Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill

I move, That the Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time. The bill gives effect to a deed of settlement between the Crown and Ngāruahine that was signed near Hāwera in August 2014. The settlement provides financial, commercial, and cultural redress and acknowledges the losses suffered by Ngāruahine arising from very serious breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi.

I acknowledge the work of the negotiators, some of whom are present in the gallery this morning, my ministerial colleagues, and Government and other agencies that have contributed to this bill. I also want to thank the chair and members of the Māori Affairs Committee for their good work during the consideration of the bill and the exploration of the issues raised in submissions.

The bill was referred to the committee on 11 August 2015, 24 submissions were received from interested groups and individuals, and the committee heard 12 of these at hearings in Hāwera and Wellington in November 2015. The committee reported the bill back to the House on 23 March 2016 and recommended that it be passed with a number of amendments, which include changes to clauses relating to fines for offences under regulations and by-laws, the inclusion of new Part 4 to the bill to provide a mechanism for Ngāruahine to reorganise their governance structure in relation to their fisheries assets, and other minor or technical amendments that are not specifically referenced in the committee’s commentary on the bill.

There is one particular matter that I want to refer to now. In its commentary on the bill, the committee went to some lengths to address Āraukuku interests covered under a claim to the Waitangi Tribunal, registered as Wai 552. This was a key issue raised by submitters opposing the bill. It is the subject of judicial review proceedings on appeal to the Court of Appeal and is set down for hearing on 19 July. Āraukuku is a Taranaki hapū that has whakapapa links both to Ngāti Ruanui and Ngāruahine.

The committee noted in its commentary that although the claims settlement process does not allow it to address to its satisfaction the issues that some Āraukuku individuals raised in submissions, it does not propose any changes to the bill and will continue to monitor the situation through the Post Settlement Commitments Unit. On the related issue of the Stratford Power Station land, I acknowledge the committee’s request for the Crown to make public statements in respect of this land, and I will certainly consider that at the appropriate time.

The other matter raised by the committee in its commentary related to concerns raised by Ngāruahine regarding the appropriateness of transferring future or contingent liabilities from their mandated iwi organisation to their post-settlement governance entity, as provided for through the governance reorganisation provisions of the bill. I understand that although the post-settlement governance entity accepts the need to take on all known current assets and liabilities, they are concerned about unknown future or contingent liabilities that result from acts or omissions by their mandated iwi organisation up until the date it is wound up.

Although the committee is not recommending any amendments to the bill in relation to future or contingent liabilities based on Crown advice, my officials agreed to look into this issue in more detail on a without prejudice basis, and I am going to write to Ngāruahine very shortly.

The second reading brings us closer to the concluding stages of the settlement process. It seeks to recognise what is important to the people of Ngāruahine and to provide redress for historical breaches of the Treaty. My hope is to host the iwi of Taranaki here in Wellington in October for a joint Ngāruahine, Te Atiawa, and Taranaki Iwi third reading. I commend the bill to the House.

Ā, ko te mea tuatahi tū ake au ki te tautoko i Te Reo w’akamoemiti; nō reira, e te tuakana i tukuna atu i taua whakamoemiti, tēnei te mihi ake ki a koe. Oti noa, mai i Te Rakiura ki Te Tonga, whiti atu ki Te Wharekauri ki Te Rāwhiti, toro atu ki Taranaki ki Te Uru, piki atu ki Te Reinga ki Te Tai Tokerau—ngā kokonga e whā o Te Motu o Aotearoa—ngā whānau i raro i te kapua pouri, kei te hīkoi i roto i te ātārangi o ngā whārua o te mate; mauri mai rā ō koutou parekawakawa kia tangihia e te wā iti nei. Tēnei te tangi apakura e aku parepare, aku w’akaruruhau, e te mūrau o te tini, te wenerau o te mano, kua mānu ki Te Waka o Aituā, nō reira e ngā mate maha o te wā hoki wairua atu ki a rātou mā i Te Wā’i ngaro. Nō reira oti atu te wā ki a koutou, e oki, e oki.

Nō reira, e tika ’oki kia ’uri atu ki ngā whānau me ngā hapū o Ngāruahine, koutou katoa kua tae mai ki tēnei Whare ki te w’akarongo ki te pānuitanga tuarua o tēnei pire. Nau mai, haere mai, whakatau mai rā, ā, tēnā koutou.

[So the first thing is that I rise to endorse the voice that gave the prayer; therefore, to you elder brother colleague who delivered that prayer, well done. Accordingly, from Stewart Island to the south, across to the Chatham Islands in the east, extending to western Taranaki, and up to Te Reinga to the north—the four corners of the nation of New Zealand—to those families shrouded in a cloud of sadness and walking in the shadow of the valley of death, bring forth your garland of greenery so that we may mourn in this brief period. This is a lament of grief, my parapet and my shield; the dread of the multitude, the vessel of death is afloat. And so to you the many deaths of the moment return spiritually to the unseen place, and the time for you is at an end; return, go back.

It is fitting, as well, to turn to the families and subtribes of Ngāruahine, to all of you who have arrived at this House to listen to the second reading of this bill. Welcome, come forth, draw closer, and greetings to you collectively.]

It gives me great pleasure to speak in the second reading of this, the Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill. I had the pleasure of sitting on the Māori Affairs Committee for this bill, and I want to acknowledge all of the submitters who made submissions in support of this settlement bill. There were some submissions that did stand out for me, and I just want to acknowledge one in particular. It was the submission by Peter Moeahu, who told us about when this process started and reflected on the changes within his own family. He spoke about the fact that at the time that this settlement first started he had one mokopuna—one grandchild—and at the select committee stage I think he had at least nine, from memory, and several great-grandchildren as well. That, for me, expressed how this settlement—because this is what he told us—was about his future generations, not for himself, and I think that reflected the sentiments from a number of submitters that it was about the future.

If we also look at the summary of the historical account—I’ll read the first sentence: “Before 1860, Ngāruahine were prosperous and economically successful, and retained the ownership of their lands and resources after consistently opposing the sale of land in their rohe to Europeans.” That first sentence tells us a lot about the history of when the breaches of the Treaty started. So in 1860 Ngāruahine were prosperous and economically successful. Peter Moeahu talked about the future of his family and his hapū, and I wanted to reflect on from 1860 till now. A lot has happened to diminish the prosperity and economic success of Ngāruahine. Only yesterday we found out through a report that talks about the prosperity of our own people, whereby the majority of assets in this country are owned by only 10 percent and that 10 percent does not include Māori, or many Māori, at all, or Pasifika as well. I wanted to mention that because I think that gives us some context around why we have these settlement bills come into this House.

This settlement is an opportunity for Ngāruahine to start turning round their lack of prosperity, the lack of economic success for their tribe. I think that it would be remiss of me not to mention that in comparison with others, Māori have an average of only $23,000 worth of assets, Pasifika have only $12,000, and European/Pākehā have $114,000 worth of assets on average. So there is huge disparity in our country today. I think, hopefully, that Ngāruahine can take this settlement and build on potential future success so that their people can live in prosperity.

There were also some submitters who did not agree with the settlement, and the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi negotiations has mentioned that, and I too wanted to mention Āraukuku. In a way it has been quite an unfortunate process for Āraukuku, but on reflection on all of the evidence, despite their concerns, the committee acknowledged those concerns. The Āraukuku hapū were included in the Ngati Ruanui settlement in 2003, and not all of the Āraukuku people agreed with that settlement, but there was not, in the opinion of the select committee, the scope to allow a discrete settlement for Āraukuku. Those members of Āraukuku who whakapapa to Ngāruahine can still participate within the Ngāruahine settlement under the relevant hapū that they whakapapa to. So although it is an unfortunate series of events and is still going through a judicial process, it is important, I think, that we acknowledge that they did make submissions.

There is also the actual settlement itself, and I mentioned the financial redress, which is by no means the most important issue. I think probably more important are the cultural redress items that were within the settlement, and they are significant. I want to acknowledge both the iwi and the negotiators of this settlement for their tenacity in getting such a good settlement, both financially in the commercial redress and under the apology and the cultural redress items as well. It could not have been an easy process to go through, and I want to acknowledge all the good work that they did.

Nō reira, tēnei ahau tētehi uri o Ngāwakataurua e tuku mi’i atu anō ki aku whanaunga kua tae mai, otirā, ki ngā whānau me ngā hapū katoa. Ki a au nei, ko te tūmanako kia pai haere ngā āhuatanga e pā ana ki tēnei pire. Kua tata te wā ki te mutunga o tēnei whakahaerenga, oti noa, he tīmatanga tēnei. Nō reira, kei te mi’i atu ki a koutou o Ngāruahine oti noa, ki ngā mema o Te Whare nei, ā, tēnā tātou katoa.

[Therefore, I, one of the descendants of Ngāwakataurua, welcome you once again my relatives but at the same time the families and all the subtribes that have arrived. For me personally I hope that aspects relating to this bill will continue to improve. The time for this process to end is near, but it is only the beginning. And so, congratulations to you of Ngāruahine, but at the same time, members of this House, my regards to us all.]

Ā, tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā, tīhei mauri ora, huri noa i Te Whare nei e ngā mema o Te Pāremata, ā, e mihi atu ki a koutou katoa. Ā, tēnei te mihi mō Ngāruahine, koutou nā taoka whakahirahira, koutou e tūmanako ake nei, koutou e hāpai iwi nei. Nō reira, e mihi atu ki a koutou katoa, ā, ki a koe e Kelvin Davis mō te whakamoemiti mō Te Whare. Ka hoki hoki ngā maumahara mō ngā rakatira o Te Tai Tokerau. Ka maumaharatia a Charlie Pētera me Tā Graham Latimer; nō reira, e ngā rakatira, e haere atu rā, e haere atu rā ki Te Pā o Te Whakawairua, takoto mai, takoto mai, takoto i raro i te rangimārie i runga i tō waka, hoea atu tō waka ki tua o te ārai, haere, haere, haere atu rā. Nō reira, āpiti hōno tātai hōno, rātou te hunga mate ki te hunga mate, āpiti hōno, tātai hōno, tātou te hunga ora ki a tātou.

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker, behold the breath of life, and acknowledgments to all you members throughout this House. And to Ngāruahine, you who are treasures of significance, are ever hopeful, and support tribes. I commend you all, and you as well, Kelvin Davis, in regard to the prayer for the House. Recollections of Northern leaders return as well, and of Charlie Pētera and Sir Graham Latimer; therefore, depart o leaders, go forth to the gathering place of the spirits, rest and lie there peacefully upon your canoe, paddle it beyond the veil, go forth, journey on, depart. Therefore the lines are joined, the dead to the dead, the living to ourselves.]

It is indeed my pleasure and honour to be able to speak on the second reading of the Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill. In this second reading I want to focus on the work of the Māori Affairs Committee in relation to this bill. Our role on the select committee is to listen to submissions, seek official advice, and recommend any amendments that would improve the bill before us. We received quite a number of submissions on this bill, many of those from Ngāruahine members and expressing strong support for the bill itself. I particularly noted the understanding that submitters showed in acknowledging the settlement that it would not, and could not, make up for everything that was lost in the past. We have seen this with many Treaty settlement bills that have come before this House, but, like the many bills before this one, Ngāruahine also have a sense of optimism about the fact that what comes out of this settlement is the opportunity for Ngāruahine to build itself an economic base for the future that will allow it to provide greater opportunities for its people.

I particularly want to—and my colleague Adrian Rurawhe actually quoted this in his speech. I want to acknowledge Mr Rurawhe, as well, because he is not a permanent member of the Māori Affairs Committee, but during the early stages of this bill and particularly when we went to Hāwera to listen to the submissions, Mr Rurawhe was there to assist the committee, particularly from a local perspective. But I want to also mention Mr Peter Moeahu because Mr Moeahu, who has been very active in Treaty settlements right across the area, particularly in Taranaki, will also be the chair of Te Korowai o Ngāruahine trust, which is the organisation tasked with administering this settlement on behalf of Ngāruahine. Mr Moeahu has been involved, as I said, in Treaty claims for quite some time, but I want to read from Mr Moeahu’s written submission, as I feel that these words are a reminder of how important this work of Treaty settlement negotiations is and the profound effect that a settlement has, not just in the commercial redress but through the issuing of a formal apology from the Crown for its misdeeds.

In Mr Moeahu’s words, when he was speaking during his appearance before the tribunal, this is what he said: “At that hearing I presented my 7 children and my first grand child to the Tribunal and said, ‘This is who the Crown steals from.’ Today on behalf of my 7 children, 14 grandchildren and 7 great-grandchildren I say this is who the Crown settles with. I also said in 1990, ‘When I look at a map of Taranaki and trace the Confiscation Line, it is an arrow piercing the heart of my people’. This Bill removes that arrow and the apology and small measure of redress contained therein, will help heal the wound caused by the Crowns grievous actions.” In the 1990 tribunal hearing, this is what he said: “if the Crown chose the right path to the settlement peace would reign. The Ngaruahine Claims Settlement Bill is the right path.”

Not all submissions on the bill were positive, though. Some individuals descending from Āraukuku hapū have raised their concerns in relation to this bill. Āraukuku has links to both Ngāti Ruanui and Ngāruahine. They were included in the claimant definition of the Ngāti Ruanui settlement based on their own decision to participate in the settlement itself. However, some individuals disagree with the hapū decision to throw its lot in with Ngāti Ruanui, and we heard from some who would like a discrete settlement for Āraukuku. As a result of these submissions, the committee sought confirmation that Āraukuku individuals who whakapapa to Ngāruahine will be able to benefit from the settlement, and we are assured that that will be. We were not satisfied that we were able to fully address the concerns of these individuals as part of this settlement bill, but it is clear that Āraukuku hapū has already settled with the Crown as a part of Ngāti Ruanui. But one thing that the committee did resolve is that it will continue to monitor the situation through the Post Settlement Commitments Unit to ensure that individuals are treated fairly.

The other amendments we have recommended are largely administrative matters concerning the reorganisation of the iwi’s governance after the settlement. The mandated group Ngā Hapū o Ngāruahine Iwi Inc. will hand over its responsibilities, assets, and liabilities to the post-settlement entity Te Korowai o Ngāruahine Trust. Our recommended amendments ensure that this happens smoothly, and we did spend a lot of time actually looking at that transition from one entity to the post-settlement entity.

I want to acknowledge those of Ngāruahine who are here today, and also those who cannot be here but who are actually watching live broadcasting from this House. I also want to acknowledge, as Mr Rurawhe also did, those who have passed on and did not actually see what is almost the final continuation—to this point, rather; to the second reading—through the Committee stage, and to the third, final reading. I look forward to discussing this bill further, in the Committee stage and the third reading. Again, it reflects the pragmatic and principled way that I believe that my committee operates as the Māori Affairs Committee. On that note, I would like to commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.

Tēnā rā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker, e Ngāruahine tēnā rā koutou i takahia mai i Te Ika-a-Māui. I mahue ai i a koutou ō koutou maunga tapu o tō maunga tupuna, a Taranaki, me ō koutou awa tupuna, kia tatū mai ki konei ki te takiwā, ki te aroaro o ngā maunga o Te Ātiawa o Ngāti Toa me ngā awa o konei. Nā reira, tēnā rā koutou, nau mai, haere mai ki roto i tēnei Te Whare, Te Whare o Te Motu. E hari koa ana kua tae ki tēnei wāhanga, te pānuitanga tuarua, ā taro ake tēnei kaupapa ka oti. E manakohia ana ko ngā hua ka ūhia ai ki runga i a koutou me ō koutou mokopuna, ō koutou uri; nā reira, tēnā rā koutou.

[Thank you indeed, Mr Assistant Speaker, and greetings to you, Ngāruahine, who traversed Māui’s Fish, and in so doing left your sacred mountains—namely Taranaki—and your ancestral rivers behind to settle here in the territory before the mountains of Te Ātiawa of Ngāti Toa and the rivers here. So acknowledgments indeed to you, welcome into this House, the House of the nation, and welcome. I am pleased that we have reached this part, the second reading, and presently this matter will be completed. The desire is that the benefits are bestowed upon you, your grandchildren, and kin; and so, well done.]

Like my colleague Adrian Rurawhe, I would like to quickly go over some of the historical account because it always puts into context what we are just discussing here. As Adrian Rurawhe has said, before 1860 Ngāruahine were a prosperous and economically successful iwi. It was only a matter of years later—about 5 years later—that the Crown began its programme of confiscation of land throughout the Taranaki area. Some 1.2 million acres of land was confiscated, and Ngāruahine, in the end, was basically left landless.

We really need to take stock of what that actually means—the forces of the Crown just turning up and shifting people off their land, taking their land. We can imagine if that happened these days—if the New Zealand Army turned up in a township and basically said to everybody: “Sorry, this place is no longer yours. We’re coming along, we’re bulldozing your houses, we’re bulldozing your gardens, your supermarkets, your schools, and everything. Off you go, and, by the way, we expect you to become successful and to develop yourselves, despite the fact that we’ve taken all your resources.” If that was to happen these days all hell would break loose, but in those days it was fairly well accepted. Ngāruahine have been fighting that since the 1860s, and that is what has brought us here today.

We need to recognise that some of that land was returned. There was 26,000 acres that was eventually returned to Ngāruahine as reserves, but the Crown retained over 145,000 acres of Ngāruahine land. That land that was returned, but it was not returned as a big parcel to the whole iwi. It was, in fact, individualised. This is just another way that the Crown has managed to alienate iwi, hapū, and whānau from their land—by returning it under individual title, where it is easily picked off and sold off. In effect, it is just another way of confiscating land. It was easy then for settlers to acquire that land, probably because many of the whānau had debts to pay after having had their land taken off them and not being able to afford to support themselves economically. The best way that they could get some money to support themselves was to sell their land. Of course they sold the land and still they were no better off.

It is important that we set the context for what we are talking about here, and I have said that before. It is quite coincidental that whenever we are talking about Treaty settlements, groups of schoolkids come in. It is important that they know this is what—come into the gallery, I mean. It is important that they hear this sort of story so that they know the true history and what has really happened to our people. Again, I will reiterate the claim that this sort of history needs to be taught in our schools.

People have touched on the Āraukuku situation—by the way, I have a map here and it gives people a bit more context. If we look at a map of Taranaki, Ngāruahine are the iwi with the land directly to the south of Mount Taranaki. To their east is Ngāti Ruanui. So they are two iwi, side by side, sharing adjacent—in fact, overlapping—boundaries, and Āraukuku are a hapū that are right on that boundary. The people of Āraukuku are descended from both Ngāruahine and Ngāti Ruanui, and that is where some of the confusion—I am sorry. I should not say “confusion”, because they know who they are. But that is where some of the confusion lies for those of us who are not from the area where the overlapping interests occur.

So there were some people who opposed Āraukuku’s settlement, and they wanted their own individual settlement, which in itself is problematic. It is believed that Āraukuku’s interests were settled, basically, entirely under the Ngāti Ruanui settlement. The Āraukuku opponents of the Ngāruahine claimant definition apparently did not respond to a Crown offer to facilitate hui between themselves and Ngāruahine to address their participation in the Ngāruahine settlement. These Āraukuku individuals were apparently unable to demonstrate a significant level of support among Āraukuku or that they had a mandate to represent the hapū.

I have some empathy because I know how intricate our whakapapa are, and someone coming from Ngāpuhi is in no position to judge the relationships and the whakapapa and the whole situation. So I do have some empathy for Āraukuku. However, in the end we have decided that Āraukuku interests have been addressed.

I will just move on to some of the recommended changes in the bill. As the chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee has said, it is largely administrative. There is a new Part 4 to the bill, and that provides a mechanism for reorganising the various governance bodies established by Ngāruahine. The liabilities transfer from Ngā Hapū o Ngāruahine, which is the very group that has brought things this far, and they are going to be transferred to Te Korowai o Ngāruahine Trust.

The bill also sets out new clause 128, which dissolves that current representative group of Ngā Hapū o Ngāruahine. New clause 129(1) vests the assets and liabilities of Ngā Hapū o Ngāruahine Iwi Inc. as the assets and liabilities of the trustees of Te Korowai o Ngāruahine Trust.

There was some issue over clause 127(1)(b)(ii) of the bill, where Te Korowai o Ngāruahine Trust was concerned about the unknown level of future or contingent liabilities. We understood that any change to clause 127(1)(b)(ii) would be a significant departure from the Crown’s current policy on assets and liabilities. The officials recommended that it remain. New clause 130 provides arrangements for the subsidiary Ngāruahine Fisheries Ltd to no longer be a tax charity for the purposes of tax legislation.

That is the tenor of most of the changes. It is more administrative, but as we are dealing with these mainly administrative issues we always need to keep in context why and how we have got to this stage, and it really does come from the historical account.

We have heard that whānau have said: “When we started this journey I had just one mokopuna; now we have many.” So we really to need to acknowledge that this is for those many mokopuna. We need to also remember and acknowledge those people who started this journey but who are, sadly, no longer with us. Their work is creating a new future direction for their mokopuna. With that, I look forward to the Committee stage and recommend this bill to the House. Kia ora.

E rau rangatira mā tēnā koutou, e ngā iwi katoa kia ora mai tātou.

[Acknowledgments to you esteemed leaders of a hundredfold, and greetings to every one of us tribes.]

It is a pleasure to speak in the second reading of the Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill. I would like to start by acknowledging my good friend and colleague Nuk Korako and his very gracious contribution and comment towards two of leaders in Te Tai Tokerau who have fallen recently: Charlie Pētera and Sir Graham Latimer. I would like to add to that list Rob Cooper, if I may, and I would say to Rob: E Rob, haere, haere, haere! Haere ki te kāinga tūturu o tō tātou Matua i Te Rangi; moe mai, moe mai, moe mai.

[Rob, depart, journey on, farewell! Go forth to the true heavenly home of our Father in the Sky; sleep, lie, and rest there.]

It is a pleasure to speak to this bill, and when I speak to bills of this sort I often like to just summarise in my own mind the progress that brings us to this point, and add to the dialogue that our colleagues from across the House have already laid down. This bill talks to Ngāruahine, which is one of eight Taranaki iwi, with a population of around about 3,800 people. The traditional lands for Ngāruahine are South Taranaki, encompassing Egmont National Park and extending from Taungatara Stream at the northernmost boundary to the Waihī Stream at the southernmost boundary.

As I look at this bill I am often inclined to go to the final paragraph in each of the acknowledgments because I find, for me, it conveys some tone and mood of what all the preceding narrative has described. So I would like to start by first of all going to the summary of historical account. The final statement here reads as follows: “During the 20th century, Crown efforts to address Taranaki Māori grievances failed to do so. Some inquiries were limited in their scope, and others provided for compensation payments that were not discussed with Ngāruahine and other Taranaki Māori. The Taranaki Maori Claims Settlement Act 1944 stated that the sums were a full settlement of claims relating to the confiscations and Parihaka. There is no evidence that Ngāruahine or other iwi agreed to this.”

Similarly, if we turn to the acknowledgments, the final stanza for the acknowledgments also conveys mood and tone of what is intended in this settlement. It reads as follows: “The Crown acknowledges that its breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi and its principles during the 19th and 20th centuries have together significantly undermined the traditional systems of authority and economic capacity of the Ngāruahine iwi, and the physical, cultural, and spiritual well-being of its people. The Crown acknowledges that it has failed to protect the rangatiratanga of Ngāruahine, in breach of its obligations under Article Two of the Treaty of Waitangi.”

The apology concludes thus: “The Crown hopes that this settlement and this apology will relieve the burden of grievance that Ngāruahine has carried for so many years, and will assist Ngāruahine to heal the wounds of the past. The Crown looks forward to building a relationship of mutual trust and co-operation with Ngāruahine founded on respect for the Treaty of Waitangi and its principles.”

A full settlement like this, of courses, includes cultural redress, and the cultural redress here talks about providing recognition of the traditional, historical, cultural, and spiritual association of Ngāruahine with places and sites owned by the Crown within their primary area of interest. This allows Ngāruahine and the Crown to protect and enhance the conservation values associated with these sites. The financial redress has been well commented on before. It is a sum of money, $67.5 million, in recognition of all the historical claims.

Finally, the collective redress is also a nice piece of work and I want to commend the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for bringing this part of the agreement together, particularly, and I want to talk to that. The collective redress elements of the settlement have been negotiated between the Crown and Ngāruahine, Te Atiawa, and Taranaki iwi. Each iwi stressed its strong associations with all of the natural resources within its rohe and its desire to achieve more positive environmental outcomes for the Taranaki region. The deed of settlement sets out a proposed model for iwi representation on the two standing committees in the Taranaki Regional Council that perform the roles and functions associated with policy, planning, and consents. This is a settlement that goes beyond focusing just on the iwi. It also focuses on their relationships, their boundaries, and their interface with other iwi, and particularly with parts of their natural environment, which, of course, is very important to Māori. This settlement is an excellent settlement. It is well-thought-out. It has had a lot of work and continues to have work through the Māori Affairs Committee. It is my absolute pleasure to commend this bill to the House.

E Te Māngai o Te Whare tēnā koe, huri noa ki tēnei Whare, tēnā tātou katoa. Ā, huri noa ki a koutou o Ngāruahine kua tae mai nei mō tēnei pānuitanga tuarua, nō reira, e mihi atu ki a koutou; tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora mai tātou katoa. He mokopuna tēnei o Te Nōta me Te Tai Rāwhiti hoki nō reira. Ko Te Ramaroa me Pangarū ōku Maunga, ko Hokianga Te Moana, ko Ngāi Tūpoto me Te Hikatū ōku hapū ki Te Tai Tokerau. Whakawhiti atu ki Te Tai Rāwhiti, anei te uri o Ngāti Porou, ā, nō reira tēnā koutou katoa. Anō hoki, e mihi ana ki ngā taitamariki, ngā tamariki pakupaku, me ngā taiohi hoki kua tae mai nei ki te whakarongo ki ēnei tautohetohe; ā, nō reira tēnā tātou katoa, kia ora.

[Acknowledgments to you, Mr Assistant Speaker of the House, and to us all throughout this House. And turning to you, Ngāruahine, who have arrived here for this second reading, I acknowledge you; well done and accolades to you collectively and my appreciation to us all. This one is a grandchild of the North and of the East Coast as well. Ramaroa and Pangarū are my mountains, Hokianga is the ocean, Ngāi Tūpoto and Te Hikatū are my hapū in Northland. Crossing over to the East Coast, here is the relative of Ngāti Porou—and so I salute you all. Also, and again, I acknowledge the teenagers, infants, and adolescents who have arrived here to listen to these debates; so congratulations to us all and thank you.]

It is absolutely an honour, always, to be able to stand in this House and address the House and address our nation and our people on readings of Tiriti settlements. I started as an MP in November last year, and so I want to pay special acknowledgment to this Ngāruahine claim because this was my very first hearing in my role as spokesperson for Māori development for the Green Party—the Ngāruahine claim.

I was still fluffing around, trying to figure out what on earth I do in this place. I was heavily endowed with the honour of being the Māori Affairs Committee member for the Green Party. It is an incredible committee and an incredible privilege to be part of this committee, which tries to do the best and make the best laws for our Māori people. So here I was. Like all of us MPs, I followed the directions in my diary on my phone, got told what plane to catch and where to drive to. I landed in a part of the country that I knew very little about. I followed the directions and followed “Auntie Google” to get me to Hāwera. I arrived in Hāwera. This was my very first Treaty hearing experience as a very, very new MP. I did not know what to expect—I did not know what to expect. I was carrying an incredible sense of responsibility to do the best job I could as the Green Party representative, and to hear what the people were going to say.

I rocked up to the Hāwera stadium place. There was the big panel. We had all been given seats, and we had our lovely gold-embossed little name tablets and everything up there. I was late. I was late, and there was my name sitting there, with no Marama behind it. So I tried to sneak in sideways and inconspicuously, to take my seat and sit down. Luckily in Te Ao Māori the pōwhiri and the mihi often take up a little bit of our beautiful time—that is, Māori time. So I still managed to sit down in time to stand up again to give my whakapapa and introduce myself.

And then I sat and I listened to, I think it was about 12 submissions that day. I remember Peter Moeahu, who is the inaugural chair of the mandated body Te Korowai o Ngāruahine, which is going to take the claim forward. Like everybody else, I cracked up when he talked about starting the claim with one mokopuna and ending it with, I think it was, 14 and with some great-grandchildren. You know, although that was a beautiful story to indicate the length of time, I was also thinking that in my family that could be 1 year, ha, ha! But it was a beautiful story to indicate not just time but how our whakapapa moves and grows through the hearings of these settlements. They do take a while. We have children, we have grandchildren, and we lose our people at the other end as well, our kaumātua—sometimes the very ones who started off these kōrero. So I wanted to acknowledge everybody involved in these fraught processes.

These Tiriti settlement claims are fraught every time. If there is one thing I learnt really quickly, coming into Parliament and being on this committee and hearing settlement claims, it is that every time they are fraught. Māori have done fabulously in trying to get anything happening and trying to get anything moving, with how fraught these processes are. This is where I also want to acknowledge all of those who also opposed this bill, including Āraukuku, who were very clear. The submitters who came to us were very clear that they wanted to align in the Ngāruahine settlement, and they felt excluded from this settlement because it was said that the Crown basically mandated that they were already part of the Ngāti Ruanui settlement. So we heard that as well. I want to acknowledge that.

Yes, I too, like my colleague from Te Tai Tokerau, Kelvin Davis, am not one to stand here and pass any sort of judgment over the wedges between hapū and across iwi that arise in Treaty settlements. I cannot imagine what I am going to say when my iwi turn up here, when Ngāpuhi turns up here, in the House—I cannot even imagine. But it is still important for me to acknowledge the sincerity with which every submitter brought their mamae, their joy, their range of emotions and stories to us on the select committee.

I will pick up, for example, from a submission from Allie Hemara-Wahanui, who supports the bill, who said: “While the settlement barely compensates Ngaruahine Iwi for the injustices of the past, it provides the opportunity to implement the aspirations outlined in our 25 year iwi strategy 2009-2034.” I am always amazed by our people in these settlements. On the continuum you have got people genuinely doing their best to move their iwi and hapū and whānau forward—negotiators, kaumātua, marae, and hapū engaging in these really fraught conversations—because you can never settle the injustices. They are never settled, and these claims are not just about a settlement. They are ongoing, enduring relationships and we need to be very clear about that. [Bell rung] Oh, already, Mr Assistant Speaker—all right then. They are ongoing, enduring relationships.

I have quoted Allie as an example of the aspirations, and I will also quote how Āraukuku felt that this was a monumental Crown blunder and that our Māori have to deal with this process, which sets hapū, marae, and iwi against each other, resulting from something that the Crown did to us, and yet it is Māori who end up having these difficult, fraught conversations. I want to acknowledge our people for trying to do the best that we can. I will finish on the fact that Te Tiriti was a relationship with hapū, and it was set up, and that is partly why trying to settle with iwi is fraught. Ngāruahine ngā mihi ki a koutou katoa, tēnā tātou. Kia ora.

[Ngāruahine, acknowledgments to you all and to all of us. Thank you.]

Ā, tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker, tēnā anō tātou i roto i Te Whare. Te mea tuatahi māku, e mihi kau ana ki a koe e te tuakana e, Kelvin, nāu i ’hakarite tā tātou noho i te ata nei, kia māmā te haere o tēnei pire mō Te Iwi o Ngāruahine. Tua atu i tēnā, koutou ngā kanohi, mai i Ngāruahine, koutou mai i te maru o Taranaki, kei te tautoko i ngā mihi i mihingia e aku tuakana i ’hakatau rā i a koutou i roto i tō koutou Whare i te rā nei, nā reira; tēnā koutou! He mihi hoki ki tēnā o ngā mate maha, i ’hakahuangia ētahi i roto i a mātou o Te Tai Tokerau, kei te tūhonohono ki tēna o ngā mate kei waenganui i a koutou i te rā nei. Na reira, e ai ki te kōrero: “Nā rātou te pō, ka hoki mai ki a tātou, ko tātou te ata.” Nā reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou.

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker, and greetings to those once in the House. The first thing for me is to really commend you, Kelvin, the elder colleague who eased our situation this morning and allowed this bill for the people of Ngāruahine to proceed smoothly. Further to that, I say to you the representatives of Ngāruahine from the shelter of Taranaki, that I endorse the tributes accorded to you by my elder colleagues in welcoming you into your House today; come hither! I pay tribute as well to that one of the many who have passed away, some of whom within us in the North were mentioned to link up with that one amidst you today. Therefore, and according to the saying: “Theirs is the night and ours is the morning.” And so I acknowledge, commend, and congratulate you collectively.]

I take some delight in participating in this debate, particularly in terms of seeing another Treaty claim settlement come before the House on its way to being enacted, and therefore allowing the claimants to leave this House knowing that essentially what they have asked for has been resolved—not entirely, but certainly resolved to a great extent. In this case we are talking about the claim from the Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill. I sat on the Māori Affairs Committee, where we heard a number of submissions, and can I say that I certainly support that process because it allows those who do not necessarily agree with the terms of settlement that have been reached to certainly air their concerns, and for us, as politicians, to hear and to consider.

First of all, I want to say that this bill is one of a number that addresses some of the—in my view—serious breaches of the Treaty in the history of our country, particularly in terms of the loss of life, displacement of a people, and the results of all of that. It is articulated in the bill as to what happened, and we all know that before 1860, 20 years after the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, this iwi was one of the most prosperous and economically successful iwi in the region—some would probably say “in New Zealand” at the time, but I am from the north, so I probably have a different view in that respect. However, the fact is that there is no question about the economic position of Ngāruahine at the time. So the invasion of Crown troops has led to this claim being made before the Waitangi Tribunal, and we all know the history involved in that.

The Māori Affairs Committee’s report makes reference to the Āraukuku issue, and, again, like my colleague Kelvin Davis, who am I to question the position that Āraukuku has taken? Given the whakapapa links between that hapū or iwi to that of the claimant group today, that is something that will always be an issue for us as Māori, who both have a concern about claims and do not agree with the claims, but at least we have been assured that anyone from Āraukuku who is descended from their tūpuna is able to benefit from this particular claim. Some members of Āraukuku did not support that decision and they campaigned for a discrete settlement for their iwi or hapū—whatever we might want to describe them as. They wanted their own autonomy, their own rangatiratanga.

Some members disagree with the exclusion of Āraukuku from the list of hapū in the Ngāruahine claimant definition. The Crown has previously stated that Āraukuku’s settlement alignment was for the hapū to resolve, and to a certain extent I agree with that, only as long as the Crown has not been responsible for that position, and some would argue that it has been. The select committee has been assured by Ngāruahine that Āraukuku individuals with Ngāruahine whakapapa are able to benefit from the Ngāruahine settlement. The settlement process does not allow for the committee to address the concerns of Āraukuku satisfactorily, and I, in this part of this debate, certainly support that notion.

The other issue that was raised was in regard to the Stratford Power Station. The land was confiscated during the 1860s and awarded to Āraukuku after the raupatu as part of a reserve, but subsequently became privately owned. As the Crown will not give privately owned land, the committee would like to have the Crown produce public statements to accompany this settlement bill. The Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations has assured this House that he will certainly do that.

I just want to make some comments about the submissions. A large proportion of those who submitted certainly supported the bill. In regard to the Kanihi hapū, and I quote from their submission, “… throughout the entire treaty settlement process every effort was made by the Nga Hapu board, and the negotiator(s) to ensure that everyone regardless of whether they were registered members of Nga Hapu or otherwise were kept informed by way of various mediums, i.e., panui, hui, website, email etc.”. So that confirms that every effort was made to inform the beneficiaries of this claim.

However, some of the issues that were raised by the submitters—I want to mention them because one or two of them do have, for me, some validity. Ngāti Tū did not support the Ngāruahine-mandated collective—Ngā Hapū o Ngāruahine Iwi Inc.—and subsequently do not support the negotiated settlement. They believe that the settlement suffers from the same issues identified with my people from the Tai Tokerau, Ngāpuhi, and the issue of the Tūhoronuku Independent Mandated Authority. Another submitter was Democracy Action. It quite clearly stated that it opposed clauses 85 and 86, relating to cultural redress and iwi representation on council committees. This clause is something that is imposed on the people of that local body area, who have been denied the right to elect who should be sitting on their council committees. That is a concern that has been expressed not only in terms of this claim but also as a consequence of other claims that have already been settled.

I think that the argument that Māori are just as good as anyone else to stand for election has some validity. I think that we are, in fact, as Māori, just as good as our fellow citizens, and we should be putting ourselves forward to stand for those positions. However, that raises another issue, and I am not quite sure whether, ultimately, it will lead to another claim against the Crown—that people have been denied the opportunity of having their own wards so that they can stand for council. This bill does meet the intention of both the iwi and the Crown, and, on behalf of New Zealand First, we commend this bill to the House.

Ā, tēna koe e Te Mana Whakawā, otirā, ki Te Whare e hui nei i tēnei ata, anei te mihi atu ki a koutou ōku hoa mahi, ki a Kelvin, e whakatau nei i a tātou i te ata nei i te karakia. Ki a koe, Nuk Kōrako, ko koe tēnā e whakahaere i Te komiti Whiriwhiri Take Māori na reira, kei te mihi atu ki a koutou, mōrena rā tātou ōku hoa mahi. Ki a koutou ō runga, koutou o Ngāruahine, ōku pou, ōku rahi, koutou e hāpai nei i tēnei kaupapa, anei te mihi atu ki a koutou! Ko koutou tēnei kaupapa e kōkirihia nei, āe, i ngā rua tekau, toru tekau tau kua pahure ake ēngari anō, mai i te wā i tangohia kēngia nei te whenua kua whawhai tō koutou whānau, ō koutou tupuna mō te whenua te take. Nā reira, kai te mihi atu ki a koutou, anō nā ki a koutou e hara mai nei mō te pānui tuarua o Hineuru. I tēnei ata kai te pīrangi au ki te pānui i tēnei o ngā kōrero. Te kōrero nei nā Ron Hudson i tuhi kai roto tonu i te deed of settlement.

Kai roto i āna kupu te kiko o tēnei kōrero nā reira, ka haere ahau ki āna nei kōrero. “I ahu mai a Ngāruahinerangi mai i ngā ranginui e tū nei, ko Rangitūhāhā, ko Māreikura, hei Māreikura, ko Te Rangiwhakataka, ko Taumakumaku ō ngā rangi, ko Te Paraparawai ō ngā rangi, ko Te Māriehou ō ngā rangi, ko Te Matawaiwai, ko Te Tuarā ō ngā rangi, ko Te Matauarā ō ngā rangi, ko Te Takinui ō ngā rangi, ko Tūtewanawana ō ngā rangi, ko Aoaoariki ō ngā rangi, ko Kirikiri ō Mātangi, ko Te Toi ō ngā rangi, ko Ngāruahinerangi iwi o Taranaki nui tonu ē! “Maungarongo ki te whenua, whakaaro pai ki ngā tangata katoa”.

I te wā i tīmata ai te muru me te raupatu i te tau 1863, i eke mai ai ngā hoia, ngā pū me ngā pū repo i te awa o Waitōtara. I te tīmatanga o te muru, me ngā raupatu, i tērā wā i a tātou te tino rangatiratanga o tō tātau maunga, awa, whenua, ngahere, takutai moana, hinuhou, ngā whakairo, ō tātou Māoritanga, ō tātou marae, ō tātou māra, ō tātau kāinga, ō tātou urupā, i te mutunga, i te matenga o ētahi o rātau i te raupatu, i murua katoatia te whenua, ā, kai reira te kiko o te kōrero nei, kai roto i te kōrero o tēnei o ngā rangatira. Kai te koroua, kuia haere aku kamo, koirā te take kāre e taea te pānui, hoi anō rā, kai te pīrangi au ki te mihi atu ki a koutou.

[And so I acknowledge you, Mr Assistant Speaker, but, at the same time, the House assembled here this morning, I acknowledge you my fellow colleagues, especially you, Kelvin, who welcomed us today with a prayer. I acknowledge you as well, Nuk Kōrako, who conducts the affairs of the Māori Affairs Committee; well done. I say “Morning” to us, my fellow work colleagues, and pay a tribute to you of Ngāruahine seated above; my pillars, my greatness, and you who are supporting this matter, well done. You are the ones pursuing this matter and, yes, not only in the past 20 and 30 years but further back to the time when the land was confiscated. Your family and ancestors fought it, the land was the reason. And so I commend you for coming here to the second reading of the Hineuru bill. This morning I want to read this one of the accounts. It was written by Ron Hudson and is in the deed of settlement.

The substance of this account is in his words, and so I proceed to read it. Ngāruahinerangi emerged from the great heavens standing here before us, Rangitūhāhā and Māreikura. From Māreikura came Terangiwhakataka, Taumakumaku of the heavens, Te Paraparawai of the heavens, Te Māriahou of the heavens, Te Matawaiwai, Te Tuarā of the heavens, Te Matauarā of the heavens, Te Takinui of the heavens, Tūtewanawana of the heavens, Aoaoariki of the heavens, Kirikiri-ō-Mātangi, Te Toi of the heavens, and thus the dominant tribe of Taranaki at large of Ngāruahinerang; indeed oh! “Peace on earth and goodwill to all mankind!”

In the year 1863 when the plundering and confiscation began, the soldiers with their guns and cannons came from the direction of the river of Waitōtara. When the confiscation and plundering began at that time, we had ownership of our mountain, river, land, forest, seashore, oil, carvings, our Māoritanga, courtyards, gardens, homes, and burial places, and, ultimately, some of them died as a consequence of the confiscation, and all the land was wiped out. There then is the substance of this account. It is in the account by this one of the leaders. My eyesight is ageing somewhat, and that is the reason why I was unable to read it. But so much for that; I do want to acknowledge you collectively.]

Ngāruahine, in the Waitangi Tribunal report, said this: “They could be the largest in the country. There may be no others where as many Treaty breaches had equivalent force and effect over a comparable time.” We have heard today of the debate that has raged during this settlement, but it goes back to the heart of this. There was a Treaty signed in this country, of partnership. The member here, Pita Paraone, has just said that there was some debate as to whether or not there should be seats in a governance responsibility on regional council and council positions, but partnership is just that—where two partners come together. The report itself highlights the breaches equivalent to none other: “[The] Treaty breaches had equivalent force and effect over a comparable time. We see the claims of standing on two major foundations, land deprivation and disempowerment, with the latter being the main. By ‘disempowerment’, we mean the denigration and destruction of Maori autonomy or self-government.” In the whai kōrero that I just read out from the deed of settlement, that is the heart of the matter: the loss of mana, of power, of autonomy, and of rangatiratanga.

“Generous reparation policies are needed to remove the prejudice to Maori, to restore the honour of the Government,”—if it can be restored—“to ensure cultural survival, and to re-establish effective interaction between the Treaty partners.” Well, effective interaction, in my mind, would mean co-governance arrangements over areas of environment and over the interests of the people in that area. “Ngāruahine record the following Tribunal findings: the whole history of Government dealings with Maori in Taranaki were the antithesis to that envisaged by the Treaty … the war in south Taranaki was commenced by the Crown without just cause and was contrary to the Treaty of Waitangi”, and why was it commenced? For no other reason but to secure land for settlement.

And why did the Government forces come out on the people of Ngāruahine? Because they simply refused to sell. Confiscation removed Ngāruahine’s land entirely. The Government’s purchase of the land offered inadequate protection of Māori interests and “did not meet the required standards of sincerity, justice and good faith to be valid in terms of the Treaty;”. And, finally, “the imprisonments without trial of several hundred Maori was contrary to the Treaty of Waitangi.”

Despite all of the conversations and the debates and the submissions that we have heard, there is one thing that is clear: no matter what settlement redress Ngāruahine is able to be afforded through this process, it will in no way make up for the huge injustice. It is merely a beginning. It must be acknowledged, as it has been for many other Treaty settlements, that this is, in fact, the largest koha, or show of generosity, from one people to another, to accept such a minimal amount in order to redress the utter destruction meted out against the people of Ngāruahine and, indeed, the iwi in other Treaty settlements across the country.

We have heard about the conflict with Āraukuku, and I recognise that Ngāruahine, in the submissions that we heard, were very supportive of Āraukuku’s claim, so we recognise that. It was a matter of great debate amongst us in the Māori Affairs Committee. We wanted to ensure that everybody had their day to present their issues in front of the Tribunal and we recognised that Āraukuku had not been afforded that opportunity, so now that has gone on to another court to see whether there can be a way forward.

But we are here today for the second reading. We have heard the redress and the packages that are going to be offered. We have heard the apology that has come from the Crown, and although that in no way makes up for the injustices that have been meted out upon the people of Ngāruahine, it is, again, in their generosity that they come to this point and accept this settlement offer so that they can progress and so that they can move forward and start to put behind them the injustices so that they can build an enduring relationship with the Crown to progress forward, and that also means their local government—their establishment of places on council—so that they can have a stronger part to play, and say, in the dealings of their people in the settlement where they live. No reira e te iwi, nei te mihi atu ki a koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora mai tātau katoa. [Therefore people, I acknowledge you collectively. Well done; my appreciation to us all.]

“Ā, tuku mauri ora ki te whei ao, ki te ao mārama, tiheiwa mauri ora.” Kāti, e Te Whare; ka tū ahau ki te tautoko i ngā kōrero, ka patere pai ki roto i tō tātou Whare i te rā nei. Ka tautoko anō au i ngā mihi i tukuna atu ki runga i a koe, e te uri o Pōmare, e Ngāti Manu, e tōku tuakana, e Kelvin. Nāu tō tātou rangi i whakarite, kia kotahi ai te wairua ki raro i ngā whakaaro, me ngā haumaru o tō tātou Kaihanga. Kāti.

Ka tautoko ahau i ngā mihi ki ō tātou tini aituā, kua wahaina mai e tō tātou Whare i te rā nei. Ka tautoko mārika i tērā kōrero ki a rātou: “Haere mai, haere.” Kua kōrero mai nā koutou, otirā tātou, mō te wāhanga ki roto i ōku ake, arā, ko Tā Kereama, arā ko Charlie Pētera, tau atu ki roto o Mōtatau i ngā rangi kua pahure ake nei, ko Rob Cooper tēnā. Kia kaua tēnei Whare e pōhēhē, ko Rob Cooper i whakapau werawera mō Ngāti Hine, mō Ngāpuhi te take, kāhore! Ko tōna mahi, he whakariterite i ngā ratonga hauora Māori puta noa i te motu whānui. Nō reira e tautoko ana i te tangi atu, i te tangi mōteatea atu ki tērā hau tupua, nō roto mai i a au o Ngāti Hine; e te pāpā, e Rob, haere, haere, haere.

Ka whakahokia mai ngā rārangi kōrero ki a tātou e Te Whare, tēnā tātou katoa. E tautoko ana ahau i ngā mihi ki a koutou. Kua tae mai anō koutou ki roto i Te Ana ō Te Raiona, kia whakarongo atu koutou ki ngā kiko kei roto i tēnei pire. Aua mātou ko te kī atu, nā mātou katoa wēnei kōrero, kāhore! Ēngari kua mutu ngā mahi whiriwhiri o Te Rōpū Whiriwhiri i ngā Take Māori. Kua noho rātou ki roto i a koutou ki te āta whakarongo ki ngā kōrero katoa, ā, e pā ana ki tēnei pire. Nō reira e mihi atu ana au ki a koutou, nau mai, hoki mai, haere mai.

E mihi atu ana ahau ki Te Minita mō ngā Take Tiriti, me te whakaaro nui ki roto i tana kōrero i te rā nei, kia whakakotahi ai ngā iwi o te hauāuru o Taranaki hei te mutunga o tēnei tau. Nō reira koutou, otirā tātou katoa, te whakanui ake i ngā mahi i oti nā i a koutou me Te Tari o Te Minita hai tatū ai i ngā kerēme ka puta mai i ngā take o Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Ka mihi atu ahau ki tērā whakaaro rangatira tā te mea, e mōhio ana tātou Te Iwi Māori, ko tēnei mea te whakapapa, kāhore e taea te wetewete. Ki te āta titiro atu ki ngā kōrero i puta mai e pā ana ki tēnei pire, ko ngā hapū katoa e kōrero ana mō ngā wāhanga kai roto i te pire; ēhara tēnei mea i te wetewete i a koutou, kāhore! Ko te kī atu, ko ngā hapū, nō reira ko te mana. E aro pū atu ana ngā hapū katoa ki ngā take nui o te iwi puta noa. Nō reira ko tēnei mea te whakapapa, kia kaua e waiho noa atu mā te ture e wetewete, e tīhaehae; ka noho weherua tātou Te Iwi Māori! Nō reira, e mihi atu ana ahau ki a koutou, ā, e ōku rangatira e Ngāruahine, me ngā hapū maha kai roto i a koutou.

Nā, kua kōrero mai tēnei Whare mō ngā tāngata i tau ki mua i te aroaro o Te Rōpū Whiriwhiri i ngā Take Māori, arā, ko Āraukuku tētahi. E kī nei te kōrero anā, ko wā rātou tūpuna, ko Kanihi-Umutahi, rātou ko Ōkahu-Inuwai ngā hapū. Kāti, e mihi atu ana au ki wēnei korero.

I a au ki roto i tēnei Whare, Te Whare Pāremata, kua titiro atu ahau ki te nuinga o ngā kerēme Tiriti ka uru mai: ka puta atu. Nā, ko reira katoa ngā āwangawanga, ko reira tonu ngā āmaimai o Te Iwi Māori. Kua kōrero mai tōku tuakana a Pita Paraone mō tēnei tūāhuatanga. Ka kōrero mai, ahakoa te ūpoko māro o Te Kāwanatanga, kia noho pū ki te tēpu o Ngāpuhi. Ko te kī atu mātou kei ngā hapū te mana. Kei ngā hapū te mana whakahaere i ngā marae maha. Kei ngā hapū ngā Reo, me ngā kōrero o Te Iwi. Nō reira, ko tāku e kī nei i a au e pānui ana i ngā kōrero e pā ana ki ngā hapū, nā, kia kaha rā koutou. Ahakoa ngā whakaritenga o tēnei Kāwanatanga, ahakoa ngā mahi e ai ki wētahi, he mahi pōheahea a tēnei Kāwanatanga ki te wetewete whakapapa, ki te weherua tō koutou noho ki roto i ō koutou whenua. Ka kite atu ahau i ngā kōrero kei roto i tēnei e mea atu ana—

[“Well-being to the natural world and to the world of enlightenment, behold the breath of life.” That is enough for the House; I rise to endorse the contributions that flowed without restraint in our House today. I also support the tributes bestowed upon you the relative of Pōmare, of Ngāti Manu, and my senior kin, Kelvin. You made our day by saying a prayer to unite us spiritually under the considerations and protection of our Creator. Enough.

I endorse the tributes to the myriad of our deaths, brought here before us today by our House. I truly endorse that, saying to them: “Come forth, depart.” You, and indeed all of us collectively, have alluded to my own ones, namely Sir Graham and Charlie Pētera, including those within Mōtatau in the last few days—and that is Rob Cooper. This House must not delude itself that Rob worked tirelessly for Ngāti Hine, with Ngāpuhi being the cause—not at all! His role was to organise Māori health services throughout the country. Therefore, I too share the tears expended, the grief and laments to that incredible person from within me of Ngāti Hine; and so, the fatherly figure, Rob, depart, go forth, farewell.

I therefore bring the focus of the discourse back to us, the House, and my acknowledgments to us all. I endorse the salutations accorded to you collectively. You have returned here once again into the lair of the lions, to listen to the substance of this bill. It is not for us to say to you these comments are ours—absolutely not at all! But the considerations by the Māori Affairs Committee have ended. They have sat among you to listen carefully to all the discourse about this bill. And so I personally acknowledge you collectively, come hither, welcome back, welcome.

I acknowledge the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and his profound speculation in his speech today that by the end of this year Taranaki’s western tribes will be united. So allow us and you collectively, to celebrate the work that you and the Minister’s office have done to resolve the claims which came out of the matters relating to the Treaty of Waitangi. I commend that profound viewpoint because we Māori people know full well that this genealogical thing cannot be dismantled. If the commentary that emerged relating to this bill was examined carefully, all subtribes were talking about the parts in the bill; this thing is not about unravelling you collectively—far from it! It is actually saying it is about subtribes, therefore it is about the mandate. All subtribes are focusing on key tribal issues throughout the nation. Therefore this thing—genealogy—should not be left for the law to unravel, dismantle, and cut up; we of Māoridom will be driven apart! But I do congratulate you my esteemed ones of Ngāruahine, and the many subtribes in your midst.

This House has spoken about the people who came before the Māori Affairs Committee and one such was Āruakuku. It has been stated, as follows, that our ancestors were Kanihi-Umutahi and the subtribes Ōkahu-Inuāwai. Enough, I commend these words.

In my time here in this House, Parliament, I have observed a huge number of Treaty claims that have come in and have gone out. However, the concerns and unease of Māoridom are still there. My elder kinsman Pita Paraone has spoken to me about this kind of situation. He told me: despite the hard-headed attitude of the Government, you must hold fast to Ngāpuhi’s table. We are saying that the subtribes have the mandate. Subtribes have executive control on many marae. Subtribes have the languages and the talk of the people. So what I am advocating here as I read the accounts about subtribes, is that you must be resolute—despite this Government’s arrangements, regardless what others may come up with in terms of strategies, or dismantling genealogy by this Government to split you in your way of life on your land. I note the comments in this bill, saying—]

“The Crown has made it clear that the nature of Āraukuku’s alignment with the two iwi, Ngāti Ruanui and Ngāruahine, in Treaty settlements was for the hapū and the two iwi to resolve.”

Nā tēnā, e mihi atu ana au ki tērā whakaaro rangatira. Mā koutou tērā e whakatau, kia kaua e waihonā atu mā te ture tātou e noho weherua, kāti!

E mihi tonu ana ahau ki ngā kaikōrero me wā rātou kōrero e pā ana ki tēnei pire. Kua wahaina mai e Te Whare ēnei momo korero. Ka whakaaro ake ahau ki te whakapapa, ki te hītori o tēnei take. Koinā hoki te take kua tae mai koutou i te rā nei. E mea atu ana, ko ngā hītori kua kōrero mai mō te raupatu, mō te tāhae whenua, mō te mauherengia o ō koutou ake tupuna, ēngari, ka whakaaro ake ahau mō ngā āhuatanga ō koutou ki roto i ngā tau mai i taua wā tae noa mai ki tēnei wā, nē? Kia arohaehaetia aua take? Nā, ko ngā take e pā ana ki te ture, ngā take e pā ana ki tō koutou noho ki runga i ō koutou whenua, mai i taua tāima tae noa mai ki tēnei wā. E mea ana wētahi, ko tēnei mea ko te “systematic legislation”, nē? Koinā hoki ngā nekehanga. Ko taku titiro ko ngā mahi raupatu o ēnei rangi, te tūkino, te taunu i a koutou, e Ngāruahine, mai i te tāima o te whenua raupatu tae noa mai ki tēnei wā.

Ko taku titiro atu ki te pire nei, i roto i ngā wāhanga e toru, kia ea ai ō koutou nawe, ō koutou take e pā ana ki Te Tiriti o Waitangi, nā, kua tutuki i roto i tēnei pire. Nō reira, ko tāku atu i tēnei wā, e mōhio ana au i ngā nekehanga o tēnei Whare. Ā taihoa ake nei ka mutu te pānuitanga tuatoru o tēnei pire. Ka hoki atu anō au ki tērā tono a Te Minita ki a koutou: kia noho kotahi ai koutou ki roto i tō koutou hurōtanga, whakahōnoretanga, whakatutukitanga i ngā take kerēme, a te Oketopa e tū mai nei. He whakaaro rangatira tēnā. Kāti e aku rangatira, e tautoko ana ahau i tēnei pire i roto i tana pānuitanga tuarua. Kāti—kua rongo koutou kua tangi mai te pere, e aku rangatira— tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora tātou katoa.

[And so I commend that noble thought. That is for you to determine—do not leave it for the law to split us in two. Enough said!

I continue to acknowledge the speakers and their contributions in regard to this bill. These kinds of sentiments have been brought to bear by the House. I reflect upon the genesis and the history of this matter. That, indeed, is the reason why you have arrived here collectively today. It is saying that the historical accounts talk about confiscation, theft of land, and imprisonment of your very own ancestors, but I think about your circumstances over the years from that period right down to now, OK? Should those matters be critically discerned? These matters relate to the law and how you live on your lands, from that time right down to this moment. Some are saying this thing is called “systematic legislation”, OK? That indeed is the way procedures move. In my view, modern day acts of confiscation violate and taunt you, Ngāruahine, from the time the land was confiscated right down to now.

When I look at this bill and its three parts to see if your grievances and your matters relating to the Treaty of Waitangi can be settled, in this bill it can be settled—yes, indeed. And so, further to that and at this present moment, I am familiar with the procedures of this House. The third reading of this bill will conclude presently. I go back again to the plea from the Minister to you: that you remain united in your happiness, glorification, and fulfilment in regards to claim matters, collective recognition, acknowledgment, and settlement of claims by the coming October. That is, indeed, an inspirational thought. Enough of that, my esteemed ones, I am endorsing this bill in its second reading. Enough—you heard the bell ring, my esteemed ones—congratulations, well done, and my appreciation to us all.]

Kia ora e te whānau whānui o Ngāruahine, rau rangatira mā hoki, ā, tēnā koutou, nau mai, haere mai ki te rā whakahirahira i tēnei rangi. [Acknowledgments to you, the extended family of Ngāruahine, and also to the esteemed ones of a hundredfold. Salutations, welcome, and draw hither on this day of high importance today.] I am pleased to stand to support this bill today in its second reading. But before I do that, I want to acknowledge the passing of Tā Graham Latimer, who had a major impact on the whole of the motu for the many amazing deeds that he did. I also want to pay tribute to Charlie Petera, another kaumātua rangatira from Tai Tokerau, and, finally, to Rob Cooper from Ngāti Hine. I want to especially mention Rob Cooper because he had a big impact on hauora Māori for Aotearoa New Zealand and he would have had a big impact up there in Ngāruahine. I started working within the health sector when I first came across Rob Cooper and Gwen Tepānia-Palmer. I was amazed at the amount of work and the push that they had in driving the improvement of Māori health through the implementation of the Māori health providers throughout the motu. That is why I just wanted to take some time out to acknowledge Rob Cooper.

Ngāruahine is one of eight Taranaki iwi who have been through this process or are coming through this process now and in the future. It is amazing that our select committee and the Crown can actually bring together all of these claims from Taranaki through this House during this year. It is amazing because all of the eight iwi have their roots to the Maunga, Taranaki, and the horrific injustices that happened there and throughout that area of Taranaki.

I want to acknowledge the many people who came to the select committee hearing in Hāwera this year. I want to acknowledge them because it is really, really difficult to articulate a lifetime of injustices in 10 minutes to a group of MPs who are sitting there listening intently, putting together the parts to your puzzle and to your history. I want to acknowledge you, because to do that takes a lot of guts and a lot of nerve, a lot of talking with your whānau and bringing together the words that you need to say so we can actually hear all the stories. I want to acknowledge you; it is not an easy thing to do. Actually, I have never submitted to a select committee, so I take my hat off to you.

I want to also acknowledge our Minister, the Hon Christopher Finlayson. I do that quite often here, but I just want to acknowledge him because he sweats a lot for all the claims. He does that and works really hard. I have been privileged to be part and parcel of the many signings that he has done throughout the country, and the words that he articulates in the speeches and apologies come from the heart. I have seen him on one particular occasion where a teardrop nearly got there and he was able to hold it together, but that is how passionate he is. I think that many people in the country do not realise the blood, sweat, and tears that he goes through to actually make sure that iwi are acknowledged by the Crown.

Some people might say “Oh, it is not enough.”, and others might say “It is too much.”, but I say it is the start. It is either the start of your economic development for the growth of your iwi or it is to grow what you have already put in place. All of these claims here, they are not about the people sitting in the gallery. They are about the future. They are about the mokopuna who come through. You know, it is about everything that is going to happen into the future. And all of you sitting here today, in this House, you will go down in the history—your history—as your mokopuna, in years to come, will look back and say: “It was my koro, my kuia who sat there and pushed hard for that day to happen.” So I have no other things to say today, in the second reading. I am very privileged and proud to commend the bill to the House. Kia ora.

Ka hono aku whakaaro ki Te Runga Rawa me te karakia whakarite i a tātou i tēnei rangi. Ā, tēnei anō e mihi atu ki a koutou Ngāruahine, ki Matua Te Tapu, te maunga Taranaki, ki a koutou kua tae mai nei i tēnei wā; tēnā koutou. Kia kaua e pōhēhē koutou ko tēnei te tutukitanga mō Āraukuku, ēngari e tika ana, me kōrero tātou ki tēnei take. Ā, waihotia mō te pānui tuatoru ki te whakawhānui ake i ngā whakaaro mā koutou ēngari, e pā ana ki te momo o ngā kaupapa i puta mai i mua i te aroaro o Te Komiti Māori, ka tika, ka whakamārama pai kia waiho ki konei. Ka mutu te wāhanga o te tutukitanga ki te pānui tuatoru.

[I link my thoughts to the Almighty Above and to the prayer that readied us for today. I acknowledge you once again, Ngāruahine, and Matua Te Tapu, which is Mount Taranaki to you who have arrived here at this point in time; welcome. You must not think mistakenly that this is the final settlement in regard to Āraukuku, but it is appropriate that this matter is discussed by us. Leave the elaboration of viewpoints for your consideration at the third reading, but in terms of the kinds of proposals that emerged before the Māori Affairs Committee, it is right that they are explained well and left here. The part relating to the settlement will reach a conclusion at the third reading.]

I just want to offer some comments with regard to the substantive issues considered by the Māori Affairs Committee, and raised through the submission process. This is a second reading, so it is important for us to ensure that all the matters that were considered and traversed by the committee are clarified here so that by the time we get to the third reading and the substantive matters of the Ngāruahine settlement we are able to move forward confidently and in a way that gives Ngāruahine a level of assurance that it is an opportunity for the iwi to move forward.

Kei whea te rongoa mō tēnei tūāhuatanga, te muru, te raupatu i pā mai ki runga i a koutou, i a mātou; te tangohia o ō tātou nei whenua nā te ture i mahia, nā te pakanga i mahia, taua tūāhuatanga hei patu i a tātou whakapapa? Ā, kua puta mai aua kōrero katoa.

[Where is the remedy for these kinds of situations—plundering, confiscation—that you and we experienced; where these lands of ours were taken possession of, and that the law and warfare effected, and whereby those situations subdued our genealogy? All those sentiments emerged.]

So it is a very difficult situation, in terms of trying to traverse some of the historical realities of what happened, and reconciling some of those through a Treaty settlement process. My colleagues before me have spoken at length on that. But can I say, at the select committee level, when the submitters came to the committee—albeit with some specific issues of contention with where interests were best represented—ultimately, the committee did not get a strong sense that this was about a contest between iwi or between hapū; actually, this was a frustration with regard to the Crown process. So I acknowledge that in the first instance.

In the second instance—and I happened to be the local MP when the Ngāti Ruanui settlement was reached. Let me just, for the purposes of those listening to this debate, consider the Āraukuku matter within that context. Members of the select committee had heard that the Ngāti Ruanui settlement had substantially addressed Āraukuku interests. They had been recognised in terms of having a seat on the governance board, and they were included in the claimant definition. However, the matter that came to the select committee under the Ngāruahine settlement was that the Wai 552 claim was not extinguished. So your common-sense approach would say: “Well, if Āraukuku’s interests were settled under the Ruanui settlement, why wasn’t the Waitangi Tribunal claim extinguished at that point if the Crown was so confident?”. We pursued all those types of questions to try to understand the submissions coming to us under the Ngāruahine settlement.

With that said, I think, in my mind, what it whittled down to was that there were some interests that may have been thought to be outside the Ruanui settlement that may have been addressed in the Ngāruahine settlement. Even if I whittle it down further, the matter really could be condensed down to the power station, which is why the select committee made comment on it. Minister, the way in which you referred to the Stratford Power Station land and its inability to be utilised for settlement purposes while recognising that that is an issue that remains outstanding is helpful, I think, as people try to ensure that the nature and extent of their interests in specific areas that have not been addressed by either settlement can still be recognised. That is really important because Āraukuku did say quite clearly that the extinguishment of their Wai claim within the context of the Ruanui settlement was something that they did not consent to. However, this committee did not change that—it did not take that out. It recognised that this bill will continue with the Wai claim, Wai 552, and the recognition that it will be extinguished.

A couple of other matters that the committee concerned itself with as a result of the Āraukuku submission were mainly that in clause 13 of the bill there was no specific reference to Āraukuku, and the issue was around the whakapapa connection. It was a really difficult situation on our select committee—we were not there to arbitrate over whakapapa. We would much rather prefer that those matters had been dealt with well before the bill came to our committee. However, we understood that these were matters that were so inextricably linked to your connection to the whenua that they would undoubtedly come to the committee. So when we were informed that Āraukuku’s connection to Ngāruahine was through Kānihi-Umutahi and Ōkahu-Inuawai hapū, we could only but accept that that was the case. Even though we heard that the Ketemarae Pā was outside the interests affected by the Ngāruahine settlement, we understood that to the extent of the Ngāruahine settlement there was an opportunity for Āraukuku interests to connect back here.

Imperfect as it is for Āraukuku—and we tried very hard—you will see in much of the select committee’s report that we tried very hard to try to whittle through every issue that was raised. Imperfect as these explanations may be, for Āraukuku the committee resolved that, actually, there was very little we could do other than recognise the extent of their representation to our committee and the importance of ensuring that for the public record there potentially may remain matters unresolved. But the relationships with Ngāti Ruanui and Ngāruahine for the time being are absolutely critical to enable Āraukuku to move forward and also to enable Ngāruahine and Ngāti Ruanui to continue to move forward. Can I just reiterate to the House, so that there is no misunderstanding, there was not a high level of animosity between Ngāruahine and Āraukuku—there was not. It was very much a frustration with the process.

Minister, you have heard all the contributions from the committee at this second reading of the bill. Can I just, for your benefit, acknowledge the extent to which the officials went to the degree of giving us the advice that we needed to make a confident decision in the report that we are providing here today. Can I thank my colleague Adrian Rurawhe, for sitting on this committee. As was mentioned by our chair, Nuk Korako, he offered sage advice to us and a level of wisdom that was helpful to the committee. Nō reira, tēnei te tino mihi atu ki a koe, Adrian, mō tērā, tō mahi, āe, i Te Rohe o Te Taihauāuru.

[And so I really acknowledge you, Adrian, for that, in terms of your work in the Western region.]

Lastly, in terms of the technical amendments and the transfer of responsibilities for the post-settlement governance entity and just making sure that no liabilities will transfer, we saw that as a very worthy amendment and we are happy to recommend it to the House on the third reading. Ka waihotia te whakawhānui ake o ngā painga katoa mō te tutukitanga o Ngāruahine ki taua wā ēngari mō tēnei wā, anei he pitopito kōrero, he paku whakamārama mō ngā āhuatanga i tae mai i mua i te aroaro o te komiti. Ka nui te mihi atu ki a koutou, kia tātou katoa, tēnā koe.

[To the actual elaborations of all benefits relating to the settlement of Ngāruahine—to that moment—but for now, here are some little bits of information and explanations in regard to the situations that came before the committee. I have much admiration for you collectively and for us all; so thank you.]

Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā, kia ora e Te Whare, tēnā koutou e Te Iwi o Ngāruahine.

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker, salutations to you the House, and acknowledgments to the Ngāruahine iwi.]

It is very good to have you here today. As a Pākehā member of Parliament from the Waikato region, I am a little bit too far removed from the action to be able to speak in great detail about this particular bill, but this is a very significant occasion. I am delighted to have the honour of taking the final call on behalf of the Government this morning. I congratulate all who have worked on this bill to this stage on the progress that you have made but I also thank the iwi for your courage and your considerable understanding in the process that you have undertaken.

As a Government we are firmly fixed on making great progress with the Treaty settlement process, and I acknowledge the Hon Christopher Finlayson for the sterling job he has done in leading us to this point. I acknowledge those before him who have also worked on these matters. I acknowledge our tremendous relationship with the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell, Marama Fox, and the members of the Māori Party, and I thank them for the work that they do as well.

To all those who have done such great work behind the scenes or up front within the negotiations, I extend my congratulations and my acknowledgment. To the Māori Affairs Committee that has worked on the bill as well, I commend you for the work that you have done.

I endorse the kōrero of my good colleague Jo Hayes, sitting beside me, who does have much greater knowledge of these matters, and, in particular, I just want to conclude by acknowledging the points that she and others have made that this is, of course, a matter of great historic significance, and your mokopuna—our tamariki—will look back in years to come at the work that is being done now. Their futures are being shaped by the decisions that are being made.

So it is my fervent prayer that this will have a very positive outcome for the iwi. I am absolutely confident that it is having a very positive atmosphere and result for our country as a whole. It is bringing to us a much greater degree of understanding. It is right that we correct the wrongs of the past, and that we learn from those lessons. I have great pleasure, therefore, in supporting this bill.

Bill read a second time.