Yates Dianne: New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill — First Reading 
Yates Dianne: New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:641;Page:10867] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the New Zealand Geographic Board (Nga Pou Taunaha o Aotearoa) Bill. It is very interesting that this bill replaces an Act that goes back to 1946. This bill is about the naming of names and I think that that is very very important. Most times when I come down to Parliament we fly around New Plymouth and we fly past Mount Taranaki. I notice that from time to time pilots talk about Mount Egmont and I think “Taranaki”. Where is this name from how did it change how does this process of change go how are names registered and how do we come to use names? 
I note tonight Mr Assistant Speaker that you have been very careful in your use of Maori language and Maori names. We have just had Maori Language Week and I must commend Radio New Zealand also on its use of Maori language in Maori Language Week and I note that it is continuing that use. 
It is very important to New Zealand that as this bill says we name names in New Zealand to indicate what places are about. This bill is not coming before my select committee but I note that in my select committee we had a bill called the Geographical Indications (Wine and Spirits) Registration Bill where we dealt with where wines come from what wines are named and how they are named in terms of export and so on. Our names in New Zealand are very very important. It is important that we get them right it is important that there is a process and it is important that there is public consultation. 
This bill does three things in that it repeals and replaces the old Geographic Board it extends the board’s jurisdiction as we have said to New Zealand’s continental shelf and it recognises the Treaty of Waitangi responsibility in the context of official geographical names. What is in a name? Everything is in a name and the names we use for things are extremely important as is the effort we go to in New Zealand to get things right. I have noticed recently that new schools in my area have been named and people have gone to a great deal of trouble to do research on the area that the school services and on who owned the land previously and what the names were. People have gone to a great deal of trouble not only in the naming of the name but in following up on the tradition of that name so that it carries on in the name of the school the name of the place or the name of the street and so on. 
I note as we have said that the bill will help to ensure that place naming will reflect who we are as a nation. I remember going on a trip to the Pacific where somebody asked me what a tui was—what was the meaning of that New Zealand word “tui”? I explained that it was a bird and the questioner said that that was interesting because he had just bought a piece of land and had dug up a whole lot of tins that all had the word “Tui” on them. He was quite impressed that the tui was not just a can of beer but also the name of a bird. That piece of land—I think it was in Vanuatu—was then going to be called “Tui” and the farm was going to be called “Tui”. The tradition had been carried on from soldiers who were there during World War II. So traditions do carry on. We can look around the walls of this House and see place names and they are place names that are very significant to New Zealanders. 
It is important that we have a geographic board and that the naming of names occurs in the way the bill intends. As we have said the bill extends the board’s jurisdiction to cover the continental shelf and it recognises responsibility in relation to the Treaty. 
The bill also mentions—and I am very pleased with this—the public consultation process. That is very important in New Zealand. There have been some tremendous arguments about names of places and about changes in names and it is very important that we get that sorted out. The bill enables the public to have access to the record of official geographic names. The bill also ensures that board membership gives a better representation of people who are involved in this process. It provides for more transparent board accountability. I think these elements are true of what we are seeing now with legislation. Not only are we feeling proud of New Zealand’s processes in forming legislation but more and more we are involving more people and having more public consultation. We are ensuring greater democracy when people are involved in the naming of geographic places. 
 I note now that some places have dual names which recognise the official languages of New Zealand. For example we have Aoraki / Mount Cook. As I mentioned in respect of Taranaki we have a greater recognition in many cases of the original names that were used by people and have significance to the culture and the history of this country. 
I thank the Minister and the officials involved for the formulation of this legislation. I am sure that it will be a very interesting process for the select committee to look into the implications of the bill and I am sure there will be some very interesting submissions on this bill about the history of naming. 
In looking at the introductory summary of the bill that I have before me I see that it refers to Aoraki / Mount Cook. I notice that so often now when we look around the country we see that things have two names. There is an interesting television ad about who we are which shows No. 1 bridge No. 2 bridge No. 3 bridge and so on. The ad says that New Zealanders are very economical with names. We are also very concerned to have names that people recognise names that are significant and names that recognise who we are and our history. I look forward to the progress of this bill through the House.