Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15305] 
Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill 
Second Reading 
Third Reading 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill) 
: 
 I move  
That the Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill be now read a second time and a third time 
. On behalf of the Melanesian Mission Trust Board I thank the Finance and Expenditure Committee for its unanimous support of the bill. I also acknowledge the members of the Business Committee and the parliamentary parties for supporting the bill and agreeing to take its second and third readings as one question. The Finance and Expenditure Committee reports that the facts and purposes of the bill as set out in its preamble were proven to the satisfaction of the committee and recommends that the bill be passed with a small amendment. 
To recap on the bill’s purpose it is designed to give certainty that the Melanesian Mission Trust Board’s income including its business income is exempt from income tax. The trust is actually a product of legislation that has been passed by New Zealand Parliaments going way back to 1862. The objective of successive pieces of legislation has been to apply income from land owned by the trust in New Zealand for charitable religious and educational purposes in Melanesia. 
The trust provides 94 percent of the income of the Church of Melanesia which utilises this funding mainly in the Solomon Islands but also in Vanuatu and New Caledonia. It runs schools vocational training centres medical centres a centre for assisting victims of domestic violence and a mothers union helping with family life life skills and literacy training. The church runs nine schools in the Solomons and 10 in Vanuatu educating approximately 4600 pupils and employing around 210 teachers. It runs seven vocational training centres for 620 students employing about 46 teachers and also provides theological training for 80 students. The Church of Melanesia also runs two medical clinics in the Solomons employing 23 staff. 
The trust has always been exempt from the requirement to pay income tax or at least that is what was thought until a New Zealand Court of Appeal decision in  
Dick v Commissioner of Inland Revenue 
 in 2002. That raised uncertainty about the trust’s status. If it was required to pay tax that would result in a $2 million reduction in money available for its charitable work or about 30 percent of its overall income. That would contradict the broader objective of the Government which is working through New Zealand aid to assist the Solomon Islands in exactly the areas that the Melanesian Mission Trust Board is contributing to. 
I do not personally have any association with the Melanesian church but given my interest in the Solomon Islands the trust approached me with a request to sponsor a local bill to clarify that its income continued to be as it was in the past exempt from paying income tax. This bill therefore amends the Melanesian Trusts Act 1974 to ensure that from the commencement date of the principal Act income derived by the Melanesian Mission Trust Board including any income from business and distributions of income by the trust board are exempt from income tax. I welcome the select committee’s acceptance of the need to do this. 
I support the small amendment proposed by the committee in new section 4A(2)(c) to be inserted by clause 5 which provides that income derived by the trust board and distributions of income by the trust board are treated as exempt income under the Income Tax Act 2007. That ensures that the exemption is comprehensive. 
The committee also raised a concern that the tax status of other charitable trust boards that were of a similar nature to the Melanesian Mission Trust Board remains unclear. It suggests that the Government to save the time and money of such trusts and indeed of Parliament should deal with the general effect of the Court of Appeal’s decision rather than through individual Acts of Parliament. That issue is beyond my remit as the sponsor of this bill but I am sure it can be considered by the Inland Revenue Department and its Minister to see whether there is a need for it and whether there is an advantage in doing so. However I understand that there may not be many other charitable trusts in the same position if any at all. Most charitable trusts rely on exemptions in sections CW34 and CW35 of the Income Tax Act 2004 which exempts income from tax if the income is non-business income or if it is applied to charitable purposes in New Zealand. The Melanesian Mission Trust Board is unusual in that it does receive income that could be characterised as business income under the  
Dick 
decision and it applies almost all of its income for charitable purposes outside of New Zealand. There may therefore given the uniqueness of this position not be a need for further legislation beyond this bill. 
The bill is supported by the Minister of Finance the Minister of Revenue and the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Once again I thank the Finance and Expenditure Committee for its careful consideration of the bill and I thank members for the support that they have shown in progressing the bill through its final stages today. I commend the bill to all parties in the House for their support. 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National—Rodney) 
: 
 I want to make it clear that the National Party will be supporting the Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill. The Hon Phil Goff has outlined every aspect of the consideration of this bill. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
Dr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH 
: The Hon Phil Goff spelt out in some detail the fine charitable work that the Melanesian Trust does around the Pacific particularly in the Solomon Islands Vanuatu and New Caledonia and I do not intend to repeat that. 
Mr Goff also covered the issue that the bill particularly addresses which is the problem that the Melanesian Trust has been operating for years—going right back two centuries ago; in fact going right back to 1862—on a tax-free basis for its income because under New Zealand tax law income for charitable purposes is not taxable if it is either not business income or used for charitable purposes here in New Zealand. The income for the Melanesian Trust is clearly not used for charitable purposes in New Zealand; it is used for charitable purposes in the Pacific. So that consideration for it to be exempt from tax is not valid so it has to be considered to be exempt from income tax on the basis that it did not receive business income. 
The problem was that in 2002 the Court of Appeal in a case called  
Dick v Commissioner of Inland Revenue 
 actually made a decision on this issue. The particular problem which the Hon Phil Goff did not go into was that in that case Dick was actually receiving income from investment in four commercial properties. The Court of Appeal ruled that because the investment was in commercial properties it meant the income from it was business income. The dilemma for the Melanesian Trust was that some of its investment was in similar kinds of properties and therefore there was a risk that the Commissioner of Inland Revenue could in fact decide that the Melanesian Trust also had to pay income tax. Now as we look forward that would cost the trust $2 million a year out of its charitable activity and it would make a big hole in what it does for the schools and medical centres up there in Vanuatu the Solomon Islands and New Caledonia. 
But worse than that—and this is the final point I will make—the trust was at risk of being assessed for years going right the way back. If a decision were made that the trust was liable for income tax because its income was business income it was at risk of income assessments being backdated for some years. Of course that would be crippling. 
The National Opposition is absolutely satisfied that this legislation is a sensible move. We support it and we congratulate the Melanesian Trust on the fine work it does. There is no need to say any more on this issue; we have thoroughly examined it and it makes good sense. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
Tena koe Madam Assistant Speaker. Ko taku noa ake i te tuatahi ko te tuku i te poroporoaki ki tera kua ngaro atu i nga pakitara o te Whare Paremata ara te toa i tu ki mua i te pa tuwatawata e tu ake nei. Ohorere ana te ngakau i taku rongo kua wahangu koe koro e Tumu i tenei rangi. Hoi ano e hoki ki Hawaiki nui Hawaiki roa ki Hawaiki pamamao. E koro haere whakangaro atu. 
I tera wiki i whakarewahia tetahi hongere whakaata hou ko Te Reo tona ingoa.Ko tona putake ko te reo Maori me ki kia rangona te reo Maori e korerotia ana. No reira me mihi ki a ratou na ratou tera kaupapa i whakatinana kia puawai i te rangi nei. Koi nei ka whakaaro ake kia whakaputaina tenei kauhau ki roto i te reo o oku tupuna kia whai ai i taua tauira. 
A ki te mema hou nau mai e rarau. He rawe tou kauhau inapo. E Sua talofa lava haere mai. 
Ko tenei pire ki te Whare i te po nei he take ahua mama noa iho ara te hiwhinga ka puta mai i te Melanesian Mission Trust Board me nga tohatoha whai muri o te whiwhinga a taua poari kia noho kore taake. E tautoko ana te Pati Maori i tenei take. Ki o matou whakaaro me noho kore taake nga take awhina tangata. Ko nga tumanako awhina a-iwi a-matauranga a-whakapono ka whai kiko ma te hoko whenua whare karakia kura whare a te whakapai poti etahi atu waka tetahi putea tiaki pihopa minita me nga kaiako. 
Me te mea nei he mama noa iho tera ara ka whakapau te Poari o te Melanesian Mission Trust i te whiwhinga tangorihi hei koha ki te Hahi o Melanesia me ki nga motu o Horomona Vanuatu me Kanaki. Kati he pera tonu te ahua? 
Ko te take nui i puta mai ki a au ko tera e pa ana ki te whakamahinga o te whiwhinga tangorihi. Ko te whenua i Mission Bay me Kohimarama he whenua i whakawehea i rihia mo nga whare. Ko tona hanga he ahua rite ki nga rihi a Glasgow ara he mea mutunga kore he mea whakahou he mea ata tirohia anotia. He ahua orite ki nga mea o Glasgow. No Aotearoa te hanga o enei momo rihi ara kia noho kohatu nga rihi ki tetahi nui ki tetahi rahi ranei ia tau ia tau a ka noho penei mo nga tau 21. Kaore tona taketake i te tino mohiotia engari ara noa atu tona panga. Ka hipa nga tau rua tekau ma tahi ka tirohia enei momo rihi (a Glasgow) ara ki tetahi paiheneti o te wariu o nga whenua ki te utu reti ranei mo tetahi atu tau 21 ano. 
Ki taku mohio i whakakorengia nga rihi o Glasgow i te United Kingdom i te tau tahi mano iwa rau rua tekau ma rua engari i Aotearoa nei i tenei whenua i tenei pito o te ao ka mau tonu ka mau tonu i a tatou. He tino aronga toku ki enei momo rihi penei i nga mea o Glasgow ara te putake tonu o te whiwhinga mo te Melanesian Mission Trust i te mea hangai ai ki te oranga ohanga o te maha o o tatou kura Maori noho. 
Ara a Te Aute tera kura Maori noho rongonui o to matou kaiarahi e rua. Whakahihi ai a te Takuta Pita Sharples ia ra engari kore rawa he paku korero ana mo nga haukerekeretanga a te Kura o Tipene i te maha o nga kemu whutuporo. A aroha mai kai te ahua kotiti taku korero. I Te Aute i te pataitia te tika o nga whenua e watea ana i raro i te ture kia hokoa. Ara a Hato Paora i te tau kua hipa ka akina a ia kia hokona o ratou whenua pamu kia whiwhi putea ai hei whakahou i o ratou kainga noho taiohi. Ara a Tipene ara noa atu nga tane o te puna matauranga penei i a Hone Harawira me etahi atu o tenei Whare a Shane Jones ko au tonu. Ko nga kaitautoko a-putea o Tipene ko te hahi Mihingare. I te wa e tuwhera ana te kura ko ta ratou he whakatikatika i o ratou rawa kia taea ai te whakahou me te whakapaipai i o ratou kainga noho taiohi. 
He take nui whakaharahara tenei ara mo te punaha whenua tangorihi he punaha kei a ia etahi hapanga kino mo nga taha e rua otira mo te whenua noho a-kainga. Ko te tino raru ko tera ki te tangata nona te whenua ara te heke haere o te moni ka hoki mai mo te rangatiratanga o te hua me te kore piki o te reti mo tetahi wa roa engari ka tae ki te wa arotake ka pa he pikinga o te rihi ki nga whakaritenga paiheneti hei kawe ma te kaipupuri whenua. I te nuinga o te wa kaore he hononga ki te whakamahinga o te whenua i te wa nei ki te wariu ranei o nga whakapainga ki te whenua. 
Koi nei te ahuatanga o tenei pire e pa ana ki te Melanesian Mission Trust Board he take wananga tonu ma matou o te Torangapu Maori. 
Ko te whiwhinga no era momo rihi a Glasgow i nga tapa taone tino minatia o Tamaki-makau-rau ara i Kohimarama i Mission Bay kei te awhina i te hahi Mihingare i Melanesia a na reira ko ta matau patai e pa ki te raruraru mo te ohanga kei runga i te Melanesian Mission mehemea he patunga ano hoki a ia o tenei momo whakaritenga rihi. 
Na ara ano tetahi take. Ko te mea pai o tenei momo pire ko to tatou tirohanga ki o tatou korero hitori a-motu nei i te wa i tae mai a tauiwi ki konei. Ki taku mohio i whakaturia te Melanesian Mission Trust Board i te tau kotahi mano waru rau ono tekau ma rua e te Pihopa Mihingare a George Augustus Herewini me John Coleridge Patteson te Pihopa Mihingare Tuatahi i Melanesia. I tae atu a Pihopa Herewini ki Tamaki-makau-rau i te toru tekau o Haratua i te tau kotahi mano waru rau wha tekau ma rua. I ako tonu tera i te reo Maori i tona haerenga mai ki konei. Na wai ra ka tino matau te tangata nei ki te reo ka kauhau mai ka whakaako mai ki roto i te reo Maori i te reo Pakeha ranei e ai ki te ahuatanga o te wa. He tangata rere ke a Pihopa Herewini i te mea ko tona aronga nui ko te matauranga me te whakapono. Nana tonu enei i tuku ki nga Pakeha me nga Maori. I taua wa ko te aronga nui o te mihingare ko te mahi ki waenganui i te tangata whenua kaua ki etahi atu. Na tona aronga ki te Maori ka taupatupatu a ia ki te hahi ki ona hoa Pakeha hoki. I a ia i te kareti o Hato Hoani i kaha tana aki kia noho orite nga tauira Maori Pakeha me nga Melanesian i nga mea katoa ara nga kainga noho nga wharekai nga hakinakina me nga akoranga. 
Na tona whakahe kaupapa whenua o taua wa ka puta hoki te riri ki waenganui o nga Pakeha. I te pakarutanga mai o te raru i Waitara me te pakanga ki Taranaki i kaha whakahengia a Pihopa Herewini mo tona tautoko whakaruruhau i a Wiremu Kingi. Kaore e kore kei te maumahara koutou i whakahe a Wiremu ki te hokonga o nga whenua o Taranaki ki te Kawanatanga. Anei tana: “that no Maori owned land the land was owned by all the people to be used communally and individually and not to be possessed. Under Maori custom no land could be sold without the consent of all the people. As leader he must make a decision in accordance with the people's demands”. 
Na no te timatanga o te tau kotahi mano waru rau ono tekau te hokonga o te whenua i oti ai me te kore whakaae a te iwi a no whai muri tonu mai te hunga ruri whenua i uru atu ai ki te poroko whenua. Ka poto te wa whai muri mai o tera ka tae atu nga hoia ki Waitara ka pakaru mai ra te pakanga. Ahakoa nga taumahatanga o taua wa ka tautokoria e Pihopa Herewini te whakahenga ki te take nei. 
E penei ana taku whakamarama mo te hitori nei na te mea ko te mea miharo ki a au ko te hono o nga taketake o te Melanesian Mission Trust Board me nga mahi o te Kawanatanga ki Waitara tetahi o nga raru whenua e kore e warewaretia. 
Hei kupu whakamutunga ka mihi ki te tapaetanga a te Melanesian Mission Trust Board me nga mokamoka i homai e ratou mo te maharahara ka ahatia tera i kia ra e ratou ko te whiwhinga kore-umanga. Marama ana ta ratou whakatau mai ka whakahekea te putea o tetahi whitu miriona taara ia tau a te Hahi Melanesia ma te rua miriona taara ki te taakehia te whiwhinga o te trust board. Kua whakatakotohia haeretia e au etahi hitori mo te Melanesian Mission me ana mahi engari ko te hapa o tetahi rua miriona taara pea te meka kotahi kaore rawa i tau ki toku ngakau. 
Kei te pire nei to matou tautoko o te Torangapu Maori me te mihi kau atu ano hoki ki te Melanesian Mission Trust Board kia u tonu kia mahi tonu hoki ratou ki te tohatoha whiwhinga mo nga take e pa ana ki te awhina tangata. Kia kaha ra. Kia ora tatou 
. 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
Greetings to you Madam Assistant Speaker. My task in the first instance is to make a meek farewell to that person who will no longer been seen at his post around the walls of Parliament that warrior who has manned the palisades that stand before us. I was shocked when I heard of your passing today Ancient One Tumu but return to great Hawaiki long Hawaiki and distant Hawaiki. Oh Ancient One go forth depart from view. 
Last week a new TV channel called Te Reo was launched its purpose being to hear the language spoken in Maori. So I acknowledge those responsible for establishing the channel and bringing it to fruition today. To follow that example I thought that this address should be delivered in the language of my ancestors. 
And to the new member welcome settle in. Your speech last evening was stunning. Welcome Sua welcome. 
This bill before the House tonight is seemingly a straightforward one to ensure that income derived by the Melanesian Mission Trust Board and subsequent distributions of income by that trust board are exempt from tax. The Maori Party supports this matter.  We believe that tax exemptions should be granted for charitable purposes.  The charitable educational and religious purposes provided for are described as the purchase of land churches colleges schools and buildings the repair of ships boats and other vessels and the maintenance and endowment of bishops clergy and schoolmasters. 
That all seems fairly straightforward where the Melanesian Mission Trust Board uses leasehold income to fund the Church of Melanesia a mission covering the Solomon Islands Vanuatu and New Caledonia. But is it all so straightforward? 
What really prodded my interest was the issue around the use of leasehold income. The land in Mission Bay and Kohimarama was subdivided and leased for housing in the form of perpetually renewable Glasgow-type leases subject to periodic rent reviews. These “Glasgow” leases are a particular New Zealand construct that fix the leases at an amount per annum that do not change for a term of 21 years.Their origins are not clear but the impact has been huge. Once the 21 years are up these Glasgow leases are reviewed either to a predetermined percentage of the land value or to a market rental for a further 21 years. 
I understand that “Glasgow” leases apparently were abolished in the United Kingdom in 1922 while here in Aotearoa this far-flung outpost of the world it still perseveres. I have a particular interest inGlasgow-type leases which constitute the major source of income for the Melanesian Mission Trust Board as it relates to the economic survival of many of our Maori boarding schools. 
Consider Te Aute College that iconic Maori boarding school of our co-leader. Dr Pita Sharples skites about it every day but fails to mention the many rugby games lost to St Stephen’s College. My apologies—I am digressing somewhat from my address. At Te Aute the legality of sections being available for sale was being questioned. Consider Hato Paora College which last year was forced to sell the farm property in order to gain revenue for the redevelopment of its hostels. Consider St Stephen’s and its many boys from this educational pool like Hone Harawira and others in this House like Shane Jones and myself particularly. The sponsor of St Stephen’s College the Anglican Church had to reorganise its assets in order to upgrade and maintain its hostels when St Stephen’s was opened. 
This is a crucial issue with the leasehold land system a system that has serious disadvantages to both parties particularly for residential land. The most obvious tension is that the lessor receives a declining return for the ownership of the asset with no rent increase over a prolonged period but when the rent is reviewed the lessee faces a rental increase in percentage terms that often bears no relationship to the existing use of the land or the value of the improvements on the land. 
So this is the nature of this bill in regard to the Melanesian Mission Trust Board an aspect that we of the Maori Party will continue to debate.  
The income from the Glasgow-type leases in the highly sought-after Auckland suburbs of Kohimarama and Mission Bay helps to support the Anglican Church in Melanesia so we have to ask the question as to whether the economic plight of the Melanesian Mission Trust Board is in itself a victim of this type of lease arrangement. 
Now there is another matter. The good thing about this bill is how we view our national historical accounts in the period of early European settlement here. To my understanding the Melanesian Mission Trust Board was established in 1862 by the Anglican Bishop George Augustus Selwyn and John Coleridge Patteson the first Anglican Bishop in Melanesia. Bishop Selwyn arrived in Auckland on 30 May 1842. When he arrived here he learnt te reo Maori.  In time he became fluent in Maori preached in Maori and depending on the circumstances taught in Maori or English. Bishop Selwyn was unusual in that education and religion were great interests of his. He delivered both to Pakeha and Maori. In that period the main focus of missionaries was to work with the indigenous people and no one else. His commitment to the Maori people however did bring him into conflict with both the church and fellow Pakeha.  While at St John’s theological college he insisted that Maori Pakeha and Melanesian students should share equally in everything such as accommodation meals sports and studies. 
Because he was critical of land policies of that time he generated anger among Pakeha as well. When the Waitara dispute and the Taranaki War broke Bishop Selwyn was condemned for his public defence of Wiremu Kingi.It was he members will recall who vigorously opposed the sale of the Taranaki land to the Government. This is what he said:  
“that no Maori owned land the land was owned by all the people to be used communally and individually and not to be possessed. Under Maori custom no land could be sold without the consent of all the people. As leader he must make a decision in accordance with the people's demands” 
. 
Now the sale of the land was completed in early 1860 without the consent of the people and soon after surveyors entered into the block. Shortly after that Government troops arrived in Waitara and war broke out. Despite the difficulties of that period Bishop Selwyn supported opposition to this matter. 
My explanation for this historical event has gone this way because connections between early origins of the Melanesian Mission Trust Board and the actions of Government in the Waitara Block truly amazes me as one of a number of land disputes that will not be forgotten. 
In conclusion I acknowledge the Melanesian Mission Trust Board submission and the detail they provided around their uncertainty as to what to do with what they described as non-business income. They spelt it out very clearly—that the funding of the Church of Melanesia some $7 million per annum stands to be reduced by approximately $2 million if the trust board’s income were taxable. I have outlined some of the history and context of the Melanesian Mission and its functions but the one single fact that does not sit very well with me is the loss of some $2 million. 
This bill has the support of the Maori Party and we wish the Melanesian Mission Trust Board the best in their ongoing commitment towards the distribution of income for charitable purposes. Be resolute. Greetings to us all. 
] 
Hon SHANE JONES (Minister for Building and Construction) 
: 
 A kia ora ano tatou. E te Pika tena koe i a tatou e noho nei i roto i to tatou Whare i tenei po. Taku mihi tuatahi me huri atu ahau ki te kura mai i St Margaret’s College no Otautahi. 
As I said in Maori greetings Madam Assistant Speaker. This evening I would like to acknowledge the presence of the students from St Margaret’s College in Otautahi Te Wai Pounamu and welcome them to our legislature. I welcome the students from the deep south. No doubt they are sporting the colours—if not on their blouses then somewhere else—of the Crusaders. I welcome them to this House. I am not entirely sure whether St Margaret’s refers to Saint Margaret of Antioch or to other far-flung elements where St Margaret was mentioned in church history given that these students are here this evening witnessing a brief set of speeches pertaining to the Melanesian Mission Trust Board. 
I follow my fellow Maori colleague Te Ururoa Flavell who in far-flung days was known as “Jimbo Flavell” and I cannot help but refer to him as “Jimbo”. However he sports the name Te Ururoa which belongs to my Ngapuhi people from Whangaroa. Hongi Hika who wandered through the country—and who I must say was responsible for settling the Anglican Church in Aotearoa—had as his key whainga or strategist Te Ururoa from the village of Pupuke in the upper reaches of the Whangaroa Harbour. It is a pleasure to support Te Ururoa Flavell and to follow him because we too both attended St Stephen’s Maori boys school which existed as a consequence of the Anglican Church. I am not entirely sure that it was the Melanesian Mission Trust Board but organisations such as that one enabled us to get the fine education that Tau Henare stares at in very admiring ways at each opportunity he has. Unfortunately that admiring quality of his did not stretch to the Ngati Porou speaker today otherwise known as Parekura Horomia. 
The Melanesian Trusts (Income Tax Exemption) Amendment Bill which has been brought by my senior colleague Mr Goff to this House deserves our support. The trust board does unstinting good work in areas of the Pacific that we in Aotearoa should have a particularly keen interest in not the least of which is Vanuatu. I myself have a strong interest in Vanuatu having looked after some of its mokopuna and put them through school in Tai Tokerau. They lived with me and my children but they also attended the boarding school that we went to. We should be mindful of the fact that Vanuatu has a great birth rate and hopefully it is benefiting from our regional employment scheme that causes us to draw people from the Pacific. 
A little bit of history would not go astray. The Melanesian Mission Trust Board has many of its property assets located around Kohimarama. Kohimarama as my tuakana Tau Henare possibly knows—or taina depending on whether the cock is crowing or the morepork is calling—is an area where the Maori chiefs met in the 1860s to determine whether they would uphold the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Kohimarama is not a word that derives from the Maori language; it was actually transported here as a consequence of the Melanesian Mission Trust Board and in respect of its roots it is a Melanesian expression. 
The work that the trust does derives from the income and the skilful utilisation of the capital assets scattered around that area of Auckland. It is good that the bill clarifies the trust board’s tax status because after all we do make large contributions to that part of the Pacific. If we are able to support an organisation or an institution such as the trust that will enable the trust to continue to allocate income to meet the needs of those families in places such as the Solomons and Vanuatu which was formerly known as the New Hebrides. 
Of course I have a small claim to fame in relation to Melanesia. It was my tupuna Reverend Renata Tangata from the iwi of Ngati Kahu who for reasons best known to himself was encouraged by the Anglican Church to go there as a missionary. He went through Melanesia as a missionary—tangata tuturu no te ao Maori as one would say the original full-blooded Maori—before the Dalmatians discovered the Ninety Mile Beach and the Maori princesses of my iwi Te Aupouri. He went there to spread the gospel and there are some delightful accounts in my iwi Ngati Kahu about the efforts of Renata Tangata who went through Melanesia spreading the gospel on behalf of the Anglican Church. So there is a small connection there that makes me feel that I should not suffer a sliver of doubt that the Melanesian Mission Trust Board does a great job that all New Zealanders ought to be proud of. If that board was not doing that job perish the thought that further burden should fall on our tax base. 
We ought to celebrate those organisations that are dedicating their capital and the income derived from the skilful stewardship of such capital assets to enhancing the lives of others. If there is anything in New Zealand popular culture that has slipped from public gaze it is the status that we should accord those organisations that work because of a mission that is not accurately captured in terms of its value by fiscal numbers or a financial abacus. These people deserve our support. These people are part of only a small organisation that is driving the development of our whanaunga—and I say that in that Maori sense from Te Moana-nui-a-Kiwa. 
I remind the House that Vanuatu which is a great recipient of this assistance has one of the highest birth rates throughout the Pacific. It has a large population that is highly youthful and we have a responsibility in terms of ensuring that we are good neighbours but that we provide an opportunity for those people. We are providing that opportunity not only through supporting this bill but also through enabling them to come to such places as Otago Bay of Plenty Hawke’s Bay Motueka Blenheim and other such far-flung places whose residents no doubt wake up in the morning and get a shock when they see 20 horticultural workers from Vanuatu wandering around the main street of whatever town it is in Otago. It is not quite what your average Pakeha would wake up in spring autumn or winter and expect to see. However such is the changing nature of our life in Aotearoa that we are bringing such people here. 
It is with some disappointment that I note that when they came here they did not play rugby; they played soccer. I did my best to enrol the Vanuatu mokopuna who stayed with me in the far north in rugby. Unfortunately the iwi of the north taught them only to smoke and not to play rugby but that is another matter. 
So without a sliver of doubt or a modicum of hesitation I stand to support the earlier speakers—in particular Te Ururoa Flavell who no doubt suffered from a paucity of content and who consequently had to use both languages but we will overlook that. Tena koutou. Kia ora tatou katoa. 
Bill read a second time and a third time.