Sharples Pita: Tariff (Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Sharples Pita: Tariff (Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:630;Page:2003] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 When the Maori Party addressed this House at the first reading of this bill we raised the notion that the Treaty of Waitangi statement in the national interest analysis could have been an excellent opportunity to see this bill as a test case for really understanding the implications of the Treaty. We have the unique situation in this Parliament of being flush with members’ bills that place before the House the concept of the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and yet ironically here was an opportunity for the Government to demonstrate leadership about that area which it has overlooked or worse yet actively neglected. 
The national interest analysis included the statement that there is nothing in the agreement that will prevent the Government from fulfilling any obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. How much more proactive it would have been to see the Government honour its obligations instead of the rather pitiful and negative response highlighted there. We could have had a strong statement about the Crown committing itself to being the guarantor and protector of the Maori interest and of the implications that would bring with it for largely unexplored relationships between the two signatories. 
This nation is on the brink of a major change and the conduct of the affairs of the nation must be interpreted in ways in which taonga Maori are actively protected. This bill could have been a starter in exploring even tentatively those implications. Article 2 of the Treaty is relevant in fulfilling the aspirations of Maori to live according to kaupapa or values and tikanga that derive from those kaupapa. But so too is article 3. The guarantee of article 3 the investment in the survival of Maori as citizens of the nation could lead to fresh thinking in all aspects of the policy programme. 
How would that work in the tariff bill? The real impacts for tangata whenua that will emerge from that agreement are to do with investments economic development and employment options that may be adversely impacted upon. Have the officials involved in putting together the agreement understood the likely implications for Maori women who may lose their jobs in the clothing and textile industries? What impact will increased foreign ownership of New Zealand assets and resources by investors from Chile Brunei and Singapore have for tangata whenua? How will the employment and cultural development of Maori be affected by the agreement? Will it have any downstream effects for the embedding of intellectual and cultural property rights? Taking the time to flesh out in more detail the development of mechanisms both legal and policy to protect Maori cultural heritage including matauranga Maori or Maori knowledge is a way of giving life to Te Tiriti o Waitangi as the foundation of our nation. 
 The Maori Party supports the continuing development of international standards to protect the world’s oral traditions intangible cultural heritage and endangered languages and supports the promotion of cultural and linguistic diversity. One would also hope that the Government would be aware of existing indigenous declarations including the Mataatua Declaration on Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights of Indigenous Peoples and be proud of them as a means of distinguishing Aotearoa on the world scene. I note how the performance of the haka at the Melbourne Commonwealth Games is being lauded as one of the symbols that makes us different from the rest of the Commonwealth and indeed the world. 
I have taken the time to give detail to what it would mean to apply treaty principles to the nation-to-nation strategic economic partnership agreement under discussion here as I fear that all too often in this House point-scoring and derision can mean opportunities for learning and challenges are missed. The relationship with Chile Brunei Darussalam New Zealand and Singapore is an opportunity for tangata whenua to be involved in the decision-making process on international trade providing us with a reason to scrutinise trade treaties as to their compliance with the Treaty of Waitangi. It is of vital importance that we open our lines of inquiry about the processes by which international agreements are made and monitor them to ensure our nation’s well-being is protected supported and enhanced. 
As an example of that approach I want to turn to another relationship document the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to show how we need to improve upon our position in respect of international agreements. The Minister of Foreign Affairs recently reported that four factors must be understood about New Zealand’s position on the draft declaration: first it must be consistent with New Zealand law and policy second it must be consistent with existing human rights law third it must protect the rights of all citizens and fourth it must safeguard the territorial integrity and political unity of States as well as the responsibility of democratically elected Governments to govern for the welfare of all of their citizens. That was a fascinating statement of subterfuge which mentions all citizens twice and yet fails to mention the indigenous people: tangata whenua; Maori. The Minister was explaining the Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and not once was the word “indigenous” used. 
In defending his statement the Minister explained that the imperatives New Zealand requires in the declaration are legitimate ones for any democratically elected Government. Other States take a similar position on those imperatives including Australia and the United States. Of course I do not need to point out to this House the value or otherwise of comparing the profile of how this nation addresses the status of indigenous peoples with that of how the Australian nation addresses its Aboriginal communities or how the United States addresses its Native American First Nations people. But the question I do want to raise is the bizarre circumstance of a policy about indigenous people that twinks out “indigenous” and replaces it with “all citizens”. Hence we get the situation of a position on New Zealand’s indigenous people that fails to mention them or of a visionless Budget Policy Statement released last May that forgot to identify Maori as part of the citizens of this land or of a foreshore and seabed policy that extinguished the rights of the indigenous people in the interests of all its citizens so that all New Zealanders could have a picnic on the beach. 
When will we become brave enough to be proud of our indigenous people and showcase our distinctive relationship with our First Nations people through Te Tiriti o Waitangi? One has only to look at the Commonwealth Games to understand how critical those relations are with indigenous societies. When Moss Burmester won the 200 metres butterfly final at the pool on the opening night of swimming the haka that the New Zealand team performed in his honour sent ripples throughout the Commonwealth. It has got people talking trying to understand the relevance of the cultural honour accorded through that practice. 
While athletes are competing in the games venue a parallel cultural event entitled the Stolenwealth Games is happening in another part of Melbourne. Thousands of Aboriginal people from around Australia and across the globe have made their presence felt in drawing attention to the ongoing injustices of the Government-enforced destruction of indigenous societies. They are gathering on Bunurong land known as Kings Domain under the banner of the Black GST which stands for genocide sovereignty and treaty. Black GST elder Robbie Thorpe described the event as demonstrating to the world the history of the Commonwealth in oppressing indigenous people across the globe in a common experience of exploitation over generations. 
I raise this issue today as I believe it is always important to look beyond the rhetoric of documents negotiated by officials to see what the situation is for the peoples of the affected communities. If we are to seriously enter into the trans-Pacific economic partnership we must as a first point ensure that the indigenous people of this land are protected and actively involved in the decision making and must concurrently ensure that the indigenous people of Chile and of other nations in the economic partnership are likewise involved with their particular interests taken care of. A trans-Tasman agreement say with Chile could be beneficial if it helped to facilitate economic and cultural linkages between Maori and Chile’s indigenous people including the Mapuche from mainland Chile as well as the Rapanui of Easter Island who have historical linkages with Maori. 
The Maori Party urges all New Zealanders to become better informed about the Treaty of Waitangi including the rights and obligations of both the Crown and Maori and about the rights of indigenous peoples under international law. We need to seek constructive dialogue rather than divisive statements from our politicians. We need continued tolerance and enthusiasm on all sides. Until we are in that position it may be better just to sort out our own backyard.