Clendon David: Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Clendon David: Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11854] 
DAVID CLENDON (Green) 
: 
 Tena koutou katoa. I will open by acknowledging the Hon Tariana Turia the Minister who opened this debate and by recognising the unique situation that she is shepherding through the House a bill that is of such significance and personal importance to her and her whanaunga. I will take only a short call on this Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill which we in the Greens have already undertaken to support through all of its readings. Although we have not participated directly in the select committee process it is clear that a great deal of very valuable and useful work has been done in the Maori Affairs Committee and that issues have been honestly and openly dealt with if not in every case resolved which is inevitable. Clearly there has been a great deal of goodwill in relation to that process and it shows in both the documents and the outcome. 
We acknowledge the work of the Minister and the members of the Maori Affairs Committee who have supported this process and most of all we take the opportunity to acknowledge Ngati Apa and wish them all the best for the progress of this bill to the extent that it will restore their tino rangatiratanga and their mana motuhake over their own lands. This bill reflects that Ngati Apa like so many other iwi and hapu have for over a century been engaged in a struggle a very real struggle to have resolution of wrongdoing and the receipt of justice and to see the honouring of solemn commitments that were made on both sides of the Treaty relationship in 1840. Again we acknowledge and offer our respects for that struggle and to those who have participated in it over many generations. 
It is clear that the progress of this bill and the negotiations that have underpinned it have followed a pattern whereby certain elements have emerged which are becoming commonplace or familiar at least within these Treaty settlements processes. It is clear within the report that some serious concerns have been expressed from particular hapu who have felt that their inclusion in this process against their wishes and preferences could to some extent compromise their own preferred outcomes in this process. But objections of that sort are common to just about every settlement process current or past. I think it is fair to say that the Crown’s policy of negotiating settlements with large natural groupings is one that must be constantly challenged and under constant review to ensure that we do not get outcomes that deny the settlement of legitimate concerns and the right of hapu to self-identity and the self-determination of their futures. We note that there have been claims that some of the lands that will be returned under settlement in this case are also claimed by other iwi. Again that is a typical effect of colonisation and the imposition of Western property law—rather than of tikanga over generations—which has confounded to some extent the appropriate resolution of inter-iwi disputes that otherwise could have been resolved. 
Again it is in common with other settlements—and it was referenced by the previous Speaker—that there are those within the wider community who seem to have a concern or even a degree of suspicion that the settlement and the return of assets and mana to the affected iwi and hapu are somehow too much—that somehow the proposed settlement might reduce or compromise the rights or expectations of those who have become accustomed to a particular situation or practice. The reality is of course that Ngati Apa as with so many other iwi and hapu have been extraordinarily patient and have been equally modest and realistic in their expectation of what can be done in the 21st century to put right the transgressions of the 19th and 20th centuries. The detail of the Crown purchases contained in the preamble to this bill tells a story that highlights very well the almost complete lack of generosity and lack of empathy—the almost complete selfishness—of those who embarked on purchasing land from Ngati Apa. I think we can consider ourselves very fortunate that in the 21st century Maori are much more generous of spirit in accepting only part of what was taken away as resolution and redress from the Crown. 
It is encouraging and very positive to see that significant material assets will be returned to Ngati Apa and that there will be some wealth that will enable them to build an economy and to utilise their resources in ways that are appropriate for them and to the exercise of their mana. Equally important to that tangible return and to those tangible assets is the sincere apology from the Crown which acknowledges the mana of these people and acknowledges that their objections and their claims—their grievances over a century—have been justified have been realised and in fact were legitimate. I cannot stress enough as others have the significance of the apology of the symbolic return as much as the tangible redress and return of assets. 
There is not much more I wish to say except to acknowledge again the good work of those in this House who have put through this bill and of those who are no longer here but who made significant contributions to it. This bill is clearly about settlement but it is also an opportunity for the truth of our shared history to be spoken and heard and we hope to be better understood. Knowing a little more of our own history of our shared history will perhaps progress us towards a speedy resolution of this settlement and of those that will follow it. No reira tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa.