff). The rules for general electorates can only be changed by 75% of all MPs or a referendum (Electoral Act, s 268), but the Māori electorate provisions are not protected this way (explanatory note), so an ordinary law could remove them (Te Ao Māori News).

Māori wards and Auckland's Māori board. A 2024 law required councils with Māori wards to hold polls on keeping them. In October 2025, 18 councils voted to keep them and 24 to remove them, with removals taking effect at the 2028 and 2031 local elections (Te Ao Māori News). Auckland Council's Independent Māori Statutory Board, set up in 2010, has nine members chosen by a selection group of mana whenua representatives, and can appoint up to two voting members to some council committees (1News/RNZ).

Not covered here. NZ First's proposal that only citizens can vote is about voting eligibility, not Māori representation. Proposals on customary marine title, such as Opportunity's plan to restore the settings before 2025, are not covered.

ACT

ACT would limit the Waitangi Tribunal to historical claims lodged by 1 September 2008, end its inquiries into current policy, and close it once those claims are heard. It sets no deadline but links finishing settlements to 2040. It would add three principles to the Constitution Act: Parliament is sovereign, the rule of law is fundamental, and all are equal before the law. Tikanga could influence court decisions only where Parliament has expressly allowed it; ACT says courts should use it in cases such as disputes between iwi. Cabinet would have to state which Treaty interests a bill engages, and clauses ACT calls "vague" would go. Brooke van Velden says ACT supports abolishing the Māori seats by Act of Parliament. No cost is published. The biggest tradeoff: ACT says Parliament, not a tribunal, would have the final say, but no specialist body would hear Māori claims about current Crown actions.

  • The Tribunal would lose its role on current policy and close once eligible historical claims are heard; ACT sets no deadline but links finishing settlements to 2040.
  • General wording like "give effect to the principles of the Treaty" would stop, and clauses ACT calls "vague" would be removed when laws are changed.
  • Three principles in the Constitution Act, a property right in the Bill of Rights Act, and limits on tikanga in courts; ACT says courts should use it only in cases such as disputes between iwi.
  • Brooke van Velden said in February 2026 that ACT supports abolition through an Act of Parliament.

Who gains

  • Party claimACT says all New Zealanders gain from equal rights under one law and from policy being set by elected governments rather than Tribunal inquiries. Historical claimants keep full hearings of claims lodged by 1 September 2008. [5][3]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceIwi, hapū and Māori groups could no longer bring claims about current Crown actions to the Tribunal; Waatea News reports ACT would "shift future rights disputes towards the ordinary courts and wider legal system". Bills with Treaty clauses would face extra Cabinet tests. [5][4][14]
  • Established evidenceIf the Māori seats were abolished, the seven Māori electorates would end; about 310,000 Māori were on the Māori roll in August 2026. ACT has not said how Māori representation would work afterwards. [8][13]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceACT has not published a cost. [5][4]
  • Party claimACT says Tribunal funding would fall as its workload shrinks. [7]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceMore than 2,500 claims have been registered with the Tribunal since 1975, and its findings are generally not binding. Since 2023 it has found Crown breaches in urgent inquiries into the repeal of section 7AA, Māori wards and the Treaty Principles Bill; two of the three became law. [11][7]
  • Established evidenceA Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement said there is "limited evidence available to support the assumption existing provisions are causing uncertainty", or that the proposals would result in greater certainty. [12]
  • Established evidenceIn July 2026 the Waitangi Tribunal found the Treaty clause review process breached the principles of partnership, active protection and good government; the government said it would continue. [15]
  • Established evidenceThe Electoral Act's rules for dividing the country into general electorates can be changed only by 75% of all MPs or a referendum; the Māori electorate provisions are not protected this way, so an ordinary law could remove them. [1][2]
  • Established evidenceAbout 310,000 Māori were on the Māori roll in August 2026, 55% of enrolled Māori, the largest gap between the two rolls since 2013; total Māori enrolment across both rolls was about 2,000 lower than at the 2023 election. [13]

Risks and side effects

  • ContestedNgāti Kahungunu chair Bayden Barber says winding up the Tribunal would make it "near impossible to hold the government to account". [9]

Implementation

  • Party claimChanges to the Treaty of Waitangi Act, Constitution Act, Bill of Rights Act, Legislation Act and Senior Courts Act, plus Cabinet rules and the Cabinet Manual. [4][5][6]
  • Established evidenceNo timeline is given. Christopher Luxon distanced himself from the details of the Tribunal plan, and Māori Development Minister Tama Potaka does not support removing the Tribunal's kaupapa inquiries. [4][7][10]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimACT argues "New Zealanders choose policy at elections, and a parallel tribunal shouldn't override that." [5]
  • ContestedDon Brash, a former National leader and founder of Hobson's Pledge, called the plan "long overdue", saying equal treatment cannot breach the Treaty. [9]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedLaw lecturer Carwyn Jones says winding up the Tribunal would "remove access to justice". Former National Treaty negotiations minister Chris Finlayson favours reform rather than abolition, questioning whether to "destroy the entire edifice". [9]
  1. Electoral Act 1993, section 268: Restriction on amendment or repeal of certain provisions · New Zealand Legal Information Institute · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  2. Electoral (Equal Protection of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill: explanatory note · New Zealand Legislation · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  3. One Law for All with One Future Together · ACT New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. One Law for All (policy document, 23 August 2026) · ACT New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Finish the Settlements, Wind Up the Waitangi Tribunal · ACT New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. ACT releases election Treaty policy - what's in it and what's gone · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  7. ACT vows to abolish Waitangi Tribunal when historical claims done · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  8. NZ First accused of race baiting for campaigning on referendum to scrap Māori seats · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. ACT wants to abolish the Waitangi Tribunal. What do experts make of the party's policy? · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. Unreleased review of Waitangi Tribunal sitting with ministers · 1News (RNZ) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  11. NZ nationalist party vows to scrap longtime indigenous tribunal (Bloomberg) · The Star · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  12. Govt proposals on Treaty clauses at centre of Waitangi Tribunal hearing · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  13. There are more Māori on the Māori roll than ever. Will they turn out to vote? · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  14. ACT puts Waitangi Tribunal on notice: contemporary claims would end under new policy · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  15. Government rejects Tribunal call to halt Treaty Clause Review after finding Crown in major breach · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 17 Oct 2026 Attributed the final-say benefit in the biggest tradeoff and the property right's effect to ACT, and kept ACT's two tikanga statements apart in the summary card. [4][6]
  2. 17 Oct 2026 Described the property right in ACT's words and cited 1News for the Cabinet Manual route; removed an unsourced claim about regulations that reduce property values. [3][6]
  3. 17 Oct 2026 Agent review; sourced the Māori seats entrenchment point to the Electoral Act and the bill's explanatory note, and used The Spinoff's own wording for the roll figure (largest gap between the rolls since 2013). [1][2][13]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 Third agent review; said ACT would move future disputes to the ordinary courts, as Waatea News reports, instead of saying it named no other route. [14]
  5. 16 Oct 2026 Second agent review; matched the tikanga rule to ACT's wording, typed Don Brash's support as an outside view, removed an unsourced line on coalition talks, and said what abolishing the Māori seats would end. [6][9][13]
  6. 16 Oct 2026 First agent review; said what Seymour says would hold the Crown to account instead of the courts, and quoted the Regulatory Impact Statement in full. [7][12]
  7. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; kept 'the details of' in Luxon's response, and added the July 2026 Tribunal finding other parties on this approach carry. [7][15]
  8. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [3][5]
As at 17 Oct 2026About ACTReport a problem with this entry

Green

The Greens would amend the Treaty of Waitangi Act so the te reo Māori text, Te Tiriti, is the authoritative text, read alongside He Whakaputanga, the 1835 Declaration. They would fund the Waitangi Tribunal more and let it make binding recommendations to return Crown and private land to iwi, hapū and whānau, and explore a right of first refusal when private land is sold. They would remove "full and final" wording from the Crown's settlement policy guide, and iwi and hapū would take part in government decisions as partners. The Greens would entrench the Māori seats, let Māori switch rolls at any time, let councils keep Māori wards without polls, and fund a national conversation on constitutional change. No costs or start dates are published. The biggest tradeoff: firmer and more lasting Māori rights in law, but less room for future Parliaments and some private landowners to decide.

  • The Tribunal could make binding recommendations to return land to iwi, hapū and whānau.
  • The Treaty of Waitangi Act would treat the te reo Māori text as authoritative, read with He Whakaputanga.
  • A resourced national conversation on constitutional transformation based on He Whakaputanga and Te Tiriti.
  • The seats would get the 75% protection general electorates have, and Māori could switch rolls at any time.
  • Councils would regain the ability to keep Māori wards for their districts.

Who gains

  • Party claimIwi, hapū and whānau, who the Greens say would gain land back, a partner's role in government decisions, and secure representation in Parliament and on councils. [3][4]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceTaxpayers fund more Tribunal resourcing. Binding recommendations could cover private land, and the Greens would explore a right of first refusal on private land sales; the manifesto does not say how landowners would be treated or compensated. Future Parliaments would need a 75% vote to remove the Māori seats. [3][7]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceThe Greens have not published costs for these proposals. [3][4]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceA Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement said there is "limited evidence available to support the assumption existing provisions are causing uncertainty", or that the proposals would result in greater certainty. [17]
  • Established evidenceMore than 2,500 claims have been registered with the Tribunal since 1975, and its findings are generally not binding. Since 2023 it has found Crown breaches in urgent inquiries into the repeal of section 7AA, Māori wards and the Treaty Principles Bill; two of the three became law. [13][8]
  • Established evidenceThe Tribunal already has binding powers in some cases. In 2013 it declined to use them for Ngāti Kahu, saying binding orders would have "upset the fine balance" of other iwi agreements and settlements. [9]
  • Established evidenceThe Electoral Act's rules for dividing the country into general electorates can be changed only by 75% of all MPs or a referendum; the Māori electorate provisions are not protected this way, so an ordinary law could remove them. [1][2]
  • Established evidenceAbout 310,000 Māori were on the Māori roll in August 2026, 55% of enrolled Māori, the largest gap between the two rolls since 2013; total Māori enrolment across both rolls was about 2,000 lower than at the 2023 election. [14]
  • Established evidenceIn October 2025 polls, 18 councils voted to keep Māori wards and 24 to remove them from the 2028 or 2031 elections. [10]
  • Established evidenceIn its May 2024 urgent inquiry into the Government's plan to reinstate binding polls on Māori wards and constituencies, the Waitangi Tribunal found breaches of the principles of partnership (including the duty of active protection), equity, mutual benefit and options. [15]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceThe manifesto would remove "Full and Final settlement" clauses but does not say whether existing settlements would be affected, or how private landowners would be treated or compensated under binding land-return recommendations. [3]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceEntrenching the Māori seats itself needs a 75% vote of Parliament. Hūhana Lyndon's bill was announced in January 2026 to go into the members' bill ballot. [7][6]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimHūhana Lyndon says entrenchment gives "a surety that a dedicated Māori voice is available in Parliament". The Greens say settlements should give "just reparations without ceding sovereignty", with iwi and hapū as partners. [6][3]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedNo named critic of the Greens' land-return or settlement plans was found. More generally, Labour's Willie Jackson opposes binding Tribunal recommendations as Te Pāti Māori proposes them, and ACT's Brooke van Velden backs abolishing the Māori seats. [18][11]
  1. Electoral Act 1993, section 268: Restriction on amendment or repeal of certain provisions · New Zealand Legal Information Institute · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  2. Electoral (Equal Protection of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill: explanatory note · New Zealand Legislation · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  3. Manifesto 2026: Te Tiriti o Waitangi · Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Māori Manifesto 2026 · Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Manifesto 2026: Local Government · Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Green Party announces member bill to entrench Māori electorate seats in law · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. The Māori seats explained: why they exist and why they're under threat · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. ACT vows to abolish Waitangi Tribunal when historical claims done · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  9. Ngāti Kahu Remedies Report · Waitangi Tribunal · accessed 16 Oct 2026
  10. Local elections 2025: final results confirm majority of councils reject Māori wards · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  11. NZ First accused of race baiting for campaigning on referendum to scrap Māori seats · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  12. Te Pāti Māori's Te Tiriti entrenchment plan: how would it work and could it happen? · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  13. NZ nationalist party vows to scrap longtime indigenous tribunal (Bloomberg) · The Star · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  14. There are more Māori on the Māori roll than ever. Will they turn out to vote? · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  15. Tribunal releases report on Māori wards and constituencies · Waitangi Tribunal · accessed 16 Oct 2026
  16. Te Pāti Māori unveils $220m plan to make Te Tiriti obligations enforceable · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  17. Govt proposals on Treaty clauses at centre of Waitangi Tribunal hearing · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  18. Māori seats draw a line in the sand over Te Tiriti · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 17 Oct 2026 Said the Tribunal's 2024 inquiry was into the plan to reinstate binding polls, and that Hūhana Lyndon's bill was announced to go into the ballot. [15][6]
  2. 17 Oct 2026 Agent review; sourced the Māori seats entrenchment point to the Electoral Act and the bill's explanatory note, and used The Spinoff's own wording for the roll figure (largest gap between the rolls since 2013). [1][2][14]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Second agent review; quoted the manifesto on the Treaty of Waitangi Act, and said the manifesto does not say how private landowners would be treated. [3]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 First agent review; described the settlement change as wording in the policy guide, said Māori could switch rolls at any time, named a critic of binding Tribunal recommendations, and fixed the Tribunal links. [15][9][18]
  5. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; gave the Tribunal's full Māori wards findings, said whose plans the critics were speaking about, and added the Regulatory Impact Statement finding. [15][17]
  6. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [3][4]
As at 17 Oct 2026About GreenReport a problem with this entry

Labour

Labour says it would "restore commitments to Te Tiriti o Waitangi in schools", after the government removed school boards' duty to give effect to Te Tiriti. It would vote against the government's bill to narrow or remove Treaty clauses in about 18 laws, and Chris Hipkins says a Labour government would not progress it. Hipkins would keep the Waitangi Tribunal and says a Te Tiriti commission could not overrule Cabinet; Willie Jackson says Labour would not support binding Tribunal recommendations or entrenching Te Tiriti. Labour's policy page has no Te Tiriti policy, and Labour has published no position on the Māori seats or Māori wards; MP Kieran McAnulty said in February 2026 that "it is Māori that should decide" on the seats. No cost is stated. The biggest tradeoff: existing Treaty clauses kept and schools commitments restored, with Parliament keeping the final say, but no binding Tribunal powers.

  • Hipkins says Labour would keep the Tribunal and that Parliament must remain the final decision-maker.
  • Labour would vote against and not progress the clause bill, and "restore commitments to Te Tiriti o Waitangi in schools".

Who gains

  • Party claimMāori learners and whānau, who Labour says lose protections when Te Tiriti duties are removed from education law, and groups relying on Treaty clauses in the laws under review. [2][4]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceLabour's policies page lists no tax or charge for these positions. [1]
  • Established evidenceThe about 18 laws in the government's bill would keep their existing Treaty clause wording, which differs between laws. [4]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceLabour has not published a cost. [1]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceIn May 2026 the Waitangi Tribunal found the Crown's approach to proposed changes to the Education and Training Act's Treaty provisions breached the principles of partnership, active protection and good government. It will report on removing school boards' Te Tiriti duty later. [9]
  • Established evidenceA Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement said there is "limited evidence available to support the assumption existing provisions are causing uncertainty", or that the proposals would result in greater certainty. [7]
  • Established evidenceIn July 2026 the Waitangi Tribunal found the Treaty clause review process breached the principles of partnership, active protection and good government; the government said it would continue. [10]
  • Established evidenceMore than 2,500 claims have been registered with the Tribunal since 1975, and its findings are generally not binding. Since 2023 it has found Crown breaches in urgent inquiries into the repeal of section 7AA, Māori wards and the Treaty Principles Bill; two of the three became law. [12][5]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceBecause the Tribunal's findings stay non-binding, each government can decide whether to act on them. [5][8]
  • Party claimLabour says Parliament must remain the final decision-maker. [5][8]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceLabour has not said how it would restore the schools commitments. Goldsmith has said the clause bill will not pass before the election. [2][10][4]
  • Party claimHipkins says a Labour government would not progress the clause bill. [10][4]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimLabour says removing the schools duty weakens protections for Māori learners. Chris Hipkins says the clause changes risk "litigation for decades to come". [2][4]
  • ContestedLaw lecturer Carwyn Jones says repeal is "likely to increase, rather than decrease, uncertainty." [7]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedPaul Goldsmith, defending the changes Labour would reverse, says the government needs "some consistency here, in the interests of increasing certainty and supporting compliance." Te Pāti Māori says Tribunal recommendations should bind the Crown. [7][15]
  1. Our Policies · New Zealand Labour Party · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. Labour pledges return of Te Tiriti commitments in schools · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. Hipkins signals Te Tiriti push as Budget pressure builds for Māori · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Labour labels Treaty review 'disgusting' as Government moves to standardise clauses · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. ACT vows to abolish Waitangi Tribunal when historical claims done · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  6. NZ First accused of race baiting for campaigning on referendum to scrap Māori seats · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Govt proposals on Treaty clauses at centre of Waitangi Tribunal hearing · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Te Pāti Māori's Te Tiriti entrenchment plan: how would it work and could it happen? · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. Tribunal releases report on proposed changes to the Education and Training Act · Waitangi Tribunal · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. Government rejects Tribunal call to halt Treaty Clause Review after finding Crown in major breach · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  11. Māori seats draw a line in the sand over Te Tiriti · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  12. NZ nationalist party vows to scrap longtime indigenous tribunal (Bloomberg) · The Star · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  13. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  14. As Labour eyes the Māori seats, te tiriti fades from the vision · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  15. Te Tiriti Entrenchment · Te Pāti Māori · accessed 15 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 17 Oct 2026 Described the schools pledge in Labour's words and said Labour has not given the mechanism. [2]
  2. 17 Oct 2026 Split Chris Hipkins's statements into party claims, separate from the record. [10][4]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Third agent review; attributed only Willie Jackson's quoted words to him, and gave jobs, health and homes as The Spinoff's summary. [14]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 Second agent review; quoted Goldsmith's objection in full and Te Pāti Māori's binding-recommendations position as the case against, replacing an unsourced line. [7][15]
  5. 16 Oct 2026 First agent review; quoted the schools pledge as Labour worded it, attributed the Māori seats view to Kieran McAnulty, removed an inference about the clause bill, moved Hipkins' comment on Te Pāti Māori's fund out of the costing, and added Carwyn Jones to the case for. [2][8][7]
  6. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; said the May 2026 Tribunal report did not cover school boards' Te Tiriti duty, and named Kieran McAnulty. [9][6]
  7. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1][4]
As at 17 Oct 2026About LabourReport a problem with this entry

National

National has no Te Tiriti policy on its election policy page. Its ministers agreed in February 2026 to set a standard no higher than "take into account" for Treaty principles in 10 laws and remove Treaty clauses from seven, a review promised to NZ First in their coalition agreement. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says the bill will not pass before the election and the government will continue with it. A government review of the Waitangi Tribunal is unreleased. In government National brought in local polls on Māori wards; Luxon said in October 2025 that local communities should decide, and no 2026 position was found. No National position on the Māori seats was found. No cost is stated. The biggest tradeoff: a single Treaty standard across laws, but weaker Treaty duties in some laws.

  • Cabinet decisions from February 2026; Luxon says the government remains committed.

Who gains

  • Party claimThe government says decision-makers and the public gain "consistency and certainty" from one Treaty standard, which Goldsmith says allows balanced consideration of all relevant factors. Local voters decide whether their council keeps Māori wards. [3][2][5]

Who pays

  • ContestedMāori groups that rely on stronger duties. Shane Bradbrook of Te Rōpū Tupeka Kore says removing the Smokefree Act clause "stops a pathway for that considered, mature conversation", and that officials "don't necessarily need or have a desire to speak to us". [2]
  • Established evidenceMāori ward seats end at the 2028 or 2031 local elections in the 24 councils where voters chose removal; the 18 where voters chose to keep them retain them. [8]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceNo cost has been published for the clause changes or the Tribunal review. [1][4]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceA Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement said there is "limited evidence available to support the assumption existing provisions are causing uncertainty", or that the proposals would result in greater certainty. [2]
  • Established evidenceIn July 2026 the Waitangi Tribunal found the Treaty clause review process breached the principles of partnership, active protection and good government; the government said it would continue. [3]
  • Established evidenceMore than 2,500 claims have been registered with the Tribunal since 1975, and its findings are generally not binding. Since 2023 it has found Crown breaches in urgent inquiries into the repeal of section 7AA, Māori wards and the Treaty Principles Bill; two of the three became law. [11][12]
  • Established evidenceIn October 2025 polls, 18 councils voted to keep Māori wards and 24 to remove them from the 2028 or 2031 elections. [8]
  • Established evidenceThe 2024 law requires polls only on Māori wards and constituencies; in its May 2024 urgent inquiry into the proposed change, the Waitangi Tribunal found breaches of the principles of partnership (including the duty of active protection), equity, mutual benefit and options. [7]

Risks and side effects

  • ContestedLaw lecturer Carwyn Jones told the Tribunal that "In all instances, repeal is likely to increase, rather than decrease, uncertainty." [2]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceOne bill covering about 18 laws, with select committee scrutiny. Goldsmith says it will not pass before the election. Asked whether National would continue without NZ First, he said "Our primary focus is to win the election first". [9][3]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimPaul Goldsmith says the government needs "some consistency here, in the interests of increasing certainty and supporting compliance." Christopher Luxon says whether to keep Māori wards "shouldn't be mandated from Wellington". [2][5]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedThe Waitangi Tribunal found the reforms would be "a significant constitutional regression". Ngāi Tahu's Justin Tipa said "Productive reform doesn't require taking an axe to everything with the word 'Treaty' in it." [3][10]
  1. Policies · New Zealand National Party · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (15 Oct 2026)
  2. Govt proposals on Treaty clauses at centre of Waitangi Tribunal hearing · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. Government rejects Tribunal call to halt Treaty Clause Review after finding Crown in major breach · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Unreleased review of Waitangi Tribunal sitting with ministers · 1News (RNZ) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Luxon: Māori ward decisions show 'local democracy in action' but low turnout a concern · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Tribunal releases report on Māori wards and constituencies · Waitangi Tribunal · accessed 16 Oct 2026
  8. Local elections 2025: final results confirm majority of councils reject Māori wards · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. Labour labels Treaty review 'disgusting' as Government moves to standardise clauses · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. Luxon meets iwi leaders as Treaty clause tensions continue to simmer · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  11. NZ nationalist party vows to scrap longtime indigenous tribunal (Bloomberg) · The Star · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  12. ACT vows to abolish Waitangi Tribunal when historical claims done · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 16 Oct 2026 Third agent review; gave what Luxon said about Māori ward polls rather than saying he backed them. [5]
  2. 16 Oct 2026 Second agent review; quoted Goldsmith's answer on continuing without NZ First, and kept the Tribunal wards finding apart from party statements. [3][7]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 First agent review; quoted Shane Bradbrook accurately, stated Goldsmith's answer on NZ First once, gave the Tribunal's Māori wards findings as written with the government's response, and fixed the report link. [2][7][5]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; dropped the Māori wards tag (no 2026 policy), gave the Tribunal's full wards findings, and quoted 1News on the Smokefree Act. [7][2]
  5. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1][3]
As at 16 Oct 2026About NationalReport a problem with this entry

NZ First

NZ First would introduce a law within 100 days of the election to abolish the Waitangi Tribunal and replace it with a Treaty of Waitangi Completion Commission, which would finalise claims made before 2008 and then close. Contemporary claims and Crown–Māori relations would move to the Ministry of Māori Development. It would hold a referendum on the future of the seven Māori seats after the election; it has not said when, whether the result would be binding, or what the question would be. A member's bill would abolish Auckland Council's Independent Māori Statutory Board and return its functions to the council. NZ First started the government's Treaty clause review. No costs are published. The biggest tradeoff: NZ First's aim is one set of electoral, Treaty and council arrangements for everyone, but the Tribunal and the board would close, and the Māori seats could go if a binding referendum chose that.

  • Legislation within 100 days; current claims and Crown–Māori relations move to the Ministry of Māori Development.
  • The Spinoff's summary of NZ First's position; the government's current review came from NZ First's coalition agreement.
  • The party says the seats could stay if enough voters back them, but has not said if the vote would bind.
  • NZ First says the board's "functions, property, and obligations" would return to the council in an "orderly transition".

Who gains

  • Party claimNZ First says its changes return New Zealand to "all being equal citizens with equal rights", and that those who influence council spending would be "directly accountable to the public". [3][5]

Who pays

  • Party claimNZ First says contemporary claims would become the responsibility of the Ministry of Māori Development, not the Tribunal. [3]
  • Established evidenceMana whenua would lose the board's appointed voting members on some Auckland Council committees. [5][9]
  • Established evidenceIf the referendum were binding and voters chose to end the Māori seats, the seven Māori electorates would go; NZ First has not said whether it would be. About 310,000 Māori were on the Māori roll in August 2026. [4][10]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceNo cost is published for the commission, the stronger ministry or the referendum, and no independent figure for the board's funding was found. [3][4][5]
  • Party claimNZ First says ratepayers paid $3.5 million for the board's operations "last year alone". [5]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceMore than 2,500 claims have been registered with the Tribunal since 1975, and its findings are generally not binding. Since 2023 it has found Crown breaches in urgent inquiries into the repeal of section 7AA, Māori wards and the Treaty Principles Bill; two of the three became law. [8][11]
  • Established evidenceA Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement said there is "limited evidence available to support the assumption existing provisions are causing uncertainty", or that the proposals would result in greater certainty. [16]
  • Established evidenceIn July 2026 the Waitangi Tribunal found the Treaty clause review process breached the principles of partnership, active protection and good government; the government said it would continue. [17]
  • Established evidenceThe Electoral Act's rules for dividing the country into general electorates can be changed only by 75% of all MPs or a referendum; the Māori electorate provisions are not protected this way, so an ordinary law could remove them. [1][2]
  • Established evidenceAbout 310,000 Māori were on the Māori roll in August 2026, 55% of enrolled Māori, the largest gap between the two rolls since 2013; total Māori enrolment across both rolls was about 2,000 lower than at the 2023 election. [10]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceNo named critic of NZ First's own Tribunal plan was found. [3]
  • Established evidenceThe referendum's timing, question and whether it would bind are not set out. [4]

Implementation

  • Party claimTribunal legislation would be tabled in the first 100 days. NZ First says a member's bill to close the board "has been written and introduced". [3][5][6]
  • Established evidenceNo record was found of the bill being drawn from Parliament's member's bill ballot or read a first time, and NZ First's pages give no date of introduction. [5][6]
  • Established evidenceMāori Development Minister Tama Potaka does not support removing the Tribunal's kaupapa inquiries. ACT supports abolishing the Māori seats but opposes a referendum, and Labour's Kieran McAnulty says Māori should decide. [13][14]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimNZ First says many Tribunal claims contest Parliament's right to pass laws, "a direct semi-judicial threat" to democracy, and that MMP makes separate seats unnecessary. [3][4]
  • ContestedThe Ratepayers' Alliance says the board "wields considerable power" unelected. [15]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedCarwyn Jones says winding up the Tribunal, as ACT plans, would "remove access to justice". Rawiri Waititi says the seats give "a unique Māori voice in Parliament". Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown says forums enable "a range of views". [12][13][9]
  1. Electoral Act 1993, section 268: Restriction on amendment or repeal of certain provisions · New Zealand Legal Information Institute · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  2. Electoral (Equal Protection of Māori Seats) Amendment Bill: explanatory note · New Zealand Legislation · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  3. Ending the Waitangi Make-Work Industry · New Zealand First · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Referendum on Māori Seats · New Zealand First · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Disestablish Auckland's Independent Māori Statutory Board · New Zealand First · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  6. Our member's bills · New Zealand First · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  7. NZ First vow to 'immediately abolish' Waitangi Tribunal if elected · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. NZ nationalist party vows to scrap longtime indigenous tribunal (Bloomberg) · The Star · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. 'Dumb, racist stuff': Mayor on NZ First campaign to scrap Māori board · 1News (RNZ) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. There are more Māori on the Māori roll than ever. Will they turn out to vote? · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  11. ACT vows to abolish Waitangi Tribunal when historical claims done · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  12. ACT wants to abolish the Waitangi Tribunal. What do experts make of the party's policy? · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  13. NZ First accused of race baiting for campaigning on referendum to scrap Māori seats · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  14. Unreleased review of Waitangi Tribunal sitting with ministers · 1News (RNZ) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  15. Ratepayers' Alliance Welcomes Move To Abolish IMSB · Auckland Ratepayers' Alliance (via Scoop) · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  16. Govt proposals on Treaty clauses at centre of Waitangi Tribunal hearing · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  17. Government rejects Tribunal call to halt Treaty Clause Review after finding Crown in major breach · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  18. NZ First votes for repeal of Treaty of Waitangi references in law · Newstalk ZB · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  19. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 17 Oct 2026 Said the Māori seats could go only if the referendum were binding, which NZ First has not said. [4]
  2. 17 Oct 2026 Split NZ First's Tribunal claim from the Auckland board facts, and cited both sources for the board. [3][5][9]
  3. 17 Oct 2026 Attributed the one-set-of-arrangements benefit to NZ First, and gave the Ministry's role for contemporary claims in NZ First's terms. [3]
  4. 17 Oct 2026 Typed the Ratepayers' Alliance view as contested, separate from NZ First's own case. [15]
  5. 17 Oct 2026 Agent review; sourced the Māori seats entrenchment point to the Electoral Act and the bill's explanatory note, and used The Spinoff's own wording for the roll figure (largest gap between the rolls since 2013). [1][2][10]
  6. 17 Oct 2026 Owner's call; quoted NZ First's claim that the board bill has been introduced, and added that no record of it being drawn or read a first time was found. [5][6]
  7. 16 Oct 2026 Second agent review; stated the biggest tradeoff without hedging, removed an unsourced line on coalition partners, and said what ending the Māori seats would mean. [4][10]
  8. 16 Oct 2026 First agent review; attributed the board transition wording to NZ First, reworded the biggest tradeoff, and moved Carwyn Jones's Tribunal comment to the case against. [5][12]
  9. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; quoted Peters on 1991 as reported, matched the as-at date, and described its own position in the Treaty clauses cell. [7][19]
  10. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [3][4][5]
As at 17 Oct 2026About NZ FirstReport a problem with this entry

Opportunity

The Opportunity Party would review recent changes to Treaty provisions in law, amending them where needed, and make Treaty analysis a visible part of lawmaking. It would support a national constitutional conversation about Te Tiriti's long-term place, using deliberative processes from its Citizens' Voice policy, with Māori taking part as a Treaty partner. It would honour existing settlements, complete outstanding historical ones, and match Māori decision-making to each issue, from consultation to independent decisions, with accountability for results. It opposed the Treaty Principles Bill. It does not list Te Tiriti among its bottom lines; leader Qiulae Wong says ideas that jeopardise it would give grounds to walk away from coalition talks. It has not stated positions on the Waitangi Tribunal, the Māori seats or Māori wards, or published costs. The biggest tradeoff: a Māori-partnered deliberative process and a law-by-law review, but no commitment on contested questions.

  • Would amend recent changes where needed; Parliament and the public would see which Treaty obligations were considered in each proposal.
  • Uses deliberative democratic processes, with Māori taking part as a Treaty partner; no outcome set.

Who gains

  • Party claimMāori organisations with a strong track record, which Opportunity says would get more control and longer-term funding. [1]
  • Party claimMāori organisations and communities, whose decision-making authority Opportunity says would be matched to each issue, from consultation and co-design to delegation or independent decisions. [2]

Who pays

  • Established evidenceOpportunity's policy names no tax or charge. [1]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Established evidenceOpportunity has not published a cost for the constitutional conversation or its other Te Tiriti proposals. [1]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceA Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement said there is "limited evidence available to support the assumption existing provisions are causing uncertainty", or that the proposals would result in greater certainty. [8]
  • Established evidenceNo independent analysis of the policy was found. [1]
  • Party claimTe Pāti Māori also proposes funded constitutional conversations, with $220 million over four years. [6]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceOpportunity has not said what constitutional outcome or timeline it would back, or which Treaty provisions it would amend. [3][1][2]

Implementation

  • Party claimOpportunity says longer-term funding for Māori organisations with a strong track record would come with "clear expectations around results, financial management and transparency". [1]
  • Party claimThrough coalition negotiations, a law-by-law review of recent changes to statutory Treaty provisions, and changes to how bills are prepared. [1][2][3]
  • Party claimThe policy paper pairs more Māori decision-making with accountability for outcomes, financial integrity, transparency and individual rights. [2]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimOpportunity says "Better outcomes for Māori will come from more collaboration, not conflict", that "A stronger Māori economy creates jobs, income and opportunity", and that constitutional change needs "broad public confidence". [1]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedNo named critic of Opportunity's proposals was found beyond The Spinoff's Liam Rātana, who calls its position "underdeveloped and ambiguous" and says it is unclear whether honouring Te Tiriti is "a fundamental principle" for the party. [7]
  1. Honouring Te Tiriti · The Opportunity Party · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. Honouring Te Tiriti: policy paper (September 2026) · The Opportunity Party · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  3. Bottom lines · The Opportunity Party · accessed 14 Oct 2026
  4. Resetting the relationship: Opportunity Party puts Te Tiriti, rangatiratanga and Māori power on election agenda · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. Leader Qiulae Wong signals Te Tiriti as non-negotiable in post-election talks (6 October 2026) · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 17 Oct 2026
  6. Te Pāti Māori unveils $220m plan to make Te Tiriti obligations enforceable · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Govt proposals on Treaty clauses at centre of Waitangi Tribunal hearing · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 17 Oct 2026 Removed a statement that the Greens also propose funded constitutional conversations, which the cited sources did not confirm, and stopped repeating the bottom-line point in the risks. [6]
  2. 17 Oct 2026 Read the full policy paper linked from the party's page and an October interview with Qiulae Wong. Added the law-by-law review of Treaty provisions, the devolution scale and its accountability conditions, and her statement that ideas jeopardising Te Tiriti would give grounds to walk away from talks. [2][5]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Second agent review; moved the funding conditions for Māori organisations from who pays to implementation. [1]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 First agent review; quoted the party's own wording on coalition talks and gave the biggest tradeoff in substance. [3][7]
  5. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; quoted its constitutional-change wording in full, named its Citizens' Voice policy, and added the Regulatory Impact Statement finding. [1][8]
  6. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1][3]
As at 17 Oct 2026About OpportunityReport a problem with this entry

Te Pāti Māori

Te Pāti Māori would pass laws binding the Crown to its Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations, which it says would stop future governments easily undoing them, and calls this a coalition bottom line. Waitangi Tribunal recommendations would bind the Crown, with courts enforcing them where needed. An independent Te Tiriti Commission could investigate ministers and agencies and issue orders to stop or suspend a decision, which the government could challenge in the High Court; it could not strike down laws. Every new bill would need a Te Tiriti impact statement. The party would restore a national plan for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples within 100 days, and spend $220 million over four years on a Matike Mai Fund for constitutional talks with Māori, aiming at 2040. The biggest tradeoff: firmer protection of Māori rights, but limits on what elected governments can decide.

  • Amend the Treaty of Waitangi Act and the Constitution Act so the Crown must follow recommendations.
  • New legislation would have to set out its Te Tiriti implications before Parliament passes it.
  • An independent Te Tiriti Commission could stop or suspend Crown decisions, and a Matike Mai Fund would pay for Māori constitutional talks aiming at 2040.

Who gains

  • Party claimIwi, hapū and Māori, who Rawiri Waititi says would no longer carry "the burden" to "run off to court" to enforce Te Tiriti. [4]

Who pays

  • Party claimTe Pāti Māori proposes a $220 million Crown fund over four years; the commission's cost and funding are not stated. [3]
  • Established evidenceMinisters and agencies would face orders that could stop or suspend their decisions. [4]

Cost and costing disputes

  • Party claim$220 million over four years for the Matike Mai Fund. [3]
  • Established evidenceNo cost is given for the commission, binding Tribunal powers or the UNDRIP plan. [3][1]

Evidence from elsewhere

  • Established evidenceA Ministry of Justice Regulatory Impact Statement said there is "limited evidence available to support the assumption existing provisions are causing uncertainty", or that the proposals would result in greater certainty. [11]
  • Established evidenceMore than 2,500 claims have been registered with the Tribunal since 1975, and its findings are generally not binding. Since 2023 it has found Crown breaches in urgent inquiries into the repeal of section 7AA, Māori wards and the Treaty Principles Bill; two of the three became law. [7][5]
  • Established evidenceThe Tribunal already has binding powers in some cases. In 2013 it declined to use them for Ngāti Kahu, saying binding orders would have "upset the fine balance" of other iwi agreements and settlements. [12]

Risks and side effects

  • Established evidenceHow entrenchment would work, including whether it needs 75% of Parliament, has not been set out. [4]
  • Party claimTe Pāti Māori says details will come later. [4]
  • Established evidenceThe party's pages do not say how binding Tribunal recommendations or progressing land back would affect Crown or private landholders, or existing settlements. [1][2]

Implementation

  • Established evidenceNeeds other parties' support in coalition talks. [4][6]
  • Party claimTe Pāti Māori says entrenching Te Tiriti would be a bottom line in those talks. [6]
  • Party claimHipkins says a commission could not overrule Cabinet. [4]

Strongest case for

  • Party claimTe Pāti Māori says "Te Tiriti should not depend on who wins an election." Green co-leader Marama Davidson said its Matike Mai fund "sounds like it aligns with where we want to get to". [1][4]

Strongest case against

  • ContestedChris Hipkins says "Ultimately, the Parliament has to be the final decision-making body, not a judicial body." David Seymour called the plan "fundamentally undemocratic"; NZ First's Shane Jones called it "an unnecessary burden on the economy". [4]
  1. Te Tiriti Entrenchment · Te Pāti Māori · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  2. Mana Motuhake · Te Pāti Māori · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  3. Te Pāti Māori unveils $220m plan to make Te Tiriti obligations enforceable · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  4. Te Pāti Māori's Te Tiriti entrenchment plan: how would it work and could it happen? · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  5. ACT vows to abolish Waitangi Tribunal when historical claims done · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026 · archived copy (17 Oct 2026)
  6. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  7. NZ nationalist party vows to scrap longtime indigenous tribunal (Bloomberg) · The Star · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  8. Te Tiriti as the bottom line: John Tamihere on Te Pāti Māori's push to reshape the Crown–Māori relationship · Waatea News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  9. How many Māori seats should there be in parliament? · The Spinoff · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  10. NZ First accused of race baiting for campaigning on referendum to scrap Māori seats · Te Ao Māori News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  11. Govt proposals on Treaty clauses at centre of Waitangi Tribunal hearing · 1News · accessed 15 Oct 2026
  12. Ngāti Kahu Remedies Report · Waitangi Tribunal · accessed 16 Oct 2026
Change history

Every recorded change to this entry, newest first, including our own corrections after checks.

  1. 17 Oct 2026 Typed the $220 million fund as the party's proposal and said the commission's cost is not stated. [3]
  2. 17 Oct 2026 Split the party's statements into party claims, and removed quotation marks from The Spinoff's paraphrase of "a bottom line". [6]
  3. 16 Oct 2026 Second agent review; attributed the aim of entrenchment to the party, described the Māori electorates bill neutrally, and added The Spinoff for impact statements. [1][6]
  4. 16 Oct 2026 First agent review; added the Tribunal's existing binding powers to the evidence, described the commission once, and gave Hipkins' comment on the fund accurately. [12][4]
  5. 16 Oct 2026 Fact-check before review; quoted Waititi on the Māori electorates bill, credited Te Ao Māori News for the commission's powers, and added the Regulatory Impact Statement finding. [9][4][11]
  6. 15 Oct 2026 First researched from party and independent sources. [1][2]
As at 17 Oct 2026About Te Pāti MāoriReport a problem with this entry