Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:654;Page:3763] 
4.  
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: Has he received any advice on whether constitutional rights and obligations of partnership under the Treaty of Waitangi apply between the Crown and the mana whenua who gifted land on which Auckland City is built; if so what was that advice? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 No I have not received any such advice. However I note that the principle of partnership was first identified explicitly in the Waitangi Tribunal’s Manukau report 
in 1985 when the tribunal emphasised the obligation on both parties to act reasonably honourably and in good faith. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: How is the Government giving effect to those rights and responsibilities in the legislation to enable the new Auckland City governance arrangements? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: The first thing that the Government has done is to support the establishment of a special select committee which will consider the Auckland governance legislation. Everyone will have an opportunity to make submissions to it. There is also ongoing dialogue between the co-leaders of the Maori Party and the Government on this issue. The Prime Minister recently stated that nothing is off the table until the final legislation is drafted. This reflects the Government’s commitment to acting reasonably honourably and in good faith. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: How is it a matter of good faith not to have sought advice about such an important Treaty principle as partnership? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: The issues are tolerably clear as a result of all the reports on partnership that have been given by the Waitangi Tribunal over the years including the 2007 report which castigated that member’s Government for the sloppy way in which it had approached negotiations with Auckland iwi. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: In terms of local government reform and the application of the Treaty of Waitangi where does the change in Auckland governance derive its legitimacy from—constitutional law or democracy? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: That is virtually a non-question. The answer is that the legitimacy of local government comes from this House in that the Local Government Act was passed by this House. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was not the question. The question was in terms of the application of the principles of the Treaty to local government reform. Invite the Attorney-General to skite again and give us a decent answer! 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Points of order should not be made in that way. I believe that the Minister did answer the question. 
David Garrett 
: What level of representation on the Auckland Council if any does he believe the descendants of John Logan Campbell are entitled to by virtue of their ancestor’s gifts of land to the city in the past? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: My understanding is that those lands were the subject of a bequest by John Logan Campbell. I am not exactly certain of the details of the bequest but I have a feeling that they are somewhat different from the circumstances surrounding transactions involving Ngati Whatua. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Is the Government willing to establish a forum to be facilitated by the transition committee for the Crown and Auckland rohe rangatira to have dialogue on Auckland City governance based on the partnership principle of the Treaty of Waitangi; if not why not? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: The Government encourages dialogue between all parties and the select committee process is an example of that dialogue. I suppose yesterday’s hikoi was another form of dialogue between Maori and the Crown although I note that the Hon Shane Jones and the Hon Parekura Horomia chose to conduct their dialogue over the counter at McDonald’s.