Mahuta Nanaia: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Mahuta Nanaia: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:640;Page:10496] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Customs) 
: 
 I rise to take a call on this particular debate in the first instance to rebut some of the issues that were raised by Mr Finlayson. The Treaty settlement process in and of itself is a very difficult process. In fact it would take a very brave person across this Chamber to take on this portfolio because by its very nature the whole process of reconciling historical grievances—and we know how disparate our past has been throughout this country—is a very difficult process. So any suggestion that this Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations is not interested in trying to get a genuine outcome is flawed should not be tolerated and is not accepted by this Government. In the second instance in respect of the nature of how the Treaty settlement process began far be it from me who knows probably on both sides of the table how difficult it is to get an outcome to stand here defending in and of itself the Office of Treaty Settlements. However the office plays an important role in order to achieve an outcome. 
Let us look at where Treaty settlements started with National. By definition of the process that National started by and large the whole assumption was that a large natural grouping would be the basis upon which it would enter into negotiations. Both Tainui and NgaiTahu are evidence of that in itself. At not one point through this process has National ever said that it would ever go to Treaty settlements on a hapu by hapu basis. National has never said that and it should come clean because it is clearly raising expectations that it does not intend to deliver on and that it is criticising the Government for. However National started a process and we are really trying to work forward and learn over time from a range of Treaty settlements that have been resolved. 
The other issue that I want to address very briefly is the issue of quantum. Everybody could say hand on heart that a certain dollar figure should be ascribed to various Treaty settlements and I am sure that Maori members would be the first to try to get the best opportunities for their region but we have to ensure that the genuine ability to ensure an outcome that is not just about quantum but that is about returning resources and taonga to iwi is a genuine part of this Treaty settlement process. This is where I think the Government has made some advance to the benefit of iwi—not merely on a dollar-value quantum but also on cultural redress. We have seen here the ability to include in quite innovative ways aspects of cultural redress that restore confidence that this is an attempt to try to get an outcome that meets the needs of local iwi in trying to get a settlement. The other issue—and this is one that I think people look at all too scantly—is the role of the Waitangi Tribunal. If it was the role of the Waitangi Tribunal to give out binding recommendations you bet your bottom dollar that the tribunal would be considering very carefully exactly what it said because of the implications. 
But let us not stop there. By and large iwi should have the right to go towards direct negotiations. Some may not choose to go to the tribunal; that is their choice. I will not sit here in judgment and say which is the right way or the wrong way. However should iwi across the land decide to go into a direct negotiation process with the Crown boots and all and accepting warts and all that this is a head-to-head opportunity to get the best outcome with people talking to people then we should preserve that ability. It takes courage it takes leadership and it is a difficult choice to make. But none of us in this House can make it. We have to leave the ability for direct negotiation from iwi to occur unfettered by everybody’s opinions. So I think that really is an important point that is always overlooked in terms of the voice of the tribunal and the types of recommendations it makes. We need to take into account that iwi continue to want to preserve their ability to have direct negotiations with the Crown. 
Whether an independent panel will actually achieve the type of outcome that was being proposed by the previous speaker for the Maori Party I think remains to be seen. I think at the end of the day that any genuine attempt to get an outcome that is durable in the eyes of those negotiating the outcome must be upheld by this House of Parliament. It is woeful that National has adopted the tactic of not supporting various Treaty settlements that have gone through this House since the time we have been in Government. It is woeful because it signals that there is no confidence at all to go down a path of reconciliation. We just cannot as members of Parliament be sending that kind of message to New Zealanders who really want to move on. They want everybody to try to resolve these grievances and move on. Thank you. 
Vote agreed to.