Mahuta Nanaia: Whanganui Iwi (Whanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Whanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Mahuta Nanaia: Whanganui Iwi (Whanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Whanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:670;Page:16921] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I will take a brief moment to make a contribution to the preamble and reiterate Labour’s support for the negotiated outcome that has been reached in respect of the Whanganui Iwi (Whanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Whanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill. 
The preamble is a very succinct illustration of the on-account settlement but one might be forgiven for reading quite a bit into it because at some point it affords the opportunity for Kaitoke Prison to be owned by the people of Whanganui and particularly by the people of Ngati Apa as I read it. 
Although I was not on the Maori Affairs Committee I commend its members for their work as difficult as it was for them. They were not able to change too much in the bill. In fact no changes have been made to the preamble at all. That is probably an inheritance of the Treaty settlement process and a negotiated outcome between primarily the Crown and iwi. The select committee has become more of a sieve if you like that tries to ensure that the intent of the negotiated outcome can be articulated correctly in legislation. We have at the most minor technical amendments but not substantial amendments and that has been the case since this process started. Although various parliamentarians have at times sought to consider changes in various parts of the bill we recognise the difficulty in being able to do that. 
In respect of the preamble I think the process of setting out clearly in a preamble what the terms and conditions of a settlement are is a good standard for settlement legislation. Over time as our House matures we might actually see a greater calling for bilingual interpretation of our legislation. I can see that over time we as a House may see ourselves debating our laws both in English and in Maori. We have a number of lawyers coming through the Whanganui iwi who want to see law written in te reo Maori. Indeed one day we may see preambles of Treaty settlement legislation at the minimum translated. 
In response to some of the comments raised by the Green Party member Catherine Delahunty I say that I do value Green members’ contributions to these types of debates. Although the process is difficult by and large once one gets to the point where a settlement has been reached—and to the point where iwi and certainly negotiators have recognised it along the way—concessions a great deal of sacrifice and some judgments have to be made. By the time that process has been through and we have got to this stage in the House it is my strong view that as parliamentarians we should ensure that there is a robust process to ensure that the legislation aligns to the intent of the deed and to ensure that those voices who do not feel that they were heard through iwi processes have Parliament as a last forum in which to petition and advocate those interests prior to the passage of legislation. Perhaps as a lasting testament to the leadership of the country there should be an opportunity for political parties to put a peg in the sand and say where they stand on Treaty settlements which will form the foundation of where this country is going. 
In my brief contribution to the preamble I say that it is a succinct summary of the terms and conditions of this on-account settlement with Whanganui iwi regarding Kaitoke Prison. I want to talk more probably in other parts of the bill about the substance of what that affords in terms of opportunities. Finally I would like to commend the work of the Maori Affairs Committee in ensuring that there is a strong alignment between the intent of the settlement with the form of the legislation. Kia ora.