Goldsmith asks When did we, as a country, decide that the Treaty trumps democracy?

Paul Goldsmith writes:

Labour’s Māori Development Minister, Willie Jackson, infamously said on Q&A recently that the nature of our democracy has changed. He’s backed it up in a New Zealand Herald opinion piece declaring, “We live in a new democracy”, while stating that politicians questioning the changes are engaging in “racist dog-whistles”.

So it is racist to defend our current democracy!

When did we, as a country, decide that the Treaty trumps democracy? We haven’t.

The idea of equal suffrage – equal voting rights, regardless of gender, class and ethnicity – has been a pillar of our democracy for decades. Remember Kate Sheppard? All New Zealanders should have an equal say in who governs them; an equal say in appointing the people that make the decisions that affects their lives.

Equally fundamental to our system is the ability to throw poor performers out at the next election – that is the bedrock accountability in our democracy. But not under this Bill. Ngai Tahu’s representatives could never be thrown out.

We are heading towards a Fiji Style Great Council of Chiefs type rule.

If we as a country no longer think that equal voting rights apply at one level of government, pressure will build for change in national elections.

I can’t think of a more divisive agenda for any government to run.

The Maori Party are very open that they want Parliament to not have equality of suffrage, but instead to be 50/50 based on race. At least they are honest about it. We don’t know what Labour is planning as they won’t tell us.

In the absence of any comments from the Prime Minister on the topic, New Zealanders can rightly conclude it is the agenda of the Labour Party to change our democracy away from equal voting rights and accountability to one that points to two classes of citizens.

If Jacinda Ardern and her government Ministers no longer think that Kiwis should have equal voting rights, then they should make the case and ask New Zealanders whether they agree.

A referendum would be a good idea, in preference to this altering democracy by stealth.