The prime minister has never supported David Seymour’s bill in principle, or beyond first reading in practice, but his language has certainly changed.
The National Party has spent a large amount of time in this parliamentary term talking about a bill it doesn’t like. Which is not much fun. In the Herald, Claire Trevett put it like this: “If you want to watch joy die in a National MP’s eyes these days, it only takes three words: Treaty Principles Bill.”
That applies as much to Christopher Luxon – who negotiated the deal with David Seymour whereby National would support the bill to select committee – as anyone. Rarely has a day gone by when the prime minister hasn’t been asked about the legislation. Like an exasperated dad trying to snuff out one of those reigniting candles, he has consistently said he couldn’t be clearer. But could he? Certainly, his responses have evolved over time. Let’s chart it out.
March 29 2022: Luxon says NZ not ready for a referendum
The Act Party proposes a Treaty Principles Bill, framing it as providing for a “referendum on co-governance”. Christopher Luxon says: “Our view is that we’re not ready for a referendum now.” After David Seymour urges the prime minister not to “run away at the first sign of controversy”, Luxon retorts: “We’re not ready for a referendum right now because we’re not clear about what we’re actually talking about.”
October 10 2022: Still opposed
David Seymour says a referendum on Treaty principles is a bottom line for any future government negotiations. Luxon says his position is unchanged: he opposes such a referendum.
August 22 2023: Don’t support but not ruling out
After the Act Party reasserts the importance of its policy to hold a referendum to redefine the principles of the Treaty, Luxon responds, “It’s not our policy and we don’t support it.” But he will not conduct coalition negotiations ahead of the election, he says.
September 20 2023: Not the time to negotiate
A few weeks out from the election, with David Seymour saying a Treaty referendum is a bottom line, Christopher Luxon dismisses invitations to rule it out, saying, “I am not negotiating a coalition agreement with the media this side of an election.”
October 10 2023: Divisive and unhelpful
Luxon is asked on The Hui if he could promise that no such referendum would be held under his prime ministership. He says: “That’s our position … That’s what I believe. I don’t think that [approach] is helpful. I think it’s divisive and it’s not something we’re supportive of.” From here, Luxon routinely uses the words divisive and unhelpful to describe the Act plan.
October 16 2023: Not negotiating through media
A couple of days after the election, with coalition negotiations yet to get properly under way, Luxon is once more invited to say whether he’d rule out a Treaty referendum. “Well, again, I’m just not going to play the rule-in, rule-out game,” he says. “Our position is really clear on that, we’ve felt very strongly that a referendum would be divisive but again, I’m not wanting to negotiate through the media.”
November 6 2023: Divisive and unhelpful, contd
From the depths of negotiation, Luxon emerges to tell Morning Report: “Our view, through the campaign, is well understood. We think it is – a referendum would be divisive and unhelpful.”
November 23 2023: The deal, explained – at this stage
The National-Act coalition agreement pledges to “introduce a Treaty Principles Bill based on existing Act policy and support it to a select committee as soon as practicable”. Asked about the commitment, Luxon says: “Our government is to support the passing of that bill through the first reading and to select committee. And that is the extent of our commitment at this stage.”
December 7 2023: As far as it will go
In his first appearance as prime minister for parliamentary question time, Luxon goes further than he has before, saying, “we will pursue a Treaty principles bill to select committee, and that’s as far as it will go.”
December 11 2023: No commitment beyond first reading
“It’s very clear in our coalition agreement. We’re supporting it at the first reading and to select committee,” Luxon says. “There’s no commitment beyond that point.” From here, the no commitment language becomes Luxon’s go-to.
January 23 2024: A great deal of no commitment, plus aeration
Asked at a post-cabinet press conference if he will rule out any prospect of the legislation living on beyond select committee hearings, Luxon says: “Our coalition government commitment is that we will support Act’s Treaty Principles Bill to first reading, but there is no commitment to take it beyond that.” So he won’t rule it out? “There is no commitment to take it beyond that and I’d just say, as the National leader, our position has been well understood for a long period of time and, you know, we have no intention or no commitment to support it beyond first reading.”
Luxon also stresses the compromise is a feature of MMP and at least allows “an aeration of the issues”. He’ll invoke this phrase – aeration of the issues – numerously over the following months.
Over the course of the press conference, Luxon uses the words “no commitment” 14 times.
January 24 2024: Yes there is no commitment
Asked at Rātana Pā if he can rule out supporting the bill past first reading, Luxon says: “I’ve been really clear about it. As a coalition government, we don’t have a commitment beyond first reading. As you know, as a National Party, we’ve had a long-standing position that we have no intention and no commitment to progressing a referendum, so it’s pretty straightforward for us.”
January 30 2024: No intention, no support
More of the same. “We’ve said that we will actually support that bill through the first reading and there’s no commitment, no intention, no support beyond that.”
February 2 2024: The bottom line is no commitment
Questioned after a meeting with the Iwi Chairs Forum, Luxon says: “I don’t know how many times I have to mention this but the bottom line is that there is no commitment, no intention, and no support to take the bill beyond the first reading. It’s part of our coalition agreement and that’s been our position.”
February 7 2024 (morning): We will not support the bill beyond first reading
With the questions mounting up before and during Waitangi commemorations, we detect a shift, a palpable shift. In an interview on The AM Show, Luxon’s language moves from “no intention” to a more definitive, “We are not supporting it beyond first reading,” he says. “We will not be supporting that bill.” That is echoed on Morning Report. “We will not support it beyond first reading.”
February 7 2024 (afternoon): Never been open-minded
Luxon dismisses the suggestion he has moved away from an open-minded stance on, for example, amendments to the bill. “We’ve never been open-minded. We’ve always said there’s no intention, no commitment, no support for it beyond first reading.” He adds: it was a bottom line for them. We came to a compromise … There’ll be an aeration of the issues through a select committee. But there is no intention to support it beyond that. I appreciate for the Act Party and for its supporters it was a very important thing. But the reality is we won’t be supporting it beyond that.”
He goes on to explicitly rule out – for the first time – changing that position if there was a surge in public support for the bill.
He’s optimistic, however, about the timetable: “There will be a first reading, there will be a select committee process, people will be able to participate, it’ll be opened and, hopefully, closed before the end of the year.”
February 8 2024: I can’t see us supporting it
In a media standup Luxon returns to the “no commitment, no intention” language, before firming to, “The National Party will not be supporting it”. After batting away invitations to issue a “guarantee” or stake his leadership on the matter, he appears to wobble, stating: “I’m saying, I can’t see us supporting it. As it is, as I understand it today, I cannot see us supporting it.”
If that sounds like muddying the waters, please stand corrected: “What I would just say to you is I can’t be any clearer; myself, the National Party, my National Party caucus do not want to support it and will not support it.”
February 12 2024: No support beyond that
The questions, they keep coming. “Our position’s really clear,” Luxon tells another post-cabinet press conference. “So I don’t plan to keep rehashing the ground that we’ve covered over the last few weeks.”
He says: “We’ve got a coalition agreement, as we’ve talked about before, where we’re going to have an airing of that issue through a select committee process. We’re going to support it to first reading. As I’ve said, there’s no support from our side beyond that.”
August 20 2024: We’ll vote against it
As the prospect of a draft bill emerges, Seymour chides National as disrespectful for its decision not to support the Treaty Principles Bill into law even before the bill takes that form, adding that the party had “taken several positions on the bill”. Luxon responds: “The National Party has a long-standing position and we will not support it beyond first reading.” He says it will return from select committee for a second reading, at which point, “we’ll vote against it as the National Party”.
October 22 2024: Not beyond first reading
“We’ve talked about this before,” Luxon notes, correctly, in response to a question about the Treaty Principles Bill. “It’s a coalition commitment. As you know, we’ll support it at first reading, but not beyond that … We made a commitment in our coalition agreements. I didn’t get what I wanted; David Seymour didn’t get what he wanted. We came to a compromise and, you know, we’ll support it at first reading but not beyond that.”
November 11 2024: A disservice to the Treaty, we will not change our minds
“There isn’t anything I like,” says Luxon, in response to a press conference question about whether there is nothing he likes in the bill. “Our party didn’t support it in opposition. As I’ve said many, many times we’ve come to a compromise.” He adds, in a press conference that features his toughest language on the legislation to date: “I think some [Māori] are fearful we will be changing our mind. We will not be changing our mind. We will not be supporting it at second reading.”
He goes on to say: “We don’t support this bill because we think it is divisive and we’re proud of the Treaty of Waitangi. It’s a very simplistic interpretation of the Treaty of Waitangi, that has served us, I think, incredibly well, and to simplify it down in that way ‒ for a piece of legislation like this ‒ I think is a disservice to the Treaty.”
November 14 2024: A reductive, simplistic bill
On the day the bill goes to first reading (and an MP’s haka steals its thunder) and his MPs vote for it by way of compromise, Luxon takes his rhetoric up a gear. “You do not go negate, with a single stroke of a pen, 184 years of debate and discussion, with a bill that I think is very simplistic,” he says before departing for Apec. “It’s not helping us get New Zealand back on track.”
November 19 2024: Luxon says position unchanged
As the hīkoi winds up on the grounds outside parliament, Luxon and his ministers face numerous questions in parliament related to the Treaty Principles Bill. At least half a dozen times, Luxon says his party is “not supporting the bill beyond first reading”, and as such it will “not become law”. His final response to the final question: “We are not supporting the bill beyond first reading, and it will not become law. I’ve been clear from day one. That is exactly our position and it remains unchanged.”