Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill

I present a legislative statement on the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.

I move, That the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time.

This bill gives effect to the deed of settlement between the Crown and Ahuriri Hapū signed on 2 November 2016, so it’s taken some time to get here. The deed, as you would expect, settles all of the historical Treaty claims relating to Ahuriri Hapū. In that respect it comprises historical redress, which records the Crown’s breaches and past injustices; cultural redress, acknowledging the connections to land and resources of significance to Ahuriri Hapū; relationship redress, which builds new connections with the Crown, local authorities, and other groups; and, finally, financial and commercial redress, which provides the basis for a strong economic base for the future.

In March 2020, after the first reading of this bill, it was referred to the Māori Affairs Committee, and it might just help the House to explain that gap between signing the deed in November 2016 and a bill not coming back to the House until March 2020. There were some internal issues with Mana Ahuriri, some issues that one or two hapū had raised, particularly about the election process. It was the subject of a complaint to the Waitangi Tribunal. On that basis, the Crown respects the jurisdiction of the tribunal and takes no further action. The tribunal found that there were issues in relation to the election of trustees and made some recommendations, one of which was that the bill be introduced but on the proviso that the trustees open their positions up for election. There was ultimately an agreement reached between myself and the trustees that that would happen. On that basis, I introduced the bill for its first reading. Then there was a period where the trustees took the view that they didn’t have to hold an election. And so there was a stand-off, to be perfectly honest. More recently, the trustees decided that they should conduct the elections that both the tribunal had recommended and that I had reached agreement with the trustees about. Those elections are now in progress. The nominations closed just recently. So ballot papers will go out and on that basis we’re now in a position to look at the bill again following the select committee’s consideration of it.

The committee opened for written submissions in March last year, closed in May 2020. There were 16 submissions in support of the bill. Three opposed the bill, and 14 referred to the trustee elections issue and wanted that to happen prior to passage of the legislation. So that has now happened, and amidst all that we were dealing with COVID-19. The committee heard nine oral submissions and they were heard in Napier in June 2020, so the Māori Affairs Committee heard those—and as I think we’ll no doubt hear from the chair, they were very appreciative of hearing from those who made submissions. I want to thank the committee for its consideration and deliberations of the bill. I think the committee was chaired by Rino Tirikatene at that time. He has been succeeded by the erstwhile and diligent Tāmati Coffey, who is running the committee in exceptional fashion.

The bill was reported back in August last year and we now have it before us. Those trustee elections, as promised, are now under way, and so the people of Ahuriri, Mana Ahuriri, can be sure that what was required by the tribunal, and what was agreed to with me, is now happening, and they can be sure that as we progress the bill, the trustees will be those who have the confidence of their people, so that by the time we get to the third reading, when redress is then placed in the stewardship of the trustees, they will be the trustees fully accountable to and with the confidence of their people.

I’ll just refer briefly to the historical account. This is always a very important part of any deed and of any bill. The committee responded to submissions about some aspects of the historical account in the bill. There are some submitters who sought to amend the description of events that took place at Ōmarunui and Herepoho. At that event, in 1866, the Crown initiated hostilities when it attacked Māori at Ōmarunui and Herepoho. Thirty Māori died defending themselves against the Crown attacks, which were launched before the Crown had made a reasonable attempt to negotiate a continuation of the peace in the district. The Crown captured Ngāti Matepū and Ngāti Māhu people during the conflict and imprisoned them on the Chatham Islands without trial and in harsh conditions.

The events are complex because some hapū of Ahuriri fought with the Crown and some fought against the Crown. But, as is the case with Treaty settlements generally, the historical account focuses on the Crown’s actions, not Ahuriri Hapū members. The attack on Ōmarunui is significant because of the grievance that it created for the descendants of those who were attacked and therefore, to supplement the historical account in the Ahuriri Hapū deed of settlement, officials have been working with the parties to record and publish the separate accounts of those events. That work is still due for completion, and I look forward to seeing that when that happens. So this second reading now brings us a step closer to concluding these issues.

For Mana Ahuriri, it has been a long time from the time the claims were lodged and then negotiated, the hiatus we’ve seen since November 2016, but we are nearly there. There will be the elections, and as soon as possible after those elections are concluded we’ll have the third reading. That’ll be an occasion, I think, for great celebration for Mana Ahuriri and that important step in restoring the relationship between the Crown and the iwi. But on that basis, I commend this bill to the House.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

I rise on behalf of the National Party to speak in the second reading of the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill. Every Treaty settlement reminds us that the path to reconciliation is never smooth or easy, and it is the case with the Ahuriri claims settlement legislation. It’s much needed and a welcome development that the Crown-iwi relationship is moving along. There are some challenges, which Minister Little just spoke to. I know that we have an empty gallery here today, so I’ll just say to all those watching: kia ora e koro mā, e kui mā, e rau rangatira mā. E ngā hapū o Ahuriri tēnā koutou. Nau mai haere mai ki te rā whakahirahira.

[Greetings to the elders and the many chiefs. Greetings to the sub-tribes of Ahuriri. Welcome to this auspicious day.]

It’s a privilege to speak in the second reading of the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill.

I’ll just note very briefly a personal connection to the area. I was originally born in the Hawke’s Bay. I’m now proud to call Southland my home and to represent the Southland region, but I do remember as a child going past the Ahuriri Estuary, for example, on many occasions. So it’s a region I know well, and I have deep family connections in that region.

The Crown and Ahuriri Hapū have been working together to reconcile their relationship and support the Ahuriri Hapū to achieve their aspirations. On 19 December 2013, the Crown and Ahuriri Hapū signed an agreement in principle which formed the basis for this settlement. The Ahuriri Hapū deed of settlement was initialled on 19 June 2015 and signed on 12 October 2016. Credit must go to former Minister of Treaty negotiations the Hon Chris Finlayson and his officials, who worked hard on this, and to the present Minister, the Hon Andrew Little, and the current officials who are working hard to complete this.

The settlement includes a Crown apology, $19.5 million in financial and commercial redress, and the right to buy shares in the Kāweka and Gwavas Crown forest licenced lands. Heipipi Pa and Conservation House in Napier will be vested in Ahuriri Hapū’s cultural redress, and in recognition of the ongoing connection of the Ahuriri Hapū to the Ahuriri Estuary, the settlement will also establish a permanent statutory committee called Te Komiti Muriwai o Te Whanga. “The purpose of the Komiti is to promote the protection and enhancement of the environmental, economic, social, spiritual, historical, and cultural values of Te Muriwai o Te Whanga”—Ahuriri Estuary—“for present and future generations.”

Minister Little touched on some challenges that have been faced in bringing this matter to the second reading, and I note that “The Waitangi Tribunal granted an urgent inquiry after receiving an application from Ngāti Pārau … and members of Ngāti Tu and Ngāi Te Ruruku. The hearing was to consider whether the Crown was in breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi because the mandated entity, by not holding substantive elections, had not established or maintained a proper mandate.” The tribunal recommended that the bill be introduced as soon as possible, but only if the post-settlement governance entity agreed to hold trustee elections for positions. I’m pleased that, I understand, elections are to be held in July and August 2021 to resolve this so this bill can be completed and the Ahuriri Hapū can progress their aspirations, as is intended through this bill.

I’ll touch briefly on the historical account which is being recognised by this bill. The Ahuriri Hapū are based in and around Napier, in the Hawke’s Bay region. The area of interest is bounded by the sea to the East, the Kāweka Range to the West, the Ngaruroro River to the South, and the Esk River to the North. The Ahuriri Hapū is one of six large natural groups negotiating the settlement of the historical Treaty of Waitangi claims of Ngāti Kahungunu. Ngāti Kahungunu is the third largest tribal group in New Zealand.

“The Native Lands Act 1865 enabled the shares of individual grantees to be alienated without the consent of the other grantees for that block or other customary right-holders whose names were not included on the title. The 1865 Act did not prevent some settlers using practices such as extending credit to grantees and subsequently acquiring Māori land after securing debt against land titles with mortgages. These practices caused considerable public controversy in Hawke’s Bay at the time. There was some doubt that grantees fully understood the legal implications of the mortgages, leases, and sales that they agreed to.

“By 1870, the Crown and private parties had acquired about 51,000 acres of approximately 54,000 acres awarded to Ahuriri Hapū individuals under what was called the 10-owner rule. In 1867, 1870, and 1873, the Crown introduced legislation that attempted to provide for Māori land titles that better reflected the interests of wider communities of right-holders and to remedy problems that had arisen as a result of the 10-owner rule.” However, these remedial measures did not apply to Ahuriri Hapū lands, which had already passed through the Native Land Court by 1867 and which had been alienated by 1870.

“Over the next 30 years, Ahuriri Hapū protested about land issues through participation in the Repudiation and Kotahitanga movements. These movements sought the review of previous land transactions, the restriction of further land sales, and the reform of the native land laws. In 1874, Parliament set aside all of Te Whanganui-ā-Orotu as an endowment for the Napier Harbour Board. Parliament did not establish a role for Ahuriri Hapū on the board. After the 1931 Hawke’s Bay earthquake raised parts of the bed of Te Whanganui-ā-Orotu above the water level, the Napier Harbour Board leased most of Te Whanganui-ā-Orotu to the Crown, and the Crown commenced drainage and reclamation work … The processes of drainage and reclamation, combined with the diversion of the Tūtaekurī River outlet to the sea, reduced Te Whanganui-ā-Orotu (originally approximately 9,500 acres in area) to a narrow tidal channel. Today, the remaining water-covered estuary area amounts to approximately 680 acres at high tide.

“Between about 1900 and 1930, the Crown and private parties acquired most of the remaining lands of Ahuriri Hapū. Ahuriri Hapū stated that money raised from [their] land sales was often required to meet living costs. By the post-Second World War period, most Ahuriri Māori had turned to waged employment to provide the necessities of life. The search for work led many whānau to leave rural pā and kāinga and settle in urban areas such as Napier and Hastings.”

As with many of these bills that come before the House, there has been a very long history behind this, and this is a moment in our country’s history where we endeavour to resolve issues that have arisen in the past and to make them right as best we can. I commend this bill to the House.

E te Māngai o te Whare, tēnā koe, otirā ngā mema katoa o te Whare nei, tēnā tātou katoa.

[Madam Speaker, thank you, indeed to all the members of this House, I acknowledge all of us.]

I’m pleased to take a call in the second reading of the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill. As the Minister—the Hon Andrew Little—outlined, what occurred in the Ahuriri region is no different to the wider Ngāti Kahungunu rohe as a whole, when two people came together, and the description of battle Omarunui is also reflected in the settlement as a recall of the history of the two people coming together and the battles that occurred there, and also the tīpuna that were imprisoned with the tīpuna from Tūranga-nui-a-Kiwa, without trial, to the Chathams—all this occurred in this period of time. Like the Minister said, I want to acknowledge not only his work but the ongoing work of the initial negotiators of the Ahuriri Trust, the seven hapū that make up Ahuriri, and, maybe for the benefit of members in this House, to reflect that Napier is regarded as the gateway to Ngāti Kahungunu—the gateway into Ngāti Kahungunu made up of te Wairoa through Ahuriri down to Heretaunga, Tamatea, and, of course, Tāmaki-nui-a Rua and Wairarapa. That’s the extent of this particular tribal boundary. In acknowledging the work of Ahuriri Hapū, the gateway in terms of the airport and the port is so critical for Ahuriri that we are now bringing this claim for its second reading.

But it’s not without its challenges, and the Minister himself acknowledged those challenges, particularly around the elections. It is pleasing to hear—and the member that just spoke before me, Joseph Mooney—the acknowledgment of the trust going to elections, as the Waitangi Tribunal requested for the progression of this bill. So I’m really pleased, as a member of the Māori Affairs Committee that heard the 34 submissions in Napier, and nine orals, that that was the underlining concern of the people who presented in front of the Māori Affairs Committee—the elections. Now, there are nine positions on this particular trust, and I think it’s really important because that was the sticking point for many of the submissions around the holding of the elections.

Can I confirm to the House that we’ve actually got 16 people running for the nine elections. The names are up on the posts. Everybody that is eligible for Ahuriri, the seven hapū are registered, will get their voting papers on 2 July, and elections will be held on Monday, 9 August. So whānau that may be listening to this debate in the House, please make sure that you’re registered and have your vote. But for the people that are standing, can I just acknowledge Maree Brown, Rīhi Elizabeth Anne Clarke-Reiri, Peter Eden, Tania Eden, Allana Hiha, Beverley Kemp-Harmer, Joinella Maihi-Carroll, Piriniha Prentice, Evelyn Ratima, Joe Reti, Mike Taane, Chad Tareha, Marina Toatoa, Emma-Marie Uriarau, Barry Wilson, and Terry Wilson. I don’t want to be accused of particularly picking any of those nine; I have mentioned all of them that have put their hands up for standing for this trust. But my underlying message is: whānau, be registered and actually vote.

This comprehensive settlement ends five of the six large natural groupings of the Ngāti Kahungunu region. Te Wairoa has settled, we have Maungaharuru Tangitū that has settled, we have Pahauwera that has settled, and we have Heretaunga Tamatea that has settled. This was the one that needed to be settled, and I’m pleased it’s here. And, of course, the last and sixth group is Tāmaki-nui-ā-Rua, Wairarapa.

Across the tribal boundaries, and acknowledging the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill, and we’ll go into details in the third reading, when, I’m sure, our galleries will be filled with the seven hapū of Napier, the intricacies of this settlement. But it has been a long journey. Members in this House, so far, have talked about it starting under a former Government, the National Government, and ending under Labour. But the critical thing—the critical thing—

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: The last good Government this country’s had.

—was the elections, and I’m pleased to see that this is being settled on their own accord. And those members over there can yahoo, but there has been a lot of fixing up of Treaty settlements started by that side but completed over here. So let’s get the record sorted. Let’s be clear: if you’re going to throw stones, then you expect some back.

I want to acknowledge Ahuriri Hapū, the seven hapū. I want to acknowledge the negotiators that have taken this claim as far as they have gone. And I want to particularly acknowledge the leadership of the chair and the people like Piriniha Prentice and, of course, Barry Wilson and Joinella Maihi-Carroll, who have carried this entire claim—and it is not easy being a negotiator, particularly amongst very active people of your own community, and keeping them on board.

But I do believe that the elections that are being held as we speak are the best way for the people of Ahuriri to progress this bill. So, come August, we will have a new trust and, hopefully, before then, we’ll have the third and final reading of this bill. But can I just say, in closing, that I totally support the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill. It is overdue and I can’t wait for its passage through the House. Kia ora tātou.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. You know, it may not surprise the House to know that National supports this bill. Indeed, over all my time in Parliament we have supported every single historic Treaty settlement claim bill that has come to the House. There’s very simple reason for that, and that is that we support fulsomely the historic Treaty settlement process, a process, indeed, that the Bolger National Government fundamentally—there was some work before that but fundamentally—started, and I, as Māori man, as a New Zealander, believe that there were past wrongs that we need to right. There will be some, a very small group in New Zealand, who pooh-pooh that and don’t take that view—the sort of the Hobson’s Pledge view of life. But the reality is, if we go back to—not the last century; the century before that—the 1850s, the 1860s, the 1870s, there was wholesale land confiscation in this country and Māori iwi and hapū had their lands, had other taonga, taken from them through trickery, sometimes through force, through war, and that needs to be put right.

One of the things, I think, that’s incredibly important to note in that putting right—some say, “It’s the putting right that counts.”—is that the putting right does not fully compensate for the loss and the damage that was done. In fact, far from it. The reality is, if you talk about a Treaty settlement process, even with the ratchet-up clauses—they’ve got a better name but it doesn’t come to me as I stand here—for Ngāi Tahu, for Tainui, even if we think about those clauses, still we’re talking about a total quantum on all settlements, when this is all done and dusted, of something like $2 or $3 billion, which in the scheme of things, when we think about annual Budgets in this Parliament from Grant Robertson in the many tens of billions of dollars, I think—what was it, $15 billion in new spending at this last Budget is, as my colleague Stuart Smith says behind me, a rounding error. I’m not saying it should be a lot more. I’m not trying to stand up here and be falsely optimistic about the dollars for Māori and for iwi and hapū. I’m simply making the point that we do not fully compensate for the wrongs—far from it. It is, in a sense, a—more than a gesture but not a huge amount more. I make the point again: we fully support the historic Treaty settlement process.

Where we do differ from the Government, I think, in this area is in the more modern ventures—or I was going to say “adventures” that we are seeing from a relatively new Office for Māori Crown Relations - Te Arawhiti, which is constantly seeking under the likes of Willie Jackson and Kelvin Davis ways to reinvent and re-interpret and find new ways to keep the gravy train going. That’s not my view of what should happen. I think we should right the wrongs of the past but I don’t think we want to be constantly finding new and creative ways; I think actually that is overly creative and overly adventurous.

In relation to this settlement bill, I just want to make—I suppose I was also going to say “a non-serious point”. It’s not that it’s jovial, but a point, and that is that I note the areas of cultural, financial, and commercial redress that this bill addresses and puts forward, including, I should say, as is right, an acknowledgment by apology from the Crown but it includes the purchase of the Kāweka and Gwavas—I think it said—Crown forest land. I was over, just before Christmas, tramping in that area. It’s beautiful, special, very remote country. The Department of Conservation’s done a magnificent job. If you go into the Kāwekas there, the Kāweka forest land—it’s the first tramp I’ve done with my young sons—there are camping huts and there are these hot springs, and the Department of Conservation has built these rather lovely big tubs. You just literally turn them and the hot water comes on. The water of the river is less than hot—shall we say. My simple point is that it’s beautiful land, it’s special land, and it’s good to see in the main redress in this bill in addition to the financial redress there’s the purchase of these very special areas of land in this part of New Zealand in the Hawke’s Bay. The Crown and Ahuriri Hapū have been working together now for quite some time to reconcile their relationship and support the Ahuriri Hapū to achieve its aspirations. We know the dates; I won’t go through all of that.

I did want to say, though, that credit must go to the Parihaka negotiators and people who have made this possible. I do also want to acknowledge my sometimes friend—it depends a bit on how things are going—the Hon Chris Finlayson. Sometimes he likes me; sometimes he doesn’t. I’m not sure which phase we are in. Well, sadly, I am actually sure what phase we’re in at the moment, but we won’t go there because I don’t want to end up with a privileges claim or something from him in this. But I do want to acknowledge him. I was getting off track. I do want to acknowledge him and his officials who were determined to form a settlement, and this bill, this good bill, gives effect to the Ahuriri Hapū deed of settlement that was signed 2 November—actually a wee while back now—2016.

So we fully support the historic Treaty settlement process. There are parts of what’s happening in Te Arawhiti we don’t support but this bill is good indeed. It is part of our righting the wrongs of the past. I wish the hapū and iwi concerned the very best. I’m sure they will have wise counsel to invest what they are receiving as redress here well and to ensure that they make the most of it for future generations of their iwi and hapū.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just to note the sincerity that seemed to come through from the previous speaker, the Hon Simon Bridges, and then the very bold comment about stopping the gravy train just kind of took all of the wind out of everything that he was trying to say about how deeply he felt about the situation, how aggrieved he was, but how we just need to get off the gravy train. So if you ask me, the people of Ahuriri should probably take that last contribution with a grain of salt.

Anyway, this is the second reading of this bill, and it did start some time ago. The Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill was referred after the first reading on 12 March 2020; the closing date for submissions was 22 May 2020. In there as well, we must note that the country was side-tracked by the COVID pandemic, which took over everybody’s lives. But despite that, submitters still managed to get their submissions in so that they could be heard. There were 34 submissions that were gathered through from interested groups, from stakeholders, from individuals, and the select committee of the time in the 52nd Parliament heard oral evidence from nine submitters, both across Napier and here in Wellington. The official advice came from the good people at Te Arawhiti. And can I just take an opportunity to thank those members of the committee: Rino Tirikatene, Marama Davidson, Joanne Hayes, Harete Hipango, Matt King, Adrian Rurawhe, and the honourables—the Hon Nicky Wagner and the Hon Meka Whaitiri. Now, the whole committee heard those submissions, they went through the bill, and the issues that the Minister brought up were noted—mainly issues around the elections of the trustees on both the trust and also the earlier mandated entity: the incorporation.

Now, there might be a bit of confusion, so I need to make sure that I get this quite clear. The mandated entity was the Mana Ahuriri Incorporated, the post-settlement grievance entity was the Mana Ahuriri Trust. Now, some of the submitters had issues with both, and said, “You need to have regular elections. You haven’t had a rotation of elections of trustees in quite some time.” So there was that that was thrown into the mix during their submission hearings. Into that as well came the mediation that happened with one of our QCs, Colin Carruthers, who was appointed to review the results of one of the ratifications that happened. In there they talked about how, of the 1,433 eligible voters, actually only 27 percent of them participated in that process. That led to a few questions being asked about the validity of that process; it led to the QC coming in. He recommended that the Minister apply his usual criteria to the result on the basis that the process and the result don’t contain significant risk of challenge.

Further concerns were raised by the Ahuriri Hapū members, and Sir John Clarke was then appointed to undertake facilitation with hapū members, trying to reach an outcome whereby things could be moved forward. The outcome of that facilitation was that all members wanted the bill to be introduced to Parliament and for elections of the trustees to be held. The Minister accepted the ratification based on that outcome and facilitation process. And you heard from him just earlier, talking about how the trust provided the Minister with an agreement to hold those elections prior to the enactment of the legislation, and the Minister then introduced the bill. He then introduced it, confirming that he wouldn’t progress to the third reading until full elections have been held.

And I thank my colleague, the MP for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, the Hon Meka Whaitiri, for noting that process; that the election of trustees is under way and they have had considerable interest in making sure that those appointments took place. So that is in train. I echo the calls of my colleague for those hapū members that are thinking they might want to get involved in this process to make sure that you apply, if you have the accurate whakapapa, to get involved and make sure that you vote, and make sure that you return your forms as well in that process so that we can have confidence in this whole bill going through and the right people sitting at the right table at the right time.

Insert into this whole conversation the Waitangi Tribunal urgent inquiry, which has happened as part of this process. So there was the urgent inquiry. The Waitangi Tribunal agreed to hear it. The flag was raised by Ngāti Pārau, by Ngāti Tu, by Ngāti Te Ruruku, and their concern was that the Crown had breached the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi because the mandated entity hadn’t held those elections and it hadn’t established a proper mandate. Also there were other concerns, which have been detailed by some of the members, so I won’t go into it, but the tribunal recommended again that the bill be introduced and also that the Crown pay for the cost of the elections, which I’ve just said are going ahead.

One of the other issues that was brought up in the submission hearings were about the concerns about the accuracy of the bill’s description of the historical events that took place at Ōmarunui. Now, the historical account in the deed of settlement was signed off, but we understand that through the drafting, some of those claimants—especially the ones that I just mentioned—were unsatisfied with the historical account. They wanted to make sure that the actions of their hapū, of their tūpuna, were actually recorded in that historical account. So to resolve the issue, the Crown engaged in negotiations with the hapū to record, to set out their varying perspectives of the events that unfolded at Ōmarunui, in agreement that once signed, both of those accounts would be published on Te Arawhiti’s website. And the committee then decided that the development of those agreements appropriately addressed the concerns raised by submitters, and didn’t recommend amending the bill’s provisions.

So this has been through a very lengthy process, and I’m sure that the people of Ahuriri Hapū would be very encouraged to know that this is going through the House with support from members all around the House. I look forward to the big day. Of course, the second reading is often not as substantial as the first and the third readings, which is why, as I look up into the gallery, we have no members from the hapū here to listen, but, hopefully they are either watching from home or they’ll be watching this at a later time on demand, and, hopefully they will have reassurance that members of Parliament have considered the submissions that got presented and are looking forward to being able to mark the occasion alongside them when they come in here for the third reading. So with that said, I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to take a call on behalf of the Green Party in support of the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill at this, the second reading. I also want to acknowledge at this time that the second reading isn’t the most scintillating in this process, and I suspect that for many members of the hapū, they’re just really waiting for the elections to happen, and the third reading, and to be able to get on with delivering for their people, which is what they’ve been waiting a really long time for.

I would like to note that some of the issues that have held up this process have been related to process that the Greens would say has been a result of the practice of large natural groupings, and bringing hapū together into a process that doesn’t necessarily reflect the basics of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, which was between hapū and the Crown, not large natural groupings and the Crown. Or, as we’ve heard very clearly in this case, actually even reflective of the different histories of relationships between hapū and the Crown, and that that forcing of groups together results in some negative relationships and tensions between hapū as a result of the Crown’s decisions of how we run this process.

For the Greens, we’ve always been critical of that process, and I think what’s happened here has been more evidence for that, though I would like to acknowledge that the Minister stepped in and did acknowledge the Waitangi Tribunal’s ruling and take steps in terms of slowing down the process to enable the elections to happen and has also enabled differing perspectives on the events of what happened at Ōmarunui to be negotiated between individual hapū and the Crown and for that to happen outside of the settlement but be published on Te Arawhiti’s website. To my knowledge, which is entirely incomplete, that’s the first time that’s happened. I think that’s quite worthwhile to acknowledge and would like to point to that for other hapū who may have had similar concerns around the process and the telling of their history.

I also want to point to—in every speech, in some way, on these settlements; I can’t help myself in terms of these problems—some of the problems in the retelling of that history, as it is agreed, and the imbalance that is existing in our settlement process, and that the agreed historical record is still biased towards the power of the Crown. I want to point to the use of one word in particular: the “vesting” of sites to hapū or iwi. “Vesting” means the generous bestowing of something on somebody. It denotes a position of power over, and an ownership from, the group who is giving to the other, whereas my understanding of the settlement process is an acknowledgment that the Crown in possession of this land that has particular meaning and purpose and original ownership from hapū does not actually have the right to bestow that. It’s actually a returning of what was always owned by—and should have always been in the ownership of—hapū.

At this point, I too would like to acknowledge, as we do, that it is a huge effort for hapū to get to this point. The collecting of those stories and histories provides a richness in terms of bringing people together—that can be really, really valuable. It is a huge undertaking, and I would like to acknowledge everybody who has been involved in that for the hapū of Ahuriri involved in this claim—particularly those who have died before we managed to get to this point today. Their knowledge will not be lost, and is being held by those still here.

I want to acknowledge that many involved may also feel some liberation through that process of discovering their own stories—kuia, kaumātua, and rangatahi alike—and that the settlement process does provide the Government with a ready-made way to engage in community dialogue about our collective history, as a nation. It is encouraging, now that we are going to get our history into our curricula, that, hopefully, these stories will be able to be taught and brought to life in the places where our children go to school. That learning can be localised and shared so that we all actually have a better understanding of the land that we stand on and the history that we are part of and benefit from, or have not benefited from. I really look forward to that time.

I also just want to point out at this point—I know I’ve acknowledged it and touched on it already—that most of the submissions were related to the concern about mandate and the need for the elections, as well as the summary of the historical account, and to our confidence have been addressed as best as they can be, considering the circumstances, by the Minister.

So just to touch on some of the things within the settlement, to acknowledge again that the key point for the hapū in the settlement was the establishment of Te Komiti Muriwai o Te Whanga, a stand-alone, statutory, multi-party arrangement including Manu Ahuriri incorporated in the Department of Conservation and relevant local authorities to manage the Ahuriri estuary. Again, it’s almost—if it isn’t every single Treaty settlement—that we are seeing the protection, that role of kaitiaki coming through. I really just want to register a sense of frustration: people fight for decades to get the right to care for our environment while the Crown has, you know, happily gone on and enabled the destruction of our environment—unhappily for us—for so long. That so much effort has to go into restoring that rule of kaitiaki, I think, really does deserve some reflection from all of us about why that should be so hard. Are there better ways of returning that role of kaitiaki rather than making people have to struggle and negotiate and fight for it?

Also within the settlement is that the Kaweka and Gwavas Crown forest licence lands will transfer, the Forestry Company Limited. There’s also letters from the director of the Office of Treaty Settlements introducing Manu Ahuriri Trust to the following entities: the DHB, Housing New Zealand, KiwiRail, and the New Zealand Transport Agency which, again, speaks to the fact that Te Tiriti is not just about property rights. It’s not about that quantum of money, or even just the vesting of property back. It’s about the relationship and partnership that is inherent in that original document, and hapū are again saying, “We want to work together. Meeting our obligations requires working together.” Again, I would have thought that there would be other ways that we could do that rather than making people battle for decades to get the right to be at the table and be treated as an equal, consistent with our founding document.

But enough said for today. We look forward to the third reading and progress.

Mr Speaker, I stand to take a call on behalf of ACT to speak to the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill, but if you would afford me just a short minute to acknowledge those on the south coast of Wellington, where a state of emergency has just been declared. That is in my electorate of Rongotai, where I live, and I would like to just put a shout out to those people out there to please listen to Civil Defence. If they come knocking on your door, be prepared to leave, be prepared to leave quickly. This is right up to, and after, high tide, which is due at 9 o’clock this evening.

The Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill was one that I was not aware of, being a new member of Parliament, and I would like to just point out to the Mana Ahuriri Trust that you have 40-odd new MPs who are learning about what you’ve had to go through to get to settlement. I would like to just speak through what I have learnt in doing the research for this speech. First thing, it’s been a very long process for you all, with the first submissions being made way back in 1988, a casebook inquiry occurring in 1996, and the Mohaka ki Ahuriri report that came about in 2004. You had seven hapū who have come together to form a negotiating group in 2006, but it wasn’t until 2016 before you were able to actually finally sign a deed of settlement. We are now progressing your settlement through the House with this, the second reading.

The area that is covered has already been traversed. It’s from the Esk to the Ngaruroro rivers, and it’s from the Kāweka Ranges to the Pacific Ocean. As has been said by other members, it’s actually quite an extensive rohe. The value of this settlement is $19.5 million, and a third of the shares that are held in the Kāweka Gwavas Forestry Company Limited. I’d just like to do a personal note here. I’ve been lucky enough to go and hunt into the Kāwekas in some of the forestry blocks—not this one in particular—but I think it’s really important when we can hand over some of that ownership, because it’s not just about investment in the forestry; it’s also about allowing hapū to go into some of these areas and hunt to be able to put food on their table.

It was noted that there were 34 submissions, and that there were nine orals that were given during the select committee process, with trips made to Napier as well as Wellington by both the select committee and also by those that wished to submit. It may seem like a small number, but I do recognise that they were representatives for hapū, who represented quite a large number of people. So 34 and nine may sound small, but I believe it would actually represent a significant more number of people.

The process was questioned, the process of settlement, and, as a result, an inquiry was held, and there were recommendations to move this process and to be able to move the settlement forward. It was unable to give effect to that, because there couldn’t be an agreement reached. So I understand that this is why we’ve had such a long delay. The issue with Ōmarunui accounts of what took place, I think, were really, really important, and I respect those concerns, and I also respect the efforts that have been made to address them. Ngāti Pārau, Ngāti Tu, and Ngāi Te Ruruku requested an urgent inquiry to address those concerns, and they got it. They got a good dialogue between the Government and themselves. The Crown, in engaging with those representatives, agreed that there were differing perspectives, but that they would acknowledge those, and have them published. So I thank you for your perseverance to ensure that the settlement details are accurately recorded, and I thank the consortium that is Mana Ahuriri Trust for their work here as well.

I understand that the inquiry recommendation to hold the bill from progressing through to its final stage until the elections for the post-settlement Government entity had taken place were not upheld, because the Mana Ahuriri Trust had a clear mandate from their people that elections were to occur post-settlement. I acknowledge Minister Little in his advice on the processes that they went through there, and am very pleased now to hear that the trustee election process is well under way, acknowledging, as well, that it will occur on 2 August. There were a few names that were mentioned for those running. I’m not exactly going to advocate for anyone in particular, but I will say that Peter Eden’s name was mentioned, and this is a man who I’ve done some extensive work with, with whānau up in the Gisborne area and all around the Ngāti Kahungunu area as well. He is a man of integrity, I found, and one that works very hard for his people, so I’m pleased to hear that he is standing.

I commend both the Government and the Mana Ahuriri Trust for forging through to complete the settlement by bringing this bill back to the House for completion of its legislative stages, in order to implement the full and final settlement. ACT continues to support this bill, and the settlement that it shall deliver to the tangata whenua represented by Mana Ahuriri Trust. Thank you.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. Tuatahi me taku mahara ki tō tātou Kahurangi a Georgina Kirby me ana mahi hei hāpaitia te iwi whānui i roto te kaupapa o Te Rōpū Wāhine Māori Toko i te Ora. Nō reira e te whaea, moe mai, moe mai, moe mai rā. Ki ngā mate huhua o te wā, haere koutou. Rere atu e kui, e koro mā ki tua o te ārai, haere, haere haere atu. Nō reira āpiti hono tātai hono, te hunga mate ki te hunga mate. Āpiti hono tātai hono te hunga ora ki te hunga ora. Tēnā anō tātou. Tēnā anō tātou Ahuriri ahakoa kāore i konei i tēnei wā, e tika me mihi ki a koutou mēnā kei te whakarongo, kei te mātakitaki i a mātou i runga i te pouaka whakaata i tēnei wā, tēnei te tino mihi ki a koutou, Ahuriri i tēnei wā. Koutou katoa, tēnā koutou.

[Firstly, let me remember our Dame, Georgina Kirby, and her work supporting all people through the Māori Women’s Welfare League. Rest in peace. To all those who have passed, depart all. Fly elders beyond the veil, depart from here. The lines are joined, let the dead remain with the dead. The lines are joined, let the living remain with the living. Greetings to us all, greetings to Ahuriri, as it is only right for me to greet you although you may not be present at this time. Perhaps you are listening and watching via television. This is a special greeting to the Ahuriri people at this time. Greetings to you all.]

I take the opportunity first to mihi to a kuia and whaea who passed away two, three weeks ago, Dame Georgina Kirby, who was of Ngāti Kahungunu descent and is very much hooked into this kaupapa as she was a big supporter of politics—not sure if it was Labour; sometimes it was National, with her, but she passed away a few weeks ago, a couple of weeks ago. She was the former president of the Māori Women’s Welfare League, 1983 to 1987, and made a huge contribution in terms of Te Ao Māori. I went to her tangi, spoke at her tangi with the Hon Meka Whaitiri and Rawiri Waititi, and it was a wonderful tangi. The memories and the talks about these sorts of kaupapa were very, very relevant.

Her contribution must be acknowledged, because these types of kuia, the tuarā behind so many of these settlements, the backbone—we must take the opportunity to acknowledge them. She was very special, of course, having led the Māori Women’s Welfare League, having led that kaupapa in terms of Māori business, in terms of Māori health, in terms of a lot of the health initiatives that the Māori Women’s Welfare League embarked on. Of course, politics was a major kaupapa for her and she was always liaising with politicians. I think one of her most memorable moments was in 1993 when, along with Dame Marilyn Waring and Dame Jocelyn Fish, she introduced the concept of gender representation. So we have a lot to mihi to her for. In that same year she introduced the Mana Wāhine claim, which I’m overseeing, along with Minister Jan Tinetti, at the moment. So I take the opportunity to acknowledge her, because she’s very much part of this Ngāti Kahungunu settlement. Nō reira, e kuia, moe mai, moe mai, moe mai rā.

The Ahuriri story very much mirrors the Māori story right around the country. Ahuriri wanted a partnership with the Crown, but the Crown repeatedly broke its word and breached its obligations under the Treaty. They did not, like many other iwi and hapū, receive the ongoing benefits from European settlement that the Crown had promised. In 1851 they agreed to sell the Ahuriri block for the price that the Crown offered. After Ahuriri Hapū did agree to sell the block, the Crown failed to ensure that adequate reserves were protected in their ownership.

The Crown also negotiated to purchase contested lands in the Hawke’s Bay, despite being aware that its approach to land purchase negotiations could lead to conflict amongst Māori who asserted interests in the blocks, and in 1857 conflict broke out. I’m just mentioning this history because it has been a bit lost, and I want to get into it in more depth in the third reading. Obviously the elections are incredibly important here, but we should not at all forget the history that went down in Ahuriri and the betrayal that went on.

Despite the Crown’s actions, there was no fighting between the Crown and Māori in Ahuriri before 1866. However, in 1866 the Crown initiated hostilities when its forces attacked Māori, and as a result 13 Māori died defending themselves against Crown attacks, which were launched before the Crown made a reasonable attempt to negotiate a continuation of the peace in the district.

The Crown captured Ngāti Matepū and Ngāti Māhu individuals during this conflict and imprisoned them on the Chatham Islands without trial in harsh conditions for two years. After the wars the combined effect of Crown land purchasing and the Native land laws contributed to Ahuriri Hapū being virtually landless by 1930, which has had a devastating impact on their cultural, social, and economic wellbeing.

This is the story wherever you go. This is the history wherever you go. I suppose it’s an example of the colonisation that many of us have spoken about in this House over many years now and the effects of colonisation. What is colonisation? It’s about dehumanising indigenous people and allowing the transfer of power and resources from indigenous people to the newcomers. If there was ever an example of colonisation, then we have an example of colonisation in Ahuriri. As I said, if you want to look at the effects, they are immense. So it puts to bed some of the nonsense that Mr Goldsmith was talking about earlier in terms of how wonderful colonisation has been for Māori. We have seen the terrible effects through this kaupapa and through so many kaupapa that our people have been part of. I wanted to mention that today, just briefly.

I’ll not touch too much on the trustee elections, but I’m pleased that we have committed to that process. I heard a lot of good people being mentioned in that election process. I too know two or three people there and I’m tempted to tell everyone to vote for them, but I won’t. This is a process—and it’s good to see Harete Hipango there. I’m glad the National Party have welcomed her back with open arms. Good to see you, Harete, and I’m sure she’ll speak on this kaupapa.

But this particular election process is incredibly important for the Ahuriri people. We have to get it right. We have to get the participation right. We must get the accountability right there so that everybody plays a part in this settlement and also everyone gets an opportunity to talk about the history and the betrayal that actually did go on. Let’s not get too side-tracked here, but let’s get our process right going forward.

I thank the select committee and the Waitangi Tribunal for their work, the trustees who are doing their work, and I wish them all well for the elections coming up. I’m looking forward to expanding on this kōrero in a third reading. Kia ora, Mr Speaker.

Tēnā koe. Tākitimu te waka. Ngā uri, ngā hapū o Ahuriri, tēnā koutou.

[Greetings to the Tākitimu canoe. The descendants of the sub-tribes of Ahuriri, greetings to you all.]

It’s always a privilege to stand to address the House and also the people who are listening in from afar on these Treaty settlement bills. Minister Willie Jackson, tēnā koe. Ngā mihi ki a koe.

I have the good fortune, and will never take for granted, that I’ve been called back to this place with a list of things to do. It just happens to be again fortuitous that I’ve been called back timely to speak to this bill, because I had the distinct opportunity and privilege to be a member of the Māori Affairs Committee at the time that this came to the committee after its first reading on 12 March 2020.

It’s always helpful for those who are listening in from afar to understand what a second reading means, because not everybody does. The introduction of a bill to the House is the first reading, and, as is known, it gets referred to the select committee for those members to go through and to see whether there should be any changes after hearing submissions or evidence from the people who have an interest in that bill, in this bill. So the second reading today is about this bill having gone to the select committee and coming back to the House no sooner than the third day after the select committee has reported. Now, the select committee reported on 10 August 2020, so we’re well out of that time frame of the third day, but the purpose of this debate is to look at what the main principles of the bill are and also any changes that have been recommended by the select committee to be factored in and included by way of amendments to the bill, which I now turn to, in this brief call that I have remaining.

The select committee reported back on 10 August 2020. We heard the evidence of some nine oral submissions out of a total of some 34 written submissions. The Minister, Minister Little, earlier today talked about the fact that 16 submissions were in support and three were opposed. The select committee report notes that there are proposed amendments, amendments which are minor and technical. In summary, those are, firstly, that clause 88 of the bill, as it reads, ensures that the language in that bill is consistent with current legislation, and therefore the recommendation is to amend that clause to take into account the changes Parliament imposed in 2019 to the Local Government Act 2002. That was one of the amendments, and that’s what’s recommended for the change to this bill going through to the third reading.

The next amendment is to clause 65, which provides for three properties to be vested in the trustees, and those are outlined in Schedule 3 of the bill. It’s recommended that those small technical amendments are to add those additional interests to the bill, to remove the expired interests, and to remove the listed interests that have no direct effect on the property and are therefore not required in the bill. So those the amendments, as were recommended by the select committee, for this second reading, to take it through to the committee of the whole House and to the third reading in time.

We’ve heard members in the House today talk about the history, the components of the bill, but important was the process that had been engaged. Often as members of a select committee, particularly with Treaty settlement bills, we are privileged because we hear not only the mamae, which is the hurt that’s associated with the history and the journey of the peoples who are uri, who are ancestors, direct descendants of those who started this journey and have traversed it all the way through to the legislative passage of being before the House, but also we hear the raruraru, the problems, the internal conflicts and tensions that are there. That was presented to the select committee, and it was for the committee to defer on that because our duty and obligation was to address those matters within the bill. Minister Little has appropriately dealt with that. When this matter comes back before the House it will do so taking into account the mamae, the raruraru, and the due process has been amended and is now to be effected with the elections, for us to bring this bill back to the House for the third reading. In closing on the second reading of this bill, I commend it to the House. Kia ora.

Kia ora. Tēnā tātou e te Whare. Ki a koutou e ngā hapū o Ahuriri. Tēnei te mihi o Te Paati Māori ki a koutou i tēnei pō. Te pānuitanga tuarua o te pire whakataunga. Nāku te whiwhi ki te tū i roto i tēnei Whare kia mihi ki a koutou i tō koutou mahi rangatira.

[Greetings to all in the House. To the sub-tribes of Ahuriri, this is the acknowledgement of Te Paati Māori to you this evening, in relation to the second reading of the settlement bill. It is my pleasure to stand here in the House to greet you for your chiefly deeds.]

It is a privilege that I rise on behalf of Te Paati Māori to speak to this, the second reading of the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill. As the bill has had its first reading before the election, this is the first opportunity we’ve had to speak to this settlement in the House. It is an honour to give a short call today. I want to begin with a mihi to all the kuia-kaumātua negotiators, hapū leaders, and w’anau who have got you to this point. The mahi of rangatira is to weave together their people, and that is exactly what you’ve done to reach this point. I acknowledge the tūpuna, the w’enua, the loss, the theft that you have experienced and unique—but, sadly, common for those of us who have endured colonisation—muru raupatu. Nothing can take away the pain, the suffering, and the trauma that your people endured and far too often still endure, but this marks an important step on your road to justice and prosperity for your people. It is the start, not the end, and despite all the challenges, all the roadblocks, that are put up to prevent real justice, nothing can take away from the fact that this is your day, this is your bill, this is your story.

I note your extraordinary generosity in agreeing to the terms of this settlement. We all know that we generally settle for less than 1 percent of what was confiscated, what was violently stolen from us in the name of greed and colonisation. Crown negotiation policies such as large natural groupings and the fiscal envelope have determined this, engineering further division, further harm, and therefore further breaches of Tiriti itself. As an opposer to the fiscal envelope and a wahine involved in iwi post-settlement, I know how difficult it can be to navigate our w’anau, our people, through the multitude of challenges: fiscal, political, cultural, economic, and mana motuhake. How do we lift the trauma of deliberate displacement while negotiating mandates and unnatural natural groupings? I also know how important it is to never settle for what was achieved in the past, that we must keep striving to get the justice that our tūpuna deserve, and to create a future where our mokopuna can thrive as their true selves.

Settlements are unsettling in process. That is why Te Paati Māori does not accept that settlements are full and final. This creates the false impression that our trauma lies in the past, that the inequities, the pollution, the poverty is no more. We all know that, sadly, that just isn’t the case. Te Tiriti is not for settling; it is for implementing. It is for honouring. Te Tiriti justice is ongoing, never-ending. A new Aotearoa is on the rise, an Aotearoa where tangata w’enua, tangata moana, and tangata Tiriti unite and work together to create the harmonious, peaceful, and just nation that is envisaged in Te Tiriti, the future that our tūpuna sacrificed to ensure that we could continue to strive for.

This settlement is a significant step on that duty. It is a milestone not just for the hapū of Ahuriri, Manu Ahuriri Trust, but for Aotearoa katoa. I look forward to continuing to support this bill as it progresses through the House and to see an inevitable continued progress of your people, your w’anau, as you enter this new era for ngā hapū o Ahuriri, Manu Ahuriri Trust. Tēnā tātou katoa.

Before I call Paul Eagle, I didn’t interrupt either of the last two speeches, but I do want to place on record the fact that at this stage of a bill, which is not a technical bill and they’re not technical speeches, members should not read their speeches.

Tēna koe te Māngai o te Whare. Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I just want to, before I start, mirror the words of a colleague there from ACT—Nicole McKee—in terms of the local state of emergency there in, on Breaker Bay Road. All of the road has been closed officially as of now, and those residents have been evacuated. So we are looking at big storms on the South Coast from about 9 o’clock tonight. Apologies for the cold northern weather that’s descended upon the sunny shores of Pōneke Wellington.

But we have some brighter news here. I just want to acknowledge and mihi the people of Tākitimu, Ngāti Kahungunu, and Ahuriri Hapū iwi. If we weren’t in the alert level that we are now, I know that at least some of their people would be here and listening in to what is an important part of the process for their settlement bill to go through at its second reading

Looking back at this bill, I had the pleasure of speaking on the first reading, and I remember clearly then that being my first bill that I spoke on in terms of a Treaty settlement claim. And I had been in this House and experienced, I guess, the third reading on a Thursday, and being part of, I guess, the relief, the exasperation, the outpouring, and the wairua that goes with this in quite an open expression of—I guess, yeah, those words sum up what many people must feel. But it was the first time I’d spoken on a Treaty claim settlement bill. And not being from the Hawke’s Bay rohe, can I just acknowledge the previous Treaty negotiations Minister, Christopher Finlayson; the current, Andrew Little; our members up there past and present; Meka Whaitiri, Anna Lorck, and Stuart Nash for helping guide some of this work through. I do, as always, want to extend my greetings to the Ahuriri Hapū, and, as I said, I know that if they could be here, they would be.

In reading the bill, it is always a humbling experience. I get quite angry when I have a look through at the history and the way that the Crown negotiated the taking of land—and words like “a heavy-handed approach” come to my mind, even in the way that tensions were sparked, armed conflict broke out in the mid-1800s around the Crown attempting to purchase the Ahuriri block; 14 Māori were killed and 39 wounded in three engagements.

In fact, when I looked closely, the Crown also captured some 86 prisoners from these attacks and sent them to, dare I say it, the Chatham Islands. I’m always dismayed at how often the Chatham Islands Rēkohu / Wharekauri comes through many of these settlement bills, because I think, “Wow, it’s certainly no prison; it’s quite the reverse.” I had the experience recently with the Māori Affairs Committee—and can I acknowledge those who were part of it previously; those on it at the moment—of going back there for the Moriori claims settlement. It’s an interesting history when you hear it from their perspective, about receiving some interesting figures on to Rēkohu during some of these times. So, once again, Māori were detained without trial, they were treated harshly, harsh conditions for some two years. And, I guess, the memories of those who are related to many of those who were treated in that way plays out in the mamae that is expressed in this bill.

I want to acknowledge the negotiation team. One of the frustrations that comes through is the desire to get a settlement completed but it must be done in a way of dignity and decency. Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, quite rightly, says that for most, these settlements will never be full and final, because, as history unfolds and, as we know, ourselves, new information and a different understanding or interpretation of the history will come through. I know and I got the feeling there that as the renaissance kicks in and people become more aware of the detail around some of the issues that they will feel that justice that was part of this settlement doesn’t really reflect the harshness of the information or the new information that they may find out. So I have every sympathy with the notion that these may never really be settled.

But, in the context of this, those who work on it, the team from Ahuriri and Te Arawhiti, it’s tough stuff. And I know even working through the one through the Māori Affairs Committee at the moment, even interpreting what, I guess, authority and powers a select committee has and the influence we have versus what has been already agreed to in a settlement can cause some frustration. We are dealing with one now where, I guess, there’s an acknowledgment of some additional items that this particular claim would like included, but we just cannot afford them. So I mihi to Debbie and some of her concerns.

These are humbling experiences. I think I can now understand why the Māori Affairs Committee is one of the more collaborative and desired select committees to be part of, because you do become, I guess, really deeply involved in what are quite personal and humbling experiences. And you find many who come through these and find themselves actually being really proud of an identity that they, simply, didn’t know. So I wanted to acknowledge that process.

It is hard for me not to say—and I’ve used this language in other speeches when I’ve talked about this, but it is hard to not express—that Māori were tricked or conned or manipulated into things at the time where—in here, I’ve got the word “hoodwinked”; I found a new word, another adjective that better describes some of the reflections as you’re reading these deeds of settlement and thinking, “Wow, is this really the same Aotearoa New Zealand that we live in today, and how could that be?”, which is here, what, some 150-plus years ago.

There is always something in a settlement—and for the hapū of Ahuriri, there is one thing I found where the Crown took o Te Whanganuiā-Orotu a place of high spiritual and cultural significance, a mahinga kai and, despite not being part of the land sale, the Crown at the time deemed that that too was going to be taken. So there is always a nugget in there—dare I use that term—just to say that despite clearing out everything else, gaining so much of the taonga and whenua, they also find something that has so much more meaning. And that, I guess, goes to my point of, I believe, once more research and history is done, something like that, in terms of its significance, could well come back as people feel the grievance doesn’t quite cover the significance of that site.

I look forward to the third reading. It is the end of the process. I’m sure the select committee will finish its mahi. We will come back in here and acknowledge the hard mahi that’s been done by many and ensure that the people of Kahungunu, Tākitimu, and Ahuriri Hapū will be acknowledged for their loss and their mamae. I commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.

💬 SPEAKER: The time has come for me to leave the Chair for kai. I’ll resume the Chair at 7 o’clock. I thought I might get away with putting the question, but I better not!

Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a little difficult to know where to start with this bill, because I’ve listened to the speeches that have been given this afternoon and tonight on it and it’s kind of interesting. I get to speak on a lot of these bills in my time in Parliament, and it’s kind of interesting because I’ve never in my time sat on the Māori Affairs Committee except to stop by for a bit of kai, and I can tell you what, it’s worth stopping by for. But that’s the only introduction to the Māori Affairs Committee that I’ve really had in my time in Parliament.

The thing that interests me about it is that when you think about the challenges that we have—and the last two speakers, at least, spoke about this exact thing—we’re trying to make a judgment on something that in some cases happened 150 years ago. We’re trying to impose today’s standard—well, not impose today’s standard, but we’re trying to balance the standards we live by today with the standards we lived by at the time when these events happened. Not only that, but then we’ve got the various iwi and hapū trying to balance what happened to them at that time with what they might be able to gain—not gain, but what they might be able to achieve now for future generations of their families and the people that associate with them, and you can see why it takes such a long time, but the challenge of it taking so long, of course, is that there’s massive lost opportunity in it.

In the course of the commentary on this bill, that lost opportunity is talked about, and I don’t think there’s an easy answer to it. I find it a great privilege to speak on these bills, for the reasons I’ve just mentioned to some extent, but it is an extraordinarily difficult thing for a group of people in 2021 to balance what happened to people, in some cases, as early as 1850, or even earlier than that—in fact, before 1842. So it’s extraordinarily difficult for us to get to the point that we can achieve, I guess, a fair settlement of grievances that have gone on for—well, if we carry on for much longer, it’s going to be 200 years, isn’t it?

So it’s quite a challenge, and I find the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill quite an interesting one, because it’s a piece of New Zealand that I think is an extraordinarily beautiful piece of New Zealand, but it’s also a piece of New Zealand that’s been subject to some pretty devastating events. Of course, if you look at the Ahuriri Estuary, which is part of this settlement and it’s a place where at least two of my grandsons live and look over and play in every day—well, they’re getting a little old to play now. They ride their bikes there, and they’ll soon be doing other things there, no doubt. But it’s a part of New Zealand that has had some very challenging events happen to it.

So when you look at this claims settlement bill, the area that it affects almost goes as far as the Rangitīkei electorate. In other words, it goes right up into the Kāweka Ranges, and probably over the hill—in fact, the Taupō electorate probably bounds on it more than the Rangitīkei does at the top. But it’s a big part of New Zealand and a very important part of New Zealand, and it also contains what I think is a very interesting port. For anyone who ever goes and spends some time at Ahuriri—and my mother lived there for a long time. She still does, actually, although sometimes I don’t know whether she knows she lives there or not, but she lives there, and, of course, that’s one of the tragedies of life, I suppose. But it is a fascinating place, and when you have a look at the port and the activity that that port generates, it’s a hugely important part of New Zealand. It’s also a very attractive part of New Zealand, and not only does this area of land contain the port but it also contains the airport.

So when you look at what’s happened to that since perhaps the beginning of these challenges that happened in the 1870s and you look at what’s happening to it now, it’s a spectacular piece of New Zealand infrastructure and a very important part of New Zealand. So for this claims settlement bill to be put through, given the background of what’s going on there today and what happened there in the past, it’s an extremely difficult thing to get a balance on. So I’ve got great admiration for the iwi and hapū who go into these negotiations, and for the negotiators that take part in these things, because, as I’ve said, it’s an extremely complicated and, I guess, to some extent risky process to get involved in, because you’re going to be blamed for ever if you get it wrong. So I think it’s pretty special that we can get these bills to the post, but I also think it’s important that we get as many of these settlements done and get them done as quickly as we can. But, at the same time, we can’t sacrifice quality for speed, because if we do, we’ll make a whole lot of mistakes that will just be repeating the damage of the past.

So it’s a great privilege for me to speak on these bills. As I said, I have a bit more association with the Ahuriri Hapū claims settlement area than perhaps I do with some others because my mother and my daughter and my grandchildren live there, and they’ll benefit. Inevitably, they’ll benefit—I’m not really sure my mother will but—

💬 Hon Member: Your poor mother.

Well, she wouldn’t like me taking her name in vain, but she won’t be able to listen because she’s deaf. So I’m safe.

💬 SPEAKER: The member’s safe—I know the feeling.

So do I. But I think the point that I’m making is that they’ll benefit hugely from this settlement because the activities that will happen as a result of these settlement bills and the result of those settlements benefit everyone that lives in those areas, and I think that’s pretty special. So I’m hugely supportive of these settlements, and I’m also hugely supportive of the activity that takes place as a result of them. I know we go back and we talk about what might have been, because, as I said when I started this little address to the House, it’s very difficult for us to judge what might have been when we are looking at a span of perhaps 180 years in a lot of cases with these bills.

So I think that we’ve got to give the Māori Affairs Committee, particularly, and those iwi and hapū concerned a great deal of credit for the work they do to get to the point they get where they can at least get an agreement and get a settlement of a sort in place. I think it’s of great benefit to New Zealand, and I also don’t believe that we should go back and make judgments on what happened in the past and compare that with what’s happening today—we do it in all forms of life—actually, because what happened when I was born was very different to things that are going on today.

The other thing that I think is very relevant to this is the time this bill’s taken, and there are people in this House who weren’t born when the process for this bill started. So that just shows how long it’s taken—over 30 years—for the process to take place and get through and get finally through to a second reading, and I’ve no doubt the third reading will not be long following. But I think it’s really important. I’d just congratulate everyone concerned on it, and I think it’s pretty special that we can be part of these claims settlement bills. I just hope that they continue and that they continue with speed and that we can get them—I shouldn’t say “we get them out of the way”, because that’s not the object of it at all. The object of it is to get to a settlement that at least can be agreed by as many of us as possible.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I hope it gets good support at the third reading, and I’m sure it will.

Tēnā koe e te Pīka, tēnā tātou ngā mema o te Whare i tēnei pō. Tēnā koutou ngā uri o ngā hapū o Ahuriri. Ngā uri o Ngāti Hinepare, ngā uri o Ngāti Māhū, ngā uri o Ngāti Matepū, ngā uri o Ngāti Pārau, ngā uri o Ngāi Tāwhao, ngā uri o Ngāti Tū, ngā uri o Ngāti Te Ruruku.

[Greetings Mr Speaker. Greetings to the members of the House this evening. Greetings to all the descendants of the sub-tribes of Ahuriri. The descendants of Ngāti Hinepare, of Ngāti Māhu, of Ngāti Matepū, of Ngāti Pārau, of Ngāi Tāwhao, of Ngāti Tū and of Ngāti Te Ruruku.]

Can I also start by acknowledging those tipuna whose names are recorded for ever in this bill, which acknowledges both their legacy and the legacy of everyone who’s been involved in the settlement to bring about a more positive future for their descendants. I acknowledge tonight Hikateko for Ngāti Hinepare, Tumahuki for Ngāti Māhu, Te Atawhaki or Te Putanga-Ō-Te Rangi for Ngāti Matepū, Hikawera for Ngāti Paarau, Tāwhao for Ngāi Tāwhao, Tūkapua for Ngāti Tū, Wharerakau or Te Hiku for Ngāi Te Ruruku, and the other ancestors who are acknowledged in those trustees. I do that to ground us, in Parliament’s discussions tonight, about those tipuna who are acknowledged in the settlement from the Crown, which sets out a series of acknowledgments and apologies to right the wrongs that were inflicted by the Crown towards these people of Ahuriri. And it’s those tipuna that bear a legacy of wrongs by the Crown that it is a privilege to stand here in the House tonight to acknowledge.

I want to start by briefly touching on the future-focused nature of this bill. I commend the Minister and the negotiating teams for their work in allowing a process which is somewhat novel, but I think really needed in this case, where there were a number of decisions to be made after this bill is introduced for the Mana Ahuriri Trust. But these represent choices that the trust can make for the benefit of its people: things like a one-year period to elect to purchase 10 land-banked properties and two years to purchase Ahuriri Station. It also includes a right of first refusal over 10 properties for the next 174 years, and the choice about whether to buy the Crown interest in Hawke’s Bay Airport. Why I touch on that is because often those things are negotiated pre-settlement, but what’s been important here is to establish the ability of the Crown to negotiate with this group formally, and then to establish the correct sort of procedural process that will mean that the people who we are trying to acknowledge here in this settlement and those uri of the tipuna who I read out are properly represented.

I also want to touch briefly on what I think is arguably the very most important part of this settlement, and that is Ōmarunui and the acknowledgments that the Crown gives about that historical event. I’ll start not with the wording of the deed of settlement, but by reading from the newspaper The Colonist in its report from 19 October 1866. And this, before the negotiation of these claims in the process of the Waitangi Tribunal, was the accepted account of the history on that day. And they write, “The body of about 70 Hauhaus who arrived at Pētane Hawke’s Bay a fortnight ago, having been reinforced by about 40 others and refusing to explain their intention, Mr McLean, the superintendent of Hawke’s Bay, determined to enforce their removal. On Monday, 8 October, the militia were called out and drilled during the three following days, Major Frasier’s party at Wairoa having been sent by sea. On Thursday night, nearly 200 militia and volunteers and same numbers of natives marched to Ōmarunui pā and completely surrounded the Hauhaus before daybreak. One hour was given to them to surrender, and at the end of two they were still refusing. At seven the attack commenced, and in half an hour they hoisted the flag in truce and 47 surrendered. Several of these escaped, but all accept four were retaken and the whole marched to the Napier Barracks. The casualties were 23 Hauhaus killed and the same number wounded.”

I read that account because it’s really important in these Treaty settlement bills that we acknowledge the history that took place and the effect of that both on the settlors and the people of these pā, who, in this case, were occupied by what was an invading force. And to see them all as one part of “the Hauhaus”, which here was a derogatory term used for rebels, would not be accurate.

So I very proudly read from the apology afforded by the Crown in the acknowledgment section, which says, “Kei te whakaae te Karauna—i tuku i te tau 1866 i tētahi tauākī whakamutunga kutikuti i whakahau kia whakahauraro te katoa i roto i Ōmarunui, tae atu ki ngā tāngata nō Ngāti Matepū rāua ko Ngāti Māhū, mahue atu te whakariterite haere tonu i te hohou rongo; ā, he mea whakamōrea ngā oranga o ngā tāne, wāhine, tamariki katoa i roto i te pā e te whakaekenga o Ōmarunui i te mōnehutanga o te tauākī whakamutunga; ā, i whakamatea e te Karauna neke atu i te 30 tāngata e wawao ana i a rātou anō i Ōmarunui, i tētahi atu whakaekenga o te Karauna i Herepoho; ā, he mahi tūkino ngā whakaekenga o Ōmarunui me Herepoho me te takahi i te Tiriti o Waitangi me ōna mātāpono.”

[The Crown acknowledges that—in 1866 it issued an unreasonable ultimatum demanding the surrender of all those inside Ōmarunui, including individuals from Ngāti Matepū and Ngāti Māhū, rather than continue negotiations to preserve the peace; and Crown forces endangered the lives of all men, women, and children inside the pā by attacking Ōmarunui when the ultimatum expired; and Crown forces killed more than 30 people who were defending themselves at Ōmarunui and during another Crown attack at Herepoho; and the attacks at Ōmarunui and Herepoho were an injustice and breached the Treaty of Waitangi and its principles.]

That’s really important, because what that speaks to is the breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and the Treaty itself when the Crown descended on Ōmarunui pā to evict those people, and it acted in a way which was dangerous to the people who were ordinarily resident there. It speaks to those women and children whose lives were lost in a militaristic action that was taken by the Crown and was an overreaction to the occupant’s failure to take into account the Crown’s ultimatum. Statements like that are important in establishing the history of what went on in this, and it’s really important that the settlement goes on to address some of those wrongs of the Crown.

We’ve heard tonight about what transpired after those events which I read about which was the taking of prisoners from Ahuriri Hapū to the Chatham Islands with the whakarau, as they came to be known. Many of those escaped two years later with Te Kooti Arikirangi on the Rifleman when he captured it, but many of them perished there on the Chatham Islands. I also want to acknowledge ngā uri o Rēkohu mea Ngāti Mutunga for their care not only of the people when they were there of Ahuriri, but also of their spirits, because as I know, as someone who’s recently travelled to Rēkohu with the Māori Affairs Committee, some of Rēkohu is a very inhospitable place, and for the people of the East Coast to be there without the protection of their whānau, without the skills to live in such a place, it would have been a very hard thing. And for their remains which are there, we thank the mana whenua there for their care for that.

It’s important that the Crown acknowledges that what was breached there was the commitment to the rule of law from the Crown. And the acknowledgment here is about the rights of the inhabitants of those pā. And when they were prisoners, they should have been treated as all New Zealand citizens would have been at the time, and, in fact, some of them who were captured after Ngātapa, they were given no trial and they were executed there. And then a very small number were tried under the Execution of Criminals Act 1858, which led to New Zealand’s first and only capital punishment, for Hamiora Pere.

So I don’t dwell on those facts to bring down the mood, but I do want to touch on what was a very troubling time in New Zealand history where the rule of law was not upheld, and the importance of Treaty settlements not only in righting the wrongs of the Crown to Māori and rebuilding the relationship—Te Arawhiti, if you will; rebuilding the bridge between the Crown and Māori—but also about acknowledging simply where the rule of law has not been followed and the importance of the Crown in acting to right those wrongs and to commit ourselves to upholding the rights of prisoners in our system. So I look forward to discussing this bill more at third reading and commend it to the House.

Bill read a second time.