Worth Richard: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Worth Richard: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:17179] 
RICHARD WORTH (National—Epsom) 
: 
 The Foreshore and Seabed Bill is one of those pieces of legislation that will raise incredibly the expectations of Maori only to see them dashed. It is appropriate in this call and I hope in the calls I will have as we move into the very late afternoon to talk briefly about the concept of what it is to be a Maori. It is not an issue that is easy to talk about; it is the sort of issue that strongly stirs people like Dover Samuels. But if we look at our community today we see it as one that is substantially intermingled and intermixed. 
In a constitutional setting the starting point—maybe the finishing point too—is the definition of Maori in the Electoral Act. “Maori” means a person of the Maori race of New Zealand and includes any descendant of such a person. I make the point that that definition was not always the definition. It is a definition from legislation passed in 1993. 
Prior to 1986 census definitions were based much more obviously on a concept of ancestry or biological make-up. In general terms the Maori population was defined as those with half or more Maori blood. That was the definition of Maori and Parliament enacted legislation to that effect. One such example is the Births and Deaths Registration Act of 1951 and at least in the period from 1951 to 1995 that was the law. The Maori population was defined as those with half or more Maori blood and at the 1981 census which I understand is the census from which most recent figures were kept only 6.9 percent of the population had half or more Maori blood. 
I suspect that the number of people now who can properly claim to be Maori in terms of the biological definition is perhaps in the order of 2 percent. What is the significance of that? We have heard from people like John Tamihere— 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: Who is your doctor? 
RICHARD WORTH 
: I will talk about my doctor in a moment—that Maori in the context of this bill seek to lay claim to perhaps 10 percent of the coastline. So 2 percent of the people are laying claim to 10 percent of the coastline; where is the justice in that?  
Some of the more noisy claimants for bounty have very strong non-Maori heritage. There are many examples in this Parliament. John Tamihere might be one. The Hon Tariana Turia is probably a really good example with her American father. What the Government is doing and what should be of concern to us all— 
Tariana Turia 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I do not think it is for the member on his feet to be defining whakapapa that he knows nothing about. 
RICHARD WORTH 
: Speaking to the point of order Madam Chairperson I point out that that is obviously a debating point and not a point of order. It is an abuse of the process of the Committee to interrupt a member’s speech.  
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is quite correct; that is not a point of order. 
RICHARD WORTH 
: So where does the Foreshore and Seabed Bill take us? It is better described as the “Floorshow and Seabed Bill” because an absolute farce is being played out in a number of its parts. 
In Part 4 rights are given to non-Maori people Caucasian or European somehow to advance claims for customary title. How will they do that? I challenge Russell Fairbrother the chairman of the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee to stand and explain how any group could possibly fit within the statutory test set in that part. The part has been deliberately designed to put up a smokescreen—a real smoke and mirrors deal—with no real possibility of such groups establishing those claims. 
I conclude as I started by saying that we should be truly concerned about this legislation. It has been rushed through Parliament. It has heightened Maori expectations and non-Maori resentment will continue to grow. 
If I have the leave of the House I am happy to talk about my doctorate and the processes that led to that award. I so seek leave. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member is seeking leave for an extension of his speech. Is there any objection? There is objection.