Prebble Richard: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Prebble Richard: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15622] 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE (ACT) 
: 
 Thank you and I thank the Government for now giving me 5 minutes rather than 3 which I am sure was its intention. I draw the attention of the Committee to the fact that under this part all disputes that may occur with regard to fisheries—which is a very commercial matter—will be referred to the Maori Land Court. I do not know how many members have experienced dealings with the Maori Land Court as I did earlier in my legal career. Without wishing in any way to be disrespectful to that court—[ 
Interruption 
] I do not wish to be disrespectful to that court. It is not a court. It is actually a tribunal. It is not equipped to handle those matters. There are possibly millions of dollars involved and the questions could be highly commercial and the judges who have been chosen have been chosen for their experience in Maori land law not in commercial law. 
This is another example of how this bill instead of passing over fishing quota to Maori so that they can have it in the same way as any other New Zealander has passed it over together with extraordinary red tape and obstacles that would damage the economic prospects even of a Ron Brierley let alone a group of iwi who have never had to administer anything of this sort before. This part is an example of political correctness run rampant. 
Hon Dover Samuels 
: What about? 
Hon RICHARD PREBBLE 
: I am sure Mr Samuels could contribute to this part and I wish he would because again I think it is an insult not just to the House but also to all Maori that the Government is not prepared at the Committee stage to deal with the questions that are being asked. I have been listening to the questions being raised on this part. Questions have been raised by Mr Franks who is Parliament’s leading commercial lawyer. He told the Committee that in his commercial legal experience this part will be impracticable. It is also an unfair thing to be doing. I am not disputing the fact that Parliament is now handing over quota to Maori fisheries. That has already been done. What we now ought to be doing is ensuring that those who receive those resources are able to use them. It is a handicap not just on Maori but on all New Zealanders. If we are not able to handle the fishery efficiently profitably and sustainably not just Maori but every single New Zealander will be the loser. 
It is a great shame that the United Future party which likes to say that it knows about small business supports this part. Would United Future like to have a law passed that small-business men must go to the Maori Land Court to have commercial issues sorted out? Of course it would not. It would not do that to its worst enemy. Yet its members are quite prepared to sit in this Chamber and vote for this legal gobbledygook—this absolute nonsense. If any member opposite claims to be knowledgeable in commercial law—and I do not know of any—I would like him or her to get up to explain why the Government is supporting this part how it will work in practice and whether the Maori Land Court is equipped to handle the matter. 
Would the Minister in the chair David Benson-Pope get up and tell us whether the Maori Land Court in fairness will get extra resources? Will it change the sorts of judges who have been appointed? Because its judges have not been appointed for their knowledge of commercial law. I cannot think of any Maori Land Court judge who has had any involvement in commercial law. There may be one but I am running the list of present judges through my head and I cannot think of one. Again I do not say that disrespectfully. I just state it as a matter of fact. It seems to me that the only thing going for the Maori Land Court is the word “Maori”. I cannot see any other reason.