Paraone Pita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Paraone Pita: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:627;Page:21787] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 A tena ano koe Mr Speaker. Tena ano tatau o te Whare nei. A tena hoki nga kaikawe o te kaupapa nei mai i Nga Rauru Kitahi i tau mai i roto i te Whare nei. Koutou o te hau kainga e noho tonu i raro i nga maunga whakahi a tena koutou a tena koutou tena koutou katoa. 
[ 
Greetings to you once again Mr Speaker. Greetings to us of this House as well. Greetings also to the negotiators of this policy from Nga Rauru Kitahi who have arrived here in this House. To those of you of the home winds living below the lofty mountains greetings greetings and greetings to you all 
.] 
I acknowledge yourself I acknowledge members of this House and I also acknowledge those who have come from the claimant group who are here today and who have carried this matter on behalf of the tribe. I also acknowledge those of the tribe who have not been able to come to Parliament this afternoon but who remain at home under the shadow of their mountain and who are listening to the debate. 
I rise on behalf of New Zealand First—and I reiterate the only non-aligned party in this Parliament. Let me say at the outset that New Zealand First supports the intention of this bill. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
PITA PARAONE 
: Let me say at the outset that New Zealand First supports the intention of this bill which is the culmination of a long and arduous process initiated by the people of Nga Rauru Kitahi towards a satisfactory claims settlement. The process has its genesis in longstanding claims against the Crown expressed through petitions and protests which led to the establishment in the 19th and 20th centuries of commissions of inquiry into land confiscated in Taranaki including those of Nga Rauru Kitahi. Such reasons for these original petitions were the Waitara purchase and the wars that followed; the confiscation of land; the impact on the welfare economy and development of Nga Rauru Kitahi as a result of these confiscations; the delay in setting aside reserves; and the events relating to the implementation of the confiscation which finally led to the invasion of Parihaka in 1881. The bill is clear that this ratification will see full and final settlement of this claim. So one can say that the journey that has seen this bill come into this House actually began way back then. 
The history of this iwi in Taranaki is steeped in blood and injustice and it is right that a formal apology and compensation be given by the Crown for breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. I commend the people of Nga Rauru Kitahi for their support for the ratification of this settlement agreement and also for their support of the management structure put in place to receive and manage the settlement assets. That bodes well for the future of the iwi and it displays a sense of unity and concord. The iwi one of eight in the Taranaki region is solid and secure and I congratulate it on reaching this important milestone in its development. The leadership commitment and courage of kaumatua and negotiators to reach this stage of accepting an apology and redress from the Crown for past injustices will allow the people of Nga Rauru Kitahi to move on acknowledging that their history of loss and betrayal can never truly be compensated for but also recognising that in order to move forward and to progress the shackles of past injustices must be recognised and removed. 
New Zealand First is therefore supportive of the settlement of this claim but I must say we have a few reservations which I wish to express. As recorded in our minority report on the bill we do not support the inclusion in schedule 12 of the statement of values relating to the Toopuni site. The site to which this schedule applies is known as the Lake Beds Conservation Area. The statement of values recorded in the schedule describes the divine origins of Nga Rauru Kitahi. Although we in no way question the beliefs and values of Nga Rauru Kitahi we do not support their inclusion in legislation. This settlement is not about cultural beliefs and we cannot see any valid reasons for their inclusion in this settlement legislation. The notions of sacredness and spirituality represented in schedule 12 have no place in the legislation of 21st century New Zealand. We believe that to include them is quite wrong. The indefinable and essentially contestable concept of divinity should not be put on the statute book as if it were some kind of legal status. 
New Zealand First believes that the traditional beliefs of Nga Rauru Kitahi are those of Nga Rauru Kitahi alone as a consequence of their tino rangatiratanga or as they would have us accept their Nga Rauru Kitahitanga. This is not a matter for the tino rangatiratanga of the Crown to have these beliefs included in this bill. I would suggest that this ought to be a signal to claimants of the future that when talking of their tino rangatiratanga that it is theirs alone and does not need to have the stamp of approval of this House. It is interesting to note that the Crown was willing to accept the inclusion because Nga Rauru Kitahi wanted it but was not willing to accept the tribe’s other request to give beneficiary status only to those born into the tribe. 
New Zealand First notes the inclusion of references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in the bill although it is pleasing to see that the presence of these references in this bill is somewhat limited compared with other legislation. During the select committee process the representatives of the claimant group were asked what they understood the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi to be. Can I say I was not surprised at their response. They did not know what it meant in this context and in fact I believe they did not know why it was included. That highlights the long-term view of New Zealand First that without clear definition in legislation there will continue to be a lack of understanding of their inclusion. New Zealand First accepts that the inclusion in this bill does not affect future or operational matters that arise from this bill but still questions the need to include in any legislation terms that lack definition. 
These so-called principles have as previously mentioned been of some concern to New Zealand First and notwithstanding the lack of impact it will have in concluding the settlement we would be happy to have references to them removed from the bill if other parties in this House would support their removal. I am conscious that during the debate on the last settlement bill that came before this House both National and ACT declined to support an amendment put forward by New Zealand First to have that happen. 
I acknowledge the decision of the Maori Affairs Committee to present its report in both English and Maori and more important in the dialect of the claimant group. That in itself recognises the tino rangatiratanga as referred to by Nga Rauru Kitahi. We are about to conclude this matter as we move to the Committee stage and I believe that it is testament to the ongoing commitment and fortitude displayed by representatives of this claimant group to persevere and allow the progress of the bill to come before this House. I state on behalf of New Zealand First that we will support the bill.