Heatley Phil: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15427] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I would like to point out an issue that came to us in the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee that probably best typifies the absurdity of some of the bureaucracy and the patronising approach evident in the bill originally tabled by the Minister of Fisheries. Some iwi came to us—NgaiTahu and Tainui in particular—and said that they had already been recognised in other Crown settlements as having structures in place to deal with settlements as having a mandate on behalf of their people to negotiate or work through a settlement and as having systems in place whereby they are accountable to their shareholders. Those iwi asked why they could not just pick up their assets and put them to work for their people almost immediately. They asked why they had to go back to the Crown and prove that they had some mandate that they had some sort of trust or company set-up that could handle the assets and that they could be accountable for their actions. 
That seemed sensible to the select committee so we went back and made amendments to clause 14 so that such iwi organisations can if they want it be given automatic recognition as iwi groups. I find it quite absurd that we in Parliament are deciding for Maori that they are iwi. Maori know they are iwi and their ancestors knew they were an iwi group. They know about their whanau and hapu and where they came from. The future generations will know about their whanau hapu and iwi group and where they came from. Why is Parliament doing this? Anyway the select committee decided it would make amendments to that clause so that iwi organisations such as NgaiTahu and Tainui can if they want have automatic recognition. All that they have to do is demonstrate that they are formally structured and are accountable to their members which they are; that they have already established an asset-holding company that can take those fisheries assets on board and put them into action straight away which they have; and that they have already been accepted by the Crown as having a mandate for Treaty of Waitangi settlement purposes which they have. 
New Zealanders know about the NgaiTahu settlement and the Tainui settlement. Those Maori groups have already been through all the hoops that a Government bureaucracy can throw at them. They have been through all the paperwork and all the court cases. They have answered all the patronising questions. They have dealt with all the accountability that the white man would throw at them—plus some for some reason just because they are Maori. They have been through all of that and this Government wanted them to go through it all again in order to get these fisheries assets—which incidentally have already belonged to them for 12 years now anyway. 
National is delighted to support the changes to clause 14 to make sure that iwi groups such as NgaiTahu and Tainui that are proven in those areas—that are formally structured and accountable have already established an asset-holding company and have already been accepted by the Crown as having a mandate for treaty negotiations—can just pick up a large bulk of their settlement assets and get on with the job of running a fishing business. Sadly that is only to do with the inshore quota. National wants to see that extended to a degree—Wayne Mapp will address it in his amendments—to offshore quota.