Hague Kevin: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Hague Kevin: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10259] 
KEVIN HAGUE (Green) 
: 
 It is an honour to speak in the second reading debate on the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill after Nanaia Mahuta. I acknowledge her contribution. 
I begin my contribution to this debate in the way that others have done by acknowledging the special role played by Lady Raiha Mahuta in bringing this matter to this point in the House. It is a proud moment. I also honour the contributions of others who have been involved in that process over many years: Sir Robert Mahuta; Tukoroirangi Morgan who is a former member of this House; and indeed the negotiators on the Government side from both Labour and National Governments. 
I am pleased to take the opportunity to make some comments on the bill and to signal that the Green Party will support its passage into law. We do this not only because supporting settlements is our default position but also because there are some particularly positive and sensible elements in the form of settlement proposed in the bill. The key word in the title of the bill and the word that provides a context for its provisions is “Raupatu”—confiscation. The Waikato settlement of 1995 and the Crown apology that formed part of it made clear beyond dispute that the military and legislative actions of the Crown in 1863 that cost Waikato their lives their land and their cultural and economic base were illegal and in gross breach of article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi. A royal commission of inquiry as long ago as 1926 found that the raupatu the confiscation of Waikato land by the Crown had been wholly excessive and that a grave injustice had been done to tangata whenua. Iwi and Maori have been extraordinarily patient for generations in their wait for a fair deal and equally modest in their demands and expectations in regard to compensation. It is to be hoped that those who accuse Maori of venality as some farmers have done in the news media today of having a victim mentality or of demanding special privileges as we have heard in the House today will one day read and understand the real history of this and other settlements and realise how generous Maori have been and continue to be in these processes. 
With a few notable exceptions the co-management model that is found in this bill has not been readily accepted or adopted in many places around New Zealand. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that this is a symptom of the Crown and Crown agencies being unwilling to relinquish control over land water and other resources. This bill represents a genuine attempt to share power over the river and its present and future management. That is commendable and we hope it will be followed by a more open and accepting approach to co-management more generally. 
Concern has been expressed notably by Ngati Koroki Kahukura that their exclusion from the settlement and from representation on the Waikato River Authority will compromise their interest in the river. The reason given for this exclusion from the authority—that a number larger than 10 would be unworkable—is far from persuasive although I welcomed Nanaia Mahuta’s comments about this matter. The reassurances from the Maori Affairs Committee in respect of this iwi and in respect of similar concerns voiced by others including Ngati Te Ata o Waiohua Ngati Tuwharetoa Ngati Raukawa and Te Arawa must be honoured as any failure to recognise the interests and mana of these tribes would threaten the integrity and success of the whole settlement. Throughout the commentary from the Maori Affairs Committee there are reassurances that nothing in this bill can or will in any way disadvantage other river iwi who assert rights to some part of the river or of the resources within or around it. It would be appropriate for the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations to restate these assurances in the House. 
It was with some alarm that we noted that the select committee preferred that the direction-setting document for the authority and its work which is designated “Te Ture Whaimana” should not have the status of a national policy statement. But that concern was alleviated when we saw that rather than being downgraded the intention was for the document to take precedence over any national policy statement or other Resource Management Act planning document. 
We support the establishment of a single governing body with equal representation from iwi and Crown agencies as being in the spirit of the Treaty relationship and in the sense that a single entity ought to be better able to take an integrated and comprehensive strategic view of management needs and practices. 
The proposed clean-up trust with assured funding to support projects is a long-overdue initiative. The condition of the Waikato River as with so many of our rivers and waterways is nothing short of a national disgrace. The sacrifice of the river water to the combined demands of farming urban development excessive extraction and discharge of waste is a trend that must be stopped and indeed reversed if we are to protect our own future wellbeing socially culturally and economically and to assure future generations of a useful and usable freshwater resource. Our only concern would be that the funding put aside may not be sufficient for the task. We would also expect that the trustees take a broad view of what constitutes a project to restore the health and the mauri of the water including for example the provision of funds to take legal action against polluters and to disperse sums to research develop and implement and enable changes to land-use practices that over time have contributed to and will otherwise continue to contribute to the water’s degradation. 
The Green Party welcomes the bill back from the select committee and gives its undertaking to support it.