From the country to the capital, there is anger in the streets of New Zealand.
A defiant convoy of activists on Monday began a nine-day hikoi — protest march — from the remote northern coast to the parliament in Wellington.
Thousands have joined their ranks as the protest moved south, choking the streets of Auckland and blocking rush-hour traffic.
And while the march was sparked by a specific law, it aims to ignite a broader conversation.
"This is to build a hunger, not just with Maori, but also people in Aotearoa [New Zealand] to properly understand the people of this country and what happened to Indigenous people," advocate Era Kapa Kingi said.
So what is this new law and why has it sparked so much anger?
Rocking the foundations of New Zealand
New Zealand is currently ruled by a conservative coalition led by National Party Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in partnership with the conservative New Zealand First party and libertarian ACT Party.
Since coming to power in 2023, they have dismantled a broad range of Maori initiatives, from the Maori Health Authority to school language programs.
But the most consequential reform is being championed by ACT leader David Seymour, who wants to redefine the interpretation of New Zealand's foundational document, the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi).
Mr Seymour argues the interpretation over the past 50 years has been "inherently divisive" and led to policies divided by race.
"You end up with some government departments that have two chief executives, one representing each treaty partner," he told the ABC's Pacific Beat program.
"You end up with an education curriculum where honouring the treaty becomes almost more important than maths."
Mr Seymour has introduced a bill to reinterpret the treaty, sparking fierce opposition from Maori leaders, who argue it will be destructive to Maori life, institutions and culture.
The Labour opposition say it "ignores" established principles and replaces them with "outdated and incorrect perspectives".
"Your government is sweeping aside this history of cooperation and good faith and taking us backwards on the race relations progress we have made," Labour said in a statement.
"Let's be clear: this bill is divisive, is costing millions just to draft, and has no support from any other party in parliament."
What is the Treaty of Waitangi and how does it shape laws?
The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840 between the British Crown and more than 500 Maori chiefs.
It paved the way for British annexation of New Zealand while requiring the Crown to protect Maori possessions and give signatories the full rights of British subjects.
In 1975, the Waitangi Tribunal was established to hear claims brought by Maori on whether legislation, policies or actions by the Crown breached the treaty principles.
A prominent victory was a 1986 report into the importance of protecting Maori language, which led to te reo being named an official language and the establishment of a dedicated language commission.
But the tribunal has little actual power to enforce its recommendations.
Maori law and treaty expert Carwyn Jones said sometimes government "genuinely welcomed the advice", other times it was "simply rejected".
"Overall it's been a pretty mixed bag and it does require the government to have the political will to do something," he said.
While no definitive list of treaty principles exist, tribunal decisions have helped establish how the treaty should be interpreted and manifest in a modern context.
So what is actually being proposed?
Mr Seymour argues these interpretations are too broad, too vague and give Maori an unfair advantage at the expense of other ethnic groups.
He wants to create "greater certainty and clarity" around the treaty and "build consensus" with a new Treaty Principles Bill.
Under it, the New Zealand government would have "full power to govern" and make laws "in the best interests of everyone" while the Crown would "respect and protect" the rights of Maori under the treaty "at the time they signed it".
"However, if those rights differ from the rights of everyone, [that clause] applies only if those rights are agreed in the settlement of a historical treaty claim," the bill states.
Dr Jones said those principles were "quite disconnected from what's actually in the treaty" and "erases Maori rights from the treaty".
"People raise these arguments that we're a multicultural society, not a bi-cultural society and I wouldn't dispute that," he said.
"But in my experiences, if you're unwilling to engage in a bi-cultural way, then you're certainly unwilling to engage in a multicultural way."
But will this actually become law?
The Treaty Principles Bill was introduced into parliament this week and after a first reading on Thursday, will go to a select committee for a six-month consultation process.
If it becomes law at a second reading, a referendum will be held to decide the issue.
But the bill may be more bark than bite given both the prime minister's National Party and the New Zealand First Party have vowed to vote it down at the second reading.
Political science professor at Charles Sturt University Dominic O'Sullivan said there were concerns that commitment could change "with strong public pressure".
"The National Party is under a lot of pressure from its junior coalition partner to change its view and if public sentiment is shown to be in favour of the bill, then I think it's still quite possible," he said
"Now that would be a breach of an election commitment, but they would obviously weigh up the politics before doing that."
How the views of the Maori and broader community will change over the next six months remain to be seen.
And despite wide protest from Maori leaders, others like Mr Seymour, a Maori, are leading the charge for reform.
"Maori voices are there [in government], they are just not the voices that have special seats reserved at the table to practice a certain version of what it means to be Maori," he said.
So what happens next?
Dr Jones expects the select committee consultation to be "a very divisive process" and "very damaging for social cohesion, for trust in governments".
"There will be people on both sides of the debate [who] will be mobilising, and we've seen organisations that are trying to create fear about the existence of Maori and the existence of Maori rights," he said.
If the bill and subsequent referendum do succeed, the relevant legislation would be reassessed under these new principles.
That could unleash a wave of litigation, which would be costly and a potentially unhelpful distraction for a government preparing for an election in late 2025.
Even if the bill fails, the public could still petition for a "citizens-initiated referendum", however, these are non-binding and require huge numbers of signatories to go ahead.
In the meantime, Maori activists will continue to protest the bill and other government changes.
Professor O'Sullivan said if the bill passed, it would diminish Maori opportunity to influence policy for themselves.
"The Treaty Principles Bill needs to be seen in that broader context of trying to recreate state Maori dependence on the state and whose interests that serves is quite unclear," he said.
"Seymour's equality is a bit like saying everyone's invited to the party, but we all have to drink the same beer."
