Mark RonRON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First): I rise to speak on behalf of New Zealand First and to signal to the honourable member Catherine Delahunty that unfortunately—regretfully—we will not be supporting this bill. I thank the contribution from the honourable member on the other side of the Chamber Nuk Korako who gave some very good reasons. In fact I would have thought that came straight out of a New Zealand First handbook that speech—talking about equality one rule for all and all of those things. We will probably frame it and when that member applies to join the fastest-growing political movement in the nation we will drag it out on his candidature. I guess the thing I need to say is that it has been a bit of a day of contradictions has it not? We have a bill being put up by the Green Party that seeks to end the confiscation or the taking of land by the Crown under the Public Works Act and yet this is the same party that has sat there and wholly supported the Kermadec legislation which sees the Crown take a property right off Māori. Catherine Delahunty: Did you hear Metiria on the radio?RON MARK: And we have to say—it does not matter what the Green Party is saying right now I say in response to that little interjection. I sat in the select committee I saw the clause by clause voting and I have heard the rhetoric. People may wish to dance on a pinhead and adjust their position because politically it is proving to be an untenable position but it is totally contrary to the way we see things for a party to say that the Crown should not confiscate or take one more acre of land from Māori using the Public Works Act whilst at the same time endorsing the confiscation of a property right from Māori under the Kermadec legislation. This just does not match. It is like One of these things is not like the other". If I could put it more simply than that I would but that is as simple as I can put it. There is something else about the bill that smacks of a little bit of paternalism and a little bit of maternalism. You are coming down to Māori saying: "Look we'll do this for you make it all look better." The truth is that many of us who have been engaged in Treaty settlement negotiations—myself for 10 years plus for my iwi—have been dealing with these issues with the honourable Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for a long time. If I take the Wairarapa for example—there are numerous examples. In fact one of my own marae Hurunui o Rangi in the Carterton district—or the Taratahi district—had land taken off it for a road that was put through. Unfortunately what that did was it separated our marae from our urupā and they did not just take the strip they needed for the road; they took a whole lot more. The Minister is very familiar with this because he has had a tour through there. They did not take just the piece of land they needed for the road; they took more and then they kept it. They never offered it back after they had built the road. In fact they dug a big hole in it and used the aggregate out of that hole for roading then turned that hole into a rubbish dump which it still is to this very day. It needs cleaning up thank you very much. We have discussed these matters with the Minister we negotiated these matters as an iwi and we have come to what we believe will be a lasting and enduring settlement. We know that there are issues about the Public Works Act but if we are to redress that we should redress the fairness in the way settlements are made so that the Crown gives fair and proper compensation to those people who are having their land taken be they Māori Chinese Indian non-Māori Pākehā or whatever blend they might be. There should be one law across the whole of the nation in respect of this. It should not single out Māori; to do so stigmatises them demonises them and sets them up for criticism as receiving something special that other New Zealanders do not get. That is fundamentally wrong. Yes there are issues with the Public Works Act. Look at how the Public Works Act has been changed recently to enable affordable housing rather than offering the land back to the original owners: Hobsonville all these other properties—Ardmore. Look at Hood Aerodrome—that was sold off to the Masterton District Council for one dollar. That should have been offered back to its original owners the iwi. There are issues in there but let us deal with those issues in a sensible way rather than have a carte blanche solution such as this bill imposes that will be seen as inequitable—actually racist and separatist—and will not resolve the problem in the long run. Thank you very much."