Mapp Wayne: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Third Reading 
Mapp Wayne: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:624;Page:19267] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 It is appropriate when speaking on a member’s bill—interestingly enough introduced by the Minister of Maori Affairs—to acknowledge Ngati Awa in the House today and acknowledge that this is part of the settlement. I guess the major part of it will actually be tomorrow but today we are establishing a new entity that is designed to facilitate and administer the settlement. For those reasons primarily National is supporting this legislation. 
I want to note that we are required to pass this law because of the Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Act of 1988 which established the runanga as a trust. Today we are giving it full powers as a body corporate. All of that might seem straightforward and simple enough but the problem is this—and I think the previous speaker Mahara Okeroa illustrated the very concern: it is a serious question I believe that we are required in the 21st century to pass specific legislation for a specific iwi giving them not a general status but a special status in legislation. The fact that the previous speaker Mahara Okeroa essentially had what was almost a private conversation with Ngati Awa demonstrates the problem we get into with this pattern of doing things for the future because today we are using the Parliament of New Zealand the supreme lawmaking entity embracing the whole nation to pass private legislation. So I guess it was not surprising that Mahara Okeroa saw it as a private conversation. But it is not. We are making the law of the land. Certainly it is for the benefit of Ngati Awa and certainly it is to facilitate the settlement but in principle it is wrong. I know we have to do it because there is existing legislation that has to be dealt with. What I would say to the Government—and I guess it is something that National will be addressing over time—is that we need a different way to deal with these kinds of issues. 
Clearly the legislation applying to Ngati Awa and indeed to many other iwi that have their own legislation needs to be modernised. It would be better to have a general piece of legislation that applied to all iwi and that brought their administrative structures into the contemporary world ensuring that the structures complied in a general way with trusts legislation companies legislation charitable trusts legislation societies and so on and so forth. 
In fact it would be the choice of each individual iwi as to exactly which option it would choose to administer its settlements. 
Clearly the issue of settlements is of huge public concern and clearly this Parliament is charged with passing specific legislation in each case. I would prefer it if in time we could move past that but at least for the meantime that is a public duty. I say to ACT members that it is not credible for them to keep coming here and saying that they want to conclude the settlement process but on virtually no occasion have they actually voted for a settlement. I say “on virtually no occasion” because I know that there has been at least one occasion when ACT did vote for a settlement but as a general proposition that does not occur. As a general rule National does vote for settlements—whether they are the Labour Government’s or ours—and we do that for a very deliberate reason. We do so because we think it is important for this nation and we will be talking further about that tomorrow. 
There may be occasions when from time to time we might want to record a particular objection to particular settlements and that would be recorded through the way that we vote. But as a general principle we acknowledge the need to deal with these issues. The problem with special legislation is this: it leads to a view that people acquire special rights. We can see that in all the consultation provisions that this Government has been introducing into a wide variety of legislation. On issues that obviously affect individual iwi consultation is relevant and appropriate. But where it is not appropriate is with the creeping participation that separates our country into two groups of people giving one group general consultation rights and another group special consultation rights not just on the things of specific relevance to the iwi but on the broad issues relating to local government health and education. In other words they are rights to do with the general administration of the law and policy in our country. 
I believe that when special legislation for particular iwi leads to that outcome we are not going down the correct path. So I would say to the Government that while it continues to do settlements—and over the next few months I guess that we may be having a few more—it needs to be thinking also about whether there is a better way of dealing with these administrative issues: the creation of the entities of the iwi to administer the settlements. I would much prefer and I believe that over time the House will see the logic of this to have a general empowering piece of legislation to deal with all iwi in relation to their governance bodies and then each iwi would choose the particular model that will suit its particular purposes. It is no business of this Parliament to have any role in that process. After all when the settlements are made they become the property of the iwi to deal with as the iwi feels fit. Naturally all of us would wish that each iwi will do the best in that regard but at the end of the day if that does not work out then it is the responsibility of the particular iwi. 
I just want to finish with this point. As I intend to say tomorrow I do wish Ngati Awa well in the administration of its claim. I do wish that it will be able to empower the people of Ngati Awa wherever they are in New Zealand in the process of the claim. I understand that in doing so it is less about money and more about pride as a people. Ultimately as the Hui Taumata demonstrated the prosperity of Maori will depend on individual endeavours through education not through iwi claims. But part of empowerment and part of pride is recognising historic grievances settling them and then moving on as a nation. 
I want to conclude by saying that National members support this bill but we do raise this general issue which I believe this country will have to deal with for the good of the nation.