Sharples Pita: Maori Trustee and Maori Development Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Sharples Pita: Maori Trustee and Maori Development Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:645;Page:14573] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. In 1921 the Government of the day created a position ostensibly to protect and enhance the interests of Maori clients and their resources. That position was the Maori Trustee. It was a position created by legislation to manage the adverse effects of fragmented multiple ownership of Maori land. Significantly the office of the Maori Trustee was expected to provide fair proper and prudent administration and management of clients’ assets within the principles and obligations of trusteeship and agency. 
Such a heavy investment in accountability and transparency was a logical expectation of the fact that the Maori Trustee was set up to take over the role of the Public Trustee. Yet 70 years after establishment how disappointing it was to read in analysis by G V and S M Butterworth that “Neither the Public Trustee nor the Maori Trustee and his administration exercised their responsibilities in the best long-term interests of those Maori whose land and revenue was vested in the trustee.” 
Pita Paraone 
: Who were the Butterworths? 
Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: That is a good question. I repeat: “in the best long-term interests of those Maori.” Clearly 1991 was a turning point year for the Maori Trustee. In that same year Ngai Tahu made a number of allegations concerning the failure of the Crown’s appointed trustee to administer reserve lands properly. These allegations included failing to consult the owners failing to act as a prudent trustee failing to take action to amalgamate land titles and develop lands and failing to prevent land from being taken for public works. The Ngai Tahu report 1991 is mandatory reading for understanding how well the Maori Trustee meets the trustee’s statutory responsibilities—and they are sizable responsibilities. 
The Maori Trust Office currently administers more than 2200 properties and special trusts. It cares for more than 156000 owners and it manages some 115000 owner accounts. So when we read through background reports that suggest that the best long-term interests of Maori have not been given due and proper accord we have to wonder about this new bill. 
The Butterworth report also referred to large capital expenditure with little return problems surrounding the collection and distribution of rents inadequate consultation with beneficial owners in respect of these matters and other concerns. We remain unconvinced when we fast forward to September 2007 and read that the Federation of Maori Authorities has said: “Currently as an administrator of Maori land it is our view that any value added is limited.” 
Set against this backdrop of concerns and the longstanding issues and reviews that have taken place over the years one would be expecting a miracle to bring about the changes required to accelerate Maori development. Such a transformation is not inconceivable. Indeed Paul Morgan the Chief Executive of the Federation of Maori Authorities goes as far as to suggest there is significant potential and that this should be provided for in the legislation. 
Indeed as we know there have been many and vast improvements and achievements over the years which the Maori Trustee has helped to prosper. Sir Apirana Ngata during his parliamentary term drew on Maori Trust moneys to support the unemployed. The Maori Trust fund was a benefactor to support Maori into homes by using the funds as a second mortgage or even by authorising loans to enable the purchase of furniture for new homeowners. The trade training schemes would never have been as successful as they were had it not been for the hostels— 
Ron Mark 
: They were shut down. 
Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: —which the Maori Trustee purchased to house apprentices—exactly—in both Auckland and Christchurch. The Maori Trustee made contributions to the Maori Purposes Fund Board to enable the publication of Maori literature and it also played a large role in supporting Te Maori exhibition that showcased Maori art forms and taonga to the world. 
Alongside of the then Maori Education Foundation the Maori Trustee also assisted in the establishment of the kohanga reo movement yet sadly much of this work has never been widely appreciated as the Maori Trustee was locked up and encased within the bureaucracy of the Maori Affairs department. 
The ongoing issues of independence of the Maori Trustee from the Crown will plague the new organisation proposed in this bill unless the Minister has the courage to invest in a strategic vision for Maori economic development. But here is the crunch. The legislation aims to transfer $35 million from the Maori Trustees general purposes fund to establish this new statutory corporation. This fund according to the Charters Sykes and Nikora review of 1991 is income derived from the beneficiaries and not the Maori Trustee. How this works is that the interest earned on the common fund—money held in trust available for loan—is credited to the general purposes fund owned by the Maori Trustee. Effectively the statute empowers the Maori Trustee to operate on beneficiaries’ incomes. If you like it is comparable to a solicitor using the interest on his or her clients’ funds to run the solicitor’s business. So we have $35 million of Maori money being put alongside $40 million of Crown money to establish a stand-alone organisation. Even from the viewpoint of the quantity of the investment this is an absolute investment in failure. 
In 2001 the Maori Affairs Committee report on the Maori Trustee drew the attention of the Government to the ongoing issue about whether the funding received by the trustee was at an appropriate level for the trustee to fulfil his role. If the solution to that question was meant to be this bill then it has got it badly wrong. The bill proposes the establishment of a new statutory corporation Maori Business Aotearoa New Zealand founded on money that the Charters Sykes and Nikora review has proven to be in doubt. Even if the Maori Trustee has the right to donate moneys from the general purposes fund to this new incorporation the tokenistic amount suggested by the Government merely confirms more of the same old handholding paternalistic patronising behaviour of a Government destined to perpetuate dependency. 
I recall as a member of the Maori Education Foundation that the Government in establishing that entity provided a subsidy of 3:1. For every Maori dollar invested the Government would match it with $3. That is the type of foresight we would have applauded in this bill but instead we have insufficient funding to hope for success and legislative bungling that continues the apron-strings approach to Treaty justice. 
The proposal to establish Maori Business Aotearoa New Zealand is constrained also by the decision to have a Crown-appointed Maori Trustee in the key governance role as well as in the management and implementation role. This is the classic behaviour of a Government that wants to continue benefiting from the puppeteer role manipulating all the strings available to it to continue to wield total control. What we have in reality with this bill is a Government that seeks to get its hands on Maori moneys the possibility of legal doubt being cast upon the validity of using beneficiary funds for establishing a new entity and then the risk that the Crown will jeopardise any independent status through influencing the making of political appointments. 
The Butterworth report concluded: “the Maori Trustee like the Public Trustee before had increasingly been used to serve the interests of others ahead of the beneficial owners of the land in his charge”. We support the view of the Federation of Maori Authorities that Maori should have a say in the appointment of the Maori Trustee not the Minister of Maori Affairs. 
It is also doubtful whether a trustee appointed by the Government of the day will be able to challenge the Minister’s directives to protect his or her clients’ interests. The conflict inherent in being an agent of the Crown and a trustee for Maori owners is simply too strong to achieve even the appearance of independence. 
The Maori Party will not support this bill.