Finlayson Christopher: Ngati Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Finlayson Christopher: Ngati Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:635;Page:6436] 
CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National) 
: 
 This is a very sad day for this Parliament. I think we should have gone the extra mile to see what we as a Parliament could do for Ngati Mutunga particularly bearing in mind the history of the Taranaki wars. As Mr Paraone said the incident at Parihaka is one of the real blots on New Zealand’s history and I refer to recitals (8) and (9) of the preamble. I think it is worth reading out recital (9): “On 5 November 1881 more than 1500 Crown troops invaded and occupied Parihaka. Over the following days some 1600 Maori were forcibly expelled from the settlement and made to return to their previous homes. Houses and cultivations were systematically destroyed and stock was driven away or killed. Taranaki Maori assert that women were raped and otherwise molested by the soldiers:” and two of the leaders were arrested and held until 1883. This House had no difficulty passing special legislation to provide for their imprisonment without trial. 
That is a real blot on New Zealand’s history. It is something so many New Zealanders know something about and in the first reading of this bill it was the subject of a number of emotional speeches by various members of Parliament. I would have thought that the very House that could pass that kind of odious special legislation could go the extra mile for Ngati Mutunga in the settlement legislation especially when the settlement report from the Maori Affairs Committee in reporting back to the House got it wrong. Once again I have to say the report simply is incorrect because it proceeds on a faulty premise. What I am seeking to do is to amend the bill to provide for the disestablishment of the iwi authority and the establishment of a post-settlement governance entity. The report says that is not feasible but that is not what I am seeking to do. So there we have it. 
There was a humble attempt by me to try to go the extra mile for Ngati Mutunga; and not for party political purposes. I was interested in the comments of Mr Paraone who said it was perhaps a bit odd or surprising that they were dealing with the National Party on this. The background to the matter was that last Monday I was sitting at Rotorua airport and I am sure Mr Flavell will confirm this and Mr Tuuta from Ngati Mutunga came and sat down and we were speaking about the settlement legislation. He mentioned there was a bit of a problem with the transfer of assets and I said for him to send me a note and I would see what we could do. That was not for party political purposes but simply because I feel very strongly that this settlement legislation is extremely important for the good of the country. I particularly recognise the serious events that occurred in Taranaki and wanted to do something for Ngati Mutunga and for Mr Tuuta for whom I have the highest regard. 
It is interesting that the rununga wrote to the chairperson of the Maori Affairs Committee on 13 November setting out the various points that I have tried to make in the course of the Committee stage. I do not know whether they have received a reply and I wonder whether the chair of the select committee will take a call and address some of those matters. It simply addresses the point that Ngati Mutunga does not seek any parliamentary involvement in the establishment of the new governance entity Te Runanga o Ngati Mutunga. This was done on 21 December 2005. But they did ask whether Parliament could assist by way of the transfer of iwi assets from the old entity to the new entity. Legislation recognising the change of ownership of assets to the new entity would simplify and expedite the task for Ngati Mutunga in making this transition. So I was simply seeking to pick up precedent provided in the Te Arawa lakes settlement legislation and other settlement legislation. Procedural difficulties appear to have got in the way and that is a great tragedy because I think in the light of that odious 1883 legislation we as a Parliament owe it to Ngati Mutunga to go that extra mile. I am disappointed that pettifogging procedural niceties have got in the way.