ACT leader David Seymour has put the future of the Waitangi Tribunal squarely into the Election 2026 campaign, promising to strip it of its power to investigate contemporary Crown actions before eventually disestablishing the Tribunal altogether.
Under a four-part policy announced by ACT, the Tribunal would be restricted to completing eligible historical claims lodged by the statutory deadline of 1 September 2008.
Once those remaining historical claims were completed, ACT would amend the Treaty of Waitangi Act so the Tribunal would automatically cease to exist.
The policy represents one of the most substantial proposed changes to the Tribunal since its establishment more than half a century ago and would end the ability of Māori to bring new claims alleging contemporary breaches of Te Tiriti principles before the specialist body.
ACT SAYS THE HISTORICAL JOB MUST BE FINISHED
ACT says it remains committed to completing outstanding historical Treaty settlements and accepts that the Tribunal has played an important role in addressing past Crown injustices.
That includes grievances involving confiscated whenua and other breaches of property rights.
Seymour’s argument is that historical redress is a finite task and should ultimately be completed rather than used to justify maintaining the Tribunal permanently.
There is already a statutory distinction between historical and contemporary claims.
Historical claims concern Crown acts or omissions occurring before 21 September 1992 and, under existing legislation, had to be lodged by 1 September 2008. New claims can still be lodged concerning contemporary Crown actions or omissions occurring from 21 September 1992 onwards.
ACT wants that contemporary pathway closed.
URGENT AND KAUPAPA INQUIRIES IN THE FIRING LINE
The most immediate consequence of ACT’s proposal would be the removal of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to investigate current government policy and Crown conduct.
Seymour argues that through urgent hearings and kaupapa inquiries the Tribunal has moved beyond resolving historical grievances and increasingly scrutinises decisions that should properly belong to elected governments and Parliament.
ACT characterises that development as activism.
The Tribunal itself describes its kaupapa inquiry programme differently. Established in 2015, it groups claims raising nationally significant issues affecting Māori and can encompass both historical and contemporary grievances.
Those inquiries have examined major areas of public policy affecting Māori, meaning removing contemporary jurisdiction would have consequences well beyond Treaty settlements involving historical land loss.
HEALTH, HOUSING, JUSTICE AND DISABILITY
Contemporary and kaupapa inquiries provide a mechanism for Māori to challenge Crown policy through a Te Tiriti framework across areas including health, housing, justice, education, environmental management and social services.
That makes ACT’s proposal particularly significant given the Tribunal’s recent work.
Only this month, the Tribunal’s disability inquiry concluded that significant parts of the disability system prejudice tāngata whaikaha Māori and identified failures involving tino rangatiratanga, partnership, equity and participation.
Under ACT’s proposed model, future grievances concerning current Crown policy would no longer have the same route through the Waitangi Tribunal.
ACT argues Māori, like every other New Zealander, should instead rely on protections available through ordinary law and the courts.
ONE LAW FOR ALL
At the centre of Seymour’s argument is ACT’s longstanding principle that legal protections should apply equally regardless of ancestry.
The party says no group should require a separate tribunal to protect rights that should instead be available to everyone through the ordinary courts.
ACT has separately proposed strengthening property rights through the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and sees that as part of an alternative framework for challenging unlawful Crown interference.
But the Waitangi Tribunal performs a different function from an ordinary court.
Its statutory task is specifically to investigate claims by Māori that Crown legislation, policies, practices, actions or omissions are inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Removing contemporary jurisdiction would therefore not simply transfer identical claims into another courtroom. It would remove a specialist Treaty-based avenue for examining contemporary Crown conduct.
THE TRIBUNAL WAS ORIGINALLY CONTEMPORARY
There is also a significant historical wrinkle in ACT’s argument that the modern Tribunal has moved away from its original purpose.
When Parliament established the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975, its jurisdiction was actually limited to contemporary claims.
It was the 1985 amendment that expanded the Tribunal’s jurisdiction retrospectively to 1840, enabling it to investigate the historical grievances that subsequently became central to the Treaty settlement process.
ACT’s proposal would therefore ultimately leave the Tribunal performing only the historical function that was added a decade after its creation, before abolishing it once that work was completed.
HUNDREDS OF HISTORICAL CLAIMS STILL REQUIRE WORK
While ACT says the historical process is nearing completion, the Tribunal itself acknowledges there remains substantial work to do.
The Wai 2800 Remaining Historical Claims Inquiry was established to address outstanding historical grievances that have not been fully heard or resolved.
The Tribunal says several hundred historical claims have historically remained outside completed district inquiries or settlements, and its current strategic direction aims to complete the Remaining Historical Claims Inquiry by 2030.
In January this year, the Tribunal adopted a nationwide process to categorise remaining claims according to whether they were already resolved, could be dealt with relatively quickly, or required more extensive research and hearings.
ACT says it would not impose an arbitrary deadline that forced those claims through before they were properly considered.
Instead, disestablishment would occur automatically only when all eligible historical work was finished.
2040 LOOMS LARGE
Seymour is deliberately framing the policy around 2040, the bicentenary of the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
For ACT, that anniversary should mark a country that has completed historical settlements and moved towards what the party describes as one system of law and rights for all New Zealanders.
For opponents, the fundamental question will be whether Treaty obligations themselves can ever be considered historically complete while the Crown continues to exercise power and make decisions affecting Māori.
That distinction goes to the heart of the debate.
Historical settlements deal with breaches of the past.
Contemporary claims ask whether the Crown is meeting its Treaty responsibilities today.
ACT wants the first completed and the second removed from the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.
A MAJOR ELECTION BATTLE OVER TE TIRITI
The proposal is likely to become another significant dividing line in an election already featuring fierce debate over Treaty principles, Māori rights, public services and the role of Te Tiriti within government.
For iwi and hapū, the consequences could be profound.
The Tribunal has provided a specialist forum through which Māori can put evidence before an independent body, test Crown policy against Treaty principles and build a formal public record of alleged breaches.
Its findings are generally recommendations rather than court orders, although legislation gives the Tribunal binding powers in some limited circumstances.
ACT’s proposal would ultimately bring that 50-year institution to an end.
The question voters now face is much larger than whether the remaining historical claims should be settled.
It is whether Te Tiriti should continue to provide Māori with a specialist mechanism for holding future governments accountable — or whether, once the historical settlement process is finished, the Waitangi Tribunal’s work should finish with it.
#WaitangiTribunal #DavidSeymour #ACTParty #TeTiritiOWaitangi #TreatyOfWaitangi #TreatyClaims #TreatySettlements #MaoriRights #TinoRangatiratanga #ManaMotuhake #Iwi #Hapu #TangataWhenua #Waitangi #Election2026 #MaoriVote #MaoriPolitics #NZPolitics #Constitution #Justice #CrownMaoriRelations #WaiClaims #KaupapaInquiry #WhenuaMaori #Aotearoa #TeAoMaori #MaoriNews #NZNews #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea
