te Heuheu Georgina: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15607] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I speak to Part 3 of the Maori Fisheries Bill which deals with the allocation and transfer of settlement assets. It is obviously a very important part because it essentially sets out the whys and wherefores of when the registered Maori organisations will receive their assets. The intention is that as soon as is reasonably practicable after Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd is satisfied that an iwi has met the criteria set out in the legislation then it must allocate the settlement assets to that particular iwi in accordance with provisions also stated in the legislation and must transfer settlement quota and income shares to the asset-holding companies of the mandated iwi organisation. I believe there is an obligation inherent in this part for Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd to be supportive in terms of helping the iwi organisations to get themselves ready established and able to satisfy the criteria so that the assets can transfer as quickly as possible. As has been said many times already in this debate National certainly wants the assets to go out to the owners of those assets. The sooner that occurs the better it will be in our view. 
With regard to the issue of who is capable we know some iwi organisations are already competent and capable. My colleague Phil Heatley has flagged our thinking on that and my other colleague Dr Wayne Mapp has a Supplementary Order Paper that deals with the issue. The issue came up several times during the select committee stage in the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee. There are iwi that are already running successful fishing companies and they have proved that they are capable and competent—like NgaiTahu for instance but that iwi will not be the only one. This legislation treats all Maori alike: as though they are witless and incapable of managing their own assets when in fact the reverse is true. As I said earlier the track record of Maori managing their own assets is not bad—not bad at all. We see that especially when we look at what happens in the general sector such as the failure of Access Brokerage last week. A lot of shareholders will be out of pocket and will have lost their life savings as a result of that. I do not know whether we have seen that happen with many of the Maori commercial entities. 
Setting free the iwi organisations the tribal companies that are competent and commercially experienced from the jail or cage that they are all jammed into is a real real issue as is the issue of the transfer of assets when the mandated iwi organisations and the asset-holding organisations are ready. As I say I think Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd has a real obligation to ensure that there is as little delay as possible. Although the bill certainly sets up enough barriers for iwi organisations that are getting themselves going I think that Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd should show a generosity of spirit and faith in the iwi and should do everything it can to ensure that the assets transfer sooner rather than later. 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I will speak to my Supplementary Order Paper 257. The Minister of Fisheries has had advice of it for a week. I direct this comment also to United Future members who always ask for time to think about things: well I wrote to them I gave them time to think about my amendment and if they read it carefully they will realise the wisdom of it rather than their just meekly following the Government as they so often do. “Be brave!” I say. 
I just want very briefly to refer to my amendment. It is intended to give commercially qualified iwi—those who have a genuine track record—the ability to access directly their offshore quota. They would make an application to Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and would have to satisfy some threshold test. I understand that that is important for two reasons: first so that people know that the asset will not be dissipated; and second to give Aotearoa Fisheries and ultimately Sealord’s a reasonable period to adjust. I understand the importance of that. The threshold tests are first the iwi has to be a mandated iwi organisation; second it has to hold relevant quota entitlements as provided for in the relevant clauses; and third—and this is most important—it has to demonstrate an existing track record of increasing shareholder value over a 3-year period. If an iwi can satisfy those three tests then it should be able to access its quota directly because frankly it will have proven that it can manage the quota as well as Aotearoa Fisheries can. 
Surely it is the Government’s intent that iwi should be empowered. How many times have members on this side of the Chamber heard that the Government has faith in commercially qualified iwi organisations? We have heard it numerous times. Well this is an opportunity to show that. This is not one of those kinds of Supplementary Order Papers that are prepared in haste; this has been thought through. It provides for a separate part. The Minister has been written to. He knows that some iwi want this particular power and I say he should give it to them because the alternative is that some years down the track Parliament will be faced with this kind of request in any event and whoever is the Minister—depending on which party is in Government—will have to produce— 
Sandra Goudie 
: It will be Phil Heatley. 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: Yes it will be Phil Heatley. He will have to introduce into Parliament this kind of legislation to enable qualified iwi to get out of jail effectively because the problem with the current legislation is that it is too much of a straitjacket. This Supplementary Order Paper offers a reasonable and responsible approach to freeing it up. It gives Aotearoa Fisheries the ability to make a managed transition and I recognise that that is necessary—obviously it is important—but at the same time we must understand that iwi want to be empowered. The best way to do that is to give them control over their assets—to provide some decent threshold tests and if they meet them then they can have that control. 
If the Government will not listen United Future has the power in its hands—as does the Green Party—to give freedom to commercially qualified iwi. I say that this Committee should be voting for freedom it should be voting for autonomy and it should be voting to give people with competence who have a proven track record control of the assets themselves. That is the aspiration of iwi organisations up and down this country. There would be threshold tests to get over and that is reasonable but if the Minister and other parties in this Committee really had the interests of iwi at heart they would vote for this Supplementary Order Paper. As I said earlier it is one that has been carefully thought through and one that provides a balance of interests.