Little AndrewHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Health): Thank you Madam Chair. Just to deal with the last three contributions; Mr Doocey's repeated himself and there's nothing much really to add apart from what I've said earlier that in order to make the bill in its totality consistent and referring to the provision providing for the Government policy statement that makes the commitment to rural communities amongst others it made sense—given that all of the other population groups referred to would have their own strategy—for there to be a discrete strategy for rural communities. It's no greater than that and I don't really intend to repeat that argument again even if members opposite wish to keep pressing that point. To Dr Reti; effectively he argued that because his Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) is provided for therefore you know his SOP should also stand. So it's actually not correct. Clause 3 of the legislation is very clear. It provides for the provision and promotion—if you like—of health services with a view to achieving outcomes. His SOP requires that the health sector should ensure that the rural communities achieve equitable health outcomes. My earlier argument stands and again I won't come back to this argument for the sake of avoiding repetition. In his Supplementary Order Paper 159 Dr Reti refers to health need". I'll just point out that right throughout the Pae Ora (Healthy Futures) Bill there is reference to what that bill is about which is ensuring that health services are provided and there are mechanisms for providing health services that are relevant to communities and relevant to the country as a whole. That is a theme right throughout the legislation. So I reject Dr Reti's claim that the bill isn't predicated on meeting health need; it absolutely and utterly is. That's why we have it.To Rawiri Waititi and his argument about needing to fulfil the Crown's obligations under the Treaty. I refer the member to clause 6 of the bill. It makes it very clear in the opening lines: "In order to provide for the Crown's intention to give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi … this Act"—and it spells out what the Act does and critical amongst those is adherence to the health sector principles. The health sector principles are provided for in clause 7. Those health sector principles are based on the principles adumbrated by the Waitangi Tribunal and the Wai 2575 claim. I think there's always a difficulty with legislation adopting passages from the Treaty. I take the view the mana of the Treaty stands on its own and the Crown is obliged to meet its obligations under the Treaty regardless of what appears in any legislation. Legislation should reflect—to the best extent possible—what the Crown practically needs to do to fulfil its obligations and that's what this legislation does. But the Crown's obligation to fulfil the Treaty remains regardless. And that is why we have Waitangi Tribunal inquiries and why there are claims made to the Waitangi Tribunal to make sure the Crown does that. It's why the courts recognise the Treaty of Waitangi and apply it in the way that they do. But the courts have increasingly shown their reluctance to take te reo terms from the Treaty—or te reo terms generally—and apply an interpretation within the Crown's courts when the interpretation may not be easy to pin down may be richer than te reo Pākehā can allow for it and ultimately seeking to avoid disrespect to Māori and to te reo Māori. So I think we are at a point in our history at a point where we are making legislation where we proceed cautiously knowing that the obligations of the Treaty stand now knowing the status that the Treaty has in our jurisprudence. But we approach cautiously references in our legislation to it. This legislation is very explicit about the way we intend to uphold our obligations under the Treaty in relation to the provision of health services and I hope that assists the member."