Paraone Pita: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Paraone Pita: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18835] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 Subpart 1 is headed “Protocols”. It is very interesting given the reference to cultural beliefs and spiritual values that these protocols were not referred to as tikanga. But I can understand why they were not included as such. That would have contravened the Government’s decision to support the recognition of two hapu based purely on geographic location which is outside tikanga. So I can understand why the Government has called this subpart “Protocols”. 
I want to refer to clause 21 “Authority to issue amend or cancel protocols”. Clause 21(1)(a) states that the Minister may “issue a protocol to the Ngati Awa governance entity in the form set out in the schedules to the Ngati Awa deed of settlement;”. That quite clearly refers to a template for a protocol. What is of interest to me is clause 21(1)(b) which refers to amending or cancelling that protocol. I have to ask what happens if any amendments are at variance with one another. Again this clause provides an element of doubt. It also may put in question the endurance of the settlement this bill is addressing. I think it is important that if there is to be any amendment to protocols then there ought to be some form of template so that there is consistency within the different areas that this particular clause addresses. 
I also note that under clause 23 “Enforceability of protocols” subclause (2) states: “If the Crown fails without good cause to comply with its obligations under a protocol the Ngati Awa governance entity may subject to the Crown Proceedings Act 1950 enforce the protocol.” Again I refer to New Zealand First’s Supplementary Order Paper—which was defeated earlier—asking for the deletion of the words “or the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi”. I suggest that here is an opportunity for Ngati Awa should they not be too happy with a decision by the Crown to cause Ngati Awa to comply with their obligations under a protocol to make a further claim to the tribunal because it is in contravention of the— 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
PITA PARAONE 
: I will correct an omission of mine just before the tea break and that was to acknowledge all the Aucklanders who are caught up in the traffic gridlock. I thought that by coming back after tea I might have missed them but I realise they are still there so I acknowledge all of those who are still caught in traffic. 
I will conclude my time talking to this part by focusing on clause 23 and in particular subclause (2) which begins “If the Crown fails without good cause to comply with its obligations”. I notice that the bill is very silent on whether the Crown is obliged to comply if Ngati Awa do not agree with the obligations under the said protocol. That highlights again for New Zealand First some of the uncertainty about this bill. We referred to the earlier uncertainty with regard to the term “principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” and said that those very words lack definition. Here we see a repeat of that situation and it again puts into doubt the durability of this settlement.