te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20201] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I want to make some comments. Stephen Franks has proposed amendments that provide for clauses 7(2)(c) 7(3)(f) and three other clauses to be omitted. They are the “principles of the treaty” clauses. I can understand why they are there because the jurisdiction of the Waitangi Tribunal under section 6 of the Treaty of Waitangi Act is based on the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. The officials need to take note of that as well. Having sat on the tribunal for 10 years I am pretty much aware of what the jurisdiction is and it is the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. So I suggest the reality is that unless a claimant tribe can come and show there has been a breach of the principles of the treaty then its claim will fail. After succeeding on that basis either through the hearings process or through discussions with the Crown it is understandable why that clause referring to the principles of the treaty will appear in the settlement bill. 
Having said that though that clause has clearly become a—what can one say? 
Dail Jones 
: A template. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: Well it is certainly a template but it has been a template for some time. I think that what one could say is that that reference has become a bit of a millstone around the neck of this Parliament. That situation has occurred only since the advent of the Labour Government in 1999 because of course that term “the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” has been seen to appear in all manner of things since 1999 and the reality is that it does not always apply. National has severe reservations about the inclusion of that statement in legislation—no less in treaty settlement legislation than elsewhere. As I said earlier it has become a millstone because the Labour Government has tried to push it everywhere—absolutely everywhere. It is in employment legislation health legislation and in local government stuff—you name it. The Government has plonked the phrase “the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” everywhere and it does not apply—it is not applicable everywhere. 
In coming into the new dawn it is basically incumbent upon the Government to think hard about what it has done in this area and to consider whether that is the best way of dealing with the claims. I guess that if something is a breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi then it is probably a breach of the treaty itself. I think that is probably why ACT has come out so strongly against that phrase so National would have to support the amendment from ACT. However we do recognise that the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi form the jurisdiction for claims to the Waitangi Tribunal and therefore we can understand why the phrase is now part and parcel of settlement legislation. Going forward National has already signalled as has Winston Peters through his treaty deletions bill that that may not be the case in future. But Maori should not be disadvantaged by the removal of that phrase because if something is a breach of the principles of the treaty it is hard to fathom why it would not also be a breach of the treaty itself. That statement is present in a number of clauses throughout the bill and the Minister in the chair at this moment Mita Ririnui should turn his mind to whether it is the proper basis on which to settle claims. There is no harm in thinking about that and it is certainly appropriate to debate the issue particularly since National has raised the issue that it may not be appropriate to use that phrase in these modern times.