Māori Purposes Bill

Kia ora anō tātou; greetings. This speech carries on from a flow of great ideas that was rudely interrupted last night, but such is the timetable of the House. A part of the Māori Purposes Bill that Labour members are very keen to support lies in Part 2. Unlike Māori members of the House who are not in the Labour Party, I will not read a prepared speech; I will speak as a parliamentarian should do, from prior experience and from the heart.

Part 2 enables Māori asset-owning organisations that hold interests in the fishing industry to go through a transition of structural reform without having to add an additional burden on to what is essentially a bureaucratic process. It will allow organisations, when they restructure, to move from one organisation that is deemed to hold the mandate for iwi governance purposes, to another organisation. That is sensible because the social and political circumstances surrounding Māori are not static; they are dynamic. In order for this dynamism to continue unabated, we must not and should not leave in law impediments that create additional costs for people wanting to ensure that the structures that hold the assets can change. We do not want to see people lumbered with structures ill-suited to the circumstances that they confront when trying to make revenue, money, and create dividends from the Treaty settlement endowments.

In addition to that, changes are contemplated in the operations of the Māori Land Court. The Māori Land Court, as you would know, Mr Assistant Speaker Roy, is a source of great debate and dissension on the marae in Māoridom. At one level it is seen as an agent of dispossession; on the other side it is seen as an institution that safeguards the rights of current generations, and also provides a buffer of support so that future generations will not lose their birthright or, indeed, their heritage that is tied up in land. At all times, the judges of the Māori Land Court and the staff associated with the administration of the court need to be operating in an efficient manner that does not cause additional costs to lie upon the communities of Māori landowners, who are probably in the lowest tax brackets.

That reminds me that, recently, when the tax reform changes went through, it was a source of considerable concern to our kaumātua and people around Māoridom that the Minister of Māori Affairs had overlooked the fact that Māori landowners now face a higher tax rate as a consequence of his inattention. As a consequence of his not moving the Māori landowner tax rate in a fashion commensurate with the other tax changes that the Hon Bill English brought in, perversely enough those groups of taxpayers are at the moment lumbered with a disproportionately higher tax rate. I am quite sure the Minister will get around to it, but I rather fear for his long-term survival—the election will arrive prior to that Act coming into force.

I will continue by talking about other parts of this bill. A number of us on the Māori side of the parliamentarian community have had some experience with Māori trust boards. The trust boards were created, in most cases, during the 1900s, and they were designed to enable the iwi and their leaders of that day to have corporate statutory organisations to hold their assets and to distribute the dividends. As governance has improved, a greater level of importance has been attached to the actual people, who are the defined beneficiaries, having authority over these organisations, as opposed to the Minister of Māori Affairs. This bill moves in a direction whereby those organisations will not be responsible in an exclusive fashion to the Minister of Māori Affairs. Such changes have been promoted by the office of the Auditor-General, who has a responsibility to audit these organisations on a regular basis. They often represent a very high cost in terms of their audit fees, but that is another matter. This movement towards establishing the authority back with the people to exercise oversight in relation to these organisations is a development that should be welcomed.

Of course, these organisations nowadays are regarded as somewhat anachronistic. The Tainui Māori Trust Board, the Ngāi Tahu Māori Trust Board, and a host of others have since been superseded—in the case of Ngāi Tahu, by their rūnanga and a variety of satellite organisations, the papatupu organisations, which give their major authority mandate. But underlying all these structures is the important principle, which is why we are keen to support it, that the people who are legally entitled to enjoy the fruits—or, indeed, suffer the costs, if things go wrong—of the endowment have the authority to direct how the organisation should be run. Indeed, they should have the authority to nominate—either appoint or elect directly—the people who will be the individual governors. Although it is a change that comes after a lot of protestation, it is a change that signals that unless people are actually put in a position where they control what is happening to the organisations that they are putative owners of, we cannot expect accountability to improve.

In fact, there is probably a good lesson here in terms of how organisations in mainstream society have gone off the boil, as well. For everything that might be said of a negative character about Māori organisations, they did not lose $6.5 billion that was turned into chaff as a consequence of the various directors and other people—some of whom will go to jail, I hope—squandering all the money of the nanas and granddads and other investors, which got poured into what has proven to be a bog of embarrassment called the financial sector community. So whenever I hear the ACT Party and others prattling on about problems with Māori stewardship, I love to remind them that the last time I checked there were not very many Māori organisations involved in the $6.5 billion meltdown of investor wealth, etc. It is almost as if when that happens in our Pākehā community it is natural, so there is not a large hue and cry, but when there is a fraction of that loss within Māoridom, it constantly makes the front page. Unfortunately, it is one of the crosses that Māori governance organisations have to bear.

I will round up this contribution, which is the final contribution from us on this side of the House. It is the calm before the storm, because legislation is about to be debated that goes to the actual heart of Māori citizens’ individual well-being and wealth. But that is to do with labour relations, and those speeches will soon follow. The fisheries structure has been a successful waka for Māori, and it is not unrelated to the aquaculture changes, which I support and I am glad that they are going to the Primary Production Committee. But the changes to the Māori fisheries iwi organisations and the changes to how Māori iwi organisations might eventually receive their 20 percent entitlement to aquaculture are connected, and everything we do to improve the governance capabilities of those organisations and their ability to generate wealth should be supported. Nā reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou, kia ora tātou katoa.

It is good to take what I hope will be a very brief call on the Māori Purposes Bill, which will come to the Māori Affairs Committee, ably chaired by Mr Tau Henare. This is an omnibus bill. It is a fairly technical bill, really, that will amend three Acts. It will be split into parts later down the track: the Māori Fisheries Amendment Bill, the Māori Trust Boards Amendment Bill, and Te Ture Whenua Māori Amendment Bill. I suppose if there is a common theme in what we are doing—and there generally is—it is that we are working to improve lives and the prospects of all Māori by cutting red tape and streamlining regulations. Effectively, I suggest that this bill is pro-business. It is for better management and governance skills for Māori generally and in Māori organisation trust boards, estates, constitutions, and the like—really providing a good environment and good policy settings, sound settings, for business success.

I will take this moment, while we are talking about doing that, and Māori business, to just bear a thought for the kiwifruit industry. It is not widely known that part of the backbone of the industry, a strength, is Māori. Through Te Awanui Huka Pak in the Bay of Plenty one has with its amalgamation with, from memory, Seeka, the biggest pack-houses in New Zealand. They are Māori-run for Māori. They have for many, many years been working with and supporting Māori kiwifruit owners, of which there are many. So the idea that is out there that Māori are not good at business and that they are new to business is absolutely not true, if one looks at the kiwifruit industry. They are, as I said, a backbone of the kiwifruit industry—certainly in the Bay of Plenty and I am sure, if I look through it, in other parts of the nation as well. They are going through a difficult time at the moment. It is an uncertain time, but the Government is working very hard on it. I am sure that the very best solution to a difficult set of facts will emerge very shortly.

I will take just a very quick call with regard to the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora. When Labour was last in Government—yes, I know I have something growing on my lip, but if you want to donate, by all means donate.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy): The member should not include me in his speech.

Well, I thought Mr Assistant Speaker might want to donate. That is fine; it is OK if you do not want to. But can you imagine 120 people giving $5 each for a worthy cause? But I digress. I wanted to take a brief call on the estate of Pukepuke Tangiora, because it should have been sorted out by the previous Labour Government’s Minister of Māori Affairs then. He was given a report by the Māori Affairs Committee asking him to sort it out. It is only now—nearly 3 years later—that our Minister of Māori Affairs, the Hon Dr Pita Sharples, has seen fit to do what the select committee asked the previous Minister of Māori Affairs to do. So I say thank you to the Minister of Māori Affairs.

I will finish by saying this is a great place—this is a great place—when one of my enemies from a long time ago can walk across the House and donate $5 to a worthy cause. I publicly say thank you to the Hon Trevor Mallard.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Māori Affairs Committee.