te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18860] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I appreciate the opportunity to say a few words on clauses 1 and 2. I want to support my colleague Dr Wayne Mapp as he confirms the support of National to get these historic grievances out of the way. I say to those members in the Committee who are a little bit new to this process and maybe to those who are not quite so new that we need to remind ourselves that Maori are continually being told to stop looking at the past but the reality is that as long as people carry a sense of injustice they will always look to the past and they will not be able to move forward until that injustice is put right. That is why these claims are so important. 
I can understand the position of members of New Zealand First and their worry about the insertion of references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi because we in National certainly have a similar concern. But I have to say I am disappointed that at this point in time they would see fit to vote against the third reading although I am not sure whether they will. I think that would be a great disappointment particularly as their Maori members know better than most how important it is that Maori are relieved of the burden of a feeling of injustice. Yet they will never be relieved of that burden if the majority of this Parliament does not vote for these settlements. 
I appreciate that the Ministers in the chair including Mita Ririnui answered all of our queries and our requests to get to their feet which is frankly somewhat of a change in a treaty Minister. I cannot remember the previous Minister getting to her feet in quite the way the current Minister the Hon Mark Burton has. We appreciate that but I reiterate to the Minister the potential for controversy and difficulty unless we firmly keep in our minds the fact that each settlement is unique to the particular tribe that is settling. 
That is why the member Judy Turner should do some homework about the issue about hapu. In our raising the issue with the Minister there was no sense of mischief at all. If members understood the basis on which hapu are traditionally viewed they would completely understand why New Zealand First and National felt compelled to make the comments they did. There should be no sense that any tribe yet to settle is in any way pre-empted in relation to what they feel and believe should be the definition of who the beneficiaries of their settlements are what they want to be recorded as being the hapu of their particular iwi and so on and so forth. So I ask the Minister to keep a keen eye out to make sure that the Office of Treaty Settlements is not bringing him things that could cause problems in the future. We certainly have our reservations about the capability of that office to understand the dynamics of Maori the tribe and the things that are important. 
In any event as the Minister was so responsive this evening I am depending on him to make sure that these things remain to the fore. The things that the Ngati Awa people have agreed to are unique to them. The treaty settlement framework is being generally followed and that is fine but when we get things like whether adopted children or whangai are to be included in settlements and whether new hapu are to be added those matters become very very serious and tribes that follow will not be told what should be in their settlements in regard to those things. 
I am disappointed in New Zealand First’s stance. I have always made the comment in relation to settlement legislation that it is all very well for ACT to criticise but where is ACT’s answer? I do not see any.