Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill

I move, That the Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Governance and Administration Committee to consider the bill.

Fa‘afetai i lau afioga le Fono Fetalai mo lenei avanoa. E muamua ona ou faatulou atu i le paia o le atunuu i ona tulaga faalupe. Ou te faatulou atu foi i le paia o alii ma tamaitai faipule ua tatou faatasi i lenei aso. Malo le soifua manuia ma le lagi e mamā.

I want to acknowledge elders both past and present and those who are with us in the House. I want to acknowledge reverend ministers and their families, and community leaders, dignitaries from the Samoan High Commission, and I note that the Speaker of the Samoan Parliament is with us today in the public gallery with his delegation of Samoan MPs from both political parties. I want to acknowledge other former MPs who are here today. I note former National Party MP Anae Arthur Anae, who is in the public gallery. And it is always good to see the Hon Aupito Su’a William Sio back in this House. I want to acknowledge Faʻanānā Efeso Collins, who did his best to teach me a mihi in Samoan, and noting that I am probably the worst Samoan-language student he ever had.

Although I am not Samoan, can I say that I am Samoan-adjacent. All Pasifika peoples, all tangata moana are adjacent to each other. I mentioned Efeso, because, like others from our generation, as this House was moving through the Dawn Raids apology, he reached out to me, like many others, to tell me that there was more injustice to unravel, that there was further to go on this journey.

Another Samoan friend of mine Renee Dingwall’s dad, Su’a Hans Schwalger, who’s over in Samoa at this time, told her to tell her friend—me—to get rid of this Western Samoa citizenship Act. So, Efeso, Renee, and all the Samoans who I grew up with, this is for you.

Our parents’ stories are our stories. Our grandparents’ stories are our stories. Those narratives form our community’s narratives. These conversations can be tough conversations, but they are important if we are to grow as a family of Pacific nations. I want to acknowledge Aupito Su’a William Sio, who guided us through one of those tough conversations through the Dawn Raids apology. It is important work and we must continue to build on that work, and I see this as another step in that journey.

This is not the first time there has been an attempt to address this issue. I did note, before, the presence of former National MP Anae Arthur Anae in the public gallery and community members that brought a petition to this House in 2003. Over 9,000 people signed that petition. I also note, and I noticed in the gallery, that my Auckland University fellow alumni Dr Tofilau Nina Kirifi-Alai is here as well, along with Seiuli Savea Peseta, and there are many others listening from home.

I make this observation—and it is this: if you have Pacific Islanders from different political parties, who, in our own different ways, want what is best for our communities, then that is something that this House should take note of. That note should be that we need to have our communities heard at the select committee.

There is a bit of history here, and I want to traverse it a little bit; it’s in the context of the bill. It is Samoan history, but it is also New Zealand history, learning about the Mau movement and the independence movement in Samoa is such an important part of our history, which would give New Zealanders a deeper understanding of New Zealand’s imperial aspirations in the Pacific at the turn of the century, and the painful consequences of those aspirations. What a lot of New Zealanders don’t know is that New Zealand administered Samoa for 48 years as part of the World War I effort, on behalf of Britain from the then German colonial rule. New Zealand administered what we now know as Samoa, and the Americans administered what we now know as American Samoan. The New Zealand administration was so appalling and so bad that Prime Minister Helen Clark had to apologise in 2002.

In 1948, New Zealand citizenship was established. We went from being British subjects, to New Zealand citizens. It was in 1982 that the Privy Council ruled that all Samoans born between 1924 and 1948 were British subjects and, because of that, from 1949 onwards, they were New Zealand citizens. As the years go by, more of these elders will pass. It is estimated that there are less than 5,000 remaining. These are important stories that need to be heard and that is why this House needs to send this bill to the select committee.

In terms of the Privy Council, I want to acknowledge the pivotal role played by Falema’i Lesa and her family and the committee’s organisers who pushed that case. Falema’i’s contribution, we honour not only her personal and individual journey but the collective struggle of Pacific peoples for equality and for justice.

Fairness is at the heart of this bill. We had a group of New Zealand citizens who had their citizenship recognised and then had that citizenship removed by statute. That is unfair—plain and simple. States should not be able to remove citizenship wholesale like that. It is unjust. This bill will address this injustice in two ways. It will repeal the Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act, remove it from the statute book; and the people who lost citizenship in 1982 will be entitled to apply for and receive citizenship by a grant under the Citizenship Act 1977. This is important. The bill does not confer citizenship directly, but it instead creates automatic eligibility to apply for and receive citizenship. It would not create new rights to citizenship for descendants of those whose citizenship was removed. As I said earlier, the youngest of these elders is now 75. That is why it is important that now is the time for us to address these issues while they are still here.

Our international standing derives from our ability to influence the Pacific. Relational diplomacy is so important, particularly in the Pacific where we have geopolitical tensions playing out between bigger nations. This is something that we can do and do well. The wellbeing of our people, economy, and environment are closely linked to that of our Pacific neighbours. It is our responsibility to continue striving to improve and maintain these relationships. That relationship is always worth strengthening. Supporting Samoan elders signals to the Pacific that we take those relationships seriously. That is why this House should send this bill to select committee.

There has been speculation in the media that this will cause mass migration. That is not my intention. Citizenship broadly happens in three ways: by birth, descent, or by grant. This is citizenship by grant. Can we have a discussion on what the grant could look like that is practical and workable? I think we can—solutions that could suit different perspectives of members across the House. We can, but only if we send this bill to select committee.

The Pacific is one ocean but it has many waves. Each island represents a distinct wave in the vast ocean. They are all part of the same body of water. It speaks to the shared heritage, struggles, and aspirations of Pacific peoples, emphasising the unity and the interconnectedness that transcends geographical boundaries. This highlights the significance of recognising and honouring the collective experiences and histories of Pacific communities, acknowledging the common challenges that we have faced and continue to face. Just as waves merge and flow together in the ocean, Pacific peoples come together united by our shared ancestry and cultural ties to navigate the currents of history and shape our collective identity.

I started with the words of Faʻanānā Efeso Collins, and I want to conclude with some of those words from his maiden speech. In his maiden speech, he talked about a saying in Samoan, and it goes: “E le tu fa’amauga se tagata—No one stands alone, no one succeeds alone—and, for [him], no one suffers alone.” I want to add a little bit to that: that we succeed best when we succeed together. So I ask for this House to send this bill to the select committee. Madam Speaker, fa‘afetai tele lava. Meitaki ranuinui. Thank you to the community for coming out today. Hopefully, your presence here in this House will inspire parties to vote for this bill in this first reading and to send it to the select committee. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Talofa lava. We in the National Party are opposing this Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill, and I just want to take you through some of our thinking.

I also want to acknowledge my long-time friend and former colleague and boss Arthur Anae in the Speaker’s gallery, and I reinforce what the previous speaker, Teanau Tuiono, was saying as far as the work and the advocacy that he has done—as have many, over many years—when he was a National MP from 1996 to 2002, and ongoingly. Only a couple of weeks ago, he was getting around the halls of Parliament, lobbying for progression on this issue. So I want to acknowledge Arthur for his long-time fight and, of course, the many other Pasifika MPs. We have the Pacific select committee room, and we know how well represented the wider community, Samoan New Zealanders, have been over many years now.

I also want to acknowledge and pick up from the sponsor our late friend and colleague Efeso Collins, and I think it’s somewhat fitting today that the Business Committee came out and announced that there will be a parliamentary acknowledgment of Efeso, after question time, at 3 o’clock on Tuesday, 30 April. I’m pleased his former leader James Shaw will be here, before his valedictory the next day or two after that, to pay tribute to Efeso. So, given the audience for this piece of legislation, I thought it was important to put out a public service announcement: 3 o’clock, Tuesday, 30 April for a tribute to Efeso.

Our main point on this piece of legislation is that it presents itself in a member’s bill situation, where we don’t think it’s the right format or forum. We believe that this has been well canvassed and well argued over many years—one could argue 42 years, since 1982. If we look back since 1982 and that Muldoon administration, that National Government, we’ve had three Labour Governments since—the fourth, the fifth, and the sixth—we’ve had 10 Prime Ministers, we’ve had an array of wonderful representation from our Pasifika community and from our Samoan community, and we’ve had an apology from a previous Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, on the Dawn Raids, in 2021. Again, that was an issue going back to the 1970s, and, of course, the National Party supported that apology.

So where there is a will to change things, from a Government perspective—and we’ve had 10 Prime Ministers, and two National Governments and three Labour Governments since then—there has been the ability to make a statement and to do things. As we saw with the apology for the Dawn Raids, the Labour Government stepped up there, and also the sponsoring member, Teanau Tuiono, talked about Helen Clark’s apology in 2002. So previous Governments have had the will and done the thing. But our point is that the Governments of the past, of many stripes, of many different colours—red, blue, green, Te Pāti Māori, others—have not taken this up, and we would argue it’s because legally the arguments have been exhausted over a 42-year period.

We are concerned that it creates a legal precedent. Legal experts will say to you that retroactively—retroactively—interesting word—

Hon Member: Retrospectively.

CAMERON BREWER: —no, “retroactively” is the legal terminology—reinstating the citizenship of citizens affected by this Act sets a problematic precedent, and we want to ensure, as have previous administrations, led by 10 previous Prime Ministers over four decades, that we have a legal framework in place that equates to fairness and equity.

So our concern is that it does create a number of unprecedented measures, and it also creates a situation where we have got a focus at the moment on managing the immigration settings and adopting them accordingly to fit today’s demands, and 173,000 non - New Zealand citizens migrated here in 2023. You would have seen our immigration Minister, Erica Stanford, unveil a range of changes to the likes of the Accredited Employer Work Visa scheme, and also, at the weekend, she put in a number of measures that will address migrant worker exploitation. So we have got huge challenges and huge workloads ahead of us and a number of legal precedents that we believe that previous administrations—three Labour Governments, two National Governments—have looked at it—

Chlöe Swarbrick: You’re in charge now.

CAMERON BREWER: —and have not proceeded on goodwill, and some of those people and some of those Governments have been led by constitutional experts like Sir Geoffrey Palmer. This is an exhaustive piece of work that’s looked at it, and successive Governments have—unfortunately for the other side of the House; unfortunately for their argument—not proceeded on a number of firm grounds.

We, as a Government, understand and continue to foster the strong relationships with Pasifika and Pacific nations. I want to acknowledge the great work that the very busy health Minister, Shane Reti, is doing as also Minister for Pacific Peoples, and if the bill progresses, it does and it will have implications on current citizenship settings. So we have given this—previous parliaments—considerable, considerable time, energy, and argument over four decades, and we believe, on balance, that for this to go to select committee at this stage, in a member’s bill format and forum, is not appropriate.

The members opposite say, “Oh well, you’re in charge now.” Well, can I just remind them that they were in charge, with the biggest majority in MMP history, six months ago. They were in charge, with a single-party majority, just six months ago.

Everyone has looked at this. Successive Prime Ministers have looked at this. Successive Governments have looked at this. We on this side of the House have also looked closely at it. We have also been talking to friends like our friend Arthur Anae. We have also been lobbied hard. We have also taken legal advice. But, on the balance of it, National will oppose this bill. Thank you.

Talofa lava, Madam Speaker, and talofa lava to the House. To all of our Samoan community who have come along today to support this bill, can I acknowledge you. Many of the people that are here today are not just here to support the kaupapa of today; they were here in 2003 outside Parliament. They were one or many of the 90,000 people that signed the petition at the time and have been fighting for this change for decades. Can I acknowledge the Green Party member Teanau Tuiono, one of only six Pacific members of Parliament at the moment. Can I just say on record that the other side who are in the Labour Party stand behind Teanau Tuiono with respect to this bill that he is attempting to pass.

I’m going to start with the Dawn Raids apology. The Dawn Raids apology was a formal acknowledgement of the discriminatory implementation of immigration laws that led to the Dawn Raids. However, beyond the Dawn Raids, the Muldoon-led National Government continued on their trajectory with the 1982 retrospective removal of the right to citizenship for those Samoans born between 1924 to 1948. So I do find it very interesting that the member Cameron Brewer says that he doesn’t want to retroactively reinstate citizenship for Samoans when it was retrospectively taken away from them. The removal of citizenship rights for any country is contentious. In fact, New Zealand has been at the forefront in some incidences of criticising other countries internationally for this. Sadly, the New Zealand Government did exactly this themselves in 1982, and this continues to be something that is deemed controversial—and rightly so.

The actions that followed the Dawn Raid apology were not exhaustive. As part of the apology, we provided educational scholarships, access to the Manaaki New Zealand Short Term Scholarship training courses, support for Pacific artists and historians to develop a comprehensive written and oral account of the Dawn Raids, but no one at that time implied that the work required by New Zealand Governments to demonstrate a genuine understanding of the discrimination and trauma the Pacific community had endured was complete.

The apology provided a platform for remorse, remembrance, and reflection of that dark time that should, and could, inform ongoing future policy decisions. What we have before us is another opportunity to honour the spirit of the Dawn Raids apology, and we truly hope that other political parties in this House will see this. I’m not going to pretend that this is where it ends. It would be remiss of me not to mention the policy Labour took into the last election where we would have provided the opportunity for some that were here illegally to regularise their immigration status. This work has not been forgotten by the Labour Party.

Turning my mind back to the bill in front of us, Teanau Tuiono has stated clearly we are talking about 3,000 to 5,000 people, not all of whom would want to take the opportunity up. It is the right thing to do, at least to allow the bill to go to select committee. Off the back of the significant contributions Samoans have made to Aotearoa, it is the right thing to do; on behalf of the nearly 200,000 Samoans who have made New Zealand their home, it is the right thing to do; in the spirit of the 1962 Treaty of Friendship between Samoa, where we pledged the two countries would be governed by a spirit of close friendship, it is the right thing to do; and with the acknowledgement of the discriminatory immigration policy our Samoan community endured before and during the period that this legislation was passed, it is the right thing to do.

I want to implore all political parties to at least support this to select committee. There is no precedent being set when it is only being considered at select committee. That is where we get to consider the advice, the submissions from the community, and to hear from the legal experts. We don’t need to hear from the people who think they are legal experts in the House today. [Applause]

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Maureen Pugh): Order! Order!

Hon CARMEL SEPULONI: Labour is represented by our Samoan community. Labour is here to support the Samoan community. We stand by our Green Party brother in supporting this bill today.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, for this opportunity. I would like to start by congratulating the member Teanau Tuiono for his member’s bill being drawn from the ballot. I know it’s quite exciting to have a member’s bill drawn but it also brings a bit of nervousness until you know which way different parties are going to vote.

So this bill is the Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill. So, basically, this bill is to repeal that 1982 Act, and I want to just ease that member’s nervousness by saying that the ACT Party has decided to support this bill to select committee. Yes, I know, some members are looking quite surprised, but this is what the ACT Party stands for: we believe in equality; we believe in fairness. So we want to really assess this bill on the basis of these two things, equality and fairness, and I think we will get this opportunity to do that in the select committee process because we would like to hear from submitters—what submitters have to say on this bill. We would also like to see what advisers have to say on this bill.

But I also want to point out this: while I acknowledge the community leaders from the Samoan community here in the gallery—thank you so much for taking the time out to be here today—in the select committee process, we expect that the Samoan community leaders and Samoan community members will support this bill. I’m assuming all of them will support this bill. But it will be important for us to hear from other people as well, overall, like from New Zealand, to see what they think about this bill. And our support is at this stage only for the first reading. So we will decide how we will vote on this bill after we get the opportunity to see what the select committee process looks like and what submitters have said and what advisers have said.

I also want to acknowledge the member for reaching out to me and some of my caucus colleagues as well, advocating for his bill. So thank you for that. Clearly this bill is—overall, when it’s looked at—something that is to look at a historic matter. And when we look at that historic matter—this is my view—which, obviously, we want to explore in the select committee process, at the time, the citizenship of those people was revoked because those people acquired Samoan citizenship. And they acquired Samoan citizenship because Samoa became—at that time, it was Western Samoa—independent in 1962. So it was considered that people—those who acquired Samoan citizenship—chose their allegiance to Samoa over New Zealand and that was the reason why their New Zealand citizenship was revoked in that 1982 Act.

So it’s very important for us to note this. I would also like to bring to everybody’s attention that our view is by passing that legislation, what New Zealand did was perfectly fine within the legal framework of that time. So New Zealand was within its rights to do what it did at that time. And referring to the member’s letter that was attached to the email that came from a member, the member has listed various reasons why this bill should be supported. One of the reasons that is listed in the letter, which I want to talk about, is the member says that this bill will address the racist origins of the Act. We want to say that we do not see that that 1982 Act was about being racist, because if it was about being racist then we know that even in 1982 there were people from so many different parts of the world; the citizenships of all those people would have been revoked if it was based on race. But the basis was because Samoa became independent and people decided to acquire Samoan citizenship, and because they had acquired Samoan citizenship their New Zealand citizenship was revoked.

So this is really important to note. But as we have said, we want to go with a very open mind to the select committee process and see what submitters have to say. And as I also said, it’s not just about one community, what they are saying, but we would like to hear from the wider community—the whole of New Zealand—and also advisers to see where this bill sits for going forward. And with that, Madam Speaker, I would say that we are supporting this bill in the first reading. Thank you.

I would first like to acknowledge Teanau Tuiono for bringing this bill to the House. I think it’s an important piece of work, the Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill. I would also acknowledge—and I think it must be with great sadness—that this bill is being brought to the House without Efeso Collins being here to share it with you.

New Zealand First is here to listen to the Pacific community, our leader—and excuse me for my pronunciation—Vaovasamanaia Winston Peters, has advocated through initiatives such as the Pacific Reset, and continues to advocate for our Pacific communities. We support our Pacific neighbours and the communities that make up our country. That is why New Zealand First will be supporting this bill to select committee. It is the select committee process that will give us an opportunity to consider and make amendments that are necessary.

The bill is attempting to restore citizenship to those in Western Samoa that lost it when the Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 was passed. We acknowledge that, yes, for over 40 years, the effect of this bill has been reviewed and considered and reflected upon. It will mean that approximately 5,000 people who lost citizenship in 1982 will be able to apply for and receive citizenship by grant. We acknowledge this doesn’t confer citizenship directly but creates automatic eligibility to apply for and receive citizenship.

We know there’s been numerous attempts to repeal this Act, and I acknowledge the petition in 2003, and, again, the former MP Arthur Anae for his work.

Now this member’s bill is before the House, we think it is an important consideration. I myself enjoy wonderful whānau members, who are in New Zealand, from the Samoan community. I’ve lived and worked most of my life in South Auckland and we are enriched and blessed by the contribution the Samoan community makes to our schools, to our communities, to our collective organisations.

I would like to see robust conversations. There will, of course, be considerations we have to reflect on. We have to understand the impacts, and, of course, being a Government, we have to consider the financial implications. We know that will be a process, and that process should take place in select committee where we can hear fairly, calmly, and rationally from those who are affected. We will not lose; I think we will gain from the opportunity of this conversation.

I think it is really important to reflect that we have all been blessed. I have worked with wonderful men and women who have come from Samoa, some of whom have saved my life on a couple of occasions, so I acknowledge that completely.

When, I think, many of us gave our maiden speeches in this House, we talked about the opportunities to work in a bipartisan way, to work across the House to find our common ground, to talk about what brings us together rather than divides us. I think this is an opportunity to demonstrate how we can do that. I look forward to the opportunity, and New Zealand First look forward to the opportunity, of having these discussions and really analysing what we are going to achieve here.

The fact that this matter has been sitting around for 40 years should not be something that we’re afraid of. It should be the reason that we actually take the initiative to sit down. So, again, I commend the member for bringing this to the House. I acknowledge the sadness that must exist because Efeso’s not here to join in this, but I take pleasure in supporting this bill to the select committee.

Te Pāti Māori—Te Tai Tokerau Tēnā koe. Tēnā koe e te Pīka. I te tuatahi me mihi atu. Kua tae mai tō tātou rōpū tāngata mana. Tātau katoa nau mai ki tēnei Whare. Tēnā tātau. Me te mea anō hoki me mihi ki te Speaker mai i te Samoan Parliament. Ka nui te mihi ki a koe, e te pāpā Aupito William Sio. Tēnā rā hoki koe. Me te mihi ki a koe mai i te Kīngi. Ko koe tēnā ka noho tata ki waenganui i Te Tekau Mā Rua—ka nui te mihi ki a koe. Ko koe tērā te tangata ka pupuri i te ahi i Rangiriri. Ka nui te mihi, ka nui te mihi, ka nui te mihi.

[First, I must acknowledge the esteemed group who has come today and all of us who have come to this House. I acknowledge us all. I must also acknowledge the Speaker of the Samoan Parliament. My acknowledgments to you, sir. Thank you. And I acknowledge you, sir, Aupito William Sio and extend the King’s acknowledgments to you. You sit closely amongst the Tekau Mā Rua—I acknowledge you. You held the fire at Rangiriri. I acknowledge you greatly.]

I stand to acknowledge and be grateful and to fully support this idea and this discussion today, and without it I think we would not be doing our job as Te Pāti Māori.

The whakapapa of this bill takes us back in time to an era not so long ago, in the time of the Polynesian Panthers, of the Dawn Raids, and, you know, the picture that comes to mind right now is Hone Harawira, and many of those of our whānau nō Te Tai Tokerau, he Māori katoa ka tautoko i ēnei whānau [family from Northland, they are all Māori who support these families]; and the time where Māori and Pasifika joined together to fight back against the relentless infringement of our rights as Pasifika and Māori that a Muldoon or National Government—not too dissimilar to our current one—inflicted upon us.

This era saw the rise of Pacific activism, which responded to openly racist treatment. It was 1976 when Dawn Raids began targeting Pacific households accused of harbouring overstayers, despite it being those of European ethnicity who made up two-thirds of all overstayers in New Zealand at the time. Events such as this inspired activism from the Polynesian Panthers and it is important I recognise here not only their commitment to their people but also ours.

They fought alongside us during the 1975 land march, Bastion Point, and for the right to equality during the Springbok Tour. And while the communities most impacted by events of the Dawn Raids have finally received their apology from the Crown—and there’s been a few apologies in the last maybe 24 hours, but I suggest that the Government might have to be prepared for more apologies to come, from that side, I mean—there has been little action taken to prove the sincerity of this. The affected community have not yet truly received their fair compensation. The amendments to this bill are the start of that process.

The bill will restore the right of citizenship to our Samoan community born between 1924 and 1949 that was stripped away with the introduction of the Citizen (Western Samoa) Act of 1982. Amendments to this bill will remedy and illustrate restorative action to the racial discrimination that our Pacific community were most certainly subject to during this time period.

It is our responsibility to ensure that those unfairly treated by this very institution are both witness to, and recipients of, restorative action. And it is important that whatever this restorative action may be, it is those impacted communities—those impacted communities—who inform us what this action is and that it is not those of us in this House who have never walked a day in their lives that dictate what it is that they think they need.

So I can stand in support of this bill—and I’m thrilled to and our party are absolutely glad to, and so we should—as presented by our whanaunga Teanau. So ka mihi a Te Aupōuri ki a Te Aupōuri—tēnā koe. [Te Aupōuri acknowledges Te Aupōuri.] We Māori can both acknowledge and understand what it is to experience a historical and ongoing mistreatment from this institution.

I’m glad we—well, I want us to get to select committee. We should have a select committee on this—if we don’t, we are still saying we know what’s best for you. And that is simply not the truth. It is not that we should describe what it is for others that don’t look like us, sound like us, and feel like us. And I’m saying that as a Māori.

Ou te faatalofa atu ma le faaaloalo. Malo le soifua maua ma le lagi e mamā.

The 685s to the world! For those members of the House who do not know what 685 means, it is the calling code for Samoa, but it took the 682, the Cook Islands, to bring this bill to the House, I acknowledge. There’s only a couple of times we like losing to the Cook Islanders, but today we’ll give it to you, my brother.

Today is a historical day because we have seen the Labour Party support the Greens, we have seen Te Pāti Māori support the Greens, we have seen the ACT Party support the Greens—never thought I’d see this day—and I’ve seen New Zealand First support the Greens, support the bill. And that is a historical day because today rights the wrongs of what happened in the 1980s. Now, the unfortunate thing for me is I did not learn about our New Zealand history until I chose to learn it at university, and that is something wrong with our country, that something as remarkable as the stripping of citizenship rights for Samoan people who were born during a period where New Zealand administered them, was their Government, was removed through an Act of this House. There is no point paying homage to the wars that we fought in Samoa, and that plaque above the head of the Speaker, if we do not right the wrongs of the past.

And what we have seen is through community advocacy, through a simple and very humble woman, Falemaʻi Lesa, we have seen what is possible through the power of people. The Samoan people in this country are proud of our roots and of our homeland. We are proud that we are the third most spoken language in this country. We are proud that we are the fastest growing Pacific population in Aotearoa New Zealand. And yet, we have hidden a historical wrong which is finally brought to the House which this Labour Party wholeheartedly supports. And we want to thank those who have paved the path for this. We want to thank our elders, our mafukaga Ministers, Anae Arthur Anae, we want to thank auntie Paula, who keeps sending me emails to make sure that I support this bill, and all our aunties and uncles, when they tell you that you had better support this bill, we better support this bill because the punishment that happens in our community is harder than any punishment that we would ever experience in this House!

I also want to pay homage to the Wellington lawyer George Rosenberg who supported Falemaʻi Lesa during that court case. He understood the importance of why they had to test that. For me, my father would have fallen within the Samoan citizenship Act because he was born in Samoa in 1945, and there’s a lot of our generation—the generation just above mine—that would have fallen within these particular rules, had they been left in. But what has happened is that was removed and then, like my father and many other fathers and mothers who are here within the House today, they would have had to go through a process when, by right—by birthright—they were born in a time when New Zealand administered their country.

So I want to thank the people who have brought this here today. I want to thank the rest of the parties who are supporting this bill. I want to ensure that the generation that comes after me—the generation of our children who, again, are the fastest Pacific population in New Zealand—

Hon Carmel Sepuloni: Fastest growing, not fastest!

Hon BARBARA EDMONDS: Fastest growing—fastest growing. Well, actually, some of them are quite fast. The fastest-growing population—that they learn this history, not because we’ve had to bring it to the House but because New Zealand is going to teach its history in the schools. So that is the stage that we need to start pushing. But for tonight, we give our alofa and we celebrate what is a milestone of achievement. The 685s to the world, brought to you by the 682, but we take it. Fa‘afetai tele lava.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Firstly, I want to acknowledge the contributions that have been given on this debate so far from across the House. The first contribution given—and congratulations to the member for having his bill drawn from the biscuit tin. It is a tough feat to get one drawn, so congratulations and well done.

Listening to the debate this evening from across the House has been engaging. It’s been challenging on a personal level. It’s been thought provoking. It’s created an environment where people have felt safe to make their contributions to why they believe they should support or oppose the bill that is in front of us.

So I want to acknowledge, firstly, the bill being drawn and having it here debated today. I also quickly want to acknowledge those in the community that have joined us this evening. For many, first time ever coming to Parliament and experiencing the halls of power in New Zealand, welcome, welcome. We stand here to represent and work on behalf of you. We may not always get things right, we may not always achieve what we want to deliver on, but I want to acknowledge you being here and your presence. Thank you for making that effort to be here.

My colleague, Cameron Brewer, really outlined our party’s position on this bill in his excellent 10-minute contribution. But I do want to acknowledge what is glaringly obvious, that the bill has the support of the wider House. And so if the bill comes to the Governance and Administration Committee—I’m not sure yet which select committee the member is intending to nominate. If it does come to that select committee though—he’s nodding, he’s telling me yes; good man—then I look forward to the further discussions we’re going to have on the bill.

I look forward to understanding the perspectives that we’re going to be hearing on that select committee and the real-world implications that this bill may be having for people. And I appreciate the opportunity that those people will have at the select committee with the wider support that has been given across this House. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Aua le kovana e

Ua e fa’afiti

E te le iloaina

O se fanata’avili

A e molimau tamaiti

ma le afafine o Kilisi

O oe lava na e fa’apa e

le fanata’avili

“Oh Governor, you have lied. You say you don’t know whose machine gun it was, but the children and the daughter of Kilisi all bear witness that you alone pulled that trigger.”

I stand here today, I welcome our Samoan community, in particular our guest Fofoga Fetalai and delegation, those who are listening at home and offshore. I began my talanoa, my kōrero, with a song, a song that was written for the time, a historical account of Samoa’s Black Saturday, when Tupua Tamasese Lealofi III was martyred during a peaceful march against New Zealand’s and Great Britain’s rule of Samoa. That particular incident: there was a horrific shooting by New Zealand military police of the Mau independence demonstrators in Apia, Samoa. That particular day, 11 Samoans died, including the independent leader, Paramount Chief Tupua Tamasese Lealofi III, on Saturday, 28 December 1929. For the record, the Paramount Chief Tupua Tamasese Lealofi III was the great-grandfather of our former colleague Anae Neru Leavasa, former Labour MP for Takanini.

Madam Speaker, on the walls of this House are 12 carved, circular rimu memorial wreaths around the balcony, and just above your head bears the name of significant engagement involving New Zealand troops in World War I. It’s the memorial wreath and ribbon of Samoa’s name engraved in there. Many New Zealanders do not know or do not understand that New Zealand administered Samoa for 48 years, from 1914 to 1962. The New Zealand administration was worse than the German administration of Samoa, 1900 to 1914, and in 2002, the Rt Hon Helen Clark, former Prime Minister of New Zealand, gave a formal apology.

Madam Speaker, you have heard my colleagues traverse today’s bill, and I want to in particular thank Teanau Tuiono, and we remember our brother Fa’anānā Efeso Collins because we miss him. Madam Speaker, you’ve heard Carmel Sepuloni, deputy leader for the Labour Party. You’ve heard Barbara Edmonds, finance spokesperson for the Labour Party. We are the daughters of the descendants of Samoa. We support this bill, the Labour Party supports this bill, and I want to thank the other parties for their support, that they support this bill to the select committee process.

I want to call and challenge the National Government. I want to call on you because you need to reconsider your position for this bill. Our Samoans have been in this country for decades. We are asking for your support that you would hear, through the select committee—Samoans need to have their say. Many Samoans have served this country for many, many decades, and what legacy do we want to leave for our young people, the future of tomorrow?

So those are the points that I wanted to raise. As you’ve heard, as you can see, the Samoan community is here in force. You’ve heard Barbara talk about “685 to the world”, because it’s not just them up there; there’s a whole global audience listening to us. Madam Speaker, I really do thank you for the opportunity. I want to acknowledge all of our colleagues that are here from the Labour Party to support this bill through to the next stage. So, Madam Speaker, I finish off those words, and I thank you. Fa‘afetai tele mo le avanoa manuia.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. A really special moment to speak this evening on this bill, and I will just try and keep my time a little shorter so that we can get the final speech in before dinner because I think it’s important that we honour and acknowledge the guests and not have them have to come back. So I’m just going to try and condense this, if that’s OK with the House, in respect of our guests here, and, look, I love Samoa. They gave us Tana Umaga and Jerry Collins; how could we not love this country? I had the pleasure of flying Jerry Collins in the back of my helicopter once and I can tell you he had the loudest and highest pitched scream I’ve heard in my life. But it was a real honour because they were two guys that I really looked up to in their heyday.

And I do want to acknowledge, you know, that it can be at times difficult to engage in a debate without getting too emotive and losing focus. You know, we talk about—and the member opposite mentioned—the wreath acknowledging Samoa. And on the one hand, I acknowledge that this was about opposing colonial rule and not wanting to put one country and their occupation and their rights of citizenship—but also the responsibilities that came with it—above another country. And yet, it was also done when New Zealand went in, in 1914, as was just mentioned—it was done without firing a shot; it was completely peaceful. And isn’t it appropriate that we can have this discussion and, as it no doubt moves through to select committee and wherever it may go from there, that we can bring different perspectives, that we can have these conversations, but we don’t have to be firing shots at each other. It’s actually OK to tease out some of these ideas and to use the parliamentary processes we have to work through this and to talk about these things.

I note that what this bill does is restore citizenship not to those in more recent times from Samoa, not to those who were living in New Zealand—because they always had it, and even in 1982 their citizenship was, of course, protected if they were living in New Zealand. But the specific date period is nothing actually to do with New Zealand’s colonial trusteeship, as it was known at the time of Samoa, but it’s actually around being a British subject; it’s not about New Zealand. And so I think we do need to think through this thing. We’re giving New Zealand citizenship in response to British citizenship. So it’s actually not quite as simple as maybe some of the emotive arguments bring out.

I do think it’s important that we consider exactly why it is, without just getting into the kind of Russian doll of “the Privy Council said this, but then that Government said this and now we’re going back to the other one.” So I think there are some complex issues to go through if we want to genuinely look at these issues. Are we looking at the colonial rules, are we looking at the old citizenship, or are we looking at what is best for New Zealand, which is ultimately what this House has the responsibility for doing?

So, with that, and in view of the time, I’ll end my contribution here. I do again just want to acknowledge all those that have spoken before and those that have come to tautoko—support—this bill tonight.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Fa‘afetai tele lava to all the members of the House who have engaged with the debate today. Also, I want to once again say thank you to all the community members for coming to Parliament, and to emphasise that this Parliament is your Parliament—this is your place, this is the people’s place, as well. And, once again, to recognise, acknowledge the Speaker of the House of the Samoan Parliament and the Samoan members of Parliament that are here with us today, and people from the High Commission.

Thank you to those members that understood the intent of the bill. Fairness is at the heart of the bill. It’s very simple: we had a group of New Zealand citizens who had their citizenship recognised, and then they had their citizenship removed by statute. It’s just unfair, plain and simple. States should not be able to remove citizenship wholesale like this. It is just not the right thing to do.

I just wanted to address some of the comments from the National Party. I hope that when this comes to the select committee, they will engage with it in an open mind—that they will engage with this topic in a way that the community needs those stories to be heard. As they were speaking, I was actually reflecting on the powerful debate that we had when the Dawn Raids apology was moving through this House. I reflect on the words of the then National Party leader Judith Collins, where she actually talked about this bill. One of the points that she said, and that I agreed with, is perhaps it would have been better if the National Party and the Labour Party both did the ifoga, because during that time period the Dawn Raids happened through both Governments as well. So it is in that spirit I invite the National Party to engage in this.

I do also want to emphasise that this is automatic eligibility for a citizenship by grant, which we could and we should talk about. What are the parameters of what that grant could look like? Because I do take that point and acknowledge that point that has been shared by members and also within the media as well: we don’t want to be enabling mass migration. This is a call for the Samoan Government. It is something that should be done bilaterally, between Governments. But what we can do is provide a pathway for citizenship for those elders who had their citizenship taken away from them unjustly and acknowledge that some of them are here tonight.

I want to acknowledge the comments from my relatives in the Labour Party—I was going to say “Samoan party”; maybe I can tonight, right?—and thank them for their comments. I was reflecting on the history that Lemauga shared, about history that New Zealand should know about—because it is not just Samoan history; it is our history. If we really learn about that history, we can get this relationship right, we can get this relationship well, because that is what we need as a region. We need to understand the history. It is a painful history, but it is something that we must unravel. It is something that we must deal with.

There are things that we do well and I think we should continue to do well, and that is that relationship diplomacy. There are tensions here, political tensions in the Pacific, and we can navigate that well when we do relationship diplomacy. This bill is relationship diplomacy. If we treat the elders of Samoa with respect and dignity, and offer a pathway of citizenship back here to Aotearoa New Zealand, that is good for Aotearoa and good for Samoa and, ultimately, good for our region. Fa‘afetai tele lava. Meitaki ranuinui—682 to 685. I commend this bill to the House.

The question is, That the Restoring Citizenship Removed by Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill be considered by the Governance and Administration Committee.

Members, the House is suspended until 7.30 p.m.

Sitting suspended from 6.03 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.