Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill

I move, That the Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill be now read a second time.

On 17 December 2025, Mr Stafford, the trustees of Te Here-ā-Nuku Trust, and the Crown signed an agreement to settle the long-running private law Stafford v Attorney-General litigation, also known as the “Nelson Tenths” case. This bill gives effect to aspects of that agreement. The primary purpose of the bill is to provide for the transfer of legal title to the trust land from the Crown to the new trustees of Te Here-ā-Nuku Trust. The bill also provides for arrangements so that some trust land may continue to be used for conservation, reserve, education, or other Government purposes. Importantly, the bill puts the settlement of Mr Stafford’s litigation further beyond doubt.

The bill has now been reported back to the House from the Finance and Expenditure Committee, and I would like to thank the committee for its careful consideration of the bill and the submitters who shared their views with the committee. I’d also like to thank the indulgence of the House for the relatively short time-frame that the bill was at the committee and thank all members for the generosity of spirit that’s been shown and making sure that we can expedite the bill to get this into law. The committee received and considered 333 written submissions and heard oral evidence from 15 submitters: 275 were in support of the bill, and 51 indicated full or partial opposition.

Some key themes that I’m advised were discussed in the committee: the intergenerational opportunity the settlement provides, in terms of reconnection of people to place; the importance of settling an injustice, given the issue’s long history and its passage through the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal for over 40 years; and the opportunity to realise the original promise and vision of the Nelson Tenths, including for the benefit of the wider region. The issues raised by people in opposition to the bill related, I’m advised, largely to issues already settled by either the High Court or the resolution agreement—for example, the role of the High Court in supervising the trust and the affected areas of Abel Tasman National Park. Based on the submissions and the advice received, the committee did not recommend changes along the lines of these submissions against the bill.

However, in addition to minor and technical amendments, the committee has suggested a certain number of changes to improve the clarity and effect of certain components of the bill. For example, there was ongoing uncertainty about the ongoing ownership of water infrastructure installed on trust land. The committee has recommended amendments to clause 114 to make it clear that Tasman District Council will continue to own this infrastructure, and I thank the diligent work of the committee for that.

I should also say, for the benefit of the House, just this evening I signed out an Amendment Paper—well, it’s not an Amendment Paper; I understand it’s going to be a tabled amendment made on the floor of the House on Thursday. It’s one very minor clarificatory matter that was not, I understand, picked up during the select committee process. I assure the House that it is a minor matter, and they’ll be able to see on Thursday, when, I understand, we’re going to consider the committee stage.

Can I also say there were very good-spirited engagements made in the select committee, and I want to thank all the members for, as I said earlier, the generosity of spirit that everyone has shown in relation to this legislation.

I’m intending to say a little bit more in the third reading around this quite extraordinary story, actually, in New Zealand history. My understanding is there will be a delegation from the Nelson Tenths there for the third reading, when that occurs, and I’m looking forward to spending a bit of time with them.

In the meantime, I want to commend the bill to the House and also thank the Finance and Expenditure Committee for their hard work.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I’m pleased to take a call on the Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill at its second reading. I do so as the member for Nelson and as someone who knows just how deeply this bill matters to people across Whakatū and the wider Te Tau Ihu region. Labour supports this bill, and I’m proud to speak in support of it today. Can I acknowledge and thank the Attorney-General and his predecessor, the Hon Judith Collins, for ensuring this bill could come to this House this term. I want to acknowledge Ngā Uri, the descendants of the customary owners of the Nelson Tenths land. I acknowledge the generations who have carried this kaupapa, who have held on to the history, who have pursued the legal arguments, who have kept faith with one another, and who have continued to insist that a promise made must be a promise honoured.

This is a bill about land, but it is not only a bill about land; it is about trust. It is about the obligations of the Crown. It is about the relationship between people and whenua. It is about the consequences that flow when an agreement is not honoured, and the long journey required to put that right.

The history of the Nelson Tenths goes right back to the establishment of the Nelson settlement. The understanding was that one-tenth of the land would be reserved for the benefit of the customary owners. Pā, urupā, and cultivation areas were also to be excluded from the sale. Commissioner William Spain’s 1845 award reflected that undertaking, with 15,100 acres to be reserved from the 151,000 acres granted for the settlement, but that is not what happened. The full reserves were not set aside. Occupation lands were not properly protected. By 1850, the Tenths lands amounted to only a fraction of what had been promised. When that happened, the consequences were not simply historical or technical; they were real. They affected economic opportunity. They affected cultural connection. They affected the ability of whānau to maintain their relationship with land, with identity, and with place across generations.

For decades, the descendants continued to seek recognition of what was promised and what was withheld. That persistence eventually led to the long-running Stafford v Attorney-General litigation, often referred to as “the Nelson Tenths case”. In 2024, the High Court found that about 3,250 hectares of Crown-owned land in Nelson, Tasman Bay, and Golden Bay was held by the Crown on trust for the descendants of the former owners. In 2025, the court removed the Crown as trustee, and appointed replacement trustees.

The purpose of this bill is quite specific. It provides the statutory mechanism needed to transfer legal title and the relevant lands from the Crown, as former trustee, to the trustees of Te Here-ā-Nuku Trust. In plain language, this bill helps give practical effect to what the court found and to what the parties have agreed.

That point is important because people sometimes, understandably, ask “What kind of bill is this?” I want to be clear: this bill is not a Treaty settlement bill; it arises from private law litigation, trust law, and a binding resolution agreement. It does not change who the beneficiaries are. It does not rewrite the history. It transfers legal title to the trustees appointed to hold and manage the land and assets for those beneficiaries.

For my constituents, one of the obvious questions is: what does this mean for the places we know, love, and use? We are talking about places that are part of everyday life in our region: Tōtaranui, Kaiteriteri, Te Waikoropupū Springs, Milnthorpe, the Boulder Bank, and areas associated with Abel Tasman National Park and the coastal track. These are places people visit, where people work, where volunteers contribute, where conservation work happens, and places that are central to the identity of Te Tau Ihu. It matters that the bill provides arrangements for land that may continue to be used for conservation or reserve purposes. It matters that it provides for public access and continuity of management, and it matters that the public can have confidence that recognising the proper legal position of the trust lands does not mean turning away from the conservation, recreation, and community values that people in Nelson and Tasman care about so deeply. I particularly want to acknowledge the trustees for the good faith in which they’re approaching this important matters in our community.

I want to acknowledge the work of the Finance and Expenditure Committee, and it was a pleasure to sit alongside them for some of the consideration of this bill. The bill was considered carefully and was recommended unanimously that it be passed with amendments. Importantly, for my community, the report deals in some detail with the Te Here-ā-Nuku parkland within Abel Tasman National Park. The select committee heard concern from some submitters about the effects the bill may have on public access to, and enjoyment of, parts of the Abel Tasman National Park.

The select committee noted in their report, and I quote in full, “We wish to emphasise that Part 3 requires the Trust to enter a licence with the Department of Conservation to enable the continued operation of the Abel Tasman National Park for a minimum of 25 years. Towards the end of the 25-year period, there will be a review of access and licensing arrangements. We also note that the Court has found that this land has always belonged to the trust, and that this is not similar to a ‘Treaty settlement’ as has been suggested in some public commentary.”

When a promise like that of the Nelson Tenths is not honoured, the impact does not sit neatly in the past; it is carried by descendants. It shapes opportunity, wealth, belonging, identity, and trust in institutions. This is why this bill matters. It is not simply a technical transfer of legal title. It is Parliament doing its part to give practical effect to justice, and it has been a very long time coming.

I want to acknowledge Rore Stafford and all those involved in the Nelson Tenths case. I acknowledge the whānau and the generations of Ngā Uri who carried this kaupapa over many years and through many setbacks. I acknowledge the trustees of Te Here-ā-Nuku Trust, who will carry significant responsibility for these lands and assets into the future. As the member for Nelson, I see this bill through the lens of my community. Whakatū is a place of layered history. It is a place where people care deeply about the natural environment, public access, local jobs, tourism, recreation, heritage, and our relationships with mana whenua. For our region to move forward well, we need honesty about what happened, certainty about what happens next, and a willingness to keep working together in good faith.

The transfer of title to Te Here-ā-Nuku Trust will create the foundation for that. It will enable the trustees to act for the beneficiaries. It will also create opportunities for constructive partnership with councils, conservation agencies, community groups, businesses, and all those who care about the future of Te Tau Ihu. That is the work that comes next, and it is work that will require care, respect, and ongoing engagement.

No bill can undo every loss. It cannot restore every opportunity that was taken; it cannot return every generation that carried the burden of breach; but this House can act now. We can uphold the law; we can give effect to the agreement reached; we can ensure that title is transferred to the proper trustees, and we can do so in a way that provides certainty for beneficiaries and for the wider community.

That is the responsibility before us today. It is the responsibility to recognise the history, to respect the court’s findings, to implement the resolution agreement, and to provide a clear and workable path forward. For Nelson and for Te Tau Ihu, this is important legislation. For Ngā Uri, it represents another step in a long journey towards the honouring of a promise that should have been honoured from the beginning. For those reasons, it is my immense privilege to commend the Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. We understand there is a desire to complete this bill, this second reading, before 10 p.m. so that we may have an opportunity to pass it in completion when Te Here ā Nuku will be in the House for the committee of the whole House and the third reading. I will abide by that desire in so far as we are unanimous as a House in wishing to see this resolved quickly, given the nearly 200 years it has taken.

It was 1839 and 1841 when the New Zealand Company, as part of their settlement strategy, planned or promised one-tenth of the land that they sought to settle: 151,000 acres would be set aside to the iwi, ngā uri, for their customary use. And it has taken until this year for the courts to make it clear to the Crown that the Crown has been holding that remnant land—in fact, only a portion of the tenth; not the whole 10 percent—in trust on behalf of Te Here ā Nuku, and it has now been returned to them.

I participated in the hearings, though it doesn’t appear in the commentary that I did—I did; I swear to God! I heard submissions and asked questions. I want to raise a couple of things that came up through that submissions process. One of them was that there were people who expressed their concerns, such as Ngāti Rārua, that there would be impacts on existing Treaty settlements, as in the 2014 one. Sitting on the Māori Affairs Committee, we know that it is a perennial challenge with settlements that there are invariably overlapping interests. This is part of the imperfect nature of the settlement process. This is not a settlement, of course—it is a resolution decreed by the courts—but it has some of the similar problems. In supporting this, we hope that there is a good-faith maintenance of a relationship with Te Here ā Nuku and other Māori in the area who have interest in the rohe and the parts of land and areas that are within the Nelson Tenths grouping.

There was also concerns about the Abel Tasman National Park—bits of it, rightly, being returned to Te Here ā Nuku. The likes of Nick Smith was concerned at the risk to Abel Tasman’s contiguous character, and he reflected the idea that it would not be a good idea to return the land and would be better to keep it in Department of Conservation control. I feel that it is not only the right thing to return the land but also there is a presumption that might be wrongly stated that, somehow, the conservation values might not be better preserved under the guidance and management and ownership of Te Here ā Nuku. Indeed, I think we could rightly assume that—whereby it could not be overruled by an Act of a Government that decided to open up 60 percent of the conservation estate to mining, for example—it might be better protected in the control of iwi.

Fish & Game also made the point that they have been on the site since 1966 and have built an office building there. They acted in good faith, they support this resolution, but through the Crown’s—for want of a better term; I think, though, this is the correct term—error, they have been caught out, though they have acted in good faith. I think it’s appropriate that we should support that the Crown compensates them for the value of the asset between $700,000 and $800,000 so that they are not unfairly impacted by what is, frankly, a Crown error in not understanding that it was holding that land in trust.

I will leave it at that point to keep it to five minutes, so that we can make sure that this is dealt with swiftly and there be no further delay in the completion of this bill, and that justice is done for Te Here ā Nuku and those who have made this claim. Indeed, we commend this bill to the House.

ACT will be supporting the Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill. This bill, basically, deals with an agreement already reached following the Stafford v Attorney-General litigation, in which the court actually found that this land was already being held in trust. It is a case founded in private property rights. ACT believes in those, and I commend the bill to the House.

I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to support the Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill to the House. The Finance and Expenditure Committee was unanimous, and I’ve got say it was a pleasure working with everybody on the select committee to reach this end.

Steve Abel: Tell them I was there, David!

Dr DAVID WILSON: Yes, you were there! Ha, ha! I’ll start again: this is a moment that transcends the party lines in the House today, and when historical errors are laid bare by our highest courts, we have the maturity as a nation to correct them. This is entirely human. It’s about resolution. It’s about property rights. It’s about justice. But, most of all, it’s about trust. We commend this bill to the House.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): The next call is a split call.

Tēnā rā koe e te Pīka, otirā tēnā rā tātou e te Whare. E tū ana ahau hei karere mō Te Pāti Māori i te pō nei. E tautokotia ana tēnei o ngā pire, Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill. Waihoki kua rongo kōrero me ngā tohutohu kia tere, kia kakama ki te kōrero i ngā kōrero mō tēnei o ngā pire kia pāhi rā anō tēnei pire i mua rā anō i te tekau karaka i te pō nei. Nō reira, arā ka whakarongo ai ki ngēnei o ngā tohutohu, ki ngēnei o ngā kōrero.

E tautoko ana mātou, Te Pāti Māori, i tēnei pire nā runga anō i te mea kua whai wāhi tēnei pire ki te whakahoki i te whenua Māori i roto i te whare kōti. Ehake i te mea kua tau atu i roto i ngā take raupatu, ngā kerēme raupatu o te Whare Miere, o te Whare Kāwanatanga. Me te kaha tautoko a komiti whakahaere katoa i tēnei o ngā pire, ka tahi.

Ka rua, i roto i tēnei o ngā pire ko te āheinga o Te Papa Atawhai kia haere tonu me ngā rātou mahi mō ngā tau 25, neke atu. Nā reira e whakamānawa ana, e tuku whakawhētai atu ana ki ngā hapū, ngā iwi maha o Te Tauihu-o-te-waka-a-Māui, nā rātou tēnei o ngā kerēme, arā Te Here ā Nuku pire. Waihoki ki te kimi rautaki, te kimi rauemi pēwhea te whakahoki i te whenua Māori i roto i ngā whare kōti e tautokotia ana e te Kāwanatanga, ka tahi. E tautokotia ana hoki e te Komiti Whakahaere i tēnei o ngā pire, me ngā kōrero taunaki a Te Pāti Māori i tēnei pō.Tēnā koe e te Pīka.

[Thank you, Madam Speaker; indeed, greetings to us all in the House. I stand as a messenger for the Māori Party tonight. This particular bill, Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill, is supported. Furthermore, we have heard the comments and the instructions to quickly and expeditiously express our comments regarding this particular bill so that this bill ultimately passes prior to 10 o’clock tonight. Therefore, we will take heed of these instructions and these statements.

We, the Māori Party, support this bill due to the fact that it has the opportunity to return Māori land within the courts. It is not the case that it has been settled in confiscation cases or confiscation claims of the Beehive, of the Executive Wing. This particular bill is strongly supported unanimously by the select committee, firstly.

Secondly, within this bill is the ability of the Department of Conservation to continue their work for 25 years or more. Therefore, I acknowledge and offer thanks to the many hapū and iwi of the north of the South Island to whom this claim belongs, that is, the Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill. Furthermore, to seek strategies and resources for how Māori land might be returned within the courts that are supported by the Government. This particular bill is also supported by the select committee, with the supportive statements of the Māori Party tonight. Thank you, Madam Speaker.]

Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Tēnei rā te reo tautoko o te Rōpū Kākāriki i tēnei pire mō ngā uri o Te Tauihu-o-te-waka. Koia nei tētahi mea nui i te utu i ngā hara o ngā mahi a ngā tūpuna i tērā rautau. He uri tēnei nō roto o Ngāti Koata, he uri nō Kāwharu e mihi atu ana ki a Pāpā Rore mō āna mahi nui kua oti hei pīkau i ēnei o ngā taimahatanga mō ngā uri whakaheke, otirā mō ngā tūpuna. Me te mōhio ki ngā mahi a te Kāwanatanga, he mea pupuri, engari kua tae ki te wā kia hoki.

Nō reira, nā runga anō i te tautoko a te Rōpū Kākāriki i tēnei kaupapa, me tā mātou kaupapahere o te hoki whenua Māori. Riro whenua atu, e tika ana kia hoki whenua mai. Me wētahi o ngā rawa, wētahi pūtea hei tautoko i ngā hiahia me ngā wawata o ngā iwi.

Otirā te mihi atu ki ngā mema Pāremata katoa nei o tēnei Whare e tautoko ana i tēnei kaupapa nui. He tauira tēnei nā te mea ētahi atu o ngā rohe e kite ana i te wāwāhi o te whenua mō te tekau paihēneti, engari kahore e tukungia ana ki te iwi ki te noho, ki te whakatupu whānau ki te whenua hoki.

Kua riro, engari tēnei tauira he mea whakahoki. Nō reira waku whakaaro e pā ana ki tēnei, me ako tātou. Me ako, me whai whakaaro tātou e pā ana ki ēnei mahi a te Kamupene o Niu Tīreni, otirā o ngā kāwanatanga o tērā rautau, oti noa ki tēnei tau tonu. Kua kapi katoa te kaupapa ināianei ki runga i te tika me te pono.

Kua pono ngā mahi a te iwi mō tētahi wā roa, te haere ki te Kōti Teitei, te tohe tonu ki te Kāwanatanga kia hoki mai, ā, kua tae ki te wā kia kite te mana o tēnei Whare ki te whakatikatika i ēnei hara o ēnei o ngā tau tonu nei. Nō reira e mihi atu ana ki te Whare. Kia ora.

[Thank you, Mr Speaker. This is the voice of support of the Green Party for this bill for the descendants of the northern South Island. This is an important event in the resolution of the sins of the actions of the ancestors last century. I am a descendant of Ngāti Koata, a descendant from Kāwharu, who now thanks Pāpā Rore for the great work that he has done to carry these particular burdens for the descendants to come, indeed, for the ancestors. Knowing the actions of the Government, it was to retain possession of this land, but the time has come for its return.

Therefore, the Green Party supports this initiative, with our policy of returning Māori land. Should land be lost, it is only fair that it be returned—and with some of the resources, the funding, to support the hopes and dreams of the iwi.

Indeed, I acknowledge all the members of Parliament of this House who support this important initiative. This is an example, because other regions are seeing the division of the land for the 10 percent, but it is not being offered to the iwi to live and grow families on the land.

It has been lost, but this example is one of return. Therefore, my thoughts regarding this are that we need to learn. We need to learn and consider these actions of the New Zealand Company, indeed, of the Governments of that century, right up to this year. The topic has been well covered now, in fairness and honesty.

The actions of the iwi have been conducted in good faith for a long time, going to the High Court, continuing the struggle against the Government so that the land is returned, and we have arrived at the time to observe the power of this House to correct these sins of those very years. Therefore, I acknowledge the House. Thank you.]

Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. He hōnore nui ki te tū ki te tautoko i Te Here ā Nuku.

[Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is a great honour to stand and support Te Here ā Nuku.]

Kia ora. That was very quick. Sorry, Mr Speaker—you know, they give such wonderful contributions that I miss them sometimes, so my apologies.

I’m just very pleased that we’re able to get through this, because people have been waiting for so long—nearly 200 years. I suppose one of the things that always stands out for me with this type of kaupapa—and I’m sure it stands out for others in the House—is there’s always the presumption that Māori will muck it all up. I noticed that with Nick Smith, the mayor, who came across and said, “Oh, you know, we’ve got some concerns”—wasn’t it?—“in terms of Abel Tasman park.” and all that sort of stuff, and “Is it really a great idea to return things”—the land—“to those Māoris?” It irritates me very much that we are always put in that type of position in regard to this type of kaupapa, particularly when you’ve had such a vigilant and strong representation down there.

I was listening to Rachel over here, outlining the history—and such a long and sad history—in regard to this kaupapa. The commitment from the people—Rore Stafford has just been one of the most amazing kaumātua, I think, we’ve seen in the last couple of generations. His vigilance, his persistence, his passion in terms of advancing this kaupapa with his people through the various Governments, is an example to everyone.

I don’t want to hold this up too much tonight, and I certainly want to have a good kōrero about it in the third reading. Like everyone else in the House, I want to mihi to those who submitted, but I make that comment because it really did irk me that here we have a tenth of that land that was reserved for the original owners 200 years ago, so betrayed by various Governments through the years—in the end, getting a reasonable settlement that was practical and pragmatic for these times. People might think of $400 million as, like, out of this world, but if you really looked at the economic loss, and if you looked at what they would be due, you would see that—as people would know on both sides of the House—they would be due in the billions in terms of compensation.

What you have here is a pragmatic solution, and you also have Māori not wanting to wreck the country economically in terms of taking billions and billions of dollars. So I mihi to the crew down there. I also say to New Zealanders that they should be grateful to Te Here ā Nuku for the way they have traversed this, progressed this, worked in tandem with the local community, and worked in tandem with politicians on both sides of the House. It’s a tribute to them and to their people.

The question will be what happens in terms of the settlement. As I think people have pointed out, this is not a Treaty settlement, but it is certainly recognition and compensation for one of the biggest injustices—I think we would all recognise that has happened—with a people in history. The loss is always the same: the generational loss in terms of language, in terms of opportunity, in terms of living in the area. In every settlement—although this is not a Treaty settlement, but in every compensation area, you see a whole generation affected by what the Government did. What Governments did in this case was totally ignore the original settlement—totally ignore the original settlement. That’s why I’m pleased and I’m proud that we, as a Parliament, have been able to come together, but also we should come together too and reject the type of nonsense we get when people say, “Oh, you know, let’s hope everything is safe now because it’s going under Māori settlement and into Māori hands.”

I just want to leave it there and come back in the third reading and talk about it more in depth. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Kia ora anō tātou katoa.

Tēnā koe e te Pīka. It’s been a real privilege to be part of this kaupapa in the Finance and Expenditure Committee, and I commend it to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill becoming law will actually conclude one of New Zealand’s longest-running Māori land and trust law disputes. It will mark the end of a 180-year struggle and 17 years of court proceedings over broken land promises that were made back in the 1840s.

I wasn’t on the Finance and Expenditure Committee that considered this bill, but I’ve read the report and understand that these disputes stem from arrangements that were made during the establishment of the Nelson settlement back in the 1840s, when Māori customary owners were promised a tenth of the settlement lands for their benefit. Over time, there were various disputes that arose as to whether the commitments had been honoured, whether land that was held by the Crown remained subject to ongoing trust obligations. Then there was a landmark Supreme Court ruling in 2017 that found that the Crown owed legal duties to the descendants of the original Nelson Tenths owners, and that then cleared the path for further litigation. This led to subsequent High Court rulings, both in 2024 and 2025, which then paved the way for the resolution agreement that was signed in December last year.

This legislation enables legal title to be transferred from the Crown to the Te Here ā Nuku Trust, and I, as others have as well, just want to acknowledge Rore Stafford for the commitment that he’s shown throughout this process, and also acknowledge the trustees of Te Here ā Nuku Trust, who will now carry on his vision and legacy as well.

I want to just make quick mention of some of the land that submitters have made mention of through the select committee process, because this will transfer legal title to some of Nelson and Tasman’s best-known and well-loved places, including land within the Abel Tasman National Park, Tōtaranui, and Kaiteriteri Recreation Reserve.

I will just quickly reiterate the point that Rachel Boyack made as well: that much of the land is currently managed by the Department of Conservation and agreements will ensure that the public have continued access through lease agreements—at least a 25-year agreement—that will guarantee public access through many of those parts as well. With that, I commend this bill to the House.

It’s been a great privilege to consider this bill on the Finance and Expenditure Committee. I appreciate the different views that have been shared across the House this evening, so I commend it to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a true privilege to stand and speak at the second reading of the Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill. There are times in this House when it really does feel like a huge privilege to speak in favour of legislation, and this is one of those times.

It was just over a month ago that we had the first reading of the bill, and many of us gathered with descendants of the trust and the trustees, members of Crown Law, and members of the extended whānau just across the road at the National Library. Members of the whānau and descendants of the trust talked about how we got to the point of settlement, which was incredibly powerful. We then went around, the small group of us who were there, and spoke about why we were in the room. You got a true sense of the fact that it was the specific people who were involved in getting towards settlement that got us there. That includes the trustees, but it also includes the Crown Law Office, and certainly the current Attorney-General, but I have to mention the former Attorney-General, the Hon Judith Collins, because I genuinely believe that without her tenacity, there wouldn’t have been a settlement at this stage.

There were also film recorders, video recorders, in the room. Some of the speakers spoke about the fact that the individuals who’d been recording them had been part of this journey as well. And while at this point we are speaking about the history of the case, for generations to come, many of the descendants will take forward what they’ve seen, and it’s really the future of this whenua that they have to look forward in, anchored in the work that Rore Stafford and the trustees have done to get us to this place.

The Finance and Expenditure Committee spent a fair amount of time considering submissions on this bill, and one of the parts of the bill that was spoken about a lot was Abel Tasman National Park, which is roughly 1,600 hectares of coastal land. It was through the submissions from the trustees in relation to this part that they talked about the delicate balance that had been achieved through the settlement—the balance between public access being preserved, the Department of Conservation’s (DOC’s) operational role being preserved, a framework for genuine partnership beyond the licensing period also being there into the future of the whenua. The committee also examined the wider practical scope of the transfer of land, including the complexities relating to schools and kindergartens, relating to community facilities, to roads and, interestingly, relating to dwellings that lay partially within the land—and I won’t say it was being returned, because it always belonged to those descendants—and partially outside of that land. They—we—acknowledge, clause by clause, the solutions that we have to put in place when it comes to the complexities of those joint uses.

Another tension I did want to mention was the tension between thoroughness and timeliness. I mentioned we were here just over one month ago, referring the bill to select committee for a shortened period of time, and ordinarily that’s something that I object to, because I do like to see things go through a full select committee process, but that has to be weighed against the reality that the committee knew that the dispute had already run for 17 years through the courts, and nearly two centuries, in terms of the disputes that originally arose. So in this case, delay is not neutral. We had also heard from members of the extended family—so from the descendants—the cost of going to litigation. It is not neutral. There’s a choice to be made, in terms of supporting litigation, that means that those descendants couldn’t put those finances toward other resources. So in this case, it was important that a shortened select committee process occurred, and I do think that regardless of that shortened period, the committee turned its mind very well to the issues at play.

In closing—because, like others, I would like to ensure that this bill gets through the second stage this evening—this is not a bill that will necessarily generate the kind of headlines that we sometimes see coming out of question time. It is, in its form, largely technical legislation, but it’s at a scale that most of us will never personally encounter in terms of land transfer or the recognition of land ownership. It gives legal form to a resolution that has already been reached outside this Chamber, but its significance is not technical at all. It closes a 180-year chapter in which a promise made to the customary owners of Nelson was broken almost immediately, and in which generations waited for that wrong to be acknowledged and corrected. I do commend this bill to the House and I look forward to committee stage, and then, finally, before the House rises this term, a third reading.

It is a privilege to commend Te Here ā Nuku (Nelson Tenths) Bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Teanau Tuiono): This bill is set down for committee stage next sitting day.

Crimes Amendment Bill

Legislative Statement