Flavell Te Ururoa: Standing Orders—Suspension 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Standing Orders—Suspension 
[Volume:630;Page:2197] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 I stand to discuss the suspension of Standing Order 261 to hasten through a fair bit of legislation that is encompassed within the Local Government Law Reform Bill. I appreciate the comments made by other members this afternoon but the Maori Party is a little bit concerned about the processes being used. The Maori Party stands for accountability and we take our responsibility very seriously as we stand up for the survival of Maori and to defend Maori rights for the benefit of the nation. We stand up for genuine progress as a nation—progress that is understood by all—for debate and dialogue being open and dynamic and for outcomes being reached that we can all have a part in. The Maori Party will encourage an opportunity for people to participate and for voices to be heard and to be involved in the laws of the land. 
I will take one issue to be included in this massive omnibus bill the Dog Control Act 1996. The aim of the legislation is to instantly identify dogs that are involved in attacks and picked up by dog control officers. More than 60000 dogs will need to be implanted with a microchip under the skin. Some might say “So what?”. Clearly the Prime Minister sees it as a critical issue proclaiming to the public that there is one law for all dogs. Immediately this morning the Taranaki Federated Farmers President Bryan Hocken challenged this direction stating that the Prime Minister will have a battle ahead of her. 
As this House will know the Maori Party always appreciates the wisdom of history and how it leads us into the future. Thinking about the Dog Control Act 1996 leads me to take us back in history to May 1898. At that time the Hokianga County Council in an effort to control the increasing dog population and its impact on the local farm stock at the time recommended that the dog tax of 2s 6d per dog apply to all dog owners. The people of the north were outraged at the imposition of the dog tax and the people of Waima refused to pay. They were threatened with arrest. Under the leadership of the Mahurehure chief Hone Toia they stood firm and continued to refuse to pay. They were threatened with being banished to other regions of the area. 
They then decided to march upon the county council at Rawene in a show of force to settle the matter. Reaction was swift and fierce. The Government sent out 120 members of the Permanent Force armed with two Nordenfeldt field guns two Maxim guns and the gunboat  
Torch 
. The women and children of Rawene were evacuated and back in Parliament the Northern Maori MP Hone Heke left Parliament in session and returned home to join other elders in an attempt to diffuse the situation. Eventually Mahurehure leaders laid down their arms and surrendered. They were arrested taken to Auckland for trial on the grounds of treason and imprisoned for a term in Mount Eden Prison. Hone Heke lost his parliamentary pay for the period of time he was absent. The dog tax remained in force. 
It is not the Crimes of Torture Amendment Bill that I am talking to at this point in time; this is just one element of the massive omnibus bill for which we are being asked to suspend Standing Order 261. When the Taranaki Federated Farmers president challenged the Prime Minister to battle it made me think again about Te Mahurehure. We must be transparent. We must look at all the issues that confront legislation. We must consider what Federated Farmers have to say just as we must listen to the Kennel Club the Veterinary Association the Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and all others who have an opinion on the matter. The only way we can do this is through a thorough and contestable process. We must not speed through the process as that could create further injustice. We hear this issue about one law for all—in this case as it applies to dogs. One law for all has been expanded in this motion to real extremes of meaning—that saying yes to one bill is saying yes to them all. It is a bit like buying a lucky dip ticket; we do not know what we are getting and the bag may not even have anything in it. 
As a matter of contrast perhaps we can compare this matter with another item in the motion on the Order Paper to do with the Local Government Law Reform Bill—the issues associated with rates. There are hefty issues for Maori associated with local body legislation. Maori have never really had a positive relationship with local government. The almost total absence of Maori representation at local government level has a long historic whakapapa. It remains one of the root causes of many of today’s difficulties amongst Maori communities in their struggle to determine and manage their own local affairs. To be fair to local bodies today there is a trend for central government to dump its Treaty of Waitangi obligations on to local bodies. The local bodies however did not sign the Treaty. Te Tiriti o Waitangi the Resource Management Act and the Local Government Act all give clarity to the notion of Crown obligations. The principles of respectful relationships good faith cooperation and information sharing models for tangata whenua representation and the need for effectiveness and efficiency in delivering resource management for the wider communities are all issues that need far greater discussion than this bill allows. 
We need to ask some fundamental questions about what use rates can be put to. One of the high-achieving kura Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Mana Tamariki in Manawatu this week embarks on a study tour to the internationally renowned early childhood centre in Reggio Amelia in Italy. The Maori Party congratulates in particular Brenda Soutar who is the inaugural recipient of a scholarship to study that centre. The centre is a distinctive example of local government dedicating a significant percentage of its rates revenue to fostering early childhood education. The centre stands as an example of innovation in the relationship between a local body the community it serves and the private and voluntary sectors of childcare provision. The philosophy behind that local government support is that priority is given to the early childhood sector; babies and young children are seen as the future. In encouraging these children to be critical thinkers it believes that it is laying the foundation for well-being and growth as a community. I use this example as an illustration of the type of use that our ratings revenue could be put to—initiatives that truly promote and reflect the foundation for genuine progress as a nation. 
 We in the Maori Party believe that the many amendments to bills encompassed within the Local Government Law Reform Bill are simply too enormous to be gathered together in the one sweeping motion before the House. The Crown’s current approach to working with the Treaty of Waitangi effectively marginalises Maori perspectives from debate and decision making. Local government directly affects the well-being of people the community and the land. Te Tiriti o Waitangi requires a more direct relationship between local government and mana tangata whenua. It is therefore critical that local government relates directly to Maori in terms of article 1 as well as articles 2 and 3 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. These are weighty issues. They are significant issues and they must not be sidelined or camouflaged within the omnibus bill foreshadowed in the motion before the House today. To this end the Maori Party will not support the motion.