Utikere TangiTANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to take a call on the third reading of the Māori Fisheries Amendment Bill. I do want to acknowledge the nature within which the contributions have been made by members all around the House today it shows the level of support across party lines to get this bill over the line. It is a bill that has let's be frank taken a number of years to get to this point this morning. And I do want to acknowledge previous Ministers who have been part of this process two of whom are my colleagues here the Hon David Parker and the Hon Rachel Brooking who have played a role in in getting the bill to this point in time. I also want to acknowledge the work of the Māori Affairs Committee—I'm not a member of that committee but many members have reflected on the way in which the consultation was undertaken and the very broad nature of that I think speaks volumes. So I do want to acknowledge the work of all members on that particular committee.When this bill last came to this place as part of the committee of the whole House there were a number of changes that were put up leading into that. There were some changes that were suggested—and I'll touch on that briefly in a moment—but there are two changes that I think make very good sense. The first is one now the bill in its current form reflects an area of change around constraints on transactions particularly around the ability to extend the quota disentitlement period from that of five years to 10 years but that would be in place post-commencement of this bill. That's the first one.The second one was around the suggestion that mandated iwi organisations would only sell the settlement quota in specified criteria that would apply. The first would be that it would be contained as a component within the constitutional arrangements or documents. The second is that any transaction that might flow from that would need to be in line with the requirements that are set out in the constitution documents. So I think that's really important. There were some other suggestions that were floated as part of this process by the Minister and I am pleased that those changes have not flowed through to the final stage of this bill. I think that actually shows the importance of that broader level of engagement with stakeholders particularly with iwi and others as well. Because the Minister signalled two possible changes one was in relation to the nature within which responsible Māori organisations would be involved around the number of directors that would be on the board related also to the appointment and to the removal of directors. And so I think that's a very dicey and difficult road to head down.So the bill that that we have in front of us today does not have that. The second was around the nature of representational Māori organisations to be involved around voting but also the capacity of voting and that hasn't followed through as well. So I think the fact that this bill in its current form does not reflect those changes that the Minister did signal were an absolute possibility I think is a very wise move.And I'm pleased to see the possibility moving forward of a future review which I'm sure will be on the cards at some point in time. Actually I think that level of certainty is important. There is the suggestion that has been raised that post-enactment that review period might be around seven to 10 years. I note the Minister in his contribution on this particular bill signalled that it might be 9 to 12 whatever format takes. I think it's really important that any post-review opportunities are done in line with a similar legislative process. That this is not a piece of work or a body of work that is basically subsumed within an omnibus bill opportunity. I think that's really important for us.So this is a bill that is long overdue. There has been much work that has been undertaken by many people inside this House and outside this House and I join other colleagues in commending it to the House.