Turei MetiriaMETIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Kia ora koutou katoa huri noa i Te Whare tēnā koutou. I te tuatahi ka mihi au ki a Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa tēnā koutou katoa. Kei aku nui kei aku rahi i te tī i te tā tēnā koutou katoa. Ka tū au ki te tautoko i tēnei pire. He pire nā te iwi o Ngāti Kahu me tōna whakataunga Tiriti ā nō reira he mihi nui ki a koutou katoa.[Acknowledgments to you all throughout the House welcome. In the first instance I pay a tribute to Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa accolades to you all. To my great and numerous from near and far well done. I rise to endorse this bill which belongs to the people of Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa bill with their Treaty settlement so a massive compliment to you all.]The Green Party will be supporting this bill through all its stages. It is a small settlement in the scheme of settlements but it has still been hard fought for by those who have been doing the work. Others have a great deal more knowledge than I do about the iwi and the hapū and the whānau connections in relation to this bill but I do want to address the controversy that arose out of this legislation around Stony Creek Station. There has long been in settlement bills—especially in the early days; less so these days—real issues around the recognition of hapū and the Crown criteria for whom it will deal with. The Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations has talked about the mandate of iwi and I acknowledge that that is the case with the process as it is but that does not mean that that process delivers justice to all of those who have had their land taken or stolen by the Crown and who are entitled to justice through the settlement process. There are a number of settlements that are controversial within the iwi and hapū themselves. The issue for me as a legislator is how we make sure that the process that is used to deliver justice through these settlements does not in itself create further injustice and does not risk modern raupatu. That is a question that has been considered often in the debate in this House but not often enough in the review of the settlement process which does at times create an injustice that cannot be resolved. It is exacerbated by the legal process but not resolved by the legal process. I think that that is in effect what is happening here. There is genuine controversy around Stony Creek Station. There was an occupation of that land over a long period of time by people who felt that they were having their land taken from them through the settlement. Whatever anyone may think of the individuals involved or the nature of that occupation occupations by whānau by hapū and by iwi have been one of the only tools that they have had to demonstrate their connection to that land and their heartache at having that land taken from them. It is occupations actually that have led to justice being achieved in many of those cases. It was the occupation of Bastion Point that led to the resolution of Bastion Point. The history of occupation has to be taken seriously as a means by which people who have no other legal opportunity who do not have the financial resources to buy lawyers or who do not necessarily have access to members of Parliament who will advocate on their behalf—it is often the only tool that they have to assert their mana over the land that they believe was wrongly taken from them and should be returned. So I am concerned that the issue for Ngāti Aukiwa is not trivialised in this debate. It is a very real risk that in the passing of this settlement bill we are enacting a modern day raupatu. If we are going to pass this bill—and the Green Party members support Treaty settlement bills because we know how hard fought for they are and that there must be some restitution for the losses that iwi Māori suffer—we need to pass it knowing that. Knowing that means that there will be another day when we have another opportunity to remedy the wrong we may be committing today. So we cannot do this without acknowledging that it is going to come back at some point and somebody is going to have to deal with it—maybe us; maybe those who come after us. In acknowledging that and in recognising that Ngāti Aukiwa in this case and other iwi and hapū in other cases of settlement controversy have the right to have their injustices and the thefts of their land acknowledged and treated seriously in this House. It is very important to us that we continue to review and reflect on the Treaty process itself to make sure that at every possible step it does not exacerbate harm that it does not cause more raupatu and that we are not continuing to cause harm to iwi Māori to hapū and to whānau. That is why we have always said that the full and final aspect of these settlements is what we write in the law but we can never have a full and final settlement of the Treaty. The Treaty is an ongoing conversation. It is an ongoing issue and it will be so for ever because this is a colonised country. We cannot pretend that is not the case. These settlement bills are one tool that we are using in the process of delivering genuine Te Tiriti justice over time. It is a tool that has its failings. It has its advantages but it is just one tool in the ongoing process of honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi. That is why the process for these settlements must be under constant review and reflection to make sure that it is not causing more harm. Unfortunately I do not think that happens. We are actually on a journey with these settlements. There is a process that is under way. That process is rolled out and there is not actually that much wiggle room. We know that iwi do not really get a chance to reassess for example the value of these settlements. We know that the mandating process is pretty much set in place. We know that the large natural groupings approach is pretty much set in place for the moment. Let us not forget that all of those criteria for how these settlements occur are not criteria established by Māori; they are criteria established by the Crown and are rolled out because of the precedent of having done it so many times. That does not make it just. It does not make it the right process; it just makes it the process we are using today. I want to genuinely acknowledge those who have worked very hard to get this settlement and to get some resolution for the loss of this iwi. I want to acknowledge all of those who have fought and lost their fight for justice for their losses as well today. Never let us trivialise the fact that sometimes we are causing harm in the process of trying to deliver justice to others. Thank you.