Jose Aquino against Stuff (Te Tiriti)
Case Number: 3817
Council Meeting: 2 February 2026
Decision: Not Upheld
Publication: Stuff
Principle:
Accuracy, Fairness and Balance
Conflicts of Interest
Ruling Categories:
Accuracy
Balance, Lack Of
Conflict of Interest
Unfair Coverage
Overview
1. Mr Aquino complains about a Stuff article published on 21 November 2025, titled Over 1000 schools say they will back Te Tiriti, after Government removes obligation. The article outlines the response of some school boards to changes to the Education and Training Act.
2. The complaint against the article’s inaccuracy and conflicts of interest is not upheld.
The Article
3. On 21 November 2025 Stuff published the article titled Over 1000 schools say they will back Te Tiriti, after Government removes obligation. It reports on the more than 1000 schools who wrote to the Government unhappy about removal of the legal obligations on schools regarding the Treaty of Waitangi.
4. It includes comments and quotes from a lawyer, Ms Waikato, who compiled a list of schools who promised they would still give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, on her views on the Government policy change.
5. Hobson’s Pledge’s views are also included, and they are described as a group who ‘campaign against indigenous rights.’ Quotes from the Minister of Education and Associate Minister of Education are also included.
The Complaint
6. In his complaint, Mr Aquino believes that the article is biased and contains misrepresentations and flaws. In particular, the comment made by Ms Waikato that the Minister of Education has ignored evidence from teachers, is questioned via asking what evidence she had.
7. The statement by Ms Waikato that she had been inundated by teachers, students and boards of trustees stating that their schools will still adhere to Te Tiriti o Waitangi is also questioned because the article does not outline how schools can adhere.
8. He further states that the statement “Lobby group Hobson’s Pledge, which campaigns against indigenous rights,” is a smear and an opinion and that there should have been a disclosure of the Green Party affiliation of Ms Waikato.
The Response
9. Stuff responds by stating that the article reports statements made by Waikato. These statements were clearly attributed and reflect her perspectives; they do not represent the views of Stuff or its journalists. Similarly, quotes were included from Ministers.
10. The description of Hobson’s Pledge is based on how the group is commonly characterised in public discourse, particularly in relation to its campaigning focus. Stuff also notes that the complainant characterises Hobson’s Pledge as a group as campaigning against “special rights for Māori’s”.
11. In regard to the need to include detail about how schools should adhere to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, Stuff responds that the article focuses on school boards and their response to changes in the law. They deemed this newsworthy and relevant to the wider national debate on Treaty issues. Detailed explanation of how schools should adhere to Te Tiriti o Waitangi was not within scope.
12. They also noted that Ms Waikato was not a Green party candidate at the time of publication and she was quoted in her capacity as the compiler of the list of school boards.
The Discussion
13. Under Principle (1) publications are always bound by accuracy, fairness and balance. The Media Council can see no breach of this Principle in this article. Quotes and comments from the various sides of the argument and key players have been included providing balance and the complainant raises no issues of factual inaccuracy.
14. After careful consideration, the Council concluded characterising Hobson’s Pledge as a lobby group is not unfair as it clearly operates to influence decision makers in favour of its causes. It’s aim to “build awareness and to prevent legislation, policy and regulations that will differentiate New Zealanders based upon their ethnicity or ancestry” can also be fairly interpreted as seeking to prevent rights based on indigeneity.
15. The Council’s Conflict of Interest Principle (10) aims to ensure publications are independent and free of obligations to their news sources. Where an author’s link to a subject is deemed justified, the relationship of the author to the subject should be declared. Here, Ms Waikato is not the author of the article and has instead been approached for comment given her specific role in the news story. The Media Council can see no breach or undermining of the independence of Stuff through the non-disclosure of her political party connections.
Decision: The complaint is not upheld
Council members considering the complaint were Hon Raynor Asher (Chair), Hank Schouten, Tim Watkin, Guy MacGibbon, Scott Inglis, Ben France-Hudson, Jo Cribb, Judi Jones, Marie Shroff, Alison Thom, Richard Pamatatau, Bernadette Courtney
Guy MacGibbon declared a conflict of interest and did not vote