Scott Lynda: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Scott Lynda: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17750. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Dr LYNDA SCOTT (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 I want to go back in Part 5 to the issue of Maori settlement. When we talk to a lot of New Zealanders and we start talking about contemporary claims for Maori it sends a shudder down their spines. Most people have signed up to the fact that they want to settle past grievances but contemporary claims make them feel that the treaty industry is never going to end. This is a very good example of the reason. 
I want to read the deed of settlement between Her Majesty the Queen and Maori from 1992 for the fisheries settlement and this is the permanent settlement of commercial fishing rights and interest. Under the treaty this settlement was supposed to actually answer the question of past grievance about Maori’s ability to have free access to their traditional grounds for collecting seafood and for fishing. It states: “Maori agree that this settlement deed and the settlement it evidences shall satisfy all claims”—all claims—“current and future in respect of and shall discharge and extinguish all commercial fishing rights and interests of Maori whether in respect to”—and members should listen to this bit—“(c) coastal or inland fisheries including any commercial aspects of traditional fishing rights and interests whether arising by statute common law including customary law and aboriginal title the Treaty of Waitangi or otherwise and whether or not such rights or interests shall be the subject of recommendations or adjudication by the courts or the Waitangi Tribunal.” 
This was the deed of settlement that we are now relitigating with aquaculture. I want to tell the Minister that the Hon Doug Kidd who was the member for Marlborough is clear that aquaculture is actually part of this settlement deed. But here under the Aquaculture Reform Bill what do we have? We have Crown Law Office advice from 26 January 1996 looking at whether there was any allocation of aquaculture tenures and coastal consents. It could not find any evidence that this extended to aquaculture. This is Crown Law Office advice. It did not extend to aquaculture. 
New Zealanders are getting really tired of the continual handouts when one has Maori on the other side of the fence saying: “We don’t accept this. There is no deed of settlement.” We heard speeches in this Chamber last night and today we will hear more I am sure saying that Maori do not acknowledge this action. They are being handed out 20 percent. They do not acknowledge it. There is no deed of settlement. They did not ask for it. They much prefer to have case-by-case negotiated claims and they do not want this. So New Zealanders are paying for 20 percent of aquaculture management areas when they have already had 10 percent of the total allowable catch 50 percent of Sealord’s and 20 percent of new quota which is what went to Maori under the deed of settlement in 1992 under the Fisheries Act. 
How long does it go on for and how much more will there be? Maori are not happy with this. This Government is handing out this 20 percent space—basically it has done a deal over the foreshore and seabed legislation. 
I was surprised by New Zealand First last night. Doug Woolerton was saying that New Zealand First is supporting this because it will forestall a fight. I do not think so at all. I do not think it will forestall anything. We are still going to see difficulties about this. In the Marlborough Sounds—the area that I represent—30 percent of marine farms are already owned by Maori. Everyone wants to see everybody in this country being able to do well advance themselves and have access to industries that will be for the betterment of this country.