Smith Murray: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Procedure In Committee 
Smith Murray: Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill — Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:623;Page:18915] 
MURRAY SMITH (United Future) 
: 
 I am pleased on behalf of United Future to take a call on the Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Bill and to express my congratulations again to the runanga on it. In particular I note that this is a watershed bill. Its approach is actually quite distinctively different from the approach we have tended to use towards governance entities in treaty settlements. That is evidenced and crystallised in the report of the Maori Affairs Committee which states in its commentary on the bill: “Under the bill Te Runanga will become a stand-alone body corporate to be administered under this bill and Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Charter. The accountabilities set out in the Charter will replace the accountabilities to the Crown that are currently specified in the Maori Trust Boards Act 1955.” It is the move towards self-governance by runanga of their settlements in a form they adopt rather than in a form imposed upon them—often a model arising from our British heritage rather than being something that identifies with tikanga Maori—that is so noticeable here and it is something to be commended. I think that it is a watershed—a sign that we are moving to a greater level of maturity in terms of our relationship with iwi where we entrust to them the ability to govern their assets in a manner more akin to their own understandings of governance entities. I think that is to be applauded. 
The key things of course that we must protect in the interests of iwi as much as in the interests of the nation as a whole are issues such as accountability. Under the structure in this bill there is a lot more accountability to the members of the runanga and iwi than there is to the Crown and that is fitting because we are passing settlement proceeds to them. We are passing them from the Crown into their hands in recognition that this is some compensation albeit modest compensation for wrongs done to them. How that money is used is really a matter for them to control rather than the Crown being a watchdog. Indeed I think that we as a nation often have been very patronising towards Maori when we have said to them that they must follow a Pakeha model and that Pakeha or the Crown know best how to manage their assets rather than Maori managing their assets themselves. I welcome that move and I welcome that recognition. 
The key thing of course is that the runanga must ensure that that accountability is genuine. Only too recently we have seen the Te Wananga o Aotearoa fiasco where the confidence of members of Parliament in particular—and I guess the media and through them the public in general—has waned somewhat because of accusations about accountability processes and management and about other issues such as nepotism which we in New Zealand tend to regard as unacceptable that have been seen throughout that institution. I think that is a warning sign of their being quite a lot of scrutiny of Maori organisations. Some would say there is more scrutiny of Maori organisations than there is of Pakeha organisations and I will not dispute that. Nevertheless there are people who are watching. The model in this bill is a new way of going forward that gives more independence to iwi which is welcome but it comes with those sorts of cautions. 
I note that one of the concerns picked up by the select committee related to the dispute resolution process particularly about whether it preserves the right of an individual to access courts when appropriate. I note that the select committee said that it had sought clarification and had been advised that although clause 15 of the Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill will remove the jurisdiction of the courts tribunals and other judicial bodies in respect of matters regarding the settlement of Ngati Awa’s historical claims it does not remove any right a member of Ngati Awa may have to access the courts in respect of disputes within the runanga about settlement assets and other matters. I am sure that is correct but it would be a pity if having achieved this the iwi of Ngati Awa were then put into a situation where they had to go back effectively to the Crown courts in order to resolve disputes within their own iwi. 
Once again from that aspect it is important that the runanga act in accordance with the ways that maintain accountability to their own members which means that neither Parliament nor the members of Ngati Awa become concerned about the way the assets are being managed. Obviously the process of democratic elections will provide some degree of oversight but as we know those happen only infrequently. A lot can happen on a fairly rapid basis that makes an iwi lose confidence and that election processes that occur only on an irregular basis cannot fix. Once again we need only to look at Te Wananga o Aotearoa to see that the problems that have arisen there are not ones that can wait until an election process can replace the board if the board has been at fault. These things arise at very short notice and hit the media. For the sake not only of Ngati Awa but of Maoridom throughout the country it is important that Ngati Awa and the runanga in particular look at this situation and take great care of the new provisions that relate to their self-sufficiency. 
So I congratulate them on what they have achieved. I think the future is now looking a lot brighter for them. I trust they will take into account the comments I have made and that they will also take into account the minority interests because that is often from where the fuel comes. When I talk about minority interests it is not only minority interests within Ngati Awa itself; I know there are Pakeha who are affected by the provisions of this bill. I have discussed at length the interests of one such person who came to me and whose land is being used to provide particular rights under this bill. There are issues still that have to be resolved in terms of the ownership of the land that the rights have been granted over and there is a lot of concern there that effectively the iwi coming on to that land will misuse the rights they have been given under this bill. This person thinks that those rights affect his land. He feels that the Crown took the land for one purpose but nevertheless did not hand it back when that purpose was no longer fulfilled and instead held on to it and turned it into reserve wrongly. The good relationships that need to be there among the landowners where they have rights over land is also an important one to protect. I think they need to be cautious about that. However I am sure that there is considerable wisdom within the runanga and that they will effectively be able to manage this well and I wish them every success.