Davidson MaramaMARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): To be clear the Green Party will be voting in support of the Māori Purposes Bill and that is because we always uphold the mana of iwi needing to decide over their own affairs and needing to run their own affairs. Improving governance: this bill does seek to improve governance and the capability of the Wī Pere Trust as well as remove unnecessary Crown involvement which we are certainly in favour of—removing unnecessary Crown involvement. I too absolutely want to raise some concerns about the late-entry Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs) from the Minister for Māori Development. I do understand and perhaps can concede that they are minor administrative updates and legislative changes but I am somewhat concerned about process. As my colleague Kelvin Davis has said we did not have a lot of notice and I am particularly wondering—I just want to be clear actually I am asking a genuine question—whether these are purely opportunity SOPs. Do they have any actual direct relevance to the actual running of the Wī Pere Trust and to this particular bill? That is what I am genuinely asking about and so I am sure the Minister will stand to talk to that. Those are the sorts of the things I am asking. Just to have the Greens on record I understand that the Māori Television Service amendment in SOP 231 is certainly an administrative update because of the disestablishment of the organisation Te Pūtahi Pāoho—kei te pai tēnā. Supplementary Order Paper 232 on Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 is slightly different and is about upholding a difference in reporting requirements between large and small organisations. I did have to check whether that was standard just to make sure we are keeping things accountable and above board. I was advised that that is standard so kei te pai tēnā. Then lastly there is the amendment to the Te Rarawa Claims Settlement Act 2015 in SOP 233. I understand that simply the mandated iwi organisation—I think that is what MIO stands for—needs to apply retrospectively from the date that the Te Rarawa Claims Settlement Act commences. So those are logical and mainly understandable but boy I did have to rush a bit to just try to get a little—actually I do not understand them deeply but the little bit that I wanted to find out I had to do really quickly on the fly. So thank you Mr Chair for reiterating and enforcing that better practice is to give us a little bit more time. I now want to come down to my colleague Meka Whaitiri's Supplementary Order Paper. Through the submissions we did hear absolutely concerns from whānau—some who were outright opposing this bill; others who just wanted to state concerns—that they did want the jurisdiction over the running of the trust to remain with the Māori Land Court and not the High Court. So the Green Party will absolutely be supporting Meka Whaitiri's SOP because one of the quotes I think from whānau submissions was that they did not believe that the High Court understands ngā mea Māori as the Māori Land Court has and does and has that deep institutional knowledge and experience as well. Of course they had concerns about access and costs and so I would quite appreciate a response from the Minister just to justify actually and clarify that movement that transfer from the Māori Land Court to the High Court. I think the families whānau who raised that concern really deserve a clear answer on that one as well because I do not see why we here in this House cannot maintain that jurisdiction. Those are the main points that I wanted to raise in Part 1. Thank you.