Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill

I move, That the Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time.

This bill represents the continued effort by the Crown to remedy the wrongs of its past actions toward Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki. Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki are an iwi centred around Maraetai and are members of both Tāmaki and—sorry, I’ve got the—if the House will indulge me for a moment, I’ll just get the right notes for the speech.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. [Interruption]

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can I have quiet during the point of order. Thank you.

Sorry, my apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hang on.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: The point that I was going to raise was that I was unable to see or hear the Minister who was speaking in what is quite a significant debate in the House, because members on both sides leaving the Chamber were conversing in the middle of the Chamber, and therefore disrupting the overall proceedings of the House.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: I appreciate the member’s point of order. It was probably just as well—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Speaking to the point of order—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, I don’t really need it, but—

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: Any amount of movement in the House does not excuse a Minister from getting on the wrong page of such an important piece of legislation.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. I don’t think that that’s very helpful. Can I call on the Hon Andrew Little, please, to speak to this important bill.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and my apologies for the error on that part. But I now point out that the bill, the Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill, gives effect to the deed of settlement between the Crown and Heretaunga Tamatea signed at Te Aute College in the Hawke’s Bay on 26 September 2015. The deed of settlement settles all the historical Treaty of Waitangi claims relating to Heretaunga Tamatea. It comprises, in that respect, historical redress, recording the Crown’s breaches and past injustices; cultural redress, acknowledging connections to land and resources of significance to Heretaunga Tamatea; relationship redress, building new connections with the Crown, local authorities, and other groups; and financial and commercial redress, providing a strong economic base for the future.

Firstly, I’d like to acknowledge those who took the time to make submissions—in particular, all the people who made oral submissions—for their efforts and for sharing their kōrero with the Māori Affairs Committee. I acknowledge the work of the Heretaunga Tamatea Settlement Trust, the Heretaunga Tamatea negotiators, Government agencies—especially the Parliamentary Counsel Office—and local authorities for their contributions to the bill.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can I just interrupt the member, I’m sorry, for a second. I do think that the member has to actually move a motion and then speak to it, and in the confusion he did not move that it be now read a second time. So if he could do that and then continue on with his speech.

I move that the Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time, and—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you.

—I hope that the House will take as read—

💬 Hon Nathan Guy: Come on, Andrew. Come on, get on your game.

—what I’ve said for the last three minutes, and I’ll continue from there. Mr Guy might want to note that this bill had its first reading in 2015. Why his Government didn’t get off its backside and get this through the House much earlier is a question, no doubt, that he’ll be able to answer when he gets to his feet. But this Government is left to clean up the mess of that Government, including some of the Treaty settlement issues.

I’d also want to acknowledge—[Interruption] Well, the members opposite might be outraged, but it just happens to be true. I would like to acknowledge, however—continuing this very important piece of legislation—the work of Peter Paku, one of the Heretaunga Tamatea negotiation team, who couldn’t be here today because of health reasons. I wish him a speedy recovery and I look forward to him being here for the third reading, which members opposite will be able to celebrate more fulsomely at that time.

I’d also like to thank the Māori Affairs Committee, who considered that bill. The bill has had robust consideration, with the committee focusing on key issues raised in submissions. After the first reading, the bill was referred to the Māori Affairs Committee and the committee heard 33 oral submissions in Havelock North on 16 February this year. The committee reported the bill back to the House on 29 March this year and recommended that it be passed with a small number of technical amendments. The committee received 47 submissions—46 in support and one opposed. The committee’s commentary on the bill focused on submissions and, in particular, the issue of Glasgow leases at Te Aute.

The land around Te Aute College was gifted by a hapū of Heretaunga Tamatea, Ngāi Te Whatuiāpiti, and is currently subject to Glasgow leases. Submissions focused on the ongoing limitations that these leases have caused, restricting owners from receiving a reasonable return on their land and affecting the aspirations of Te Aute College. The Glasgow leases have been a long-running concern for the Te Aute community.

Glasgow leases arose in the early 1900s when it was considered that long-term tenancy of land was beneficial. The leases gave lessees incentives for remaining on the land for an extended period of time, 21-year lease periods, perpetual rights of renewal, and the ability for lessees to construct and own improvements on the land. This arrangement was appropriate at the time but is not beneficial to the lessor today.

Te Aute Glasgow leases are, however, an arrangement between two private parties and, therefore, options for the Crown to intervene are limited. Throughout the negotiations, the Glasgow leases at Te Aute College were a key matter raised. The importance of Te Aute is also evidenced by the signing of the deed at Te Aute College. And I might say as an old boy of New Plymouth Boys’ High School, that had an annual sports exchange with Te Aute College, I do know of the pride with which that college and its old boys hold themselves and the important place that that college plays in the Hawke’s Bay community and to the Māori community generally.

The Heretaunga Tamatea settlement has specifically provided $5 million to support the long-term sustainability of Te Aute College. The committee considers that this will assist in resolving the issues associated with the Glasgow leases and support Te Aute College to thrive and produce outstanding Māori leaders and citizens, as it has done in the past.

In response to submissions, the committee has also commissioned a report on Glasgow leases. The committee’s commentary on the bill also focused on issues raised in other submissions on the bill.

Another issue for submitters was the effectiveness of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee focuses on resource management and comprises representatives from the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and local iwi. The regional planning committee was formed under the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee Act 2015 and arose from discussions during the Ngāti Pāhauwera negotiations. A review of the regional planning committee will be carried out in August 2018, under section 15 of that Act. This will be the opportunity for the parties to assess the operation of that regional planning committee.

The one submission in opposition to this bill was in relation to Wai 574, the Karanema Reserve Claim, and asserts that the Wai 574 claim should be removed from this settlement and negotiated separately. The Crown negotiates with large natural groups and settles all historical Treaty of Waitangi claims associated with a large natural group. Wai 574 is within the Heretaunga Tamatea large natural group. Therefore, Wai 574 remains included in the Heretaunga Tamatea settlement. The committee is satisfied that this Wai claim has been duly and fairly included in this settlement.

The committee has recommended a small number of technical changes to the bill, including updating the legal descriptions of cultural redress sites following the completion of surveys. This second reading brings us closer to the concluding stages of settling the historical claims of Heretaunga Tamatea. I intend to speak in more detail at the third reading when we fully celebrate that settlement. Until then, I commend this bill to the House.

Tēnā koe, Madam Deputy Speaker. E rau rangatira mā, kia ora mai tātou. It’s a pleasure to speak to this, the second reading of the Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill. I’m hoping today just to give a little bit of background and to also talk to some of the key items that the Māori Affairs Committee discussed and, if we have time, to also look at some of the items in the deed of settlement that are not covered in this bill.

Heretaunga Tamatea is a large hapū of 15,000 to 16,000 people in the middle of the Hawke’s Bay. As we heard from the previous speaker, during the select committee there were several items of interest that consumed quite a bit of resource. One in particular, a key part of the select committee deliberations, was around Te Aute College and the issue of the Glasgow leases.

To give the background to that, if we just recall, the Heretaunga Tamatea hapū gifted 7,000 acres of land to the Crown for Te Aute College in 1853. The next significant step was in 1916, when the Te Aute Trust Board divided the land into 23 blocks, which were placed under the Glasgow leases. Glasgow leases are also known as ground leases. At that time, the leases were designed for long-term occupation and they were intended to provide the college with a source of income to support the college’s operation.

The Te Aute College lease arrangements have been prohibitive in allowing the college to earn a reasonable rate of return on the land. With Glasgow leases like this, you often get that tension between the landlord and the tenant, particularly in these forms of leases. Clearly, you have the tenant, who is looking for the lowest rent they would pay, and you have the landlord, who’s looking for the highest. The issue is that Glasgow leases are valued on what’s called the unimproved value of the land. Typically, 5 to 7 percent of the unimproved value of the land is how the rent is set, often in seven-year rent reviews but sometimes you have 21 years in perpetuity.

Some of the challenge there, and what has been contested all the way to the High Court, is the definition of unimproved value of the land. There are some who would say the land will never be vacant, will never be unimproved, because by nature of the lease there will never be new structures on it per se. The problem there is that the value of unimproved land is substantial because developers can see an opportunity to develop on it. But in these particular cases, in the Glasgow leases, the lease prohibits that. I think the last time this was substantively traversed was Cornwall Park in the High Court in 2010.

We can understand how Te Aute have got caught up in this dilemma of breaking up their land into blocks that they hoped would produce income for Te Aute, but in fact it hasn’t done that. This truly was a significant issue, if not one of the key issues, for this organisation. We know that, because we can see in the departmental report that He Toa Takitini, the mandated body for Heretaunga Tamatea, informed the Office of Treaty Settlements that they did not consider that the settlement would be successfully ratified by Heretaunga Tamatea if it did not include redress in relation to Te Aute College. So, very clearly, this was a big deal for them and, as we can see in the settlement, $5 million was put aside for the sustainability of Te Aute College. So it’s a very important part of the bill.

I think the second item that received substantial time in the select committee was around Wai 401, Renata Kawepo Estate claim. The issue here was that Wai 401 included interest in Heretaunga Tamatea and the Taihape District. As the settlement was written, it would have expunged all claims for Wai 401. All the parties agreed this wasn’t appropriate or fair, and so there were some amendments made to the bill so that the Wai 401 claimants could progress through the Taihape settlement process.

The third item of substance from the select committee was raised around the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee (HBRPC). Basically, they were concerns from Heretaunga Tamatea that some of the relationships and promises that they’d understood were to be developed with the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee had not actually eventuated. The iwi had actually raised concerns with the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations in 2016 but felt that no substantive discussions of a meaningful nature had continued from there. The regional planning committee was established outside the Heretaunga Tamatea settlement, and so the feeling of the committee was there was no scope in this bill to address that particular issue.

If I could just come back to the Glasgow leases. I think Minister Little also did talk to the fact that the bill was not thought to be the right place to deal with what are private ownership issues around the Glasgow leases—just to conclude that piece of thinking.

I think it’s also important to note those items that are not in the bill—those items that are in the deed of settlement but are not covered in the bill. Sometimes they can be substantive, and all we see is what’s in the bill and think that’s a good settlement. We sometimes forget the other appendages that are included in the bill. I would like to comment on some of them.

The key elements of the deed that do not appear in this bill include various commitments relating to developing the relationship between Heretaunga Tamatea and the Department of Conservation, the Ministry for the Environment, the Ministry for Primary Industries, the Ministry for Culture and Heritage, the Department of Internal Affairs, Te Papa, and the Ministry of Social Development.

The Heretaunga Tamatea Settlement Trust’s right as a post-settlement governance entity under the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee Act 2015 is to provide for the governance entity’s entitlement to appoint two members to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee. So while there were discussions and unhappiness, there was some resolution as to how to sort of resolve that and keep moving. Two members will be appointed to the HBRPC.

The total financial and commercial settlement package, to the value of $105 million—again, not in the bill, but as part of the deed of settlement—includes $5,000, being the on-account payment paid on 23 July to the governance entities for their operations; $7.989 million for the value of the shares held in Kaweka Forestry Co. Ltd; $45,000, being the on-account payment made on 10 March; and $5 million—I may have said $5,000; I meant $5 million—was the gifting to Te Aute to maintain the sustainability of Te Aute, and I just wanted to comment on that part also.

This is a good bill. I think it has clear bipartisan support. There’s some excellent work that’s been done by the select committee on some quite challenging clauses in this bill. It’s certainly with pleasure that I commend this bill to the House.

Madam Deputy Speaker, e tū tautoko ahau ki tēnei pire whakatau i ngā kerēme o Heretaunga Tamatea i tēnei pānuitanga tuarua.

[Madam Deputy Speaker, I stand supporting this Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill in this the second reading.]

I’m delighted to be able to speak in support of this bill at its second reading. As the chair of the Māori Affairs Committee, I want to acknowledge Minister Little and his work in referring the bill to our committee, but in particular I acknowledge the members of the committee and our advisers and all who were involved when we gave close consideration to this bill.

I really love the Hawke’s Bay. I love visiting the Hawke’s Bay, and I want to acknowledge the haukāinga of Heretaunga Tamatea and all the many hapū that gave us such a very warm welcome up into their takiwā just over a month and a half ago. As has been traversed by other speakers, there were a number of issues that were raised, but the overwhelming message that I received as the chair of the committee, from the hearings that we conducted up in Havelock North, was the overwhelming support by the many hapū of Heretaunga Tamatea on the many marae that make up that wonderful grouping of Ngāti Kahungunu—all of the support.

As was evidenced by the Minister, there were 33 submitters that we heard on the day. Yes, it’s actually a very moving time to be able to hear the kōrero that is shared when we consider the evidence that’s presented before the committee, and we heard a range of kaumātua and whānau and had the sharing and the laying before us of whakapapa and photos of their tūpuna and their descendants. To me, that’s the most enduring and memorable part of conducting these hearings as a committee, because we’re able to get the full feeling and the full context from the marae, the hapū, the kaumātua, and all the constituent groups that make up Heretaunga Tamatea.

This is a very large natural grouping, and I want to commend them because it’s a massive ordeal to get to this point in time, and to actually go through a Treaty settlement and all of the various steps that are involved to actually lead to its completion, which we are conducting through the passage of this bill through the House. There’s a significant amount—a huge amount—of work that goes on. It takes many, many years. There are so many huis that must take place. I was very, very pleased that as a committee, we were able to see the strong support that came through very strongly from all of the various hapū and groups within Heretaunga Tamatea.

I wanted to touch on some of the key points, I think, that came through for the committee and that we asked for further advice on. I will touch on the issues around the Glasgow leases and other matters, but, firstly, I want to focus on the issue of—I’ll get to the tough one.

There was a tough issue around the whānau of ngā uri o Te Heipora. These are the descendants of the tūpuna who are largely centred around what is now the township of Havelock North. I wanted to acknowledge that whānau because they gave an impassioned presentation to our committee in the hope that they could be treated separately and that their Waitangi Tribunal claim could progress.

I do want to acknowledge the lady who presented that and who was the named claimant for that claim, because Mereana Wickliffe, who is now deceased—I wanted to give consideration to that whānau in recognition of their mum, who spent many years advocating on behalf of their tūpuna and their connections there through whakapapa. We sought advice on that matter, and it’s not for us as a committee to try and second-guess or reinterpret things, but we were advised that Ms Wickliffe was involved through the various stages of He Toa Takitini as that claim progressed through very many stages. Receiving that advice, it appeared clear to us that they were in support of the settlement to the extent of where we’ve ended up today. But I wanted to pay reference to that whānau for their impassioned and forceful kōrero.

I just wanted to also touch on the issue of the Glasgow leases. It is an issue that tends to rile especially Māori who, like myself, are descendants of reserve lands in the West Coast of the South Island, the top of the South, and around the country. There is such a colourful history around land in this country and Māori tenure and Māori title, and the diversity and the history that’s involved.

This is one such instance, where a magnanimous gesture from the hapū to gift over 7,000 acres to Te Aute College, and subsequent to that, the college subdivided the lands and then entered into these Glasgow leases, which, ultimately, have been to the detriment, I guess, of the college, because they haven’t achieved their intended purpose, which was to provide some revenue to flow back to support the ongoing operations of the college.

This is more a matter for legal scholars, but, clearly, as Treaty settlements, we cannot interfere with private rights matters. However, I think, as a legal doctrine—we all know about contracts that may be unfair. Everyone’s saying they’re unfair, and we all know that there were rules against perpetuity, so things cannot carry on for ever. So I would hope that there is work conducted—hopefully, by the Government—to look into these matters because they are very complex, but clearly it just locks in a perpetual mamae for the landowners.

Now I am pleased, though, that under this settlement—and it was separate, actually. It was the Attorney-General—the Minister wearing his hat as the Attorney-General. He came to an arrangement whereby there is a $5 million payment to support the ongoing, long-term sustainability of the college, and I’m sure that that will be used for such purposes once this legislation in the settlement takes effect.

Lastly, just in the remaining time that I have, I also wanted to acknowledge the submissions that we received around the strong connection that the whānau from Heretaunga Tamatea have to their environment, to their ancestral landscape, and to their water bodies: the aquifers, the lakes, and the rivers. As we know, it’s such a hugely productive region of Aotearoa, and what became clear was the inadequacy of bodies such as the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee. I acknowledge the passion that they displayed—and it’s all around kaitiakitanga—and I certainly hope that further work is conducted into that area so that we can come to more suitable arrangements whereby the hapū can exercise their kaitiakitanga.

I commend this bill at its second reading. Kia ora tātou.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. Ki ngā hapū, ngā whānau o ngā uri o Heretaunga Tamatea, nau mai ki tēnei Whare.

[To the various tribal groups and descendant families of Heretaunga Tamatea, I welcome you to this House.]

It’s a pleasure to take this call and acknowledge the members of the Māori Affairs Committee and the work, the many hours, that they’ve put into what we have before us here this afternoon as a second reading. The committee report recommends a small number of technical changes to the bill, arising from the submissions and changes that are agreed to by the Heretaunga Tamatea Settlement Trust. I acknowledge the work undertaken by He Toa Takitini, the mandated entity, on behalf of Heretaunga Tamatea. I know that anything that gets to this point involves many hours of personal, historic, but also just work and sentiments and undertakings, so for me to be here is just one tiny sliver in the narrative.

I’d just like to acknowledge that this deed of settlement will include a package of acknowledgments, an apology, cultural redress, financial and commercial redress—all things that are incredibly important and are, as I said before, historic, personal and just. We would always want, through the passage of this Parliament, settlements that are final and that are durable, and I believe that this particular package is well on its way to achieving that. It’s about strengthening partnerships between Crown and iwi. So what I’d like to do is just simply acknowledge our collaborative agreement for the passage of this bill and for this, the second reading, and acknowledge, once again, Heretaunga Tamatea. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

E ngā mana, e ngā reo, e ngā karangaranga maha; tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

E mihi ana ahau ki ngā uri whakaheke o ngā tīpuna o Heretaunga, o Tamatea. He mihi aroha, he mihi maioha ki a koutou. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

[To the various representative entities, to the many spokespersons and delegates, greetings to you all, indeed greetings to all assembled here.

I acknowledge the descendants of Heretaunga, of Tamatea. I bid you a warm and sincere welcome. Greetings to you all, greetings to all gathered here.]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and a welcome to those from Heretaunga Tamatea. I’d like to acknowledge He Toa Takitini, the negotiating body, for this settlement. It was a fantastic experience for me to head, with the Māori Affairs Committee, to Hawke’s Bay to be part of the submissions process. It was the first time I’d been inside that process from that side—from the Government side. Previously, in the North, I had been into hearings, through the Waitangi Tribunal, with my Ngāpuhi iwi. So, for me, it was a great privilege to sit and hear your stories. So thank you very much.

I’d like to acknowledge the Minister, Andrew Little, for his contribution in the House today and the work that he has undertaken with this and also, too, the previous Minister, Christopher Finlayson, and the work that he did to get to this stage. In the House today, we’ve heard from Dr Shane Reti. He talked quite a lot about the Glasgow leases. I’m sure we will all mention those today because, as Minister Finlayson said in his first speech, they were ghastly—the ghastly Glasgow leases. I will mention them a little bit more. To the chair of the Māori Affairs Committee, Rino Tirikatene, thank you for your contribution as well. It was an experience that you talked about and for me to share in that too, and thank you to the whānau, who had such a lovely manaakitanga that we all shared in on the day.

One of the things that Rino talked about was locking in these perpetual mamae from these Glasgow leases, and I think we should really acknowledge that in the House today. During the 20th century, Heretaunga Tamatea hapū and whānau suffered social, economic, and cultural marginalisation, and today more than half of the people live outside the traditional rohe. Heretaunga Tamatea’s wide-ranging historical claims include the alienation of land through the failure to implement the terms of pre-Treaty land transactions; the Land Claims Commission; the deep dispossession of land through deliberately misleading business practices; and the impact of the loss of communal ancestral lands on traditional tribal structure. Heretaunga Tamatea is a large natural grouping of Hawke’s Bay hapū with a population of approximately 15,900.

I’d like to start by looking, really, at the deed of settlement in relation to Te Aute College. I will note that my brother-in-law played rugby for Gisborne Boys’, and he told many stories of the rivalry that they had with the boys at Te Aute and the great games of rugby—but not just the rugby; it was the admiration that they had for the students and the learning that they undertook at Te Aute. Now, in addition to the $100 million package, the $5 million that will be set aside to support the long-term sustainability of Te Aute College is a very worthy point to make inside the settlement. The college has made a huge contribution to the education of some outstanding New Zealanders, and now with the settlement it will continue to guide and realise the full potential of future generations of successful Māori, successful New Zealanders. The lands of the college, as we’ve heard about, have been trapped by what has been termed as “those ghastly Glasgow leases”: 7,000 acres handed over for education but the people remained penniless. It’s a deal that was detrimental to the donors of the gift, detrimental to the school.

Looking at the time line, in 1853, the Heretaunga Tamatea hapū Ngāti Te Whatuiāpiti gifted those 7,000 acres. In 1906, a royal commission was appointed to look at the Te Aute and Wanganui School Trusts. A royal commission recommended the trusts subdivide the gifted land, and by 1916, those 7,000 acres were divided into 23 blocks. The 23 blocks were placed into Glasgow, or perpetual, leases, and we’ve all heard about those peppercorn leases and how detrimental they were until this day. Now, the intention, though, of those leases was to provide an income, and now, through this deed of settlement, there will be security for the school to move forward. I’d just like to note how my iwi, Ngāpuhi, are still yet to settle, and noting on this that a school, Hato Pētera, as we’ve all heard, is down to its final student. So it is a shame that we haven’t been able to move forward with our settlement and ensure that one of our schools is kept safe into the future.

I’d also like to talk about the experience of going into Hawke’s Bay—into the region—and note the contamination, back in August 2016, of the drinking water that caused an estimated 5,500 of Havelock North’s 14,000 residents to become sick with campylobacteriosis. Forty-five were subsequently hospitalised, and it is possible that the outbreak contributed to three deaths. The drinking water that was sourced from Te Mata aquifer, under the Heretaunga Plains, was thought to be a safe, confined source of water. We had a couple of submissions from Waipatu Marae, and they talked about the water and what it really meant for them through this campylobacteriosis incident. They, basically, had to say that the tino rangatiratanga lies in the hapū hands and that they had been advocating for clean water for quite some time—that if they had been listened to earlier, this whole water emergency could have been avoided, and it was a slight on their kaitiakitanga over these aquifers. We heard from Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga Trust. They talked a lot about the freshwater management, and they still felt that they were in a position of subservience and how their aspirations of mana whenua were still to be recognised. They also talked about how, when they had visitors come to their regions and their water was unclean, there was that whole perception; that their visitors would recoil in horror if they were offered a drink of water. That mamae continues from that incident.

It was a pleasure to hear from Waimarama Māori marae. This is a coastal settlement located in very close proximity to Waipuka land blocks. Waimarama Māori marae, gazetted under the Māori Reservations Act, had jurisdiction of some land from Cape Kidnappers to Porangahau. A lot of their land was placed for soldier resettlement—this was at the end of World War I. The Government initiated the gifting of land for returned servicemen. This excluded, though, Māori servicemen from any of the proceedings. So, I’d like to acknowledge Waimārama Marae. Also, Kohupatiki Marae—we heard at the hearings from the Hon Meka Whaitiri. This was her marae, so I’d like to make note of her and the discussions she had. She told us about how her marae is on the banks of the Clive River and how they can no longer whitebait there.

Finally, I’d just like to mention, in closing, Tamatea. My nephew is named Tamatea, so it’s a name I hear every day. He lives in my home, and he’s a delightful young man. His father—my brother-in-law Michael—did a lot of shearing in the area. He sheared with his dad, Boy Winiana. Michael tells stories of how he would jump the train and take a ride to Otane, where his grandmother, Nanny Ma—also known as Nanny Gorgeous—lived and the time he spent in the area shearing, and time with his nanny, who is now buried in the urupa near Pukehou Marae.

So, in conclusion, “Heretaunga”, the whakataukī that I would like to read now: “Heretaunga haukū nui, Heretaunga, ararau, Heretaunga hāro o te kāhu, Heretaunga takoto noa.”

[“Heretaunga, a life-giving dew; Heretaunga, of Arcadian pathways; Heretaunga, beauty of which can only be seen by the hawk; Heretaunga that has been left to us, the humble servants.”]

New Zealand First supports this bill. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. I have been an MP for three years, and this is the first Treaty settlement bill I’ve spoken on, which I’ve got to say is reasonably unusual, given that in the last Parliament, when the National Government was in charge, it put through a whole series of Treaty settlement bills. But I haven’t had the privilege and distinction of serving on the Māori Affairs Committee in that time, and typically it’s the people who hear the submissions and consider the bills in detail who end up speaking. So I actually consider this a bit of a privilege. So it’s a bit of special moment for me, really, to be able to speak on an important bill for the people of Heretaunga Tamatea that provides a settlement for their historical Treaty of Waitangi claims.

As I said before, I know that I’m not on the Māori Affairs Committee, which I know Rino Tirikatene does a very good job of chairing. One of my colleagues from my patch, Rino does a good job around the community of Pētone and other areas in the Hutt. He does a good job chairing the committee. I know that they heard 40 submissions and heard oral evidence, including in Havelock North, which was very important—to go to that particular area and hear that evidence.

As other speakers have made mention, this gives effect to that deed of settlement, signed by the Crown and Heretaunga Tamatea, to that final settlement. It gives effect to the settlement of alienation of claims through the failure to implement the terms of the pre-Treaty land transactions, the Land Claims Commission, the dispossession of land through deliberately misleading business practices—something that was very common of the Crown of the time and for other iwi, including Heretaunga Tamatea—and the impact of the loss of communal ancestral lands on traditional tribal structures.

This is a claim that has taken some time to result. The mandate was recognised in March 2007—so some 10 or 11 years ago—and then it took seven years to reach the agreement in principle on 11 June 2014. Then, of course, the deed was signed in September 2015, and now we have the legislation before the House. It is going to go through the Parliament, as is traditional now with Treaty settlement bills, unanimously. That’s a fantastic thing. It’s not always been the case that Treaty settlement bills have been unanimously agreed to and the subject of no dissent, but it is certainly true of the Parliament today. That’s a wonderful thing for the future of New Zealand, both in an economic sense but also in a harmony sense.

Members before me have talked about Te Aute College, and it seems like everyone’s got a connection to Te Aute.

💬 Hon Meka Whaitiri: Tell us yours.

My only connection there is through debating. And I’ve had a bit to do—

💬 Hon Stuart Nash: I knew it wouldn’t be through rugby.

That’s very mean from the member for Napier. The member for Napier yells out, “It wouldn’t be for rugby.” That’s true. I was a hopeless rugby player.

But Te Aute College has produced some fantastic orators—that fine tradition of Māori oratory on the paepae, and they have produced some very fine debaters. So my only connection is adjudicating Te Aute College a few times, and I’ve been in the mighty Hawke’s Bay—Stuart Nash’s patch—and adjudicated secondary schools debating, which I know he is a big supporter of, as well.

Look, I don’t want to take up any more of the House’s time on this excellent bill. I just commend it to the House.

Kia ora, Madam Deputy Speaker. I too would like to acknowledge what a privilege it is to stand in the House and speak on Treaty settlement bills. I am now speaking on this bill on behalf of the Green Party, for the second reading, and when acknowledging Catherine Delahunty who spoke for us at the first reading as our Pākehā Te Tiriti spokesperson—it is a big job to step in to her shoes.

I would like to start by acknowledging a point that she always made in her speeches that, really, the work of committing to new partnerships and acknowledging the past wrongs is primarily the job for Pākehā. For too long these discussions and the burden of these unresolved grievances have been borne by Māori, and the responsibility of speaking to them has been left with Māori, when, in actual fact, the job and the work to be done is work for Pākehā.

Also, it is traditional for the Greens, on all readings of Treaty bills, to acknowledge that for us Te Tiriti is not just about property rights; it is about an ongoing relationship between iwi, hapū, and the Crown. As such, Te Tiriti can never and should never be settled. It is a relationship.

It is also, I guess, our tradition to acknowledge that through the process of these so-called settlement bills, tensions are often still created by ongoing Crown policies. One of those policies is the policy to settle large natural groupings, which makes this process easier for the Crown but does not reflect the true intent of Te Tiriti, which was a relationship between the Crown and hapū. We have again seen that in the process of this bill coming to the House, with the one opposition submission coming from a whānau who did not support the designation of this large natural grouping, at least in their submission.

But the Greens are always in support of this. We acknowledge that the process—it’s been mentioned, 11 years through this part of the process. But, clearly, for Heretaunga Tamatea this has been well over 100 years of raising their voice, coming together, organising, and doing whatever they could to be able to challenge the unjustifiable theft of their land and the breaches of the Treaty. So it is important to acknowledge this moment and this step closer to a new beginning for this group of people, and for all of us as a country in having the opportunity to understand a little bit more of our history so that we can move forward into a better future for all of us.

Just to speak to some of the points that were raised through the submissions, many of which have been raised by previous speakers, and I will touch on them again. Specifically, I understand, from the 47 submissions, 33 oral submissions, that Te Aute College and the issue of the Glasgow leases, which have been mentioned, was of very significant concern. In the settlement it’s a specific application of $5 million to support the sustainability of Te Aute College and a $10,000 ex gratia payment by the Ministry of Justice to support their trust board to gain advice on how to alleviate the issue of the Glasgow leases.

This is really important, particularly in how we’ve seen so many of the Māori legacy schools lost to our communities over recent times, and the very special place that Te Aute College plays in the history of this country and the support and the development of some quite significant Māori leaders, who we’ve all benefited from. So there was strong support for that, and it’s great to see that the Māori Affairs Committee has commissioned a report, I understand, on the Glasgow leases. So this is not work that is finished here; actually, there will be ongoing work on that issue.

Also, to acknowledge concerns that were raised by multiple submitters around the effectiveness of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee—it is about the core around Treaty relationships, that regional planning committees engage with mana whenua in making the decisions on the use of land. Submitters raised concerns that the planning committee, who works to oversee and review the development of the regional policy statement and regional plans for the Hawke’s Bay region, were not, in their view, living up to their commitment. So while this wasn’t an issue resolvable within the scope of this bill, because the regional planning committee was formed separately to the settlement, my understanding is that there is a formal review of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee that will be happening from August 2018. So, again, this process does not end here.

I also did want to just briefly touch on, as well, that while there are elements of this settlement that include standard commercial and cultural redress, there are distinctive aspects relating to the vesting and gift-back of Cape Kidnappers Gannet Reserve and Cape Kidnappers nature reserve, and that those, I think, do offer another indication of the important role that mana whenua often play in kaitiakitanga, which is to the benefit of all of us.

In the final moments, I did just want to speak to some of the points that were raised from He Toa Takitini and the principles that led them in this work towards this settlement because I think they are important to acknowledge through this process. One of the principles was working to have acknowledged the huge generosity of Ngāti Kahungunu to the people of Hawke’s Bay and to us as a country: that Ngāti Kahungunu looked after the settlers who went on to exploit and take their land and dispossess them, that they maintained a spirit of peace in response to that significant grievance that they are still carrying today from the loss of their land and their opportunities and the poisoning of their waters that fed them previously, and that right through that process they organised peacefully and sought to engage constructively.

What they received in return were lies and promises to act that were never fulfilled. How people move on, with 150 years of that happening, to me is quite extraordinary and needs to be acknowledged. When we hear so much of the rhetoric through stories of negative statistics, we miss the true resilience and the mana of the people who have been so badly treated by our Crown and our settlers. So I think one of the key things of this process is to restore and acknowledge the mana that should never have been denied of Ngāti Kahungunu. Thank you.

It gives me great pleasure to rise and speak to the Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill, second reading, and I acknowledge the people in the gallery who are from Heretaunga Tamatea, who have actually been instrumental and drivers in getting to this point. I also acknowledge Havelock North High School, who are in the gallery, and all three Hawke’s Bay MPs are in the gallery, so this is a great day for the mighty Hawke’s Bay to signify this significant second reading.

I do want to thank the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, the Hon Andrew Little, for getting it back into the Parliament. I want to particularly thank the Hon Chris Finlayson for the significant work he did in shepherding this bill from the initial deed through to the signing, which I attended in September 2015 at Te Aute College. At that stage, I had no idea I would be a member of Parliament.

This claim, effectively, affects people from south of Napier right to Takapau—and is the majority of the electorate I represent. It is made up of fine people, people who are represented in this gallery, with tremendous vision, courage, mana, and integrity. As previous speaker Chris Bishop said, I expect this will go through the House in a unanimous way, and that’s largely because of the way it’s been handled to this point, the way in which the Hon Chris Finlayson shepherded it to this point, and also the way in which those negotiating the claim for the people from Heretaunga Tamatea stepped up to the mark.

There is a lot of history here. People have spoken about Te Aute College, and while the $5 million is nice and is a great contribution to the integrity and sustainability of the college, it actually does not deal with the real issue that is behind this. I want to say in this House that while I’m heartened by what’s being done here, we actually need to find another way to deal with the Glasgow leases. I say this deliberately in front of my fellow Hawke’s Bay MPs. I don’t think we will find a cute legal solution. I actually think the Crown will have to buy those leases out or otherwise Te Aute College will be forever shackled by unfair disadvantage.

The reason I know this is just before I became the Mayor of Hastings, the former Mayor of Hastings Jeremy Dwyer, who had substantial connections with Te Aute College, brought to me a lease agreement because he didn’t know anything about farming and at the time I was a farmer. He said, “Lawrence, have a look at this.” I did have a look at it, and I was horrified at the terms and the cheapness of the leases and the terms in which they were under—to the complete advantage of the farmer and the complete disadvantage of Te Aute. That continues to this day, and it simply is not fair. Even since I’ve been a member of Parliament, I’ve had conversations with the Hon Christopher Finlayson about options for this. But it in the spirit of what we’re trying to do, I’m asking this House to think about, outside of the Treaty settlement process, whether there is a way the Crown can actually make this right, because without it this grievance is going to continue.

I want to say to the people from Heretaunga Tamatea who are here today, I understand, and I get that. It is completely unfair, and I will do all I can while I’m in this position I have, to work with colleagues on the other side of the House to find a solution. It is great that $100 million or thereabouts has come out as part of this settlement. I also acknowledge the courageous decision to spend part of that $100 million on individual marae; in other words, $1 million roughly, I think, to each individual marae. That is a huge decision, and I applaud the decision makers for that.

As a member of Parliament, it’s actually an absolute privilege to stand up and say these things in front of representatives of the claimant group at this second reading. To you, please keep coming. I don’t think this will be taken off its rails. It will go through its process, but there are some things to tidy up and you should have confidence that we are doing all we can to address the longstanding grievances, one of which is the Glasgow leases that still remain. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

This is a split call—five minutes each.

Tēnei e tū ake ki te tuku ngā mihi ki a koutou i tae mai nei ki te whakarongo ki ngā āhuatanga kei mua i te aroaro o Te Whare e pā ana ki ngā take Tiriti. Nō reira, ki a koutou katoa, tēnā koutou.

[I stand here to acknowledge those of you who have come here to listen to deliberations before the House which relate to Treaty matters. Therefore, to you all, greetings.]

It is a great privilege to be able to offer a few comments at the second reading on this particular bill, because the Ngāti Kahungunu ki Heretaunga Tamatea claims settlement is something of, I guess, a bit of a guide and some encouragement for other Treaty settlements coming through the pipeline. So, first and foremost, I wanted to acknowledge the Hon Chris Finlayson. In his first reading speech he set out, quite succinctly I might add, the historical context within which this particular claim was coming to the House, but he put in context what was being challenged in terms of the Crown not upholding its obligations.

So, in summary, we can’t ignore the fact that there was once a time when around about 1.4 million acres was the domain of the people who come here to this House now, and they lost around about 1.2 million acres of that land in a period of time after quick succession between the 1870s and the 1880s as a result of native land law—a great proportion of their tribal rohe. But I was really moved when I went back to read the speech of Minister Finlayson and he highlighted something I suspect he heard when he was going to gather his own evidence and information about the foundation for this particular claim. There was a phrase he quoted that there’s nothing more compelling than the statement from Heretaunga Tamatea people, when they said, “Being tangata whenua without whenua is something people can’t comprehend.” I think it is hard to really make sense of that in contemporary terms unless you’ve lived and experienced the loss, the significant loss.

I also draw on that statement because it is evidence of a population of around about—at the time of reaching settlement, I understand—15,900 people. A great majority of those people live outside of the rohe. So while we’re talking about a settlement in which I think a lot has been achieved, reconnecting and connecting people back to their place, their papakāinga, their marae, in such a deliberate way, to build the sense of pride and identity of the Heretaunga Tamatea people, I think is very, very important.

The other thing I wanted to comment on briefly was the fact that Te Aute—some comment has been made today around Te Aute. I heard the remarks of the previous speaker Lawrence Yule, and I too acknowledge that the issue of the Glasgow leases remains outstanding and they haven’t been addressed. While in part this settlement tries to, I guess, shine a light on the future opportunity of Te Aute being sustainable, it won’t fully be sustainable until the issue of the Glasgow leases is resolved, on which point, I should add—this is the subject of a delegation that has come to raise this very issue with me as the Minister for Māori Development—that I am keen also to see some approach to seeing if this could be resolved.

It wasn’t picked up during the amendment to the Māori Reserved Land Act. This is a very difficult issue, which is why the previous Government couldn’t deal with it, and I’m not under any illusion that it will be easy for this Government either. But we will embark on a journey to be able to see if there is a way. If there is a way, it will require agreement across the House if we’re able to get to some kind of solution.

The other thing I wanted to add is that there were very few challenges raised by the Māori Affairs Committee in terms of the substance of the bill, which is why this is a brief contribution. So with that said I want to acknowledge He Toa Takitini. I want to acknowledge the negotiators. I want to acknowledge, actually, for those who understand just how difficult it was, that it was a special factors presentation that was made that, I understand, took this settlement, kind of pushed this settlement right to the outer limits of what could be achieved. So I commend them for their strategy, their foresight, and their fortitude to ensure that a settlement resolves outstanding grievances that can rebuild the capability, the cultural pride of Ngāti Kahungunu ki Heretaunga Tamatea. Nō reira, tēnā tātou katoa.

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It’s a pleasure to rise in relation to the Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill. I’ve not spoken on Treaty settlement bill before, but it does seem to me that the character and nature of these things is somewhat special and unique. I’m conscious of, perhaps, a sense of history for those involved: those who are present—physically present here today—and I acknowledge them, but also those who might be following from afar; and, also, those who are in the present time but also future generations who will see the benefit of the significance of what is being decided, in effect, here today. I acknowledge all those who have been involved at prior stages of the passage of this legislation, including the Māori Affairs Committee, and also Minister Little and—as he then was—Minister Finlayson for their passage, in conjunction with the many affected parties who it appears to me—somewhat from the outside, in terms of my own involvement—have played a constructive role in good faith to bring some resolution to a matter of some historical pain and distress.

I just wanted to focus briefly on a couple of words from the introduction to the bill that, to me, seem significant in terms of what it is that we are deciding or deliberating on here today. The first is the word “alienation”. The historical claims of these people from the Hawke’s Bay include the alienation of land through the failure to implement the terms of pre-Treaty land transactions. That word “alienation”, of course, has a technical meaning in the sense that it was lands alienated or taken away, but I also think that it’s got another significance in the sense of making the parties alien to each other, alien from the land, made other, or made separate in that sense. So it seems to me, as part of the healing and the acknowledgment that we are undertaking as part of this process, that we acknowledge that separation, and that we can bring, at least to some extent, a land and a people back together in that way that is both physical but also emotional.

Similarly, the word “settlement” in the bill’s title, of course, is inherent to the nature of the process that we are undertaking. “Settlement”, again, has a technical meaning in terms of land law—meaning, of course, the completion of a transaction. But, on another level, we might think of settlement as being the act of settling or the act of bringing some calm or resolution to a matter—again almost in an emotional as much as a physical or, certainly, a material sense.

So for all those reasons, it seems to me that this is very worthwhile opportunity for Parliament to go some way towards completing a process that has been very long running and very significant. It is a privilege to be part of it and I acknowledge all those others who have also been a part of it, and wish all those concerned the very best for the future.

Kia ora, Madam Deputy Speaker. Ki a koutou i Heretaunga Tamatea, Ngāti Kahungunu, tēnei te mihi ki a koutou i whakarangatira i a mātou i tēnei wā. He hōnore nui ki te tū i mua i a koutou ki te tautoko i tēnei kaupapa.

[Heretaunga Tamatea, Ngāti Kahungunu, I greet you, you who honour us at this time. It is my great privilege to stand before you in support of this important event.]

I make a short contribution today, because some of the kōrero that’s gone out from both sides has been exceptional, and I value these types of kōrero because we have a House that’s in unison and acknowledging the injustices of the past. It’s great we have a Parliament that has reached that stage, so I acknowledge the other side and the previous speaker, Chris Penk, and, in particular, the previous Minister, Chris Finlayson, who without doubt has done a terrific job in advancing some of the Treaty settlements over the last few years. At the same time, I acknowledge the current Minister, the Hon Andrew Little, who’s got it all in front of him—all in front of him—and he certainly has a challenge.

I also want to acknowledge members of Heretaunga Tamatea who have passed on since the lodging of the claim. Many of the original claimants are no longer with us—too many to name—but their commitment and contribution to where this settlement is today should be rightfully acknowledged and honoured. And, of course, I acknowledge our rōpū who are here today, some of the negotiators who are here today: ngā mihi ki a koutou. I think we have Elizabeth Munroe, I’m not sure if Peter Paku’s here, Brian Morris, Elizabeth Graham, Cordry Huata—the negotiators of a claim that I think that has been well thought through and well negotiated.

I want to pick up on the point that our Green MP Jan Logie made earlier in terms of the contribution that Māori make to this country and to this economy. I think that is always underrated when we go through a settlement process like this. In particular, when we look at the settlement package here and we look at a total value settlement of $105 million, of course, that’s a very good settlement in comparison to other settlements. However, if we really want to look at loss and sacrifice and at what Māori have gone through, we need to take that into account. I’m sure, as our negotiators will know and other people in the House would know, if we look back on past settlements in terms of Tainui and if we look back on past settlements in terms of Ngāi Tahu, in those settlements, the economic loss value was valued by top economists. For Ngāi Tahu, it was $20 billion—$20 billion—and Ngāi Tahu settled for $180 million.

So that’s what you call sacrifice and contribution in terms of this country. That’s what you call sacrifice and that’s what you call contribution in terms of this country. So my hope is that people don’t get all silly when they look at a group that’s maybe done well in terms of other groups, but in the overall context of loss and sacrifice, this country can’t pay for the loss and sacrifice that our people have made. There’s just no doubt about that. So I mihi to these negotiators for this settlement, that is a very good settlement.

I note some of the excellent kōrero from before about the total value settlement of $105 million, $5 million in support to Te Aute College, and a memorandum of understanding with the Aorangi Māori Trust Board, including an ex gratia payment of $1 million and a right to purchase 10 surplus Crown properties. These are the types of settlements we need to see. The key points—I know that the Hon Meka Whaitiri will elaborate more, but I think it’s good to just break down, a little bit more, parts of the settlement, with Heretaunga Tamatea being one of six—I’m not sure if that’s been mentioned yet—large natural groupings of Ngāti Kahungunu who have negotiated this settlement in terms of their historical Treaty claims. It is a population of about 15,900 with land interests extending from south Napier to Takapau in the Hawke’s Bay.

The history of Heretaunga Tamatea has been mentioned this afternoon. The 19th century, in particular, was marked by land alienation, warfare, and socio-economic deprivation, and the 20th century was marked by social, cultural, and economic marginalisation. As we heard today, the hapū themselves have said they have been the tangata without the whenua, and how many iwi and how many hapū can say that type of thing?

So I just say well done, and it’s such a long process, this. Our people know, when they go into this process, the long, protracted process it can be. It can go on and on and on. In Heretaunga Tamatea’s case, it was from March 2005, when they negotiated their claim directly with the Crown. Their mandated entity, He Toa Takitini, was recognised by the Crown in February 2011, with terms of negotiations signed on 19 December 2011—seven years ago. Seven years ago. So justice takes a while to come through. On 11 June 2014, the Crown and Heretaunga Tamatea signed an agreement in principle. The deed of settlement was signed on 26 September 2015, and deeds to amend were signed on 16 February and 13 June 2017, providing for updated arrangements in relation to the Kāweka Crown forest licensed land.

So I mihi to this Heretaunga Tamatea group for—we’re only in the second reading, and we have another reading to go, but, in my view, the more we talk about this type of kaupapa, the better for our people. This is such a long process that our groups and our people deserve their stories to be told in the House, in the media, and on the TV, and New Zealand needs to be reminded of the type of contribution that our iwi are making and that our people are making. The point is that they make it in an understated way. There’s no, sort of, putting anything in anyone’s faces, and anybody who objects to it—you have to ask the question. Anyone who objects to this type of settlement, you have to ask why, why, why—particularly when we get a House like this, where there’s a unanimous view that a huge injustice has taken place.

For myself, it’s always one of the better times to talk in this House, rather than at other times when we might get a little bit excited and a bit carried away in terms of the different kaupapa that we put out there. So these are the times, I think, to value and celebrate. These are the times for the House to be proud, where we can mihi to each other and where we can acknowledge the contribution from both sides. They are days, I think, when Parliament should be very proud.

So well done to everyone today in terms of acknowledging this. There’s still some way to go, but, again, to our manuhiri who have come here today to honour this settlement I say, ngā mihi ki a koutou. Rawe ki te tautoko i te kaupapa. Ngā mihi ki a koutou i kōkiri i tēnei kaupapa i ngā wā katoa. Tēnei te mihi ki a koutou. Tēnā koutou, a, tēnā anō tātou katoa.

[I say, well done to you all. It is great to support this occasion. I congratulate all of you who have always worked towards this outcome. Well done to you all. Greetings to all of you, indeed greetings to all assembled here.]

Tēnā koe hoki. Ki ngā hapū me ngā uri o Heretaunga Tamatea; e mihi ana ki a koutou i haere mai nei i tēnei wā.

[Greetings to you, also. To the tribal entities and the descendants of Heretaunga Tamatea, I greet all of you who have come here today.]

I stand to take a brief call. I acknowledge you of Ngāti Kahungunu here today, and I look forward to when we move this through to the final reading, when you will gather in force and in strength, as you are today. I also acknowledge the former Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, the Hon Christopher Finlayson, and the Hon Andrew Little for the mahi, the work, that’s been given towards progressing this matter, and also fellow members of the Māori Affairs Committee.

I acknowledge you Ngāti Kahungunu, Heretaunga Tamatea, as, myself, uri of Wanganui and also MP of Whanganui. I acknowledge you because I connect and relate to the journey that you have endured—you but also your tūpuna. I acknowledge that the connection that I have with you is not only as one who’s endured that journey with my tūpuna, with the reaching of the settlement of Te Awa Tupua, but also the relationship that I have as uri of Ngāti Tūpoho of Wanganui and my marae, Pūtiki W’arenui a Tamatea Pōkai W’enua. Ngā mihi, Ngāti Kahungunu.

I also had the privilege for the first time as an MP, a National Party member of Parliament, to partake in my first hearings in participation as a Māori member of the Māori Affairs Committee at your hearings in your rohe. I listened intently to all who spoke and also to those who didn’t. The nature of the hearings and the journey that we embark on, and our tūpuna, is fraught and mixed with so much emotion. So your journeys and your emotions I acknowledge, I sense, I feel, I know. However, I listened to the mamae and the distress and the frustrations as to the process and that which was felt due. I listened also and observed the hope and the goodwill that was at your hearings. And I know, because I believe in your abilities, that in your journey, despite the anguish, we will move forward and we will progress, and we embrace that opportunity.

Your stories, his-stories, her-stories—they are yours. And it is that in your knowing. And from this I believe and I know that you have the confidence and the ability to move forward. Simply, we must do; thus we do.

As a member of the Māori Affairs Committee for the first time participating and listening, I heard the mamae, I heard the anguish, and as members of the Māori Affairs Committee we took heed of that. That has been noted in the amendments, and they’ve been stated as being a small number of technical changes, but may I just encourage and say that those small technical changes are significant. And I trust that you will embrace that accordingly.

There’s been the kōrero about the Glasgow leases—Te Aute College. As I sat there and I listened to the anguish of that, my connection with you, at Te Aute, was through a tupuna of mine, Porokoro Pātapu Pohe, flight officer of the Royal Air Force. He was an old boy of your school. The connection that I have as uri of Wanganui and the whenua that was there for the laying of foundation of Wanganui Collegiate School. Te Aute College and Wanganui Collegiate School have had an enduring association not only through the Anglican churches but through our tūpuna, and that enduring relationship is one that, over the decades, I’ve had the privilege of attending as a parent of a schoolboy of Wanganui Collegiate School, who expressed that he would liked to have gone to Te Aute College. However, he attended Wanganui Collegiate School because we are of Wanganui, nē rā.

So Te Aute College, the Glasgow leases: fraught with difficulty but, in hearing my colleague Lawrence Yule talk about that, there is a way forward—and in hearing the Hon Nanaia Mahuta addressing that also. We will endure and we will continue the good fight.

I had the privilege also of listening too. And I hope that in some small way I was able to contribute to clearing the pathway to facilitate the issue of the Wai 401, Renata Kawepo Estate Claim, the people who also had that link to Taihape, and keeping that claim open. That too is my link; that is part of my whakapapa.

I turn briefly also to the significance of Wai 574, the Karanema Reserve Claim, about that not being included. However, I acknowledge that it is not for the Crown to say how things should be done. You know how to resolve those issues amongst yourselves, and you’re entrusted to do so.

So, in closing, may I just conclude that this is the second reading. I commend this bill to the House for its passage to its final journey to the third one, and I look forward to embracing you all in your attendance that day. Kia ora.

E Te Māngai, tēnā koe, otirā, ngā Mema o tēnei Whare, tēnā tātou katoa. He mihi tuatahi e te iwi o te haukāinga kua tae mai, tēnā koutou, nau mai, tēnā koutou, nau mai, tēnā koutou katoa.

[Greetings, Mr Assistant Speaker, indeed greetings to all of the members of this House. Let me begin by acknowledging those from the tribal homelands who have come here, greetings, welcome, greetings, welcome, greetings to you all.]

It’s indeed an honour to rise in support of the second reading of this Heretaunga Tamatea Claims Settlement Bill, firstly, as a descendant of Heretaunga Tamatea, but also the proud member of Parliament for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, which electorate this settlement sits within. I also want to acknowledge too, first and foremost, the many claimants. Without those claims, we wouldn’t be here addressing this important bill, so I want to acknowledge those, particularly those that are no longer with us. I also want to acknowledge the many hapū and marae who actually face the brunt of the losses, particularly of land, at the omissions of the Crown. So I want to acknowledge our marae. I too want to acknowledge the former Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, the Hon Christopher Finlayson, and, of course, our Minister Andrew Little. I also want to acknowledge the work of the Māori Affairs Committee.

The second reading, for those that may be at home watching, is the time when we report back to the House on the examination of this bill at select committee. I want to share with the House that I attended the hearing at Havelock North—not to sit on the committee but actually to sit in amongst the crowd, to hear the multiple submissions. I want to say that getting asked to sit on the committee by the chairman of the select committee—it was indeed my honour to do that. I want to acknowledge one of the opening submitters, who goes by the name of Ngāhiwi Tomoana. I don’t want to, because I cannot, paraphrase how he started his submission, but essentially it went like this: “It’s ironic that you’re holding this select committee in Havelock North, which 12 months ago had the largest outbreak of gastroenteritis that this country has known, when 5,000 people went down.” He then went on to say something around body parts and the multiple use of toilet paper, as his introduction as to why we were in Havelock North. So I just want to acknowledge that even though these are serious bills that we’re considering, there is a light side in terms of the relevance of why we had the hearing in Havelock North.

There were three issues that the select committee raised, and I want to talk of one that’s obviously been well traversed in this House, and that is Te Aute Glasgow leases. It may be helpful for the House to just, again, capture what we mean by Glasgow leases. The ground leases, or the Glasgow leases, allow the lessee to build a permanent structure. They have been used in colonial times to transfer land usage rather than ownership for a specific purpose. They have a usual term of 21 years and can be renewed in perpetuity. Any rent reviews are conducted on a current market valuation, and valued by an appropriate registered valuer. While they have the potential to continue for ever, the tenant, however, can bring them to an end by simply not renewing them.

As Glasgow leases confer private property rights, the land cannot be returned to iwi, under Treaty settlements, and that’s been declared in the report back to the House by the select committee. However, as many contributors to this bill have acknowledged, this Treaty settlement bill does not address the outstanding issues of the Glasgow leases, in so far as Te Aute endowment lands.

By way of historical context, can I just again draw the House’s attention to Te Aute College endowment lands that were gifted by the generosity of Ngāi Te Whatuiāpiti, approximately 7,000 acres, to establish Te Aute College in 1857. I do want to go on record, because I am a daughter of a Te Aute old boy. I have three brothers that went to Te Aute College. But I’ve also got to acknowledge Hukarere Girls’ College, that was opened 23 years later, in 1875. I mention Hukarere Girls’ College because Te Aute Trust Board is the legal entity of both of these renowned, iconic Māori boarding schools. Again, as the daughter of a Hukarere Girls’ College old girl—with grandmother, great-grandmother, and nieces that all went there—it’s important that I put that on the record. So when we talk about the Glasgow leases, in terms of Te Aute College, we must also remember the role that those Glasgow leases have in determining the survival of Hukarere Girls’ College going forward.

In terms of value, the value of Te Aute lands that we are talking about—the 6,000 acres, 23 blocks—on average, per annum they get $230,000 on their lands—$230,000 per annum—and it’s been valued at $1.4 million; $1.4 million. So that’s an example of what Te Aute College and Hukarere Girls’ College are missing out just in income in today’s dollars. It’s almost 24 percent of what the full value is.

Using Treasury’s own figures, at a 2 percent rate of inflation, using Treasury’s modelling, $70 million of value of these lands has been lost to Te Aute Trust Board—$70 million worth of value, since the royal commission was established that broke the land up into 23 blocks in 1916. I want the members of this House to realise we are not talking about short change here. Conservatively, it is $70 million of lost revenue to Te Aute College and Hukarere Girls’ College that we are addressing here. So I want to encourage the House, because both sides of the House have been acknowledging that Te Aute Glasgow leases are an outstanding issue that we in this House should put immediate attention to.

I want to talk about the Māori Reserved Land Amendment Act 1997. The question that I pose is why Te Aute lands were not included in the Māori Reserved Land Amendment Act 1997. The reason why I say that is there are three things that this Act allows you to do, in terms of Māori reserves. It allows leases to be renegotiated, it allows solatium payments or top-up payments, and, thirdly, it allows the lessor to get compensation for historic loss. For me, there is a legislative solution for the Glasgow leases, and that is called the Māori Reserved Land Amendment Act.

That’s my blurb on Te Aute Glasgow leases. I think it is a really important issue that this House does turn to address and turns its attention to. I want to acknowledge the Minister for saying that he is going to commission a further report into those leases. But I’ve just indicated that there’s a possible tool here.

In terms of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee, there’s been contributors from both sides. One thing I do want to say is that it would have been very useful for the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council to have appeared and submitted in front of the select committee. Given the concerns that many of the submitters raised, it would have been very useful for them going forward. I hope that they take that opportunity going forward.

In terms of Wai 574, the Karanema Reserve Claim, there’s been enough kōrero around that. The only thing I would add—and I would support the former speaker that spoke before me, Harete Hipango—is that this is something that the trust could address. This is the issue when you have hapū that have no marae. So I want to acknowledge the trust’s commitment of $1 million per marae, but in this particular case, in the Karanema Wai 574, they have no marae.

Finally, in the time that I’ve got left, there’s been talk about Te Aute’s prowess in their rugby days. I’m sitting here with the member for Napier, Stuart Nash—

💬 Hon Peeni Henare: Slightly overexaggerated.

Ha, ha! I just want to acknowledge the hard work of our negotiators in getting us here. I want to acknowledge all the submitters that came before the select committee. I thought the day in Heretaunga was a very illuminating day in terms of the support for this claim. The $5 million that’s going to an entity yet to be determined for the ongoing sustainability of Te Aute—I hope, in the trust’s decisions, that they also look at Hukarere. That college always seems to miss out, and my mother will be calling me if I sit down and I didn’t mention the opportunity for Hukarere Māori girls’ school to also bask in the returns as we pass this second reading. I commend this bill to the House.

Otirā, e ngā mema, i mua i te whakaaetanga o te mōtini, e tika ana kia tuku mihi atu ki a koutou o Heretaunga Tamatea; nō reira tēnā koutou.

[Therefore, fellow members, before the motion is passed, it is only right that those of you from Heretaunga Tamatea should be formally acknowledged; therefore, greetings to you all.]

Bill read a second time.