Hon Christopher Finlayson

Part 2 Organisation and governance

CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) : I am delighted to take a brief call on this matter, because I want to say something about Mr Harawira’s amendment, which proposes to insert a Treaty clause into the Policing Bill.

I have spoken on Treaty clauses in this Committee and in the House on a number of occasions. I refer to a speech I gave on the first reading of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Deletion Bill on 26 July 2006.

Hon Darren Hughes: Just remind us again.

CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: For Mr Hughes’ benefit, because I know he always reads my speeches and, indeed, memorises them, I say to Mr Hughes that this speech can be found in Hansard, Volume 632, at page 4454.

In that speech, which dealt with Mr Woolerton’s rather substandard bill on deletion of the principles of the Treaty, I identified four types of legislation that contain Treaty provisions: firstly, general legislation; secondly, private Acts; thirdly, settlement legislation; and, finally, two important Treaty statutes that deserve special mention. I argued that I failed to see how it was appropriate to remove Treaty provisions from certain types of legislation, but include a Treaty provision when dealing with general legislation like the Crown Minerals Act, the Crown Pastoral Land Act, or the Crown Research Institutes Act.

I adopt a similar approach to the insertion of a Treaty clause in this particular bill, because it is of general applicability. The responsibilities of the police are to every New Zealander, regardless of race, creed, colour, or political party. They have those general obligations, rather than specific obligations.

So, with the greatest of respect to Mr Harawira, it seems to me that although it may be appropriate to have a Treaty clause in Treaty settlement legislation—because the breaches of the principles of the Treaty are the very reason why there needs to be a hearing in the Waitangi Tribunal and a Treaty settlement—I have difficulty with the inclusion of Treaty clauses in legislation that is to have general applicability. So National will not be supporting this proposed amendment. We understand why the member has put the amendment forward, but we do not think it is consistent with the general principles of statutory interpretation for this type of legislation.