Davis Kelvin: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Davis Kelvin: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11499] 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 The decision to establish a Maori advisory board instead of what Maori really want—that is dedicated seats on the Auckland Council—is yet another breach of the partnership inherent in the Treaty of Waitangi. It also is contrary to the intentions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This Government was happy to ratify it on 19 April this year only to disregard it on 20 April. That declaration was drawn up over the course of 20 or so years to address issues of this very nature. Now this Government has the opportunity to demonstrate to Maori that it can offer more than simply the modern equivalent of beads and trinkets—beads and trinkets that have little or no value other than to pacify the natives. In comparison with what Maori actually want—that is dedicated seats—the Maori advisory board is just another bead another trinket. 
Article 3 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples says: “Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic social and cultural development.” In terms of the Auckland Council Maori have said that the political status they want is dedicated seats not an advisory board. Now is the time for this Government to show that its ratification of the declaration is more than just a broken promise and that it can be more than just an aspirational and non-binding waste of time. The Government should demonstrate that it is genuine and sincere in pursuing the right of Maori to “freely determine their political status” as article 3 of the declaration states allow Maori to freely pursue our “economic social and cultural development” and allow us the opportunity to make a contribution at the council level to decisions that will affect all Maori and all citizens in the city of Auckland. 
Clause 45 in Part 2 of the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill includes section 67A which says that the advisory board is not required to accept direction from any person. That is this Government’s way of saying to the board that it has some form of tino rangatiratanga—that it does not have to accept direction from any person. And thank goodness for the never-ending generosity of this Government because when it comes to the board’s name section 68 in clause 45 says that the board may choose to name itself. That is about the extent of the tino rangatiratanga or the decision making that Maori have when it comes to the Auckland Council. Section 69 in clause 45 says that the board is “to develop a schedule of issues of significance to mana whenua groups and mataawaka of Tamaki Makaurau and give a priority to each issue”. If I was on that advisory board the very first issue of significance that I would draw up would be to call for dedicated Maori seats. I would remind the Government over and over again of its obligation in terms of this part of the bill and I would remind it of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. As I said on 19 April this year the Government was quick to sign up to the declaration but on 20 April it was equally as quick to disregard it. 
Labour worked hard to ensure that the advisory board would be more effective but we still have not altered our position that there should be dedicated Maori seats on the new Auckland Council. Under Labour’s plan there would be at least two Maori seats on the Auckland Council but there could be more. It would depend on how many Maori were on the Maori roll in the Auckland region. 
It is difficult for me to understand what this Government is afraid of when it comes to genuine Maori seats and Maori representation. When we consider the contribution of Maori in general and of tribes such as Ngati Whatua to the establishment and the defence of Auckland in the mid-1800s it would appear that those contributions have simply been banked and forgotten by those who are now in charge. Ngati Whatua contributed a lot. They gave 3000 acres back in the 1800s for the establishment of the city. They gave other land. They gave Takaparawhau which we know as Bastion Point. Only 14 years after the initial offer of land for Auckland the 700-acre Orakei block was all that was left. The papakainga of that hapu was taken and there was no compensation. I believe that a small form of compensation that could be afforded to the descendants of Ngati Whatua would be a couple of dedicated seats on the Auckland Council. 
It is not as though a successful precedent has not already been set. Like in Parliament and also on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council these seats should be allocated on the basis of the number of Maori on the roll. A Department of Internal Affairs report said that the key to effective participation and better decision-making was having Maori representatives with the same status as other elected councillors. In talking to staff councillors and Maori involved in the Bay of Plenty Regional Council one officer of the council described Maori representatives as being the best-prepared and most-effective contributors to council decisions. I believe that it would be no different if instead of a Maori advisory board working with the Auckland Council we had dedicated Maori seats. The advisory board in my opinion is just another empty hollow symbolic gesture. There is no replacement for protecting and supporting the ability of Maori to participate effectively in our democracy. There will be no benefit to Maori in their not having representation on this city council. There is no polite way to put it: in my opinion Maori have been shafted. 
When the issue of Maori seats on the Auckland Council was raised John Key floated the idea of a compromise. Even after Cabinet had rejected the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance that three seats on the council should be allocated to Maori John Key still said that nothing was set in stone. I do not believe that. I believe that the decision had been made a long time ago before all this double-speak and speaking with forked tongues occurred. I believe that it was decided long ago that Maori would not have any representation on the Auckland Council that they would not have seats on the Auckland Council. Maori have to put up with the second-rate second-status entity that is a Maori advisory board. I do not think that is acceptable. I believe that Mr Key was being disingenuous. He knew back then that there was no way that Maori seats on the council would be acceptable. He is yet to learn that when dealing with Maori we like people who are straight up to our faces. The most recent example of that is the decision made by Mr Key not to return the Urewera ranges to Tuhoe. That is a case in point where speaking with a forked tongue actually wins more enemies than friends. 
People did make their views known and the majority of the submitters to the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee backed Maori seats. Of those submissions 60 percent supported Maori seats a further 20 percent instead affirmed the need for some sort of Maori representation or participation and just 20 percent registered their opposition to Maori seats. That was a clear mandate but Mr Key gave into the Hon Rodney Hide’s threat to resign and the seats were scrapped. 
I believe that the people of Auckland—in fact of New Zealand—owe it to the biggest Maori population not just in the country but in the world to give it representation on the Auckland Council so that its views can be heard. I know that Maori would be able to contribute effectively to the running of the Auckland Council.