For almost forty years the Waitangi Tribunal has sat in judgement on New Zealand’s past and found most – if not all of it – sorely wanting. One of the words used by the Tribunal to justify some of its more controversial decisions is the Maori word taonga, a word which in modern times is said to mean many things, including the wonderfully vague – “treasure”. Yet some have claimed that the meaning of taonga in 1840 was in fact very different and that many Tribunal decisions are therefore based on a fantasy.“Contra proferentem” is a legal doctrine used by the Tribunal to claim that the Maori language Treaty version – “Te Tiriti” – has precedence over the English language “Treaty”, effectively denying the Crown any say in its interpretation – surely a very strange thing in an agreement between two parties. What is the actual truth of the matter? Have taonga and contra proferentem been used correctly? Or have important Tribunal decisions been based on a very wobbly house of cards? And just what is the robustness of the Waitangi Tribunal process and of over forty years of decisions that have turned New Zealand on its head?