Peter Dey apparently sees himself as the local self-appointed apologist for Maori interests intent on enshrining Tititi o Waitangi as supreme law of any new Constitution maintaining the composition of the Constitutional Review Committee is fair, balanced and unbiased. With 5 representatives appointed for Maori interests (10%), 1 for Asian (9%), 1 for Pasifika (8%) and only 5 representing the rest of NZ citizens (73%) – this can never be seen as balanced and fair. The allocation if one was looking at ethnicity should be Maori (2 at most), Pasifika (1) and Asian (1) with the remaining 8 members for the rest.
Of even greater concern is that the Review Panel was appointed on ethnic and race-based principles when it needed to be composed of the 12 best suitably qualified NZ citizens all being at least familiar with constitutional matters to do the job properly. They would then report back intelligently and objectively to the Government.
Other than Professor John Burrows, QC the co-Chairman there is not a constitutional law expert in sight on the Committee!
People must take this on board when looking at what is a flawed excuse for a Constitutional Review and draw their own conclusions. The consultation process including public confidence is undermined by the biased composition of the Review Panel. Undemocratic, unbalanced and premeditated is the best description.

R Paterson, Matapihi.