Kedgley Sue: Maori Fisheries Bill Te Ture Whenua Maori Amendment Bill (No 2) / Maori Land Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
Kedgley Sue: Maori Fisheries Bill Te Ture Whenua Maori Amendment Bill (No 2) / Maori Land Amendment Bill (No 2) — Third Readings 
[Volume:620;Page:15762] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 I extend our greetings to Koro Wetere Doug Kidd and others who have come here today for the third reading of this legislation. I am presenting this speech on behalf of my colleague MetiriaTurei who cannot be here today. The Greens are pleased that the allocation of fisheries assets a result of the 1992 Sealord’s deal is at long last being settled. Sadly however the Green Party is unable to support the final shape of the legislation. We had hoped for significant changes to it during its consideration at the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee but that did not happen. Some of the key issues raised in submissions included the need for greater accountability of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd to iwi greater accountability of mandated iwi organisations to their iwi members changes in the timing and procedures to review the governance structures of new entities greater flexibility in the disposal of settlement assets reductions in delays in the transfer of assets to mandated iwi organisations and recognition of iwi for the purposes of the legislation. 
Some of those concerns were addressed but unfortunately little real accountability was added. One of the changes that was intended to address the issue of accountability was the provision that mandated iwi organisations would be able to table non-binding motions at general meetings of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and that all reporting documents should go to Te Kawai Taumata the electoral college to enable it to assess better the performance of the directors it appointed. But the problem is that non-binding motions ultimately are really worthless. Those assets after all belong to hapu and iwi yet in the end those groups will have little control. 
The Government has been reluctant to interfere with the legislation on the basis that it concerns a settlement that is primarily for hapu and iwi to work out. But we believe that the Government has failed to recognise that the significant agreement in the community to move forward on the settlement allocation does not amount to significant support for details of this legislation. 
The intention was that these issues of concern would be sorted out in the select committee process. Maori believed that the process was democratic and that their views would be listened to and taken into account but in many cases that has simply not happened. We continue to oppose the paramount role of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. The changes that have been made still do not go far enough to remedy the fundamental conflict of interest in the governance and commercial structures established by the legislation. Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd will retain the sole voting share over Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd which is a commercial organisation in competition with fishing entities established by mandated iwi organisations for the management of their settlement assets. We proposed an amendment to ensure that mandated iwi organisations would receive voting shares but that unfortunately was not passed. We strongly believe that iwi are entitled to voting shares in Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd—the commercial entity that will retain 50 percent of the settlement assets originally intended to be transferred to the mandated iwi organisations. If the assets are to be retained in a centralised form iwi should be able at the very least and entitled to exercise the responsibilities of shareholders consistent with standard commercial practice. 
The Government wanted Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd to have almost complete control over every organisation involved in the management of the settlement assets but that amounts to an abrogation of the principle of rangatiratanga inherent in the deed of settlement. Iwi cannot control Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd because they have only income shares not voting shares. As far as accountability Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd will still be subject to an operational audit only every 4 years to determine how well directors are carrying out their duties and functions. In the 11th year an independent review will be conducted to determine whether any changes in the Government’s arrangements or asset-disposal restrictions would better serve the interests of beneficiaries. At least that reviewer will be appointed by iwi who will also be able to set the terms of the review. 
Another amendment we proposed was to remove the power of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd to retain constitutional oversight of mandated iwi organisations and to be able unilaterally to alter the requirements they must meet. What other organisations are subjected to what amounts to a form of paternalism? The basis for that control is the premise that Maori cannot look after their own money. 
The Green Party believes there are too many layers between Maori and the governance of their settlement assets. There also remains a conflict of interest when Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd are set up to compete with iwi groups. There is little benefit in that for iwi who wish to manage their own destiny in the fishing industry. How will they compete against the huge company that is Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd? We are disappointed too that a Government amendment was passed last night that will allow a special procedure to allocate and transfer assets to an iwi that cannot complete its coastline claims because one or more neighbouring iwi does not have a mandated iwi organisation. An iwi that does not have a mandated iwi organisation will now have 3 years to establish one. If it does not then allocations will be able to proceed and some iwi may end up with nothing. 
That amendment is problematic especially for iwi such as Ngati Hine and Rongomaiwahine who may face problems disaggregating from the conglomerate which may hold up the process so that a mandated iwi organisation cannot be established. 
That would be a litigation nightmare. We sincerely hope that it will not happen but the Government’s amendment provides that it might. 
Finally although the Greens disagree with the final form of this bill we are extremely pleased that progress has been made. The issue may be a full and final settlement in the Government’s view but we fear that it is not a full and final settlement for hapu and iwi who will no doubt struggle with what has been put in place by this Parliament.