12 H U M A N R I G H T S COMMISSION | A FAIR GO FOR ALL? A Treaty of Waitangi-based approach to structural discrimination One message that emerged from the workshops is that the Treaty of Waitangi has a place in any discussion of structural discrimination. Although there are areas of disagreement between the English and Mäori texts of the As part of this work, the Commission has collected casestudies of existing Crown-Mäori relationships and analysed them for elements of success, particularly in providing more positive outcomes for Mäori. Examples include: Manawhenua ki Waitaha and the Canterbury District Health Board, and Ngäti Kahungungu and the Ministry of Education.53 Treaty of Waitangi, there are important areas where the The Commission’s analysis found the following common texts do agree. All three articles concern the recognition elements, among others, in successful relationships and of rights and identification of responsibilities. These rights positive outcomes: and responsibilities are central to addressing structural discrimination. They include: • the rights and responsibilities of the Crown to govern (Article 1 - käwanatanga/governance) •  the collective rights and responsibilities of Mäori, as Indigenous people, to live as Mäori and to protect and develop their taonga (Article 2 – rangatiratanga/selfdetermination)49 • the rights and responsibilities of equality and common citizenship for all New Zealanders (Article 3 – rite tahi/ equality). The Commission found in its 2010 report on Human Rights and the Treaty of Waitangi that the guarantee of equal rights promised in the Treaty remains unfulfilled today, as systemic disadvantage remains to be fully addressed.50 Modern interpretations of the Treaty emphasise partnership or power-sharing between the Crown and Mäori arising • entering into relationships with a genuine desire to improve outcomes for Mäori and to provide redress for past actions • regular dialogue to strengthen relationships and understand each other’s issues and aspirations • foundational agreements: usually formal e.g. Memorandums of Understanding based on acknowledgement of status, role, authority and obligations of each. All effective relationships were based on the recognition of rangatiratanga • shared decision-making as the norm at both high level and service level engagement • recognition of the Treaty of Waitangi • valuing Mätauranga Mäori (Mäori knowledge): this was particularly valuable where education was the focus of a relationship. from the common principles of käwanatanga (governance) More recently, the Waitangi Tribunal’s 2011 report Ko and rangatiratanga (self determination) in articles one and Aotearoa Tënei poses solutions to inequalities based on a two. These concepts can provide a foundation on which to fundamental shift in philosophy, attitude and approach by identify and address structural discrimination, particularly the Government. The tribunal stated: in respect of improving outcomes for Mäori. The Commission’s Treaty framework offers one tool to address structural discrimination. Based on an extensive programme of community engagement beginning in 2003, the Commission launched its Treaty framework in 2010; at its heart is the “promise of two peoples to take the best care of each other.”51 This framework sets out the rights and responsibilities that the Treaty conferred on both the Crown and Mäori, not least in ensuring equality for Mäori and other New Zealanders. It also recognises that ensuring equality for Mäori involves the protection of rangatiratanga.52 Unless it is accepted that New Zealand has two founding cultures, not one; unless Mäori culture and identity are valued in everything government says and does; and unless they are welcomed into the very centre of the way we do things in this country, nothing will change. Mäori will continue to be perceived, and know they are perceived, as an alien and resented minority, a problem to be managed with a seemingly endless stream of taxpayerfunding programmes, but never solved.54