• • • • ensure a Treaty education strategy is developed that includes the current role and status of the Treaty and the Treaty settlement process so people can inform themselves about the rights and obligations under the Treaty; support the continued development of the role and status of the Treaty under the current arrangements as has occurred over the past decades; set up a process to develop a range of options for the future role of Treaty, including options within existing constitutional arrangements and arrangements in which the Treaty is the foundation; and invite and support the people of Aotearoa New Zealand to continue the conversation about the place of the Treaty in our constitution. The Commission supports the recommendations of the Panel. Effective Remedy (Article 2) The rule of law lies at the foundation of a free and democratic society and is essential for the protection of human rights. However, legislation is increasingly being used to oust judicial and other review mechanisms, which significantly impacts on the right to justice (and to an effective remedy). Recent examples include: • • • • Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act 2010; Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act 2010 Taxation (Tax Administration and Remedial Matters) Act 2011; and Immigration Amendment Act 2013; In 2012 the Court of Appeal affirmed that the policy of not paying family carers to provide disability support services to disabled family members constituted unjustifiable discrimination on the basis of family status. In direct response to this decision the Government passed the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Act under urgency11 on 17 May 2013. The Act effectively ousts the Commission’s jurisdiction and removes any potential domestic remedy for unlawful discrimination relating to family care policy.12 The passage of the Act from introduction to enactment in 24 hours with no opportunity for Select Committee Review, a heavily redacted Regulatory Impact Statement and a report from the Attorney General that the Bill breached BORA was greeted with despondency and despair by disabled people. Adoption of National Plan of Action (Article 2) The Commission has statutory responsibility for the development of a National Plan of Action for human rights. In 2005 the Commission developed the first 5 year action plan. The Human Rights Committee welcomed the action plan and recommended that the State should engage in the development and official adoption, as government policy, of a further national human rights action plan for 2010-2015. 11 Meaning that despite there being significant human rights implications, neither the Commission nor the public were able to make submissions on the Bill. 12 It stops people from bringing unlawful discrimination complaints about a family care policy to the Commission. Nor will any proceedings be able to be commenced or continued in any court in relation to discrimination. Page 4 of 35