Turei Metiria: Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Turei Metiria: Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:678;Page:1019] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 This Ngati Pahauwera settlement claim does have some ongoing issues around the mandate and objections to the settlement of these claims which again do need to be put on the record for the Committee. There are overlapping claims that are still in dispute in relation to the Wai claims that are being settled here and the lands that are being settled. There continue to be mandate problems. What we have seen with this settlement as we will see with a number as they go on is that the Office of Treaty Settlements is increasingly OK with a 30 percent response rate for a mandate and for ratification of a settlement or lower. I recognise the difficulties in getting quite a few thousand—50 percent or more—of the beneficiaries of these settlements to be engaged in the process. The fact that it has become the norm now to accept a very low mandate is increasingly problematic. It is all well and good to get 90 percent support but if you are talking about only a few hundred people out of quite a few thousand then it simply does not have the mandate to continue with the settlement.  
The Government’s programme to drive these settlements through—as we see from the way that this process is working today—because it wants to get the Treaty issues settled is leaving those who are the wronged party in these negotiations at even greater disadvantage. The process does not allow for them to engage effectively with the issues. The process is not designed for them or by them. It does not deal properly with their actual needs. We are seeing that reflected in the very low turnout for mandate votes and for ratification. As a result there are still ongoing problems. With this settlement there continues to be an incorporation that has continued to object to the claim. There are still tribunal claims that have not been settled I understand over this claim. There are claims of beneficiaries who have been actively excluded from the voting and mandating process.  
The argument from the Government side is that these issues should be dealt with by the iwi and hapu and that is right. But it is very difficult for iwi and hapu to resolve issues like that if they are also being driven by a political timetable that is trying to get the assessment done because of some farce that the Treaty can be settled. From the Green Party point of view the Treaty cannot be settled. As someone said recently it is a deal; it is not a settlement. It is a deal done today in today’s circumstances under today’s political constraints. It is not a settlement of the issues when you are talking about the abrogation or the destruction of tino rangatiratanga the removal of rights to be decision makers and control over their own people.  
So this one continues to have problems and I think there will be ongoing problems despite the fact that this House will support this legislation to pass. The Green Party will continue to support this bill. We did for the first and second readings and we will continue to support it. But we do want to note that this is an ongoing problem and there will be continuing issues with this settlement. We will support those claimants as much as we can during that process. Thank you. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 13 in the name of the Hon Christopher Finlayson be agreed to. 
Amendments agreed to. 
Preamble Parts 1 to 3 schedules 1 to 4 and clauses 1 and 2 as amended agreed to. 
Bill to be reported with amendment presently.