Every question and original answer

For the 7 November 2026 New Zealand general election, the parties have significantly different views on Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the constitutional relationship between Māori and the Crown, and whether government should actively address racial and ethnic inequalities.

The central political divide is this:

• National, ACT and NZ First generally emphasise equal citizenship, equality before the law and public services based on individual need rather than ethnicity.
• Labour supports Te Tiriti partnership and targeted measures to address Māori disadvantage, but takes a more incremental approach to constitutional change.
• The Greens and Te Pāti Māori support a stronger constitutional role for Te Tiriti, greater Māori decision-making authority and more active measures to address historical and systemic inequalities.
• The Opportunity Party (TOP) sits broadly between Labour and the Greens, supporting stronger Treaty recognition without proposing the same degree of constitutional transformation.

Here is a breakdown of the seven main parties.

1. Party-by-party comparison

Based on published 2025–2026 policies and reported party positions, checked against material available in October 2026.

National Party

National Party

Te Tiriti

• Recognises Te Tiriti as a founding document of New Zealand.
• Emphasises Crown sovereignty and equal treatment of citizens.
• Has supported clarifying references to Treaty principles in legislation.
• Rejected ACT's Treaty Principles Bill beyond its first reading.

Māori-Crown relations

• Does not support the extent of co-governance arrangements pursued by the previous Labour government.
• Has overseen the disestablishment of Te Aka Whai Ora (Māori Health Authority).
• Has removed some statutory requirements recognising specific Crown obligations to Māori.

Racial discrimination and equality

• Emphasises equal treatment regardless of ethnicity.
• Removed race and ethnicity as explicit prioritisation factors in health care.
• Removed diversity quotas from government procurement.

Underlying approach: Equal citizenship and mainstream public services, with recognition of Te Tiriti but less emphasis on distinct Māori governance structures.

ACT New Zealand

ACT New Zealand

Te Tiriti

• Accepts Te Tiriti's historical significance but rejects interpretations that establish an ongoing Crown-Māori partnership involving different political or legal rights.
• Maintains that Māori chiefs ceded sovereignty to the British Crown.
• Advocates its One Law for All policy.

Māori-Crown relations

• Opposes co-governance as a general principle of government.
• Wants Parliament's sovereignty explicitly recognised.
• Supports protecting iwi and hapū rights recognised through Treaty settlements.
• Proposes limiting the circumstances in which courts can rely on tikanga Māori.

Racial discrimination and equality

• Strongly opposes race-based distinctions in public policy.
• Argues government assistance should be determined by need rather than ethnicity.
• Emphasises individual rights and equal treatment under the law.

Underlying approach: A common legal and political framework for all citizens, rather than a constitutional partnership between Māori and the Crown.

New Zealand First

New Zealand First

Te Tiriti

• Recognises Te Tiriti and existing Treaty settlements.
• Opposes what it describes as the expansion or mission creep of Treaty principles.
• Wants generic Treaty references in legislation replaced with specific statutory obligations or removed.

Māori-Crown relations

• Opposes co-governance and Treaty-based constitutional transformation.
• Supports existing Treaty settlements but resists extending Treaty principles into additional areas of government.
• Has advocated a referendum on the Māori electorates.

Racial discrimination and equality

• Emphasises services based on individual need rather than ethnicity.
• Opposes what it calls separatism and race-based divisions.
• Challenges explanations of contemporary social disadvantage that place primary emphasis on colonisation and historical grievances.

Underlying approach: Recognition of historical Treaty obligations and settlements, but opposition to extending Māori-specific political arrangements or legal frameworks.

Labour Party

New Zealand Labour Party

Te Tiriti

• Recognises Te Tiriti as New Zealand's founding document.
• Supports partnership, protection and participation.
• Opposes attempts to redefine or diminish Treaty principles.
• Campaigns to restore explicit Treaty obligations removed from areas such as education.

Māori-Crown relations

• Has previously introduced co-governance arrangements, including Three Waters.
• Established Te Aka Whai Ora.
• Supports Māori participation in decision-making and distinct approaches to addressing Māori disadvantage.
• Has not embraced the more extensive constitutional transformation advocated by Te Pāti Māori.

Racial discrimination and equality

• Supports addressing systemic inequalities affecting Māori.
• Has supported targeted Māori health and social services.
• Recognises that equal treatment does not necessarily mean identical treatment where different communities experience different barriers.

Underlying approach: A Treaty partnership within the existing constitutional system, combined with targeted measures to address historical and contemporary inequalities.

Green Party

Green Party

Te Tiriti

• Regards Te Tiriti and He Whakaputanga as foundational constitutional documents.
• Wants the Māori-language text of Te Tiriti to have authoritative legal status.
• Supports Treaty-based decision-making across government.

Māori-Crown relations

• Supports iwi and hapū exercising rangatiratanga.
• Wants Māori to participate as constitutional partners, rather than merely being consulted.
• Supports stronger Waitangi Tribunal powers.
• Wants Treaty settlements reformed to better recognise hapū authority.
• Supports additional avenues for returning land that was wrongfully alienated.

Racial discrimination

• Recognises systemic and institutional racism as issues requiring active government intervention.
• Supports Māori-led approaches to health, education and social services.
• Supports policies addressing structural inequalities rather than relying exclusively on formally identical treatment.

Underlying approach: Transforming government institutions to reflect Te Tiriti partnership, Māori self-determination and active redress of historical injustices.

The party's detailed position is in its 2026 manifesto.

Te Pāti Māori

Te Pāti Māori

Te Tiriti

• Makes Te Tiriti the foundation of its constitutional vision.
• Wants Te Tiriti entrenched in New Zealand's constitutional arrangements.
• Has identified constitutional entrenchment as a bottom line in potential government negotiations.

Māori-Crown relations

• Supports mana motuhake (Māori self-determination).
• Wants binding Waitangi Tribunal recommendations.
• Proposes a Parliamentary Commissioner for Te Tiriti.
• Wants every new bill to include a Treaty impact statement.
• Supports returning land and increasing Māori political authority.
• Proposes longer-term constitutional changes, including a Māori Parliament.

Racial discrimination

• Sees institutional and systemic racism as requiring structural change.
• Supports Māori-specific decision-making and services.
• Argues that Māori rights under Te Tiriti are not simply ethnic privileges but obligations arising from the Treaty.
• Supports stronger Māori control over decisions affecting Māori communities.

Underlying approach: A fundamental reorganisation of the relationship between Māori and the Crown, based on rangatiratanga, mana motuhake and constitutional recognition of Te Tiriti.

The Opportunity Party (TOP)

The Opportunity Party

Te Tiriti

• Supports strengthening the role of Te Tiriti.
• Opposed ACT's Treaty Principles Bill.
• Supports honouring existing Treaty settlements.
• Supports restoring previous customary marine title settings.

Māori-Crown relations

• Supports greater Māori autonomy in health and justice services.
• Supports iwi-led approaches to resource management.
• Supports better recognition of Māori participation in constitutional discussions.

Racial discrimination

• Generally supports addressing structural disadvantage.
• Supports Māori-led service delivery where it improves outcomes.
• Emphasises equitable opportunities rather than simply identical treatment.

Underlying approach: Strengthening Treaty recognition and Māori autonomy while retaining a more incremental approach to constitutional reform than the Greens or Te Pāti Māori.

2. Comparing the parties across the three issues

The following table summarises the differences.

Party	Te Tiriti's constitutional role	Māori-Crown relationship	Approach to racial inequality
National	Founding document; Crown sovereignty	Limited co-governance	Equal treatment; needs-based services
ACT	Primarily historical significance; parliamentary sovereignty	Opposes ongoing partnership arrangements	Strongly against race-based distinctions
NZ First	Recognises Treaty and settlements; opposes expanding principles	Opposes co-governance	Needs-based rather than ethnicity-based
Labour	Foundational document; partnership	Supports participation and some co-governance	Targeted action on systemic inequalities
Greens	Constitutional foundation; stronger legal status	Partnership and rangatiratanga	Structural action against systemic racism
Te Pāti Māori	Central constitutional foundation	Self-determination and constitutional transformation	Māori-led solutions and structural change
TOP	Strengthened Treaty recognition	Greater Māori autonomy and participation	Equity and targeted approaches

3. The biggest disagreements explained

There are three particularly important questions separating the parties.

A. Does Te Tiriti establish an ongoing partnership?

This is arguably the biggest constitutional disagreement.

• ACT and NZ First: Reject the idea that Te Tiriti establishes an ongoing partnership requiring separate political or governance arrangements.
• National: Recognises Te Tiriti but emphasises Crown sovereignty and equal citizenship.
• Labour: Supports an ongoing partnership, but within the existing constitutional system.
• Greens: Wants partnership reflected more substantially in government structures and decision-making.
• Te Pāti Māori: Wants the relationship fundamentally transformed, with Māori exercising greater independent political authority.
• TOP: Supports a stronger partnership but has not specified the full constitutional implications.

B. Should Māori receive distinct services and decision-making authority?

This is where the debate about co-governance and Māori-specific public services becomes important.

There are two competing approaches:

Needs-based universalism

ACT and NZ First particularly emphasise the idea that public services should be available according to individual circumstances and need, not ethnicity.

National broadly aligns with this approach.

Treaty-based equity and partnership

Labour, the Greens, Te Pāti Māori and TOP support various forms of Māori-specific participation, services or decision-making.

However, their positions differ considerably:

• Labour supports targeted services and some co-governance.
• TOP supports greater Māori autonomy in particular services.
• The Greens support wider Treaty-based decision-making.
• Te Pāti Māori advocates a much more extensive transfer of political authority.

C. Is racial equality achieved through identical treatment or addressing structural disadvantage?

This is an important distinction.

There are two different understandings of equality:

• Formal equality: Everyone is treated the same under the law, regardless of ethnicity.
• Substantive equality: Government recognises that different groups may experience different barriers and sometimes requires targeted action to achieve equitable outcomes.

ACT and NZ First place particularly strong emphasis on formal equality.

The Greens and Te Pāti Māori place much greater emphasis on substantive equality and addressing institutional and historical disadvantage.

Labour and TOP generally support elements of both approaches.

Importantly, opposition to race-based policies does not necessarily mean opposition to anti-discrimination law. Equally, support for Māori-specific policies does not necessarily mean support for unequal individual rights.

These are separate questions.

4. What has actually changed under the current government?

It is useful to distinguish party philosophies from actual government decisions.

Since the National-led coalition took office in 2023, significant changes have included:

• Disestablishment of the Māori Health Authority.
• Removal of section 7AA from the Oranga Tamariki Act.
• Changes to Treaty references in 19 pieces of legislation.
• Removal of ethnicity as an explicit health-care prioritisation factor.
• Local referendums on Māori wards.
• Changes to customary marine title legislation.
• Removal of compulsory Treaty education requirements.
• Introduction of ACT's Treaty Principles Bill, which National supported only through its first reading.

These changes reflect the coalition's direction, although many originated in ACT and NZ First coalition agreements rather than National's own original policy programme. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o WaitangiWhere political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi

5. Where to look more closely before voting

A few useful sources provide different perspectives:

• Green Party 2026 manifesto – detailed Treaty and Māori policy.
• The Spinoff: Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti – independent political journalism comparing the parties.
• Know Your Vote 2026 – non-partisan guide drawing on official party policies.
• Democracy Action's party comparison – a perspective focused on equal citizenship and parliamentary sovereignty.

Overall perspective

The most important distinction is not simply whether a party supports or opposes Te Tiriti.

It is what each party believes Te Tiriti requires of the modern New Zealand state.

The debate encompasses:

1. Whether Māori have a constitutional partnership with the Crown.
2. Whether rangatiratanga requires distinct Māori political authority.
3. Whether co-governance is an appropriate expression of Treaty obligations.
4. Whether targeted Māori services are necessary to achieve equitable outcomes.
5. Whether racial equality means identical treatment or addressing systemic disadvantage.

These are related but distinct questions. A party's position on one does not automatically establish its position on all the others.

For further comparison, you could explore Compare the parties on co-governance and Māori self-determination or Compare their policies on institutional racism and affirmative action.