Henare Peeni; Costello CaseyHon PEENI HENARE (Labour): Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak during the committee of the whole House on this particular bill. A number of my colleagues have already canvassed or at least with a light touch something that I wish to delve into with respect to my particular contribution. That is clause 7 which repeals section 3AB(a) to (c) of the principal Act. Wow; where do I start? On the other side of the House over the past 24 hours we've heard that there is going to be this great big empowerment of iwi-Māori partnership boards so that they can have a determination over the health outcomes and aspirations of their local regions their rohe their papa kāinga—all of those places. Yet in this one fell swoop—and I'll get to the question very shortly for the Minister—that opportunity to be able to contribute to those health aspirations and the goals that your community might have is being stripped instantly.But not only is it being stripped my challenge to the Minister is that it's being stripped from a particular group of people with this and that is Māori. It is the iwi-Māori partnership boards which for the past 24 hours I've heard from that side of the House are going to be this great big saviour of Māori health because this Government is empowering them to do that. Yet in this particular bill it's being taken away instantly without explanation. That's the question I have to the Minister: does the Minister realise that this particular move is contradictory to the bill that has just been passed in this House ushered in by her colleague Minister Reti? Does the Minister realise that? And without the proper consultation—and my colleagues have already canvassed that particular challenge to the Minister—it's being taken away under urgency here in the House without the ability for the community to speak to this. Well in the absence of that community voice all of the people on this side had the same question: when did the Minister meet with that particular community—in this case the Māori community in this case any of the iwi-Māori partnership boards—to discuss this particular matter to advise them that regarding their rights their ability to speak up their ability to discuss with the Director-General of Health where tobacco can be sold within the region etc?My question to the Minister is: did she meet with iwi-Māori partnership boards (IMPB)? I'm not going to buy one of the arguments that I've heard in the past 24 hours that they're yet to be established—that's simply not true. Under my time as the Minister we established 11 of them and there were a couple more still in the pipeline.So my challenge to the Minister is: has she met with an IMPB? We're going to go a step further here and ask if she has met directly with the iwi to discuss the matters with Te Tiriti o Waitangi.Hon Simeon Brown: Which clause?Hon PEENI HENARE: Now Mr Simeon Brown might chirp away on that side of the Chamber in arrogant bliss of what's taking place here but the fact of the matter is that in his electorate Ngāi Tai or the iwi there I'm pretty sure they haven't spoken to Minister Costello about this particular bill and that's the point that I want to make. Not only is it stripping the voices of those Māori and the Māori leadership on these matters it does something far more fundamental than that. What it does is it actually continues despite the words of the Prime Minister saying that they won't support a Treaty principles bill by the ACT Party past the second reading but the National Party are going to do it by subterfuge anyway.Andy Foster: What's this got to do with smoking?Hon PEENI HENARE: The Treaty of Waitangi my friend; have a read. It's clause 7. It's repealing Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the bill and if that member wants to get up and take a call I encourage him to because at the moment from that side of the Chamber it's silence. It's nothing. It's an embarrassment—in fact it's her own colleague. So the member might want to get up and help her might want to get up and assist her to push through what we regard as a terrible bill in the House.So just to recap in the last 50 seconds I want to know whether or not the Minister has met with any IMPBs—iwi-Māori partnership boards. Her Government has already applauded IMPBs that they're going to be the answer to Māori health aspirations. So I want to hear it: has the Minister met with an IMPB? Stretch that further into iwi: when the Minister went and met with the iwi chairs up in Waitangi did the Minister raise this matter with the iwi chairs not three weeks ago and if she did what did they say? What was their reply? Simple questions to the Minister and we want to hear answers to enable us to interrogate this bill properly otherwise it's going to seem like more cover-up and that's not what we want on something so important to our community. Thank you Madam Chair.Hon CASEY COSTELLO (Associate Minister of Health): I'll just respond to the first questions that were received around why second-hand smoking is changed and the change in the language with regard to the amendment bill replacing the overarching purpose section of the Act. The clauses have been drafted to remove the purposes that reflected the previous Government policies regarding retail reduction low nicotine and smoke-free. That is the reason why that language has changed.I will note that the matter for urgency arises from both New Zealand First and ACT's coalition agreement with National which placed this into the 100-day plan which is why the urgency is required.Finally in terms of the amendments around the Treaty clause this was required to be changed as a result of—the section that existed was to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi relating specifically to the retail reduction scheme but we have retained the requirement for the Minister for Regulation relating to requirements for smoked tobacco products to consider the risks and benefits for Māori of regulating a constituent. So we have retained the requirement to consult and we will continue to do so.