The outpouring of emotion over the death of Queen Elizabeth II came as a surprise to many. Hundreds of thousands of people lined the streets in Scotland and England in tribute, as they witnessed the magnificent pageantry of the meticulously planned transfer of Queen Elizabeth from her Balmoral sanctuary to her final resting place in Windsor Castle’s St George’s Chapel, next to her beloved husband, Prince Philip.
Over a quarter of a million people queued for up to 30 hours to pay their respects to the Queen as she lay in State in Westminster Hall. More than four billion watched her funeral, televised live around the world.
Her grace, humility, and dedication to public service, gave Queen Elizabeth an unprecedented aura of dignity and respect far greater than the Office itself.
Who can forget when the Queen made an unscheduled recording – for only the fifth time in her reign – to comfort and reassure people across the globe, who were trapped in the Covid nightmare, conveying hope for a better future:
“While we have faced challenges before, this one is different. This time we join with all nations across the globe in a common endeavour… We will succeed – and that success will belong to every one of us.
“We should take comfort that while we may have more still to endure, better days will return: we will be with our friends again; we will be with our families again; we will meet again.
“But for now, I send my thanks and warmest good wishes to you all.”
That mantle of the Monarch has now passed seamlessly to King Charles III.
The Monarchy, with its roots in thousands of years of history and culture, has provided this country with a beachhead of steadfastness, anchoring our society with values that generations of New Zealanders held dear. But now, with the blessing of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, those foundations are being eroded by a new age of extremism.
Almost from the moment the Queen’s death was announced, opportunists proclaimed New Zealand needs to cut ties with Britain, reject the Monarchy, and become a Republic.
Even Members of Parliament condemned the Monarchy at the first opportunity – in spite of swearing an oath of allegiance to our Sovereign: “I, …, swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God.”
During the special debate in Parliament honouring the Queen, Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson condemned the Monarchy’s “colonial and imperial agenda”, claiming, “We cannot ignore the oppression of Maori as very real and continuing”.
She also used the opportunity to reveal, “The work to decolonise and re-indigenise this land continues”, with a new constitution and a Maori justice system, identified as key parts of that strategy.
The Maori Party co-leader Rawiri Waititi claimed, “The British Empire and the power of its monarchy was built of stolen whenua, stolen resources, and stolen taonga.”
And Nanaia Mahuta used the opportunity to push her ‘partnership’ fabrication: “The Queen represented the embodiment of the Crown as partner reflected in the Treaty of Waitangi.”
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator is Treaty and Constitutional expert David Round, a former Law Lecturer at Canterbury University, who reminds us of the importance of the Monarchy and the danger of replacing it:
“There is one other enormous and overwhelming reason, why we must cling to King Charles. The reason is simply this ~ that if the monarchy were to be abolished, that abolition would undoubtedly be the pretext for introducing the ‘principles’ of the Treaty of Waitangi into our fundamental law. The principles, of course, are a blank cheque. The latest announcement from the Waitangi Tribunal is that they require ‘co-governance’ ~ in other words, an end to democracy and racial equality. That’s not what they meant even a few years ago ~ and for all we know, we may discover a few years down the track that the ‘principles’ require complete Maori control of our country. That is, after all, what some radicals are saying right now…
“And once we had the Treaty in our constitution, we would be sunk. No matter how mild the references to the Treaty might be, we can be certain that they would be used, not just by politicians but by politically activist judges in the courts, to impose apartheid on us for ever. Even without such a provision, our previous chief justice, the unlamented Sian Elias, raised the possibility that judges were entitled to ignore Acts of Parliament which did not comply with her own radical interpretation of Treaty principles, and there is no doubt that several decisions of the courts have already done just that. But whatever we have in a constitution will be interpreted and applied by courts, and against the judgment of the highest of those courts there is no appeal. And even if a parliament far braver than today’s pack of racists, incompetents and cowards were to say ‘No, that is not what we meant’, the judges would simply reply that parliament was breaching the constitution ~ was behaving unconstitutionally, and illegally ~ in saying that. Even now, the law is not what parliament says, it is what judges say parliament says. Once we get a written constitution, a higher law which binds parliament itself, there will be no stopping judges as they interpret it as they please.”
David is absolutely right.
Under our present constitutional arrangements, the ultimate law-making power rests in Parliament – and, through our elected representatives, voters. That has been our democratic strength as it continues to remind our law makers that they are answerable to the people.
Those calling for a new “written” constitution want to transfer that ultimate law-making power from voters, to unelected judges – who cannot be sacked.
If we want to preserve what little democracy we have left, any attempt to replace our present “unwritten” constitution, must be firmly rejected.
Right now, iwi leaders are scheming over how best to introduce a Treaty-based constitution without alarming the public. If we are to counter this grave threat to New Zealand, we must ensure other Kiwis become aware of the dangers a new constitution represents.
As David mentioned, the evidence of the Judge-made disaster that would await us, can already be seen – especially in the foreshore and seabed debacle.
Under British common law the ownership of New Zealand’s foreshore and seabed – which consists of 10 million hectares of the country’s richest natural resources, from the average spring high tide waterline to the 12 nautical mile Territorial Sea limit – was vested in the Crown. This was affirmed by a 1963 Court of Appeal ruling.
However, as the result of a marine farming dispute between tribal groups and a council, questions over customary rights escalated to the Court of Appeal. In 2003, activist Chief Justice Sian Elias ruled that pockets of customary interest in the foreshore and seabed might still exist, and that such claims should be heard in the Maori Land Court.
That ruling opened such a floodgate of claims to the coast that Prime Minister Helen Clark was forced to step in and legislate, cancelling hundreds of claims, and restoring Crown ownership through the 2004 Foreshore and Seabed Act. While the new law enabled tribal groups to claim customary interests in the High Court, there were on-going complaints that the bar was set too high for claims to succeed.
The Maori Party campaigned for a law change, and once in coalition with John Key’s National Government, the Marine and Coastal Area Act was introduced in 2011 to repeal Crown ownership and open the area for tribal claims.
The tests were stringent. To gain a Customary Marine Title applicants had to satisfy section 58 of the Act: they not only had to “hold the specified area in accordance with tikanga” – where ‘tikanga’ was defined as “Maori customary values and practices” – but they also had to have “exclusively used and occupied the area without substantial interruption from 1840 to the present day.”
This common law requirement was included to ensure claimants met stringent property rights tests, that would restrict customary title to minor pockets of the coast.
Overlapping claims, which are inconsistent with the concept of ‘exclusive’ use and occupation, were expected to be ruled out, as were claims for areas where third-party use resulted in substantial interruptions. Since tribal groups had limited ability to navigate far from shore in 1840, it was also expected that few Territorial Sea claims would succeed.
The new law, which specified two pathways for claimants – a hearing in the High Court or direct negotiation with the Minister of Treaty Settlements – provided funding for applicants of up to $458,000, but nothing for opponents.
On the eve of the seven-year deadline for lodging claims, almost 600 overlapping applications flooded in – some 200 for the High Court, and 387 for Crown Engagement.
As a result, the NZCPR raised funding for a voluntary community group, the Landowners Coalition, to oppose the claims in the public interest. Their focus on the first High Court case – the Edwards claim for a 44 km stretch of the Bay of Plenty coastline around Opotiki – was based on the hope that a sensible decision would have a precedent effect on all other claims.
However, in his bombshell ruling, Justice Churchman found in favour of the claimants. By elevating the status of ‘tikanga’ above the common law section 58 requirements in the Act, ‘tikanga’ became the “critical focus”, overriding “western property concepts.”
That decision means that almost nothing can prevent customary title being awarded to Maori claimants – as long as they can show they have held their own area according to their own ‘tikanga’.
Furthermore, that critical ‘tikanga’ assessment was not even determined by the High Court Judge, but by Maori advisors appointed by the Court in agreement with claimants!
Ignoring concerns that ‘overlapping’ claims breached the ‘exclusive use and occupation’ test in the law, Justice Churchman created a new concept of “shared exclusivity” to ensure that few claimant groups would go away empty-handed.
Despite being contrary to what Parliament intended, the Churchman decision now stands as a precedent and if not overturned on appeal, Maori tribal interests are likely to gain title and control of New Zealand’s entire coastline and Territorial Sea.
With claimant groups having access to taxpayer funding for appeals, while other groups do not, the NZCPR again raised the funding to appeal the Churchman decision to the Court of Appeal. A number of claimant groups are also appealing the decision, but most are arguing over the spoils – who got what.
This case shows exactly how activist judges can create new laws that are contrary to Parliament’s intentions.
Since transferring the entire coast to Maori interests was not National’s stated intention, they have an obligation to New Zealanders to put it right.
National should pledge to repeal the Marine and Coastal Area Act, cancel the claims, and return the coast to Crown ownership.
The point is that this disastrous outcome, caused by Judges taking the law into their own hands and re-writing what Parliament intended, has occurred under our current constitutional arrangements. At least now, MPs are able to repeal Judge-made law and replace it with laws that voters want.
Imagine just how much worse it would be if Judges held the ultimate law-making power through a new constitution.
Worse, with Maori supremacists determined to enshrine the Treaty of Waitangi in any new constitution, New Zealand would be turned into an apartheid society, where race would determine whether we are part of a privileged ruling class or are relegated to second-class status.
Anyone pressing for constitutional change in this political climate, no matter what their intentions, would be opening up the country to capture by separatists. There are no two ways about it – a new constitution would lead to Judge-led tribal rule.
Please note: To register for our free weekly newsletter please click HERE.
THIS WEEK’S POLL ASKS:
*Do you support the introduction of a new written constitution for New Zealand?
*Poll comments are posted below.
*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.
THIS WEEK’S POLL COMMENTS
| Thought when the Monarchy went so did the Treaty. How can a country move forward together when it is constantly being dragged back 200yrs. Thought when the Monarchy went, so did the Treaty. How can a country move forward together when a 200yr. old treaty keeps on being brought up? It is a lot of dangerous nonsense and needs to be consigned to history. | Monica |
| There can be no constitutional change while the “Treaty” still exists as anything but an archaic relic collecting dust in a lonely corner of a long forgotten museum. This divisive document, with it’s treasonous. nonsensical interpretations, and “magical” ability to transfer vast sums of money, property, and natural resources, to a tiny number of “entitled” and militant Maori elite (fully assisted by the “I’ll do any thing for money” enablers, apologists, and lawyers), wields it’s “power” behind closed doors, with no ability for the citizens of the OUR NATION to challenge the theft and extortion it’s wealth. The Maori elite appear to be under the illusion that they are heading towards a golden age of empowerment, with minority rule, based on the appointment of those with the least merit. But let’s be absolutely clear: they will soon be relieved of both their illusions, and their temporary gains, for the REAL beneficiaries of these crimes will be the massive globalist corporations that will exploit the opportunities presented by an incompetent minority in possession of unearned wealth and resources. This is the TRUE PURPOSE of the drive towards co-governance. Fools and their money are easily parted. | Jasmine |
| No. The bias that perminates in NZ society would not allow for a meaning full document. A constitution that did not refer to race, and decreed, all equal under the sun With fear nor favour to no one under law might come close But the the lunitic fringe cosying up to a document of the 1800,s that has pasted its use buy date has the ability to pollute any constitution, and thus equality | Bruce |
| ABSOLUTELY NOT. | COLIN |
| Too dangerous to make changes at this time in history. | Rob |
| NEVER. Co governance is a bad enough idea%u2026 a republic with constant reference to the Treaty would be worse. Democracy is one person, one vote. Tribal rule is apartheid by another name. | Elizabeth |
| But remove all reference to Treaty of Waitangi from all statutes and abolish Maori seats. | Richard |
| ABSOLUTELY NOT | TRISH |
| NO,NO,NO. | John |
| I think we need something that govt as well are not able to override our basic rights like they have during this plandemic | vaughan |
| maybe… but I know what I do not support… The sellout tyrants, that want us to re-elect them… all in the same party, all NWO/WEF/CFR TYRANTS, I will not be voting for any of them !!! | David |
| Not at present. we need to get our current act together, for the benefit of all New Zealanders, before we turn into a racist reverse apartheid society, favouring the select few above everyone else. | Trevor |
| It must never be altered.We must keep our democracy at all cost. | ngaere |
| Why this, why now? Because it’s part of the damned plan. Resist! | Mark |
| Any such move becomes racist. | Roger |
| too much at wrong time | Rnald |
| I am strongly opposed to NZ becoming a Republic with a race based constitution and judge-led tribal rule being imposed. The Supreme Court ruling in the US about abortion and overturning the Roe vs Wade decision, to the detriment of millions of American women, shows the danger of a political system dominated by judges and their particular biases. It is parliament who should make decisions not the judiciary. Retaining the constitutional monarchy is far safer for the preservation of democracy and to prevent likely abuse of power by a politically appointed president. I fully support the issues and concerns raised by David Round in his guest post on the NZCPR site ‘The Danger of Constitutional Change.’ and also the concerns raised by Dr Muriel Newman ‘Questions Over Our Future.’ The problem though that we are now facing is that many young New Zealanders, who are being brainwashed by revisionist history and the denigrating of our colonial history, including the role of the monarchy, cannot see anything wrong with NZ becoming a Republic because they are not being presented with all the facts. Their knowledge is often superficial. one-sided. and influenced by social media. Having a president is also far more expensive to maintain than having the King and the Governor General and much more open to abuse of power. The suggestion that NZ should become a Republic bodes ill for NZ’s future. and will open up a pandora’s box of vipers. God save the king. | Virginia |
| With Maori as a population minority it is time to get rid of the nonsense about the Treaty of Waitangi. Time to embrace a constitution fit for the 21st Century which works for the whole nation. A constitution void of race discrimination and religious bias. Move NZ to the forefront in secular thinking. | Peter K |
| The present system is quite satisfactory! | Ron |
| two words – binding referendum | Chris |
| A definite NO,NO,NO. The Maori radicals are pressing for this for their own purposes. A sizeable percentage of Maori are against it. It would be the downfall of New Zealand. | Robina |
| I’m quite satisfied with the law of precedence and am alarmed at the possibility of the Waitangi Treaty being the focus of such a constitution. | Tony |
| I hope never to be ruled by Maori activists. Keep the Monarchy – sink the Treaty of Waitangi | Geraldine |
| In this current militant racist Maori environment such a constitutional change would be highly dangerous. | Peter |
| no way Jose then every non Maori would be packing their bags and going to Aus or further afield. | Lorraine |
| Judges are corrupt now, why make it worse | Barry |
| I just don’t know If we were to model it off the American constitution then yes I believe that our governments just illegally override what we have now | Tony |
| We need to get with equality irrespective of colour, religion, ethnicity | Leeanne |
| Not at the moment when we have such a treacherous Government whose agendas are becoming more apparent as time goes on. The first thing to do is get rid of Labour and all it’s climate and indigenous promotions plus bullshit co governance etc etc.. At this stage will any of the alternatives be any better but we first have to get rid of the extreme leftists. People are leaving the Country due in many respects to the agendas of this Government and not for extra cash as is always stated as the reasons for departure. Keep the Monarchy meantime !!!!!!! | Alan |
| We are all New Zealanders | LEE |
| Not with this Government who are the most dishonest lying and hidden agenda admin in the western world.It’s not broken so don’t fix it | bill |
| No way – without all citizens having an informed say & a referendum. Otherwise if it is imposed there is a massive danger of racial separatism which is totally contrary to democracy. There has been no acknowledgement of the value of what European civilisation has brought to this country. | Peter |
| Certainly not while the current bunch hold any sway at all. .they are totally untrustworthy in my opinion and could not be trusted to enact a democratic and equal outcome – more likely to push through another biased and undemocratic piece of nonsense with little or no consultation, under the cover of darkness, as seems to be their way. | Don |
| Who can be trusted to form a new constitution when we have had so much policy and rules pushed through these past two years without New Zealanders consultation. | Sharron |
| As long as those writing the new Constitution were NOT politicised Lawyers or biased in favour of the Treaty myths! | Sylvia |
| Not if it contains Labour agenda | Robin |
| No Way if we do you watch all the Maori elite and the Waitangi Treaty crooks that will want the treaty to be bound in the constitution that gives them more rights than the rest of New Zealanders. And who ever is appointed as head of state would be politicly driven. Leave things as they are if we want peace in the future. The world is in ahell of a mess as it is | ken |
| Certainly not written in the current climate. | Gerry |
| No – corruption from the top down is masquerading as democracy. The current lot are “tweaking” democracy for a race based select few so we already know apartheid and dictatorship is the end goal along with the destruction of a once descent society. | Sam |
| I am a 76 year old who now no longer trusts politicians or High Court Judges. Keep up the good work before NZ goes too far down the path of no return. It’s not far away. | Kevin |
| It’s unnecessary | Richard |
| Be fully informed before making any changes | Noel |
| Yes, so all kiwis are untitled to the same and not all for Maori land and money grabbing racist Maori activists take over. | Neil |
| absolutely not | John |
| No.not ever !!! | Mark |
| Parliament must be the ultimate authority in matters of law. | Stephen |
| NO!!! This would mean the end of democracy in NZ, open the door to racist, extremist policy and apartheid. If these nutters get there way (politicians/judges included) i am out of here. The Maori friends i have want nothing to do with this crap. What must the South African immigrants here who fled there homeland think of this? This would lead to the flight of our most productive population. Are we to return to slavery, cannibalism and savagery? | Andrew |
| abso,, b… lutely N O T all that will do is imbed the now twisted treaty and all the cr….that goes with it, forever NO NO NO NO NO | Carolyn |
| Parliament has to be the Highest Court and undisputed governing body of New Zealand and a written Constitution could allow the courts activist judges interpretations override the intention and wishes of the Parliament and the NZ voters. | Graeme |
| No, No need for a new constitution. I think all this trouble comes from the racist Maori seats that corrupted Jacinda into introducing Maori seats into councils and ‘Three Waters’ where they come from nowhere and control half of it. Remember she did not tell her followers that dirty deal she did to get their votes until after the elections. And always remember the Maori seats were created in 1867 as no Maoris could vote before that. But should have been scrubbed 12 years later when all men got voting rights in 1879. Consider, a Maori MP is only there for Maoris, where any other MP is for his electorate consisting of every race on this globe. | Eric |
| Absolutely not.Its a pity we didn`T HAVE a govenor general to call for lack of confidence in this current bunch of ratbags in power and force an election now! | brian |
| Apartheid be damned! | Patrick |
| No way | Philip |
| No – because there is absolutely no way we could control what goes in a new constitution- likely it would include the TOW and be a total disaster for the country. | Roger |
| I do not agree with rewriting the NZ constitution as it covers the necessary needs of the people and is all inclusive. | Doris |
| No that is not necessary. | Jane |
| Our laws are based on centuries of common law decisions and this should remain the status quo ad infinitum | Peter |
| Keep the Monarchy. The Bill of Rights is just fine. NO constitution – look at the mess America is in right now! | Rodger |
| Those who would endeavour to remove the monarch as Head-of-State need to consider the possibility of a defiant populous. Consider the English Parliament response in 1642. For 9 years the country was divided politically, destroyed economically, and weakened commercially. The Parliament was disbanded, and the country essentially became a “Parliamentary dictatorship” under Cromwell (sort of along the lines of the Kremlin). The rise of anarchy and civil unrest led to the intervention of Monck (of Scotland) and the eventual restoration of the Monarchy in the style we have today as opposed to the Absolute Monarchy of Charles 1. The lesson here is perhaps the grand ideas of the Roundheads disenfranchised the majority of the citizenry, and with the Restoration of Charles 2, 400 years of comparative peace and prosperity returned. If a Commonwealth like the UK can descend into a murderous civil war in such a situation, it could happen anywhere, even here. | Keith |
| this is overdue | Gerhard |
| If it resulted in Judges getting more power to make decisions on direction and law, that would be a total disaster. We see regularly, crazy decisions coming from the Courts, and protested against by the public sometimes too. | Hugh |
| I think we need a constitution but a one people one,universal. not a divide and conquer one by an illegal govt | mike |
| We are already fighting for our democracy, why make it worse. | Sven |
| We need to get this very important information out to the public so that they can truly see what is going on. It’s thanks to your wonderful work and your column that allows us to see what is going on in the background. Let’s keep the monarchy as our head of state. Lets have a New Zealand where we can all be treated the same. Not given preferential treatment to those who think they deserve more. everyone has the same opportunity to succeed in life | Danne |
| Under no circumstances! If we were to have one, it would be based on the “Principles” and “Partnership” of the Treaty of Waitangi, both of which are pure fiction. and this country would be Aotearoa – up in the clouds! If these tribalistics think that the rest of us owe them something, think again! Where is the political party with the intestinal fortitude to toss out the blatant racist Tea Party Maori bunch? Ask these tribalistics what happened to the first people when their ancestors arrived here! It is time that we had one person, one vote, and turned New Zealand into a Democracy that we are told that is is! When will we become one people? Don’t ask the Labour or National Parties. | Kevan |
| not while we’ve got this maorised govt one more brain in this labour Party would be very lonely | edward |
| Absolutely no way. | William |
| A constitution drafted these days would entrench more extreme fringe attitudes | Euan |
| The recent aggressive attempts by Maori activists and sympathisers to significantly modify the original Treaty objectives of achieving peaceful, fully democratic, and respectful living under the protection of the Crown, would be disasterous for NZ. Our best prospects to achieve equitable rights remain under constitutional Monarchy or its equivalent. | Peter |
| We have far more protection under the monarchy then we would as a republic. | Jacqueline |
| Thank you Muriel for alerting me to the implications of a new constitution. We have to be alert and ready to voice our concerns, it is not racist to do so rather it is important for the survival of democracy. | Sue |
| The Moari’s are stuffing up our country quick enough wth out them writing a constitution for for our country they have rewritten the treaty to suit themselves enough is enough | Russell |
| New Zealand currently enjoys what is probably the best system in the world. Any constitution would be written by separatist maori politicians and activist judges and would result in the country becoming a banana republic. Already the current Labour Party, Green Party and Maori Party separatists want to change democracy from one person, one vote to a system based on race. | Gavin |
| If the new Constitution involves ‘Dual Government’ of both Maori and the rest of us, no way. I do not want to live in a Banana Republic, run by a Ghost minority ‘type’ of Government. | Geoff |
| Judges duty is to interpret the law in the spirit that parliament intended. | Richard |
| No, leave us with our individual rights | Chris |
| at this present time NZs political landscape is dysfunctional , and could not write a decent constitutional document | Robert |
| To introduce a new Constitution would be to invite too many individuals with their own personal agendas. Retaining DEMOCRACY, one person, one vote, irrespective of race, is vital to our stability. | Marg |
| The marxist puppet Adern has a habit of excusing the inexcuseable. First it was Ducky and giving him a plum job in Dublin. What’s the bet she’ll even give him a knighthood. Now its the racist Kelvin Davis. I know who I would put my money on to have the most maori ethnic genes. And it ain’t the white Maori. Love to see his DNA makeup, but he’ll be keeping that close to his chest like several other of the radicals. Next up for plums is Phil Goff. What sort of person was he with his welcome homes to Vietnam vets. Ardern again in the spotlight trying to excuse the theft of ratepayers water delivery storage & assets. I hear the new health authority is already in trouble and did I hear they were specifically advertising for Maori or Pacifika only, in contravention of the law. I hope no white girls have signed on there as nurses, doctors or other specialists. Westralia calling. Go West young lady. And next I suppose she’ll be trying to give Red Rob a knighthood, that’ll be fun. . | Terry |
| Republics do not work – just look at the mess in Russia and USA (land of the free and home of the brave and Trump) | Rob |
| Wording in a new constitution would need to be voted on by the country in a democratic voting process | richard |
| Retain full democracy | Helen |
| Never. | Jasmine |
| We need our freedom assured | tony |
| LONG past time…. | Michael |
| No way – and go further down race based policies | Rick |
| I believe in the value of a constitution if it is made to support True Democracy, ie One Law for ALL, not special privilege for a few based on false interpretations of the Treaty. The Third Article of the Treaty stated plainly that Maori would be accorded the same Rights and Responsibilities as every other citizen. How clear does it have to be? Read the ARTICLES, not the so-called Intentions or Interpretations. Get it from an original source; all the recent publications have been doctored. | Joyce |
| The Treaty is not a partnership | William |
| We should never have let go the Privey Council safety net. | Maurie |
| This would be a retrograde step which remove our unity as a nation from the Crown. It would also foster separatism and the tribal aspirations of the radical Maori. Which is itself against Christianity where we should regard ourselves as one people under God. Tribalism is fundamentally a form of arrested development and the opposite of progress. | Alastair |
| That is all we need to end this country as we know it now. Even though it has had some radical changes especially under this divide and rule government | Laraine |
| We need to live in a fair world for all. Democratic principles must be held by the ballot box. | susan |
| Just imagine how the socialists / communists would write it. Co governance everywhere | Michael |
| Who would write the “Constitution”? I can guess. Leave well alone | Philip |
| Provided it is done in a right and ;proper manner for all concerned | Laurel |
| The one we had was fine until the radical Labour/ Maori Causus coalition Government set about undermining it. | Phil |
| Hell NO. We’ve seen how easily things can be twisted to mean something completely different. Just look at how the treaty has been manipulated to benefit maoridom. Look what they are doing to our history etc. The activists eyes must be the size of saucers at the thought of how they can manipulate a constitution. Our system has stood the test of time and we must retain the power to elect our MPs or to sack them. | Peter |
| No, not a constitution in today’s philosophical climate in New Zealand. Most constitutions today serve socialism more or less. The American one came very close to the truth. Then there is the English one which is almost forgotten. it should be dusted off and reinstated. Keep the Monarchy and King Charles in line with his mother’s fine tradition. He should remove himself from the WEF and climate change issues. It will be his and the Monarchy’s undoing if he doesn’t. | Donald |
| We should do it | ROB6 |
| NO! NO! NO! | William |
| No, No, No. What are these clowns up to now with head girl trying to screw the reaming tax payers in NZ. Be interesting if all normal people adding value to NZ bugger off to Oz and leave the thieving scum to each other and see what happens. They would starve to death and be sleeping rough when all the houses fall down due to lack of maintenance. This is eye watering time to stand up and be counted | rod |
| Lets vote on apartheid first and see where that lands us. | Henk |
| It is sickening these part maori activist elite really believe they are looking after their people!! And using our taxpayers money!! We need democracy in this country, already the PM is allowing separation for their own control regime. Wake up all NZers. | Alison |
| A constitution cannot be based on the colour of your skin, or on a particular treaty. It must ultimately place the power in the people, and the people must have the ultimate say. Masters of our own destiny. | Neil |
| But not Treaty based. | Vic |
| no not in this climate of racial segregation, get rid of this racial govt then we would be ready, treaty of waitangi needs to be scrapped & all privilege based on race we are one people Maori sepperists need to realise the only way forward is with everyone being equal under the law of New Zealand & forget the past or this country will burn in it | Nigel |
| No leave our constitution exactly as it is. However we all know with this current government and their Maori caucus they will be pushing extremely hard to bring this about soon. | Lawrie |
| We need to lock in equity and equality for all | Ihaia |
| Treaty of Waitangi is only a ‘treaty’ not a constitution. | Ian |
| A very cautious ‘yes’, depending on what exactly is in the constitution. | pavel |
| we have a government who can’t follow the rules in the current Bill of rights. I don’t trust them to do anything properly | Tony |
| I don’t trust them to act in a fair and reasonable manner according to the laws as laid down by parliament | Arthur |
| Definitely NO!!!!!! The specter of Apartheid under the Treaty of Waitangi is just too much to contemplate. | Evelyn |
| very dangerous | steven |
| David Round and Muriel have hit the nail on the head – a written Constitution and a Republican form of government in NZ would be an unmitigated disaster. The possibility of having the likes of the Maori King (and his hangers on), Helen Clark, or Jacinda as President, is the stuff of nightmares! | Scott |
| Will National step up and put an end to all this dangerous nonsense?? Right now, I fear for the New Zealand that we know and love!! | Alan |
| But yes to a written constitution if (say) 75% of voters agree with it in a special referendum. | Andy |
| How can citizens that so vehemently denounced apartheid during the Springbok rugby tour now be promoting apartheid in New Zealand based on race for our future governance? Stop it now. | Alain |
| We need to stop what is becoming a burden on our country. The handing of millions of dollars to people who have Maori ancestors. We are supposed to be one people. | Steve |
| not if NZ politicians write it! | Martin |
| That’s suicidal! | J J |
| Am a total Monarchist. To become a Republic would open the gates for any form of Political persuasion, even a Dictatorship as per the current Government. | Roy |
| Will lead to Maori takeover of NZ | LEO |
| not in a million years | erin |
| Any change might well be by judges, not politions , and that has already shown racial bias and becoming undemocratic. | Peter |
| Why a ‘ new’ written constitution for N.Z.? National should repeal Foreshore and Seabed legislation., mess. | David |
| Unelected activist judges (or anyone else) shouldn’t be given authority over Parliament. | Gordon |
| We need to get out of this present government before we can get our senses back on track. | Denis |
| Judges are not elected by voters to represent us | Rod |
| The existing one needs strengthening with power to exclude minority groups from bringing nonsense alterations to it. | Edgar W. |
| Lack of democracy and co governance would be the result | Christine |
| Remember what happened in Rhodesia when it became Zambezi. South Africa,and here in NZ when the Tuhoe receive a large sum of money to administer lake Waikaremoana | Robert |
| In todays world and as divisive as we have become I wouldn’t trust the proponents not to promote their personal agenda’s compared to the American Constitution of 1787 which was for the betterment of all of mankind and country. | ash |
| Absolutely not | Tony |
| Who would want a new written constitution which would most certainly turn New Zealand into a banana republic under the rule of cannibal savages. What we need is to burn the treaty and turn our country back into a civilised NEW ZEALAND WHERE ALL PEOPLE ARE EQUAL where law and order exists and Real penalties are enforced to those who do not comply. | Des |
| Thank God that we have NZCPR, it gives the silent majority some voice as the present Govt is only interested in the minority and sending NZ down the tribal path. | Geoff |
| Be a good way to get rid if the treaty rubbish and establish baseline for all as it should be. | Ross |
| Rawiri Waititi believes ” the British Empire and the power of the monarchy was built on stolen resources,, and stolen taonga”. So was the British Isles, by its Roman and Norman invaders , yet we intermarried and interbred, alongside the other invaders, Angles, Saxons and Jutes from Europe. And now we are one nation, British, one which New Zealand/ Aotearoa will never attain if these racist demands do not cease. If we agree to get on with each other and embrace a respect for our past cultures, we can only grow. If the Monarchy is rejected, I will welcome the abolition of the Treaty of Waitangi, as the Crown will no longer be bound to it. If there is to be a new constitution in the future it is up to the politicians to draft the law in a way that binds the judiciary, religious groups and armed forces to it. All 3 are bent on power. Give us a magna Carta. | Vic |
| We need to stay as we are, any changes will have to go to a referendum with the public. The constitution we have has been great for many years. | Nancye |
| New constitution will lead to tribal rules | Lyudmila |
| I would not wish to become a republic until such time as the country had discussed and had agreement what the Monachy should be replaces with. I would not want the political parties to be responsible for choosing our head of state | wade |
| Not desirable. | Tony |
| Provided it is for ALL New Zealanders, with NO groups singled out. With the Intent of the 1840 treaty recognised and consigned to history, as having done all it was intended to… Make New Zealanders one people. | Lionel |
| I feel strongly that we should always be DEMOCRACY. At the moment we are not being asked, just TOLD! | Ngaire |
| This country needs to live as one people | John |
| Written laws are always up for debate/dismissal by Judges. | Catherine |
| Absolutely NOT | Gail |
| Most definitely not…….. | Mike |
| The Left want this- TIME TO JUST SAY NO!!!! They want discussion- to spread it all over TVNZ headlines and The Mainstream Media- The answer to question the No! – New Zealand has a Democratic system with Sovereignty – an envious successful combination for nearly two hundred years!!. Why would you tamper with such success!!. | Philip |
| Because it will all be based on the Treaty of Waitangi, they have already changed laws that allow separatism in New Zealand and indoctrinating their language on our children when they can not be bothered speaking it themselves, no way do we want this. | Gayle |
| The question asked for this Poll is perhaps more vague than it should be. For example, a written constitution that condemns Apartheid, and states; ONE LAW FOR ALL CITIZENS REGARDLESS OF RACE OR ETHNICITY , would be highly desirable, & would over-ride the crazy ‘Principles of the Treaty’ side show immediately. However, a constitution that includes reference to the Treaty of Waitangi, without the safeguards of dismissal of the fabricated ‘Principles’, would be a total disaster. The problem we now have with the current head of the Monarchy, King Charles the III, is his desire to see all Nations Sovereignty disappear, in preference of the N.W.O. Globalist Agenda. His approval of the World economic forum, & U.N climate emergency agenda are proof of that. | A.G.R. |
| no way | paul |
| We are all one people. Its only a few Maori’s who want to gain an advantage over the rest of our people here in New Zealand. | William |
| God forbid | George |
| We are now a multicultural society and need to respect all New Zealander’s under a fair democracy | Teresa |
| It’s not BROKE. Don’t fix it. | Doug |
| A discussion at least would be beneficial | Mike |
| I support New Zealand as it is with the mix of population as it is with a constitution that reflects who and what we are from the days of the treaty. We do not need a new constitution, we don’t have one, do we? | Ken |
| No, nay, never. | Paloma |
| A very dangerous move. Will lead to severe civil unrest. | John |
| Tis could well spell the end of tribal rule | Bryan |
| I do not support a new constitution. This government will push for it as it is part of divide and conquer. It will end in a civil war like no other in the past, UN troops will come in at his country as we knew it is over forever! | Peter |
| I fear for the future of this country. democracy seems to be a thing of the past. Whats concerning is the backlash to this as good people rebel. | Steve |
| It is time that national referendums were introduced as a compulsory measure to decide the outcome of any substantial matters of New Zealand governance. Property ownership is an integral right expected when any land is transferred in New Zealand it should not be subject to any Tikanga as described. If “customary titles” are provided for the foreshore and seabed then Maori will proceed with customary title claims to the entire New Zealand land mass. This is a legal nonsense and must be stopped. Do we have such a definition of customary title in our statutes? NO ? then it is a made up dream and has no validity. I understand the risk of creating a new constitution. It will certainly open the floodgates for outrageous claims and the beginning of new civil wars in this country if indigenous claims are not supported. Modern weaponry could make this a terrifying thought. | terrence |
| I am absolutely against any change to our written constitution and against NZ becoming a Republic. | Jan |
| Absolutely not!! | Valda |
| I don’t want a race based Constitution. Leave this one alone. Scrap the Treaty or return it to its 1840 interpretation. | Frank |
| Absolutely Not, | Darrell |
| To think New Zealanders protested so hard against apartheid in South Africa and now want to introduce it here. | Claire |
| we should stick with the monarchy, changing the constitution is only going to benefit the maori gravey train its quite unbelievable whats brewing in this country of new zealand maori will not give up till they have it all,not bad for a race of people that are not even indigenous no body is in this country all came from over the waters,how do you stop this,we need to think very seriously, about getting rid of this government in the next election | rodger |
| I really oppose tribal rule. I am for democracy. | Pam |
| Stay with the monarchy for everyone’s sake. The Treaty should be relegated to the distant past. It is the most twisted and ill-used document in human history. | Graeme |
| But only if it DOES NOT include the Treaty of Waitangi as its basis or any form of Maori separatism. All New Zealanders should have input into the document and only ratified when 70% of the population agree to its terms | Phill |
| The written T.O.W. is written and look how that has been misinterpreted by, Judges, MP’s, Maori themselves. Heaven prevent us from more intended meaningful ideas being butchered in the future by the likes of the dross posing as a Government we now have in power. | Peter |
| Many of us fought tooth and nail to stop this happening a few years back and won, but we knew it wouldn’t be long before they would back on it again! | Christina |
| Just another opportunity for maori elite To take over New Zealand. VERY DANGEROUS. | Kevin |
| we cannot give ultimate control to judges, needs to remain with parliament | Colin |
| Not unless it was based on the US Constitution with all the proviso’s to get rid of elected persons if they do not perform to spec.!!! i.e. ability to rescind appointments. Including the PM!!!!! | Davem |
| absolutely NOT. Any new written constitution must be very carefully written probably by an outside agency. | mike |
| Maori are now showing themselves to be the true racists more so than anyone else. | Mick |
| Not if it contains any reference to the (treaty); | Don |
| To open to corruption. | Ken |
| Absolutely not as this would significantly erode our already fragile democracy thank to this communistic government. | Shaun |
| keep us “One” Human being, nothing else to determine | Murray |
| Judges can userp Parliament | max |
| It would complicate rather than clarify due to the diversity of vested interests. | Murray |
| No leave it as it is. What a mess this country is in. Every corner one turns there is a problem and a lot of these problems were generated by decisions made 10-15 years ago. In this publication Dr Newman makes reference to the John Key government making decisions on the seabed and foreshore that Maori are happy to manipulate to their advantage. On Pita Sharples return from the UN in 2010 on indigenous people, the Key government signed it off. John Key said a few years later they regretted it but thought it was just symbolic. The Key government opened the immigration doors and a million people flooded in without consideration to the country’s infrastructure. No wonder he resigned in 2016, he could see the big picture that this Labour government is happily taking advantage of and for Maori gain. I strongly believe Christopher Luxon is the man to turn things around and we will see him develop over the next 12 months. | Chris |
| If, and it is a big if, the radicals win we are doomed. Even though I am in my 80′, Aus just might be where I head. | Helen |
| Any change must be carefully considered. Democracy must be protected. Equal rights for all living in NZ. | Neil |
| Not at this time under this government or the incoming National Act government. | Murray |
| why change | richard |
| NO!!!! The lunatics are running the asylum now. By the time our warm fuzzies in Parliament write the Treaty of Waitangi ( 2023 version and translation and amendments ) into any such constitution the end is nigh. God Save The King and NEW ZEALAND. The Parliamentary opposition is useless. The country is stuffed. Happy Daze! | Bruce |
| Not if it embeds the Treaty into the constitution. What 5he treaty needs is a group of independent judges to put straight once and for all that it is not a partnership. | Laura |
| Based on the British system with NO raced based references – a constitution inclusive of all the people by the people and of the people. One NZ | mike |
| HELL NO!!! | Sherrin |
| If the Judiciary are given unfettered reign via a new constitution, NZ will go down the toilet ! | Craig |
| I am no Royalist, but this country is far better served by retaining the Monarchy, than having it handed over to some President in charge of a Republic. We will be Zimbabwe before we know it, and our rights (anyone who is not Maori), will be further eroded. Stay the way we are! | Heather |
| Not if written while present Government is in power | Tony |
| However, we must first generally agree on processes to formulate a draft for consideration and for ratification. | john |
| I don’t want apartheid in NZ | royce |
| Tell Maori to funky off | Allan |
| NZCPR A new written constitution (assuming we actually have a Constitution) needs to be investigated thoroughly and with as little bias as possible. This proposed constitution needs to be presented to the citizens of New Zealand and explained in an unbiased and plain English format so that they can have a properly informed opinion on it. Once there’s a general consensus that the wording and intent is deemed suitable, then a binding referendum would seal the deal. As the NZCPR points out, we cannot allow a minority to hijack the agenda but to not proceed is to succumb to the fear of failure and deny the ability to introduce a Constitution that treats all it’s citizens fair and equally. | Gerard |
| Without knowing the rules, how can we play the game. The new codified constitution must be agreed upon by consensus & have no mention of the treaty. Charles 3 is not my king. | Steve |
| Disaster waiting to happen | Peter |
| I don’t have confidence that the present entrenched bureaucracy has the morality to write a fair all-encompassing constitution for the benefit of ALL New Zealand citizens | Bob |
| This will lead directly to ‘tribal rule’ based on skin colour and apparthied. It will take NZ back 300 years to the time when that idea failed then….it will also fail now. | mark |
| Some of our politicians and Maori opportunists should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. The Queen was barely in her grave before these narcissists opened fire. Do they have no moral fiber? There should be a minimum qualification before you are able to enter parliament in which case half of our politicians would be unemployed. At the moment, I truly despair at the direction our country has taken. | chris |
| It would be a disaster! | Alastair |
| Not while the current government are in power. | Jane |
| One law for all . All for one. | Robert |
| Could only be acceptable if based on total democracy, which is unlikely in view of the current push for co-governance ie tribal rule | Graham |
| Utter race based nonsense. The only way I’d support it is if the Treaty is not mentioned. | Stephen |
| NO, NO, NO. ALL NEW ZEALANDERS need to be awake to all these activists antics, and we need to get rid of them! | Bill |
| Does anyone know what is behind the determination of our current leaders to give away the nation to a racial group who failed to hold their land 250 years ago, when they were stone-age people, and now expect us to believe that they can operate in the 21st century? It remains a mystery to me, as it is so obviously a recipe for certain disaster. Remember Lenin? Remember Amin? Remember Mugabe? “One man – one vote – one time!” While you still have a vote, please use it wisely. | TOBY |
| Too hard! It would create a minefield. | jill |
| Certainly NOT.We all must fight against the Comrade Nania Mahuta tribal elite supported by Comrade Jscinda and through out the totalairian Government. | David |
| a new constitution would lead to Judge-led tribal rule | Mark |
| never in our life time | gerard |
| Absolutely NOT. If that is done it will be the end of New Zealand! | Colin |
| Why bother? | RICHard |
| Recently on a visit to Batemans Bay, south of Sydney, we went to two nearby beaches, only to find that there was a fee for parking and visiting them. I have no idea who owns the beaches, but whoever, that is, we have to avoid anybody doing the same here. | John |
| No but I do support the introduction of legislation to clearly define the principals of the Treaty. These would be 1 The crown is Sovereign 2 Property rights are enshrined and 3 We are all one people. Just as the three articles of the Treaty said | COOKIE |
| God save the King. On change required | David |
| Accountability to the people of NZ rests with Parliament, not the judiciary | Bruce |
| Our current legislative safeguards would disappear; allowing unchecked abuses of power and a threat to democracy. | Richard |
| Very dangerous | Bryan |
| Our democracy is suffering now and would possibly not survive any attempts at resuscitation in the current political climate of co-governance. | Peter |
| God can only help us if this should happen as it will be the end of our democracy | eric |
| Because it would undoubtedly be pro-Maori and anti-British and would trample underfoot the heritage we now enjoy. | russell |
| It will be to all New Zealanders to to ensure a future constitution represents 100% racial equality and the democratic principal of 1 person, 1 vote. We should have an elected president and our current parliament. ur current Governor General is a joke and represents no safe guards for all the people of NZ. | Dave |
| Not needed | Ray |
| No very dangerous especially as the new Te Pati Maori Party has already stated that in sport Maori are genetically superior and the race relations ministry has refused to address this highly racist statement. The worst crimes in history have been committed on the belief of racial supremacy and inferiority and becoming a republic will facilitate this belief. WAKE UP NZ. | Peter |
| The best reason I can find for retaining a constitutional monarchy is not the power that it holds but the power that it denies others. | John |
| Never. In fact I would scrap the Treaty of Waitangi. It has served its usefulness as all New Zealanders now have the same rights as each other. | Dennis |
| Certainly not This is getting ridiculous | Alan |
| If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it ! ! ! | Michael |
| The exercise would likely be captured by extremists. | Trevor |
| It sounds simple and sensible; so easy to get sucked in if you don’t know all the things that are left unsaid in that statement. Go ahead and jump out of the frying pan and right into the fire? Yeah, if you’re that stupid. | Rob |
| This is just another way of pushing NZ as a Republic….. | Carl |
| The future of our country is looking very dire under Labour. | Jackie |
| Your assessment of the effect of a written constitution is spot on. The big challenge is to get this information out to every voter. All the other clamouring distractions make that very difficult! | Peter |
| everything I read about my country and my Government and the way they have managed it over the last fifty years make me want to cry, from great to shit in fifty some one has to pay | noel |
| Certainly not with this dam Govt would be a disaster, the Treaty all over again I think. | Barbara |
| This would be Maori oriented and based on the Maori interpretation of the treaty, non Maori would be seriously disadvantaged | Gvprice |
| Too dangerous. Holds nz to now politics and damn the past and future | Derek |
| No never. A republic is what the Maori elite want to bring in total tribal rule and subjugation of all other ethnicities that they label as pakeha to justify this (NZ consists of many different ethnicities- we are multicultural) Please note Iwi elite in the past wiped out all other ethnicities – the ‘insignificant other’ ethnicities will be treated with utmost contempt if we are guilted into allowing the Iwi Elite to rewrite republic rule to establish apartheid. | Brenda |
| It is time we grew up | Warren |
| I support a constitution that does not segregate or discriminate based on ethnicity. There needs to be a constitution for Kiwis and not groups within NZ. The past is over & reparations have been made so there needs to have no reference to the treaty. | Dave |
| The long term results would b appalling. At nearly 80 it wont affect me but I shudder for future generations. | Bev |
| NEVER | Ian |
| Absolutely Not. It was Geoffrey Palmer who assisted the court (Robin Cooke) to re-interpret Te Tiriti o Waitangi. In my view Palmer has made millions of dollars from his creation of the gravy train – Waitangi Act.. A traitorous act that denies Te Tiriti o Waitangi as signed by 565 Rangatira. | Maureen |
| No – New Zealand does not need this foundational tampering. If we go down this path then two things will happen – Either revolution or the country will be eroded to nothing more then a third world banana republic and the exodus will be significant. | Bryce |
| It would create more of a mess than currently. | Ann |
| Abandon the treaty in full: as is divisive & confusing. The treaty was designed & agreed to by tribes at the time for the benefit and inclusion of all traditional land owners and colonials who later triumphed in N.Z. wars. Maori have bigger issues to address, health, drugs, gangs whanau violence; before persuing their greed of loss of costal resources. For them to get their priorities correct in the first instant. & work for collective progress not greed for the nation. Ban the treaty. | mike |
| Keep the crown, | Andrew |
| scary | Brian |
| While it may be something that could enhance New Zealand and what we stand for, I am too worried about such a document being fair to all residents. It would be a very interesting place if all occupants who did not have Maori blood lines elected to leave New Zealand and take up residence elsewhere – much like the South Africans. Who would pay the taxes which would provide for the infrastructure of New Zealand then? | Sue |
| Absolutely not, NZ cannot allow this to occur . | James |
| If it isnt broken dont fix it | Bruce |
| Most definitely NOT. We don’t need a new Constitution. The current one works very well. Also in today’s climate with those with a drop of Maori blood in their veins, any input from them would be race based with is blatantly racist. We should all be one – no ifs or buts – and treated the same. Everyone has other ancestry too as well as those claiming to be ‘Maori’ highlighting how ridiculous racial demands really are. | Helen |
| The Treaty of Waitangi needs to return to what it originally meant not what activists would like it to mean. Any new written constitution would be carte blanche for maori activists. | Chrisitne |
| Whatever the Maori elitists say? Their forebearers signed the Treaty of Waitangi and to be ruled by the then Queen of England. Now we see their primitive tribal cultures starting to emerge, Rape, pillage and destroy. John Keys has to be accountable for all of what is going on as he was the one that let Dr. Pita Sharples go over and sign the UN indigenous act when Maori are not indigenous to New Zealand. | Wayne |
| It would be the doom of democracy | Bruce |
| i shifted to nz 20 years ago with my family and have witnessed the change for the worse, please leave it as it is | natalya |
| I vote no! We NZ citizens need to be careful for what we wish for. We currently are just hanging on to the very best democratic system that is the envy of many other peoples throughout the world. To change the system now has a very much greater risk factor to our way of life than would be any likely improved benefits. We must keep what the final Magna carta gave us otherwise our democracy as we currently enjoy will be no more. However I fear that there are too many NZ citizens who are completely unaware of the dangers now lurking to demolish our democracy or they are so currently effected by their own struggles to reach a decent level of citizenship that they simply just don’t care. There is much to do in this country to raise more people to a decent standard of living and thus have more of the population interested in keeping our advanced democratic system from being destroyed. | Garry |
| Just another step on the way to apartheid. One can see this in the local body elections. WAKE UP WAKE UP NZ. | Don |
| keep nz as it is | adrian |
| This would create a country controlled by a few self-privileged Maori elite; in effect, na apartheid State. | Michael |
| This should not be left to left wing judges to interpret. | michele |
| Absolutely not but will our voices be heard? | Shirley |
| Not unless it specifically rejects all reference to the treaty of Waitangi or any other race based law. | Robbie |
| We need to be an equal nation where leaders work for the good of the people and not themselves | Ron |
| A constitution based on equality of opportunity and access to opportunities for all people regardless of race, gender age sexual preference etc is needed. | antoni |
| That would be the end of democracy in New Zealand | Glen |
| Our history is already been rewritten by Maori. Racism by Maori is blatantly ignored by govt .. so time to ignore any further treaty payments to iwi. They are not the indigenous people of New Zealand. Where in the treaty does it declare we are obligated to pay huge amounts of money to Maori ? | Dianne |
| The current system works well, why change it ? Maori conveniently forget what they have learned from colonisation. | Lindsay |
| We only have to look at what has happened in other countries who disposed of their monarchies and entrenched tribal rule to see what the outcome would be here. Disaster. | sally |
| I reject the premise that Judges have the power to overturn or ‘modify’ parliamentary law. | Tony |
| I belonged to a club that had a written constitution. Every meeting was about changing the constitution. Nothing was ever achieved. | Dave |
| No way can we open the door to Judge / iwi control of our laws and a constitution based on the flawed “treaty” interpretation. If a majority of those who identify as Maori have 1/8 or less Maori what is the balance of their heritage and why are they denying that? Greed, self interest or just Iwi bullys trying to take control. As with Maori settlements, I guess the people who were supposed to be help will see no benefit. Do we want a constitutional and democratically voted parliament or Judges/iwi with total control? | Rita |
| It seems that no one in the current government or court system has the desire or ability to create a fair, workable, intelligent constitution. With the high level of post COVID discontent we have, chaos would ensue. | Kirke |
| Of course not, only those high ranking stupid greedy Maori and some others would like a change to the current constitution and return the country to what it was in the 1840 period, tribal wars. These, now part Maori, do not realise how lucky they have been. As for those part Maori who are not happy in this country, paddle off to where you came from, and the sooner the better, good riddance. One can only get sick and tired of this perpetual rubbish. We are one country | Tom |
| We wish to remain a democratic country with equal rights for everyone. It would be a total disaster to allow the radical maori elements rule this country. | Bruce |
| I shudder to see where this will lead. Cant we see what has happened in Africa. | Pauline |
| The system we have is not perfect, but it works | Les |
| With our increasingly diverse population we should be leaving the treaty of waitangi behind us and discussing how to represent this new population base. A new constitution would consolidate this and set us on a new path. Of course the Treaty o w would be considered in this discussion but it is now , in my opinion, going to be overtaken by the increase in asian chinese and pacfica populations that will soon overtake the maori population who will wish that their rights, customs et al are taken into consideration. When they are in the majority it will be too late for a peaceful transition to take place. Start the conversation. | peter |
| It may result in a level of Apartheid | David |
| It will be an excuse for bitter activists, corrupt tribes and venal interests to capture and destroy the country. New Zealand is already in some respects bordering on Third World in its internal politics now. A Maori constitution would destroy the country with population flight and a resulting collapsing economy that would cement Third World status. | John |
| Your article shows very clearly what a disaster such a constitution would be. I am disgusted with the Green Party .. set up to support protection of NZ natural environment/land etc has been hi-jacked by one-eyed greedy Maori activists. | Rochelle |
| In the present climate you could not trust its construction. | Jack |
| It needs to ensure that ANY reference to the old outdated treaty of waitangi is NOT included. A new constitution should not refer to RACE or culture. There would be one vote and one law NO privileges would be given to people of maori decent. | Darryl |
| Absolutely | Sue |
| It should be based on the original USA constitution without reference to Treaty principles and be subject to support or otherwise by referenda. | Roger |
| Misrepresentation of the Treaty needs to be sorted. | Gill |
| Keep n.z.democratic,one vote per person for all. We cannot afford to be split by race and if Labour get back that’s what will happen, it already has in many ways but has not brought about any improvement anywhere | Chris |
| Never | Robin |
| Having a separate binding relationship with the Queen provides NZ with a true democracy, and a partner if war broke out. | Peter |
| We must remain a monarchy or bi-partisan rule will drag this country into a form of apartheid -greater than it is already under Ardern | Bob |
| Never a written constitution! Too many “legal conformists” would use such an instrument and interpret it in a random manner. We see the problems with the US constitution and how it has partially fixed the US mindset in the 18th century. A NZ constitution is likely to fix NZ in the pre stone age! | charles |
| We cannot allow sitting MPs to create a republic constitution for New Zealand as it would be written to suit their desire for power. The only way to create a republic for New Zealand would be from the ordinary people and this would more than likely require a rising up of the people to forcibly recover our democracy from the wreckage created by recent parliaments. That being the case we do not need this racial attempt to take over New Zealand and break away from the present system. | Ian |
| It’s just old fashioned greed using race as a means | Donald |
| NZ is already hamstrung by APARTHEID. Why would we risk entrenching it further. | Geoff |
| our present political structure has delivered us a very stable democratic structure/ system for 180 years and should continue to do so. Very sound checks and balances and safeguards all built in . Do we want a system that can throw up and allow such narcissistic; ruthless , dictatorial, ideologically-driven power and control freaks such as Hitler; Mao; Stalin; Putin ; Trump to impose themselves on us ? No , I think not. | Hugh |
| I agree with you it’s a dangerous move, but we need to look at better options (eg The Republic of Ireland maybe) | Grant |
| We are a Democracy and the majority of New Zealanders want it to stay this way | Doug |
| Absolutely not. This Apartheid Government members and Ardern should not have the outright power to do this | Julz |
| We cannot foresee the future and therefore should not bind the future to the concepts of today | Cliff |
| Now more than ever, due to the current separatist agenda being promoted, we need an unbiased higher authority to appeal to when injustices are practised. The Crown provides the certainty and confidence that ALL people of New Zealand have fair representation and arbitration when major disputes arise. Otherwise we will end up with a dictatorship that cannot be removed without force. | Martin |
| NZ would have to be absolutely sure any alternative would be better. You know ; open honest and transparent. | bill |
| It CANNOT be written by government. It MUST be written by the people. We need massive constitutional reform in NZ to make government and the public service accountable to the people, transparent, streamlined and fit for purpose. | Alex |
| What we have is by far the best | tony |
| The Westminster System has worked well for NZ including Maori, for 180 years so why mess with it now? | John |
| No constitutional change is needed other than to restore equality for all New Zealand citizens irrespective of racial origin | Mike |
| In the present climate definitely not. However, in the future a written constitution that guarantees individual rights and is firmly rooted in common law could be on the cards. | Andrew |
| I feel this would open a floodgate of changes where Maori would claim constitutional benefits that are racially against a One N.Z. for all policy. | Colin |
| Sadly too many left wing wankers will push a totally apartheid New Zealand and maori greed based agenda . Adern and her other bottom feeders will introduce a unlivable country whilst the sleep walking kiwis will moan but sit on their hands and maoris know it . | Ray |
| I’m getting really tired of this rubbish – When are we going to stop minority self-interested groups of people trying to take advantage of everyone else? If this keeps going, there will either be mass emigration from NZ or violent opposition. | Roy |
| This would send us into the hands of Apartheid activists. | Brian |
| Under no circumstances. | David |
| Churchman has proved to be a real problem in other areas. | Sylvia |
| Enforce our bill of rights. Defend freedom of speech. File the treaty as a document of past history. One person one vote | John |
| Mainly the maori would take full advantage of the change and push for the law fully to benefit their agenda. It is bad enough now how they have screwed the treaty to benefit them and them only. | David |
| Definitely not, and no to a republic. | Mike |
| If a new constitution gets rid of the rort that is the current activist interpretation of the Treaty Of Waitangi then my answer is yes if not no. | pdm |
| Emphatically NO | Kevin |
| It ain’t broke, so don’t fix it | Geoffrey |
| As things stand at this point in time here in New Zealand: These radicals ( we know who they are– no need to name the devil here) will do everything to grab control and force their unethical and immoral rule over us. It is not about saving language and culture. It is not about saving the environment, it is not about eradicating ‘hate speech’, it is not about ‘gender’ That- amongst other schemes- is nothing but a smoke screen to divert attention from their evil plans. | Michael |
| Shocking revelations. | Evans |
| We would become a more apartheid state. | john |
| Keep laws | Janet |
| Not until “we the people” have dealt with this out of control (and now dangerous) gravy train. | neil |
| absolutely not ! | mike |
| No way boy am I sick of the elite Maori we live in New Zealand no where else Maori language week seems to be here to stay we don’t watch mainstream tv anymore as I get angry with so much Maori spoken and kiwi names being changed take a look at a map index to see how many Maori names we have now we don’t need any more I can see why so many friends are leaving and have already left never to return | Peter |
| When we had the crown and religion with the 10 commandments we had a very good moral society, once morals went in came greed and corruption | Colin |
| We need to remove the ambiguity of interpretation from the Treaty of Waitangi that is splitting our country according to race. | gavin |
| If this happens, we are stuffed and the exodus from NZ would be huge. | Mike |
| As long as the current government has nothing to do with it | Greg |
| Never, and never especially while the current and activist driven Ardern government is in place. | Peter |
| Not with the current government in place, the outcome would be to enshrine Apartheid as part of the new constitution, which would have harm 85% of the population and be the destruction of New Zealand | John |
| Just look at the way our judges interrupt the laws at present. Heaven help NZ. | John T |
| We have the Magna Carta that gives us our base. If it’s not broke don’t fix it. | Clive |
| Depends who writes the constitution and what it says. Splits Maoridom- can’t be a republic and have the treaty centre stage as it would be null as an agreement between connected countries. | Laura |
| Apartheid is rearing its ugly head trying to remove the coastal environment from 85% of New Zealanders | Sidwell |
| This would be a disaster for Nz | Sheila |
| “… all hell would be let lose…” with a new written constitution for NZ . | Chris |
| Stop the Maorification of New Zealand by all means possible. | Lance |
| NO, although I would support a new constitution where we would all be equal as it should be and sending the no longer relevant Treaty into oblivion – at the same time removing all race-based legislation. | Scott |
| Didn’t we fight apartheid around 1981? | Adrian |
| Absolutely not. Democracy v. Apartheid. It must not be allowed to happen. We must keep the Monarchy to preserve NZ for A Mew Zealanders | Laurine |
| The country needs to respect historical precedents, not re-imagined Maori/iwi fantasies. | DAVID |
| App POWER resides in the Parliament where it has Parliamentary Sovereignty . This is from the 1688 British law . There is NO checks and balance in the government , refer to the Kiwi party vs the Attorney General , that was the ruling of the NZ Supreme Court . | Mitchell |
| We need the constancy and seperateness of the Monarchy | Linda |
| If it sets out clearly and legally and without discrimination binding rules that apply to the very core of our identity. | Ray |
| Yes, but without any reference to the TOW. An update of the Constitution Act of 1856 that superseded and nullified the TOW | Charlir |
| I voted Yes because I think a solid constitution with a Bill of Rights and no reference to the treaty or racist sections and a two level legislature would be better. I would be against any document referencing the treaty. | Larry |
| We need to ensure that we do not get rid of the current head to end up with another king, the Maori king. Being part of the commonwealth keeps trading doors open and protection that we don’t really deserve as we have a minute defends force. | Nic |
| Retain both our current constitution and the Monarchy as, while they are not perfect, they are better than any other political systems. Like Democracy, which also has its faults, it is also better than any alternative. If we were to be a republic, we would also have to change our flag and that referendum clearly demonstrated that New Zealanders were generally happy with the status quo. The discussion on a republic is undergoing the same strategy as that being used to promote New Zealand’s official name being changed by stealth to Aotearoa, through its constant reference to Aotearoa, as well as instructing all government agencies, local government and the media to use it. The government doesn’t want to risk a referendum, at this time, because there is still significant opposition to changing the name of New Zealand. | John |
| If based on the original 10 amendment US Constitution | George |
| Labour is not working for the Common Man, and Woman, it is trying to subdivide the entire Country to a change in Order, namely a Divided Nation with Hidden Agendas for a minority. This is not a Fair Nation anymore if this happens. Please wake up to our Labour Leaders and others planned Division. No way should this be possible. An unfair Divided Nation should never be on our entire Countries Hidden Agenda. | Chris |
| Disagree with any constitutional changes based on race agenda | Anthony |
| The treaty’s current misinterpretations, can be easily seen as the wishful thinking of Maori elite. Some solid evidence is needed. NB like reading ‘One Sun in the Sky’. | Lenna |
| This is the biggest threat to democracy New Zealand has ever witnessed. | Paul |
| With a few amendments guaranteeing property rights | sam |
| No change to our democracy | Peter |
| Definitely NO | Glenys |
| Our collection of legislation that we use as a “constitution” allows for change and repeal. A set constitution based on the Treaty would be interpreted to suit by the maori activists, but inflexible to all others. | Ross |
| Just another lie of Arden’s to further tax people for her to throw around Ike confetti to those who don’t pay any tax | Sidwell |
| No | David |
| Never while my arse points down! | David |
| with the likes of mahuta, jackson,dolittle and our tooth fairy and her brown nosing mates writing their version of a written constitution would completely destroy this country and have a ugly scared face and useless made up language speaking puppet’s as leaders bleeding this country dry which with aderns help they are already doing. | Richard |
| YES… Along with the recognition, of our founding document, sovereignity, and flag, aspects of 1835, as well as fixing the broken disfunctional treaty of 1840 . | David |
| No, No, No – a Treaty-based constitution would be a disaster! | Bruce |
| New Zealand must avoid a Treaty-based constitution at all costs. We fought them off in 2012 or so when the Maori Party tried it on and we must fight them off again. | Walter |
| How on earth do we warn the public about this? Most people have no idea how our constitution works, so “updating” it to include the Treaty doesn’t sound too sinister – yet that’s what it would be. | Carol |
| We should leave everything as it is – “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”! | Gordon |
| Absolutely not! New Zealand does not need a new constitution at all. Our present arrangements are adequate. It is only greedy activists who want to change things so they can gain control. They must be opposed at every step of the way. | Jason |