SpeechHon ALFRED NGARO (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'd like to begin my speech on the third reading of this bill in the House as I began last night. It's not the what" that we debate; it's the "how". We know that what we need to do is to get our country back into a state where people can live normal lives children can go to school mums and dads can go to work they can have time socialising gathering around our country whether it be in maraes or churches. That is what we all want and what we all desire. So the "what" is not in question in all our debates here in this House in regard to this bill; it's the "how". It is how this bill will give extraordinary powers in ways and in places that for us we object to and we've heard the cries of the community at large who have spoken to us about this.Earlier on today in the morning session of the House in the debate around this bill the Hon Chris Hipkins talked about the role of an Opposition and as he recounted his time when he was here on the opposite side as the Opposition during the Christchurch earthquake he saw that his responsibility as an Opposition member was to debate and to scrutinise the bills that were before the House. That's absolutely correct and that's our role and responsibility. The issue though is this: the comments that he made was it about this disease and about the rampant nature of it? The viciousness the carelessness—that had no care and concern whether it be by ethnicity whether it be by social demographic. Irrespective of that this disease would harm and hurt all peoples in its way. We understand that. But can I say to the member to the Minister and to the public at large: let's not let the disease determine our sense of destiny. Let's not let this disease and the fear of this disease determine the way in which we conduct ourselves both in this House and also in the public place.Fear raises an awareness and a concern but should never be our motivation. Our motivation should always be that we lead both the country and its people and our communities with an aspiration that identifies who we are as a people. You don't step out in fear. You need to step out in faith to believe in the vision of this country and of its people. That's how we step forward and yet inside this bill it's based on a motivation of fear. As the Minister talked about we fear the fact of what this will do to us and yet it's a proven fact that over the different levels of level 4 and level 3 the country has rallied together. The goodwill has been seen and shown in so many different ways that we are proud of as a country. That is the character and that's the nature.I want to acknowledge Kiritapu Allan and what she spoke about. She's absolutely right. She talked about the history and the past. And I want to talk about and when I spoke in my first speech why was not the trust and confidence for Māori at the forefront of the decisions before the drafting of this bill? And this morning as I was around the place and saying karakias I went out into the lobby—and not many of us grab a hold of the Hansard that is there. My attention was drawn to the fact of the Hansard of 1881. We remember that Act because on 5 November 1881 was the blot and the shame in our nation's history of Parihaka where the confiscation of land and of people's rights were taken away. And that's the fear at times that people have: will we revisit the past? At different times we have. I couldn't find it there because the determination and the proclamation was actually made in October and the Hansard finished in September because that's when the House rose. But what I did find—and I know the Hon Shane Jones will know this—was a petition by Nu Hare which is for Ngati Here and the Ngati Tupako hapū which are in the Hokianga. It was the Tapawai Block which was again confiscated and taken from them.When I read the Hansard the way in which our Māori people were treated was one in which we would hang our heads in shame. And I want to say this and the reason I mention that is that the truth is we've all got blood on our hands. We've all got guilt in our heart for the way that we have treated Māori in this land and in this country. But how this relates to Part 3 of the bill is this: Māori were given an exposure draft of the bill. Prominent members of Te Rōpū Whakakaupapa Urutā the National Māori Pandemic Group gave their response—a considered a measured response. The first comment they made: "There is neither any general Treaty clause nor any obligation to have regard to the Treaty or its principles at any point of decision making or performance of functions under the Act." You see that's the point for all of us here not just for those that are in the governing power. What we've forgotten is this: we've not treated this relationship this covenant relationship with the due respect that it deserves. And if we don't do it now—and for those of you that are in this position because there will come a day when it will change and the same question should be asked: what are you doing to honour that relationship?The words that we use are not "partnership"; the word is called "kawenata" which is a covenant a sacred moral obligation that's irrevocable. And yet we find again consistently—I asked the Minister the Attorney-General when did he receive that advice? I do know that advice came prior to the bill being drafted and being submitted into the House. So why again was it not included? None of the provisions or the submissions that were made were included in anywhere near the draft. I can read from the comments that we hear and I want to state this. They said "To ensure that there is no further erosion of goodwill it is critical that the actions are proportionate and enacted in a high-trust environment. In particular there must be recognition of the significance of marae and their expression of mana motuhake." That was prior to the drafting of the bill and that's the point. It's not the fact that you've changed it. And I want to acknowledge the fact of the advocacy. I do. Kiritapu Allan and others that are here; the Hon Peeni Henare the Hon Shane Jones. I know that you advocate but you see there's a failure in our system—I'm going to own this; our system—where we've not taken on board what should have been included right from the start a piece of legislation that impacts all of our people. And here's the point: if we can't get that covenant relationship right how will we conduct ourselves for the rest of New Zealand?This is how we conduct ourselves. When it came to the funeral directors and others and clergy those who conduct places of worship we didn't trust them to be able to accommodate and put in place—when it comes to tangihanga we weren't trusting them. And now we have; we've come half way. They said a hundred; now it's 50. When it came to places of worship you can go to a gym where there's a hundred people you can even go to the movie theatre but you can't go to your place of worship where it could be 2000 square metres of space and yet you can't even have a hundred people in there. Why? The question is that you're not trusting the people. If we haven't had the ability to trust a covenant relationship for tangata whenua that will impact all of us and I say all of us. If we don't change this part of the system we'll not learn the lessons of the past—and what I hold here is part of Hansard of 1881. I can tell you this now; we'll keep repeating it into the present and then into the future. That's the point of the debate that I put forward.I want to finish off with my final remarks that come as this—and this comes again from the words that have been spoken here by the advisers by Māori that were given an exposure draft that came prior to the bill being introduced into the House. The bill states that the Minister must have regard to advice but there is no legal compulsion to seek or take that advice. There again seems to be no regard to culturally informed evidence-based decision-making. It is of great concern that the interests of Māori are not referred to at all in this section given that all manner of enforcement powers and associated sanctions have historically and contemporaneously been used disproportionately against Māori. This absence raises alarm—this absence raises alarm. And if we can't in this nation get right after 160 years of Westminster governance the roles and responsibility between a covenant relationship what we are doing today in this House by passing this bill is a breach of every other relationship of every civil liberty of every other citizen in this nation. If you get this one right you get the others right. We haven't today in this House and I own this as a "we". But for you in power and with influence you have the ability to decide this.So today you will now own the responsibility of this bill the consequences of it: the removal of the ability of trust and confidence in our nation at the heart and core of the people that are critically important today. We oppose this bill on the grounds of the fact that it does not give trust and confidence. Fear is a powerful stimulant. Used in the wrong hands it is a coercion but used rightly it will bring protection and power to the people of this land. Thank you Madam Speaker.DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call. I call Kiritapu Allan."