Turei Metiria: Treaty of Waitangi (Removal of Conflict of Interest) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Turei Metiria: Treaty of Waitangi (Removal of Conflict of Interest) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:640;Page:10296] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 The Greens will not be supporting this bill either for the reasons that have been outlined much more articulately than I can articulate them by my colleague Hone Harawira who spoke just before me. We do not consider there is any problem that needs to be addressed. We cannot see the mischief that this bill is supposed to address and we think that in large part this bill is about applying a double standard. It applies a separate standard to Maori judges to Maori courts and therefore to Maori people and their concerns from the standard it applies to the rest of the population. That is not acceptable. This Parliament should not support any legislation that does that to the detriment of Maori people. 
As far as we can tell—and we may be wrong about this—the only situation where there has been this combination is in relation to the current chair of the Waitangi Tribunal. So again where exactly is the mischief? This is not systemic to the process; it is simply one example. What this is really about—and I agree with the previous speaker on this—is an attack particularly from New Zealand First on the institutions that protect the ability of Maori to resolve their issues through the appropriate forums. 
New Zealand First is well known for its attacks against what it calls the Treaty gravy train. In the time I have been in this House which is nearly 5 years at least two other members’ bills from New Zealand First about the removal of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi have been brought before the House. There have been perpetual attacks particularly by Winston Peters the leader on Maori lawyers on Maori claimants on Maori judges and on Maori who are trying to find ways to broker a better process for the settlement and who are dealing with the restoration of historical wrongs. It is a form of denial about what is really happening for Maori. It is a form of denial against the ability of Maori to reclaim our opportunities to be independent to be economically independent and to have control over our own lives and our own people. 
I guess for some—obviously for New Zealand First—it is a threat that Maori may have more control over the issues that concern them; that they may have more control over their own economic development and resources. Frankly it is very difficult to see what else the point is. Why would this party attack these Maori institutions so strenuously unless it felt that there was some inherent threat to them? That is unfortunate because it is not a real threat. I know that a number of New Zealand First members are deeply involved in Maori institutions that are progressing economically and doing very well and that they are very committed to that. So why then continually attack the institutions that help to support that independence and that movement towards independence? 
It is certainly true that since the foreshore and seabed legislation—and actually before that too—there have been significant attacks made on the Maori judiciary. It was most obvious and most vehement and vicious during the foreshore and seabed debates. I was here during that time as many members will know and I witnessed some of the comments made against the judiciary which had been trying to find a reasonable process in law to deal with a very complex issue. The judiciary had found a very good process. It had used the current legal system and its rules to find in favour of Maori being able to continue to use that process and it was attacked for doing so. 
Since then we have had continual attacks on in particular the judges of the Waitangi Tribunal. I think though that those attacks have been going on for quite a long time. Even just the fact that the tribunal was stripped of its power—for example the power to make mandatory recommendations because it did actually exercise that power once so the tribunal had that power taken from it immediately it had exercised it—was a clear example of that attack in previous years. We are seeing that exact same thing happen with the Government’s refusal to acknowledge the validity of the tribunal’s most recent claims because they attack the Government’s settlement process at heart and describe it as being unfair. 
I think it is much better for this House to dispose of this legislation. It should not go any further. It should be thrown out of the House right now today. Thank you.