Heatley Phil: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15591] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 When we were previously debating Part 2 I mentioned to the Committee that there was a great deal of interest in Supplementary Order Paper 253 which I had submitted to the Committee and that members were researching. It is to do with the appointment of directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. A number of iwi came to the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee during the submission process and said: “Our people feel isolated from the activities of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. That particular company structure generates huge income currently it has the potential to generate a huge income in the future and it is a strategic asset of individual Maori and collective Maori in whanau hapu and iwi groups yet we feel isolated from it.” 
At the moment as it stands the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd are selected by Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd directors who in turn are selected by Te Kawai Taumata trustees who in turn are selected by an iwi electoral college which in turn is selected by Maori from individual iwi. In other words there are five layers between individual Maori beneficiaries of this settlement and the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. My Supplementary Order Paper cuts out one significant layer and that is Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. 
What I am saying—and members will see this in the Supplementary Order Paper—is that given that Te Kawai Taumata select the directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd which is its sole responsibility why cannot Te Kawai Taumata also at the same time select the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd? Rather than selecting the directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and having them choose the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd why does Te Kawai Taumata not do that directly? The Supplementary Order Paper is a mechanism that addresses that particular issue. So that would take away one layer. 
Members will note that I have not introduced any amendments in the Supplementary Order Paper that ask for the reporting-back mechanism to go through Te Kawai Taumata and avoid processes that would be overseen by Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. In fact by leaving out those clauses I have left the responsibilities for ensuring there are audits of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd—that is Sealord’s and so forth—and that accountability and the reporting-back mechanism within Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd still go through Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. There is no reason why Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd cannot continue with those particular functions. So I am happy for it to be involved in the auditing and the overseeing of accountability and of the reporting back. But what I am not happy with is it being involved in the appointment of the Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd directors. The question has to be asked: why is it involved in the appointment of those directors? 
In amongst the clauses there is some check to ensure that a chairman of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd cannot be a chairman of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and I think that is great I acknowledge that and we support it; that a deputy chairman of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd cannot be a deputy chairman of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and I also applaud that; and that a deputy chairman of either cannot be a chairman of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd or Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd and we applaud that. But we think it should go even further. The directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd should not select the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. They should not select the directors who will run Sealord’s. In our view there is no reason why this particular body—this college Te Kawai Taumata that selects the board of directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd—cannot also select the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. 
 Why should it select the directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd in turn select the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd? We can take out a whole layer between Maori beneficiaries on the ground who should receive the benefits of the settlement and a major settlement asset which is Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. 
That is the basis of my Supplementary Order Paper which I commend to the House. Certainly if any questions are raised by other speakers I will seek another call to address those. I do want to emphasise the fact that the amendments in the Supplementary Order Paper refer to the selection of the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. They do not address the working back of the accountability back through Maoridom at all. I do not see it as the role of Te Kawai Taumata to be involved in auditing motivating accountability and motivating the report back. Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd can still do that through the latter clauses of Part 2. 
But I do see it as the role of Te Kawai Taumata to appoint the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. In fact if one can argue strongly that that particular electoral college Te Kawai Taumata is in a good position to select directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd then one can certainly argue that it is in a position to select the directors of Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. I cannot think of any good reason why that electoral college cannot do that. I know that individual Maori beneficiaries and iwi around the country will applaud the idea of having a much closer association with the most significant asset as a whole in this settlement. Of course that most significant asset is reaching close on $300 million to $400 million worth of value. That is not just in quota shares but in buildings trucks fishing vessels and all sorts of assets. I cannot express enough the anxiety out there amongst Maori that they need a close association with and close accountability to the directors of that particular company. As members will see in the Supplementary Order Paper I am addressing clauses 23 and 24 and clause 40 in particular.