New Zealand lawmakers reject bill to redefine country’s founding Waitangi Treaty

New Zealand lawmakers reject bill to redefine country’s founding Waitangi Treaty
Members of Parliament celebrate as the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi bill was rejected by Parliament in a 112 to 11 vote in Wellington, New Zealand, Thursday, April 10, 2025. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 10 April 2025
Follow

New Zealand lawmakers reject bill to redefine country’s founding Waitangi Treaty

New Zealand lawmakers reject bill to redefine country’s founding Waitangi Treaty
  • The Treaty guides the relationship between the government and Māori, with its meaning established through decades of legislation and court rulings
  • The bill sought to end the 185-year conversation about the Treaty’s meaning by enacting in law particular definitions for each clause and specifying that any rights should apply to all New Zealanders

WELLINGTON: New Zealand lawmakers dealt an overwhelming defeat Thursday to a controversial proposed law seeking to redefine the country’s founding treaty between Māori tribes and the British Crown.
The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi bill was rejected by Parliament in a 112 to 11 vote in Wellington, halting its progress to a third and final vote. Cheers and applause erupted before lawmakers and the public sang a waiata — a traditional Māori song — after the result was announced.
The sweeping reinterpretation of the 1840 treaty signed by British representatives and 500 Māori chiefs during New Zealand’s colonization was never expected to become law. But the measures provoked a fraught debate about Indigenous rights and last November prompted the biggest race relations protest in the country’s history.
But its defeat did not spell the end for scrutiny of Māori rights in New Zealand law.
What is the Treaty of Waitangi?
The Treaty guides the relationship between the government and Māori, with its meaning established through decades of legislation and court rulings. It promised tribes broad rights to retain their lands and protect their interests in return for ceding governance to the British.
But two versions of the document were signed – one in English and one in Māori — and while both promised Māori the rights and privileges of British citizens, the documents differed on what authority the chiefs were ceding. Crown breaches of both created steep disenfranchisement for Māori, who still face stark inequities.
Since an Indigenous protest movement surged in the 1970s, Treaty considerations have been a growing part of New Zealand law. Redress efforts have bolstered a dwindling Māori language and culture — now experiencing a resurgence — and resulted in billion-dollar settlements for stolen Māori land.
What did the Treaty Principles Bill say?
The bill sought to end the 185-year conversation about the Treaty’s meaning by enacting in law particular definitions for each clause and specifying that any rights should apply to all New Zealanders. Its author — libertarian lawmaker David Seymour, who is Māori – has decried what he said were special rights and privileges on the basis of race.
In his speech to lawmakers Thursday, Seymour said New Zealanders should all have “the same rights and duties.”
He urged lawmakers outside his party to break ranks and endorse the bill. None did.
What did opponents say?
Parliamentary opposition leader Chris Hipkins lambasted the bill as “a stain on this country” and accused its supporters of spreading “the myth of Māori special privilege.” He cited the disadvantage of Māori on almost every metric — including higher rates of poverty and ill-health and lower life expectancy.
The Treaty of Waitangi “is not about racial privilege or racial superiority,” said opposition lawmaker Willie Jackson. “It is and always has been about legal rights Māori have in their contract with the Crown.”
Parliament received 300,000 written submissions from members of the public — more than a proposed law had ever received before — 90 percent of them opposed to the measures.
“This bill has been absolutely annihilated,” said Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke, an opposition lawmaker from Te Pāti Māori, the Māori political party.
Maipi-Clarke faces disciplinary proceedings at Parliament for her protest of the bill’s first vote last November, when she tore up a copy of the measures while performing a haka — a Māori chant of challenge — as she and colleagues walked toward Seymour. The lawmakers refused to attend a hearing on their conduct this month, because they said Parliament does not respect tikanga — Māori cultural protocols.
Why did the measures get so far?
Despite its unpopularity, the proposed law passed its first vote due to a quirk of New Zealand’s political system that allows tiny parties to negotiate outsized influence for their agendas.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon agreed his lawmakers would endorse the bill at its first reading to fulfil a political deal with Seymour that handed Luxon power. Without enough seats to govern after the 2023 election, Luxon negotiated support from two minor parties, including Seymour’s, in return for political concessions.
They included Luxon’s early support for the Treaty Principles bill, although the New Zealand leader always said he would later oppose it. Luxon’s opponents on Thursday derided his political dealings.
What happens next?
The Treaty Principles Bill was not the only measure Luxon agreed to that will scrutinize the Treaty’s influence on New Zealand law and policy. Another of Seymour’s initiatives, already enacted, directed public agencies to stop targeting policies to specifically redress Māori inequities.
Luxon also agreed to consider and either replace or repeal mentions of the Treaty of Waitangi throughout most New Zealand laws.


Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, aid official says

Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, aid official says
Updated 16 sec ago
Follow

Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, aid official says

Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, aid official says
  • More than 3.5 million children in Afghanistan will suffer from acute malnutrition this year, an increase of 20 percent from 2024

Afghan children will die because of US funding cuts, an aid agency official said Tuesday.
The warning follows the cancelation of foreign aid contracts by President Donald Trump’s administration, including to Afghanistan where more than half of the population needs humanitarian assistance to survive.
Action Against Hunger initially stopped all US-funded activities in March after the money dried up suddenly. But it kept the most critical services going in northeastern Badakhshan province and the capital Kabul through its own budget, a measure that stopped this month.
Its therapeutic feeding unit in Kabul is empty and closing this week. There are no patients, and staff contracts are ending because of the US funding cuts.
“If we don’t treat children with acute malnutrition there is a very high risk of (them) dying,” Action Against Hunger’s country director, Cobi Rietveld, told The Associated Press. “No child should die because of malnutrition. If we don’t fight hunger, people will die of hunger. If they don’t get medical care, there is a high risk of dying. They don’t get medical care, they die.”
More than 3.5 million children in Afghanistan will suffer from acute malnutrition this year, an increase of 20 percent from 2024. Decades of conflict — including the 20-year US war with the Taliban — as well as entrenched poverty and climate shocks have contributed to the country’s humanitarian crisis.
Last year, the United States provided 43 percent of all international humanitarian funding to Afghanistan.
Rietveld said there were other nongovernmental organizations dealing with funding cuts to Afghanistan. “So when we cut the funding, there will be more children who are going to die of malnutrition.”
The children who came to the feeding unit often could not walk or even crawl. Sometimes they were unable to eat because they didn’t have the energy. All the services were provided free of charge, including three meals a day.
Rietveld said children would need to be referred to other places, where there was less capacity and technical knowledge.
Dr. Abdul Hamid Salehi said Afghan mothers were facing a crisis. Poverty levels among families meant it was impossible to treat severely malnourished children in private clinics.
“People used to come to us in large numbers, and they are still hoping and waiting for this funding to be found again or for someone to sponsor us so that we can resume our work and start serving patients once more.”


Magnitude 5.6 earthquake strikes Hindu Kush region, Afghanistan, EMSC says

Magnitude 5.6 earthquake strikes Hindu Kush region, Afghanistan, EMSC says
Updated 8 min 56 sec ago
Follow

Magnitude 5.6 earthquake strikes Hindu Kush region, Afghanistan, EMSC says

Magnitude 5.6 earthquake strikes Hindu Kush region, Afghanistan, EMSC says
  • EMSC first reported the quake at a magnitude of 6.4

KABUL: An earthquake of magnitude 5.6 struck the Hindu Kush region in Afghanistan on Wednesday, the European-Mediterranean Seismological Center (EMSC) said.
The quake was at a depth of 121 km (75 miles), EMSC said, and the epicenter 164 km east of Baghlan, a city with a population of about 108,000.
EMSC first reported the quake at a magnitude of 6.4.

 


US plans to use tariff negotiations to isolate China, WSJ reports

US plans to use tariff negotiations to isolate China, WSJ reports
Updated 16 April 2025
Follow

US plans to use tariff negotiations to isolate China, WSJ reports

US plans to use tariff negotiations to isolate China, WSJ reports
  • US officials plan to use negotiations with more than 70 nations to ask them to disallow China to ship goods through their countries and prevent Chinese firms from being located in their territories to avoid US tariffs

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump administration plans to use ongoing tariff negotiations to pressure US trading partners to limit their dealings with China, The Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday citing people with knowledge of the conversations.
US officials plan to use negotiations with more than 70 nations to ask them to disallow China to ship goods through their countries and prevent Chinese firms from being located in their territories to avoid US tariffs, the report added.

 


UNICEF projects 20 percent drop in 2026 funding after US cuts

UNICEF projects 20 percent drop in 2026 funding after US cuts
Updated 4 min 10 sec ago
Follow

UNICEF projects 20 percent drop in 2026 funding after US cuts

UNICEF projects 20 percent drop in 2026 funding after US cuts
  • UNICEF has implemented some efficiency measures but “more cost-cutting steps will be required,” said the spokesperson

UNITED NATIONS: UNICEF has projected that its 2026 budget will shrink by at least 20 percent compared to 2024, a spokesperson for the UN children’s agency said on Tuesday, after US President Donald Trump slashed global humanitarian aid.
In 2024, UNICEF had a budget of $8.9 billion and this year it has an estimated budget of $8.5 billion. The funding for 2025 is “evolving,” the UNICEF spokesperson said.
“The last few weeks have made clear that humanitarian and development organizations around the world, including many UN organizations, are in the midst of a global funding crisis. UNICEF has not been spared,” said the spokesperson.
UNICEF did not specifically name the US, but Washington has long been the agency’s largest donor, contributing more than $800 million in 2024. Since UNICEF was established in 1946, all its executive directors have been American.
“At the moment, we are working off preliminary projections that our financial resources will be, at a minimum, 20 percent less, organization wide, in 2026 compared to 2024,” said the UNICEF spokesperson.
Since returning to office in January for a second term, Trump’s administration has cut billions of dollars in foreign assistance in a review that aimed to ensure programs align with his “America First” foreign policy.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said last week that it will cut 20 percent of its staff as it faces a shortfall of $58 million, after its largest donor, the United States, cut funding.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres also last month said he is seeking ways to improve efficiency and cut costs as the world body turns 80 this year amid a cash crisis.
UNICEF has implemented some efficiency measures but “more cost-cutting steps will be required,” said the spokesperson.
“We are looking at every aspect of our operation, including staffing, with the goal of focusing on what truly matters for children: that children survive and thrive,” the spokesperson said. “But no final decisions have been taken.”


Justice Department can cut funding for legal guidance for people facing deportation, US judge says

Justice Department can cut funding for legal guidance for people facing deportation, US judge says
Updated 16 April 2025
Follow

Justice Department can cut funding for legal guidance for people facing deportation, US judge says

Justice Department can cut funding for legal guidance for people facing deportation, US judge says
  • The main reason for falling prey to immigration scams is the lack of legitimate legal help, said immigrants at the hearing

A federal judge has allowed the US Department of Justice to temporarily stop funding legal education programs for people facing deportation or immigration court while a lawsuit brought by the organizations that provide the service moves forward in court.
The decision from US District Judge Randolph D. Moss in Washington, D.C., means a coalition of nonprofit groups that offer the education programs will lose their federal funding on Wednesday – and possibly, some access to potential clients inside detention centers.
Unlike criminal cases, people in immigration courts and detention centers don’t have a right to an attorney if they can’t afford one themselves. Proponents of the legal education programs say they ease the burden on immigration judges and help immigrants navigate the complicated court system more efficiently.
Congress allocates $29 million a year for four programs — the Legal Orientation Program, the Immigration Court Helpdesk, the Family Group Legal Orientation and the Counsel for Children Initiative — and those groups spread the funding to subcontractors nationwide.
The Justice Department first instructed the nonprofit groups to “stop work immediately” on the programs on Jan. 22, citing an executive order from President Donald Trump targeting illegal immigration.
The nonprofit groups about a week later, and the Justice Department then rescinded the stop-work order. But on April 11, the agency said it was terminating its contracts with the groups nationwide, effective at 12:01 a.m. on April 16.
During a hearing Tuesday afternoon, Moss told attorneys on both sides that he wanted more information about exactly how the Department of Justice came to its decision to end the contracts, any plans for spending the earmarked money in the future, as well as any problems the nonprofit groups run into as they try to provide legal information to detained non-citizens in the coming weeks.
The judge also said he wanted to issue a final decision in the case quickly, and set a hearing for a preliminary injunction and possible final decision for May 14.
A few blocks away from the federal immigration courts in New York City, a leader of the one affected program testified at a city council hearing on immigration fraud.
“We’re often the first attorneys people are able to speak to about their immigration cases,” said Hannah Strauss, an immigration lawyer who supervises a team triaging cases Supervising Attorney of the Immigration Court Helpdesk run by Catholic Charities.
New York state is one of only six states in the US where more than half of immigrants are represented by an attorney in pending immigration cases, according to government data compiled by Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. That’s thanks in part to state and city grants, as well as a large pool of lawyers who volunteer. But federal funding forms an important part of the system.
Strauss said the $1.2 million federal grant covering New York covered the helpdesk, a skeleton crew relied upon by other NGOs to screen immigration referrals and by immigration judges to explain the basics on laws regarding asylum and other forms of legal immigration.
“Unfortunately today marks the final day of both ICH and FGLOP, as the federal government has chosen to terminate our contracts as of midnight tonight,” Strauss, referring to her organization and the Family Group Legal Orientation Program, run by Acacia Center for Justice.
The main reason for falling prey to immigration scams is the lack of legitimate legal help, said immigrants at the hearing. The immigrants testified without using their names, citing fear they could become targets of Immigration and Customs Enforcement for speaking out, but details they shared were representative of cases that have been investigated by federal prosecutors, costing immigrants thousands of dollars and sometimes ruining their cases.In the hearing, the city council discussed ways to crack down on immigration service providers advertising exaggerated or outright fraudulent services.
For example, it’s considering increasing funding for civil enforcement of business laws through the city’s consumer protection department. The agency uses investigators, sometimes undercover, to investigate violations that can lead to civil penalties, or referrals to criminal prosecutors.