Newsroom reported last week that officials would not be able to get through the outstanding submissions in time and tens of thousands would be excluded unless Parliament passed a separate resolution to archive them after the fact.

Webb had wanted the deadline for the committee’s report to be extended to allow all remaining submissions to be included in the official record.

Committee chair James Meager, a National Party minister, said Stephenson’s motion “was the most appropriate solution and better than extending the report back date to an undetermined time as proposed by Duncan Webb”.

Labour’s Willie Jackson said it was “incredibly important” all the submissions were seen and heard.

“You might have the Act Party [with] a bit of guilt coming over them. They are the ones that waffle on about the democratic process – now there is an opportunity, and I think a lot of people will be happy with that. They do not want their submissions wasted.”

“Appalling lack of process”

In the hours before a solution was found, Webb released a scathing statement, saying the committee had finished its work more than a month ahead of Parliament’s deadline. He said the committee’s report was expected to be presented and available tomorrow.

“Labour sought an extension of time so that all submitters could be heard and their submissions put on the permanent record. Instead, the justice select committee has rammed it through with outrageous haste,” Webb said.

“This is an appalling lack of process on a hugely consequential bill.”

He said many submitters had found making a submission challenging.

“Now the committee is telling them all that effort, that time and emotion, wasn’t worth their time. The New Zealand public were forced to have their say on this bill, now the Government is not doing them the justice of including what thousands of them said.”

More than 300,000 submissions were lodged via Parliament’s website on Act leader David Seymour’s bill, which proposes replacing the many Treaty principles developed over several decades with three new ones.

“A constitutional tragedy”

Also speaking before the solution, Victoria University of Wellington law professor Dr Dean Knight said it was “a constitutional tragedy” to exclude submissions from the public record.

“First, the select committee’s appraisal of the bill will be deficient because the committee won’t have the benefit of the people’s voice or the wisdom contained in many, many carefully worded submissions. Secondly, it’s a punch in the stomach for civic engagement.”

He said that for years “we’ve lamented lack of public interest and participation in our democracy”.

“Yet the one time where folk overwhelming engage in the parliamentary process, those charged with running that process close their eyes to most of the submissions.

“I would be wild if I was a submitter who had shown good citizenship by expressing views on the bill only for those views to ignored; with good reason, those folk are probably wondering why they would bother doing so again in the future, on at least two levels.”

Dr David Wilson, Clerk of the House of Representatives, did not comment in detail on the situation.

“Select committee proceedings are confidential until the committee has reported back to the House.”

Julia Gabel is a Wellington-based political reporter. She joined the Herald in 2020 and has most recently focused on data journalism.