Ahead of the release of a major yet contentious review of the functions of the Waitangi Tribunal, New Zealand First Minister and one of the tribunal’s strongest critics – Shane Jones – reveals to the Herald what he said during that inquiry. While the coalition attacks the tribunal amid claims

In May 2025, the Government announced a review of the legislation that governs the Waitangi Tribunal to see if the tribunal was meeting the original intent of the law. Jones has previously called the tribunal’s findings “scaremongering”, Act leader David Seymour said it was becoming “increasingly activist” and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has often rejected its findings.

During the coalition’s term in power, the tribunal’s findings have been particularly scathing. It has often referred to a fraying Māori-Crown relationship, Government policy breaching the Treaty of Waitangi, no consultation with Māori and, most recently, the potential to cause serious harm to Māori, including the potential loss of Māori lives, if the New Zealand First-led Treaty principles review goes ahead.

The Waitangi Tribunal was established in 1975 to review contemporary claims of grievances – instances of the Crown breaching the Treaty. In 1985, this mandate was expanded to include historical claims, which eventually paved the way for iwi settlements.

Since 2015, the tribunal has undertaken “kaupapa inquiries” – investigations into nationally significant issues that affect Māori as a whole (rather than a geographic area), such as rights and interest in water, Māori treatment in the justice system or legislation like the Treaty Principles Bill. The Waitangi Tribunal is the country’s only formal watchdog for breaches of the Treaty by the Crown.

Jones told the inquiry that Māori Land Court judges were spending too much time “entangled” in the Waitangi Tribunal and should be back in the court administrating Māori land.

“The resources represented by the Māori Land Court judges need to be diverted back to the Māori Land Court, because the economic taproot for many of our rural Māori communities is land,” he said.

He said there should be a broader range of people chairing hearings “to change the mindset surrounding the Waitangi Tribunal”, including “suitably qualified laypeople” such as lawyers or demographers – “just as we are able to do through fast-track.”

The Fast-track Approvals Act 2024 enabled a swift approval system for consents, applications or permits for different projects, including mining, infrastructure and housing. It is controversial for some – including different Māori groups. In a submission to a parliamentary select committee, the Māori Law Society said the scheme diminished Māori rights by concentrating power within the Government and shifting from a consultation to a notification model.

Labour and Te Pāti Māori both support the Waitangi Tribunal in its current structure but disagree on how influential its findings should be. Te Pāti Māori said the tribunal’s findings should be binding.

“The Waitangi Tribunal can investigate, hear evidence and make findings, but governments can just simply ignore them,” party co-leader Rawiri Waititi said.

“Our answer is simple. We will ensure that we put mechanisms in place to strengthen the institutions that uphold Te Tiriti [the Treaty] instead of allowing others to weaken them.”

Waititi accused the Government of attacking the watchdog that exposed its Treaty breaches, rather than addressing the breaches.

Labour MP Willie Jackson said the party had the “upmost respect” for the Waitangi Tribunal, but its findings should not be made binding because “you would wreck the country financially”.

Jackson referred to iwi settlements where the actual losses or the value of the land loss far exceed the value of the settlement.

For example, around 34.5 million acres (almost 14 million hectares) of Ngāi Tahu land in the South Island was passed from the Māori to the Crown in the 19th century by dubious and contested means. The economic loss from this was around $20 billion but the value of the 1998 settlement between Ngāi Tahu and the Crown was $170 million.

“It’s hugely beneficial what they have done and the influence they have had on society – we just don’t know the fiscal ramifications,” Jackson said.

“There is no doubt the tribunal will make the right decisions in terms of injustices.”

Jones said his experience with these issues goes back to 1980s.

“I find myself, as I would say, as Parliament’s most experienced MP on these matters.”

“We have got a contest of wills: those of us who track our mandate back to the election result and the tribunal and hapū leaders and the lawyers who believe their mandate is the existence of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.”

Jones said New Zealand First would campaign on this vision for the Waitangi Tribunal in the election – continuing similar efforts at the last election, which were then baked into the party’s 2023 coalition agreement with National. This committed the Government to amending legislation to “refocus the scope, purpose and nature” of the tribunal’s inquiries “back to the original intent” of the legislation.

“The party is working through the final stages of our manifesto – take it from me, there will definitely be policies that we will campaign on pertaining to the future roles of the Waitangi Tribunal,” Jones said.

“We will take those forward and see a mandate from the electorate.”

Asked if his view of the tribunal was shaped by the tribunal’s negative findings on many Government policies, Jones said he, like all ministers, often encountered opposition.

“I encounter it in mining, I encounter it in fast-track, God knows I encountered it in recreational fisheries. But to transform that into some capital offence under the Treaty of Waitangi I resent,” he said.

“I say to my critics – a pig’s tail is never straight.”

Julia Gabel is a Wellington-based political reporter. She joined the Herald in 2020 and has most recently focused on data journalism.