Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill

I move, That the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Māori Affairs Committee to consider the bill. Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki-makau-rau is the collective name taken by 13 iwi and hapū of Tāmaki, or Auckland, a body often referred to as the Tāmaki Collective. Representatives of the collective signed a deed with the Crown on 8 September 2012 for collective redress for their shared interests in Tāmaki-makau-rau. This bill gives effect to the deed.

The deed and this bill are the product of almost 4 years of very intensive negotiation between the Crown and the iwi and hapū of Auckland. In early 2009 I approached Sir Douglas Graham to advise the Crown on Treaty settlement negotiations in the Tāmaki, Kaipara, and Hauraki regions. These were areas where, for good reason, negotiations had, effectively, stalled. In 2007 the Waitangi Tribunal described the Auckland area as having highly complex interrelationships between groups, with customary interests that are multiple and multilayered. The tribunal set a challenge for iwi and the Crown to find a way that recognised the legitimate interests of individual iwi while also recognising those layers of interest. Sir Douglas Graham proposed that the Crown deliver redress collectively, such as the volcanic cones—the maunga—of Tāmaki, where many iwi and hapū held customary interests. Cabinet agreed, and in July 2009 Sir Douglas presented the proposal to the various iwi and hapū of Tāmaki.

The subsequent agreement by the iwi and hapū to the concept of collective redress was a very significant breakthrough for negotiations. First, it allowed iwi to work together to secure the transfer of 14 of Auckland’s iconic volcanic cones to the Tāmaki Collective. The adage “strength in numbers” certainly applies here. These maunga will be held as reserves for the common benefit of the Tāmaki Collective and the people of Auckland. Public access and third-party interests over them will be protected. In this, the iwi and hapū of the Tāmaki Collective have recognised not only their customary interests but the interests of all people living in Auckland. The maunga were formerly fortified pā and villages, with their occupants having command over most of the Tāmaki isthmus. Today they are regularly used as places to visit and play on, to have picnics, and even for getting married. For Māori and non-Māori alike, they will remain a defining part of the Auckland landscape.

Second, the collective has given both the Crown and Auckland Council a representative body of tribal interests to engage with. At the heart of the settlement is the establishment of a co-governance body called the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority, or Maunga Authority. This authority is made up equally of representatives of the Tāmaki Collective and Auckland Council. Although Auckland Council will be responsible for the day-to-day administration of the volcanic cones, the authority will oversee their governance. In effect, a partnership is going to be formed between Māori and the council in an arrangement that will enhance the future management and protection of these very, very important landmarks. The collective will also have a relationship agreement with the Minister of Conservation and the Director-General of Conservation on issues across the Auckland Conservancy. Three seats on the Auckland Conservation Board are reserved for the collective.

Other collective redress includes the vesting of four motu, islands, to the Tāmaki Collective: Rangitoto, Motutapu, Motuihe, and Tiritiri Mātangi. This is for a 1-month period, after which they will be vested back to the Crown for the benefit of all New Zealanders. Three areas on Rangitoto, including the summit and sites at Islington Bay, will remain in the ownership of the collective as scenic reserves. The Department of Conservation will continue to manage the summit of Rangitoto. The collective will also be involved with the Department of Conservation in the development of a management plan for the islands.

Very significantly, this bill does not settle any historical claims or provide financial redress. Rather, members of the collective will individually reach their own deeds of settlement with the Crown. The deed and bill nevertheless provide the members of the Tāmaki Collective with a right of first refusal for 172 years over Crown-owned land and certain Crown entity - owned lands that become surplus in that period. This is a very important shared benefit and is likely to provide significant long-term benefits.

I am very pleased to say that the legislation for two iwi, Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei and Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, has been passed recently by this House. I am confident that settlements are within sight for other collective members, including Marutūāhu iwi, Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki, Te Kawerau-a-Maki, and Ngāti Tamaoho. We are also committed to reaching settlements with Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, Ngāti Te Ata, and Te Akitai.

The negotiations that led to this deed were far-reaching and robust. First, and most important, I want to acknowledge all the leaders of the 13 iwi and hapū of the collective. Their vision and their willingness to work together and with the Crown have enabled this ambitious redress package to proceed. In particular, I acknowledge the astute leadership and vision of the chairperson of the collective, Paul Majurey. This settlement would not have been possible without agreement and active cooperation from Auckland Council, and I want to acknowledge the vision of His Worship Auckland Mayor Len Brown and other councillors who have worked very, very hard in support of this proposal. I think this bill delivers an innovative structure through which Auckland Council can engage with the iwi and hapū of Tāmaki. It is an exciting time for Auckland.

I must also pay tribute to the city leaders who preceded the Auckland Council: again, Mr Brown for Manukau; John Banks for Auckland City; Andrew Williams for North Shore; and, of course, Sir Bob Harvey in Waitakere. I also want to thank my fellow Ministers whose departments have been involved in negotiations—in particular, the previous Minister of Conservation, the Hon Kate Wilkinson. I also acknowledge the hard-working officials in the Office of Treaty Settlements and the chief Crown negotiator Michael Dreaver—ever-optimistic, ever-energetic.

To conclude, this bill gives effect to an innovative and groundbreaking deed of redress. The package is a robust one and will serve well not only the iwi and hapū of Auckland but also the public of Auckland and the Auckland Council. I commend the bill to the House.

Ā, kia ora anō tātou. Ka tahi, me mihi atu au ki a tātou i roto i te kaupapa i karangahia ai tātou kia hui mai ki konei i tēnei rā ki te āwhina atu i te whakaterenga o tēnei waka, hou mai ki roto i te Whare Pāremata. Te waka e kōrero nei ahau, ā, ko te pire. Ko āna kaihoe te hia noa atu hapū e whai pānga ana ki Tāmaki-makau-rau. Nā reira, kei te mihi atu ki te hunga kua tatū mai i roto i ngā whare tātai o Tāmaki-makau-rau, tēnā koutou. Mihi nōki ki te Minita, ki a tātou katoa e hui tahi nei i tēnei rā, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou, kia ora tātou katoa.

[So, greetings to us all once again. First of all, my acknowledgments to us in regards to the matter that has beckoned us to gather here today to assist the launching of this conveyance into Parliament House. The conveyance that I am referring to, of course, is the bill. Its paddlers are the vast number of subtribes that have an interest in Auckland. So I extend a welcome to those from the genealogical houses of Auckland that have arrived here. Salutations to you, collectively. I also acknowledge the Minister and all of us gathered here today. Salutations to you, greetings to us, and compliments to us all.]

We will be supporting this Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. We look forward to the inevitable submissions that come—will come, should I say—to the Māori Affairs Committee. The reason that we support it is because it is something that has been agreed to by the civic leaders of the Auckland super-city council and it is something that comes with the blessings of those who hold mandate from the large number of hapū and iwi in and around Tāmaki-makau-rau.

I also want to acknowledge the efforts of civic leaders of the past: obviously the current koromatua—the mayor—and the officials, because, although inordinate sums of money are not involved in any transfer terms within this bill, it is quite a tricky proposal. It takes some of the most iconic features of the Tāmaki-makau-rau landscape and commits them to a co-governance regime. The regime, on one hand, has to deal with the needs and uses of utility companies, not the least of which is Watercare Services, the leader of which is Mr Mark Ford, who probably spends precious time there now, given he is on a quest to resuscitate Solid Energy.

But on the Māori side it has been an arduous and long struggle. In fact, one of the most celebrated cases of the Māori Land Court to do with competing hapū and iwi interests took place in and around Tāmaki-makau-rau. I refer here to the longstanding case that pertained to the islands in the outer Hauraki Gulf, where you had applicants from Ngāti Whātua and applicants associated with Te Kawerau-a-Maki and Ngāti Wai. The Māori Land Court decisions, not unlike they do today, see-sawed. Hopefully we will not see a repetition of that.

This bill has some innovative features and some omissions. I want to acknowledge the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. I just intimated to him that during the select committee process we will find out the Māori names for Mount Roskill and other mountains, because no tangata whenua can want to be a steward of a maunga if they do not know the Māori name for it. That is not in this bill, so that is not good enough for me. A simple check with the Anglican Church would establish whether or not these maungas have Māori names, and, indeed, the amateur ethnographer George Graham has got an exhaustive list of all the main maunga and sites of significance that were published in the Journal of the Polynesian Society many, many years ago. Given that we are having a struggle at the moment as to whether or not our brethren in the South Island like the name Te Wai Pounamu and whether or not North Islanders like the name Te Ika-a-Māui, let us get the names right in this bill. That is something that the Māori members of the committee will endeavour to do. But that is a small matter.

💬 Hon Dr Nick Smith: What’s the member’s view?

I will resist the temptation to find a suitable name for that member from the South Island. Rest assured it will not be “greenstone”. It may pertain to something green, but it will not be greenstone. But for fear of raising the ire of the Minister shepherding this bill through the House, I will not trivialise these matters by any further references to Nick Smith.

What I hope the select committee will focus on is what I think is an innovative set of arrangements for co-governance, in the sense that a plan needs to be drawn up, and some of the provisions in that plan have to take account of or make way for agreeable cultural activities. I say “agreeable” in the sense that I presume both sides of the governance group have to sign off on them. The bill, very wisely, identifies what some of those activities might be. It is not only, I think, some potential cultivations—there is a reference there to tangihanga. The notion of a tangihanga being on Mount Eden is, I suppose, better than all the Māoris being in Mt Eden, but that lies in the future.

The reason we will also support this bill is that where it is not possible for Māori exclusive rights to be recognised, it is only fair, I think, given the current mix of New Zealand society—and nowhere is that mix more colourful than in Tāmaki-makau-rau—that the two sides come together: i.e., the proxy for the Crown and the representatives for the tangata whenua. Presumably the tangata whenua process will run smoothly, to the extent that it can. We will test that out in the select committee as well. But a lot of these positions are actually volunteer positions, virtually, so we do not want to make them so onerous that the system breaks down because people are either not fully resourced or the level of obligation grows to the extent that it is beyond the wits or the ability of anyone operating in a largely voluntary manner. The notion that both sides should come together is, I think, a way for the future.

There will be some areas, as, indeed, there were in Ngāi Tahu, where the property rights for the pounamu were vested exclusively in the iwi, presumably with special interests for the hapū of the West Coast. Whether it is in law, that is probably what they feel. The point that needs to be made is that this is a very good model for other iwi areas, and I commend the Minister for the work that he has done there recently.

I had occasion to talk about this bill when I went to the tangihanga for Laly Paraone Haddon. Despite the negative media treatment of the former Minister Doug Graham, it was good to see him there in tow with the evergreen-looking Michael Dreaver. They came to pay their respects to the hapū for the loss of our matua, Laly Haddon. I say that only because these settlements take a great deal of time. They burn out personalities, and entire generations can pass away before you see the fruition.

The notion that these maunga will now be regarded as something where the Māori footprint is as equally important as the other stakes reflected by local government is a very happy, worthwhile day, and it deserves to be celebrated. I will tell you what—it is a heck of a lot more lively and it is a heck of a lot more positive than the words on the obelisk. The words on the monument at Maungakiekie, One Tree Hill, are from a time when it was being contemplated and looked at that our tūpuna, the mātuas of that area, were about to put their heads on the pillow and disappear for ever.

If anything, small though the numbers of some of these hapū may be, large is the opportunity for them to now influence a co-governance type of arrangement that gives good outcomes for Māori heritage and protects the interests of other stakeholders, but puts the pou whenua of identity on to the political, social, and ecological landscape of Tāmaki-makau-rau. And as the place becomes more multicultural and as the place becomes more pluralistic, this is a way of ensuring that the elements of Tainui, Ngāti Whātua, Te Kawerau-a-Maki, and Manuhiri—who, to the best of my recollection, have some connections, actually, with Taranaki—have the opportunity to reflect their history and to show their fellow neighbours in Tāmaki-makau-rau that “We’re not just a bunch of Māoris. We are the kaitiaki, we are the tangata whenua, we are the descendants of the tūpuna who committed to the Treaty of Waitangi.”

This is a way of giving it a very visible and a very positive expression today. So we support the bill and look forward to it appearing in our select committee, where we will test what has happened to these Māori names. Kia ora tātou.

Ā, tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. E ngā mana whenua o Tāmaki, nau mai, haere mai ki te Whare Pāremata e takatū nei. E ngā rangatira huri noa i te Whare, tēnā koutou, tēna koutou, ā, tēnā tātou katoa.

[And thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. To the local people of Tāmaki, welcome to Parliament House in readiness here, welcome. To the leading figures throughout the House, greetings, salutations, and acknowledgments to you all.]

I am pleased to rise and take a call in the first reading of this bill, the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. I support this bill, following on from my colleague the Hon Shane Jones. This bill represents the many hapū and iwi of the wider Tāmaki-makau-rau, each of whom have historical claims against the Crown. Because of the scale of the area under claim and the many hapū and iwi involved, it was thought best to deal with those things that all claimants had a common interest in.

In this instance, a deed has been entered into. This bill gives effect to that deed that the Crown would vest ownership in 14 iconic maunga back to the collective, and there will be a co-governance arrangement with Auckland Council and the Department of Conservation. The new body is called the Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority. The Crown is going to contribute some pūtea to help with the set-up costs of this co-governance group, and the council will have day-to-day management of the long-dormant cones on behalf of Aucklanders and New Zealanders. As well, there are certain sites that are exempt, which will continue to be managed under the Department of Conservation.

Four islands are included in the redress—namely, Rangitoto, Motutapu, Motuihe, and Tiritiri Mātangi. The titles of these islands will be vested in the collective, which will then very graciously gift them back to the Crown. The summit of Rangitoto and two small waka landings will be retained by the collective. The deed of settlement also gives the collective the right of first refusal over certain right of first refusal land for the next 171 years. Basically, this means any land in Tāmaki deemed as sited on right of first refusal land must be offered back to the collective for the right of first refusal.

The best place to take in the sight of all that land is the viewing platform of the Sky Tower. You could take that up another level, because actually the best place to view the Auckland isthmus would be at the restaurant atop the Sky Tower. It is this rotating wharekai in the sky that takes in the truly wonderful beauty of the Auckland isthmus, known today as Tāmaki-makau-rau. One can imagine, if one thinks back to the day, the many villages built upon the long-dormant volcanoes, bush full of birds, and harbours and swamps full of fish and fowl. It was a utopian scene worthy of a renaissance painting. I encourage my friends across the House to visit the Sky Tower during the day, because you will be able to see what I mean. Going at night will serve no purpose, because all you will see are pretty lights. But that is basically the beauty of the Auckland isthmus.

I would like to take time now to acknowledge, as I like to try to do in all of my speeches, my own connection to my Ngati Rārua ancestor Tūpāhau and his confederate and relation Maki, who stopped by Maungakiekie, or One Tree Hill, for a while. Hine-te-Ao, who was from Maungakiekie and the Waiohua people, gave birth to Tūpāhau’s son, Korokino. His umbilical cord was buried with a sprig of a tōtara, which became the tōtara that was cut down and later replaced with a California pine atop One Tree Hill. Korokino was the father of Toa-Rangatira. Tūpāhau would return to south of Kāwhia, and there at Kiritehere he had another family with a woman of Ngāti Haumia, namely Rārua. This whakapapa links me to the very old Ngāti Awa of the far north.

It is no wonder people wanted to get to know the chief Maki. I am definitely no gun speaker of Te Reo Māori like my colleague Shane, but I would like to give my translation of Tāmaki-makau-rau: “Tāmaki”, belonging to Maki, and “makau-rau”, desired by many. So the land that belonged to Maki was desired by many. And who would not have been desirous? Picture the scene of a young Māori warrior on a brief trip to the much-heard-about Tāmaki-makau-rau. How could a visiting warrior from down in Pōneke not be impressed as he foiled his twin-hulled waka into Kohimārama, Rangitoto in silhouette, with the sun rising over the horizon? It is what we call a “melting Māori moment”.

I guarantee you that Māori boy from Pōneke would be looking for the highest chief in the pā with the most beautiful and yet tempestuous daughter. In years to come there would be some whanaunga from down around the pā back in Pōneke who would ask: “Hey, whatever happened to Tama boy?”. And the reply would be: “Didn’t you hear? He went up to Tāmaki a few years back and cracked it—got a beautiful missus, a whare with plenty of land, two fishing boats, and her old man has got a box at Eden Park.” There are plenty of stories like that within the history of the isthmus, such was the desirability of Tāmaki-makau-rau to all our Māori warriors of old.

For many people since that time of Maki, and probably before his time as well, Auckland’s desirable location, fertile soils, its birds and fish, and its picture postcard - beauty made visitors envious. That is the problem of Auckland. Even today, it is too desirous. It has $800,000 houses. No one can afford to live there. All the land is still in council hands—lands, dare I remind this House, that once were under the mana of these 13 iwi and hapū who make up this collective.

So I would like to acknowledge all of the work of the Tāmaki Collective and the officials, who have worked over many years to bring this portion of the settlement to a conclusion. I look forward to contributing within the Māori Affairs Committee and as we tautoko the passage of this bill through the House. I commend this bill. Kia ora tātou.

Tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. E te Whare, tēnā tātau katoa. Kai aku rangatira kua tae mai i Tāmaki-makau-rau, nau mai, hara mai ki te Whare Pāremata. Ko tāku, he whaiwhai haere i ngā kōrero o ētahi o ngā mema, tae atu ki te Minita. Ki a koutou kua tae mai i tēnei rā, haere mai, haere mai, tēnā koutou.

Hara mai me ngā mate o te wā kāinga kua tatū mai ai ki roto i ngā pakitara o te Whare nei, kia honoa ā-wairua rātau, tētahi ki tētahi, a tātau mate i te rā nei i te mea, kāre e kore pēnei i ētahi o ngā whakataunga kerēme, ko ētahi kua ngaro atu i te tirohanga kanohi, ko te hunga nā rātau anō rā tēnei kaupapa i āki i te wā i a rātau, ā, tae rā anō ki tēnei wā. Nō reira, koinei au e tū ake ki te kī atu, haere mai me ngā mate o te wā, kia tangihia e tātau i te rā nei. Waiho rātau kia moe, anei koutou kua tae mai ngā uri o rātau mā, Tāmaki nui, Tāmaki herenga waka, Tāmaki-makau-rau te pai, me te whai rawa o Tāmaki-makau-rau, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

Otirā, wā tātau mema Pāremata i te rā nei, me mihi anō rā ki te Minita nā runga i te mea, ko ia tērā e āki nei i ngā kerēme kia eke ki te taumata e tika ana. Kai te Hōnore Minita, tēnā koe, mōrena.

Kāti, ki a koutou ngā uri kua tae mai i tēnei rā, koinei te tū ake o te Pāti Māori ki te tuku i ngā mihi ki a koutou ngā uri o rātau mā ngā tai ki Tāmaki-makau-rau—Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Pāoa, Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Te Ata, te taha ki a au ki a Waikato anō hoki, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei, Te Akitai o Waiōhua, Te Kawerau ā Maki, Te Patukirikiri, tae rā anō ki Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, haere mai.

Me te kī anō hoki, kāre te Minita i konei i tēnei rā, kua raruraru te Minita ēngari, i kī mai ki a au: “Te Ururoa, me tuku i ngā mihi ki te hunga ka tae mai ki te Whare Pāremata i te rā nei.” Koinei te tuku atu i tērā mihi, e Tame, ki a koutou katoa.

Ki taku mōhio i hui koutou, me kī, ngā mana whenua o Tāmaki-makau-rau ki te tihi o Pūkawa i te Mahuru o te tau kua hipa ake nei. I reira koutou i whakaaetia atu ai kia whakakao mai i ngā take Tiriti katoa i raro i te marumaru o te mea kotahi. E hoa mā, he mea nui tērā ki te whakakao mai i ngā momo hiahia o tēnā iwi, o tēnā iwi, ki raro i te korowai o te mea kotahi. Arā anō tēnā me ōna hiahia, arā anō tērā me ōna wawata ki te whakakao mai, ki te whakakotahi mai, kia tae mai ki te tēpu o te Minita, he mea nui tērā, ka mihi rā ki a koutou katoa mō tērā āhuatanga. He tauira tērā mō te motu. He tauira nui tērā mō te motu i te mea, ko te nuinga o ētahi kerēme kua tae mai ki roto i te Whare Pāremata, kua puta mai me ngā raruraru nui, ngā tohe nui, ngā pakanga nui i ngā tau i mua noa atu. Kāre au i te mōhio mēnā i pērā rawa ki a koutou ēngari, i tōna mutunga mai kua whakakotahi mai i te rā nei. He mea nui tērā ki a au.

Ki taku mōhio, ko tētahi kaupapa nui i roto i tēnei pire, me kī, ko te whakahokinga mai o te mana o ngā wāhi tapu, o ngā wāhi o roto i te tāone nui o Tāmaki-makau-rau ki raro i te mana i tōna mutunga mai, i tōna tīmatanga mai, me kī, o roto i a tātau o Te Ao Māori. He mea nui tērā ngā ingoa o ō tātau tūpuna, o ō tātau mātua. I te wā i a rātau, e ai ki ngā kōrero, ka puta mai ngā ingoa nā runga i te āhuatanga o te taiao—a nā runga i te āhuatanga o ngā aituā, te whānautanga mai, te reka rānei o te rongo i tētahi kakara, te hōhonu rānei o te wai, tētahi aituā i pā mai, tētahi tohe pea, tētahi pakanga nui pea. Koinei te āhuatanga o ngā ingoa katoa o te motu. He tohu tērā mō te āhuatanga o ā tātau noho ki te mata o te whenua. Nō reira, e tautoko ana i tērā āhuatanga katoa i whaiwhaitia haeretia e koutou kia hoki rā anō ki ngā ingoa o ngā tūpuna, ki ngā ingoa taketake o roto o Tāmaki-makau-rau hei tauira mō te motu. Mēnā ka taea ki roto o Tāmaki-makau-rau, ka taea i te mata o te whenua. Nō reira, ka mihi ki tērā āhuatanga. Tērā, tērā.

E ai ki tāku e mōhio nei i te mea, i haere au ki tētahi whare wānanga pai i ētahi wā, ko te Whare Wānanga o Tāmaki-makau-rau. He tauira pai ahau i roto i tērā whare wānanga, Ko tētahi o aku whāinga ko te anthropology me taku kore mōhio he aha tēnei mea ko te anthropology i te wā i a au i te whare wānanga. Ka tae atu ki mua i te aroaro o ngā tohunga ki tērā āhuatanga, ki ngā mea pēnei i a Roger Green. Koia aku mōhio ki tērā momo tangata, ā, ko tāna mahi he heri haere i ngā tauira ki te kite atu, ki te kite mai i te āhuatanga o te noho o te Māori i ngā rā o nehe. I tētahi haerenga i haere atu au ki runga o Motutapu, me te kī atu, kātahi te wāhi nei. Ko te tangata tēnei o roto o Rotorua, kāre i paku puta i te tāone rā, ā, kātahi ka tae ki Motutapu, me tana heri haere i a mātau ngā tauira ki ngā wāhi ka kite atu. Koinei te nohonga o ngā mātua tūpuna i tērā wā, me te ohorere, ā, i pērā rawa te āhuatanga o ngā mātua, o ngā tūpuna. Nō reira, ki taku mōhio, i ngā rā o nehe tīmata mai ai i Motutapu, ā, kei te mōhio tonu koutou ko te āhuatanga o Motutapu i hū mai, ā, ka puta ko Rangitoto. Ā, ki reira i whai wāhi ai a Te Arawa ki roto i ngā āhuatanga o Tāmaki-makau-rau, i whai wāhi a Te Arawa nā runga i te āhuatanga o te rangi i tōngia a Tamatekapua. Ko taku tipuna tērā ki te taha o tōku whāea. Kāre i te mōhio mēnā i waihotia ake tētahi pānga whenua ki a Te Arawa, kāre rānei ēngari, kai reira tonu te ingoa. He mea nui tērā i roto i ngā kōrero o ngā mātua o ngā tūpuna. Nō reira, tēnei te uri o Te Arawa e mihi atu ana ki a koutou kua tatū mai. Ki taku mōhio i tae atu te waka o Te Arawa ki Te Ika-a-Māui, ā, ka whaiwhai haere i te takutai kia eke atu rā, mai i Whangaparaoa i te tai rāwhiti, ā, tae rā anō ki Waitematā. I a rātau e haere ana, i reira te tohunga nei a Ngātoroirangi, anā ka riro māna e taunahanaha haere ngā wāhi whenua, mai i te Whangaparaoa, ā, tae rā anō ki tērā taha ki Waitematā. I a rātau e haere ana, ka pā atu ki ētahi wāhi i runga i tērā huarahi, ka whakatata atu ai ki ētahi huarahi.

Ā, kai te mōhio pea koutou i tētahi wā i eke atu te waka o Te Arawa, Tamatekapua te tangata, ka kite atu i a Hoturoa o te waka o Tainui, ka tipu ake te raruraru. Nā te aha? Nā ngā mahi pūremu pea a Tamatekapua, ngā mahi tinihanga a Tamatekapua ki ngā wāhine. He tohunga tērā tangata ki te āhuatanga o te whaiwhai haere i ngā wāhine. Ka mutu i tohe, i pakanga a Tamatekapua rāua ko Hoturoa, ā, nā wai rā, nā wai rā, ka puta te ingoa Rangitoto. Nō reira, e ai ki ngā kōrero ko te rangi i tōtōngia a Tamatekapua, arā, koinei te āhuatanga o te hononga, te pānga atu ki tērā o ngā whenua. E 67 tau i ngā rā ō mua i te tau 1946, i konei i te Whare Pāremata nei, a Eruera Tirikātene, te koroua o tēnei nā, he mema Pāremata mō Te Tai Tonga. I roto ia i tēnei Whare. Ko ia te tangata i whakatau ai kia hangai tēnei rōpū te New Zealand Geographic Board. I roto i tērā ture ka whakatau mai a ia kia whakaritea he rōpū whakatikatika i ngā ingoa o te whenua nei. Hei whakapākehā atu ki a koe—

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and greetings to us all, the House. Welcome to my esteemed elders who have arrived here from Auckland, welcome to Parliament House. My part is merely to follow up the sentiments expressed by some members as well as those by the Minister. Welcome to those of you who have arrived here on this day, welcome, greetings.

Bring forth your deaths from back home inside the walls of this House, so they can be connected spiritually again today, all of our deceased, because as with other settlements some of them no doubt are no longer seen and have passed away. In their time they drove this matter forward right up to this moment. Hence the reason for standing before you and saying come forth with your deaths of the moment for us to mourn today. Let them rest. You, their relatives of Tāmaki the great, Tāmaki, the resting place of many canoes, Tāmaki of 100 fine spouses, and much wealth has arrived here, so greetings, salutations and acknowledgments to you all.

I acknowledge our members of Parliament today, too, especially the Minister, as he is the one urging the claims along to get the desired outcome. Honourable Minister, thank you and good morning. And so to you the descendants who have arrived here today, I rise on behalf of the Māori Party to extend greetings to you relatives of those connected to Tāmaki-makau-rau—namely, Ngāti Maru, Ngāti Pāoa, Ngāti Tamaoho, Ngāti Te Ata, my connection and to Waikato, as well, Ngāti Whanaunga, Ngāti Whātua of Kaipara, Ngāti Whātua of Ōrākei, Te Akitai of Waiōhua, Te Kawerau of Maki, Te Patukirikiri, and eventually to Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, welcome.

I should add that the Minister was unable to be here today but he said to me: “Te Ururoa, give my regards to the ones who arrive at Parliament House today.” And so I express that sentiment to you, Tame, and to you all.

I understand that you, let us say, the local tribes of Tāmaki-makau-rau, met at the summit of Pūkawa in September last year. At that meeting you agreed to gather all Treaty matters together and put them under the one umbrella. Friends, gathering up all kinds of aspirations from each tribe and putting them all under the cloak of a single entity is a huge undertaking. Each tribe would have needs and aspirations of their own but then these would have to be gathered and together when it arrives on the Minister’s table. That is a huge undertaking. All of you are to be applauded for that. It is an example for the country. It is a great model for the country because from the majority of some claims that have arrived in Parliament have emerged huge problems, disputes, and battles from years that go back to a very long time. I do not know whether it was like that with you, but ultimately it has come together as one today. That is a significant thing for me.

I understand that a major feature in this bill is the return of total control over burial places and places within Auckland City to us of Māoridom. The names of our ancestors and forefathers are important. In their time, according to what has been stated, names emerged due to the circumstances of an event that occurred around them—tragedies, births, pleasant experiences, water depth misjudged, an accident, a dispute, a major battle perhaps. This is the situation that relates to all place names across the nation. It signifies the way we live our lives. So I totally support that intent of yours to go back to the original place names of Auckland as a model for the whole country. If it is possible in Auckland, then it can be done throughout the country. So I commend that initiative. That is that matter.

I have an idea of what is disclosed here, having attended a very good university most of the time, and that was the University of Auckland. I was a good student at that university. One of my pursuits while I was at university was anthropology without knowing what this anthropology thing was about. I came before experts in that field like Roger Green. That is how I got to know a person of that ilk, whose job it was to take students to visit and view sites that showed how Māori lived in ancient times. On one of these trips, I climbed Motutapu and it was an amazing place. This was a person from Rotorua who had never ventured out of that town and had finally made it to Motutapu, and who was being taken with other students beside him to sites that I could see before me. So these are the sites that ancestral forefathers occupied in that period. The way the forefathers and ancestors lived then surprised me.

So my understanding of those ancient times begins at Motutapu and you are totally aware that Motutapu erupted and Rangitoto resulted and Te Arawa became involved in the history of Auckland due to the day that Tamatekapua’s nose was bloodied. That person is an ancestor of mine on my mother’s side. It is not known whether an interest of land was actually handed down to Te Arawa or not at all, but, that aside, the name is still there. In terms of historical records relating to forefathers and ancestors, that has significance. Therefore, this descendant of Te Arawa is recognising you who have arrived here. I understand the Te Arawa canoe got to the North Island, followed the coastline to Whangaparāoa, on the east, and went across as far as Waitematā, to the west. As they were travelling, this priest Ngātoroirangi was present and so it was left to him to claim sections of land as they went from Whangaparāoa through to Waitematā, by naming them. As they were travelling along, they came into contact with some places on that route and closed in on some routes.

You might be aware of a time when the Te Arawa skippered by Tamatekapua came to shore and he spotted Hoturoa of the Tainui canoe and a problem brewed up. Why? Perhaps it was because of Tamatekapua’s adulterous actions or because he seduced and cheated women. Tamatekapua had a reputation for chasing after women. Eventually there was an exchange of words and a fight between the two broke out and it was during this exchange of blows that the name of Rangitoto emerged. So according to accounts it was the day when Tamatekapua was bloodied. That is my connection and contact to that one of the lands. It was 67 years ago, in 1946, that Eruera Tirikātene, grandfather to that one there, was here in this Parliament as a member for Southern Māori. He was here in this House. He legislated the creation of the entity the New Zealand Geographic Board. His recommendation in that legislation was to have a panel to amend the place names of this country. I will address you in English.]

In Sir Eruera Tirikatene’s kōrero in this House he pleaded to his fellow parliamentarians that correcting Māori place names would restore some of the historic background in the original names and would enable the younger generation to understand something of the Māori names. Koinei au e mihi nei ki a rātau katoa mō tērā āhuatanga kei roto i tēnei pire. Hei whakakōpani, me mihi rā ki a koutou o roto i te rōpū o Ngāti Whātua, pēnei i ngā mea o roto o Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei, o Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, o Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua. Ko koutou te hunga i āta wetewete nei i ngā take. Ka mihi ki a koutou o Ngāti Marutūahu. Tēnā koutou katoa i whai pānga anō rā ki roto i tēnei whiriwhiringa. Waiōhua, ka mihi rā anō hoki ki koutou katoa tae rā anō ki ngā mihi ki te Kīngi Māori, me te Kauhanganui. I whai wāhi anō hoki rātau ki roto i ngā whiriwhiringa, ka mutu, e ai ki taku mōhio, ka hoki te mana kōrero o ngā maunga tekau mā whā ki roto i ngā ringaringa o Tāmaki-makau-rau ki a koutou. He mea nui tērā ki roto i tēnei pire, me te mihi anō rā i te mea, ko ēnei āhuatanga he tauira mo te motu.

Kāre he mea i tua atu o tērā. Ko tāku, he mihi kau atu ki a koutou, me te mōhio anō hoki, ā, e rua, e toru pea ngā wāhanga kei mua i te aroaro kia tatū noa, kia whakakōhatutia ki roto i te ture. Ko tāku noa ake, he wāhi i te kōrero mō te taha ki a mātau o te Pāti Māori. Kai aku rangatira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora tātau e te Whare.

[This is why I am commending them all for having that aspect in this bill. In conclusion I must congratulate those of you of the Ngāti Whātua collective, like these ones of Ngāti Whātua of Ōrākei, of Ngāti Whātua of Kaipara, of the Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua. You are the ones who actually scrutinised matters. I acknowledge those of you of Ngāti Marutūahu. Well done to all of you who have participated once again in this negotiation process, and to all of you Waiōhua, too, including the Māori King and the Governing Council. They participated in the negotiations, and, as I understand it, ownership of the 14 mountains, which is currently in Auckland hands, is being returned to you. That is a thing of huge significance in this bill, and I congratulate you once again because these are examples for the nation.

There is nothing more beyond that. My part is simply to applaud you knowing full well, too, that there are just two and three parts perhaps ahead when it is settled and passed into law. My contribution has merely been to open the dialogue on behalf of the Māori Party. To my elders, greeting, salutations, and congratulations to you, and my appreciation to us all, the House.]

Kei te mihi nui ki a koutou. I am pleased to stand for the Greens to make a brief call to speak in support of the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. When I first read the bill my thoughts went to the Māori Affairs Committee, and I was not sure whether to envy its members the work they have ahead of them or to feel sorry for them for the work they have ahead of them. This bill is unique, in my experience, and I suspect it is unique in many ways. It does break new grounds. The Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations referred to it as being an ambitious piece of legislation, and it is ambitious in a good way. I think that the challenge for the select committee members will be to navigate their way through the submissions, through the many, many interests that will be expressed, and the many parties who will take an interest in this legislation, and to get an outcome that is satisfactory for everyone. I certainly, in a sense, envy them because it will be, I think, a fascinating process to hear the submissions, to hear from the various interest groups. But also, because of its complexity and because it is novel, I think there is the potential for things to go horribly wrong, but I am sure the committee will guide the process and get a satisfactory outcome for everyone. We certainly will be supportive of that outcome anyway.

I think that the reason why this bill will attract a great deal of attention is the level of attachment to the various landscape features. The maunga, the motu, the land, and the waterways around Auckland, around Tāmaki-makau-rau, carry a considerable burden of attachment not only for Māori but for Pākehā New Zealanders, Pākehā Aucklanders, and all of the other extraordinarily diverse and interesting cultural mix that now makes up Auckland’s population. For that reason I think the level of attachment to the maunga and to the various other landscape features does make this somewhat fraught, as I have said. That level of attachment could easily roll over into distrust, suspicion, and a concern that the outcomes will not be ideal, and that is something the select committee will need to deal with.

One of the great strengths of this legislation is that it talks about co-governance, so that all the people around the table—all the members of this collective, Māori, Auckland Council, and the Crown representatives—are working at a strategic level. They will be making the key decisions about the future of this landscape and of these places. It is not just co-management. Not to decry the value and different contexts of a co-management model, but this is a co-governance model that is being talked about. All of the various parties—the 13 rōpū who make up the collective from the Māori side, the council, the Crown through the Department of Conservation, and other agencies—are the governors of this land. That will carry a considerable burden of responsibility, but also provide an opportunity to make it better, to reveal the richness and the complexity of that landscape, and the interactions that human beings have had with it over time. That is going to be something that will be an extraordinarily interesting set of developments, both for the participants at the legal level, at the legislative level, and indeed for the people of Auckland, as we progress through.

There is considerable scope within the legislation and within this model of co-governance for having this collective act with authority and with responsibility for the maunga in particular. We only have to look at Maungauika or North Head as an example of what can be done in terms of bringing alive both the ancient and the modern history of a place—the work that the Department of Conservation has done in revealing and interpreting the Māori history, the pre-European history, and then, of course, the extraordinarily interesting military history of North Head, with the restoration of the old fort bringing people on to that mountain, and opening their eyes to both its historic and contemporary significance. There is considerable opportunity under this model for the richness of the other sites identified in it to be revealed over time, to be brought to Aucklanders, and to open people’s eyes to what has happened there. I think that will make Auckland a better place, a more interesting place, and it potentially will even enhance that attachment that Aucklanders feel to this extraordinary landscape and everything within it.

In terms of the islands, there is Rangitoto, of course. If there is a single iconic symbol of Auckland it would have to be that mountain, that island. Put aside the Sky Tower and the harbour bridge; all of those things will come and go. But Rangitoto is probably the single identifying motif for the Auckland area, for Tāmaki-makau-rau, to the extent that the management, the governance, of that island will be affected by this bill. I think there will be a level of concern about that, and we hope that the select committee and the people will inform themselves about the positive potential. Similarly with Tiritiri Mātangi Island there has been an extraordinary investment of people’s time, money, and energy, and considerable emotional investment in converting that island from a basically degraded pastureland with a few ramshackle buildings to what would have to be one of the jewels in the crown of the conservation estate, restoring the vegetation and the natural ecosystems on that. I was privileged to be on Tiritiri Mātangi Island on the day that the tuatara were returned a number of years ago. Tuatara were brought back to that island as a secure place for them to breed and to continue.

So there is this history of engagement, of involvement, and of emotional attachment to many of the sites that are dealt with in this bill. It will be a major challenge for this governance authority, for this collective group, to make sure that the people of Auckland do feel engaged with the future development and use of these sites, which are important to all of us. It will be a complex task. I do not think we should underestimate how complex it will be. There are historic and existing relationships between the members, the Māori rōpū who make up this collective; there is the council interest of course, which seeks to represent now something like a million people; there will be the Crown interest—and all of these multiple layers of relationships will not be easy to navigate. I think it will be a major challenge and an opportunity for the collective to ensure that we do get the preferred outcomes.

Essentially, one of the key ingredients to getting good outcomes will be time—simply allowing decisions to be made at a pace and in a way that does not scare the horses, that does not give people concern that their Auckland is being taken away from them. I come back to the point that I believe that with the potential within this legislation and the governance body that will come out of it, there is an opportunity to really enrich people’s experience, both people who live in Auckland and those who are fortunate enough to visit it.

That is probably as much as I need to say. This is an ambitious piece of legislation, and I add my congratulations to the people who conceived it and to those who have done the work to bring it to this point. I wish the select committee well in its deliberations. They will be difficult but this will be an extraordinarily interesting piece of work it has before it. I wish it well in getting a good outcome for that. Kia ora.

Te mea tuatahi, kei a koutou e aku rangatira, tēnā koutou. Ā, tēnā koutou i a koutou haere mai nei i tēnei rā mō tō koutou pire hou, mō tō koutou raruraru i a mātou te Karauna. Nō reira, ngā mihi nui ki a koutou katoa.

[The first thing, my leaders, is acknowledgments to you, collectively. Greetings to you who have come here in respect of your new bill and the problem you have caused us, the Crown. So, huge greetings to you all.]

Where to start? First of all, as a long-time resident of Auckland, again I say thank you to Ngāti Whātua for allowing me to stay both in Ōtara and in Te Atatū peninsula.

Like my colleague from the Greens, David Clendon, has said, the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill is quite a unique piece of legislation in the fact that it allows for co-governance. We see more and more, when we are doing Treaty bills, that there is a move to co-governance and co-management. I think that is a good thing. I think that is a world-beater. It is one of the reasons why I think this country can hold its head up high in terms of the work it does in trying to work with indigenous people. We have not got it completely right, but I think we do lead the way in our thought process on indigenous issues.

There are a couple of funny things about this bill. In 2006 it was signed off. An agreement was signed in principle between Ngāti Whātua o Ōrakei and the Crown. Then, as is most probably typical in Māoridom, a few iwi got their noses out of joint.

💬 Hon Shane Jones: Who were they? Who were they? The Māori Party. The Māori Party.

No, I am not going to say who they were. But I think that actually led to a better agreement than the 2006 one-off. So now we have 13 iwi who have put their hands up and wanted to be part of a collective co-governance regime over maunga and motu.

Let me say to the House and also to the folk in the gallery that there is one maunga that I have a particular interest in, and it is not Mount Eden. It is Maungarei in Mount Wellington and my involvement, and I am sure many people’s involvement, in the Kōkiri training centre in Maungarei. To all of those people who have been involved in the Kōkiri training centre at Maungarei, my hat goes off to them, right from the first day until the last day. My hat is certainly doffed to all of those people involved in the centre for their work.

I cannot wait to get on the road with my colleagues from the Māori Affairs Committee and to come and listen to the submissions. I think it is important that the home folk of this bill—the 13 iwi—make sure that they make submissions to the Māori Affairs Committee. Wherever you go, and when you talk to taxi drivers and you talk to people on the street about this issue, they will say: “Those blinking Māoris are going to get the mountains. Those blinking Māoris are going to get the islands in the Hauraki Gulf.” It is up to us and it is up to you to start educating the rest of Tāmaki and the rest of the country in terms of what is actually involved here. If you talk about co-governance and you talk about the way things are going to pan out, people actually start to take ownership of it and quite like the idea that there is co-governance, that there is co-management, and that there is basically joint ownership of the taonga that they see every day and every night.

Lastly, can I say about Tāmaki that my vision when you look at Tāmaki is Rangitoto. It is not the Sky Tower; it is Rangitoto. I want to say to the home folk that we must always have Rangitoto in our minds when we are looking at Tāmaki. It is the most beautiful sight in the world, and we have got it right here in Tāmaki. Again, I cannot wait to get on the road with my colleagues on our select committee to listen to some of the stories, some of the reasons, behind this settlement. I suppose it is just another tick in the box of our Government and our Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations in terms of, I think, our determination to settle as many of these grievances as possible in the shortest possible space of time. Kia ora.

I am pleased to be able to take a brief call in the first reading of this bill, the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. I want to mihi to all the iwi who have been identified as members of this collective redress, and I want to, more specifically, go to some of the detail of the bill, which I will be raising in the select committee, because at the end of the day our role as the Māori Affairs Committee will be to put under some scrutiny the ambitions of the deed and the aspects of how the legislation relates to that.

Firstly, I do want to question officials further around the issues of how the co-governance model operates and what the relationship of that body will be with regard to the Auckland Council, or the super-city council. One would consider that if all the volcanic cones, all the maunga, are managed in a collective way to be able to reflect in part the relationship of those iwi with those maunga but for the greater purposes of public use, then you would want to know that there is a deliberate connect with Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development, for example, in Auckland, because it is there to promote Auckland as a super-city, and it is there to ensure that tourism based on the natural features and those aspects can be achieved in a very comprehensive way. I just want to ask whether there is a formal relationship of the co-governance group with the way in which Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development develops its plans and its aspirations for improving tourism in the isthmus.

Secondly, and more specifically, is in relation to Part 4 and schedule 5 of the bill, which are all the provisions around the rights of first refusal. There is a level of detail around the time frames in which rights of first refusal provisions can take place—a 40-day period, roughly—and if hindsight is anything to go by, this whole mechanism is still a bit clunky. I can say that from, certainly, our iwi’s perspective, which is that the rights of first refusal mechanism does not operate as smoothly as it could and that it should be reviewed as a matter of course. So I want to pursue in more detail how these provisions apply, whether they will actually achieve what they are intended to achieve, and whether the time frames are realistic in terms of enabling a transfer.

Also, there are a number of Crown lands identified that can be transferred at some point or another to respective iwi or to some authorities. I would like to pursue whether or not it is an “all in” or a “some in” type of approach towards the Crown assets. I am sure that the officials will be able to help, certainly, my thinking and clarity in that respect.

I am aware that certainly iwi with Waikato connections are pursuing their individual and specific claims, and I want to in some part commend Michael Dreaver for starting with where people can agree, and realising the huge task before him, which will be going to the more specific. I need only point out the Waikato iwi who are included here: Ngāti Tamaoho, Te Akitai, Te Kawerau-a-Maki, Ngāti Te Ata, and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki. These will all have very distinct interests within the isthmus. Boundary issues will be a challenge—to work that out. More specifically, because it is the Auckland isthmus, there will be a fusing, I think, of some historical claims with some contemporary claims.

So how the approach to that will take place going forward, although it is not under the direct purview of this particular bill, is of some interest, I would expect, to members of the Māori Affairs Committee as to how there will be scope for those individual iwi to be able to achieve their specific claims. We should pursue this with a level of vigour that enables a good, healthy opportunity for specific claims to be able to leverage off what is in here—for example, the transfer of rights of first refusal lands to more specific, identified iwi I think might be one area where there is crossover.

I have grown up for some of my life in Auckland. I was born there and lived there until I was about 5. I got towed around by my parents to all sorts of places. We spent a lot of time in Māngere, by Māngere Mountain at the place of old Bob Kerr, who used to then be at the university where my father was studying. We learnt a lot about the history in that part of Auckland and certainly in Ngāti Te Ata’s footprints around Matukutureia, around the stonefields there: Te Akitai, Pūkaki, and around the airport. So I have some affinity with the need to ensure that the boundary issues are relatively well sorted out here.

As a young child growing up and having the honour of listening to some of the old people whom I can recollect from that time, I say that they were very clear about whose interests were within Tāmaki, now that it has been kind of fused together. But naming is an important thing and I want to pick up on the point raised by Rino, Te Ururoa, and Shane: if we have nothing else as Māori to stake our claim, naming becomes very important. And who can whakapapa to the names in the rohe will often tell you who has mana whenua status. Without throwing all the balls in the air here on this issue, I thought it was interesting too that some of the maunga did not have the Māori names set out. Again this will be a question for the officials and perhaps it may be clarified in the submissions as to why this did not take place, but it is of certain note that this type of omission has taken place.

Another point to raise is really to paraphrase again what the Minister said: this bill does not address all the historical claims in the isthmus and it does not provide the level of redress that this House has been used to when debating Treaty settlements. However, it does provide scope, and it provides scope for a collective of iwi and their significance in the biggest city of New Zealand to find a way of working together around some common interests, and for that I commend the Office of Treaty Settlements, I commend the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, and I commend Michael Dreaver and his team for bringing this bill to the House.

I was at the signing for the bill and I heard all the side stories. But what I was more interested in was that people had the fortitude and the foresight to be able to identify the things that they can agree on. In this day and age, certainly in Auckland, and certainly with regard to the way in which Treaty settlements are quickly evolving, I think this will provide a good lot of scope, certainly in the area of tourism and certainly in the area of preservation of natural features within the Tāmaki isthmus to be protected, to be utilised, to be enhanced, and also to leverage what Auckland City has to offer to many people who are visiting and living in the city.

So again I am looking forward to the bill coming to the select committee. I am looking forward to the submissions, and I hope we have a robust number of submissions that can clarify some of the questions that are swirling around and have been presented to the House today. When it comes to the second reading speech, perhaps I will be in a position where I can answer some of the questions that I have brought to the House today. Tēnā koutou.

It is a privilege to speak on this, the first reading of the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. It is a bill that will give effect to the deed of settlement that was signed by the Crown and the Tāmaki Collective. The Tāmaki-makau-rau region represents around one-quarter of all remaining settlements, and it is an area of complex and overlapping claims with many shared interests. I think Ms Mahuta expressed quite clearly what are some of the issues that are pertaining to this bill. Certainly, I am proud as the MP for Maungakiekie to represent a number of peoples within the Tāmaki-makau-rau area, particularly in the isthmus. But I must say I do depart from my colleagues in terms of the iconic feature in Tāmaki-makau-rau. In my view, it is clearly Maungakiekie. It is through no interest or bias in representing the area, but it is certainly one of those iconic pieces of landscape that is recognisable to all New Zealanders.

The collective approach recognises that iwi and hapū intersecting their interests would not be possible under any other approach. A number of iwi and hapū have settled their individual claims. We saw that last November with the legislation to recognise Ngāti Whātua Ōrakei, who are my local iwi, as well as Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara. This bill, as has already been stated, provides for the collective redress shared by these groups over the maunga and motu. As such, it forms part of the comprehensive redress, which comprises individual claimant group’s particular settlements. The vesting of those 14 maunga in the Tāmaki Collective is on the condition that they are held in trust for the common benefit of iwi, hapū, the Tāmaki Collective, and the people of Auckland. That will be vested as a reserve and have public access—that is a critical point—and third-party interests will be protected. That is something the local people in Maungakiekie are keen to maintain, and this bill certainly supports that. The bill establishes, as has already been stated, a co-governance regime between the Tāmaki Collective and Auckland Council, with representatives from both and a temporary Crown representative for the initial establishment period.

This is a bill that certainly has wide support across this House. It is a bill to be commended. I also want to acknowledge the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and the Office of Treaty Settlements for the hard work they have put in to bring this to bear. One of the consequences of this bill, I think, is we will see replanting on Maungakiekie, which is another point, I think, that people—certainly in the area of Maungakiekie—look forward to. I commend this bill to the House.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Māori Affairs Committee.