Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11847] 
Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill 
Second Reading 
Hon TARIANA TURIA (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector) 
on behalf of the  
Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: I move  
That the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time 
. Last weekend over 200 descendants of Nga Wairiki / Ngati Apa gathered at Whangaehu Marae to celebrate the special significance of Puanga at the start of the Maori New Year. In our tribal records Puanga was the time of wananga a time to feed the mind and spirit and to learn whakapapa and histories. It was a time to share hospitality to be entertained and to learn. And it was a time to reflect on our past acknowledging those who live on in our memories inspiring the promise of a stronger future. It is therefore an entirely appropriate time to be advancing the bill to settle all the historical claims against the Crown by Ngati Apa. 
I firstly acknowledge the work of the Maori Affairs Committee which considered this bill and reported back to Parliament within 3 months. The chairperson the Hon Tau Henare is to be commended for his leadership and for ensuring that progress was both comprehensive and expeditious. The committee considered 34 submissions on the bill. Submissions in support of the bill were received on behalf of each of the hapu collectives of Ngati Apa including Nga Ariki Nga Wairiki Ki Uta Ngati Tauira Ngati Kauae and Ngati Rangiwhakaturia me Nga Uri o Taitapu. 
The committee has now examined the bill and unanimously supports it. The committee has recommended that it be passed with a number of technical amendments. For Nga Wairiki / Ngati Apa this settlement is life changing. It provides a springboard to the future that is forever associated with our foundations back to the whenua. 
Our research describes Ngati Apa as an alliance of Nga Wairiki and Rangitikei people which emerged from events in the 1820s 1830s and 1840s. From that period on we have been linked together by whakapapa our connections strengthened by relationships to the five rivers of Mangawhero Whangaehu Turakina Rangitikei and Oroua. As we move forward it will be because of the importance we are giving to unity between Nga Wairiki Rangitikei and Oroua the rivers along which our ancestors dwelt. 
In coming together we are joining together the autonomous hapu collectives that make up Nga Wairiki / Ngati Apa because we are intrinsically connected. Our whakapapa is indivisible. It has also been important to work collaboratively with overlapping claimants. The need to sit down early on with Ngati Raukawa Whanganui iwi Rangitane o Manawatu Ngati Kauwhata and Ngati Haua and others has required a huge commitment from all parties. It was wonderful to read the submission of Te Runanga o Ngati Hauiti and their reference to the Pourewa Accord. The accord demonstrates the deep respect between Ngati Hauiti and Ngati Apa the mutual acknowledgment of the validity of each other’s overlapping interests and the agreement that identifies clear boundaries for future management and development. 
Although some submitters felt that Nga Wairiki should not be included in this settlement the committee’s view was that the vast majority of Nga Wairiki gave their mandate to Te Runanga o Ngati Apa. They were also satisfied that the mandating and ratification processes were robust. There has never been a separation of Nga Wairiki / Ngati Apa certainly in my lifetime. Indeed it is impossible to remove strands of one’s whakapapa when our whakapapa sites of significance and rivers are intrinsically linked together. The committee was finally assured that te runanga has left the door open for members who were not supporting the settlement to still participate in the post-settlement affairs of the iwi including the right to participate in elections in respect of the governance entity. 
I firmly believe that out of the growth of kotahitanga Nga Wairiki / Ngati Apa is now moving to a new phase; a time when Mt Curl will be known as Parae Karetu and when Round Bush Scenic Reserve will be called Omarupapakau. The settlement includes the gifting of five papakainga properties AgResearch lands Parewanui School part of Santoft Forest and Lismore Sands Forest and Kauangaroa School. 
The settlement allows for the implementation of the cultural redevelopment plan including marae development and investment in current programmes or initiatives that focus on areas such as te reo arts taonga and matauranga. This is a unique initiative to revive the life force of the people. The revitalisation focus has been recognised as a first in Treaty settlements and it is something to be immensely proud of given that many of the Ngati Apa hapu are probably lucky if they have one te reo speaker on each marae. 
The immediate history of this legislation started on 16 November 2004 when the Crown recognised Te Runanga o Ngati Apa’s deed of mandate. But of course the enduring story for Ngati Apa tracks back to 1849 when the Crown purchased the 260-arce Rangitikei-Turakina block. Our circumstances reflect that today. Ngati Apa own less than 1 percent of their traditional rohe the lands have been alienated and the people have been disenfranchised. This bill confronts the failure of the Crown to adequately protect 35000 acres of reserves set aside from the 1849 transaction. 
The bill also takes into account the impact of the native land laws. They contributed to the erosion of traditional tribal structures and resulted in the alienation of nearly all of Ngati Apa’s remaining land. It also brings to the fore the consistent perseverance of our tipuna in challenging the injustices meted out by the Crown. It reminds us of the petitioning of the Premier in 1899 seeking the establishment of the reserves for the Ngati Apa Act; a call on the Crown to pass an Act of Parliament to protect our lands. 
Through all of the land transactions Ngati Apa endeavoured to establish a relationship with the Crown. They sought to strengthen this relationship by going so far as to expressing loyalty to the Crown but it was to no avail. The Crown failed to ensure that the arrangements in 1849 were given effect. The Crown failed to take steps to adequately protect the tribal and hapu custodianship of their lands. 
The settlement enables us to gain a clear appreciation of the historical relationship between the Crown and Nga Wairiki / Ngati Apa. A history is documented; the disillusionment that grew out of the transactions resulted not in prosperity but in poverty. We know now that the Crown’s policy was to acquire land as cheaply as possible on the pretext that the growth of European settlement all around us would have ongoing benefits. The partnerships aspired towards in those times did not eventuate and the wealth of a secure living was rarely experienced except by those who settled the land. 
Now with the progress of this settlement we are poised to build a strong foundation to carry all our descendants of Ngati Apa / Nga Wairiki forward. The deed of settlement was signed by kuia and kaumatua appointed by their respective hapu. All the hapu provided the runanga with information to negotiate the statutory acknowledgments to write the statements of association and to negotiate the deeds of recognition. 
We are also indebted to the leadership and vision of a very young negotiating team Te Roopu Rangahau and the strength of their w’anau in supporting them through such a demanding process. Many complex negotiations have been required and our young people have made us proud through their skills and talents and most of all the great integrity they brought to the task. 
We mihi today to all those previous Labour Government Ministers who began the process of negotiation. Ki a koe e Mita he mihi noa tenei ki a koe.  
Finally I want to mihi to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Chris Finlayson who has brought a fierce intellect an irrepressible enthusiasm a gracious dignity and a genuine sense of understanding to the settlement of Ngati Apa as indeed he does to every Treaty settlement. It has been a privilege to work alongside him and I thank him for the honour of being able to speak first in this debate for my own iwi. Na reira tena koutou tena koutou katoa. I commend this bill to the House. 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. E te whaea te Minita tenei te mihi ki a koe. It is an extraordinary moment I think that a descendant of the tribe the hapu the iwi in question is the Minister of the Crown who moves the second reading of the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. The Minister may have missed it but my halting Maori at the beginning of my speech greeted her. It was a short mihi of acknowledgment of her role and some acknowledgment from a Pakeha who tries to understand what this might mean. Suddenly we are coming to the end of 100 or more years of struggle and protest on behalf of the Ngati Apa people in order to reclaim some of the land that was theirs originally. 
I will talk about a couple of things that I think are particularly significant in this settlement bill. I recommend that anybody who wants to know why this Parliament does these things read the preamble to the bill. The history that is recounted in this bill in the preamble is worth more people knowing about than just this House and the immediately affected iwi. It is the story of an indigenous people who were trying to get on with those who arrived more recently. They were trying not only to get on with them but to benefit from living together in that part of the country which is largely around the Rangitikei area but includes part of the country that runs between—if I remember correctly—the Whanganui River and Whangaehu River. Being brought up in Taranaki I had to learn from the Hon Tariana Turia out of respect for where she comes from to pronounce the w-h as a “wh” and I acknowledge that. It is difficult to unlearn things but saying “Whangaehu” when I have always driven across it over it and around it and pronounced it “Fangaehu” is something that I will make an effort to do out of respect for those who come from there. 
One of the amendments I am pleased to see that the Maori Affairs Committee put in was one in which they insisted on putting the “h” into Whanganui. They insisted on that regardless of protests from outside that it should not be spelt that way. I acknowledge the work of the select committee not only in that respect but also for the fact that with the submissions that they heard and the protests that were registered with them they arrived at the conclusion that there was not much to amend in the bill as it was first put forward. 
In pledging Labour’s support for this bill which I hope has been obvious from my comments so far I recognise some of the history and the length of time it has taken for this bill to get where it is. In fact negotiations were led by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen and the deed of settlement was signed on behalf of the Crown by the Hon Parekura Horomia in October 2008. The bill’s introduction came in August 2009 and the first reading in November 2009. From there it was referred to the Maori Affairs Committee and finally has emerged today after report-back for its second reading. 
The area we are talking about in this bill is that part of the Rangitikei-Manawatu area that anybody who is familiar with that country knows is beautiful—beautiful pastoral land and a beautiful part of the North Island. I commend to people to read the story of purchase and quasi-agreement that started this process of alienation of land. Much of it as I said is recounted in the preamble. It is worth noting that Ngati Apa never felt that they were properly consulted when an agreement was being drafted and that they were never properly taken into account. Regardless of whether they received £1000 in exchange for 86200 acres of land and regardless of whether that was fair at the time it is true that the reserve lands that were set aside for Ngati Apa were also alienated later. 
It is hard to find a piece of Aotearoa New Zealand that has been subjected to more laws quite frankly. By the time one has gone through the events of the 1830s the 1840s and on into the 1850s and the application of a number of laws to the settlement of this piece of land it is a wonder that anybody can track exactly what went on particularly as we are told because in some instances the diary of the Pakeha negotiator was the only record available. 
I refer to some of the content of this bill. It provides a number of critical things that now people ought to be becoming familiar with as we move through Treaty settlements. One is an acknowledgment of the obligations of the Crown. Another is an apology because there are times when an apology is the only way that we can proceed as a nation to move forward. There has to be some recognition of wrongdoing and an apology even generations later. Beyond that the critical things that also are contained in the bill are to do with cultural redress and commercial redress. The settlement includes a historical account much of which I have alluded to in my speech; the Crown acknowledgment of historical breaches of the Treaty; a Crown apology; a cultural redress package featuring the transfer of a number of sites of cultural significance to Ngati Apa including two lake beds; and a quantum of money including the opportunity to purchase four Crown properties in the Rangitikei region. 
In winding up I acknowledge some words that my colleague the Hon Mita Ririnui said in his first speech on this bill’s first reading. They echo the statement of the Minister and recognise the young people who came forward to negotiate this settlement. I pay tribute to them. 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Ngati Apa rohe Ngati Apa tangata te iwi o te maunga tupuna i a Parae Karetu tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa. 
[ 
To the region and people of Nga Apa the people of the ancestral mountain Parae Karetu greetings to you greetings to you and greetings to you all. 
]  
I acknowledge the contribution of both previous speakers. I consider I am one of the lucky ones in Parliament in that my opposite number Maryan Street is such a sensible person; it does not always apply when one is dealing with Opposition MPs. 
The Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill recognises and addresses the historical grievance of North Island Ngati Apa. Those grievances are longstanding. They relate primarily to the Crown’s purchase in 1849 of the Rangitikei-Turakina Block and the subsequent failure to protect reserves set aside from this transaction. As the other speakers have said from 1848 the Crown purchased many hundreds of thousands of hectares of land in which Ngati Apa held interests. Through these transactions Ngati Apa endeavoured to establish a relationship with the Crown and they sought to strengthen this relationship by expressing loyalty to the Crown. But the Crown failed to ensure that the arrangements in the 1849 deed were given effect and the Crown also failed to take steps to protect collective tribal and hapu custodianship of the land. 
North Island Ngati Apa have worked over many years to have their claims addressed by the Crown. The Crown recognised the mandate of Te Runanga o Ngati Apa in November 2004. The negotiation reached a significant milestone when an agreement in principle was signed on 12 July 2007 followed by an initialled deed of settlement in September 2008. The settlement is well supported by North Island Ngati Apa. In September last year 35 percent of the registered adult members of Ngati Apa voted on the deed of settlement and proposed governance arrangements. Of these 97 percent voted in favour of accepting both the deed of settlement and the proposed arrangements. The Crown and North Island Ngati Apa subsequently signed a deed of settlement on 8 October 2008. I acknowledge the work of my predecessor Dr Cullen. On 25 August 2009 the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill was introduced to Parliament. 
I agree with the other speakers when they say that settling this claim is an important further step in this country’s progress towards settling all historical Treaty grievances. The settlement redress provided by the bill recognises the history of North Island Ngati Apa’s interaction with the Crown. It includes Crown acknowledgments and an apology for historical breaches of the Treaty. Ngati Apa have significant aspirations for the development of their iwi. The redress included in this bill will help them make progress towards those aspirations in the future. The commercial and financial redress totals $16 million including a right to purchase approximately 6500 hectares of Crown forest licensed land and certain other Crown-owned properties. The redress includes innovative cultural revitalisation elements including the gifting of five papakainga properties provision of funding to develop and implement a strategy for revitalising North Island Ngati Apa customs and funding to assist in compiling a comprehensive historical record. Although it is not possible to fully compensate Ngati Apa nor any claimant group for the loss their people have suffered the cultural redress in this bill seeks to recognise Ngati Apa’s longstanding cultural and spiritual association in the region. 
The bill was referred to the Maori Affairs Committee on 17 November last year. The committee reported back to the House on 17 March 2010 and I thank the committee for its excellent work on this bill and for considering it in such a timely manner. The committee received and considered 34 submissions on the bill. Submissions in support of the bill were received on behalf of each of the hapu collectives of Ngati Apa. The committee heard oral submissions on the bill in Marton on 17 February at the Turakina Maori Girls College. The committee has examined the bill it has proposed no major amendments and it unanimously supports it. The committee has recommended that it be passed with a number of technical amendments. Ten properties listed in schedule 2 have been surveyed since the bill’s introduction. The technical amendments recommended by the committee reflect the updated legal description of these properties. 
I acknowledge the North Island Ngati Apa people who suffered from the breaches of the Treaty and who carried the grievances. I particularly acknowledge those who are no longer with us. I also acknowledge Te Runanga o Ngati Apa including the members of the negotiating team; their dedication and determination have been vital in the path towards settlement. I thank other Ministers and departments involved in this process. A wide variety of people from across the political spectrum have made really important contributions to this settlement over the years. 
The second reading is part of the last stage of the settlement process that seeks to recognise what is important to the people of Ngati Apa and to provide redress for historical breaches of the Treaty. It is one of the many settlements that this Government is progressing toward a goal of settling historical Treaty of Waitangi claims by 2014. 
Hon MITA RIRINUI (Labour) 
: 
 Otira kia ora tatou e te Whare. Kia ora tatou e te Minita ahakoa kua wehe atu nau tonu nei te pire i whakapanuihia ki te Whare otira ki te motu katoa. E tika ana ra te tikanga mau tonu ra te pire e panuihia i te mea ra ko koe ra te uri o ratou i arahi mai tenei kaupapa kia tae mai ki roto i te Whare nei. 
[ 
So greetings to us all the House. Greetings to us and the Minister; even though you are no longer present you personally presented the bill to the House and to the whole nation. That you should present the bill is appropriate because you are their relative and the one who guided this matter here into this House 
.]  
In the time I have been a member of this House I have had the good fortune to have been involved in many settlement bills. Some have been quite massive and I could run off a list just to highlight those particular settlements. But this one the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill is of particular significance to myself not so much for the way that the Ngati Apa people were treated during the 1800s and in the early 1900s but for the manner in which they conducted themselves throughout this whole process. 
The Minister the Hon Tariana Turia who is also the member for Te Tai Hauauru reminded us of the sad history of this claim particularly as it relates to her people of Ngati Apa. If one reads the history of this settlement the historical account one would understand why over the years many people carry grievance to the point where it dominates their lives. 
When we consider the commitment of the negotiating team young as they were and still are given that this settlement has progressed quite well—they did not start young and finish old; they started young and they are still young—and their attitude throughout the negotiations it is obvious that they were the right people to lead us. Those who stood behind the negotiations and supported them were the ones who felt the harshness of Government policy and its effects over a period of time. Those young people had a clear vision that in order to overcome the grievance they needed to show leadership lead the way finalise the settlement and provide for their people the opportunity to move forward. They have done an excellent job as the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations reminded the House this evening. Apart from his unkind opening statements the rest of his speech was very positive. 
This bill gives effect to the deed of settlement in which the Crown and Ngati Apa agree to a final settlement of Ngati Apa’s historical claims. I am proud to say that Labour supports this bill and does so for obvious reasons. The negotiations on behalf of the previous Labour-led Government were led by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen. The deed of settlement was signed on behalf of the Crown by the Hon Parekura Horomia Minister of Maori Affairs in October 2008. Soon after the deed was signed Dr Cullen reminded us that this settlement was a historic moment in the relationship between the Crown and Ngati Apa. It allows both parties the Crown and Ngati Apa to move forward into the future. I am very pleased that Minister Finlayson continues to support the positive initiatives initiated by the previous Government particularly when it comes to Treaty settlements. If the Minister is to meet his 2014 deadline he will need the cooperation of every party in this House. I thank the Minister for his positive moves in this portfolio. 
I will spend some time talking about the select committee process because that was very very interesting. As with most settlements issues developed along the way between competing interests competing tribal groups and also between competing tribal groups and their local mainstream communities. Ngati Apa had it all. So it was really a test for them to see how they managed those different dynamics those competing interests so that they would be able to finalise this settlement legislation. 
I am reminded of the differences in terms of status between Ngati Apa and iwi belonging to Nga Wairiki and the manner in which they resolved those issues. The select committee was reminded that many of those who belong to Nga Wairiki also claimed that they had whakapapa to Ngati Apa. In fact they overwhelmingly supported the mandate of Ngati Apa. To that point Ngati Apa was able to proceed even though some dissenters came to the select committee. Also those in support of the Ngati Apa mandate belonging to Nga Wairiki were happy with the way that the legislation was to be written and the way that the post-governance settlement arrangements were to be constructed. They will continue to enjoy by right the benefits from the settlement and the assets. The select committee recommended in its report back to the House that there be no changes in terms of the inclusion of Nga Wairiki groups in this settlement legislation. 
The area of cultural redress properties was interesting also. Many of the properties that are included in the cultural redress are situated in areas of tremendous significance to the Ngati Apa people. Although these properties may not have a significant commercial value—in fact many of them have none in so far as Ngati Apa is concerned—the areas of land on which these buildings are erected are of tremendous significance to Ngati Apa. For that reason and that reason alone it was important that these properties not be overlooked in the negotiations and that they be included in the settlement package as part of the cultural redress. I am glad that the staff of the Office of Treaty Settlements did not recommend to the Minister that these properties be classified as commercial redress because that would have been a grievance upon a grievance; that would have been wrong. 
I remind the Minister that his officials advised the select committee that in so far as schedule 2 the list of 17 cultural redress properties is concerned AgResearch lands are not yet included in the land bank properties. We were given the assurance that by the time this bill completes its passage through the House that land would be included in the land bank and form part of the redress. I am hopeful that the Minister will be able to conclude this small technical matter by the time the Committee stage is finished. It is important that we all have a discussion on that. This is something new in Treaty settlements. We have included a parcel of land as part of the redress and it is important that it is in the right place—for want of words—and that is the land bank. That indeed is a minor challenge but nevertheless it is a challenge for the Minister. 
The fisheries protocol is very interesting. Anyone who knows the area of Whanganui or Ngati Apa’s rohe well knows that in the rivers and lakes—small as they are—there are massive populations of tuna of eels. One person who submitted on the bill—and I know that the committee members were surprised to hear it—referred to small eels. We said to ourselves that anyone who has been there—to Whangaehu and those particular areas—would never have seen a small eel. They are massive; we call them taniwha. But that was a good example of a competing interest. Somebody believed that their commercial interests would be severely compromised because Ngati Apa were going to catch small eels. Ngati Apa do not catch small eels and that is one thing we had to tell that person. But that is a good example of self-interest rather than of competing interests of having little consideration for the customary rights of others and of having consideration for doing the right thing which is what this bill is about. 
In the short time I have left I will take the time as everybody else before me has done to congratulate the select committee—and rightly so because the chairman conducted a very open and flexible process when we heard the submissions. He allowed members to be quite broad in their questioning of submitters and officials. As a result we have before us a well-considered bill. I hope that he keeps up those standards. Thank you. 
DAVID CLENDON (Green) 
: 
 Tena koutou katoa. I will open by acknowledging the Hon Tariana Turia the Minister who opened this debate and by recognising the unique situation that she is shepherding through the House a bill that is of such significance and personal importance to her and her whanaunga. I will take only a short call on this Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill which we in the Greens have already undertaken to support through all of its readings. Although we have not participated directly in the select committee process it is clear that a great deal of very valuable and useful work has been done in the Maori Affairs Committee and that issues have been honestly and openly dealt with if not in every case resolved which is inevitable. Clearly there has been a great deal of goodwill in relation to that process and it shows in both the documents and the outcome. 
We acknowledge the work of the Minister and the members of the Maori Affairs Committee who have supported this process and most of all we take the opportunity to acknowledge Ngati Apa and wish them all the best for the progress of this bill to the extent that it will restore their tino rangatiratanga and their mana motuhake over their own lands. This bill reflects that Ngati Apa like so many other iwi and hapu have for over a century been engaged in a struggle a very real struggle to have resolution of wrongdoing and the receipt of justice and to see the honouring of solemn commitments that were made on both sides of the Treaty relationship in 1840. Again we acknowledge and offer our respects for that struggle and to those who have participated in it over many generations. 
It is clear that the progress of this bill and the negotiations that have underpinned it have followed a pattern whereby certain elements have emerged which are becoming commonplace or familiar at least within these Treaty settlements processes. It is clear within the report that some serious concerns have been expressed from particular hapu who have felt that their inclusion in this process against their wishes and preferences could to some extent compromise their own preferred outcomes in this process. But objections of that sort are common to just about every settlement process current or past. I think it is fair to say that the Crown’s policy of negotiating settlements with large natural groupings is one that must be constantly challenged and under constant review to ensure that we do not get outcomes that deny the settlement of legitimate concerns and the right of hapu to self-identity and the self-determination of their futures. We note that there have been claims that some of the lands that will be returned under settlement in this case are also claimed by other iwi. Again that is a typical effect of colonisation and the imposition of Western property law—rather than of tikanga over generations—which has confounded to some extent the appropriate resolution of inter-iwi disputes that otherwise could have been resolved. 
Again it is in common with other settlements—and it was referenced by the previous Speaker—that there are those within the wider community who seem to have a concern or even a degree of suspicion that the settlement and the return of assets and mana to the affected iwi and hapu are somehow too much—that somehow the proposed settlement might reduce or compromise the rights or expectations of those who have become accustomed to a particular situation or practice. The reality is of course that Ngati Apa as with so many other iwi and hapu have been extraordinarily patient and have been equally modest and realistic in their expectation of what can be done in the 21st century to put right the transgressions of the 19th and 20th centuries. The detail of the Crown purchases contained in the preamble to this bill tells a story that highlights very well the almost complete lack of generosity and lack of empathy—the almost complete selfishness—of those who embarked on purchasing land from Ngati Apa. I think we can consider ourselves very fortunate that in the 21st century Maori are much more generous of spirit in accepting only part of what was taken away as resolution and redress from the Crown. 
It is encouraging and very positive to see that significant material assets will be returned to Ngati Apa and that there will be some wealth that will enable them to build an economy and to utilise their resources in ways that are appropriate for them and to the exercise of their mana. Equally important to that tangible return and to those tangible assets is the sincere apology from the Crown which acknowledges the mana of these people and acknowledges that their objections and their claims—their grievances over a century—have been justified have been realised and in fact were legitimate. I cannot stress enough as others have the significance of the apology of the symbolic return as much as the tangible redress and return of assets. 
There is not much more I wish to say except to acknowledge again the good work of those in this House who have put through this bill and of those who are no longer here but who made significant contributions to it. This bill is clearly about settlement but it is also an opportunity for the truth of our shared history to be spoken and heard and we hope to be better understood. Knowing a little more of our own history of our shared history will perhaps progress us towards a speedy resolution of this settlement and of those that will follow it. No reira tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa. 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 Kia ora tatou katoa e te Whare. Sitting on the Maori Affairs Committee to hear stories from whanau hapu and iwi is a real privilege as it was to hear the submissions of Ngati Apa on the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. It was an opportunity to hear them speak with pride of their whakapapa their descent from Apa-hapai-taketake another tupuna of Rangitikei and Nga Wairiki. 
Four months ago we travelled up to Marton to hear submissions at Turakina Maori Girls’ College and also of course to enjoy the sweet melodies of the beautiful young Maori women who attend that wonderful school. We heard submissions in support from various hapu of Ngati Apa including Nga Ariki Nga Wairiki Ki Uta Ngati Tauira Ngati Kauae Ngati Rangiwhakaturia and Nga Uri o Taitapu. 
We also heard submissions lodged by Wai 655 claimants and the Southern Whanganui Cluster / Tupoho working party several of whom felt that Nga Wairiki should be left out of the Ngati Apa settlement and dealt with perhaps as a separate iwi or as a hapu of Whanganui. But we noted that three major Nga Wairiki hapu groups had already chosen to be included in the Ngati Apa settlement and that the runanga had left the door open for all of Nga Wairiki to participate in the post-settlement affairs of the iwi including elections to the new governance body. We recognised the differences but we also accepted the fact that those matters were best resolved in-house by Nga Wairiki themselves. 
The other contentious issue was that presented by members of the Southern Whanganui Cluster / Tupoho working party who said that they wanted to take issue with the part of the settlement that involved the Lismore Hills Forest which both Ngati Apa and Whanganui have interests in. Some objected to the transfer of 65 percent of the forest to Ngati Apa because they felt that there was a stronger Whanganui claim to the part of the forest being offered to Ngati Apa. They felt that they were being shut out of gaining any interest or settlement from that area. That was one of the more complex issues that we had to consider but our research showed that a lot of time had already been given to enabling the various interest groups to resolve that issue including extensive litigation through the Waitangi Tribunal and the Court of Appeal which upheld the tribunal’s decision. Given the number of meetings the litigation and the outcome of the litigation and the very strongly held but differing view of the parties we simply did not believe that more time would necessarily lead to a positive agreement. We noted though that 35 percent of the Lismore Hills Forest had actually been set aside for use in any future settlement with Whanganui iwi. 
The Hon Tariana Turia herself of Ngati Apa and Nga Wairiki has already spoken of the Pourewa Accord between Ngati Apa and Ngati Hauiti. It was interesting to note that Ngati Hauiti felt that any concern they might have had regarding the settlement and other redress was covered in that accord and that they therefore had no major issues with the bill. That is a precedent that other iwi and hapu might do well to consider. It is unnecessary in the north of course but certainly worthy of consideration in some of the more rebellious areas south of the Tamaki River. 
Nga Wairiki ki Uta spoke of the ongoing support they have received from and given to Te Rununga o Ngati Apa over the years their continued representation at the runanga level how the runanga itself could help represent Nga Wairiki ki Uta. They spoke about a number of other important issues including fisheries resource management iwi representation and other dealings with the Crown and their gratitude to the runanga itself following the devastating floods of 2004 which had severely damaged their marae and a number of their homes. 
I come back to Ngati Apa. The various hapu collectives of Ngati Apa have come together to give their support to Te Runanga o Ngati Apa negotiating and settling their historical claims. They told us that their hapu had freely and willingly participated in every aspect of the negotiations and the settlement process including a number of information hui held throughout the rohe and that the deed of settlement had in fact been ratified by 97 percent of those who had voted. Ngati Apa clearly are people on the move rebuilding their culture and their identity from a time when they were almost landless. Their tikanga was under threat and their capacity to speak the reo was seriously endangered. The progress they have made is a credit to their commitment and their vision to rebuild and restore themselves as Nga Wairiki and Ngati Apa. The Maori Party is proud to acknowledge their efforts and to support this bill today. 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 Te mea tuatahi kei a koe e te Tumuaki o te Whare nei tena koe. Kei a koutou e aku rangatira nga mema o te Komiti Maori tena ano koutou katoa. 
[ 
The first thing Mr Assistant Speaker of this House is greetings to you. To you my illustrious colleagues members of the Maori Affairs Committee my acknowledgments once again to you all. 
] 
I will not take too long on the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. Nothing gives me more pleasure than to be able to play a part in the theatre of Treaty of Waitangi settlements. One of the reasons is that I get a sense of national pride a sense of nationalism and a sense of patriotism when the House enters this stage of a Treaty settlement. 
I take my hat off to my colleagues. Somebody on the other side is whispering and not listening to what I have to say but that is OK. I take my hat off to the members of the Maori Affairs Committee from both National and Labour and to the Greens who were sometimes there. I am not saying anything disparaging about them; it is just that they have a big workload. 
I will briefly mention something that is in every Treaty settlement bill that I think we do not pay enough attention to during the process. If members cast their eyes over the preamble to the bill they will find a précis of the history of the involvement of Ngati Apa. Although it is not a huge historical tome of where Ngati Apa has come from and where it may end up it is a small historical account of a people’s struggle. I am sure that one day we will be teaching this stuff in our schools and not for any other reason than to be patriotic and nationalistic about the history of our country. It will not be taught with any feeling of guilt or any thoughts other than this nation can through this process become closer as one nation. 
I will not ramble on too much more other than to say that our select committee meeting at Turakina Maori Girls College to hear submissions was one of the best of our session. 
Hon Mita Ririnui 
: Did you pay the koha? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Yes we paid the koha. 
Hon Mita Ririnui 
: Who sang the waiata? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Hone Harawira sang the waiata and our kaumatua Mita Ririnui did the korero. 
Our select committee is a good select committee. We may have our run-ins and we may have fun but we take our job very very seriously as do other select committees. Again if we only took the time to have a look at the bills that go through our House of Representatives this could be the beginning of something new in our education system. No reira kei a koutou ano aku rangatira tena koutou a tena koutou katoa. 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Te mea tuatahi mihi kau atu ki tera te Minita a Tariana nona nei te iwi e korerotia nei e tatou i te wa nei. 
[ 
The first thing is to acknowledge Minister Tariana Turia whose people we are discussing at the moment 
.] 
I would like to start by touching on what the Hon Tau Henare has just mentioned about the wealth of history that is in these Treaty settlement bills. I agree totally with him and say I think it would be great if we could teach this history in our schools. I encourage Ngati Apa as part of its cultural redress to consider developing this history just a little further and taking it to schools so that schools and the local iwi can work in partnership and cooperation to make sure that local iwi history is not simply forgotten. I encourage that not just for Ngati Apa but for all schools in the areas covered by Treaty settlements using the information in these bills. 
It is important for us to consider that in 1840 Ngati Apa had considerable land interests in the Rangitikei and Manawatu areas. That is the first point. The second point is that it is also important for us to know that three members of Ngati Apa signed the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. The way that the land was broken up which became a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi disenfranchised Ngati Apa from their land and from their culture and that is at the crux of this bill. It is important that the Crown has acknowledged that Ngati Apa have been raising grievances with the Crown for over 100 years and that the Crown failed to deal with the longstanding grievances of Ngati Apa in an appropriate way. The recognition of the grievances of Ngati Apa is long overdue. It is also important for us to realise that from 1848 over 400000 acres of the considerable land interests of Ngati Apa were purchased. It was through these land transactions that Ngati Apa endeavoured to establish a relationship with the Crown. 
The deed for the 1849 Rangitikei-Turakina purchase stated that approximately 35000 acres of that land would be reserved for all of Ngati Apa to collect and settle on. However later native land legislation enabled these reserve lands to pass through the Native Land Court which awarded land interest to individuals rather than to all the tribe and that excluded many Ngati Apa from ownership of the tribal reserve land. That failure of the Crown to ensure that the arrangements recorded in the 1849 deed were given effect to was a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi. The native land laws in particular awarding the land to individual Ngati Apa rather than to iwi or hapu made the lands that Ngati Apa were able to retain more susceptible to partition fragmentation and alienation. It is a classic case of divide and conquer. This contributed to the erosion of the tribal structures of Ngati Apa which were based on collective tribal and hapu custodianship of the land. The Crown failed to take steps to adequately protect those tribal structures and that had a prejudicial effect on Ngati Apa. Again that was a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi. 
Despite Ngati Apa’s contributing lands for settlement purposes the significant benefits that Ngati Apa expected to flow from its relationship with the Crown were not realised. The cumulative effect of the Crown’s actions and omissions left Ngati Apa virtually landless. The Crown failed to ensure that Ngati Apa retained sufficient lands for their present and future needs. Therefore today we have the situation where most of Ngati Apa live outside their tribal rohe and the loss of their traditional lands has impacted on the access of Ngati Apa to resources such as their rivers lakes forests wetlands and traditional walking paths. Ngati Apa have lost control over many of their significant sites including wahi tapu and this has had an ongoing impact on their physical and spiritual relationship with the land. 
So it is important that we acknowledge the apology that has been offered by the Crown. It is important that we acknowledge the work that was started by Dr Cullen the Hon Parekura Horomia and the Hon Mita Ririnui and that has been continued by the Hon Chris Finlayson. It is also important to note that four Ngati Apa people signed the original document. They were Lillian Te Aweawe Ropata Te Hina Arikihanara Mare Mare and Mariana Shenton all from Ngati Apa of course. 
The apology is really important. An apology does not bring back everything that was lost but it is important that the Crown has apologised and recognised the efforts and struggles of Ngati Apa in pursuit of their claims for justice and redress. It is also important in the apology that the Crown has said it profoundly regrets and unreservedly apologises to Ngati Apa for the breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. It is also important to note that the Crown regrets and apologises for the cumulative effect of its actions and omissions over the generations through to the present day. These matters have all had a detrimental impact on the traditional tribal structures of Ngati Apa. With this apology the Crown seeks to atone for the past wrongs to begin a process of healing and to make a significant step towards rebuilding a lasting relationship with Ngati Apa based on mutual trust and cooperation. 
The cultural redress is that there are protocols to be issued to the trustees by the Minister of Conservation the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage. There is an acknowledgment by the Crown of the statements that were made by Ngati Apa of their cultural spiritual historical and traditional association with nine statutory areas and the effect of the acknowledgment deeds of recognition between the Crown and trustees and also the vesting in the trustees of the fee simple estate in 17 cultural redress properties. It is really important for everyone and for the House to understand that the 17 cultural redress properties represent but a fraction of the land that was denied or that was partitioned and removed from Ngati Apa. I can imagine all the rednecks out there saying the blimmin Maoris are getting more land handed back. But the rednecks have to realise that this is just a fraction of what Ngati Apa lost. 
Finally there is a part of the cultural redress that talks about the alteration of place names. We know about the most obvious example of altering place names from the debate over whether “Wanganui” or “Whanganui” is correct. I believe it is really important for us to recognise that to Maori it is important that our language our places and our place names are given the due respect that they deserve. It is not fair or right that a group of people can come and change names often not just by removing a letter from the name but actually by supplanting a name in another language and then to say that is the way it is and Maori just have to get over it. 
This settlement has been great. I endorse what the others have said about being part of the Maori Affairs Committee and the work that has gone on with regard to this legislation. It is well overdue. Ngati Apa have waited far too long for this settlement to occur and Labour of course supports this bill. Kia ora. 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
: 
 Tena koutou e te Whare; e te Tumuaki tena koe. I rise to support the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. It is great to see that this historic claim has finally been settled. It is particularly pleasing to see that the settlement package is a mixture of cultural redress and financial and commercial redress and also that there is an agreed historical account and Crown acknowledgment that form the basis of a Crown apology to Ngati Apa. All members of Ngati Apa wherever they live will be pleased to see this final settlement. 
National is committed to our goal of reaching just and durable settlements from historic Treaty claims by 2014. We are putting our money where our mouth is. Budget 2010 provides an extra $6.5 million over the next 3 years to achieve the Government’s goal of settling all historical Treaty of Waitangi claims by 2014. This Ngati Apa settlement is part of a significant acceleration in Treaty settlements that we have seen over the past year. The Government has signed 11 agreements in principle and six deeds of settlement in the last 12 months. The extra funding that we have put in Budget 2010 will continue speeding up that process by providing resources for our successful team of Crown chief negotiators to employ extra staff to support negotiations and draft the deeds of settlement. 
More groups are also keen to ramp up the speed of negotiations since they have seen the benefits that settling claims in a timely fashion can bring for people by creating jobs and unlocking economic development opportunities. Coming from Otautahi or Christchurch in Te Wai Pounamu or the South Island I am particularly pleased to see more settlements taking place. Our local iwi Ngai Tahu led the settlement process and the whole South Island community has benefited form their proactive stance. Because they settled early they have the opportunity to grow their assets to grow their businesses and to strengthen their iwi. They are now dominant and highly respected players in the business community of the South Island. Ngai Tahu companies are involved in retail education agriculture fishing and forestry. But they are best known—and perhaps best loved—for their tourism ventures. The story of Whale Watch Kaikoura in particular illustrates powerfully everything that is good about economic independence for iwi. 
The Treaty settlement process is about acknowledging unfairness making amends for mistakes and accepting each other’s apologies. This Government is committed to its goal of reaching the just and durable settlement of historical Treaty claims by 2014 because we understand the importance of getting down to the business of settling the claims with as little delay as possible. We must settle those claims so that all New Zealanders can look to the future and move forward together. 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 Tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa. I am pleased to speak on this Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill but I will start by recognising the members across the House including former Labour Ministers who have contributed to this process. I also acknowledge the recognition by the previous speaker Nicky Wagner of the significance of this settlement to a member of this House. This settlement is for Minister Turia’s whanau her people. Occasionally in this House members are able to look back on the words they said as a newbie MP. In my maiden statement I said: “In supporting this National Government the Maori Party MPs have shown that they are not bound by rigid left or right-wing ideology in their pursuit of better lives for all Maori.” I acknowledge Minister Turia and the Maori Party for the purposeful and hard-working job they are doing in walking a line that is enabling them to keep their independence as a party while making extraordinary progress for Maori. This week’s announcement on the foreshore and seabed is a real achievement which guarantees access to our beaches while restoring the ability of Maori to have the fundamental right to test their rights within our court system. That is a fundamental right of all New Zealanders and I support that. 
I will touch on why we are here and on why we are doing these settlements for all New Zealanders. Firstly we believe that Maori are seeing the benefits that settling claims in a timely fashion can bring to their people and we know that by doing that in a timely fashion we can see that new jobs are created and economic development is unlocked. Secondly we are doing this because we fundamentally acknowledge that there is unfairness that we need to make amends for mistakes and that we need to accept each other’s apologies. Thirdly we are doing this because we want to live in a country that moves beyond grievance to the empowerment of people. 
I have just a few other comments to make. Obviously we acknowledge the pace our Government is working at and I acknowledge Mr Finlayson for the huge amount of work that he has done. I think that previous speakers have called him someone who has a huge intellect and graciousness and I support those comments. We have put a lot of money into speeding up the pace of these settlements and I think that people are acknowledging that. 
But this settlement is really about Ngati Apa and I acknowledge Minister Turia’s comments that this bill is life-changing for them. Ngati Apa has more than 3200 members. The historical grievances of the iwi relate primarily to the Crown’s purchase in 1849 of the 260000 acre Rangitikei-Turakina block including the Crown’s subsequent failure to adequately protect approximately 35000 acres of reserves set aside from that transaction. I acknowledge that this is the final settlement of all of Ngati Apa’s North Island historical claims. Nicky Wagner acknowledged the fact that the package includes cultural redress and financial and commercial redress. 
I acknowledge members of the Maori Affairs Committee and in particular Tau Henare for the way that he has led that committee. In closing I speak to the people of Ngati Apa when I say: Ngati Apa mauri ora ki a koutou katoa. Thank you. 
Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) 
: 
 It is a delight to take a brief call in support of the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. It is pleasing that Ngati Apa has progressed this bill. A huge process has been entered into to get to this point. 
One of the wonderful things about what has happened in this Treaty settlement period of New Zealand history as Maori reach a post-renaissance period is the many examples where a particular iwi or tribe Ngati Apa in this case is mandated to develop a process to identify all of the issues that are before it and then to enter the process of negotiations with the Crown over a long period of time. It is something special about New Zealand society that this has happened many times now. It is now Ngati Apa’s day. We acknowledge the grievances that have been raised we acknowledge the hurts of the past and we find a way to the future. 
One of the defining aspects of contemporary New Zealand society is that we are able to do this. It sets us apart from many many other countries and it makes us unique. In many countries indigenous people and tribes have been colonised and have had their rights and their land taken away. Sometimes they never reach the point that Ngati Apa is reaching today. That is the special characteristic that I acknowledge and celebrate as a New Zealander and as a member of this House speaking at this stage of the bill. 
The bill is a credit to previous members of Parliament and previous Governments that have worked on this process. In this particular case we note that the part of Mr Cullen has been acknowledged and that of others. I also acknowledge the part of the Hon Christopher Finlayson in bringing it together. They all do this House and this country proud by engaging in the process and taking their own time to make it so special. It falls on the present Government to bring this legislation to a conclusion so I acknowledge the Hon Christopher Finlayson the Maori Affairs Committee and others who have worked on this bill to bring it to this phase. 
This bill has all of those unique aspects that have become a hallmark of settlements in New Zealand. Firstly the main provisions acknowledge the harm that was done and offer an apology. That is quite special about New Zealand society. Some do not realise that. At times in many conversations outside the House there are those who say that they did not do anything wrong so why should they apologise. But indeed in a symbolic sense these apologies are unique to us as New Zealanders at this point in our history. So this bill also provides an apology and there are several aspects of it. The bill also includes cultural redress aspects as well as commercial redress. Together those aspects make the bill a cause for celebration. It provides a pathway forward and puts to rest certain matters of the past. It provides compensation to the extent possible which is never enough clearly. Most important it enables this particular tribe to move forward as equal partners in this society. 
My call is a brief one to acknowledge that particular work and to acknowledge unique aspects of our society at this time. I wonder what aspects people listening to this debate will focus on. Will they think that it is just another settlement and that Parliament is going through the motions again? Or is it more important than that? Clearly it is particularly significant for Ngati Apa. It is their time; it is their process. It is their time to be compensated to have resources and to move forward. But would it not be nice if others also moved forward with it? That is the symbolism of the apology which I mentioned earlier. It is us as a nation trying to put to rest some aspects of the past. As we do that it provides a way to move forward. I urge others who are listening others who might not be 100 percent behind what this bill is about to accept the symbolism of the apology and the importance of the settlement. It provides us as a society with an opportunity to move forward as well. 
I congratulate those who have taken part in bringing the bill to this stage. I acknowledge the work of this Government and of the previous Labour Government. I acknowledge Ngati Apa and Minister Turia in particular who introduced the bill. I stand proud to support this particular bill. Thank you. 
Bill read a second time.