te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:613;Page:10173] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
I intend to take only this call in the Committee stage but I would like to make some comments none the less that will probably range over a number of issues. I am pleased that the bill has now reached Committee stage. National supports the settlement and the swift passage of this bill. But I do express disappointment that it has taken 4 years to get to this point given that the heads of agreement was signed in September 1999. None the less it is good to see the bill here today and no doubt we will see its passage into law tomorrow.  
During the select committee stage National had a comment in the report back about those provisions that provide for preferential rights for the claimants to coastal space. I flag again the concern of the National caucus about the measures providing for preferential rights on coastal space proceeding at a time when major public policy decisions relating to aquaculture and the ownership of foreshore and seabed have yet to be made.  
As we said in our comment a specific settlement of a historic grievance should not of itself be seen as setting a general precedent. Perhaps the Minister might like to take a call and address that matter even by way of giving some reassurance that we are not creating for ourselves something difficult in the absence of any final decisions on the foreshore and seabed issues. Other than that as this Committee knows when settlement bills come before a select committee they are the subject of a deed of settlement between claimants and the Government. The select committee’s ability to make alterations is limited in the regard that if some major amendment were proposed then it would have to go back to the parties involved—both the Crown and claimants. On balance by the time it gets there it is always thought that after as long as this in negotiation the hope is that the best has been done by any particular group of claimants—in this case Ngati Tama—so in a sense the select committee’s job is to ensure that the provisions in the actual deed of settlement are properly accommodated in this legislation.  
In any event I take this opportunity to make one or two comments about why it is important that we all support a swift passage. I am repeating myself here but I think it is worth repeating that these settlements are about historic injustices. It behoves the leaders of this nation which we are when we come into this place to use the very best efforts we can to try to make the best reparation we can for those who have suffered this injustice. In the case of the Taranaki iwi—the eight iwi of Taranaki which obviously includes Ngati Tama—the background to their claims and the injustices that have occurred in their case have represented a blight on our past history.  
This always gives us the opportunity not only to make proper redress to those people but in a sense to restore the honour of the Crown because these injustices for as long as they exist call into question the honour of the Crown. As I say we parliamentarians are given the opportunity to restore the honour of the Crown in making sure that due reparation is made and that settlements are concluded.  
I am not certain but I think that the ACT party is opposing this bill. [ 
Interruption 
] It is opposing it. I express disappointment at that because I have heard members of that party say it is important that injustices be addressed. It is a most difficult thing that this Parliament does when it tries to repair the damage that has been done through the injustices that have occurred. We can only do the best we can. We can never make full reparation to claimants but we can do the best we possibly can.  
It is easy to pick a settlement to bits and flag all sorts of reasons why certain provisions may not be the best in the end. I think it is a lot harder first of all for a tribe to make a decision to settle and then for the Government whichever party is in power to try to piece together a settlement package that hopefully gives the particular tribe a basis on which to go forward.  
ACT I think agrees with the principle of setting right past injustices. If ACT does not agree then that says something about ACT. It shows that it is willing to let injustice lie. I ask ACT to give some further thought to this matter and maybe not in this stage but at a future stage to see fit to support these settlements. They are difficult and complex. New Zealanders are keen to see this all put behind us. Maori especially deserve proper recompense for injustices they have suffered. The settlement package represented in this bill is the best we can find. Perhaps ACT might reconsider its view and for once support a settlement package.