Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill

I move, That the Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill be now read a third time. I want to begin by welcoming to this Chamber the people of Te Atiawa. It is a real privilege to be here with you on a day that marks a very important step in that ongoing relationship between Te Atiawa and the Crown. As the Crown acknowledges in this bill, recognition of Te Atiawa’s historical grievances is long overdue. Many present in the gallery have spent so much of their lives working towards this day, and I want to acknowledge their work and determination, and the sacrifices that they have made. I also acknowledge those tūpuna of Te Atiawa who carried the flame before the current members but who are no longer with us.

As I did in the previous debate, I want to acknowledge a few individuals who have been instrumental in making today a reality. I have to mention Te Atiawa negotiators, and, in particular, I want to record my thanks and admiration for Peter Moeahu and for the late Wikitōria Keenan. Peter and Wikitōria carried an enormous responsibility for negotiating the settlement of these historical claims and for leading negotiations from start to finish. I am sure that all of us here today share my sense of admiration for the key role played by Wikitōria in these negotiations, my appreciation that she was able to be present from her hospital bed to see the Te Atiawa deed of settlement signed, and my sadness that she is not in the gallery today. So my thoughts are very much with Wikitōria and her family.

I also want to acknowledge the work of all members of the Te Atiawa Iwi Authority and Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Trust. From here in Wellington, we can really see a young leadership emerging in Te Atiawa—and I look up and see Liana Poutu staring down at me. I very much look forward to seeing where you and Hēmi are going to take your iwi in the future.

Finally, I want to thank my chief Crown negotiator Rick Barker, my team at the Office of Treaty Settlements, and the staff of other Government organisations, who really have contributed to making this settlement a reality. The cooperative nature of these negotiations will continue to be a feature of the relationship between Te Atiawa and the Crown, and that I promise you.

This is a day of very mixed emotions. To the extent that this bill marks a new beginning in the relationship between Te Atiawa and the Crown, it is certainly a moment to celebrate. But when we reflect on the history that makes this bill necessary, other emotions inevitably arise: anger, sadness, and, on the part of the Crown, a real sense of shame. This is as it should be. We are not here to forget history—I can assure Te Atiawa of that—nor are we here to leave it behind; we are here to acknowledge it and to place it on the permanent record of this House so that all New Zealanders can learn from it, both now and in the future.

It was in 1839, during a period when many Taranaki Māori were living away from their rohe, that Europeans, also attracted by that region’s rich resources, made their first attempt at acquiring land in Taranaki. Once started, the pressure to sell land did not abate. When the Te Atiawa rangatira Wīremu Kīngi Te Rangitake expressed his intention to bring his people back to his ancestral lands at Waitara and resist their alienation, the Governor himself threatened to have their vessels destroyed. The threat did not work, and by the end of the 1840s Te Atiawa were back at Waitara. As new economic opportunities emerged, Māori from throughout Taranaki became even less inclined to sell their land. The use of secret payments by Crown agents increased tensions within and between hapū, which in 1854 erupted into armed conflict, costing a number of Te Atiawa people their lives.

For a time, purchasing halted, but in 1859 the Crown attempted to purchase the Pekapeka Block. When Wīremu Kīngi’s people prevented the survey of Pekapeka in early 1860, the Crown declared this to be an act of rebellion and commenced hostilities against him and against his people, plunging Taranaki into war. Te Atiawa received support from other Taranaki iwi, and after a year of fighting the Crown negotiated a peace agreement. In April 1863 the Governor decided to renounce the Waitara purchase. However, before this decision was announced, war erupted again and fighting continued into 1864, during which many Te Atiawa people lost their property, their homes, and their cultivations. Many also lost their lives. Then in 1865 they lost their land. In response to the so-called rebellion, the Crown proclaimed 1.2 million acres of Taranaki land confiscated, including every acre—every acre—of the Te Atiawa rohe.

Te Atiawa of course know this story, but it is so very important to record it here in the permanent record of this House. As you know, it is perhaps impossible to overestimate the devastating effect that raupatu had on Te Atiawa individuals, on whānau, on the welfare, economy, culture, and social development of Te Atiawa as an iwi ever since. It is also difficult to imagine a worse breach of the Treaty that the Crown had signed only 25 years before. The Crown then compounded this injustice with other failures and further breaches. When a small amount of land was finally returned in the 1880s, virtually all of it came under non-customary, individualised title. In a further insult, the land was not returned to Te Atiawa people outright but placed under the administration of the Public Trustee, who then either sold the land or placed much of it under a regime of perpetual leases that remains in place to this day.

It is important to acknowledge and record that Te Atiawa were never passive victims. Time and again, Te Atiawa men and women actively opposed land sales, prevented surveys, resisted Crown military force, and refused to accept the return of land under individualised title. Te Atiawa also played a prominent role in the establishment of Parihaka and the movement for peace and independence that developed there. The form of resistance that emerged from Parihaka was anything but passive. Between 1879 and 1880, under the leadership of Te Atiawa rangatira Te Whiti o Rongomai and his co-leader, Tohu Kākahi, Te Atiawa people were among the many who participated in campaigns of peaceful resistance against Crown injustices, but they were arrested and exiled to South Island prisons, detained in harsh conditions without trial. Although some Te Atiawa people were among the very few protesters who did receive trials, the Crown then detained them beyond the terms of their Crown-imposed sentences. Some died while in prison. In November 1881 Te Atiawa people were among those displaced from Parihaka after more than 1,500 Crown troops invaded and systematically dismantled the settlement.

So this is a very difficult story. The settlement package that the bill delivers to Te Atiawa cannot compensate them for the losses and the anguish they have suffered for generations, but it is a testament to the vision and generosity of Te Atiawa that they were willing to negotiate with the Crown on these issues and to negotiate a settlement—a settlement that does not compensate for their losses, but, hopefully, will enable them to resume their place as a major economic force in their rohe, to rejuvenate their social, their cultural, their political life, and, once again, imagine a future with them in control.

To that end, this settlement will provide Te Atiawa with resources to help them develop their economic and social well-being. It includes $87 million of financial and commercial redress, the option to purchase a number of Crown properties, sale and leaseback over two Crown properties, and a right of first refusal over a range of properties. Cultural redress includes the vesting of a key site, the Taumata property in Te Atiawa, and a range of redress mechanisms that highlight the significant relationship of Te Atiawa to the land.

I acknowledge, as indeed I must, that one of the emotions being felt by some Te Atiawa today will be frustration around the issue of the Waitara endowment lands. I hope this will be a generation that reaches some resolution over this land. Waitara remains one of the most complex issues we have ever dealt with in a Treaty settlement, and although the outcome may be less than what many Te Atiawa would have wanted, it is a testament to their negotiators’ persistence and their pragmatism that every possible opportunity was explored both with central and local government.

It is a great pleasure to be here as the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, speaking as the first speaker in this third reading. I know that I always seem to have notes, because I want to read very carefully into the record of the House what happened, and it is important to record it accurately. But I want to conclude without notes by saying to Te Atiawa that it has been a great journey with you. I always recall Ōwae Marae and Māui Pōmare Day in 2009, when I was invited to speak. I said: “Why don’t we start negotiating again?”. When I went back to the Office of Treaty Settlements on the Monday morning to tell them that I was lining up Te Atiawa to negotiate, there were a few coronaries that morning, because it was not in their scheme of things, but I had to remind them that I am the Minister.

So on 17 March 2010 we signed the terms of negotiation, again at Ōwae Marae, and it has been a fantastic journey with wonderful people. There is nothing better than walking up to the top of Mount Kaukau in Wellington on a clear day—and we do have those in Wellington—and looking out to see in the far distance the majestic Taranaki. So to have been part of this journey is indeed a great honour. There is a bit more for us to do, and I will say more about that in the Taranaki debate, but for now I commend this bill to the House.

Members, the question is that the motion be agreed to, and I remind them that we should not take a leaf out of the Minister’s book and speak for 5 minutes and 30 seconds over their allotted time.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare, otirā, kei te mihi hoki au ki a koutou ngā whānau me ngā hapū o Te Ātiawa, nau mai, hara mai ki Te Whare Pāremata i tēnei rā mō te pānuitanga tuatoru o tēnei tō tātau pire i mua i a tātau, nō reira, tēnā koutou, nau mai hara mai, tēnā tātau katoa.

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, but at the same time I commend you, the families and subtribes of Te Ātiawa. Welcome, and come forth to Parliament House on this day with regard to the third reading of this, our bill before us. Therefore, congratulations to you collectively. Welcome, welcome, and my appreciation to us all.]

First of all, can I acknowledge the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for all the work that he has done on all of the Taranaki iwi settlement claims. Can I also acknowledge the members of the Māori Affairs Committee and the chair of the select committee, Tutehounuku Korako, for the work that they have done on this bill. I had the pleasure of listening to the submitters and I want to acknowledge all of those who have made submissions on this bill. Probably the one that sticks in my mind the most is actually the submission that was made by Peter Moeahu, and I want to acknowledge him for his submission. I think he contextualised this settlement very well, in that he talked about his mokopuna—the mokopuna whom he had at the time that this started, and the many more whom he had at the time of the submissions—so I want to thank him for that context.

I want to read part of the acknowledgments and part of the apology that is made through this settlement. Within the settlement bill, the Crown acknowledges that “(a) it unfairly treated Te Atiawa as being in rebellion; and (b) the confiscations of 1865 were indiscriminate in extent and application and had a devastating effect on the welfare, economy, culture, and social development of Te Atiawa;”. In the apology, it states: “(c) The Crown is sorry for the immense prejudice it caused by confiscating the lands of Te Atiawa. The raupatu was indiscriminate, unjust, and unconscionable. The Crown deeply regrets the damage this caused to the economy and society of Te Atiawa.”

It is really important that when we make an acknowledgment and apology we actually follow through on it, and I have to say, as I said in my second reading speech, and after hearing submissions on the New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill, I do think that a shadow has been cast upon this settlement. I read those out specifically in relation to the Pekapeka Block. I think it is important that it is also recorded in the debate today. The words that we use around this block and what happened there is important to be acknowledged.

To talk about “endowment lands” actually reinforces the history of those lands. They became endowment lands, as we heard in submissions on the New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill, through a process that was unfair and unjust. So the terminology that we use today is important to be acknowledged—we are actually talking about the Pekapeka Block. I refer to these acknowledgments and apology in this context. The other bill before this House, potentially, if we are not careful, will impact negatively on this settlement and the people of Te Atiawa. I want that recorded because I think it is important that we go into this with our eyes wide open and fully cognisant of the potential of that other bill. That is not to say that we will vote against it—no, we will support this bill in its third reading. It is clearly what the people of Te Atiawa want.

Within this bill there is clause 117, which outlines a process around the Pekapeka Block, or, as we are calling it, the endowment land. The other bill that is before the House will remove that, and that is the bit I am really concerned about. But those are issues that the Māori Affairs Committee must deal with with the other bill, not this one. It is clear that this bill needs to pass, and I stand here in support of it, but it would be remiss of me not to actually mention the magnitude of what is being proposed. That is something that the post-settlement governance entity needs to be very clear and direct about in its oral submission when it makes it next year.

The paper trail tells me that the heads of agreement for that agreement between the district council and Te Atiawa was signed within days of the deed of settlement. It kind of tells me that these discussions had already taken place and are directly linked to this settlement. I want it on the record that the submission of Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa now opposes the New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill, and I want that on the record in the reading of this bill.

It is a very difficult situation for negotiators. This is not an easy process to navigate and to get through, with so many competing interests. But my words to Te Atiawa and to the post-settlement governance entity are words of encouragement, to encourage Te Atiawa to take every opportunity it can to reconcile this issue, not only with those who are opposed but also with those who are in favour of it. Not an easy task, I acknowledge, but I want to acknowledge everything that is in this bill for what it is.

I have said on a number of occasions before that the Treaty settlement process is a flawed process, and we must all enter into that process with our eyes open. We must acknowledge what it can deliver and what it cannot deliver, and be absolutely aware of those two things. As I have said to the House on a number of occasions before, we must then ask the question whether or not the claimant group—the iwi—can accept what it can and cannot deliver, and whether or not we can live with it. Those are the important questions, before even entering into this process.

I have to ask whether or not everyone connected to this settlement considered that question, because there have been a number of objections to this settlement, and even requests to have this settlement legislation delayed—which I do not agree with. But those are questions that I wanted to pose within this debate, with humble respect to all of those who participated in this process.

Tēnei au e tuku mihi atu ki a koutou, ko te tūmanako kia ūhia mai e rātau mā i te wāhi ngaro ō rātau kaha, ō ratau manaakitanga, ō rātau aroha ki runga ki ngā whānau me ngā hapū o Te Ātiawa, nō reira, e Te Māngai o Te Whare tēnei te mihi atu ki a tātau katoa o Te Whare nei, tēnā tātau katoa.

[I accord this tribute to you collectively with the hope that they and others at the place out of sight bestow their courage, kindness, and empathy upon the families and subtribes of Te Ātiawa. Therefore, Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend us all of this House. Well done.]

E ngā mana, e ngā reo, e ngā rangatira mā, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa. I wish to welcome and acknowledge members of Te Atiawa here today. Liana, Hemi—good to see your whānau. Peter, kia ora, welcome—and many others who are here today as well, in support of this bill. I would like to also acknowledge Mayor Neil Holdom—great to see you here. Also the deputy mayor from South Taranaki, Phil Nixon; Craig Stevenson, Kelvin Day, Basil Chamberlain, Barbara McKerrow, and I saw Howie Tamati in the crowd as well—kia ora, Howie. I would like to acknowledge the negotiators Peter Moeahu and also Wikitoria Keenan, and I acknowledge Wikitoria’s passing. No doubt, today is a day that she would have greatly desired to be here.

I would like to read a passage from The Taranaki Report—Kaupapa Tuatahi, and then I want to go back in history, with the hope that we might understand some of the deep background of what has taken place here in Aotearoa New Zealand. The report says “We have been struck by the coincidence between this current perception of partnership and good faith”—speaking of Te Atiawa—“and the view of Maori leaders at the time. The predominant Maori view, as we see it, was that there was a place for Pakeha, provided Maori authority was also acknowledged. Nor was this expectation of respect couched in unreasonable or demanding terms. On the eve of the New Zealand wars of the 1860s, for example, as the Government was preparing to attack him, the Te Atiawa leader, Wiremu Kingi, wrote simply to the Governor: You should remember that the Maoris and Pakehas are living quietly upon their pieces of land, and therefore do not you disturb them. Later, when a military commander presented an ultimatum, a virtual declaration of war alleging Kingi was in rebellion, Kingi replied: Friend, Colonel Murray, salutation to you in the love of our Lord Jesus Christ. You say that we have been guilty of rebellion against the Queen but we consider we have not. This is my word to you. I have no desire for evil, but on the contrary, have great love for the Europeans and Maories. Listen, my love is this, put a stop to your proceedings, that your love of the Europeans and the Maories may be true.”

“Twenty years later, when the war had come and gone, the leadership, as represented by Te Whiti, still maintained the same position: there was a place for Pakeha and a place for Maori but Maori authority had to be recognised and dialogue between Maori and the Government had to be maintained. Te Whiti and Kingi, in turn, were adherents of the Kingitanga, the movement under the Maori King, where the relationship between the separate authorities of the colonisers and Maori was exemplified in the symbolic depiction of ‘the [Maori] King on his piece; the Queen on her piece, God over both; and Love binding them to each other’.”

Another reason why I wish to speak of this is because of my family ancestry. My tupuna John Hobbs—my great, great, great, great-grandfather—came to New Zealand on 3 August 1823, to the Bay of Islands, as a young 23-year-old, after working in Tasmania, ministering to the convict population there. He was an accomplished musician, he was an artisan, demonstrating great ability to improvise, and he offered his assistance to the Wesleyan mission in the Bay of Islands. He was a skilful linguist, who learnt to speak nine languages, and he became an interpreter. Did I say he was a very handsome young man as well?

💬 Hon Te Ururoa Flavell: No you didn’t. You missed that part.

So I missed all those bits about him. Prior to the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in February 1840 Hobbs had lengthy discussions with his friend whom he had helped encourage into Christianity, Tāmati Waka Nene. It was Nene’s speech, according to the encyclopaedia of New Zealand, Te Ara, that turned the tide in favour of the Treaty during the signing of Waitangi. At the Mangungu signing, Hobbs interpreted for Lieutenant Governor William Hobson. In 1847 he noted that he had translated Hobson’s assurances that the Crown wanted sovereignty, not land, and that land would never be forcibly taken.

What we see is broken trust. What we see is not just the loss of the land but the loss of a relationship that should have been based on trust, mutual acknowledgment, and respect and understanding. When I plug my iPhone into my computer, the question comes up “Is this a trusted device?”, because unless I say “Yes”, there is no communication between those two devices. What I hope for, out of all of this, because we know that what was lost was hugely greater than what has been returned—but what I hope may be restored is trust.

I want to acknowledge my good friend the Hon Christopher Finlayson, who, I believe, has made that word “honourable” true in this Parliament, in this country, because he has sought to build trust and to build communication. He has sought to bridge the huge divide that has existed, and we know that what is needed is just this foundation to go forward.

I remember that once when a news article came out in our local paper, the Taranaki Daily News, about the progress of the Treaty settlements, I put it up on Facebook, and somebody commented to me. They said: “How much is this costing us?”. I came back straight away and said “Nothing, compared with what it has cost our iwi.”, and the reply came back “Fair enough.”

I think if people understand the loss, they will also understand that what is being returned is, essentially, token in comparison. But it is something that will offer a foundation that what can be, and ought to be, returned is mana, is spirit, is place, is leadership, and is well-being, with the great hope that for us in Taranaki, we can see a future together that will take us as a people in the spirit of what Wīremu Kīngi has said and what my ancestor John Hobbs has said. Kia ora. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

E Te Māngai o Te Whare, tēnā koe, otirā, e ngā mema o Te Whare nei, tēnā tātou katoa! Ka titiro au ki Te Maunga Tipua, ko Hikurangi o Te Tai Rāwhiti, hoki atu au ki ngā maunga o Tūranganui-ā-Kiwa, ko Haumī, ko Tītīrangi, ko Manawarū, ka hoki au ki te Whakapūnake Maunga o Te Wairoa hōpūpū, hōnengenenge, matangirau. Hoki atu au ki Maungaharuru-o-Tangitū. Haere ana ki te maunga teitei ko Kahurānaki o Ngāti Kahungunu-ki-Heretaunga. Titiro au ki Ruahine o Tamatea i Tamaki-nui-ā-Rua. Ka hoki atu au ki Remutaka o Ngāti Kahungunu, Rangitāne hoki o Wairarapa.

Kua tae mai ki Te Awakairangi o Taranaki whānui, Te Ātiawa hoki, nō reira, Taranaki Maunga, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, ā, tēnā koutou katoa. Te Ātiawa Reo, Te Ātiawa Mana, Te Ātiawa Tangata, tēnei te mihi ki a koutou mō ngā maunga teitei o Te Rohe o Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, nō reira, nau mai, nau mai, hara mai! Nau mai, hara mai i runga i te kaupapa tino whakahirahira, te whakamutunga o tō koutou pire, ka ngangaro, ka mau te wehi!

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker, but at the same time, acknowledgments to all of us members of this House. I look at Hikurangi, the supernatural mountain of the East Coast and go back to the mountains of Gisborne, Haumī, Tītīrangi, and Manawarū, and then back to the Wairoa River full of lumps, unevenness and spite of Whakapūnake Mountain, to Maungaharuru-o-Tangitū. I go on to the lofty mountain Kahurānaki of Ngāti Kahungunu at Hastings. I look at Ruahine of Tamatea at Dannevirke and go back to Remutaka of Ngāti Kahungungu, Rangitāne, and also of the Wairarapa.

I have arrived at Lower Hutt of Taranaki at large and also of Te Ātiawa, and so to you, Taranaki Mountain, greetings, salutations, and greetings to you collectively and to us all. To you, Taranaki voice, Taranaki authority, and Taranaki individuals of Te Ātiawa, I acknowledge you collectively for the lofty mountains of the Ikaroa-Rāwhiti electorate, so welcome, welcome, come hither. Welcome and come forth on this really magnificent matter, the conclusion of your bill; how overcoming and awesome.]

It is time to celebrate, it is time to reflect, and it is time to remember those who are no longer with us, in this passing of Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill.

As the proud member for Ikaroa Rāwhiti, I stand to bring warm greetings and salutations from the constituents whom I represent, on this historic day for the iwi of Te Atiawa. I am looking at the deed of settlement. I notice—but I will not traverse the parts of the bill—and I acknowledge that the parts of the bill are made in three areas, from the agreed historical account, acknowledgment, and apology, to the cultural redress and the financial and commercial redress. As I read the overview of the settlement, I particularly wanted to draw to the House’s attention—and, obviously, to the attention of those who are in our gallery—the statement that stays pretty much in the under-view. It says this: “The benefits of the settlement will be available to all members of Te Atiawa, wherever they live.”—wherever they live.

It is my experience that many of our people around the motu do not live within their tribal boundaries, for many reasons. They have either moved away for mahi or moved away for study, but their heart always remains within that rohe, and I want to acknowledge Te Atiawa for acknowledging those who no longer live at home. I guess the trick is how we bring those who are not at home to benefit from this particular bill, and I do not see it merely as a financial benefit but also leadership and governance and in management as you, as a people, go forward. I will be safe talking about my own iwi of Rongowhakaata—we are still trying to get our home people to accept many of our people no longer live at home. Approximately 75 percent of the Rongowhakaata people do not live in our rohe. And, like your settlement here today, you are acknowledging that it is a benefit for all. My point is, how do we include those who are no longer living in our tribal boundaries?

I then want to just quickly touch on the financial redress. I want to mention that the Crown is honoured to pay Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Trust, on settlement date, $69,876,000, which is the financial and commercial redress amount of $87 million, less the following on-account payments: $40,000 paid to Te Atiawa Iwi Authority board back on 26 November 1999, and I am pretty sure that was used to help awhi and hāpaitia the negotiations, and an amount of $16,724,000 was paid to Te Kotahitanga on 15 May 2014. I also acknowledge that the settlement provides a cultural fund of $985,000.

The reason why I am highlighting the financial redress is that in our particular claim we were offered a farm. I am making this reference in relation to the Pekapeka Block. In our settlement we were offered a farm. It was not productive, and our negotiators thought it was too big an issue to take on a farm that was not productive. And so that decision by negotiators at our time was to take it back to our people and to pānui through our ratification to ask the people of Rongowhakaata whether we wanted to purchase a farm that was not productive. I distinctly remember, as one of those negotiators, the kaumātua who told us at that time that our No. 1 priority was to get land back—the No. 1 priority was to get land back. They never saw the farm as turning money. They saw the farm as being land in our rohe and we had lost so much. So I am making that point because we can get into difficulty if decisions are made by the few and not taken back to the many. Enough said about that.

I want to acknowledge the hard work of your negotiators on your behalf, and acknowledge the passing of one of them. It is not an easy task to stay on top of negotiating what you believe is a fair settlement with the Crown when the Crown has all the resources. So I want to acknowledge the negotiators. I want to acknowledge you as a people for your patience and your tenacity in staying committed to resolving these historic breaches on behalf of the Crown. So thank you very much, Te Atiawa.

To the Minister, I want to acknowledge the Hon Chris Finlayson for his work in bringing this bill to the House and, of course, the hard-working members of the Māori Affairs Committee. I want to wish Te Atiawa—when I see these young ones running around, it is about their future. It is about their future, and this settlement will help in no small part to ensure that when they are at their straps they have opportunities. I do hope that we invest in our young people, through settlements, grow our own talent, and ensure that they have pathways to participate both as iwi members but also as iwi managers in the businesses and opportunities that this settlement can bring about. Nō reira, huri noa e ngā mema o te Whare nei, all the very best Te Atiawa. We look forward to hearing the successes that will come upon you.

Nō reira e Te Iwi, ōku rau rangatira mā, kui mā, koro mā, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātau katoa!

[Therefore, to you the tribe, my esteemed ones of a hundredfold, my elderly women and menfolk; congratulations, well done to you collectively and to us all.]

Tēnā koe, tēnā koutou katoa, Te Ātiawa, te toki te tangatanga e te rā.

[Thank you and acknowledgments to you all, Te Ātiawa, the adze that can remove the very sun.]

As I uttered the words about the toki of Tokomaru waka and how it refers to bindings that cannot be undone by the sun, it is appropriate as I think of the kotahitanga of all of you here today to honour this third reading of the Te Atiawa Treaty Claims Settlement Bill and the fact that not only do your people remain bound and working through historical grievances and issues together but the glare of the sun—likening it to the challenging up-and-down harshness, the wero of trying to include all the different voices, the different hapū and iwi through this settlement process can often be a threat of undoing. And yet you stand here, remaining strong and committed to doing the best you can for the future as well.

We just had the final reading of the Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill, and at the end of that you have graced this whare, all of you Taranaki whānui—you stood and graced this whare with your waiata, with your pao, with your chanting, with your tūpuna words—still mopping up the stains of the tears that had to fall. It is the epitome of the dignity with which our people hold themselves through all the pain, through all the grievance, through all the difficulties, and then there you are, standing strong, proud, loud, beautiful, and blessing us with your voices and the history in the words of our tūpuna.

I want to mention that because it is an incredible symbol. It is an incredible tohu of the amazing strength and generosity that our people have in spite of some of the incredible injustice—not just the fact that every acre of land was taken from Te Atiawa through war, through perpetual leases, through other Crown mechanisms, tools of alienation, tools of theft—and yet you are here today. We are here all morning. It is a long morning. It is a beautiful long morning for all of us. I quickly had to visit our wharepaku, and on the way I met some of our Taranaki kaumātua community in two whole other offshoot rooms that were filled with all of you, and it is beautiful. You are here, having gone through all of that, not just this settlement but generations of injustice—generations—and you are here proud and beautiful and strong. We cannot overemphasise what an incredible thing, what an incredible testament to your people this is.

I had dinner a couple of nights ago with a group of Māori women. It is often said that it is a dangerous thing when Māori women group together and have a kai. Really, we are scheming—always scheming. Certainly, Te Atiawa wāhine are no exception. I had a kai with some amazing wāhine Māori including some Te Atiawa wāhine. I want to acknowledge the privilege that I have had and the friendships—the lifelong friendships that I am a part of—with some incredible Te Atiawa Taranaki wāhine and the learning that they have given to me, including through the teachings and the transfer of their own stories and their own knowledge of the injustices and of the strength of Te Atiawa Taranaki whānui history and people.

The ongoing exercising of the authority and the kaitiaki responsibilities of Te Atiawa people—ongoing, over generations, mai rā nō; mai i te tīmatanga—has never stopped. It has never stopped in the face of incredible injustice and mamae, including those tūpuna who were taken south in an unjust way and then treated with injustice. Some of them were never to return. The importance of whakapapa and the severing of it in those instances of that particular injustice—whakapapa is everything to us. The mamae that is carried when our whakapapa is severed in that way is ongoing. So, again, it is a testament to the strength and the uri who will continue the whakapapa.

I want to pick up on the right of first refusal in this particular settlement. We, the Greens, are of course supporting the Te Atiawa settlement, but the right of first refusal—I want to acknowledge my colleague Catherine Delahunty for calling on a briefing from the Crown officials about this right of first refusal and the subsequent kōrero with Minister Finlayson. In some bizarre way, it is actually the right of third refusal and it is not actually the right of first refusal. So this is bizarre. Then there is also the situation where if you have something stolen and then offered back to you for $23 million—a price that you cannot afford—where is the justice in that? That is particularly relevant to the leasehold land in Taranaki. That is important because, again, the Greens will always say that these are not full and final settlements and they are not justice. If we want to honour Te Tiriti relationship, then it is a permanent and ongoing relationship that has to be based on justice.

I want to acknowledge one of the previous members, Mr Young, and his particular plea that he hopes that this is a step towards trust. The Crown has to prove that. It is the onus of the Crown to prove that trust. As far as I am concerned across Aotearoa, the Crown has not yet gained that trust from Te Iwi Māori. The injustices are ongoing and continue to this day, and there is lots of work for us to do if we are ever to be in that fully trusting and fully just relationship. Although I acknowledge the good work of the Crown in negotiating the difficulties of these settlements, we are a long way away—we need generations of time to pass where the Crown stops creating further injustices, and then we might think about some trust.

In the short time I have got left, I also want to acknowledge my colleagues Jan Logie and Catherine Delahunty again: the peace walk they went on that left from New Plymouth and the learning that they had—which my colleague Catherine Delahunty has spoken about—and the further learning on the injustice of what happened to Te Atiawa and to Taranaki whānui, and how important it is for our country, for our children, and for all of us to come to terms with those stories of the injustice, not just for education but to help us seek true enduring justice for our entire country as we go forward. That is the sort of Te Tiriti relationship that the Green Party would like to see.

We wish Te Atiawa the best of kaha and strength as you go forward. We wish to celebrate with you. We wish to acknowledge the hardships, the disagreements—that the voices have not always been smooth and agreeing, because that is what happens in this Crown-mandated process. You have done amazing with all of that. You will continue to. From the Green Party and from myself ngā mihi nui, ngā mihi aroha ki a koutou katoa. Tēnā koutou.

Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker. I take a call on behalf of New Zealand First in the second of this trinity of legislation, which will see a number of Treaty settlements come to conclusion in terms of the legislation that will see those particular settlements completed, as far as this House is concerned. I hope that that is the case and that somewhere down the line when there are further breaches in spite of the settlements that have been made today—I just hope I do not live to see that day.

The bill itself records the Crown breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi against the iwi of Te Atiawa and, as a previous speaker alluded, it provides a new relationship between the Crown and Te Atiawa. I do not need to restate those breaches that have led to this day. Suffice it to say that those breaches were part of, shall I say, the darkest parts of the history of this country, particularly as it affected Te Atiawa and the rest of the indigenous people of this country.

Reference has been made to the Pekapeka Block. Probably because of those issues, it became the genesis of the battles that took place that saw Te Atiawa lose their land by way of confiscation.

But this bill certainly provides the platform for Te Atiawa to regain economic, cultural, and social sovereignty for their people, and I want to emphasise that this settlement is for their people because I know, particularly from reports in the media, that there are other organisations that see these settlements as an avenue for them to have the benefits of—and I am talking about certain Government departments and certain local bodies, all mentioning that these settlements will be an advantage with regard to things like infrastructure.

I just want to say to the iwi that this settlement is for you and your people, and you determine how it should be utilised in order to promote yourselves, both economically and socially. I want to make that point, and I cannot make that point too strongly, because already I have noticed that some iwi who have settled have gone into those arrangements, and possibly at their own desire. But I just want to make the point that these settlements are for the particular iwi, and in this case it is Te Atiawa.

Of course, with this settlement there is still the issue of the Waitara lands, and Marama Davidson, the previous speaker, articulated those concerns very well. I do not need to repeat them, suffice it to say that that is a matter that is still to be considered by this House. It is now before the Māori Affairs Committee and we have yet to hear all the submissions that have been made, but we will do that by visiting Waitara early in the new year.

I also want to say, again, like with the previous bill, the Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill, that New Zealand First still has that concern. In this particular bill I refer to clause 77, particularly in terms of section 77(2), where it imposes on the council that it “must” make those appointments, and yet, under the Local Electoral Act, the word that is used is “may”. We would not have had any problem with the word “may”, because it gives the local body the choice. In this instance, and in the instance of the previous legislation—and, no doubt, in the bill that is yet to be heard today—the question of “must” places the compulsory emphasis on the local bodies. If the people who elect local bodies are not in favour of that, then the respective councils have to face that difficulty.

Again, apart from that, I want to reiterate also our objection to the fact that groups like Federated Farmers are recognised in the same way. We oppose that, as well.

We believe that Māori are no less able—and are just as good, if not better, in some cases—to represent their people and their communities on councils by being elected. The recent local body elections have shown that a number of Māori around the country—admittedly, not as many as we would like to see, to reflect the percentage of our people as part of the overall population of this country. But there is the fact that we have Māori who have been elected on their own merits, not because they are Māori but because of their own merits, and I just want to refer to my relative who has become the Mayor of Porirua.

💬 Marama Fox: What about the partnership? Treaty principles of partnership?

That is all part of it. We subscribed to that when we signed the Treaty of Waitangi. And I believe that although this is what was agreed to by the negotiators—that is their right—all we are saying is that we can get Māori on to councils. If that is the wish of this particular clause—to get Māori on to councils—then we can do so in the mainstream by electing our people, and we need to tell our people to get out there and vote.

Having said that, I have no difficulty in terms of the settlement that has been agreed between Te Atiawa and the Crown. Suffice it to say that even amongst the iwi there are people who disagree with the settlement, so, like them, we exercise that same privilege here in the House. But, having said that, I want to wish Te Atiawa and those who have been charged to carry the terms of this settlement through all the best for the future, because, as one negotiator said, he had to wait until his great-grandchildren arrived before this settlement got to this stage. Nā reira e tātou mā tēnā koutou, kia ora mai anō tātou!

[And so to us and others, I acknowledge you collectively, my appreciation once again to us!]

Kia ora, Mr Assistant Speaker. I am just choosing my words. Tēnā koutou e Te Whare, nei te mihi atu ki a koutou, rawe te tūtaki i a koutou anō ahakoa kua tatari roa nei mō tēnei rangi, kua tae ki tēnei wā! Hoi anō, kai te mihi atu ki a koutou, koutou katoa, ngā pou, ngā rahi kei waenganui i a koutou, kai te mihi atu ki a koutou, ngā kuia, ngā koroua, tēnā koutou kua tae ki te wā!

[Greetings to the House. I acknowledge you collectively; it is nice to meet you once again. Despite the lengthy wait for this day, this moment has been reached. Nevertheless, I salute you collectively, all of you, the pillars, the great amongst you. I commend you, the elderly women and menfolk. Congratulations; the moment has arrived.]

Here is the thing: we signed a Treaty—a Treaty that guaranteed rangatiratanga, our choice, hole in one, our choice. We signed a Treaty that said we would work in partnership—yes, a partnership of trust—and in that Hobson’s pledge they said they were not interested in land, just sovereignty. So it is hard to understand—or maybe it is not hard to understand—that trust.

You know, I am a pretty trusting person. I give trust freely. You have to break that trust, and then you have to earn it back again, but I will give it freely first, and our people gave that trust. So it is difficult to say that we trust that we will be treated fairly, because our history tells us otherwise. It is difficult to say that we can give that trust freely and know that when we vote we will get our people on the council, because our history tells us otherwise. So under the Treaty of partnership, as a right to recognise our right to have a say and a vote and decision-making powers, yes, we support arrangements where our people have the right to sit at the table and be heard and to participate in decision making and be heard, because actually our history tells us we cannot trust that always in good faith what we say is what we do.

I want to talk about Wīremu Kīngi. In the first reading I spoke about that story, as articulated by one of your own: how the Suppression of Rebellion Act meant that the Governor of the day could decide what rebellion looked like and therefore roll out any measure—any measure—he deemed necessary to suppress that rebellion in order to put it to rest. But Te Rere-tā-whangawhanga, in his ōhākī, lay on his bed and reached out to his son, Wīremu Kīngi Te Rangitake, and said “Do not sell our lands, ever.” He probably said it better than that, and in Te Reo, and beautifully articulated, but that is the essence of what he said: never sell. And all Wīremu Kīngi ever did was try to uphold the wishes of his dying father and refuse to sell the land.

The Governor of the day deemed that to be rebellion against the Crown, and therefore enacted the first of all the Land Wars that would follow. I am just going to read something about this, because Wīremu refused all the way through—vetoed sales, pulled out the survey pegs. I wish I had a survey peg. I wish I had a survey peg right now. He pulled them out, and let me tell you what happened as a result.

“For two days Colonel Charles Gold and his Imperial troops tried to overthrow the pā, but failed. In The New Zealand Wars … [they say this]: ‘Its anti-artillery bunkers and covered trenches effectually protected its garrison from cannon and small-arms fire. Nearly 500 troops poured in a heavy fire all day from as near as 50 yards. Two 24-pounder howitzers fired 200 rounds, “every shot through the place”, from close range,’ ” but none were killed—because we are pretty clever, us Māori people. “And because the pā was so quick to put up—it took just one night—Te Rangitaake and his men had no qualms in leaving it.”

Two hundred rounds—but that war went on for the next year, and at the end they were finally overthrown by numbers; not by stealth, not by strategy, because they were amazing strategists. It was not because they gave in, but because the Crown was able to pull troops out of Australia and bring them here to carry out here what they had already done there. As a result, 1.2 million acres of Taranaki land was eventually confiscated. There is little trust, but today marks a new era. It is not about putting it behind us. Someone said to me once: “Forgiveness is to remember without pain.” I am not sure that I am there. We may not yet be there, but we are trying. Here are the examples that your people give us: Te Whiti, Tohu Kākahi. Still, to this day, you uphold their legacy and you say: “It’s OK. We’re here in peace, and we invite you to live amongst us, and we will share.”—despite all of that.

You know, the other week we welcomed descendants of Parihaka to the screening of the movie here in Parliament, which told the story of what happened to those men: bound, enslaved—enslaved. I just repeat that for the benefit of the New Plymouth District Council. They were enslaved and taken away on ships. The story says that when the boat was too heavy, some of them were made to hold on to ropes dragged behind the boat, in the water. When many of them lost their lives in the journey that followed, they were tossed overboard. They were enslaved in the bourgeoning city of Dunedin to build their roads and create the foundations of the Otago University, the council buildings, and the library. Twenty years later, they came home—those who still survived. And so, you have given so much to the foundation of this nation, in blood, sweat, and tears, and still—and still—you stand in peace, with the raukura that reminds us of all of that. My mihi to you.

I am not sure that I can remember without pain, but I am learning to live with our whānau, and try every day not to let that sacrifice go to waste. Every day in this House, every day with my babies—every day, I learn from the example that you and your people have left us, so that we can see a brightness of hope for our future. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora mai tātou katoa.

Te Ātiawa iwi, tēnā koutou, ka tika me rongo ki te pātukituki o te whatumanawa hei arahi i ēnei kōrero i mua i a koutou i tēnei rangi.

[Acknowledgments to you, Te Ātiawa tribe. It is apt indeed that you feel the palpitations of the heart as a lead into these contributions before you on this day.]

I sometimes wish we had the benefit of foresight so that we could make contributions to these types of debates, having seen what the impact of settlements would be 20 years forward. Sadly, that is not the case, but it got me thinking, especially, on this bill. When I came into this House, the settlement process was very new. Our own settlement had transpired. In fact, when I read some of the historical record, much of the history is similar.

The first Treaty settlement bill that I was able to participate in at the select committee level was the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Bill. I remember some strong representations. It was a new process, and people were very unsure about the step they were about to embark on in settling their claim. I remember Te Maiharoa, mokopuna of Hipa Te Maiharoa, the prophet, coming and advocating for his people of Waitaha. Although he got a good hearing, again, with the benefit of hindsight, I think we might have just listened to him a little bit more, to hear what he was saying. This is not to detract from that particular settlement—in fact, in our own settlement, Ngāti Te Ata would be the exemplar again—but to actually offer some insight as to how difficult a step it was to take to go down the settlement path.

This is the first time in any Treaty settlement debate that I have made any contribution on, Minister Finlayson, where I have a real sense of concern, and where I need to call on the moral fibre of the character of each of us as decision makers and as leaders to ask the question: have we got it right? I want to support this settlement, and I will, because Te Atiawa has negotiated it in good faith with the Crown. Yet, I feel that there is one matter outstanding, which has not been addressed and must be, and it is the Pekapeka Block. If we go back to our history, we could say in New Zealand that the first land confiscated—that is why Maniapoto went to Taranaki, to support the cause—was actually this block. It is not good enough for us to think that we can have two different processes trying to come up with the remedy for a very difficult situation.

Indeed, we are at a point in time, in the Māori Affairs Committee, where we have got a parallel process. Yes, we have got the third reading of Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill today, and we will support it. However, we do it knowing that there remain reservations around an outstanding matter that cannot simply be washed over. If we want to truly rectify the wrongs of the past, we have to truly be able to be brave enough to challenge some very systemic wrongs that were created. Unlike Taranaki, which had to cope with reserves and leases as well as raupatu, Waikato lands were just taken—sold off. We have a situation here today where, if we ask the question “Are we doing enough to restore mana?” to Te Atiawa about what wrongfully happened to them, we cannot neglect the issue of the Pekapeka Block. It is here in the historical account of this settlement.

I am concerned for that reason, Minister. I know that this House will debate at length through the select committee process and the third reading of the New Plymouth District Council (Waitara Lands) Bill as to where to from here. I am looking at the honourable member for New Plymouth, Jonathan Young. You know, as we do, that this is a difficult task, but it will draw on our moral fibre and character to ask the question: can we do more and should we create space for a different way forward? If we were brave enough to do that, we can support Te Atiawa bill, with a level of concern and knowing that the issue of Pekapeka remains an issue yet to be resolved because we have an imperfect process dealing with it at the moment.

I say that, not to detract from your day and from the things that you want to see happen with this settlement bill, but in good faith, as we make all our impassioned speeches about restoring the wrongs of the past and making sure that the Crown upholds its obligations. When we debated Treaty settlements 20 years ago in this House, the big debate was around full and final settlement and durability. We cannot quite have that conversation today with this bill, because there is a matter outstanding. It requires a brave solution. It requires a different approach. It requires political intervention, because if we just do it by the law and by statute it will not happen. There are people in this House who can make those decisions. We are just a cog in the wheel, and through our humble contributions and our good conscience we are wanting to try to move this debate along. I told myself today, for this particular settlement, for Te Atiawa—knowing the history and knowing where my tūpuna stood in support of you, and knowing, beyond that, the reason why—that I think more can be done.

The reason why more needs to be done is that we need to get over the hurt of what raupatu really did to our tūpuna, but to successive generations—successive generations. If we leave a significant outstanding matter in relation to Te Atiawa’s raupatu claim unresolved or imperfectly resolved, we are going to basically reconcile half of the iwi to a world full of hurt that may not be resolved within the iwi. How can that be? We have got a chance to do something as decision makers. I hope we do. That process is continuing. Minister Flavell, I know that you have a significant connection to this area and that you are working with—well, more than significant; super-significant. I know that you would work constructively across the House with us if there was some political bravery around this approach.

The select committee will do as much as it can with regard to the local bill before us. But again, if it is left to a transactional approach of looking at legislation, without dealing to the moral obligation—the moral obligation of our country to get things like this right; things like this. There are only certain times, with certain bits of legislation, when you can stop and say that this is one of those times to get it right. It is one of those times. Twenty years into the future, if I only had one chip to saying this is the time, it would be on this issue, right now—right now; to get it right.

So, Minister Finlayson, I know your officials worked hard, and have worked hard through this process. You have expressed a keen desire to see the cohort of settlements from Taranaki progressed in unison because the maunga is the next step. But I say in all good faith to you and with goodwill that if we could do something more and better to resolve this significant outstanding issue of Pekapeka, which I believe is the first bit of raupatu land that occurred in our country, then we would be doing the nation a favour. We would be doing the mokopuna of Te Atiawa a favour. We would be doing your mokopuna, Minister, a favour. We would be doing all of our country a favour, because we would have stood up, braved the storm, found a different way, and we would have had the moral fortitude and courage to do it, because we knew it was right. If there was one time, this is it, and I say we should do it. Tēnā tātou katoa.

Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker. Kia ora tātou katoa. E hoa mā, te hunga kua tae mai i tēnei ata, ka mihi rā ki a koutou e whaiwhai haere nei i a Ngāruahine i tēnei ata. Haere mai, tēnā koutou, kia ora tātau katoa. Kia ora tātau nā runga i te āhuatanga o te noho tahi kia taea ai e au te kī: “Te Maunga Tītōhea e rarau ki roto i Te Whare Pāremata.” Ko te mate kē o tēnei Māori, ka kite he tangata, ka hoki ngā mahara, ka kitenga kanohi ka hoki ngā mahara. Koinei te mate o tēnei Māori, i tēnei ata e pērā anō te āhuatanga. Ki a rātau kāore i konei i tēnei rangi ēngari, ko rātau te hunga i hoe i te wāka nei ki tōna taumata. E kōrerohia ake nei ko te āhuatanga ki a Wiki, ē, ka tangi ake! Nō nātata nei au i kōrero ai ki wāna tamariki mō te āhuatanga o te marae e wawatatia nei, kia tū ki ngā motu, ē, ka tangi ake, he ōhākī mōna, otirā, mō te hunga kua ngaro. Kai te kite atu i ētahi, ka hoki ngā mahara ki a Uncle Lindsay, ki a Mākere, ki a Uncle Tommy, ki te whāea o te mema Pāremata e noho nei, Mahara, te āhuatanga ki tō whāea. E tika ana te kōrero o te mema o Te Tai Hauāuru, ēhara nō nāianei ēnei tohe, ā, nō tua whakarere. Koirā ka tangi, ā, me te whakaaro ake, mō Te Kauhoe!

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker, and acknowledgments to us all. Fellow companions, the ones who arrived here this morning, I do commend you for following up on Ngāruahine this morning. Welcome, salutations to you collectively, and my appreciation to us all. My congratulations to us for being so collaborative and making it possible for me to say: “Barren Mountain, settle into Parliament House.” The problem with this Māori, really, is that when a face is sighted memories are recalled, recollections come back at the sight of a face. That is a misfortune with this Māori, and that is the situation this morning. To them who are not present here on this day, but they were the ones who paddled this canoe to its pinnacle. As mentioned here in regard to the situation concerning Wiki, I really mourn her! I recently had a conversation with her children about the situation relating to the desired marae to be erected upon the lands, I do lament her. It is a parting wish for her but at the same time for the ones gone. I sight others and memories go back to Uncle Lindsay, Mākere, Uncle Tommy, to the mother of the member of Parliament sitting here, the situation relating to your mother, Mahara. The address by the member of Te Tai Hauāuru is fitting that these disputes are not of recent times but rather are of ancient times. Consequently, I mourn and reminisce for Te Kauhoe!]

Today is a bit of a hard day because I know these people, and I am a hopeless tangiweto. But there is a huge contradiction, for me, being here today, actually. From memory, it was about 30 years ago, on one Tuesday night, that some of these people—those proactive initiators I talked about earlier—went to a marae up in Otaraua, which is just out of Waitara. Some of these people were plotting—sorry, they were strategising—to go down to a hui that was at the marae of the Hon Mahara Okeroa, the Ōwae Marae at Waitara. The marae was—not even they can remember—up the top. But we had a hīkoi organised. It was a big hīkoi. We got together; we had some planning. We talked about the damn Crown coming to Taranaki to talk about the settlement of Treaty claims. It was most of these people up in the gallery; I sort of was on the periphery—as you know. I watched these people plot. They said “We’re going to go at it from a different angle. We’re not going to go down necessarily with placards; what we’re going to do is we’re going to get some blankets,”—it was not my idea or anything to do with me; it was those fellas up there—“and we’re going to wrap blankets around ourselves, and we’ll go down at 6 o’clock in the morning.”

So we woke up—or they woke up at 6 o’clock in the morning—and they said: “Te Ururoa, let’s go.” I said: “OK; fair enough.” So we went out of the marae and we walked all the way down to the main road. We turned right. We walked down to the Waitara township. Some of those people up there had microphones. They were yelling and screaming obscenities. No, they were not. They were very kind. We were singing waiata. We got up to Ōwae Marae, and the occasion was the arrival of Sir Wira Gardiner and Sir Doug Graham, to present the fiscal envelope. I was at the back of the line—way back. Some of these people marched on to the marae. Do you know—they were against what we are doing today. So was I. We were absolutely against settling claims, on the basis that it was so unfair. How can you talk about settlement, when you are talking about only 1 to 2 percent of the real value of these claims?

So we marched up and we went on to the marae, and there are a couple of things I remember from that. The first one was that we sat down. We had our blankets, and we sat in the sun on the marae, and Taranaki presented its case to Sir Wira, who was the facilitator, and to Sir Douglas Graham. It was a sad day; it was an emotional day. The two events I remember—and they are even written about in Sir Wira’s book. He said that it was probably the most—not inspirational, but the one event that affected him so much. This is because when he came out of the marae, these people—a couple of hundred of them, sitting on the ground, with those blankets wrapped around their waists—were absolutely quiet. As I said earlier, you would think that, against raupatu, you would be pretty angry. These people—we sat quietly. No one moved. When they came out for kai, everybody said: “Come on. Come and have kai.” No one moved. That was our anger about the fiscal envelope.

And so I say to all of my in-laws that, today, you jump the fence and I jump the fence. We all came over to accept that, at the end of the day, you do what you have got to do. You do what you have got to do, and I cannot get in the road of what iwi want

Ko tāku i tēnei rā he tautoko i ngā kōrero mō te āhuatanga o te huarahi e whaiwhaitia haeretia nei e koutou.

[Mine today is to endorse the contributions about the situation relating to the procedure to be followed up by you collectively.]

So there is the first part. There is a bit of a contradiction, but I will get over it. The second part is I want to talk about, as I did this morning, a person whom I did meet. He set the scene, I reckon, for Taranaki about how things would play out. His name was Aila Taylor. Aila Taylor, I reckon—I met him; a fairly humble man—but he, pretty much on his own, set the scene by saying that allowing people to put sewage, rubbish, and offload into the river, into the waterways, and into the sea, and to upset the tide and not allow people to get kai, was wrong. What he did was he went in to bat for that and put up a claim around that. So I think about Aila Taylor today because he was a simple Waitara worker from the meatworks, but he hated—and led a campaign for 34 years to stop—discharge being washed into the Waitara marine area. His claim, Wai 6, was filed on 4 June 1981 on behalf of Te Atiawa. So here we are today, talking about the settlement of some of these issues, but, for me, you cannot go past a name called Aila Taylor in the history of Te Atiawa, and, indeed, Treaty claims and settlements. It is a landmark case and it went on to be the Motunui issue.

The other issues in respect of Waitara—other speakers have spoken about that, so I am not going to go into that. But I can say that I take up the offer from the member Nanaia Mahuta that some of these things we have got to work together on. We are always open to that.

The last point I just wanted to make in the short space of time is that, you know, sometimes some of these issues are so bound in racism. That is the hard part: that people talked about Māori getting over feeling angry about our history. Some people talk about history as being way back, but, actually, it is all around us right now. A person pretty close to me made a stand in respect of some street signs in Waitara. There was a development just recently where one of those developers up there said “Oh, I want to name this development”—two streets; one called Dreaver Drive and the other one Masters Lane—and the iwi said “Hey, how about, because of the history, Māori street names?”. Hello—there was an uproar: “You Maoris are asking for too much.” Then you think about Andrew Judd, who might be in here today, asking about seats for Māori as a right, for goodness’ sake!

💬 Marama Fox: What? A seat for Māori?

I know, I know. That seems to be too hard, and we get hit with notions of too much privilege for Māori. So if anybody thinks history is all the way back there—confiscation, and so on—no. It is still around us now. I want to make that point because, actually, as I talked about street signs earlier, our people have to deal with these things on a daily basis. At least this settlement allows our people to move forward. So I acknowledge those who have been responsible for bringing it to an end.

Liana koutou, Hēmi, ka nui te mihi ki a koutou! Kai aku rangatira, ka tangi ake ki te kite i a koutoui tēnei rā. Kotahi anake te kōrero kai a au, taihoa ake nei ka hoki mai ki aku hoa nō Taranaki. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, haere mai, nō reirā kia ora tātau.

[You collectively Liana, Hēmi, there is much admiration for you! To my esteemed ones, I mourn indeed to see you on this day. I only have one statement for you, and very shortly I will come back to my companions from Taranaki. Acknowledgments and congratulations to you collectively, welcome, and so my appreciation to us all.]