Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill

I move, That the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time. This omnibus bill represents the culmination of a huge amount of work over many years by some very dedicated people. The bill is going to give effect to eight deeds of settlement that seek to remedy the wrongs of the past and set a foundation for eight iwi at the top of the South Island to thrive into the future. Ngāti Apa, Ngāti Kuia, Rangitāne o Wairau, Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama, Te Ātiawa, and Ngati Toa Rangatira are the eight iwi whose claims are going to be settled through this bill.

I want to say something about the historical claims of the iwi. They relate to events at the top of the South Island, the prow of Māui’s waka. In legend, from this waka Māui and his brothers raised the great fish—that is, the North Island—from the depths of the Pacific. With all remaining South Island historical Treaty claims settled through this very bill, I am sure that we as a country will be in a strong position to pull that sluggardly large fish, the North Island, to a similar position. In that regard, I thank the Māori Affairs Committee for the tremendous work it did yesterday on the Tūhoe bill in the North Island. I acknowledge Mr Tirikatene, who, to quote the lyrics of the old song, “drove all night” so that he can be here for the hearing today—the debate. I forget I am not in court any more! This bill is a strong step in the direction of settling all historical Treaty claims in New Zealand. The progress of the bill is indeed long awaited for the eight iwi concerned, but also for New Zealand as a whole. I encourage the House to support this bill today and the four individual bills it will split into for the third reading.

Te Tau Ihu, at the helm of the waka, was the setting chosen for one of New Zealand’s earliest settlements for migrants coming out from England. Nelson was seen as an ideal place for those from England to start afresh and to find a place to set their feet. In the course of this stage of our country’s development, we saw eight iwi lose access to their land, so it is time to again start afresh through this bill. Te Tau Ihu was also the setting, in the Wairau Valley, for one of New Zealand’s most infamous violent conflicts between Māori, who were attempting to preserve their land ownership, and Pākehā. It is indeed unfortunate that large tracts of Māori land in Te Tau Ihu are today locked into inert forms of land ownership. Te Reo is not widely spoken Younger generations do not have the connection to the whenua that their ancestors had, and Māori do not have the representation in decision making for their region that they should.

As I often say when I get these speeches, it is not possible to fully compensate iwi, or, indeed, any claimant group, for the loss their people have suffered. The redress in this bill seeks to recognise the long-standing cultural and spiritual association the iwi had with places in which they resided in the 18th century but where they have since incurred substantial land loss and disenfranchisement. The bill provides a platform for the iwi to establish a strong position into the future and to rebuild a relationship of dignity with the Crown. The omnibus bill will also settle the historical Treaty claims of Ngati Toa Rangatira, across the Cook Strait to the lower North Island, and, very importantly, is going to recognise the relationship between Ngati Toa Rangatira and the “Ka Mate! Ka Mate!” haka. The redress package acknowledges that Ngati Toa Rangatira lost land in the Porirua and Kāpiti area, as epitomised by the case of Wī Pārata and the Bishop of Wellington.

Negotiations between the iwi have been long and, at times, difficult. They were difficult because of the highly overlapped nature of interest in claims in this area. As such, a novel approach was taken whereby all eight iwi progressed to a final redress package concurrently. Not only did they individually have to negotiate with the Crown but also they had to work through the differing views with other iwi. So I am very grateful to the members of the Māori Affairs Committee who have considered this bill, having invited public submissions on it. They heard submitters in Wellington, and they travelled to Blenheim and to Nelson to hear from submitters, such is their commitment. I thank the committee in the context of the handful of other Treaty settlement bills soon to be referred to it on the back of this one. I acknowledge the time that the committee spends on these bills, and, once again, say that the committee has done an excellent job.

The committee received 36 submissions. It has examined the bill and has proposed amendments with the endorsement of the Crown and the iwi concerned. The first amendment is a statutory release from liability in favour of Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama, and Te Ātiawa in relation to Puketāwai, a cultural redress site they will receive as part of their settlement. The second amendment is the refinement of a section of the “Ka Mate! Ka Mate!” haka’s attribution. This refinement clarifies the exclusion for educational purposes from the attribution right in favour of Ngati Toa Rangatira over the “Ka Mate! Ka Mate!” haka. I will say a lot more about that particular form of redress, which is novel and very, very important, when we come to the third reading. Other amendments are minor and technical in nature. I commend the bill to the House.

Tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. Tuatahi, me mihi atu ki a koutou e ngā iwi o Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka, naumai. Haere mai ki te Whare Paremata e takatū nei. He rā whakahirahira tēnei. Huri noa, e aku rangatira, e te Whare, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, ā, tēnā tātou katoa.

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. In the first instance, I acknowledge you, the tribes of the Prow of the Canoe, welcome. Welcome to Parliament House, waiting here in readiness. This is an important day. So salutations to you collectively my esteemed leaders throughout and to the House, greetings and acknowledgements to you all.]

I am delighted to be here in this House this morning to speak at the second reading of the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill. Not fog, nor thunder, nor rain, nor any other type of weather that Tawhirimatea could throw at me would hold me back from being here in the House this morning. [Interruption] It may have held Tau back but not me.

I am delighted to speak in support of this bill. As you can see, this bill is some 480-plus pages long. It is a voluminous bill. It is a very significant bill. It settles the claims of all of the tribes of Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka a Māui. Rangitāne, Ngāti Kuia, Ngāti Apa, Te Ātiawa, Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Rārua, and Ngāti Kōata are all resident in Te Tau Ihu, and Ngati Toa Rangatira of Porirua also has shared interests and propriety rights in the south as well as in Te Whanga-nui-a-Tara. So it is a significant bill.

I am very proud to have been a member of the Māori Affairs Committee. We met on several occasions to hear public submissions on this bill. As is always the case with every submissions hearing that I have sat through, there are those who are in support of the bill and there are those who are against. Those who are for are generally those who have done the hard mahi, the hard graft, to actually bring this bill into fruition, and they are generally satisfied and want to hurry its passage through because the work has been done. Unfortunately, some of the submissions are against, and, obviously, they voice their opposition quite strongly. We heard some strong opposition from certain submitters.

Just to canvass a range of the issues that we covered at the select committee—and I am selecting only a few because it is such a huge piece of legislation and it spans such a wide geographic area and numerous iwi and waka groups—we heard submissions from the Port Nicholson Block and Te Ātiawa against Ngāti Toa regarding redress in central Wellington and also Ngāti Toa’s interest in Taputeranga Island in Island Bay.

The issue of that police station is a complex argument between the tribes, the negotiators, and the lawyers. There was eleventh-hour legal action, as we know, by Te Ātiawa, and that led to some frustrating delays. But, at the end of the day, Ngāti Toa’s presence on the south-west coast is acknowledged by Te Ātiawa. It is not so accommodating when it comes to Taputeranga, but it seems that, unfortunately, these actions really go back to the Crown, because previous negotiators with the Port Nicholson Block claim have some explaining to do. They have some explaining to do just in the way that it created a quite messy issue that was not available during previous negotiations, but then there was a way forward when Ngāti Toa came to negotiate. That has been acknowledged, and that was an impasse that was created by the Crown in terms of the negotiations on those respective claims.

At the hearings in the South Island we heard from all the iwi, all very much supportive of the negotiation process. But it is very true that more recompense should have been available under these settlements, and that was very much a strong thrust of the submissions from the iwi. But he aha—they are willing to get the deal done and make sure they can move forward, and I do mihi to them and acknowledge them for that.

In the south we heard from Pākehā families—for instance, around the Tuamarina area—who are associated with that site, regarding public land and reserves being transferred over to Ngāti Toa. These Pākehā families are some of the descendants of the settlers who took part in what has become known as the Wairau incident. These people felt that no change was necessary, and they were unhappy with the statutory role Ngāti Toa will play in the administration of that reserve. But the Wairau Valley and that incident involving Ngāti Toa and the settlers is a very important footnote in the history of both the settlers and Ngāti Toa. I think it has been dealt with appropriately through recognition. Ultimately, these matters will require an ongoing relationship being formed between the iwi and the actual resident groups, the people, at Tuamarina. We can only encourage that taking place, and it will take place into the future.

Still in Wairau, there was a Pākehā family by the name of Fairhall, who asked for the return of some land that was acquired under the Public Works Act to build the Woodbourne air force base. This land has been earmarked by the Crown to use in the Treaty claim settlement negotiations. The family say it is at their expense, and they have recently gone to the High Court, I understand, for a judicial review on that particular matter. But just as the Public Works Act has been a taniwha for many a Māori whānau or hapū right throughout the country, it was interesting that it applies not only to Māori but also to Pākehā families.

There were many other submissions from various other hapū, and I am thinking internally within the Rangitāne. Of significance, I think, were the submissions in relation to the Wakatū Incorporation and other historical land entities within the top of the South Island area—Nelson, Wairau—and their assertion that their rights have been overridden through these settlements. My only comment to that is that, ultimately, these settlements are about the iwi working together, as the Crown has done on a regional grouping basis, and, ultimately—ultimately—the outcome that has been achieved through this legislation benefits all of the iwi members in Te Tau Ihu o te Waka a Māui, whether or not they are shareholders in Wakatū Incorporation, Ngāti Rārua-Ātiawa Iwi Trust, Wellington Tenths Trust, or other historical land entities and incorporations. This is an iwi-wide settlement and the iwis have gone through a tremendously long process to establish themselves and to get to this point, and, ultimately, all of the whānau benefit because they are all members of the iwi.

That is the only way I can really address the mamae of certain whānau. There is mamae right across all the whānau of Te Tau Ihu. You can never really adequately address it, but this is an iwi-wide settlement, and the eight iwi who have participated have done so in good faith. Even though there has been opposition from corporate organisations like the Wakatū Incorporation, the iwi have stood strong and that has prevailed, and we tautoko it here through at the second reading as this bill continues its passage.

One of the sadder parts of the submissions around this bill was the number of those who were totally opposed to the Treaty settlement process. You know, some made some very racist accusations towards the iwi, towards Māori. In particular, they were accusing certain rangatira of being murderers of both Māori and Pākehā. Look, it is not for me to go over all of the history. What we are trying to do here is not only acknowledge that history but also ensure that the Crown properly recognises the injustice and the grievances of these iwi and settles them so they can all move forward.

We heard a few of these submitters. They do not believe that the Crown ever breached the Treaty—they probably do not even believe in the Treaty. Clearly, their thinking is wrong, but it is a sad indictment that there are still intractable parts of society who believe that Māori deserve nothing from the Crown. Some of the letters that were received are quite openly hostile along those lines.

Be that as it may, we heard a range of submissions, but, I think, under the guidance of our chair, the committee considered everything—all the submitters—and we are very pleased with the outcome that we have come to. I look forward to awhi the further passage of this bill through the House, and I commend it to the House. Kia ora tātou.

The Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill will be the most important piece of legislation for my community of Nelson in the term of this Parliament. I want to recognise Ngāti Apa, Ngāti Kuia, Rangitāne, Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama, Te Ātiawa, and Ngāti Toa representatives in the gallery and many of their elders who started this claims process but have since passed on.

I also want to recognise Chris Finlayson for the outstanding pace that he has put on to the Treaty settlement process, which for us South Islanders gives the very real prospect that in the term of this Parliament all Treaty claims in the South Island will be settled with this bill. The lifting of that cloud of claims over the South Island, with the very substantive Ngāi Tahu settlement as well as these claims, is a huge step forward.

When I attended Waitangi Day at the Whakatū Marae this year, the first thing that was notable for me, as one who has been there over many years, was the record number of people who were there, and rather than an atmosphere of almost shame, there was an atmosphere of pride. The story of Treaty settlements associated with not just this settlement but those that are being achieved New Zealand - wide is showing a maturing of our nation and an acknowledgment of things in our history that were not right. And in terms of settlements of this sort, that really offers huge hope for communities like mine in Nelson.

The previous speaker, Rino Tirikatene, noted that there are a few grumbles around the edges, and there are elements of my community—I too get the letters of the grumpies who oppose this process. I assure my colleague opposite that they are an increasingly small minority and, actually, the broader mood of the Nelson Pākehā community is one of really looking forward to this work being completed, to these settlements being resolved, and for our top of the south community to be able to celebrate the success and the partnership with Māori, their success in the economic world, and their greater involvement in many of the public lands that are in our areas. Also, in terms of the economic significance of the scale of the settlement and the way in which, actually—let us be honest—this money is more likely to stay in our community, with the very long history of each of these iwi and the way in which they will move forward.

Can I acknowledge the work of the Māori Affairs Committee. I mainly actually want to acknowledge the huge patience, the determination, the hard work that have gone in by iwi to get us to this point. I look forward to the point where this bill goes through its third reading and when Nelson and the entire South Island can move forward from the period of grievance over these Treaty breaches and look forward to a far more prosperous and optimistic future for the top of the south. Thank you very much.

It gives me great pleasure to be able to contribute to the second reading of the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill. I recognise the huge amount of effort and commitment that has gone in to reaching this point by all those negotiators and advisers and acknowledge all those people who have participated throughout the whole process to ensure the result we have here today, which is a cluster of settlements tasked with taking the people in Te Tau Ihu forward. I want to also make an acknowledgment of my friend and colleague Maryan Street, who was at those same Waitangi Day celebrations at the marae that the Hon Nick Smith referred to. One of the things that she said to me in our conversation was that it was a brilliant day because everybody from the whole community came on to the marae and had a place where they all felt they belonged. Is that not a great testament to the progress that Treaty settlements can make for all New Zealanders in terms of shaping our national identity within communities throughout New Zealand? That is what Te Tau Ihu and the group of iwi in those claims groups are able to achieve.

When we went down to Nelson to listen to the submissions, we understood how acute some of the local issues are for those iwi. We understood that despite some of the tense points of negotiation and some of the internal factions that occurred, it had taken place over a long period of time. So anyone listening to this debate today should have the confidence that this has not happened all of a sudden. It has happened because there has been a lot of work and effort put in to reconciling issues within each respective iwi and trying to progress a settlement for the greater interests of those iwi members.

One of the things that always vexed the Māori Affairs Committee is the issue of mandate, so I thought it would be useful to actually go through the ratification of the deeds of settlement of each respective iwi involved in the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill so that people can see that the rate of participation and the level of confirmation of the deeds of settlement were quite healthy. We should be encouraged by that. Ngāti Tama ki Te Tau Ihu had a 40 percent participation rate in the ratification of its deed of settlement and an approval rate of 100 percent. It had very few invalid votes. Ngāti Rārua had a 28 percent participation rate and a 99 percent approval rate. Ngāti Kōata had a 25 percent participation rate of its tribal members in ratifying its deed and a 98 percent approval rate. Te Ātiawa o Te Waka-a-Māui had a 28 percent participation rate and a 92 percent approval rate. Ngati Toa Rangatira had a 26.2 percent participation rate and a 98.7 percent approval rate. Rangitāne o Wairau had a 34 percent participation rate and a 98 percent approval rate. Ngāti Kuia had a 34 percent participation rate and a 99 percent approval rate. Ngāti Apa ki Te Rā Tō had a 32 percent participation rate and a 99 percent approval rate.

I guess in percentage rates people might think 20 percent or 30 percent is not much, but when you look at the scale of Treaty settlements across the board, they range from something like 18 percent to around about 52 percent at the highest level, from what I can observe. So we can see that the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill is somewhere in the middle. We should have a level of confidence that a lot of work has gone in to ensuring that the broadest possible net of securing greater participation in the decision-making process has happened. Mandate is a key issue in the Treaty settlement discussion, and it certainly became a point of criticism, I guess, for those people who did not support it.

But we must, in fairness, go to some of the submissions that were put before the select committee. I want to ask the House to look at the key amendment that the select committee raised. That was in relation to the Puketāwai site. One of the things that tasked our minds around getting that particular amendment was actually agreeing with submitters that they should not be inheriting a liability. So we have amended the bill to insert new clause 277A to ensure that the liability on that landfill site does not transfer to the new owners. Why that is so important is because previously it was, to my understanding, in the hands of local government, and it is not fully disclosed what level of contamination exists on that site. We sought advice from officials. The Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations certainly heard the plea of the select committee to reconsider this particular aspect, and, thankfully, we were able to achieve an amendment to make it very clear that no liability was to transfer from this closed landfill site.

I think that is a gain in terms of the value of the select committee and what it contributes to the process. It is also a gain because the iwi are much more confident in terms of taking back land where there may be an undisclosed liability that they will not have to pay for the cost of clean-up. In terms of the Woodbourne airbase, we did, as my colleague Rino Tirikatene has said, get a fair amount of concern around the return of this land and it not going back to private landowners. However, we recommended no change to the bill, because it is an airbase site, it is a defence site, and it will continue to be that. There was no indication, when the select committee pursued the interests of people who objected to the clause, that the site would no longer be used for a defence site, so we thought that, actually, the provision in the bill can stay the same.

In terms of Wakatū, this is another area where the Wakatū Incorporation put its interests before the select committee and said that some of the private shareholding interests underneath its purview would be significantly affected by terms in the bill. Our mind was tasked around two particular things—firstly, the cluster of Te Tau Ihu claimants actually did originally include members who were advocating for Wakatū, and some way through the process, if I recollect the discussion, those interests had fallen away from continuing with the negotiation. The second key point was that this is an iwi settlement; this is not a private shareholder settlement. The fundamental difference is that some of the shareholders of Wakatū are not members of the iwi who will benefit from the settlement. So we kind of teased that out and got ourselves sufficiently comfortable with the fact that the clause protecting or preserving the legal interests that currently exists in the bill covers off all the concerns that Wakatū were concerned about.

But can I put on the record, because we wanted to make absolutely sure, that we sought advice from both the Office of Treaty Settlements and the Crown Law Office in terms of that significant submission. I will read the advice that we got back from the Crown Law Office for the benefit of those who are listening and are interested in the debate. It says: “The current orthodox position is that the Treaty of Waitangi does not give rise to directly enforceable legal obligations without specific statutory authority. In the Wakatū proceedings the claims are based around the same factual grievances that are the subject of the settlement, but primarily raise private law claims based in trust and fiduciary duty, not based on the Treaty breach. The ability to prosecute certain private law claims raised in Wakatū may be impacted by extinguishment provisions of the Tainui Taranaki Treaty settlements and their extinguishment clause, unless expressly preserved. Crown Law advice was sought on this matter and ultimately, it was considered … improper to obstruct the final determination in the appellate courts. Legislative drafting was developed to specifically apply a preservation clause only to the current litigation and specific parties to that litigation.”

I have read that quote for the benefit of Tainui Taranaki so that they are clear in terms of the way in which the select committee approached this issue and reconfirmed that the bill should not be changed in this regard. This is the second reading. Hopefully, in the third reading of the bill every member of the Māori Affairs Committee, who I know would want to speak on this, will be able to make a contribution and acknowledge the hard work and effort of all those negotiators of Te Tau Ihi who have brought this bill to the House to be considered. Kia ora.

Tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. Tēnā koutou katoa e te Whare. E ngā iwi e huihui nei, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Greetings to you all in the House. To the tribes assembled here, salutations, acknowledgments, and greetings.]

I just want to acknowledge, before I start, the people who are in the gallery today, ngā tangata o Te Tau Ihu te rā. They are: Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō, Ngāti Kuia, Ngāti Rangitāne o Wairau, Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama ki Te Tau Ihu, and Ngati Toa Rangatira. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

I acknowledge that the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill is complex, covering eight deeds of settlement for breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi for historical grievances, and that it offers some redress for those breaches. The bill also covers the intellectual property issue of the haka “Ka Mate! Ka Mate!” and acknowledges Ngati Toa Rangatira Te Rauparaha as the composer of this iconic haka. In the next part of the parliamentary process this bill will be split up into separate Acts.

I said in my first reading speech that it is a privilege to rise to speak on this bill, and I reiterate that. The Treaty settlements have such a wide-ranging impact on so many people, and to understand the significance of that is to feel the weight of the respective histories as a very tangible thing.

I have to confess to the iwi that this is the first time I have sat on the Māori Affairs Committee to hear submissions. I am struck by how very different it is from my other committee, the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee. It is very collaborative, with the interests of the Treaty settlements at heart. I am very glad that I did get to the top of the south—Te Tau Ihu—to hear firsthand from the people affected by these settlements. I do read the written submissions, of course, but to actually hear what the people say while they are in their own rohe, on the whenua, about how these settlements will affect them is very powerful. I do believe that the submissions process helps us as politicians to understand the settlements so much better. So for all those who have submitted or who have ever made a submission in any type of democratic process, take heart. It does make a difference.

It is also good to hear the arguments directly from those who oppose the bill, and I want to take time to acknowledge them—in particular, Ngāti Rangitāne o Kaituna, who presented to the select committee in Blenheim. The select committee report back to the House refers to decisions of the Waitangi Tribunal in 2003 that said that there was no distinction in whakapapa for Ngāti Rangitāne o Kaituna and that, effectively, Ngāti Rangitāne o Kaituna must sort things out with Ngāti Rangitāne o Wairau. I guess this is where the Greens’ position on the Treaty settlement process is made apparent. Our position, and I stated it in the first reading, is that we reject that these Treaty settlement bills are full and final, regardless of what they say.

One reason for that is that the Crown determines whom it will and will not negotiate with, and our concern is that it can perpetuate further grievances by pitting Māori against Māori and hapū against hapū. This has happened before. The Crown has refused to acknowledge the status of iwi and they have had to fight tooth and nail for recognition, and several of the Treaty settlements in recent times outline these struggles. It is the Crown, then, that draws the line in the sand and says: “We will talk to only these people, and only if they have been there since a certain date.” That explains one submission that was in opposition to the Ngati Toa Rangatira redress in the Wellington area.

Our unease is probably best summed up by this bit from Chris Matenga Webber, who submitted on behalf of the descendants of Te Rangi Hīroa from Kāpiti, who had their own Treaty of Waitangi claims lodged. He wrote: “Members of Te Rangihiroa and other family lines have expressed concerns that [the Te Tau Ihu] settlement does not cause further harm within and between the iwi and have sought for opportunity to resolve [matters]. Concern remains around the non return of lands, government manipulation of tribal and political landscape and imposition of models and agreements which further cement that status of tangata whenua as subservient whilst the Crown strengthens the inequality of its relative position.”

I note that in the Tasman District the Wakatū Incorporation had a similar concern, as well as concerns that these settlements would impact on its ability to settle its own property claims. But we have heard in great detail from the Hon Nanaia Mahuta the legal position of that and how we sought legal advice. Basically, to sum it up, because the Crown will not negotiate with an incorporation, it negotiates with iwi.

I want to acknowledge that I realise that there will always be competing interests. Iwi so often share common ancestors and whakapapa to the same areas and, quite simply, have had boundaries around their rohe that have stretched and reduced over time and that overlap. So I note that in this bill, in some areas of redress like the Puketāwai cultural redress site, the land is jointly vested. Here it is vested in three iwi: Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama ki te Tonga, and Te Ātiawa o Te Waka-a-Māui. This redress property is another example of the generosity of iwi in these Treaty settlements.

The report back to the House says that this bill needs to make sure that with the vesting of Puketāwai with iwi, they not be liable for the economic or environmental liabilities that result from the closed landfill that is also on this land. Iwi in this area lost thousands and thousands of hectares of land, and they get a tiny proportion back. In this case, with Puketāwai, it includes a closed landfill. That must be a metaphor for something, but I do not know what.

I want to acknowledge the generosity of the iwi who have had land returned to them that they have then given back to the Crown for the benefit of all New Zealanders. Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō, for example, will be receiving and returning the alpine tarns in the Nelson Lakes National Park. Again, that iwi, with Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama ki Te Waipounamu, and Te Ātiawa o Te Waka-a-Māui, will have Te Tai Tapu in the North-west Nelson Forest Park vested in them, but will return it to the Crown after a week.

The commercial redress in these settlements offers the chance for iwi to start to rebuild their economic base. The cultural redress is an acknowledgment and restoration of the status of the iwi in relation to their land and their resources and of their role as tangata whenua and kaitiaki. The renaming of certain sites back to their original names is important in telling the history of the area from a Māori perspective, and again it addresses the tangata whenua status of iwi.

I want to recognise the fact that these settlements do not just drop out of the air, that it takes years and years of work. These bill readings and the submission process are the culmination of a huge collective effort over generations. I also want to acknowledge that these settlements are hard fought for and hard-won and that their success should be celebrated. I look forward to the third reading and the enactment of these settlements. I will be supporting this bill. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

Kia ora, everybody. I would particularly like to congratulate our Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Christopher Finlayson, who has done a fantastic job in making progress on completing final and durable settlements for these Treaty of Waitangi claims. I hope that the people of Rangitāne and Ngāti Kahungunu in my electorate of Wairarapa are watching their televisions screens this morning, listening to their radios, and watching this progress. One thing about the Treaty process here this morning is that my own iwi are behind the game, because for the last 8 years we have not got into the same space as the good people of Te Tau Ihu.

When the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill enacts the final settlements in the South Island, finishing the work that was begun by the National Government in the 1990s with Ngāi Tahu, the settlement will recognise the rights and wrongs of the past and, I hope, strengthen the partnership between the Crown and Māori and, as well, between all people in New Zealand, irrespective of their ethnicity, their background, and their path to this country. I think that the main benefit, which is why I want to see progress also in the Wairarapa electorate, is that the settlements will allow iwi to unlock their economic potential and boost regional and provincial areas, in keeping with the Government’s policy of building a more productive and competitive economy. This is a very good bill. I congratulate not only the Minister but also the Treaty negotiators, the Government’s negotiators, and all the people who were involved in coming to this very momentous occasion through this legislation in the House today. Thank you.

E ngā iwi o tēnei kerēme, ngā iwi o Te Tau Ihu, nau mai, nau mai, haere mai. Haere mai ki tēnei Whare, ki tō Whare, ki tō tātou Whare, Te Whare Pāremata o Aotearoa. Nō reira, ōku rangatira, kui mā, koro mā, kei te mihi, kei te mihi, kei te mihi.

[To the people of this claim, Te Tau Ihu, welcome, welcome, welcome. Welcome to this House, to your House and ours, Parliament House of New Zealand. So to my esteemed chiefs, elder women and menfolk, I greet, acknowledge, and salute you.]

I join with all members of this House in supporting the second reading of Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill. Labour believes in building a future for all. Labour believes in having an economy that works for all New Zealanders. Labour believes in having a fair and just society, where all live in dignity. Labour believes in having an environment we protect and a nation we can be proud of. In the second reading of this bill, I believe that ngā iwi o Te Tau Ihu will be able to build that very future for their own. They will be able to build an economy that works not only for their people but for all New Zealanders. Ngā iwi o Te Tau Ihu will also be able to build a fair and just society, where their own people and others will live in dignity, and I believe they will build an environment that they will protect. Finally, I believe wholeheartedly that ngā iwi o Te Tau Ihu will build a nation that they can be proud of.

I stand in consolidation with all members of this House in supporting this important bill, Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill. Can I acknowledge the efforts and role of the negotiators, the role of the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, the Hon Chris Finlayson, and, of course, the role of the Māori Affairs Committee for its work throughout the select committee process, both down in Nelson and also here in Wellington. Obviously, in a joined up or large settlement such as this there are a lot of compromises and challenges that go on behind the scenes to get it to this stage, so it is with a lot of, I guess, personal experience, having been a mandated negotiator for the Rongowhakaata claim, that I know that that is not often an easy challenge to overcome. Often, our people are forced in terms of time and, of course, resources, but the way in which I believe that the people of Te Tau Ihu, the iwi of Te Tau Ihu, have shown the humility, the dignity, the patience, and the perseverance to get us here—I believe that what I see in front of us in the second reading of this bill is an acknowledgment of all those combined efforts and commitments. So, again, I join in celebrating this bill in its second reading.

To the bill itself. Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill is an omnibus bill. It comprises four components, three of which are claims settlement bills that seek to give effect to the deeds of settlement entered into by the Crown with Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō, Ngāti Kuia, Rangitāne o Wairau, Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama ki Te Tau Ihu, Te Ātiawa o Te Waka-a-Māui, and Ngati Toa Rangatira for the final settlement of their historic claims for breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. The fourth component bill provides Ngati Toa Rangatira with the attribution rights in relation to the very famous haka “Ka Mate! Ka Mate!”. The eight deeds provide for the settlement of all historic claims in the top of the South Island, an area referred to as Te Tau Ihu o Te Waka o Māui. The Ngati Toa Rangatira deed also provides for the settling of all of Ngati Toa Rangatira’s historical claims in the North Island. The bill includes only those elements of the redress and the settlement package that require legislative authority. The deeds of settlement set out in full the redress provided for the eight iwi in settlement of all their historical Treaty of Waitangi claims. I could not do justice going to each part of the bill, suffice to acknowledge, and I would like to take this time to reflect on, all the iwi in giving a brief background to them as a way of supporting the second reading.

I turn to Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō. Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō has customary interests in Te Tau Ihu, or the northern South Island region. Around 700 people registered an affiliation to Ngāti Apa in the 2006 census. The Waitangi Tribunal heard the Te Tau Ihu claims of all iwi with interests in the northern South Island between August 2000 and March 2004 and released preliminary reports in 2007 and a final report in November 2008. On 23 November 2005 the previous Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi negotiations and the Minister of Māori Affairs recognised the mandate of the Kurahaupō ki Te Wai Pounamu Trust to represent Ngāti Awa and two other iwi in negotiating a comprehensive historic Treaty settlement. The Crown signed terms of negotiations with the Kurahaupō Trust in June 2006. On 11 February 2009 the Crown and the Kurahaupō Trust co-signed a letter of agreement. So to Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō I say: kei te mihi, kei te mihi, kei te mihi.

We turn to Ngāti Kuia. In terms of a background, Ngāti Kuia has customary interests in Te Tau Ihu, or the northern South Island region. Around 1,600 people registered an affiliation to Ngāti Kuia in the 2006 census. The Waitangi Tribunal heard the Te Tau Ihu claims of all iwi with interests in the northern South Island between August 2000 and March 2004 and released preliminary reports in 2007 and a final report in 2008. I note here that the terms of negotiations were signed with the Kurahaupō Trust in 2006 and on 11 February 2009 the Crown and the Kurahaupō Trust co-signed a letter of agreement.

I want to acknowledge Rangitāne o Wairau, who hold customary interests in Te Tau Ihu, or the northern South Island region. Around 1,000 people registered an affiliation to Rangitāne o Wairau in the 2006 census. I knew that if I started going down this track I would run out of time in acknowledging all the iwi. Suffice to say to Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama ki Te Tau Ihu, and Te Ātiawa o Te Waka-a-Māui: can I again commend you for all the efforts and the mahi that you have displayed in bringing this bill to this House, with the support of, clearly, the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and with the work of the Māori Affairs Committee. I join with all members in this House, particularly on this side of the House, in commending this bill at its second reading. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

Tēnā koe. I would like to acknowledge the participants in this settlement: Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō, Ngāti Kuia, Rangitāne o Wairau, Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama ki Te Tau Ihu, Te Ātiawa o Te Waka-a-Māui, and Ngati Toa Rangatira. I am speaking from the desk of the Hon Tau Henare, who, I am sure, would like to be here with you today. I will not say that I am speaking on his behalf, because I would not attempt to emulate his skills. I would like to also acknowledge the wonderful work of the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, the Hon Chris Finlayson, who I think is respected by all sides of the House for the work that he has done. Of course he has been only half of the combination that it takes to form these agreements.

This is a particularly important agreement. I find it important because in my 9 years here I have spent 3 of them as the electorate MP for West Coast - Tasman. So I am familiar with that part of the northern part of the settlement. The National-led Government is making great progress. This bill is very special because it finishes the work that the National Government began in the South Island with Ngāi Tahu. This is the final settlement so it makes it particularly special. Settlements, of course, recognise the rights and wrongs of the past and strengthen partnerships between the Crown and Māori. Settlements also help unlock the economic potential and boost the regional and provincial areas, in keeping with National’s priority to build a more competitive and productive economy. I was very comforted to hear that—and I am not on the Māori Affairs Committee.

I understand from previous speakers that the Wakatū situation has been taken into account, has been addressed. And although it may not have resulted in a situation that is satisfactory to everybody, the matter has been addressed and has been fully worked through. I think that is the very important thing.

The select committee has examined the bill carefully and has brought through a number of recommendations, which I would just like to address now. The Woodbourne airbase will allow Ngāti Apa, Ngāti Kuia, me Rangitāne o Wairau to exercise the right to purchase the land at Woodbourne airbase, by way of redress. Part of this land was acquired by the Government for defence purposes from the estate of George Fairhall. Members of the Fairhall family, as we heard from other speakers, have opposed the inclusion of this land in Treaty settlements as they consider this will override their rights under section 40 of the Public Works Act 1981 and they have commenced a judicial review. So, again, the process will take its time and the results will reflect, I am sure, a sense of justice.

It is always quite interesting to reflect on what is being achieved with the settlements, particularly, as I say, under the authority of the present Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. I can think back to my own origins, which are Scottish, and, of course, they had the Highland Clearances, which—

💬 Hon Maurice Williamson: Really?

Yes, yes, indeed Scottish. That is why I have a hairy nose. Those clearances were never really properly addressed, and they still, to this very day, are a source of grievance to people whose relatives were so affected. So although there are injustices, the important thing about the New Zealand society and the New Zealand community on both sides is that they are working together to address these and to create fairness and a decent outcome. If I could just conclude, I guess it is a case of exercising with caution my limited skills in Māori: “Let us wield the paddles of the canoe as we move forward together.” Tiakina te hoe kia rite [ensure the rowing is in unison]. Thank you.

I te tuatahi me kōrero ahau i roto i tō tātau Reo Māori, hei tāpiri atu ki runga i ngā kupu kua puakina i waenga tonu i a tātau i tēnei ata, hei tautoko i te kaupapa, arā, ko te waka e whakaterengia ana i raro i te ture hei hari, hei hāpai i ngā taonga roa noa e tāria ana. Kātahi tēnei rā ka whakawhiwhia atu e te Karauna ki te iwi ko rātau ngā uri, mai i ngā tūpuna i mamae ai i tō rātou wā i roto i ngā mahi i mētia e te Karauna. Nā reira, a Te Tau Ihu tutuki noa ki tēnei taha o Te Wai-a-Raukawa, Te Moana-a-Raukawa, tēnā koutou. Tēnā koutou i tēnei rangi, tēnei rangi whakahirahira tā te mea, ko tā koutou i ōhia ai, kātahi ka tutuki ki te kapu o te pepa i raro i te ture, i raro nōki i te tāhūhū o tēnei Whare, tō koutou whare, te Whare Pāremata. Nā reira, Te Tau Ihu, ngā kokonga katoa, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

[Firstly I must speak in our Māori language and add my sentiments to those expressed this morning amongst us to endorse the passage of this bill, which is responsible for the development of long-awaited resources. At last this day the Crown has provided to the people who are descendants of the ancestors who suffered, in their time, through deeds imposed upon them by the Crown. We have reached the day where the tribe will soon receive these resources from the Crown. And so, to those of you of Te Tau Ihu, stretching across to this side of Cook Strait, the Sea of Raukawa, greetings to you collectively. Salutations to you on this day of great significance, because that is what you collectively have hankered after, and now it has been done. It is at last on the palm of the paper under the law and under the ridge pole of this House, your House, Parliament House. And so to you Te Tau Ihu and to all corners of the Chamber, greetings to you collectively, greetings.]

I rise to support the earlier speakers and remind us how long this claim has been wending its way through the process. I have recited some of the history on earlier occasions and have shared the pleasure of sitting on the Māori Affairs Committee for a brief period of time during one of our visits down in Te Tau Ihu to hear the submissions.

There are several elements I want to focus on in the Te Tau Ihu Claims Settlement Bill. First, I want to acknowledge the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, the Hon Chris Finlayson. I want us to focus on something that I genuinely believe will, over a period of time, prove to be an extremely intelligent thing to have done. I am not being facetious to the Minister. I refer here to the ability of the iwi to actually enforce their protocols.

Often, iwi find that once these settlements have been entered into, Governments come, Governments go, and Ministers move on and do other things with their lives. Goodness me, I can think very vividly of the time when Doug Kidd was the Minister of Fisheries—a personality not unknown to these people. I think also of Douglas Montrose Graham, who, irrespective of what might be said about him outside of this House, I have no compunction whatsoever in saying he did a lot of the heavy lifting in the original stage of the Treaty settlement process. I recently saw him at the mate for one of our matuas of the Tai Tokerau, the late Laly Haddon, otherwise known in North Auckland rugby lore as the “Black Tracker”. I had no qualms whatsoever in escorting him around the marae and sitting with him on the marae in that area.

But the point I am making is about cultural redress, in clause 32: “The Crown must comply with a protocol while it is in force. (2) If the Crown fails, without good cause, to comply with a protocol, the relevant trustees may, subject to the Crown Proceedings Act 1950, enforce the protocol.”—if the Crown fails, the relevant trustees may, subject to the Crown Proceedings Act, enforce the protocol.

I think that in times to come, that simple provision will be an injunction to the courts to ensure that these protocols, which do not have the same force and standing of property rights, do represent an attempt on the part of the Crown to ensure that Māori are no longer marginalised in a range of areas, whether it be fisheries, whether it be landscape management, whether it be heritage, or whether it be standing up for those cultural resources the Tau Ihu iwi feels are integral to their identity.

The other thing that is important for us to emphasise today is that this claim covers an area that is provincial. We need to ensure that the Crown, as it goes forward with its Māori affairs policies and economic development policies in the regions of New Zealand, never overlooks the endowments and never overlooks the rights that the smaller iwi in the regions are receiving.

It could have been that Te Tau Ihu, in times gone by, was regarded as one homogeneous group of Māori. That is not the case in this bill. This bill recognises each particular iwi, just as the bill to deal with the Muriwhenua tribes—when it wends its way into the House—will recognise my grandmother’s iwi, a small iwi by the name of Ngāi Takoto. I doubt it even has 1,000 members, although, as a consequence of economic stewardship that I am sure will be skilful, its numbers will grow in time.

The point I am making is that it is very important to claimants that they see their particular identity not melded into, let me say, larger organisms. But that is not always the case. A choice was made by the Kahungunu iwi, which thought the Treaty claims would be better dealt with by dismembering the broad Kahungunu iwi community into more specific parts. That is not an approach that will work with the Ngāpuhi tribe. The Ngāpuhi tribe has the largest claim outstanding, as I am sure the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations will agree. That is the largest tribe with outstanding claims. It has members in excess of 125,000. Whether or not they are active members or they are the great-grandchildren of our forays into Ngati Porou is another matter—that is another matter. In fact, I am quite confident that a number of them are growing more confident that their whakapapa in Ngāpuhi is no longer an item of embarrassment.

I would say to the Minister, who has also got heritage responsibilities, that Christmas Day 2014 will be 200 years since my matua Ruatara brought Samuel Marsden to Aotearoa, along with our other matua Hongi Hika, an unrivalled chief. The less said about that today the better.

I think we need to celebrate what this group of Māori iwi have achieved. The task will not be easy to transform this into a durable flow of economic benefit, but you have made your choice. The Crown has taken it as far as it believes it can, and the fact that there is no more internal dissension is something the Ngāpuhi people need to learn.

Given that the Ngāpuhi claim could very well be in the vicinity of $250 million, if that was put on account, it would earn 5 percent per year. A 5 percent yield on $250 million is about $13 million. The squabbling has gone on in the Ngāpuhi area for over 6 years. Six times 13 is not far from $80 million. No mana-munching personality in the Tai Tokerau Ngāpuhi iwi is worth $80 million. Kia ora tātou katoa.

Bill read a second time.

In accordance with the determination of the Business Committee, this bill will be divided by the Clerk of the House, and those bills are set down for third reading next sitting day.