Kuriger Barbara; Henare PeeniIn CommitteePart 1 Amendments to Parts 1 to 3CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Members the House is in committee on the Pae Ora (Disestablishment of Māori Health Authority) Amendment Bill. We come now to Part 1. Part 1 is the debate on clauses 4 to 37 Amendments to Parts 1 to 3" of the principal Act. The question is that Part 1 stand part. Hon PEENI HENARE (Labour): Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you for the opportunity to open with a contribution of course analysing Part 1. I mentioned in the first reading and in the second reading that we will be going through clause by clause to make sure that we can interrogate properly the Government's intentions and actions as set out in this particular bill and we will challenge them as we will continue to oppose this. But those views have been well articulated across the House and it brings me to my first question—and I mentioned it in my first and second reading speeches—which relates directly to clause 6. It says here that clause 6 amends section 6 which describes how the Act provides for "the Crown's intention to give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi)" to reflect changes made by the legislation.Well the first question I have for the Minister is that in considering this particular clause one can't help but question as we look across all of the clauses in Part 1 what this one sets out in clause 6—how it's trying to divorce itself from the rhetoric throughout the entire bill. For example one of the principles here is of course the principle of partnership yet we see later on in clause 19 that section 35 is being amended and with respect to the preparation of the Government Policy Statement (GPS) it removes a Māori voice. In fact if you look across at section 35 "Preparation of the GPS" it silences the Māori voice there. My question to the Minister in the first instance is: does he see clause 6 sitting separately or intertwined throughout all the clauses we'll be debating in Part 1? That's the first question.The second question is that as we look across the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi the principles of partnership and acting in good faith don't seem to be apparent as we look towards the changes that this bill is making. I've already highlighted clause 19 and the section 35 amendment. We can also go on to give another example here of clause 15 where section 30 is amended and it goes down to the bottom there to clause 15(5) which is: "Repeal section 30(1)(g)." and that's about iwi Māori getting to have a say on appointments. Now when we think of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi it's quite clear to me that (1) their voice isn't being heard so therefore one can argue here that that partnership isn't being met there; and (2) it's once again a clear breach of good faith as Māori are expected to only serve part of their consultation and part of their duty within this particular legislation and across the entire Pae Ora legislation and yet are being silenced in other areas that are key to the successful execution of the Pae Ora legislation itself. So just to reiterate the first one is around whether or not the Minister sees that clause 6 stands alone or whether or not he sees it intertwined throughout the entire bill and I've already given the examples of where those changes I believe are in contradiction to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi—and I'll state them again: clause 19 "Section 35 amended (Preparation of GPS)". I wonder if the Minister can then explain to the committee and answer this question: then where in the GPS is the Māori voice heard?For some of the newer members across the committee they might not understand how the structure of good health policy in health legislation works. The GPS is one of those important documents that continues to drive the policy of health in this country yet what we're seeing here is a complete breach of clause 6 which says about the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi—and here once again is another example of how this particular bill continues to silence the Māori voice on such important matters and important documents that will continue to drive health policy in this country. I now turn to another part which continues to do this—contradict the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. When I look at new section 15 in clause 11 where it says here that "Health New Zealand must support and engage with iwi-Māori partnership boards" and then it goes down to say "Health New Zealand must—(a) take reasonable steps to support iwi-Māori partnership boards" one of those reasonable steps one would expect is actually consultation up front. What this sets out to do is give somewhat of a back-door exit if you will to give the Government a bit of a clause to escape out the back door when we look towards whether or not the engagement by Health New Zealand with Māori is appropriate and is timely. I'd like the Minister if he can with respect to that particular clause—if he can explain to us in his mind and indeed the mind of the Government what do "reasonable steps" look like to support iwi-Māori partnership boards to achieve their purpose in section 29. It does go on further to say that part of that is by including "administrative analytical or financial support where needed;". It would be remiss of me not to indicate to the committee at this point in time that the iwi-Māori partnership boards in their establishment—some are ahead of others some are far better equipped some have better infrastructure to be able to look towards having a proper functioning iwi-Māori partnership board within their region and I can describe one of those. It's where a number of us in the House come from in Te Tai Tokerau. Te Kahu o Taonui already has pretty good infrastructure across the Māori health provider network and it has already proven really great outcomes during COVID-19 which I elaborated on through the first and second readings of the bill. That is why I want to make sure that if the Minister can answer this question he understands where those iwi-Māori partnership boards are with respect to their ability to provide their function because what he's proposing here is to include by providing "administrative analytical or financial support where needed;". Well I've already indicated some are ahead and some aren't quite as far ahead as others. So is the Minister committing then to making sure he can support its administrative function and its analytical function and so on as it says in new section 15? The other one is: sufficient and timely information. The other side of the House—and this is the question I put to the Minister—were rather dismissive of the COVID-19 pandemic that hit the world and one of the key arguments for the case of Te Aka Whai Ora was made by Mr John Tamihere in the timely release of analytical data in order to serve our communities. That community was the Māori community. In fact he took that case all the way to the High Court. In new section 15 I'm asking the Minister: what then does "sufficient and timely information" look like? Is it the kind of data that will allow iwi-Māori partnership boards and Māori health providers and iwi to make decisions in order to serve those communities in a timely fashion and in a very targeted fashion? We heard the Minister talk about how it's important to target set targets and home in on where the need is. Well it's clear to us—and all of the data that's presented by health professionals—that the need sits with Māori. So to reiterate for that particular question: what does "sufficient and timely information" look like? What does it look like? Is it structured in a way that allows Māori to have input on what it is that they're looking for in order to get the outcome that the Government might look towards or is it simply another case of paternalistic central bureaucracy telling iwi what to do?In the last minute and a half of this particular contribution I want to come back and circle back to clause 6. Clause 6 in reference to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi: in order for that particular clause to work we made it clear as the Government of the time to make sure that all of the steps throughout the entire pae ora legislation would continue to reference back to the principles and allow it to be successful. I want to remind the Minister that as we scroll through the proposed changes in his bill here we can't help but see the stripping away of a Māori voice of a Māori presence and of the ability for Māori to contribute meaningfully not only to the outcome but to the planning to the discussions and to everything that it takes in order to get a successful outcome.Just finally from me you will hear from the members on this side of the Chamber those with significant community experience and with significant health experience a continual prosecution of the clauses within this particular bill proposed by the Minister in order to get some clear definition. It's important that we get that clear definition for our Māori communities who have been silenced on the progress of this bill. Madam Chair thank you very much."