Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill

I move, That Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Māori Affairs Committee to consider the bill.

This approach that we’re leading is taking whenua Māori and these reforms to a different place. The previous Government tried to introduce a bill that was championed as Māori-led reforms but had massive opposition from Māori land owners. At the time, we opposed these reforms which appeared to preference the utilisation of Māori land over the protection of Māori land for the next generation and engaging Māori land owners in the development of their own whenua. So I’m pleased to say at the heart of this new bill are small and targeted reforms which will reduce the compliance and complexity Māori land owners encounter when they engage with Te Ture Whenua Maori Act and the Māori Land Court.

As an example, these reforms will introduce a tikanga-focused resolution service that will offer Māori land owners a way to settle issues outside of a formal court hearing. Tikanga, in relation to Māori land, can better accommodate beneficial outcomes, and that’s what we’re seeking to do. To realise the full potential of Māori land, whānau need an effective regulatory framework that is fit for purpose, clear, accessible, and futureproofed.

This is an important bill, as 1.4 million hectares of whenua Māori remains in Māori freehold title. It’s crucial that this land becomes more economic, in the interests of not only Māori land owners but all of Aotearoa, and Māori must be at the centre to that development. Māori have a deep spiritual connection to whenua. It’s an intergenerational connection which is recognised as taonga tuku iho. Māori are the kaitiaki of this taonga, our whenua, which provides a source of unity and identity for tangata whenua.

A long and complex history precedes Māori land tenure here in New Zealand, and the role of the Māori Land Court has been chequered in and of itself. But we can now say that Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 represented a shift in the legal framework from one that transferred whenua out of Māori control to one that promoted both retention and utilisation. The Act has now been in operation for over 25 years and can provide a sound framework for Māori land tenure, supporting Māori to retain as well as develop and utilise their land, but we can improve the way in which the Act is operating.

Our Government is committed to improving services and outcomes for tangata whenua who are seeking to use their land in a productive and sustainable way. That’s why we need to make some practical and technical changes to the Act to reduce the complexity and compliance they encounter when engaging with the Māori Land Court.

Let’s go to the bill. The bill addresses various issues associated with the processes of succeeding to Māori land. Currently, to succeed to Māori land interests an application must be made to the Māori Land Court to prove the successor’s right to succeed. All applications need to be heard at a sitting of the court. The length, complexity, and associated costs of this judicial process can be a disincentive for whānau to succeed to their whenua, and this has contributed to a high number of land interests remaining in the name of deceased persons. The bill will allow for simple and uncontested succession applications to be received, confirmed, and recorded by a Māori Land Court registrar. This simplified process will reduce the time and cost of whānau of attending court and encourage whānau to reconnect with their whenua and participate in its management.

Some additional changes will also be made to address other issues with succession. For instance, the bill will specify that the right of whāngai to succeed to Māori land interests of a deceased person will be determined by tikanga Māori.

In terms of dispute resolution, the bill provides for a tikanga-focused mechanism to assist Māori land owners to resolve disagreements and conflicts about their land. The resolution process recognises that disputes involving Māori land are often delicate, sensitive situations involving people with close kin ties to each other. Enabling the parties to come up with their own solutions to resolve a dispute outside of court will be a helpful and progressive step forward and will maintain the relationships between whānau. The dispute resolution process will be available for proceedings that are already before the Māori Land Court as well as those in which court proceedings have not yet been identified.

Applicants will be given the ability to choose their own mediator to assist the resolution of disputes. At the moment, however, there are only a small number of suitably qualified people skilled in both mediation and tikanga. For this reason, the process will begin with judges providing mediation, which is now the case for disputes involving Māori fisheries and aquaculture. There is a pool of talent on the bench to be able to apply tikanga, and I’m pleased that this is an innovation where we can use their expertise. The use of external mediators will be delayed until 2022 to enable a pool of potential mediators to be increased.

The Māori Land Court does not have jurisdiction to hear certain matters relating to Māori land, even though it may be the more appropriate forum to do so. The bill will allow the court to hear applications relating to Māori land for matters associated with the Family Protection Act, the Property Law Act, and a range of other legislation. The bill makes improvements to the way that the Māori Land Court functions, such as allowing a registrar to deal with simple applications relating to Māori land trusts and also ensures that remedies available to enforce a decision are practical and effective. For instance, when whānau apply for an injunction, the court will now be able to require a person to remove an object or repair any damage to the land. These changes will bring the Māori Land Court in line with other courts and enable it to oversee matters that lead to better protection over whenua Māori.

To obtain an order to occupy—that is, to live on the land—the applicant must generally be a beneficial owner of that whenua. This disadvantages people who have placed their interests in a whānau trust, as legal owners are not able to apply for an occupation order. The bill addresses this shortcoming by enabling the Māori Land Court to grant occupation orders in favour of a beneficiary of a whānau trust, and I know that this will make a huge difference for whānau considering moving back home.

The bill also removes one of the main obstacles to the development of papakāinga housing on Māori reservations. Currently, a lease or occupation licence may only be granted for 14 years on a Māori reservation, which makes it really difficult for whānau to get funding from banking institutions for papakāinga development. Enabling a lease or occupation licence to be granted for longer terms will enable whānau to access finance and will support them to connect to their marae and whenua, contributing to the intergenerational wellbeing of their whānau.

A small number of minor and technical changes are being made to improve the operation of the Act. These changes will better align Māori land trusts and incorporations with similar governance bodies and will make it easier for whānau to establish Māori incorporations, if that is their wish.

The difficulties associated with accessing landlocked land prevents the use and enjoyment of whenua. Currently, the factors that the Māori Land Court may take into account when granting an order for reasonable access to landlocked Māori land are too restrictive—for instance, the court is not able to take into account the culture and traditions of the applicant with respect to the land. The bill allows the court to take account of a broader range of factors. By doing so, it will help unlock the unrealised potential for growth, including job creation for whānau, especially in relation to landlocked land.

The targeted amendments to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act are part of the Whenua Māori Programme, which was announced in February last year. As part of the Budget, $56.1 million was allocated over four years towards implementing the programme, which aims to stimulate the social and economic development of whānau through the 1.4 million hectares of whenua Māori that remains in Māori freehold title. This investment will do a number of things: it will modernise the Māori Land Court information system, it will provide new and enhanced Māori Land Court services, it will create a whenua knowledge hub and website specifically for Māori land owners so that they have access to accurate data and information to make decisions, and it will enable regional advisory whenua services providing on-the-ground support, starting with Te Tai Tokerau, Waiariki, and Te Tai Rāwhiti. There is further legislative reform on the way, but I’ll save that for another time.

I do look forward to hearing from submitters, Māori land owners, legal practitioners, and the select committee, who will be, I understand, having a full set of hearings. There’s a lot of potential out there amongst our Māori whānau, if they can access their land. These changes are designed to ensure that there is a method to be able to ensure not only that they can access and succeed to their whenua but they have knowledge, information, streamlined processes, and services on the ground to help them realise their true potential.

I’m really pleased to be able to support this. I want to acknowledge Meka Whaitiri, who led the charge on the way in which this Government should be going forward on ture whenua Māori reforms. I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I stand to take a call on Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill. I’m really pleased to see the bill come into the House. We have been waiting a little while for the bill to get here, but it is with heavy heart, really, because we had an opportunity at the last sitting period to get this bill across the line and, unfortunately, it was Labour that kept blocking the opportunity for that to happen.

It does concern me a little bit that Minister Nanaia Mahuta talked about some minor changes in the bill, and that’s what we’ve actually seen on reading the bill—that it does tinker around the edges. It was an opportunity for the Labour-led Government to take this bill and really upgrade it to where it should be today, rather than adding more amendments and more amendments to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993, and that’s what this bill that’s been put before us is actually doing. It’s tinkering around the edges. It’s adding more amendments to an Act that should have actually been upgraded and brought into this time and up to this year.

I want to let the Minister know that the part around the landlocked lands—and that is great. But I didn’t see anything within the bill around how the Government is going to address those who own land ahead of the landlocked lands—so big farm stations that have private ownership—and whether they will agree to easements being put across their land to access the landlocked lands in the back. One farming area that I am referring to is Mōkai Pātea’s land that sits at the back of Ngamatea Station. Would Ngamatea Station agree to an easement being put across their land so that Mōkai Pātea whānau could actually access that land and start to get some good economic development opportunities there for their whānau, rather than leasing it out to private deer hunters? So I think that’s where I’m talking a little bit around lost opportunity in this bill and the weakness of the landlocked lands area.

Around the mainly judicial changes, where the whānau can actually go to the Māori Land Court and have some of their issues, technical changes, complexities, etc., addressed within the Māori Land Court, I think that, really, we need to take a step back and work with whānau about how they’re actually going to get to that place in the first place. Around whāngai, now, I’m obviously part of Māori land ownership, and that’s one of the issues that we have had around whāngai, and who is a whāngai and who is not. I think allowing iwi or hapū to try and sort that for a whānau does actually limit the whānau. It doesn’t support the whānau to make that decision, and I know that for my whānau in the Wairarapa, they will be quite disappointed around the ability of the Māori Land Court to dictate as to who is a whāngai and who is not a whāngai.

So I’m disappointed that the Labour-led Government just didn’t pick up the whole of the National Government bill and use that, because new Part 3A that’s being inserted, around dispute resolution, was actually extracted from the National Government’s Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill, as well as the succession part in our bill, and that just tells me that Labour did see some good in our bill. Actually, the whole bill was really good, and why they didn’t just pick it up, I have no idea.

Finally, this side of the House will be supporting this bill in the first reading to send it to the select committee. I do look forward to the submissions coming. It will be interesting to see how those submissions are different to the ones that we received in 2016, and are there going to be many changes within those submissions? Will we get submissions coming in stating that this Government could have done a lot more in this bill in giving power to whānau?

Around the occupational parts of this bill, which the Minister talked about, occupation on Māori land—that’s great. However, there are issues—as the Minister talked about—in being able to access funds from the banks. Well, that’s great. However, it’s about being able to repay that loan, as well. So there’s a whole lot of other things that sit in behind this bill that actually haven’t been brought out through this bill, including the difficulties that some whānau may have with being able to build on their land and their ability to be able to pay those bank loans back.

I don’t know whether this bill is actually a voice for Māoridom, whether it is an empowerment for Māoridom; we’ll just have to see how we go. Personally, where I stand, I don’t think it is a very good bill. I think that a lot more work could’ve been done on it, and that’s why we’re supporting it to select committee. That’s why we will do exactly, on this side of the House, what Labour did to our te ture whenua bill: we will make sure that we scrutinise it in depth and that we will debate it with vigour on this side of the House, to make sure that we turn every single stone over to make sure that it is a solid bill going forward for our people. So without any further ado, on this side of the House we support the bill and commend it to the House. Kia ora.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. I’m proud to stand in support of this very important bill, Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill. Māori land, as the Minister for Māori Development has said, is 1.4 million hectares of the land mass of Aotearoa. That’s about 5 to 6 percent of our total land mass, so this is a very important piece of legislation, and it is really important that we are unlocking the potential of that 6 percent of the land mass of Aotearoa through the enactment of this bill.

I want to acknowledge the Minister, the Hon Nanaia Mahuta, for her outstanding leadership with her department, Te Puni Kōkiri, in crafting this bill so that it is acceptable to Te Iwi Māori katoa, because, as we know, in the previous Parliament, we had a massive bill that the previous Government put forward to the House. Quite frankly, it was a cumbersome bill which tried to totally repeal and replace the existing Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993, and it just didn’t meet the grade. It didn’t cut the standard that was required to be accepted by our people as an acceptable piece of legislation which would be workable—workable—for Iwi Māori katoa, all Māori land owners. There were so many deficiencies in that bill—I don’t really want to go into it. I’m pleased, though, that it was withdrawn, because there were tremendous concerns about the impacts of that bill had it passed. So I want to acknowledge the Minister for withdrawing that bill but also putting this much-improved bill before the House.

This is a much-improved bill because we are making targeted amendments which are widely regarded as necessary, which are easy to implement, and which further the coalition Government’s agenda of boosting productivity and strengthening our regional economies. We know that Māori land, particularly in the geographic regions where it’s concentrated—unlocking the potential of those lands will indeed strengthen our regional economies, and so this is a very welcome piece of legislation. It fits, as the Minister has said. It’s not a bill in an island of its own; it’s integrated into a wider whenua Māori plan providing support for whānau and for Māori land owners, providing better service, providing access to better information, streamlining processes, making it easier to go through various processes such as succession, dealing with whāngai, dealing with disputes—making all those processes much easier.

I want to acknowledge the members opposite for their support of this bill, because this is a good bill. This is a no-brainer bill. This is a bill that we want to put through this House and which Māori will greatly welcome, and I’m looking forward, as chair of the Māori Affairs Committee, to hearing from submitters on this bill. If there are refinements that can be made, certainly we are always open to doing that, but this bill actually has been well-canvassed, well-consulted upon, and it has the broad support of Māori leadership. When we think of groups like the Federation of Māori Authorities, the strongest and largest Māori business network of Māori land interests spread across Aotearoa, who support this bill; when we think of the Iwi Chairs Forum, who support this bill; and when we think of all of the Māori legal practitioners and those who are involved in the Māori Land Court, and possibly the bench also, who support this bill, it has been well-canvassed and consulted upon, and there is strong support for the provisions that we are seeking to enact.

Just to go into the targeted amendments which we are implementing in this bill: succession in trust matters. It’s very welcome. As all Māori know, we all have interests in Māori land spread up and down the motu. I’m legally trained. I practised law, and I remember having to do a succession application. I had to fly from Wellington to Christchurch, wait for a court sitting, and fill out paperwork. It wasn’t an easy task, having to fill out all of the actual forms and then actually wait to be scheduled for a court hearing just to do a succession, just to succeed to the land and set up whānau trusts or the like. That poses a huge cost on whānau, and also delays—delays in terms of waiting for court scheduling, waiting to appear before the judge—and what does this bill do? Well, it streamlines that process. It makes it easier for whānau, and it puts those administrative functions in the hands of the court registrar, and that’s where they should rest, really. These are more administrative tasks. So that’s a very welcome amendment.

As we go on, the other targeted amendments are around dispute resolution. We need to think outside the box. Court processes shouldn’t be just focused on adversarial litigious processes before a judge. I mean, it might be welcome for their counsel and lawyers that represent certain clients, but it’s not the optimal process. The fact that through this bill we are providing expanded options for dispute resolution, I think, is a very welcome addition to the court processes, which will make it much more user-friendly for those applicants, those whānau that will be interacting with the court.

Likewise, the issue around whāngai and adopted children. It can be quite a very sensitive issue in terms of succession for particular—just in general, it can be quite a contentious topic. With this bill, we are clarifying and making sure that those decisions will ultimately be determined by Māori tikanga of the relevant hapū and iwi. I think that’s the best place for those very tricky issues to be determined, in accordance with the tikanga.

So just returning to the purpose of this bill—it’s very important. We are legislating to unlock the potential and enhance the further development of 1.4 million hectares of land across Aotearoa. This is going to be a very welcome piece of legislation, and we know that this is just the first in a series of bills and further actions that the Minister and that this coalition Government are doing. We mustn’t forget that we are helping—this forms part of our broader programme as a Government about boosting productivity, about supporting our regions and economic development, and enhancing the opportunities for our whenua and our whānau on those lands—be that through economic generation from their lands or through the ability to have papakāinga housing and support, right across hapū up and down Aotearoa.

So this is a welcome piece of legislation. Again, we are looking forward, as a committee, to giving it further consideration. I want to acknowledge my colleague the Hon Meka Whaitiri who led the charge when we were in Opposition, in terms of highlighting the shortcomings that were evident in the previous incarnation of a ture whenua Māori bill. I’m looking forward to her contribution, sitting on our committee, with her expert knowledge that she will be able to share with our committee as we further hear from submitters and give further examination to all the different provisions of the bill. So with that, I look forward to the work that lies ahead and I commend this bill, at its first reading, to the House. Kia ora tātou.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I’m very pleased to be able to speak to this Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill. I’m very interested in the comments from the member Rino Tirikatene. What he said was true about National’s bill, Chris Finlayson’s bill—it was comprehensive, it was complicated, it was a very big bill, but, actually, I see that as an advantage rather than as a disadvantage. The issue with this bill is really—although it’s taken the eyes out of that bill, we will support it because that was the work that was done in the past, and the member did point out the amount of consultation and submission that was done on that bill. We will support it because of that, but this is a truncated, pale version of that bill, and in that case it’s particularly disappointing.

As I’ve said, it has picked up several of the issues that were addressed in our bill, and I just want to point out, as the member has said, that that was voted down by Labour. These issues in that bigger bill were voted down by Labour. We will also support it because we see it as a first step. It is a small first step, but it is absolutely a step towards unlocking the economic value of Māori land, and this is something that is particularly important to New Zealand, and to all Māori and all New Zealanders.

I just want to flip back and look at the original Te Ture Whenua Maori Act, because that was passed back in 1993. While that was really focused on the retention of Māori land in Māori ownership it wasn’t a perfect Act. It was only within five years of that Act being passed that there was agitation for reform, and, in fact, there have been at least six different panels, advisory groups, and discussions considering changes over that time. In 2011, the Hon Chris Finlayson began an update of that Act, and he began that update because he was asked to do that. He was asked to by Māori and iwi leaders, because they expressed a real concern that the Act was not delivering the way that it should, and, as I say, the Hon Chris Finlayson spent three years working on that Act. They wrote a bill, they took it out for consultation, they took it out for submissions, and it culminated in a bill that was designed to ensure that Māori land owners had the right to decide about their land and how it was used. They also had the right to take advantages of opportunities to develop that land for themselves and for future generations.

It also provided a very clear and accountable governance framework, including the dispute resolution that we’re looking at today, and mechanisms to overcome fragmentation to help unlock that value. At that time, the value that they were looking to unlock was $8 billion—$8 billion towards the Māori economy, which is a significant and important thing to do. Again, I note that that bill was never passed and Labour voted against it. I also want to note the member was talking about the Hon Meka Whaitiri and the fact that she was an expert in this area. I just want to note what she said about the bill: she couldn’t vote for it because it was not comprehensive—well, actually, that’s exactly the opposite of what we’ve just heard—and it didn’t deal with the issues, in particular, landlocked land, paper roads, and land acquired under public works, and rating. None of those things are in this bill, so I’m wondering if she’s actually going to support the bill and if she’s actually going to vote for it.

But if we go back to this bill, as I said, it doesn’t provide for real reform, the real reform that Māori have been wanting and needing. This Minister herself, Nanaia Mahuta, has said that it is a small and targeted amendment and it’s only stage one. There’s also going to be stage two and stage three, I believe, but no one has any idea at this stage what they are going to look like. So as we’ve already heard this bill merely tinkers around the edges and doesn’t provide the reform that will make a real difference.

I think a complete revision of this legislation is essential, and I think it’s essential. As Rino Tirikatene said, Māori freehold land is extensive—between 5.5 percent and 6 percent of all of New Zealand. Most of that—95 percent of that—is in the North Island, and that’s about 12 percent of the whole land in the North Island. Actually, that’s interesting, because much of the area where this land is located is crying out for new opportunities to make their land more productive, and the thought that they can open up this land, that they can create jobs, and that people who want to return to these areas—return to their land—have an opportunity for work, have opportunities to develop their families, and to move into a brighter sort of future.

Just looking back on the laws in relation to land, there’s been 180 previous laws dealing with Māori land—180 of them—and some of those in the past have actually led to the reduction of Māori land ownership and the fragmentation of that landownership. When we look at that now, there are over 2.5 million ownership interests in Māori freehold land—2.5 million people have an interest in a particular piece of Māori freehold land. This is particularly problematic when we have enormously large numbers of people with an interest in an individual piece of land. There have been examples of single blocks that might have 14,000 landownership interests, and, on average, right across the country, each block has over a hundred people interested in it.

So we do need better mechanisms to protect the rights of the owners of Māori land, to protect their rights so that they can retain control, so that they can occupy that, and also so that they can develop their land for the benefit of the present and future generations. I’d like to reflect on a whakataukī from Ngāi Tahu: Mō tātou, ā, mō kā uri ā muri ake nei—for us and our children after us.

So as we’ve heard, this bill proposes a simplification around succession processes, a tikanga-based dispute resolution service—and that’s very similar to what Chris Finlayson had been talking about—and changes to the Māori courts. None of those ideas are new or very controversial. However, there are issues around the inheritance of whāngai and adopted children, and I think that’s going to require a little bit more debate.

As I’ve said, the difficulty for us in supporting this bill is that it doesn’t deal with the big, tough issues. It takes out the small, discrete things that we can deal with—which is a good thing—but it hasn’t tackled the stuff that we really have to do if we’re going to open up and protect Māori ownership and open up the land for development. So, although it’s limited and it doesn’t do that, National will support this bill to select committee. Kia ora.

Kia ora. I roto i Te Reo Māori i te tuatahi—in the Māori language, firstly. Tēnei mātou te tautoko nei i te pire nei. Tēnei pire hira noa atu i te pire i hinga ai tērā hoa ōku, a Te Ururoa Flavell, nōna i roto i Te Whare Pāremata. Kotahi anake te take i pokea ai tērā tangata me tana hikoi i roto i te ao tōrangapū, ko te pire whakamutunga i whārikitia ai ki roto i Te Whare nei. Tēnei pire? Ka nui noa atu tana pai. Hira atu i te pire tawhito.

Ahau e tū nei, me te rangatira o tō mātou rōpū, ka nui noa atu tō mātou taunga ki ngā pūngāwerewere o tēnei pire.

Ahau rawa, nāku taku pāpā i āwhina kia haere atu ki te kōti kia whakawhiwhia mai ki a ia tētahi paku pānga mō tētahi whenua iti. Ka hia noa atu te roa, ka mate taku pāpā. Horekau tēnā take i oti. Koia tāku e tautoko nei kia tū ai tētahi mana takawaenga e oti ai i roto i te whānau, i te hapū rānei, hei ā wai rānei ngā pānga, ka whiwhi, ko wai rānei te rōpū e tika ana kia whakatūria hei pupuru i ēnei kongakonga.

Nā, koia tēnā tetahi wahanga ka nui noa atu te tautoko atu i a mātou nā runga i tō mātou taunga, me ngā kārawarawa kei o mātou tuarā Māori mō te roa noa atu o te wā e wheke ana, e okeoke ana mātou kia whakawhiwhia mai ngā pānga.

Kei ahau kei tōku whānau ētahi pānga e hoki ana ki te wā o taku tupuna whaea, te kuia nāna ahau i napinapi, nōku i te tamariki. Tērā kuia, whānau mai i te tau 1892. Ka pērā rawa te roa o te wā kāhore anō kia oti i roto i ētahi o ā mātou nei toronga te whakawhiwhi i ngā pānga i tīmata mai tō mātou kuia. Pērā rawa te pūngāwerewere o ngā take e pā ana ki te kōti nei. Me pēhea rānei ngā take iti nei e whakamāmāngia ai?

Ara tētahi atu take māku te kī—me pēhea rānei he whare e waihangatia ai ki runga i te whenua Māori? Ahau, e mahara ana ki te wā i te mana a Helen Clark. Ko tana Minita mō Te Hanga Whare ko Sandra Lee. Hōnore Sandra Lee. Whakamatua? Whaka-aha rānei tana ingoa Māori nō roto i a Ngāi Tahu. Ka mutu, tērā wahine ka haere atu ki te taha o Dover Samuels ki roto i Te Tai Tokerau ko te tau 2000. Rua mano! Take o rātou i haere ai ki reira? i toro tētahi whare ki Matauri, ka mate te mokopuna i roto i tērā whare. Mai i tērā wā, tae noa mai ki tēnei rā, kei te pokepoke tonutia o tātou whenua Māori, te korenga e āhei ki te whakatū he whare hei noho mā te whānau.

Nā, tētahi wāhanga e oti ana i konei kia āhei ai te hunga nō rātou te whenua kia whakanekehia ai te roa o te wā e oti i a rātou te noho pūmau ki runga i tērā whenua. Me tautoko mārika tēnei whare i tēnei wāhanga, tā te mea, ko te hunga e tino tāmia ana mō te kore whare, mō te mate mītara me ētahi atu take ka hia rānei te tinitini e hamahama nei, nā, ko te iwi Māori.

He wā anō māua ko taku rangatira kei te werawera o māua i tō māua iwi, tō tātou iwi Māori pua noa, mā rātou anō rātou e whakatikatika engari me pēhea rānei e rātou e oti i tētahi kaupapa kia pai ai, kia pai ake tō rātou noho pēna pūngāwereweretia ana o rātou pānga ki roto i te ture o te whenua Māori?

[Greetings. In the Māori language, firstly. We support this bill—this bill, which is much better than the bill that befell my friend Te Ururoa Flavell when he was in Parliament. There was only one thing that dragged him down politically, and it was the final bill he presented in this House. This bill? It is much better; this bill is much better than the prior one.

I stand here today, alongside the leader of our party, and we very much agree with the reach of this bill.

For me personally, I went with my father to court to try and sort out a matter about him receiving a small number of shares in a small parcel of land. After who knows how long, my father passed away. His matter had not been resolved. That’s why I support the establishment of a mediating authority, be it within the whānau or the hapū, to vest shares within the appropriate group which is established to hold these miniscule holdings.

So we strongly support this section because of our familiarity with these aspects, and the constant lashings we Māori receive who are angry and frustrated at the time it takes to receive shares.

My family and I have shares that date back to my grandmother, the grandmother who raised me when I was a little boy. That grandmother was born in 1892. That is how long we have been waiting to receive shares in some of the blocks she has an interest in. That is how old some of these court matters are, so how can these small matters be made easier?

There is another matter I would like to speak on—how can we build houses on Māori land? For me, I go back to the days when Helen Clark was in charge. Her Minister for Housing Construction was Sandra Lee. The Hon Sandra Lee. Whakamatua? Whaka-something or other—her Māori name from Ngāi Tahu. In the end, she went with Dover Samuels to the North in the year 2000—2000! Her reason for going there? To visit a house in Matauri, where a grandchild had died in that house. From that time, all the way to the present day, our Māori land is still being tied up, unable to have houses for families built on it for them to live in.

Now, one thing is achieved here so that it becomes possible for those who own the land to change the length of occupancy on their land block. This House must support this clause because those who are adversely affected by homelessness, by measles, and are hammered by countless other issues are the Māori people.

There could well come a time where my leader and I are criticised by our tribe or Māoridom generally, but at the end of the day, they have a degree of independence to deal with their own matters, but, really, how can we do something constructive to deal with these long-outstanding issues of shares within the framework of Māori land laws?]

I stand to support this bill. As I said, in our Māori language, part of the reason why it ought to be supported is that there is genuine hardship in trying to navigate our Māori Land Court system. Often that hardship is born of frustration, of no clear direction, and of a shortage of tools on how to resolve, often, very simple transmission issues.

I’ve recited a story, and I think New Zealanders do derive—certainly, Māori New Zealanders—some confidence from hearing the parliamentarians of Māori extraction actually talk about experience. I gave the example of both my grandmother, who was born in either 1892, 1893—one of those two years—and her younger sister, and to this day, members of my own whānau have struggled to navigate the system, to actually have the shares transferred to either an entity or to the next generation who are willing to use the land and create something more substantial or something that’s possible with the myriad of services that exist today. So to the extent that a process will exist to enable us circumventing a very laboured process through the Māori Land Court, we should be celebrating that.

I also started off by saying that the last bill may have been ambitious, the last bill may have even been heroic, but I say to this House: it is that bill that caused my old head boy and friend Te Ururoa Flavell, from St Stephen’s School, to lose his seat.

So this issue of Māori land is most certainly an issue that can not only be vastly politicised but it strikes people in a way—in a Māori community—that they understand. The understanding that we’re trying to enlarge today is that there will be a process where you can circumvent the court with an appropriate statutorily mandated mediation process.

Now, I’ve actually been on a mediation committee, mandated by the Māori Land Court, and it was chaired by Judge Hingston and a koroua from Te Arawa—the name eludes me. I had to leave the mediation meeting early because my former wife, Ngāreta, was having one of our seven children—I can’t remember which one. The reason I was there is that it pertained to not only the mandate and the mana whenua of Rangitāne, Kahungunu, and Dannevirke but also the local government and resource management provisions. Naturally, we made a decision, the quality of which still shines many years later—though that’s another matter. But it’s just to demonstrate that those of us who come with not necessarily bags of professional experience as lawyers appearing before the court, but, actually, trying to go through the court without lawyers, are of the view that this is an improvement.

On the question of papakāinga, I dare say, Mr Speaker, yourself, for the many years you’ve been in the House, and not unlike my own leader—Lord knows how many iterations we’ve sat through, debated either remits, policy suggestions, potential legislative amendments as to how we free up Māori land so that it can offer an opportunity for expanded housing. I think for a number of us who have straddled both the world of policy and trying to understand the ambitions of Māori constituents—and you don’t need to be a Māori to suffer that malady—we’ve been exhausted by it.

So to the extent that this bill enables the owners of Māori land either within a trust or in another sort of aggregation to free up that land to boost the supply of housing, then we’ll be doing something that my tuakana Dover Samuels struggled to do for the eventful period of time that he was here. I won’t expand the word “eventful” for fear it afflicting my good self. And at that stage he was aided by the Hon Sandra Lee who went to Ngāpuhi land around about the time in the Helen Clark Government when there was an awful tragedy and a fire in Matauri Bay and in that fire perished some mokopunas.

I only tell that story because ever since then we’ve seen precious little movement on blocks of available Māori land to actually expand housing, and to the extent that this might offer that solution, then naturally we should support it, because it is potentially—if we can get this provision in a more orderly fashion, then you’re freeing up a home purchaser from the obligation of having to buy the land. Now in Auckland I’m sure it’s about $600,000 or $700,000 to buy a section in a half-decent part of Auckland. That in itself is grossly immoral—that in our own country as a consequence of worsening immigration and poor planning laws we’re saddling the next generation with $600,000 worth of debt before they even put a stick in the ground. However, if you own Māori land then all you’ve got to focus on is the infrastructure associated with living and good sanitation. Don’t buy the land, pay a small rental, and put the money into the actual physical infrastructure.

Now, for fear of causing the ire of the Labour Party to fall upon me, I have similar ambitions for Ihumātao. Thank you very much.

Tēnā koutou katoa. Look, it’s a pleasure to speak on behalf of Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill. We support this bill. It’s a 25-year-old Act and it’s well in need of updating, but they took our bill and they gutted it, and then they gave the remnants back, and they put it forward as their bill. It’s rather like taking a substantial steak meal and giving us back burnt two-minute noodles. So they could have taken our bill—100-plus hui consultation run and headed by the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell, and a far superior bill. They said “ambitious”; I’d say “comprehensive”—yes, ambitious, comprehensive, a thorough bill. But do you know what’s happened? It was politically hijacked, opposed by Labour at every turn, and so some of the blame for it not getting through has to be laid at the feet of Labour. And they stalled it all the way. So at every stage they were working through the committee stages and it just got stalled and held back. So we could’ve had that bill through and I can tell you, no doubt, it would have been beneficial for Māoridom if we’d got that bill through. So those are the facts.

I do note that they’ve pulled out some parts of our bill. The alternative dispute resolution, that’s plucked straight from our bill. And I know that in Northland—it says here from a Ministry for Primary Industries study in 2014 that Māori land, 85 percent of Māori land, is under- or undeveloped, and in Northland I would say almost more than any other part of the country we would benefit from legislation that improves Māori land. It would unlock economic potential worth billions of dollars in Northland. A third of our land in Northland is Māori land—roughly a third. Large parts of it are landlocked, and I note that this bill does nothing to address that.

So I look forward to the select committee process. I look forward to there being significant improvements at the select committee process to address some of these matters. I think that this legislation, with significant improvements, could be massive for Northland. So I support it. Nō reira, tēnā koutou katoa.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise with pleasure to speak in support of this bill, which focuses on strengthening a tikanga Māori approach to dealing with Māori land. This is a welcome development and it should be a development that we see across all policy areas if we are to uphold Te Tiriti o Waitangi as a living constitutional document of our nation, and I note that we do stand today—or sit—on land that was never ceded. So it is important to keep coming back to the issue of Māori land as having special cultural significance, as being qualified as taonga.

Māori land comprises some five percent of New Zealand’s total land area. It’s 1.4 million hectares. Although 5 percent is quite small, 1.4 million hectares is representative of quite an enormous opportunity for Māori, for iwi, for hapū, and for whānau to exercise their ongoing right to self-determination, which we know is what our country must turn to and must begin to provide to Māori as the indigenous peoples of this land. So this bill seeks to make that easier to facilitate Māori to manage that land, to use it whether it’s for housing, whether it’s environmental protection, whether it’s developed in another way, by decision-making processes that best reflect tikanga Māori and the will of whānau, of hapū, and of iwi—the way that it was always intended to be.

The law, as we’ve heard, the existing law is now some 25 years old, so the need for modernisation and update and reform was really there. So this is a welcome change. And as with all law—as with all good law—this bill signals modernisation by way of making the law much easier to access by those that it seeks to serve. So it is simplifying processes, it’s making processes clearer, it’s bringing them in line with other laws like the trust legislation. And importantly, it’s allowing people to access succession, which has been a huge impediment procedurally to Māori from engaging with land that they would otherwise have a right in and, in fact, it’s an obligation of Government to facilitate that right to access.

It’s simplifying that process by allowing succession to be carried out in a better way by the Māori Land Court in that applications for succession won’t have to go to court to a live hearing of the court where whānau would have to actually travel to court, to take time off work, to pay for presentation, and to be present even where there is no dispute being heard, essentially, and succession is being done by agreement. So in simplifying that process, this bill will allow for registrars to administratively approve succession applications. We’ve been getting some 2,241, on average, applications per year over the last 10 years. And knowing how difficult applications are to make, how difficult the court is to access for most ordinary people, that number is likely to go up and it will be a vast number of people who will now be able to better engage with their right to have a say and to manage how Māori land—their land—is being used, and that engagement will be so enriching for those communities.

The bill also allows, importantly, a mediation process for dispute resolution. We know that where disputes are not forced into an adversarial framework the outcomes are always better; they’re better, in particular, where ongoing relationships between people are at the centre of a dispute. That mediation will also be meaningful in retaining relationships within the community that need to continue to have access to and to cooperate together in managing land and leaving a legacy for descendants that will then succeed to that land.

So, all in all, the bill simplifies the law, simplifies access to Māori land, makes dispute resolutions less adversarial, and, more than that, ensures that everything is much more focused on tikanga Māori processes. So this is a welcome change in the law when it comes to Māori land, but I do also want to recall that it’s the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the work that we do need to do as a nation to ensure that land and other taonga are made available and that Māori rights are facilitated in an ongoing way. I do want to notice that that doesn’t mean that we just settle everything away necessarily, and sometimes it means looking back and righting wrongs, as we know have to do when it comes to the sacred land at Ihumātao. So looking forward to doing that work in Government, but I commend the bill to the House today.

Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā. It’s a pleasure to rise and take a very brief contribution to the first reading of Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill. I certainly want to acknowledge the significance of the issue: 1.4 million hectares, roughly 5 to 7 percent of New Zealand’s land mass, and roughly $8 billion in economic opportunity for Māori in New Zealand. So it’s a really important issue and National absolutely supports the kaupapa of this bill that we have before us today.

But what I have as a question to the other side is why reinvent the wheel? Why is it that we are here discussing a new bill when we had another bill that we brought into Government in the last Parliament? The arguments that I’ve heard from the opposite side have not been satisfactory to me. We’ve heard from a number of people about the succession of trusts and that process, but this Government could have proposed amendments to that bill. I think that what they’ve been talking about is actually very sensible, but they could have proposed amendments to that bill instead of bringing a new bill to Parliament.

The dispute resolution and making that a user-friendly process—well, that was already addressed in the bill that we put forward in the last Government. That bill—may I remind the House—had already been through a robust process of consultation. That robust process began with the Minister at the time getting a panel together. We’re not going to call it a working group; we’re going to call it a panel. Through that panel they made a whole bunch of recommendations that led to the formation of the original bill. That bill then subsequently went through Parliament. It went through the select committee process, as far as the stage of the committee of the whole House, but, unfortunately, the Labour Party did not support that bill. It’s just such a shame, because we’re back here now, having to go through this process once again, when we could have actually just not reinvented the wheel—taken a bill that was already in good formation, made slight amendments to it to address the issues that the other side has raised today, and move forward.

So it is with that reservation that National is supporting the bill. We support the kaupapa, but we’re just disappointed that we’re here again, and that we could have, actually, taken another bill that we were discussing in the last thing. So that is the brief contribution that I have today. As I said, we support this bill. I commend this bill to the House in its first reading. Thank you.

This is a split call. I call the Hon Willie Jackson—five minutes.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Tuatahi, tautoko te kōrero a Shane Jones. Rawe ki te whakarongo ki tana kōrero, tana whakamārama e pā ana ki tēnei pire and tika me mihi ki a koe Shane mō tō kōrero rawe. Nō reira, tino tautoko tēnei kaupapa.

[Firstly, I support the speech of Shane Jones. It was excellent to listen to his speech, to his explanation of this bill, and it is only right that I thank you, Shane, for your excellent speech. So I strongly support this matter.]

I just wanted to remind the previous speaker, Dan Bidois, who seems to be so surprised and shocked that there was some disagreement, that the Māori community found the previous ideas from the National Party, in terms of ture whenua, as abhorrent. In fact, it was actually called “poisonous”—the bill in the previous form was called “poisonous” by the Mana Party leader, Hone Harawira, who was—

💬 Matt King: Ha, ha!

Well, it’s absolute fact. You can laugh all you like but that’s an indisputable fact. Let me elaborate for you. The Māori Women’s Welfare League also found the work that was done by the previous Government as abhorrent, as well as the union movement, as well as the—

💬 Matt King: Well, we should support it then. They should support it.

Well, I’ll carry on. The Waitangi Tribunal said it would be a breach of principles in terms of Te Ao Māori. The Human Rights Commission found the work from the previous Government and the Māori Party—they also said it was a total breach. So just to that previous speaker: that is why we have had to change things. So I just felt that there’s an explanation. They seem to be stunned that we had to change things when you had the whole of the world saying how useless the previous Government were—and the Māori Party, who were advocating for something. I think it was absolutely imperative that we change things. So I have to say, as the Māori campaign chair during the 2017 campaign, it worked a treat for us—it worked a treat for us.

I want to mihi to my tuāhine here, the Hon Meka Whaitiri, for her work in exposing the previous Government and the tricks that they were getting up to in terms of this bill. Members here, particularly within the Māori caucus—Kiritapu Allan and others who’ve worked in the legal fraternity—knew in their communities how abhorrent this bill was. It was one of the big kaupapas of the last election. As the Hon Shane Jones said, it contributed mightily, sadly, to the demise of the Māori Party leader Te Ururoa Flavell, who fell out of favour with his constituents, and, of course, eventually to the Māori Party going out of Government. So I hope that I’ve explained that well to the previous member. Again, I want to pay tribute to the Hon Meka Whaitiri for the work she did—just fantastic.

I think, as others have explained, at the heart of this bill are small and targeted reforms which will reduce the compliance complexity for Māori land owners when they engage with the Māori Court. I think one of the best examples of this in terms of the reforms is the tikanga-focused resolution service that offers Māori land owners a way of settling issues outside of the formal court hearing. So I think that that is a great opportunity for us to be able to roll out a tikanga that we’re used to and we’re able to get innovative and creative in that area. I think it’s vitally important for us—when you have 1.4 million hectares of whenua remaining in Māori freehold title, it’s crucial that this land becomes more economic in terms of the interest of not only Māori land owners, but this country.

As a Government, I think we’re absolutely committed to unleashing the potential that we have. And our people said—and again, I refer to the Hon Shane Jones, his story. His story is the story of hundreds, literally thousands, of Māori through the years who have been restricted and inhibited within this whole process. So I mihi to our people who have taken up the fight, and to our Minister who has put forward this for our select committee. I have a sincere hope that we will have Māori land owners contributing—that’s my sincere hope—throughout the whole process. Kia ora tātou.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Carrying on from the previous speaker, Willie Jackson, and colleagues around the House this afternoon, it’s been well-traversed—the stories of each party, in terms of this bill. I take a brief call this afternoon and, importantly, it’s one to say that the National Party, we stand and we speak in support of this bill to the first reading.

There’s been much talk around the demise of previous members of this House. I think it’s really important to look at how we rebuild, how we reframe this kōrero, this conversation, and, particularly, reframe the bill to make it somewhat better than what is proposed at the moment. Although I do not sit on the Māori Affairs Committee, I will be seeking leave to be able to do so, so that I’m able to contribute in a constructive manner, which is the tone and the tenor of that select committee, so we can seek to construct and improve what is proposed in this bill. There’s been much said about the previous Government and the efforts that have been made there. I consider that my role and duty as a member of this House and as a member of Parliament for my electorate is to contribute in a constructive way.

I will just briefly traverse the history of the Māori Land Court. We all know that the purpose and the intent of the original Native Land Court was to divide and to rule. The purpose and the intent of my contribution to this House, and, hopefully, to the select committee, is about how we can reframe and reconstruct and strengthen what’s proposed.

There’s so much detail around this bill. It is a complex one. It has been fraught in terms of the complexity of the divide and rule and the monopoly and domination of Māori land. The ownership issues have been talked about in terms of percentages of Māori freehold land, which are very minimal. It is about seizing the potential to whakamana the opportunity, the people, and the land. So I leave it at that, because this is a brief call, and I will seek to contribute in a constructive way for the benefit of our Māori communities and our Māori land owners. Tēnā tātou katoa.

Tēnā koe Te Māngai, tēnā koe Te Whare, otirā, tēnā koutou katoa, rau rangatira mā huri noa i te motu. Kei konei i tēnei pire hou, arā, ko Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill e hāngai pū ana ki Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 i tēnei pānui tuatahi kei mua i a tātou. Ka tika me mihi atu rā ki Te Minita, ko Nanaia Mahuta, nāna tēnei pire i kawe mai ki Te Whare i te rangi nei.

He aha te mahi o te pire? Tuatahi, ko te whakamārama ake i ngā hātepe tauatanga, tauatanga te kupu Māori mō succession, kia māmā ai te mārama. Tuarua, ko te whakatū i tētahi pūnaha kia tāea ai te whakatika raru mō ngā whenua Māori, arā, ko te “dispute resolutions”. Tuatoru, ko te whakapakari i ngā ratonga e hāngai ana ki Te Kōti Whenua Māori.

Kāti rā, e tū ake au ki te tautoko tēnei pire, nā te mea i te tau 2017 i porotēhi a Ngāi Māori, ngā tiati o Te Kōti Whenua Māori, Te Pāti Mana, me ērā atu rōpū Māori hoki mō te pire o mua, te pire i raro i te kāwana o mua, Nahinara me Te Pāti Māori. E ai ki te kōrero o mua, tino kino tērā pire. E pīrangi ana rātou ki te whiu i Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 ki te ipu para. Nā rātou i pīrangi he tīmatanga anō mō Te Kōti Whenua Māori, heoi, e ai ki te iwi Māori, ehē. Nō reira, kei konei te pire hou.

Engari, he aha te pire whānui? Kāore e kore, he taonga tuku iho te whenua Māori mō ngā whakatipuranga katoa. Mā te whenua e whakahaumako tō tātou oranga, ā-ahurea, ā-ōhanga anō hoki, kia whai hua te pito mato o te iwi Māori. 1.4 miriona ngā heketa o ngā whenua Māori e rite ana ki te 5 percent o te whenua Māori o Aotearoa. Ko te nuinga o te whenua kei te puku, kei Te Waiariki, heke iho rānei o Te Ika-a-Māui. Mā te hātepe ture whakamanawa, whakamana hei tautoko i te hunga mau whenua Māori kia oho mai te hunga moe.

E kāwanatia ana te whenua Māori e Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. Nā te ture nei e tohu ana Te Karauna he taonga tuku iho te whenua Māori. He momo pūmanawa anō hoki tō te whenua. E ngana ana tēnei ture kia whakautu i te papa tākaro, me kī, o te whenua Maori kia mau tonu te iwi Māori ki tōna ake whenua kia whai mana anō hoki te Māori o tōna whenua.

Neke atu i te 25 tau ki mua i whakamanahia Te Ture Whenua Maori Act e te Pāremata, ā, e tautoko tonu ana te ture nei i te hātepe ture whānui o Aotearoa kia mahi Te Māori i tōna ake mana Māori motuhake ki runga i tōna whenua Māori.

Te tauatanga—ko tētahi o ngā raru e aro mai nei te hunga Māori. Ko te nui o ngā tāngata e whakapānga ana i te whenua Māori mā te whakapapa Māori, te aha atu rānei, engari kāore anō kia whakauru mō te tauatanga kia tau ai te tauatanga o te whenua Māori. Me whakapānga atu te tangata ki Te Kōti Whenua Māori, kia whai mana tōna whakapapa ā-toto, ā-aha atu rānei.

Ki tērā e kōrerotia ana. Kua whiwhi Te Kōti Whenua Māori i ngā tono 2241 ia tau, ia tau. Ko te katoa o ngā tono, ka tika me rongo ki roto i te kōti whenua Māori i te nuinga o te wā. Me haere tawhiti te whānau, te hapū, me puta atu i te wāhi mahi rānei kia āhei te tae atu ki te hui. Me whai tonu ngā whānau i tēnei huarahi, ahakoa te aha. Ina whakaae rawatia e te whānau tēnei whakapānga atu, koinei te ara me whai rātou. Ko te roa—me uaua, me te utu mō te whai i tō tāua atu ki tō te whenua Māori, he momo kawa ki Te Māori, he tohu kia kaua e whai atu i tō honohono atu ki tō whenua.

Kātahi te raruraru pōuriuri ko tēnei mō tātou. Nā te pire nei ka whakamāmā ake i te tauatanga mō te tuku tono ki te kōti. Ki te kore ngā tāngata e tau whawhai i te tono a tētahi atu, ka taea e te kaitono te haere tōtika ki te kairēhita o Te Kōti Whenua Māori kia whiwhi, kia whakamana, kia rēkoata.

Ka tukuna au, tēnei Whare, tēnei pire ki Te Komiti Take Māori, heoi anō, e Te Māngai o tēnei Whare, ka whakaae ai, ka whakaae au ki tēnei pire. Kia ora.

[Thank you, Mr Speaker. Greetings to the House and greetings to you all, the distinguished leaders from throughout the country. We have a new bill—that is, Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill, which is directly related to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993, on this first reading before us. It is only right that I acknowledge the Minister Nanaia Mahuta, for she has brought this bill before the House today.

What does this bill do? Firstly, it clarifies the processes around tauatanga—“tauatanga”, the Māori word for succession—so that it is easier to follow. Secondly, it establishes a system that allows Māori land disputes to be dealt with; there will be a mechanism for dispute resolutions. Thirdly, it will strengthen the services that are aimed at the Māori Land Court.

Furthermore, I stand to support this bill because in 2017, Māoridom protested, as did the Māori Land Court judges, as did the Mana Party, as well as other Māori groups, because of the old bill, the bill that was proposed by the previous National - Māori Party Government. According to what has been said previously, it was a bad bill. They wanted to throw Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 into the rubbish bin. They wanted a fresh start for the Māori Land Court; however, Māori said no. So we have a new bill.

But what is the bill generally about? There is no doubt that Māori land is for all generations. The land will nourish our existence, culturally and economically, so that Māori reach their potential. 1.4 million hectares of Māori land is equal to 5 percent of the total land in New Zealand. Most of this land is in the central North Island, in the Waiariki, or further down the North Island. The legal process will support and empower those who own Māori land to energise those who need to be woken up.

Māori land is governed by Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. It was this Act that established to the Crown that Māori land was an intergenerational gift. It is like land has its own heartbeat. This law seeks to reset the playing field, you could say, to ensure that Māori people continue to hold on to their land, and that Māori retain mana over their land.

It has been a little over 25 years since Te Ture Whenua Maori Act was passed by Parliament, and it is still supported by legal power here in New Zealand, which allows Māori to have a degree of independence and control with regard to their own land.

Succession—this is one of the common disputes within Māoridom. Most people have an interest in Māori land, whether by genealogy or other reasons, but have not yet applied for succession so that the succession on Māori land can be dealt with. A person then needs to apply to the Māori Land Court so that their genealogy or other connection has legal force relative to that being discussed.

The Māori Land Court receives 2,241 requests/petitions every year. All of the requests/petitions are rightly heard in the Māori Land Court most of the time. Whānau and hapū have to travel from afar or take time off work in order to make it to the hearing. Families must follow this process, irrespective of the circumstances. If applying to the court is what families have agreed on, this is the path they should follow. It is the length, and the difficulty, and the cost of doing it through the land court—it is a type of custom to Māori; it is a sign to not make your connection to your land.

What a catastrophic disaster this is for us. This bill will make successions easier than applying to the court. If people don’t settle a dispute amongst themselves, the petitioner can go straight to the registrar of the Māori Land Court to receive, to enact, to record.

I, and this House, commend this bill to the Māori Affairs Committee, and also I support this bill. Thank you.]

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. Kia ora mai tātou, everyone. It’s a pleasure to speak to this bill, to take a very brief call as the last speaker for the National Party, and I’d like to make a few acknowledgments, first of all, and echo some of the words of my colleagues. I’d like to acknowledge the Hon Chris Finlayson and the substantial contribution that he made to this piece of work in the last Parliament. I recall him talking about it, how probably three to four years ago—probably five years now—he went to the Prime Minister, who was John Key at the time, and said, “I want a crack at the ture whenua Māori bill.” The Prime Minister at the time said, “You know that’s a big piece of work?” and Chris said, “Yep, but I’m up for that. I think we could make some real changes, make some real differences.” And so Prime Minister John Key said, “Yep, go on then.” So he did, and I think it became a real passion for him. I think if we look at the fingerprints of Chris Finlayson through his parliamentary career, a large number of people would point to ture whenua as being a piece of work that really does have his fingerprints. Yes, we weren’t able to reach it to a conclusion, as we’ve heard from some of my colleagues here tonight, but I do want to acknowledge the in-depth work that Chris did on that.

I also want to acknowledge Nuk Korako, the chair of the Māori Affairs Committee in the previous Parliament, who also had an important role in leading this bill, or the bill in its previous iteration, through to as far as we were able to take it.

Now, you’ve heard from my colleagues that we’ll be supporting this to the next stage. There are parts of this—and we can claim attribution or we can say it was the Labour - New Zealand First Government; it sort of doesn’t matter to some degree, because there’s good parts of this that are going to benefit Māori. In particular, I think the improvements in efficiencies to the Māori Land Court, that increasing in scope that the Māori Land Court registrar will be able to do, and some of the extra actions that Māori Land Court judges can undertake—the issuing of injunctions to compel and granting equity relief—are really good steps in productivity for the Māori Land Court.

We’ve heard from our colleagues some of the issues around succession. That ability for succession to be immediate and yet still retain the rights of the spouse or partner is a nice piece of work, and whāngai—for the court to be an arbiter working in collaboration with tikanga hapū, tikanga iwi, I think are also nice pieces of work.

So, again, this is a short call to wrap up the National Party contribution to this part of today’s proceedings. You’ve heard from my colleagues Jo Hayes, Nicky Wagner, Matt King, Dan Bidois, and Harete Hipango. They’ve described the history of the bill to this point, where it was in our hands and what the contribution from the Government of the day is here now, and our plan is to support this to the first reading. We look forward to it going to select committee. Kia ora mai tātou.

Tēnā koe e Te Māngai o Te Whare. Otirā, e ngā mema o Te Whare nei, tēnā tātou katoa. I am pleased to add my voice of support, as all members have, in this first reading of Te Ture Whenua Maori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill. It is really important that we get Māori land legislation right, not just for Māori land owners, not just for Māoridom, but for this nation. What do I mean by that? If I look at the Māori economy, if I look across the Māori asset classes—to enlighten members of this House—to see Māori ownership, in forestry, 40 percent of New Zealand forestry is owned by Māori. In lamb production, 30 percent of lamb production is owned by Māori. In dairy production, 10 percent is owned by Māori, and sheep and beef production is 30 percent. Kiwifruit is 10 percent, and, of course—not land-based—fishing is 50 percent.

My point is that a piece of legislation that enables and unlocks the economic value of Māori land while retaining the protection mechanisms, as described in the preamble of the existing Act, which talks about taonga tuku iho, is really, really critical, and that’s why I support this bill. I support this bill because it simply acknowledges the complexity around unlocking the economic potential but not at the risk of losing your rights to Māori whenua.

So I am pleased that the Minister for Māori Development has worked to bring this amendment bill to the House. It does isolate the targeted processes around succeeding in the Māori Land Court, and if members have never ever been to a Māori Land Court hearing where you hear succession orders, I encourage you all to go along and have a listen. I encourage you to go along and have a listen, because, as the Hon Shane Jones indicated, it’s not an easy process. Now, I consider myself fairly educated. I’m no expert on Māori land. I feel, myself, that I’m fairly educated in succeeding to my father’s land interests and my deceased uncle’s land interests—thought I had succeeded only to find out I hadn’t, and that’s by going to the land court. That’s not a reflection on the Māori Land Court at all; it’s a reflection on the complexity of the process.

So that’s why I’m supporting this bill, because it tries to unlock the complexity of succeeding, which is the rightful right of Māori who have interests in land to do. How they do it, when they do it, and why they do it is really, really important. We’ve got to have a legislative framework that allows Māori land owners and those that have interests or beneficial shareholdings to do exactly that, and that’s what Minister Mahuta has brought to this House in terms of the succession and trying to simplify it. I love the fact that she’s introducing a sort of low-level succession standard which only requires the registrar of the Māori Land Court. Anything more complex, it’ll obviously get kicked up to the Māori Land Court judges, and can I please just acknowledge the work of the Māori Land Court judges throughout the motu. Can I also acknowledge the work of the Māori Land Court staff, because under that lot, they got under-resourced—they got under-resourced. I know, under this side, we’re making amends on the infrastructure of nine years of neglect, and it’s not going to get fixed overnight, but we’re on that pathway.

So Minister Mahuta’s bill here, the ture whenua bill, absolutely talks around a Māori land plan. Like she said, announced last February, there was $56 million in the last Budget, and that’s to deal with, again, the targeted issue, the vexed issue, of how we succeed to land without jeopardising the protection measures of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act.

She talked about mediators. I’m pleased to hear that in 2022, we’re going to have a suite of new mediators, that one of the criteria is that, one, you’ve got to have tikanga Māori, but you’ve also got to be a good mediator. During the hearing of the last disastrous bill by that side, that’s what came to bear with the submitters: the need for good, skilled mediators, mediators not just in mediation but mediators who had a tikanga Māori skill as well. So I look forward to the Minister bringing that roll-out of that plan. It’s an opportunity for a lot of Māori to be those mediators throughout the Māori Land Court, and I encourage our whānau who have an interest in Māori whenua, wherever they are round the motu, to consider for themselves an opportunity around mediation.

The Minister also talked about the ongoing plans. She talked about addressing paper roads, talked about land acquired under the Public Works Act, and she also talked about landlocked lands. So I’m looking forward to seeing further plans that come rolling out as a part of this bill, that’s just kicking off the phase around the introduction of this particular bill.

You see, it is a complex issue. It’s a complex issue that ensures that with Māori land, a lot of Māori land owners, for right or wrong reasons, may not want to develop it economically. You know, it might be a wāhi tapu, it might be of significance, and they might just want to protect it for future generations, and that’s entirely their right to do it. But the other fact that I want to bring to the House is that most of the Māori freehold land, the 1.4 million hectares, is actually in the hands of Māori land owners. They don’t necessarily sit at an iwi level, and so it’s critical that when we roll out Māori land legislation, we’re actually going to those that that legislation’s going to impact on. As we did in the previous one, having toured quite extensively during the consultation rounds—I think two rounds that I went—it was really clear, the complexity that Māori land owners were saying. There isn’t a Māori land owner who doesn’t want their whenua developed—there isn’t. They just want to be in the middle of that development, driving that development, leading that development, and absolutely acquiring the returns from that development.

What we heard when the last lot were in Government is that that wasn’t what Māori land owners were seeing. They weren’t seeing that. That’s why you got the public outcry that they got. That’s why Te Ururoa Flavell lost his seat. That’s one of the biggest prices that that side needs to acknowledge. You guys cost a Māori member his seat by pushing a piece of legislation that Māori did not want. So it’s pleasing that you’re supporting this bill to first reading and select committee, and I do hope that you keep your ears open to what Māori land owners are going to say, because on this side we are going to make sure that Māori land owners do come in front of the select committee and give us their honest feeling about what this bill is proposing, because it is a no-brainer bill. It’s a no-brainer bill.

It’s around succession orders. It’s around mediation. It’s around low-level succession that only requires a register. But the biggest thing for me, which is why I’m standing in support of this, is that it’s part of a bigger suite of plans to unlock potential in Māori land that this coalition Government committed to, the day we came into office—the day we came into office. We are a Wellbeing Budget. We are a wellbeing Government that believes in deriving benefits for all. And Māori whenua, as I expressed when I opened my contribution, in terms of the Māori economy—conservatively valued at $50 billion and growing—is something that should be of interest to all members of this House. So I stand.

I want to also acknowledge all the former leaders, Māori leaders, Māori politicians who have always fought for the retention of Māori land while also looking for opportunities to develop it. So it’s with pleasure that I support this bill to first reading and look forward to the many submissions that are going to be coming to our select committee as we work through this piece of legislation that’s going to bring those opportunities for Māori land owners throughout the motu. I commend this bill to the House.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Māori Affairs Committee.