te Heuheu Georgina: Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill — In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:647;Page:15869] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I too will take just a brief call on Part 2 and absolutely support everything that my colleague Chris Finlayson has talked about. He is right in saying the main discussions in the Maori Affairs Committee focused on clause 7 which in the original bill was the source of great pain to the Tauranga Moana iwi. It is amazing how what appears to be a very simple provision just a few words can cause great angst and pain. When the select committee went to Tauranga to hear submissions from the Tauranga Moana iwi that fact was very very obvious to us. I repeat the words in clause 7 which my colleague stated and which were taken out of the bill: “For the purposes of any enactment … Mauao historic reserve must be treated as if the fee simple estate in the reserve were still vested in the Crown.” Although clause 5 had stated quite clearly that the estate was to be vested in the Mauao Trust the iwi took great umbrage at this vesting and called it a Clayton’s vesting because on the one hand the bill stated that the reserve was being vested in the trust but on the other hand it had this phrase—“as if … the reserve were still vested in the Crown.” My colleague Chris Finlayson made reference to the fact that the Maori Affairs Committee worked very diligently to find a set of words that took that pain away. I suppose that in Parliament now and again fortunately we get legislation to work on for which politics really do not apply. This bill is an example of such legislation. 
Over 30 years of Treaty history and Treaty settlements in this country a sea change has occurred in the understanding of many New Zealanders about the association of iwi to their maunga or mountain; their awa or river; and their sea or lake. Clearly the maunga in respect of Mount Maunganui and Tauranga Moana has huge meaning. I am grateful to the member on the other side of the Chamber Mita Ririnui for giving us some of the historical association which I certainly was not aware of but which I had alluded to in my speech on the preamble. This bill was one of those occasions where all of the members of the select committee both Government and Opposition could see that it was possible to have some different wording while still making sure that the reserve is vested in the iwi but that the obligations that should remain with the Crown and with the Tauranga District Council would be accommodated. So hopefully the work that has been done by the committee has resulted in something that those iwi can now accept. Hopefully they will be present here as the week goes on when we do the third reading to support the work that has been done. 
As I say politics in this place are sometimes completely out of place and to play politics in relation to this bill would have been totally out of place. The members on the Maori Affairs Committee sometimes come to that conclusion a lot faster than those on other select committees. I am very pleased that we were able to make some accommodation to better—[ 
Interruption 
] Of course our own member Bob Clarkson was on the committee and so was Chris Finlayson. As I say there is a tendency when it matters—and it matters for Tauranga Moana iwi—that there is a clear responsibility to keep the politics out of the situation. At times like this it is a great pleasure to be on a committee that works in that way. 
I just make reference to one of the other things that I think made it sensible to make the changes. When we look at what happened with Bastion Point and Okahu Bay for Ngati Whatua we see that a form of words and a vesting was found back in the 1990s whereby the reserve was vested in Ngati Whatua and all other things were taken care of in much the same way.