te Heuheu Georgina: Te Roroa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Te Roroa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:649;Page:18355] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 I want to take a call just to make some comments on the observations that were made by our colleague across the Chamber Pita Paraone who of course and rightly so always feels compelled to raise the issue of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and I in turn always feel compelled to make some comment on his raising that issue. Of course these claims are brought under the mandate or brief of the Waitangi Tribunal which has to look at a claim to see whether it breaches the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. That notion or measurement is to be found in the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975. As I say it is the measure by which the tribunal must measure all the claims. So of course when we come to settle a claim there has to be some acknowledgment in there that that claim has been well founded in that there has been found to be a breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Aroha mai I feel sometimes for New Zealand First and for our associates across the way who still seem to be in the dark after all these years as to what the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are. 
Pita Paraone 
: Tell us! Tell us what they are. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: First of all there is the principle of good faith—the duty upon the Crown to negotiate with claimants in a spirit of partnership and good faith. Secondly there is the principle of protection. I can go through these but really I would have thought that after that party has been in Parliament this long supporting settlements as it does—unlike ACT which used to and probably still does oppose everything to do with Treaty settlements— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Rodney’s got the tan now. Rodney’s got the spray-on tan. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: That might make a difference as to whether ACT supports a Treaty settlement. It probably will. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: It’s a bad spray-on tan. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: Bad or not we wait with anticipation to see whether ACT will support this Treaty settlement. 
But coming back to New Zealand First I say that I would have thought for a party that considers itself despite its numbers a big party equal to National and Labour that after all this time someone there might have taken the time to comb through the Court of Appeal and Waitangi Tribunal decisions because the principles are to be found in the judgments and the reports of both those organisations. As I say I have talked about the principle of the Crown acting in good faith and in the spirit of partnership towards claimants. That is an underlying one. This settlement is meant to embody those principles and that is why earlier I talked about the apology. That is why it is important that reference to the principles is here so that we all know and New Zealanders know that yes this claim has been properly investigated and yes a breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi has been found. That phrase was integrated into legislation back in 1975 by that member’s relative probably the Hon Matiu Rata— 
Pita Paraone 
: Yes. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: —yes—who came up with that phrase because as we know the Treaty is in English and in Maori and if we were to say “the Treaty” people would ask which Treaty. So using the phrase “principles of the Treaty” enables the tribunal to look at both versions and distil from both versions what the underlying principles thoughts and thinking of the signatories to the Treaty were at the time. So aroha mai to our colleague in New Zealand First. He should not worry; the principles are there. They are talked about constantly particularly in the Waitangi Tribunal reports because they have to be. The Waitangi Tribunal has to set out how it has found a claim to be well founded because it is in breach of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. So those principles are easily gleaned if the member were to take the time along with his party to find them. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 236 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen to omit clause 14 and substitute new clause 14 be agreed to. 
Amendment agreed to. 
Part 1 as amended agreed to.