te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:635;Page:6383] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 Thank you very much Madam Assistant Speaker. I am very pleased to take a call in the second reading of the Ngati Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill. I have had the privilege of taking calls in the debates on a number of settlement bills in my 10 years in Parliament—although it does seem that progress has slowed in the last 6 years. None the less when the Labour Government finally gets settlement bills to this House I am very pleased to take part in the debate. I just want to say “tena koutou” to those of Ngati Mutunga and others who have an interest in their settlement who are here in the gallery today; also to my colleagues on the Maori Affairs Committee albeit we are from different parties. 
Very very often in these matters we tend to demonstrate whether or not we like to admit it that Maori ties are longstanding historical and binding. They are enduring. All of us Maori MPs have ties that were in existence when we came into this Parliament and they will remain and endure long after we leave. Actually as soon as some of our Pakeha colleagues understand that we might make a lot of progress in this place. 
In essence even though on the face of it the bill is a simple one in that it follows the format of previous legislation and even though there is a big mamae or hurt in the hearts of the iwi to settle there is also the wish on the part of Ngati Mutunga to move forward. So as I think I said in the first reading the leaders of the iwi made the decision that it was time to move on. 
It is a privilege when one is in this place and has had the opportunity to move around New Zealand and participate in the hui of our people—people of all description—to see the impact a settlement has on tribes who have settled to date. For a lot of reasons it is always great to see progress on settlement bills such as this one. 
I want to raise two matters in relation to the select committee process. The first is the definition of Ngati Mutunga. This issue of definition always comes up and it will continue to come up because many Maori have reservations or anxieties—I certainly do—about who the settling iwi are as finally defined in a piece of legislation. The Office of Treaty Settlements the Crown requires that Ngati Mutunga tikanga be overridden by a number of Acts including the Adoption Act. In a sense for many Maori that is anathema. It is an absolute no-no. The reason is that inheritance in Te Ao Maori proceeds on the basis of genealogical ties—blood ties—and adoption in the traditional way very often does not include blood relationships. We have come to accept that this will become part of settlements but it does not mean to say that we all like it. 
Sure there is a point at which the Crown can say that these settlements were negotiated with iwi and that the iwi are happy and the Crown is happy to a greater or lesser degree but they are always pepper-potted with various provisions that essentially cut across tikanga—in this case Ngati Mutunga tikanga. However it is there. The wishes of Ngati Mutunga are overridden by the fact that the definition of who they are includes children who are adopted getting the same rights as those who were born and bred Ngati Mutunga. That is one point. 
The other point is the matter that my colleague Gerry Brownlee referred to and about which National may propose a Supplementary Order Paper. The issue is one that revolves round the Crown’s requirement which is a reasonable one—and I am not saying that this is just the Crown in its current form because this was developed when National was in Government—that claimant groups have an established governance entity to receive and manage their settlement assets and that this entity must be representative accountable to the claimant community and have transparent decision-making and dispute resolution processes. 
 Some claimant groups namely those who settled under the previous National Government and National - New Zealand First Government have used private legislation to fulfil this requirement. But currently it seems to be the policy of the Labour Government that they are not supportive of this and so the reality is that Ngati Mutunga have to go through this pretty convoluted process of disestablishing their current tribal entity and going through the cost time and effort in the process that that entails. Really their desired course was that private legislation would be available to them in the way that it was available to Tainui; Ngai Tahu with their Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu Act; to Ngati Awa who also had Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Act and one under the current Government in the Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Act. They have been denied this; instead they were given a slightly increased sum to offset some of the costs of disestablishing their runanga but ultimately it does seem they have been somewhat discriminated against by not being given the availability of private legislation which invariably on the face of it makes the process a lot simpler. 
I want to flag that and Gerry Brownlee certainly flagged it. He did say though that he would like to know why Ngati Mutunga are asking for a Supplementary Order Paper that accommodates their wish. Basically it boils down to a significant saving in cash in the transaction costs. 
It is not about the establishment of an entity bound to Parliament; most definitely it is not that. I would not have a part of it if it were. I know that they are smart enough not to want that. So it is an issue about the significant transaction costs acknowledging the contribution that Office of Treaty Settlements has made and an ease of process that ultimately seems to be much more sensible than what they are being asked to do now. 
This is a phase that gets us closer to the third reading of this bill. I hope it is the Government’s intention to see that occur before the end of the year—that would be great. It would add to the things that make a parliamentarian feel good when coming to the end of a parliamentary year. So I would like to feel good. National will certainly support the timely passage of the bill to its third reading. As I say I hope it is the Government’s intention to do that. No reira tena koutou tena koutou tena tatou katoa.