Public acceptability. The Sealord deal demonstrates no Crown recognition of the importance of achieving a general understanding of the requirements of the Treaty in 1993. The deal was concluded in haste and secrecy; there was no public discussion, no public education campaign, no opportunity for public input, and little understanding by parliamentarians of the Act they were passing.181 Further, there was no attempt to explain the findings principal plaintiffs will shine forth as some of the great lights of their people (New Zealand Parliamentary Debates Vol 532,1992: 12842). 179 New Zealand Parliamentary Debates Vol 532,1992: 12951. 180 New Zealand Parliamentary Debates Vol 532,1992: 12951. 181 Government MPs, in particular, demonstrated a woeful ignorance of the Treaty and the Sealord deal in the debate on the passage of the Settlement Act. The Caucus generally has made little effort to get on top of the issues and has not turned up for Treaty briefings: F X’Xxxxxxxx “Simple solution to Sealord problem was always highly improbable”, The National Business Review, 11 December 1992, 11. The taking of urgency is also of concern. As Xxxxx Xxxxxx said in Parliament, much consultation may have taken place, but “because of the widespread confusion, anger, and misconceptions that are abroad, if all the various interest groups do not have the chance to make submissions and to be heard, justice will not be done”: New Zealand Parliamentary Debates Vol 532, 1992: 12937. There are also unresolved constitutional issues relating to parliamentary ratification of Treaty settlements, as Xxxxxx explains: SEALORD DEAL 419 of the Waitangi Tribunal,182 and the need for a Treaty claims settlement, and after the settlement, no effort to clarify its implications.183 Treaty claims settlement, in general, is shrouded by misconception and misunderstanding.184 The Crown has sought to bypass the issues with a minimum of fuss.185 This is no basis for the people of New Zealand to work carefully through the structural and attitudinal changes which the Treaty requires in 1993. It is facilitative of instant, chequebook answers, not real solutions which shift power and resources. “Political acceptability” is only a function of understanding; it should not be used to fob Maori claimants off with less than the Treaty requires. There must be a Crown commitment to build public acceptance of the Treaty of Waitangi.
