New Zealand rightly acknowledges the historical significance of the Treaty of Waitangi, which was signed in 1840 to establish governance, maintain order, and create a framework for relations between Māori and the Crown at a time when the country had no unified system of government. It addressed the needs of a very different era, a frontier society facing uncertainty about authority, land, and settlement.

Nearly two centuries later, New Zealand has evolved into a stable democratic nation with strong institutions, equal voting rights, and the rule of law applying to all citizens. Our society is no longer defined by the circumstances that existed in 1840. People from every background now live, work, own property, build businesses, and make decisions about their own lives under the same legal system.

In a modern democracy, citizenship — not ancestry — should define a person’s relationship with the state. While history should always be acknowledged and respected, it should not be used to divide the population into separate political or legal groups. A strong and unified nation is built on the principle that every individual stands equal before the law and shares the same rights and responsibilities.

These principles should also guide New Zealand’s international agreements. The recently concluded New Zealand–India Free Trade Agreement reportedly includes a reference to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a provision that has raised serious concerns. Trade agreements are intended to facilitate economic cooperation, expand markets, and create opportunities for citizens. Embedding ideological or constitutional frameworks unrelated to trade risks importing political commitments that have never been fully debated or democratically endorsed by the public.

Even more alarming are reports that this clause was inserted without transparent public disclosure and without the knowledge or consent of the minister responsible for overseeing the agreement. If true, this represents a serious breach of democratic accountability. Decisions that carry constitutional and political implications should never be quietly embedded within international agreements without open scrutiny by elected officials and the public they represent.

In a functioning democracy, transparency is not optional; it is fundamental. Trade agreements must not become a backdoor mechanism for advancing ideological commitments that have not been clearly debated or approved through democratic processes. When provisions with far-reaching implications are included without the awareness of those tasked with ministerial oversight, it raises profound questions about governance, integrity, and who is truly making decisions on behalf of New Zealand.

New Zealand citizens are entitled to expect that agreements entered into in their name are negotiated openly, with full political oversight and accountability. If significant clauses can be inserted without the knowledge of the responsible minister, it undermines confidence in the process and erodes public trust in the institutions responsible for protecting democratic decision-making. A healthy democracy cannot function if important commitments are made behind closed doors without the informed consent of those elected to govern.

The Conservative Party would seek the removal of UNDRIP references from trade agreements so that New Zealand’s international commitments reflect the same democratic principle we expect at home, equal rights and equal citizenship for all. The Conservative Party would also strengthen transparency requirements around those drafting so that nothing without clear Ministerial approval, Cabinet sign-off, gets passed through to stop any misconduct or improper procedural behaviour.

© Scoop Media