Last week’s Parliamentary urgency debates, coming at the 11th hour of this Government’s term, remind us just how fragile our democracy can be.

Three bills relating to Te Tiriti o Waitangi were progressed through Parliament under urgency. The proposed changes include removing some references to Treaty principles from legislation, standardising Treaty references, and changing the strength of some obligations so that they require the Treaty or its principles to be “taken into account”.

The Government says these changes are about clarity, consistency and reducing legal uncertainty for agencies and policy makers. But for me, this raises a much bigger question.
What happens when we start removing the foundations that require governments to recognise and respond to Te Tiriti? When legislation follows the normal parliamentary process, there is an opportunity for the public to have a say. Select committees hear submissions from people across the country. Patients, whānau, workers, organisations and communities can tell Parliament how proposed legislation may affect them.

It can be a long process. But democracy is not supposed to be convenient. It is supposed to give people an opportunity to be heard.

Urgency is not new to New Zealand. Governments have used urgency when there has been a genuine need to act quickly. We saw it following the Christchurch terrorist attacks in 2019 and during the COVID-19 pandemic, when decisions had to be made quickly to protect lives and public safety.

The issue is not whether urgency should ever be used. It is what happens when urgency becomes normalised. This Government has made extensive use of urgency during its term, including during the final sitting week of this Parliament which sat for extended hours while significant legislation was progressed.

We should be asking whether this is becoming the new normal because when legislation is rushed, the opportunity for proper scrutiny can be reduced.

Public scrutiny does matter! It matters because legislation is not just words on paper. It affects real people. It affects whether our homeless are safe. It affects the education and opportunities available to our young people, whether people can afford a warm, dry home, whether families can access healthcare and it affects whether people can get to work and put food on the table. And it affects Māori!

For Māori, Te Tiriti o Waitangi is not simply another reference sitting in legislation. It is fundamental to the relationship between Māori and the Crown. So, when Treaty references are removed, changed or reduced in their legal effect, we need to be asking what that means for Māori participation, decision-making and outcomes. We have seen what happens when Māori voices are not properly heard in the development of health policy.

As nurses, we see it every day. We see the consequences of decisions made at the top that do not always reflect what is happening at the bedside, in our communities, in rural areas, in emergency departments, in aged care or in people’s homes. We know what happens when policy does not match reality,  that Māori continue to experience inequities across our health system and that access, affordability, workforce shortages, cultural safety and the availability of appropriate services all have consequences for our whānau. That is why Te Tiriti matters.

It is not about adding another layer of bureaucracy. It is about ensuring that Māori have a voice in decisions that affect Māori. The Government says these changes will create greater certainty and consistency. But certainty for government agencies cannot be the only measure.

We also need to ask:

• What does this mean for Māori?
• What does this mean for Te Tiriti?
• What does this mean for future governments?
• And perhaps most importantly: Who gets to have a say?

The Treaty bills are now before the Justice Select Committee, where public submissions are being invited. That opportunity matters because democracy is not simply about voting every few years.

Democracy is also about scrutiny. It is about being able to question those who make decisions on our behalf, about communities being able to say, “This will affect us, and we need you to listen.”

It is about ensuring that those who are most affected by legislation are not the last people considered.

For Māori, that must include the right to have Te Tiriti o Waitangi recognised and respected in the relationship between Māori and the Crown.

• We should not be afraid to ask difficult questions.
• We should not be told that scrutiny is an inconvenience.
• We should not accept that speed is always more important than participation.

Because once public scrutiny and participation become something we only use when it is convenient, we need to ask ourselves what we are actually protecting.

So when we stand together and ask:

“What does democracy look like?”

Perhaps the answer is not simply in what Parliament does. Perhaps it is in whether we continue to speak up. Whether we continue to question. Whether we continue to participate and whether we continue to expect those elected to represent us to listen.

Because democracy is not just the right to vote. It is the right to be heard.

Kia kaha!