Okeroa Mahara: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Okeroa Mahara: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:621;Page:16979] 
MAHARA OKEROA (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 I have been moved to rise by the previous speaker’s statements that this bill is racist. Let me remind this House that as a Minister that member Nick Smith took an action against Wakapuaka reserve which already had an existing blue-water title that had been enshrined by the Maori Land Court a number of times and which enabled the Ngati Tama people of that area to get on with their business as the tangata whenua. Oh no! He prefers to lead a charge which I shall call racist amongst the community of Nelson against the inherent tangata whenua rights of the Ngati Tama people which were enshrined in law on the basis that they somehow exclude access to their estuary.  
This is private Maori land and the estuary has a blue-water title. The only reason that Ngati Tama—and I hope Dr Mitchell is listening to this—has put a gate across the access is to ensure that people who want to visit treat the estuary and the foreshore and seabed with respect. It is there so that people do not drive their four-wheel drive vehicles up and down unfettered and leave their rubbish around this estuary that has a blue-water title that is in the ownership of Ngati Tama ki Wakapuaka. The member wonders why under clause 2A we have included the statement “including the protection of the association of whanau hapu and iwi with areas of the public foreshore and seabed.” One of the reasons that is included is that misguided influence and ministerial authority leave those tangata whenua in a difficult position. That case is still before the courts.  
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Because your Government is appealing it. 
MAHARA OKEROA 
: So what do the people do? Because he was the Minister of Conservation. So not only he suffered but so did a certain section of tangata whenua ki Te Tau Ihu o te Waka. I am appalled that some members of the Opposition who are not supporting this bill view clause 2A as being deeply racist. I am absolutely appalled that we started the discussion this morning on that level. It demonstrates for us that there is nothing to fear about this. Maori have for many many years insisted on a right as Maori so that they can protect themselves— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: A special right. 
MAHARA OKEROA 
: So that they can protect themselves I say to Mr Smith into the future from the misguided views and visions of people of his ilk. One submitter from Nelson came to a submission hearing we had in Christchurch. I must endorse her courage. She stayed even though her message was obviously totally unpopular given the context. She was carrying a message that was very similar to the messages we are hearing this morning about this law being deeply racist. She appended that with her experience of Wakapuaka. How can this law be deeply racist? I fail to understand that when we are discussing whether Maori—whanau hapu and iwi—can be included in clause 2A. To exclude that is racist. So what National left in its wake is a diabolical mess.