Henare PeeniPEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): Excellent—thank you very much. I thought I had about 4 minutes and 59 seconds. Kia ora anō tātau katoa kua hāpai nei i tō tātau kaupapa ki roto i tō tātau Whare i te rā nei.[Acknowledgments to us once again who have supported this matter of ours here in our House today.]I think given the long period of time since I was last on my feet on this particular matter I might just canvass briefly if I may some of the discussions and points had last night in particular in my contribution. We are looking at Part 1 here and I mentioned last night the interpretation of the term ahi kā" in relation to Part 1 clause 8—"Descent relationships determined by tikanga Māori". In clause 8(1)(b) it says there: "an association with land in accordance with tikanga Māori." I raise the fact that many of the Māori land shareholders live outside of the actual land holding itself. They live in Tāmaki-makau-rau. They live in Australia. If you are going to use the basis of tikanga Māori then it is a well-known one within Māoridom: the term "ahi kā". Ahi kā is a very straightforward one. It is about making sure that the home fires are tended to—the home fires are burning. If for example a shareholder lives in Australia one could argue over a length of time that they no longer have ahi kā. They no longer have ahi kā. It would be easy to suggest that through association they would have ahi kā but the reality of the types of shareholdings that we are talking about is that actually no it is pertaining only to their shares. That was one point I made yesterday and I wanted to just reiterate that in my contribution now.The other one was even further in to the "Evidence of applicable tikanga Māori" under Part 1 clause 9. It says there: "In any proceedings under Parts 1 to 9 any questions as to the tikanga Māori that applies in a particular situation must be determined on the basis of evidence." A bit later on in the bill or in this particular Supplementary Order Paper we will look at some of the appointments that can be made for administrators and other roles that have been given power through this particular bill to oversee the administration of Māori land. I will delve into a little bit of the pitfalls of some of those. But I want to point out the "Evidence of applicable tikanga Māori". I mentioned last night about the relevance of tikanga Māori and more importantly the failure of legislation to truly and adequately determine what tikanga Māori is. It is easy to suggest: "Well it's such and such." It is funny—I remember a discussion with one of my colleagues. We discussed the term "wairua" and that person said: "Oh yes 'spirit.' " And I said: "Well no actually. 'Wairua' isn't just 'spirit'. Wairua means so much more." Tikanga is the same argument. Tikanga is the same argument. It is not just simply about "koha" meaning "giving something". Actually koha means more than that. So it is these kinds of vagaries that make me think—and I have always said this in this House in my short time here—that tikanga Māori must stay out of legislation. It must stay out of the hands of legislators. It must stay out of the hands of judges.Later on we will see about the appointments of particular administrators of Māori land and I made reference in a previous contribution on another bill in this House about the fact that this Government appointed my father Ērima Henare and my great-uncle Kevin Prime to resolve a dispute in Te Arawa. Anybody who knows Māori history—New Zealand history—will tell you that sending a Ngāpuhi into Te Arawa is the worst thing to do. It is like sending a Ngāpuhi into Ngati Porou. You just do not do it. You just do not do it. And they were given an extremely hard task under the vague explanation of tikanga Māori that this dispute would be resolved. So I have some serious questions about tikanga Māori in particular in relation to the principles of Parts 1 to 9."