---
title: "PF135 · Captured AI answers"
publisher: "Onsomble Limited"
publication: "NZBrands.ai"
edition: 1
collected_on: "2026-10-05"
html_url: "https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/questions/cf0650f9-b643-4e1d-9c5a-f14fd006e3dd/"
---

# PF135 · Captured AI answers

Edition 1 · answers collected 5 October 2026.

[Read on NZBrands.ai](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/questions/cf0650f9-b643-4e1d-9c5a-f14fd006e3dd/)

## Question

For the 2026 New Zealand general election: How do parties differ on Te Tiriti, Māori-Crown relations and racial discrimination?

Question ID: cf0650f9-b643-4e1d-9c5a-f14fd006e3dd. Report reference: PF135.

Issue: Te Tiriti and Māori-Crown relations. Voter: No voter described.

[Source record (JSON)](https://nzbrands.ai/data/nz-election-2026/editions/1/answers/cf0650f9-b643-4e1d-9c5a-f14fd006e3dd.json)

## How to read this evidence

The answers below are shown as the assistants gave them, not a verified account or NZBrands.ai voting advice. They may contain errors or outdated claims. A recorded source association is not necessarily a link shown to the reader.

Captured 5 October 2026. 4 answers were saved for this question. Missing answers have not been filled in.

[Study methodology and limitations](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/method.md)

## ChatGPT · asked nationally

Answer ID: e7789cdf-22ef-4069-8960-d2dc763a3bee. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

As of **5 October 2026**, the major parties are quite far apart on this question. The central divide is whether **Te Tiriti should be an active constitutional framework shaping government**, or primarily a historical founding agreement whose modern legal effects should be limited and applied equally to everyone.

| Party | Te Tiriti | Māori–Crown relationship | Racial discrimination / equality |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Te Pāti Māori** | Wants Te Tiriti at the centre of constitutional arrangements; supports stronger rangatiratanga and entrenchment. | Māori should have substantially greater authority and decision-making power alongside the Crown. | Supports Māori-specific rights and institutions where they arise from Te Tiriti and Māori collective rights. |
| **Green Party** | Strongly pro-Te Tiriti; wants it at the heart of government and constitutional reform. | Emphasises genuine Crown–Māori partnership and rangatiratanga of iwi/hapū. | Supports targeted measures to address Māori inequity, viewing equal treatment as sometimes requiring different treatment to achieve equity. |
| **Labour** | Supports Te Tiriti as a founding document and opposes reducing its role. | Wants a partnership model and greater Māori participation/leadership in areas affecting Māori. | Supports equity-oriented Māori policies and rejects the idea that Te Tiriti-based measures are simply racial discrimination. |
| **National** | Recognises Te Tiriti as a founding document but favours a more limited and clearly defined role for Treaty principles in legislation. | Emphasises Crown sovereignty and equal citizenship, while maintaining existing Treaty settlements and engagement with iwi. | Generally stresses equal treatment regardless of ethnicity; its government has removed or reduced several Māori-specific mechanisms. |
| **ACT** | Wants Treaty principles defined narrowly in law and constitutional arrangements changed toward equal citizenship and parliamentary sovereignty. | Rejects an ongoing partnership model that gives Māori distinct political authority beyond specifically settled Treaty rights. | Strongly “one law for all”: opposes race-based legal distinctions and argues everyone should have equal rights before the law. |
| **NZ First** | Wants substantially less institutional influence for Te Tiriti and Treaty-related bodies. | Wants Crown authority and Parliament's sovereignty clearly paramount; proposes abolishing the Waitangi Tribunal and replacing it with a settlement-completion body. | Strongly colour-blind approach: equal rights irrespective of race and opposition to race-based political arrangements, including the Māori electorates. |

### The key differences

**1. What does Te Tiriti actually mean for today's government?**

The **Greens, Te Pāti Māori and Labour** broadly see Te Tiriti as a *living constitutional commitment*. They argue that the Crown's obligations extend beyond historical Treaty settlements and should influence how government makes decisions today. The Greens, for example, explicitly say government structures should uphold the **rangatiratanga of iwi and hapū**. [Manifesto 2026 - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

**National, ACT and NZ First** put considerably more emphasis on **parliamentary sovereignty and equal citizenship**. National still describes Te Tiriti as a founding document, but its government has been systematically reducing or clarifying Treaty references in legislation. In May 2026 it announced changes to 19 Acts: seven Treaty references would be removed and ten would be limited to obligations no stronger than “take into account”. [Ensuring Treaty references are consistent | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/20260515-honpaulgoldsmith-treaty?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

ACT goes further. Its 2026 policy proposes constitutional principles stating that Parliament is sovereign, the rule of law is fundamental and **all New Zealanders are equal before the law**. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/one-law-for-all-with-one-future-together?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

### 2. Partnership versus sovereignty

This is probably the biggest conceptual difference.

**Labour/Greens/Te Pāti Māori** generally use the language of **partnership, rangatiratanga and shared decision-making**. Labour, for example, says decisions affecting Māori should be made in partnership with Māori and has committed to greater Māori leadership in education. [Release: Labour will partner with Māori in education](https://www.labour.org.nz/news/release-labour-will-partner-with-maori-in-education/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

**National/ACT/NZ First** place greater weight on **Crown/Parliamentary sovereignty**. National has supported Treaty settlements and consultation with iwi, but its current direction is toward making Treaty obligations more specific rather than allowing broad Treaty principles to generate new governmental obligations. [Ensuring Treaty references are consistent | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/20260515-honpaulgoldsmith-treaty?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

ACT's position is especially explicit: its proposed Treaty principles say the government has full power to govern and Parliament has full power to make laws, while Māori Treaty rights that differ from everyone's rights would be confined to rights recognised through historical Treaty settlements. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/over-300000-treaty-principles-submissions-and-not-a-glove-laid-on-equal-rights?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

### 3. What counts as racial discrimination?

This is where superficially similar statements—“everyone is equal”—lead to very different policies.

**ACT and NZ First** use a largely **colour-blind equality** concept: the law should not confer different rights or privileges according to ancestry. ACT's proposed Treaty principles explicitly guarantee equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/speech-treaty-principles-bill-second-reading?utm_source=chatgpt.com) NZ First similarly describes its philosophy as **“one people, one law”** and a “colourblind state.” ["Power to the People" - Winston Peters - State of the Nation 2026 - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/power_to_the_people_sotn_2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

That position leads them to oppose things such as Māori-specific political representation. NZ First is campaigning for a **binding referendum on the Māori seats** at the 2026 election. [New Zealand First to Campaign for Referendum on Māori Seats - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/nz_first_to_campaign_for_referendum_on_maori_seats?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

The **Greens, Te Pāti Māori and Labour** make a different distinction: **equal treatment isn't necessarily the same as identical treatment**. Their argument is that Māori-specific measures can be legitimate where they reflect Te Tiriti obligations, collective Māori rights, or attempts to remedy demonstrable inequities. The Greens' current programme explicitly links Te Tiriti, rangatiratanga and addressing the consequences of Crown breaches. [Manifesto 2026 - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

So the disagreement isn't simply *“for or against equality.”* **Both sides claim equality as a principle; they disagree about what substantive equality requires and whether collective rights can legitimately differ by whakapapa.**

### 4. Where National sits between the two camps

National is worth treating separately from ACT and NZ First.

It has **not adopted ACT's Treaty Principles Bill as its own constitutional position**. National refused to support that bill beyond its first reading, and the bill was ultimately defeated in Parliament with ACT alone supporting it. [Treaty Principles Bill voted down amid fiery MP debate](https://www.1news.co.nz/2025/04/10/treaty-principles-bill-voted-down-amid-fiery-mp-debate/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

But National's government has nonetheless moved policy in a direction closer to the **equal-treatment/limited-Treaty-effects** side: among other changes, it removed section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act, removed ethnicity/race as explicit health-prioritisation factors, ended compulsory Treaty education, and changed Māori-ward arrangements. [Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi | The Spinoff](https://thespinoff.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

That makes National's position somewhat different from both Labour and ACT: **it accepts Te Tiriti's foundational status but is seeking narrower, more predictable legal consequences from it.**

### 5. NZ First is now proposing the most extensive institutional rollback

NZ First's September 2026 policy goes beyond opposition to new Treaty-based arrangements. It proposes **abolishing the Waitangi Tribunal**, replacing it with a Treaty of Waitangi Completion Commission intended to finish historical claims before 2008. It also proposes returning Crown–Māori relations to the Ministry of Māori Development. [Ending the Waitangi Make-Work Industry - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/ending_the_waitangi_make_work_industry?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

That's a substantially different conception of the Crown–Māori relationship from the Greens or Te Pāti Māori, which see Treaty institutions and rangatiratanga as part of an ongoing constitutional relationship.

### In one sentence

The spectrum is roughly:

**Te Pāti Māori → Greens → Labour → National → ACT → NZ First**

with the important caveat that this is **not a ranking**—it represents a shift from **Te Tiriti-centred constitutional partnership and Māori collective authority** toward **individual equal citizenship, parliamentary sovereignty and a colour-blind state**. The parties overlap considerably on some practical matters, particularly honouring completed Treaty settlements and opposing outright racial prejudice.

The most important thing to watch in the 2026 election is therefore **not whether a party says it supports equality or respects Te Tiriti**, but **what legal and constitutional consequences it thinks those principles should have**. [Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi | The Spinoff](https://thespinoff.nz/atea/25-08-2026/where-political-parties-stand-on-te-tiriti-o-waitangi?utm_source=chatgpt.com)

**End captured answer**

## Gemini · asked nationally

Answer ID: 89fb4142-a738-4131-a060-8ced1c05ee0d. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

In New Zealand politics, the interpretation and application of **Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi), Māori-Crown relations, and racial discrimination** represent some of the most sharply contested ideological fault lines. Parties span a wide spectrum, ranging from those seeking constitutional transformation based on indigenous rights to those advocating for a strictly race-neutral approach to citizenship and governance.

---

### 1. Te Pāti Māori, The Green Party, and Labour (The Left / Indigenous-Centric Approach)
Parties on this side of the spectrum view Te Tiriti o Waitangi as a foundational constitutional document establishing a partnership between the Crown and tangata whenua (indigenous people). 

* **Te Tiriti & Constitutional Reform:** Te Pāti Māori advocates for expansive reforms, including implementing the *Mātike Mai* constitutional transformation model, creating a Te Tiriti Commission with enforcement powers, and making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations legally binding. The Greens and Labour generally support strengthening Te Tiriti compliance across public services, protecting Māori rights, and upholding indigenous governance frameworks.
* **Māori-Crown Relations:** Strongly favor co-governance arrangements, partnership models in resource management (such as water and conservation), and dedicated funding for Māori-led social initiatives to close persistent socioeconomic and health disparities.
* **Racial Discrimination & Equity:** They view systemic and institutional racism as primary drivers of inequity in health, education, and the justice system. They support targeted interventions, anti-racism action plans, and specific measures (like Māori wards in local government and health authorities) to guarantee equitable outcomes rather than identical treatment.

---

### 2. National and New Zealand First (The Centre / Pragmatic & Traditional Approach)
These parties generally support honoring the historical settlement process and acknowledging Te Tiriti, but draw a firm line against modern co-governance models that they argue divide citizens based on ethnicity.

* **Te Tiriti:** National and NZ First maintain that the Treaty established the Crown's right to govern while protecting property rights and traditional customs, but they reject co-governance in public service delivery (such as health or water infrastructure), arguing that public services should be universal.
* **Māori-Crown Relations:** Focus heavily on local, practical partnerships and economic development rather than broad constitutional restructuring. They emphasize fixing socioeconomic gaps through mainstream delivery backed by performance targets, rather than race-based funding allocation.
* **Racial Discrimination & Equity:** Both parties emphasize "equality of citizenship"—the principle that all New Zealanders should have identical political and civil rights regardless of race. They are critical of race-based distinction or preferential allocation in public funding, arguing it risks deepening social division.

---

### 3. ACT New Zealand (The Libertarian / Race-Neutral Approach)
ACT takes a distinctively firm stance on constitutional and race relations, championing a strict interpretation of liberal individualism and universal civic equality.

* **Te Tiriti:** ACT has historically pushed to redefine or legally codify the principles of the Treaty through legislation (such as the debate surrounding the Treaty Principles Bill), seeking to legally anchor principles that define all citizens as having equal rights under the law, rather than distinct partnership rights for Māori.
* **Māori-Crown Relations:** Strongly opposed to co-governance, iwi-specific consultation mandates, and separate administrative bodies or authorities based on ethnicity. They advocate for dismantling race-based provisions across government departments.
* **Racial Discrimination & Equity:** ACT defines racial discrimination strictly as treating anyone differently based on their race—applying this critique not just to historic or interpersonal racism, but specifically to modern policies that allocate resources, voting structures (like Māori seats/wards), or public benefits by ethnicity. They argue true equality requires a completely "colorblind" state.

---

### Summary Comparison Table

| Party Bloc | View of Te Tiriti | Approach to Māori-Crown Relations | View on Equity & Discrimination |
| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |
| **Te Pāti Māori / Greens** | Foundational partnership; seeks constitutional transformation and legally binding obligations. | Active co-governance, self-determination, and indigenous-led solutions. | Systemic racism must be actively dismantled via targeted, equitable, and race-conscious policies. |
| **National / NZ First** | Historical settlement framework; rejects co-governance in public service delivery. | Practical, localized collaboration focused on measurable socioeconomic outcomes. | Focus on equal citizenship and universal public service delivery without ethnic separation. |
| **ACT New Zealand** | Seeks to replace current interpretations with strict legal definitions of equal individual rights. | Opposition to co-governance, separate representation, and race-based authorities. | Strict "colorblind" equality; views any race-based policy or distinction as a form of discrimination. |

---

*How do you see these different approaches impacting public services or local representation in your community?*

**End captured answer**

## Google AI Mode · asked nationally

Answer ID: e21014d4-2082-4df8-9927-aa91a13c279a. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

The interpretation and application of Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi), Māori-Crown relations, and public policy addressing racial equity and race-based provisions are major dividing lines among New Zealand political parties.

As outlined by analyses from platforms like The Spinoff and reporting by RNZ, the parties span a wide spectrum from advocating for deep constitutional transformation to pushing for a strict "one law for all" framework.

* * *

1\. Te Pāti Māori & The Green Party (Indigenous Rights & Constitutional Transformation)

 * * **Te Pāti Māori:** Advocates for sweeping constitutional transformation based on a bicultural partnership. According to their platform, Te Tiriti and _He Whakaputanga_ (Declaration of Independence) are foundational. They propose making Te Tiriti legally binding on the Crown, making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations binding (including on private land returns), and establishing an independent Te Tiriti Commission. They reject race-neutral public service delivery, arguing instead for self-determination and distinct mechanisms for Māori governance.

 * **Green Party:** Aligns closely with a tiriti-led constitutional framework. The Greens support strengthening the Waitangi Tribunal, incorporating Te Tiriti into local government and public service training, implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and enabling pathways for returning wrongfully alienated land. They generally support empowering iwi and hapū through shared decision-making models.

 *

2\. The Labour Party (Moderate / Restoration Approach)

 * * **Labour:** Takes a middle-ground centre-left approach. While Labour established certain co-governance frameworks (such as in health and water reforms) when last in government, their current platform focuses more moderately on restoring explicit Te Tiriti references and obligations in public sectors (like education) that were altered or removed by the current administration. Labour supports the Waitangi Tribunal but has explicitly ruled out making its findings binding, citing economic and practical caution. They oppose radical constitutional restructuring while committing to formal treaty principles of partnership and active protection.

 *

3\. The National Party (Pragmatic / Status Quo & Review)

 * * **National:** Leads the current centre-right government block, which has systematically reviewed and amended various pieces of legislation to redefine or remove broad references to "the principles of the Treaty" across public agencies. National has rolled back specific ethnicity-based criteria in sectors like health and removed select Te Reo Māori institutional names, favoring public service delivery based on measured need rather than co-governance models. However, National generally stops short of the harder abolitionist stances of its right-leaning coalition partners regarding historical settlements and the baseline existence of the Treaty settlement process.

 *

4\. ACT New Zealand & New Zealand First (Conservative / "One Law for All")

 * * **ACT Party:** Advocates for a strict race-neutral approach under the banner of "one law for all". ACT rejects the concept of an ongoing Crown-Māori partnership, arguing instead that the signing of Te Tiriti constituted a complete cession of sovereignty to the British Crown. Their policy centers on government support and public services being distributed strictly on individual need rather than race, and they have pushed to formally define treaty principles through legislative measures (such as the contentious Treaty Principles Bill) or wind down the Waitangi Tribunal once historical settlements are finalized.

 * **New Zealand First:** Takes a populist nationalist stance opposing separate administrative arrangements or co-governance structures based on ethnicity. NZ First has taken a hardline stance against the Waitangi Tribunal, with party rhetoric calling for its outright abolition, and similarly emphasizes equal civil rights for all citizens under a single legal standard. [NZ Herald]

**End captured answer**

## Google AI Overviews · asked nationally

Answer ID: 6d6c9bea-ed2b-453c-9175-440f78e25996. Captured 5 October 2026.

**Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified**

For the **2026 New Zealand general election** , political parties are sharply divided on Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi), Māori-Crown relations, and systemic vs. merit-based policies regarding racial discrimination. The political spectrum is broadly split into two camps: a governing center-right bloc looking to restrict Treaty interpretations and remove race-based provisions, and a left/Māori bloc advocating for Te Tiriti's constitutional entrenchment and systemic equity.

A direct comparison of how the main parties approach these issues highlights the stark differences:

Political Party| Position on Te Tiriti (Treaty of Waitangi)| Māori-Crown Relations| Approach to Racial Discrimination & Equity
---|---|---|---
**National Party**| Supports full and final historical Treaty settlements but opposes broad constitutional reinterpretation past the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill.| Promotes a "need, not race" framework; focused on practical regional development and Māori-Crown relations under Minister Tama Potaka.| Opposes race-targeted public funding; oversaw the removal of ethnicity as a prioritization factor in health care and government procurement quotas.
**ACT New Zealand**| Campaigns on strictly limiting Treaty interpretations; explicitly promises to **abolish the Waitangi Tribunal** once historical claims are finalized.| Advocates for "one public service for all"; wants to completely disestablish contemporary iwi co-governance mechanisms.| Views diversity quotas as reverse discrimination; introduced bills to entirely **end race-based hiring and merit exemptions** in the public service.
**New Zealand First**| Aligns closely with ACT; campaigns on reviewing Treaty clauses in legislation and vows to significantly scale back or scrap the Waitangi Tribunal's modern scope.| Rejects co-governance; seeks to hold a **binding referendum on keeping or abolishing the Māori seats** in Parliament.| Strongly opposes race-conscious targeting, labeling diversity and inclusion metrics in government agencies as "left-wing social engineering".
**Labour Party**| Vows to restore explicit Te Tiriti obligations removed by the coalition government but rules out calls for an independent Treaty commissioner.| Supports the existing role of the Waitangi Tribunal but opposes making its findings binding, arguing it would financially "wreck the country".| Focuses on addressing systemic disparities through targeted socio-economic support, while balancing a platform centered on broader cost-of-living and healthcare issues.
**Green Party**| Views Te Tiriti as a foundational promise of protection for whānau and the environment; heavily criticizes government rollbacks as breaches of Treaty duties.| Strongly supports co-governance, iwi/hapū political authority, and expanding the scope of the Waitangi Tribunal.| Advocates for structural changes to combat systemic racism, including using Te Tiriti as a base framework for disability and social welfare legislation.
**Te Pāti Māori**| Campaigns on major constitutional reform to **make Te Tiriti o Waitangi legally binding** and entrench it into lawmaking by 2040.| Demands a complete constitutional overhaul via a $220 million Mātike Mai fund to establish distinct rangatiratanga (Māori self-determination) frameworks.| Argues that "need and race are intertwined" in NZ; vehemently opposes the deletion of race-targeted data and public equity programs.

Key Legislative Flashpoints

The debate leading into the 2026 election is heavily shaped by the government's final sitting block, during which it introduced **three omnibus bills to standardise and amend references to Te Tiriti across 19 pieces of legislation**. Left-wing parties and Te Pāti Māori have condemned these legislative changes as systemic rollbacks of indigenous rights, while ACT and New Zealand First champion them as essential restorations of democratic equality and individual merit.

**End captured answer**

## Publication and corrections

Published and funded by Onsomble Limited. NZBrands.ai takes no view on any party or policy.

[Independence](https://nzbrands.ai/about/independence/) · [Corrections](https://nzbrands.ai/about/corrections/) · [Contact](https://nzbrands.ai/about/contact/)