🧪 EXPERIMENTAL / ALPHA — this is an independent prototype, not an official record. Data may be incomplete or wrong - always check the linked Hansard source before relying on it.
Hot Air

Tuesday, 23 November 2021

Moriori Claims Settlement Bill

Part 1 Preliminary matters, historical account, acknowledgements and apology, and settlement of historical claims
HansardID: a5a7e0cd-ec64-47c1-be8b-47c239045594
Back to debates
🗣️ Speech Adrian Rurawhe (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Te Tai Hauāuru)
Time unknown

Members, the House is in committee on the Moriori Claims Settlement Bill. We come first to Part 1.

🗣️ Speech Hon Andrew Little (New Zealand Labour Party — List Member)
Time unknown

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP), which is SOP 95, in my name, and for the benefit of the many Moriori who will be watching this broadcast by live streaming and other means, we have a small part of the bill that enacts their settlement to have to correct. It just relates to a number of place names that have been negotiated since the deed was signed and, indeed, since the Māori Affairs Committee has considered the bill. They’ve been agreed with the national geographic board, or whatever the entity is that looks after—the New Zealand Geographic Board—that looks after these things. So this is simply an SOP that has a number of minor amendments to place names referred to in the bill, and that therefore brings all the correcting matters in the bill to a close. It has been subject—

🗣️ Speech Adrian Rurawhe (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Te Tai Hauāuru)
Time unknown

Sorry to interrupt the Minister, but that SOP is in Part 2. We are on Part 1. Would some honourable member like to, if we want to move it as—

🗣️ Speech Kieran McAnulty (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Wairarapa)
Time unknown

Point of order, Mr Chair. I seek leave for all questions to be taken as one debate.

🗣️ Speech Adrian Rurawhe (New Zealand Labour Party — Member for Te Tai Hauāuru)
Time unknown

Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There appears to be none. Therefore, the question is that Parts 1 to 3, Schedules 1 to 4, and clauses 1 and 2 stand part.

Parts 1 to 3, Schedules 1 to 4, and clauses 1 and 2

🗣️ Spoke in this debate (3)