Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to speak to this bill the Te Rohe o Rongokako Joint Redress Bill and I thank the Minister for providing some of that background. National will be supporting this redress bill through its further stages. This bill provides for a settlement as per the deed of settlement which was signed many years ago actually between Ngāti Rangitāne and Ngāti Kahungunu. What we understand from the deed of settlement is that there'll be several provisions here. First of all the first part to the bill talks about primarily administrative actions that you would find normally in a settlement bill. The second part looks to address cultural redress. It particularly points out a provision for an overlapping classification over Castlepoint Scenic Reserve and a provision for the making of regulations for the management of customary fishing in Wairarapa Moana and the Ruamahanga River catchment. It also provides for vesting in fee simple of three cultural redress properties—either jointly in the joint redress trustees or in a tupuna—to be jointly managed by a joint management board. Part 3 of the bill talks more specifically to the Wairarapa Moana framework including provision for the establishment of the statutory board—the Wairarapa Moana Statutory Board—giving it certain powers and functions. In 2010 the Waitangi Tribunal report Wairarapa ki Tararua identified 28 claims and boiled them down into three particular grievances shared by Ngāti Kahungunu and Rangitāne. These included the Crown's acquisition of vast areas of land and its failure to ensure that adequate reserves were protected in their ownership; the Crown's failure to provide ample reserves near Lake Wairarapa as it had agreed to under the tuku rangatira of the lakes; and the Crown's failure to protect the iwi from virtual landlessness and from the erosion of their tribal structures—the social deprivation that resulted in the loss of te reo Māori. I want to acknowledge here the select committee who has progressed this bill—the Māori Affairs Committee—and done a lot of work in this regard; the negotiators; and the key stakeholders which the Minister mentioned in his offering for the work that has brought it to this point. Now yes there have been some challenges in these past few days but in fact if we look back the issue that's been particularly challenging was first raised as far back as 2016 if not further. That is more specifically the whakapapa for these two hapū and whether they sit with Ngāti Kahungunu or with Ngāti Rangitāne or with both. And you know that's been a point of disagreement from many decades ago and it sits as a point of disagreement here today. And there are some things in Treaty settlement bills that are just unable to be resolved. They progress and the iwi progress which is what we all want but these particular items are never resolved. On one level they are somewhat unresolvable. And we find ourselves in this position today with Ngāti Rangitāne being desirous of these two hapū to maintain their whakapapa relationships to them rather than Ngāti Kahungunu. To put this in context let's remember that Ngāti Rangitāne has completed their Treaty settlement and that slowing down the progress of this redress bill also slows down the progress of settlement for Ngāti Kahungunu. So this is a stepping stone in progress. It may well be that even at the completion of this bill and a deed of Ngāti Kahungunu's settlement both parties will still disagree on this point. Let this not be the barrier. Certainly it's not for us to debate and reach a final point on whakapapa—that is for them to decide; that is for iwi to decide. But I think what we all have unanimity on is the desire for iwi to benefit from the sort of Treaty settlement legislation that we're progressing here today. And so what I'm saying here is we acknowledge this difference in opinion. It has been long held and it was not able to be resolved through select committee. I note that Ngāti Rangitāne who feel the most aggrieved did complete their deed of settlement which does come with some responsibilities. In the documentation provided to my colleague Joseph Mooney who helps us lead this role one of the key issues of contention was around advisory provisions from Te Arawhiti that Ngāti Rangitāne had agreed that the hapū could be jointly shared if you like—if you can do that—between them. And they have grievous concerns around that advice and they have put as much in writing to us. My understanding is that as that was reported back to the departmental report it was incorrect. And we are acknowledging—and certainly I and we on this side of the House are acknowledging—that this has been a point of contention that was unresolved decades ago when it was raised that was unresolved through the select committee and that will be unresolved as we pass through this bill here today. Our hope is that we can find a position of peace and progress with that unresolved issue that does not hinder these iwi from getting the enablement and facilitation that these Treaty settlements will bring. So we acknowledge this difference in opinion and acknowledge the letter that we received and would seek to redress it here in this third reading by acknowledging that in our view the report back from Te Arawhiti and its documentation in the departmental report was incorrect and did not accurately spell out the position of Ngāti Rangitāne in its entirety. And for that I will certainly apologise if I'm in a position to have that mandate to say I'm sorry; that that was wrong—in my view and in our view—to Ngāti Rangitāne." And then hopefully that provides some peace and addresses one of the key issues if not the major issue that came to us in the past 24 hours. So we want to see progress for Ngāti Rangitāne. We certainly want to see progress for Ngāti Kahungunu. Ngāti Rangitāne already has their settlement. This contributes to it and we hope that Ngāti Kahungunu can then move forward and progress the benefits that we all want them to have and that on one level there may be some finding of peace around this issue over time. I commend this bill to the House."