Brownlee Gerry: Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:634;Page:5364] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I was not seeking leave; I was acknowledging your ability as the Chair Mr Chairperson to make a decision. The text of acknowledgment in clause 7(1) of the Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Bill states: “(1) The Crown recognises that Te Arawa value the Te Arawa lakes and the lakes’ resources as taonga. The Crown acknowledges the spiritual cultural economic and traditional importance to Te Arawa of the lakes and the lakes’ resources.” I think that that statement begs the question of who Te Arawa are. Further it would ask the question if this is to be a full and final settlement whether we do not have to be certain that the overwhelming majority of Te Arawa are happy with the settlement. And does that not then in turn cause us to look at the mandating of those who have been in negotiations with the Government? 
 Firstly I think those who have been in negotiation have acted honourably and in the belief they were doing their best for the people who had put them there. However we still go back to the point that there were 20 submission on the bill and of those 20 submissions 18 were opposed to it. That group of 18 submitters all came from Te Arawa. This afternoon we have heard Te Ururoa Flavell making it very clear that inside Te Arawa there are some significant objections to this particular settlement. So it would be useful for the Minister to stand up and tell us what the mandating process was. 
Hon Mark Burton 
: I already have when the member was— 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: It does not matter. The Minister could do this through every part. 
Hon Mark Burton 
: Well I did. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Well did the Minister tell us ultimately that only 4000 of this group of 40000 voted for the settlement? 
Dave Hereora 
: He did that Gerry. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Dave Hereora—I will say that name again: Dave Hereora which is a name that not many people will have heard before none the less he is a member of Parliament—is a fine gentleman. He does a marvellous job chairing the Maori Affairs Committee—I mean that quite sincerely. He has said that that point has been covered. The question then is why the Government is comfortable that fewer than 10 percent of those who say they are Te Arawa have voted in favour of this settlement. The settlement should therefore be an imposition on the rest of them. I ask Mr Hereora whether it is not true that much of Maori history is oral and the stories that belong to a particular iwi are transmitted from one generation to another. What is to stop the story for 90 percent of Te Arawa being: “We got sold out. This was not a full and final settlement. We were not part of it. It’s not what we wanted.”? For anyone to say that that will not happen because the settlement is done by Act of Parliament and once it is all done they will all be happy and never come back again I say is rubbish. 
This is the second go at this bill. We freely acknowledge that the first time round was not too hot. But it was an imposition the first time round that causes us to be here now. If only 10 percent or less of one’s whole iwi was in favour of this settlement then it is an imposition now as well. No one can claim that the settlement is full and final and only people who have their eyes shut would raise their hands and say “I vote” on the basis of this being full and final. 
It seems to me that it would not have been hard to sort this out before we got to this stage. Why were some of the affected hapu not included in the negotiating group? Why did the Government not insist on some form of rununga structure that had that wider representation? What was it about the Te Arawa Maori Trust Board and the exclusions of representation on that board that the Government found so acceptable? I say again that I mean no offence to the trust board or its members but I think the Office of Treaty Settlements should be looking at getting settlements that are very very well mandated where there can be no doubt about what is accepted. Te Ururoa Flavell made the good point that these are generous settlements on the part of the settling party. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The question now is that the question be now put.