Smith Murray: Ngati Ruanui Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
Smith Murray: Ngati Ruanui Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5267] 
MURRAY SMITH (United Future) 
: 
 I will begin by recognising and welcoming the people of Ngati Ruanui who are here today as well as the people of Tangahoe and Pakakohi. Kia ora tatou. I am very aware that apart from the Minister I am the first member of Ngati Pakeha to speak to this bill today and that my te reo ability is very modest paling into insignificance in comparison with those who have spoken before me. 
Nevertheless I trace my ancestry back to the Ngati Ruanui whenua in South Taranaki because my great-great-grandparents the Luty family farmed in that area. My grandparents and my mother grew up in Wanganui and I therefore have an identity with the land there. However as Pakeha settlers they were perhaps on the other side of the conflict. I do not know what role they played in the Crown’s actions and misdeeds in that area but I do know that they settled on the land at Maxwell and I know that Maxwell was very infamously named after the leader of a colonial militia who on 27 November 1868 led a party against Nga Rauru and Taranaki iwi children at Handley’s woolshed near Waitotara. There in an unprovoked attack that militia fired on chased and attacked with sabres children the eldest of whom was 10 years old wounding and killing them. I think given that it was a totally unprovoked attack and given the things that happened there the naming of the town of Maxwell after such a person was reprehensible. I would strongly support the moves that I know there are among some people to rename that town. I want to apologise on behalf of my tupuna and whanau for any actions they took that contributed to the problems caused by the Crown in respect of Ngati Ruanui’s land and for the demise of the land and the mana of Ngati Ruanui. 
United Future New Zealand is delighted to see the third reading of this bill today. I want to bring to the House’s attention that we pushed the Government hard to bring the second reading and the Committee stage into urgency so that we could reach the position we are now in of getting this bill resolved and passed as soon as possible. I am very very pleased to see that finally we have reached that stage. I note that the first reading of the bill was in October 2002. Despite what the Minister said I think that it has taken too long for this legislation to pass through the House that grievance settlements are too slow and that the Office of Treaty Settlements and the Waitangi Tribunal are under-resourced. 
For Ngati Ruanui this is a time of celebration. However it is hard to celebrate when one is obtaining something one has always been entitled to and when the compensation has been extremely conservative. Given that Maori at one stage owned 90 percent of the land in New Zealand settlements of restitution for iwi and hapu that are far far short of that indicate the generosity of spirit that there is among Maori people. 
The history of this settlement bears the hallmarks that many many claims bear. We know that Ngati Ruanui was a prosperous and economically successful iwi in the 1840s and 1850s and we are told that it traded extensively with European settlements and overseas traders. Following the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi Ngati Ruanui consistently opposed the sale of Maori land in Taranaki and by the mid-1860s Ngati Ruanui and other iwi of Taranaki and elsewhere had entered into a contract to oppose further land sales. But as so often seems to have happened to the Maori people the Crown proclaimed martial law throughout Taranaki on 22 February 1860 in response to Maori opposition to the Crown’s attempts to acquire the Pekapeka block at Waitara. The Taranaki wars of 1860-61 and 1863-69 followed and we are told that Ngati Ruanui suffered much loss of life and property let alone mana during those wars. So there was tremendous suffering. The people were oppressed and the land was confiscated. We are also aware of the commendable involvement of Ngati Ruanui people at Parihaka; those events are well recorded. 
I note that a compensation court was set up under the New Zealand Settlements Act in 1863 but in order to qualify Maori had to prove that firstly they had an interest in the land and secondly they had been loyal to the Crown without which they would not get compensation. Almost all of Ngati Ruanui were rejected. Only 40 out of 997 of them were awarded a full share of entitlement. But in fact even then none of the awards were properly implemented. 
I note that the Green Party is opposed to settlements such as this one with Ngati Ruanui on the basis that they are full and final settlements. However the Crown’s limitation on the ability to provide complete compensation is obviously a factor that has to be taken into account. I have some sympathy with the situation that the Greens are talking about and I also have some sympathy with Tangahoe and Pakakohi who are aggrieved at the way they have been included in the settlement process. However from my perspective as Ngati Pakeha that is an issue between Maori and Maori and I have great reservations about the Crown interfering in sorting out problems between Maori and Maori. I note that the Waitangi Tribunal which is the closest to a Maori-controlled court that we have decided after an extensive look at the issue that this settlement process was correct and also that the Maori Affairs Committee comprised predominantly of Maori also despite strong opposition to their inclusion by Pakakohi and Tangahoe decided that this settlement should continue. I think we have to rely on that. I have sympathy for their position but it is a balancing factor. 
I think we have to recognise that the ability to provide any more compensation will diminish in the future. The land continues to be developed other parties’ interests are affected and we need to look at the interests of New Zealand as a whole. If the Greens had their way there would be no end to the treaty reconciliation process. That is an extreme view. On the other hand the ACT party does not believe there should be a treaty reconciliation process at all. That is the opposite extreme view. Extremist views typically reflect neither the wishes of the majority of New Zealanders nor the best interests of New Zealand as a whole. We need to look at Maori and non-Maori working together and advancing together into the future with the treaty grievances resolved so that we can face the future as a nation that works well together in the spirit of the Treaty of Waitangi in the spirit of the commonality that we have and with the much that we have in common as citizens of this land. 
United Future congratulates Ngati Ruanui on reaching the stage of the passing of this bill the first I note of the Taranaki claims to reach this point. And I look forward to attending the hui at Pariroa Pa on 3 June to hear the Crown’s acknowledgments and apologies read and to note the transfer of the settlement redress on that day. Tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa .