Street Maryan: Whanganui Iwi (Whanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Whanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Street Maryan: Whanganui Iwi (Whanganui (Kaitoke) Prison and Northern Part of Whanganui Forest) On-account Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:670;Page:16924] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I want to pick up a number of points that relate to Part 1. I foreshadowed them somewhat in my comments on the preamble. First of all it is important to note as my colleague Kelvin Davis drew attention to in his speech that this settlement legislation is not something that has been arrived at in a vacuum. It dates back to the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi so for it to take time in this Chamber is no hardship. If we get this right and the legislation is right and the settlement is good just and durable then we are performing an enormous service to the country. 
The settlement of Treaty of Waitangi grievances historic grievances is absolutely fundamental to our forward progress as a nation. For members opposite to roll their eyes and think that we are taking too much time over this is offensive—it is simply offensive. I ask that they look at the bigger picture and look at the seriousness of some of the infringements of the Treaty of Waitangi that have occurred which this small bill in its small way is trying to redress for the people of Whanganui iwi. So it is worthwhile to take time and look at it. 
Part 1 consists of clauses 3 4 5 and 6. Clause 3 is the purpose clause which states: “The purpose of this Act is to give effect to certain provisions of the deed of on-account settlement of the Whanganui Iwi historical claims.” Why are we at this point? Why is this legislation necessary? What precipitated this legislation and means that we are moving it through the House in I hope a dignified and considered way and not with the kind of haste that some members opposite are seeking? 
The fact of the matter is that this bill is a response to breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. It is as simple as that. There is a piece of legislation that many iwi up and down the country revile and it is the Public Works Act. Properties were taken by previous administrations in the course of the 19th century in particular but later as well. Pieces of land were appropriated purloined confiscated and stolen by the Crown under the Public Works Act. In this legislation concerning the on-account settlement of the Whanganui iwi historical claims two things are cobbled together: Crown forests and the Kaitoke Prison. These two things are put together—two sources of aggravation of grievance and of distress for Whanganui iwi. Here is a moment when we can correct that. 
Clause 4 is simply interpretations but frequently everything hangs on interpretations. It is again useful to remember that this legislation does not sit in a vacuum. Not only does it have its historical antecedent in breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi of 1840 but it tries now to address those breaches and it picks up on grievances that have arisen subsequently and I particularly want to focus on the definition of Crown forestry assets because of what happened to that land and the land that was used for Crown forests. 
In 1989 as we know the process of the sale of Crown forests was held up by the New Zealand Maori Council. Sir Graham Latimer as chairman of that council took the case all the way to the Privy Council. This resulted in legislation that protected the land on which the trees stood. The land on which Crown forests stood was to be held in trust by the Crown Forestry Rental Trust for iwi or whoever the rightful owner was determined to be when an eventual settlement of the historical grievance under the Treaty of Waitangi was to be settled. We are settling that grievance with this legislation. 
The process in this settlement was begun under the previous Government and it is being continued under this Government by the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. Both the previous Minister for Treaty negotiations and the present Minister deserve to be commended for their efforts in bringing it to this pass. But it means that the Crown forestry assets that are referred to in clause 4 the interpretation clause are set down in the Crown Forest Assets Act of 1989. The year 1989 is not so long ago and it goes to show that even in relatively modern times events were happening that compounded grievances previously caused by Crown actions. Those grievances remain deeply felt by iwi but here we have a settlement and we have the restoration of the northern part of the Whanganui Forest in this settlement. 
Little by little piece by piece Crown forestry assets are being returned to iwi and the value of their rental is being returned to iwi or apportioned appropriately according to negotiation by the Crown and the iwi concerned. This is a living moment for a long-held grievance that resolves a piece of our history. It should not be rushed it should be taken with care and it should be scrutinised properly in the Committee stage. Before the next National member rises to move that the question be now put I ask Government members to consider the seriousness of what we are dealing with at this moment. Thank you.