Muller ToddTODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I rise to speak on this very good proposed amendment from my colleague Nick Smith. Actually there are quite a few issues that deserve the Minister in the chair Carmel Sepuloni's response and I very much look forward to her taking a call and actually responding to these very core questions that we've put on the table both Nick Smith and my colleague Simon Bridges in the last few minutes. Also we want to hear the Minister's response.Consistency is important and if this legislation enables councils to hold a view over the establishment of Māori wards it seems incongruous that they then don't have the opportunity in the future to be able to disestablish them. The lack of consistency around that is concerning. It is not clear. Dr Smith has made I think a very very strong point that there is a lack of clarity around that point in the bill and he is asking for that confidence that the Minister has shared previously that is actually backed up in the specifics here in this legislation.A couple of feedbacks that I think are useful for consideration around this proposed amendment from the feedback that we had in select committee: we had comments from Ngāi Tahu who were broadly supportive of aspects of direction of travel but had made it very clear that they believe that under their Treaty settlement and their relationship with the Crown they have a direct relationship—direct relationship—with various local governments of the South Island. They had very little interest in the Māori wards as a proposal that is going to impact in any way—in any positive way in any meaningful way—their ongoing relationship with the Crown. My question Minister is if you have in a Canterbury context Ngāi Tahu already holding that view in the future deciding that actually the council's decision to perhaps in the future establish a Māori ward is not working for their relationship on behalf of Ngāi Tahu—direct relationship with the Crown—and they would like the council to reflect on the merits or otherwise the appropriateness or otherwise of a Māori ward in Canterbury what this legislation is saying is that there is no possible way for the council to be able to respond to that request from the very Treaty partner that they have been required under legislation to have a strong and enduring relationship with.This is poor law Minister. It is not clear and it doesn't actually deliver what any normal average person would expect that if you give a power to a council to establish a Māori ward they also if circumstances—Louisa Wall: Consult with mana whenua—you consult with the iwi. Pretty simple. They won't propose it if the iwi don't want it.TODD MULLER: —and perspectives in that community including those who have the direct relationship between local rūnanga iwi and the Crown might wish to see change in the future this actually—Chris Bishop: Point of order. Thank you Mr Chair. Look I don't like to tell tales but I did hear a member from the other side use an unparliamentary word in relation to the speech that Mr Muller was just giving. It related to the word dog whistle".CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I didn't hear—I certainly heard an interjection but I didn't personally hear an unparliamentary term. You need to say who.Louisa Wall: Making things up.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Did a member use an unparliamentary term? Would you like to tell the committee exactly who you're talking about?Chris Bishop: Well that's what I heard but the member's now accusing me of making things up which is definitely out of order.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Yeah you shouldn't take offence on—you know you really need to construct the point of order correctly. You need to tell me. I can't make a ruling if you—I've told you and the committee that I did not hear any unparliamentary statement. If there was one it would be helpful if you told me who—Chris Bishop: I just did.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry you did not.Hon Simon Bridges: I believe—point of order—I heard Louisa Wall say "dog whistle". I mean it could be that she said the "pog and thistle" or—I mean it's possible but I believe she said "dog whistle".CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Well I can only appeal to any member that has made an unparliamentary statement to stand withdraw and apologise. And if—Hon Simon Bridges: I mean if she's saying she didn't that's fine—we'll move on—but I reckon she did.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Well—TODD MULLER: There was at least quarter of an hour left I think the last time I looked up on there!CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Sorry I'm going to re-correct the clock.TODD MULLER: It was about a minute. I can carry on I'm sure.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I think it was just under two minutes but we'll put two minutes in there.TODD MULLER: That's fine Mr Chair. I'm very sure I'm going to have an opportunity to share my dulcet tones and remarkable insight for Willie Jackson to dine out on again in this evening's session.One thing the Minister said the last time she spoke was that this bill is part of a significant suite of changes which will be coming in the near future. This is again why I return to that fundamental point around fairness and equity with respect to the time that we have had in discussing these issues because actually this particular amendment is one that's justifiable does deserve an opportunity to be tested more than just here over a few speeches and should have actually Minister been part of a far longer process. I think it's a very fair amendment and I would hope that the committee would see the merits of it when it considers a vote in due course."