Whaitiri Meka: Hineuru Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWhaitiri Meka: Hineuru Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 24 May 2016. Volume:714;Page:11186. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MEKA WHAITIRI (Labour—Ikaroa-Rāwhiti):Ā waiho ki“Te amorangi ki mua ko te hāpai ō ki muri”.E ngā mate huhua kua hinga atu haere haere moe mai rā.E rau rangatira mā! Ngāti Hineuru e ngā kaumātua nau mai haere mai hoki mai. Hoki mai ki tō tātou Whare. E Te Māngai o Te Whare nei tēnā koe e ngā mema katoa ā tēnā tātou katoa. E tātou e “te iti rearea teitei kahikatea ka taea”. Nō reira tēnā koutou katoa.[Leave it to the aphorism: “Emblem of god in the vanguard food bearers to the rear”. To the vast number that have fallen depart go rest there.To the respected leaders of a hundredfold to youNgāti Hineuru respected elders welcome come forth and welcome back. Welcome back to our House.Mr Assistant Speaker thank you and acknowledgments to all of us members. We are indeed like “the tiny bellbird capable of soaring over the great heights of the kahikatea tree”. Well done all.]It is indeed my honour to stand in support of the Hineuru Claims Settlement Bill. In terms of context as the Minister Christopher Finlayson has alluded to the second reading is really an opportunity to report back what was presented in front of the Māori Affairs Committee.Before I address some of the critical issues that Ngāti Hineuru themselves raised at the Māori Affairs Committee may I just paint some context for the tribe of Ngāti Hineuru. They descend from two ancestors: Apa-hāpai-taketake of Ngāti Apa and Kurapoto. The Hineuru rohe—although a mountainous region; its location is on the main access routes between Napier and Taupō Rotorua and the Bay of Plenty. Their history is indeed an interesting one. Although the subjects were raised at the select committee—and as the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations rightfully said recommendations were made and technical changes were made—I want to take my time and talk around the negotiation process that the negotiators of Ngāti Hineuru had to endure. They raised some very important points in front of the select committee that I may seek the indulgence of the House to traverse in my contribution this morning.The history with the Crown is described by the submission submitted by Ngāti Hineuru. The most important incidence of the Hineuru history was the Crown attacks at Ōmarunui and Pētane in 1866 during which their rangatira Te Rangi Hīroa was killed. Following these attacks many were captured and sent to the Chatham Islands. There they came across Te Kooti and were subsequently involved in his escape and the subsequent wars that ensued. While all this was happening the Crown was purchasing and taking Hineuru lands. Ngāti Hineuru were left virtually landless. And to add salt to the wounds the Crown also awarded certain Hineuru lands to other iwi. This is an area of contention for Hineuru as it is for many other iwi who have suffered a similar fate. Once a very powerful iwi Hineuru held very strategic areas in the central North Island. Following the loss of their lands resources and people the Hineuru people who remained lived in poverty and in the shadow of the pains of the past. Once a powerful nation their journey to settlement is about rebuilding their people.The other interesting aspect of this particular claim was that Ngāti Hineuru had to attend three hearings: the Mōhaka ki Ahuriri inquiry during 1996 and 2000 the central North Island tribunal hearings in 2005 and Te Urewera hearings from 2003 to 2005. It is a challenge enough to attend your own hearings and prepare yourself to ensure that your interest in your rohe is protected but in this particular instance of Ngāti Hineuru the requirement to protect what little they had required them to attend three hearings. I would put the question around whether any other iwi has to endure three hearings to ensure what land they have can be protected.Entities were established. Ngāti Hineuru Iwi Inc. was established in 2005 and its responsibility was for the negotiations. Te Kōpere o Te Iwi o Hineuru Trust responsible to receive and manage the redress was ratified by just under 75 percent in late 2015. I want to acknowledge the six pou that form the intent of the iwi to rebuild their people: the restoration and protection of their cultural heritage and history for future generations; the restoration of the health and well-being of their people; the recognition of the mana of Hineuru and the restoration of the relativity Hineuru had with other iwi in the region; the reassertion of the presence of Hineuru through their rohe; the rebuilding of their economic base; and the revitalisation and restoration of their role as kaitiaki of their natural resources and environment.The two issues that I want to raise in my contribution are first issues pertaining to the negotiations and second the continuing pursuit of recognition. It was interesting in the submission to the Māori Affairs Committee—we often do not hear the struggles that sometimes negotiators have to go through in terms of getting their particular settlement over the line. I want to mention the issue around the Crown Forestry Rental Trust funding and the extra pressure it put on the negotiators when it came to funding the particular negotiations. It was sorted—I would like to say that; it was sorted through perceived conflicts of trustees of Crown Forestry Rental Trust—but the upshot was that Ngāti Hineuru were left with a debt and they still have a debt over something that had nothing whatsoever to do with them in terms of the releasing of funds. So I want to say to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations that if there is any way in his good grace that we could forgo that debt I am sure that you will make Ngāti Hineuru people very very happy.The other issue that was raised at the select committee was the continuous pursuit of recognition. As we have seen in many many settlements the use of iwi authorities in current legislation confers some benefit and clearly those who do not have the status of iwi miss out. In Ngāti Hineuru’s case they mentioned the fisheries protocol with the Ministry for Primary Industries. Far be it from me to be talking about fish in this settlement but the fisheries settlement means that Ngāti Hineuru’s part of the settlement is not managed by them. If I can read through their submission they would one day like (1) to be recognised as an iwi; but (2) to pursue and enjoy the opportunities that other iwi have in relation to the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claim) Settlement Act. Again I put that on the floor of this House: if there is anything that the Minister could help with in that regard we would definitely support that—and also the census classification.I too in my final couple of minutes want to thank the select committee the Minister the officials the negotiators and the people of Ngāti Hineuru.In my closing point the Ngāti Hineuru claim like many others has shown the Crown’s action in retaining Māori whenua in Māori hands has been dismal has been an abject failure and has been a dereliction of duty. Like Ngāti Hineuru none of their land loss was of their own making. Being removed from their land and incarcerated on the Chatham Islands without trial was not of their doing. Their land being sold in their absence was not of their doing. Earlier this month the Government introduced a brand new Māori land law Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill—not an amendment of the existing Te Ture Whenua Maori Act but a complete rewrite. Māori landowners have had a year to understand the 400-page bill. Like Ngāti Hineuru I contend this is not of their doing. I commend this bill to the House.