Brownlee Gerry: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Ngaa Rauru Kiitahi Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:627;Page:21883] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 That was all very interesting but it is news to me. 
Hon Mita Ririnui 
: You weren’t there. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I sat on the Maori Affairs Committee and I was there for the various processes related to the signing off of this bill and that explanation has never been offered before. So I am a little intrigued to learn that Nga Rauru Kitahi has itself accepted this situation. Notwithstanding that I notice that clause 17 lists specific enactments that are not to affect the land in question: the Treaty of Waitangi Act the State-Owned Enterprises Act the Education Act 1989 the Crown Forest Assets Act and the New Zealand Railways Corporation Restructuring Act. 
I do not see the Property (Relationships) Act listed in that clause and Mr Prebble quite rightly brought that Act into the argument. So I ask the Minister a simple question. If someone receives property as a result of this settlement and it is a decision of the governing entity to put some names on the title of that property which is not uncommon and if one of the people who are named marries someone or enters into a common law arrangement with someone and that breaks down after 2 years what will happen? The Government’s decree is that assets are split down the middle but if the only asset is that person’s name on the particular title what will happen? Will a court have the authority to add another name to that title to reflect the share that the other party would then under our law in this country be entitled to? 
Just to go back to the issue of legal adoption I would have thought that under the whangai system there was no problem because most of those arrangements would be made within the particular iwi structure—in fact probably within the hapu structure or even within the whanau. But in the case of someone who was legally adopted I find that a little bit hard to swallow. Let us say that the person I spoke of before who has his or her name on a title somewhere enters into a common law arrangement with someone who has three or four children—or two or one; however many it is—and decides to legally adopt them and then after the prescribed period of 2 years it all turns to custard as people say. What is the status of those children then? Are they then suddenly caught in the loop? They may have absolutely no idea of what Nga Rauru Kitahi is all about. They may never have lived in the tribal district and they may not ever intend to live in that district. Is the Minister honestly telling us that the governing entity of that particular iwi group will say that there is no problem and that because those children’s names are on its roll they are beneficiaries of whatever is produced as a result of the settlement assets being worked in a good economic fashion and that it wishes them good luck? 
Part of the problem we have in all these settlements is the claim that is repeatedly made by iwi that their lands were dispersed and taken away from them. I worry quite a bit that with the acceptance of the 1955 Family Protection Act as it is applied here with the overlay of the Property (Relationships) Act that we have now and with the great change in circumstances in New Zealand families these days we will see quite a diminution of any particular ownership interest in lands and other assets. If the Minister wants to put it on the record that I am wrong by saying that there is no problem with regard to this issue then I invite him to do so.