Mahuta Nanaia: Maori Trustee Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Mahuta Nanaia: Maori Trustee Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:653;Page:2764] 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I rise to speak in the Committee stage of the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill particularly to Part 1. Supplementary Order Papers containing some technical amendments and an amendment to the commencement date have been lodged by the Minister of Maori Affairs and we certainly support them. 
The history of this particular bill is that it has been well debated in this House. The previous Labour Government introduced it with two specific components. One was to have the office of the Maori Trustee established as a stand-alone entity and the other was to do with accelerating Maori development. The Maori Affairs Committee at the time gave the bill quite a full hearing and what we now have in the Committee stage are some minor but useful amendments. 
As I point out some of those issues I hope that the Minister in the chair the Hon Georgina te Heuheu sees fit to take a call because what has happened is that of the two parts of the bill as it was introduced by the previous Labour Government the first part of the bill has remained all but intact with some useful amendments and the second part regarding Maori development has been left for a further conversation. 
I was not a member of that select committee but I remember the debate in the House. It is interesting that people tend to forget what they have said in Opposition once they are in Government. I have a particular statement here which is a very forceful one: “National believes that the role of the Maori Trustee needs fundamental revision. National believes that it is time to have a deep think about how Maori land should be reviewed particularly the assets involved with the Maori Trustee. It is fundamentally wrong to have this approach. It simply transfers assets that could have been transferred to iwi back into a centralised approach … It simply transfers assets that could have been transferred back to iwi back into a centralised approach.” That was said by none other than Dr Wayne Mapp during the first reading debate. What he was saying there basically is that what Labour was doing in trying to set up the Maori Trustee office as a stand-alone entity was not the right thing to do— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Oh rubbish! You’ve got it wrong. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: —and that we should in fact give all the assets back to iwi. I have that statement here I say to Mr Henare and I am quite happy to table the statements made by Dr Mapp when he was in the House. 
Actually the important thing about this particular issue is what it leads one to think. National now that it is in Government has a real ability to add things into the Maori Trustee Act. When National members were in Opposition they talked about the types of things they said they would do. Now that National is in Government it has the prime opportunity to do those things and it has not done so. 
I will give an example. One of criticisms voiced by Mr Henare when he was in Opposition was that it was difficult to find Maori landowners. Many of the Maori electorate MPs—in fact many of the Maori MPs in this House—know just how difficult it is to find Maori landowners and to try to ascribe a lot of those unclaimed moneys. Is there anything in the Supplementary Order Papers that suggests a way of putting greater obligation on the Maori Trustee to do this? There is nothing. Members opposite when in Opposition criticised things that were very difficult to do and they said that this should be done and that should be done. Now they have an opportunity to do that and they have not done so. I have raised that point because it is very interesting to hear what people say in Opposition and do not deliver on when in Government. 
Largely this bill is not controversial. I think everyone would agree that setting up the Maori Trust Office as a stand-alone entity is a good thing. I see that it is the strong intention of the Government to make sure that the Act comes into force by 1 July and I think the sooner the better. That is very important. The Act is to be read in line with Te Ture Whenua Maori Act and I do want to pick up on some comments made by Dr Wayne Mapp in the previous debate. I also agree that Te Ture Whenua Maori Act is in need of review and some changes should and must be made. 
This is a slight departure from the debate but it is a useful one I think. When we consider a number of the inhibiting and constraining factors around developing unproductive Maori land we see that part of it lies in a legislative solution and part of it lies in policy but a great part of it lies in a reorientation of how current policy is used. I am particularly pleased to see that Te Puni Kokiri is continuing its review of Maori land with regard to the valuation of Maori land and the rating of Maori land. I think this in part may help to loosen some of the constrictions.