Te Tiriti o Waitangi and accountability Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a living document that was signed in 1840 between more than 540 Māori chiefs and representatives of the British Crown.11 Māori rights are affirmed in Te Tiriti,12 and the document is recognised as an important part of Aotearoa’s constitution. Debate continues surrounding the translation, interpretation, and application of te reo Māori and/or the English text of Te Tiriti, which consists of a preamble and articles. Article 1 outlines Kāwanatanga and recognises the legitimacy of the Kāwana to enable the Crown to govern its own citizens, Article 2 affirms rangatiratanga and retains the rights of Māori to maintain control over their own people, lands and resources, Article 3 guarantees ōritetanga and Article 4 affirms active protection of Māori beliefs and values, which include tikanga, kawa, reo and mātauranga Māori.13 Since 1975 when the Waitangi Tribunal was established, there have been significant Treaty provisions in laws passed by Parliament and subsequently interpreted by the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal. The concepts of partnership, protection and participation principles are not new and have been discussed and debated in Treaty jurisprudence for decades. The Waitangi Tribunal raised the important fundamentals of accountability regarding the 1998 Te Whānau o Waipareira Report,14 where there must be strong consideration of Māori aspirations to address the performance of Crown agencies. Failing to do so is The Rangatiratanga sphere not a reflection of genuine partnership and inhibits the exercise of Māori rangatiratanga. Te Tiriti o Waitangi is foundational to understanding the systems of accountability. It is important to recognise from the outset that there are two clear distinctive paradigms regarding the concept of accountability between Tangata Whenua and the Kāwana. As Jones describes, “both Māori social organisation and the New Zealand state’s liberal-democratic values is the ideal of accountability of leaders and decision-makers to the wider community. It is of course also true to say that these two systems of accountability tend to operate in different ways.”15 With this in mind, we explore different models of accountability systems inspired by model six (the bicameral model made up of an iwi/hapū assembly and the Crown in Parliament) in the Matike Mai Aotearoa report, which recognises the two spheres of influence of “the ‘rangatiratanga sphere’, where Māori make decisions for Māori and the ‘kāwanatanga sphere’, where the Crown will make decisions for its people”.16 This model (Figure 1) has no provision for a relational sphere and is adopted intentionally for the purposes of understanding the deficit of accountability systems within the housing sector and institutional arrangements. We adopt this approach to outline and frame this discussion paper and make specific references to the language used in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. The Kāwanatanga sphere Figure 1. Matike Mai Aotearoa model six.17 13