Ririnui Mita: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Ririnui Mita: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18913] 
Hon MITA RIRINUI (Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 I stand briefly to respond to some of the matters that have been raised. Firstly I will respond to the matter raised by the Hon Richard Prebble in relation to the Maori Affairs Committee and the continued inclusion of bilingual commentaries in legislation. I want the member to know that the Government is a minority on the committee. In this particular case there was considerable discussion and it was agreed by the committee that there would be a bilingual commentary on this bill. Whether that practice continues in the future will be up to the select committee. 
In respect of the other matters raised by the Hon Georgina te Heuheu I will say in relation to the low turn-out by Ngati Awa for ratifying the governance arrangement that this is a problem that we seem to be confronting with a lot of settlement bills particularly when it comes to the ratification of the governance structures. 
Ngati Awa has a long history of attempting to get its governance structure right. The first discussions about the appropriateness of the Ngati Awa Trust Board began in 1995 and have continued week after week month after month year after year right up until December of last year to determine whether the proposed runanga was the appropriate structure. It is fair to say that like many claimant groups by that time Ngati Awa was suffering from treaty fatigue. 
Basically this double-step ratification process—one step to accept the settlement package and the second to accept the governance structure—is probably a very difficult process for all claimant groups. That is why we believe we are seeing a low turn-out. This has happened in every case. 
I say in response to another of Georgina te Heuheu’s concerns that one of the submitters expressed some concern about the runanga’s ability to not only hold assets but to retain them. I advise members to look at the charter that the Ngati Awa runanga has put in place and they will find that there is a very very rigid process to be undergone before any assets can be alienated from the runanga. That would happen if it were Maori land under the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act. It is a similar process. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
Hon MITA RIRINUI 
: Before I was rudely interrupted by the dinner gong I was responding to concerns raised by Richard Prebble Gerry Brownlee and the honourable member Georgina te Heuheu. I believe I responded sufficiently to Mr Prebble’s concern in terms of the ongoing inclusion of bilingual commentaries in settlement legislation. As I said that would be a matter for the Maori Affairs Committee and it is unfair to say that the Government has the numbers because the Government is in a minority on this select committee. Any decisions in that regard would be required to be supported by more than just Government members. 
I also touched on the history of this legislation and the length of time that Ngati Awa had been involved in determining a suitable governance structure to manage their post-settlement assets. 
Lastly I responded to concern that was expressed at the select committee in terms of the ability of the runanga not only to hold assets but to retain them and to ensure that there was a transparent process in place before any assets could be alienated from the runanga. If I had a concern at the select committee it was not that the transparency was not there but probably that if anything the charter that the runanga has agreed to might prevent its ability to grow those assets. But going by the explanation given to the select committee in Whakatane that certainly would not be the case. But it was important for the runanga to ensure that the assets were protected into the future and at the same time to ensure the runanga could still do business in terms of growing those assets.