Written By:
- Date published:
2:47 pm, November 5th, 2025 - 19 comments
Categories: casey costello, Christopher Luxon, national, nz first, racism, same old national, treaty settlements -
Tags:
The Government’s all out assault on te Tiriti o Waitangi continues.
And this time supposed liberal Erica Stanford is engaged in the latest assault.
From John Gerritsen at Radio New Zealand:
The government’s decision to axe schools’ obligation to give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi has shocked groups representing school boards, teachers and principals.
The government had been moving to change the emphasis on the requirement in the Education Act, but on Tuesday announced it would remove it altogether.
Education Minister Erica Stanford said the treaty was the Crown’s responsibility, not schools’.
“School boards should have direction and we are giving very clear direction. You need to ensure equitable outcomes for Māori students, you need to be offering te reo Māori and you need to be culturally competent,” she said.
“But what is not clear is a conferred and unreasonable treaty duty that they are expected to decipher.”
Stanford said the Crown’s treaty obligations in the school system sat with her as education minister and she took them very seriously.
The treaty requirement currently in the Education Act said schools would give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including by ensuring plans, policies, and local curriculum reflected local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori; taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori; and achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students.
The government had been progressing an amendment that would change the treaty objective to place achieving equitable outcomes as its first action, and replacing references to local curriculums reflecting local tikanga, mātauranga and te ao Māori with “teaching and learning programmes”.
Some teachers and principals were not happy with that proposal, but the announcement took that further and groups including the School Boards Association, Principals Federation and teacher union, the Educational Institute, reacted angrily.
The response of Stanford and Christopher Luxon is predictable. They are trotting out the line that observing the treaty is a Crown responsibility and not a School Board of Trustees responsibility.
The argument would have more credibility if this Government had not repeatedly undermined and attacked the treaty. Just read any recent Waitangi Tribunal decision to understand the severity of the attacks that have occurred.
And the flip flop suggests that New Zealand First may have been throwing its weight around in the background.
The original Act, as amended in 2020, contained this provision in section 9(b):
“any statement of national education and learning priorities issued by the Minister must be consistent with objectives for early childhood, primary, and secondary education and learning that include instilling in each child and young person an appreciation of the importance of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori”.
And section 9(1)(d) stated that one of a school board’s primary objectives is:
“to ensure that the school gives effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including by—
(i) working to ensure that its plans, policies, and local curriculum reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori; and
(ii) taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori; and
(iii) achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students”.
The Education and Training Amendment Bill sought to amend this provision by repealing section 9(1)(b) and tweaking section 9(1)(d) to state the following:
[I]n meeting its paramount objective in governing a school, a board must ensure that the school gives effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, including by—
(i) achieving equitable outcomes for Māori students; and
(ii) working to ensure that its plans, policies, and teaching and learning programmes reflect local tikanga Māori, mātauranga Māori, and te ao Māori; and
(iii) taking all reasonable steps to make instruction available in tikanga Māori and te reo Māori”.
But for some reason even this heavily weakened language was too much for the Government and the version reported back by the committee of the whole will only require that boards seek to achieve equitable outcomes for Māori students, take reasonable steps to provide for students to be taught, and to learn, in te reo Māori on request of their parents or immediate caregivers and take reasonable steps to ensure that the policies and practices for the school reflect New Zealand’s cultural diversity.
The Government is stating that it is a Crown responsibility to respect the treaty. But the change to section 9(1)(b) removes the crown’s obligations to instil “in each child and young person an appreciation of the importance of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori”. Fancy not wanting to teach kids about te Tiriti.
Hobson’s Pledge is taking credit for the change. It had been running a campaign to stop Stanford’s sneaky sellout which obviously has had an effect. All those grey haired right wing kwyboard warriors can pat each other on the back.
It makes you wonder if Casey Costello, who has pristine links to Hobson’s Pledge, has had a role to play.
This is dog whistle racism. Clearly New Zealand First and presumably Act have gazumped the moderates in National’s ranks.
Yes its very convenient to blame NZF and ACT for something national also want.
They will pay for this.
They are racist arrogant and backward.
Wild that we’ve reached the point where the government’s racism isn’t even subtle. Just lazy and loud.
But as odious and retrograde as this move is, it’s mainly symbolic anti-wokeism. An attempt to appease a shrinking base that’s wildly out of step with the views and lived experiences of most New Zealanders.
I’m on a school board in a small, overwhelmingly Pākehā rural community. This change will make precisely zero difference to how we talk about, or teach, Te Tiriti and te reo Māori at our school.
Because at the end of the day, we’re not doing it to meet some invented bureaucratic obligation. We do it because our community has been clear: our job is to foster respect, inclusion, and to prepare young people to thrive in a country that belongs to all of us. It’s a choice communities and schools have made up and down the motu. And, I have every confidence, will continue to make.
The real tragedy is that this government seems more interested in stoking culture wars than supporting the educators who are actually delivering for our tamariki. Stripping Te Tiriti from the Education Act won’t make inequities disappear — just as it won’t make te reo Māori disappear from our day-to-day vernacular.
Despite what David Seymour, Hobson’s Pledge, and the blue rinse brigade might wish, you can’t legislate away the truth.
My kids and their friends are growing up in an infinitely more multi-cultural, confident, and historically honest country. No amount of crowing about winning the "war" on "woke" will change that
Tena koe lovely comment.
It is symbolic. I am sure most schools will get on with teaching the treaty and teaching respect for the treaty.
The response is quite evil. They are calculating that enough people will be upset so that they will change their vote. But their problem is that it will be people deciding between Act and NZ First.
There will be a more and more intense battle for the Hobson's Pledge vote. Meanwhile more and more people will be at best indifferent and at worst oppose what they are proposing.
I am not sure National realise this.
Pro treaty sentiment is strong now and they seem to be stuck in the 1970s.
Pro-Treaty sentiment is strong now, and so is anti-Treaty, anti-Māori sentiment, if the number of Kiwis who rejected Māori wards is any indication.
I agree with Res Publica that the tide of multi-culturalism and historical honesty is on 'our' side, but it's certain that all three CoC parties will be frantic to drum up and exploit anti-Māori sentiment ahead of the 2026 general election, particular when they’ve been outed as the self-serving economic vandals.
How Labour / Greens / TPM effectively neutralise that appeal to racism will be crucial – one challenge will be to present at least a semi-united front.
The best way to deal with it is to roll their eyes, state the obvious (that the coalition is racist and out of step with normal New Zealanders) and then keep hammering home the cost of butter, the hollowing out of our public services, and the enormous quantities of public money being wasted to achieve far less than Labour did, at far greater cost.
The strategy is simple: Ferries, Fonterra, and Fairness.
that wins us the next election, all good.
NZ also has a problem with culture change. It's deeply tied to neoliberalism and class war, but it can't just be put aside while we focus on cost of living etc. Because the culture war is being fought over a long time frame, beyond whether the coalition survives the next election or not.
I agree that most Kiwis don't support racism. The problem is the intentional leveraging of division, so that when the tipping point arrives, more people are ok with what the right want to do. We saw a bit of this in 2023, where people reacted against 3 Waters and Co-governance. Not the only thing, but it was a factor.
The left has been relying on liberal direction too much instead of bringing people along.
As an example, the roll out of te reo across the public sector was well intentioned, but even as someone who believe te reo should compulsory in schools, I roll my eyes each time I'm engaging with a worker who is so badly pronouncing the name of the org they're telling me about that I don't know who they're talking about. Progressives didn't do the deeper work of helping people learn te reo. We took a very important class issue and treated it like identity politics: change the names but don't upset neoliberalism by supporting workplaces to teach te reo.
Hobsons Choice are the outside edge of shifting the Overton Window on this. They're blatantly racist, and the more they do that, the more it gets normalised. Trump empowered this, so we can see how that dynamic works. Winning the next election is utterly necessary and not sufficient.
I think that’s an important point!
If the wider New Zealand left lacks anything (aside from organisation and a coherent strategy) it’s a long-term project to shape the country around a shared set of national values.
Yes, we should always seek to win and keep hold of the levers of power. But we also need to be absolutely clear about why.
For all their faults, the right is at least consistent. Their goal, whether stated or not, is to dismantle the state and its fundamental protections, and to unwind any progress towards sovereignty for Māori.
It has the great advantage of being clear and easy to understand. And also gives them an overarching framework within which to fit their political strategy.
This made me actually laugh out loud. It's not funny, but it was very funny. /darkhumourlol.
absolutely this. I should write some posts. If we can't say out loud what we stand for, in ways that appeal to the country broadly, we're screwed. The right are much better at this.
It's one of those situations where you can either laugh or cry.
And where it'd all be significantly funnier if it was happening to someone else.
#InsertLeftInfightingMemeHere
My genuine worry is that there might not yet be enough 'normal' Kiwi voters who are immune to well-funded racist political disinformation campaigns.
The counterargument is that yes, there are plenty of racists out there in the electorate. But that their racism is largely incidental to their political identity.
I’d posit they care a lot more about the price they’re paying for groceries than whether their Year 9’s maths textbook uses Hōne or John in an example.
It’s not that they’re not racist. It’s just that they’re probably not racist enough.
You're probably right, but that Einstein quote nags at me – the NAct1 CoC is ‘governing’ for the sorted, and will use every scapegoat it can find / invent.
https://theconversation.com/racism-and-democracy-why-claims-of-division-by-race-in-the-nz-election-and-voice-referendum-need-challenging-213651
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/race-issues-emerge-new-zealands-election-2023-10-03/
Exactly!
Which makes the coalition’s decision to keep pursuing a culture war when people are far more worried about the skyrocketing cost of living and a stalling economy, even more baffling. Especially given their traditional perception as being the safer pair of hands when it comes to economic management compared to the left.
Not many voters will be watching their kids’ teachers to see if they say a karakia before class. But they will be keeping an eagle eye on the price of butter.
If there’s any lesson to be drawn from the US elections yesterday, it’s that, irrespective of the messenger, messages around hip-pocket issues really resonate, and incumbents who focus elsewhere do so at significant political risk.
The longer NACT fixate on Māori issues, the less credible their inevitable pivot back to “economic management” in the next 12 months will seem. We’re already seeing it with Labour’s CGT-lite. Nobody honestly believed Luxon’s criticism of it.
Thank-you for your comment @ 4 Res Publica. I have lifted it with a view to showing it to a few people. It is the most inspirational comment I've seen on the subject.
Great article and some great comments as well. I remember learning some reo and about Te Tiriti at all levels of my schooling in the 1980s and 1990s – this just feels like an extinction burst of racists.
Side note: some corrections required as there are some instances of "Sanford" instead of "Stanford".
[Thanks will teach me for rushing this out. Will Correct – MS]
Stanford is not an East Coast Bays liberal – she's as much a racist & a neo fascist as the rest of this shitty cabinet
Brilliant Micky.
One Term Government.
I can’t see anyone with Maori blood or Maori sympathies or with a sense of fairness voting for National, ACT or NZF in 2026.
If Stanford is supposed to be the liberal face of this government, gawd ‘elp us.