Harawira Hone: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Harawira Hone: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:629;Page:1143] 
7.  
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: Is he satisfied with the resourcing provided to the Crown Law Office to enable it to respond in a timely and professional manner? 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General) 
: 
 Generally yes. 
Hone Harawira 
: He aha tona whakautu ki a Pita Tashkoff o Tamaki-makau-rau kua whanga nei mo te 8 marama mai i te wa i tae ake tona amuamu mo te Ture Takutai Moana ki te Tari Ture o te Karauna a kua korero ano ia ko te tikanga o te whakautu o te Kawanatanga he mahi whakato kia roa kia kore e tutuki wawe tana take? 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
What is his response to Peter Tashkoff of Auckland who has waited for 8 months since his complaint about the Foreshore and Seabed Act was lodged with Crown Law and who has stated that the ongoing delays in the Government’s response to his complaint are intended to deliberately stall the process? 
] 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: The Crown Law Office charges Government departments fees for any legal advice or services the office gives to departments. For example in the case of foreshore and seabed negotiations Vote Justice actually administers the cost of those negotiations. Having said that I am not aware of any Crown Law resourcing constraint causing any delay in any of those negotiations. 
Christopher Finlayson 
: If the resourcing of the Crown Law Office is generally adequate how does the Attorney-General explain the serious decrease in client satisfaction with that office which is recorded at page 28 of the report of the Crown Law Office dated 30 June 2005? 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: I do not understand there to be any serious complaint with the quality of the service that the Crown Law Office is providing departments. 
Tariana Turia 
: What will Crown Law’s response be to the complaint that I lodged on 14 April 2005—some 10 months ago—which referred to the United Nations’ findings that the Foreshore and Seabed Act contained discriminatory aspects against Maori in particular in its extinguishment of the possibility of establishing Maori customary title over the foreshore and seabed; and when will I receive a response or will I be told yet again that the response is delayed because of competing work priorities? 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: I can assure the member that lack of resources is not behind any delay that the member may have suffered—if indeed such delay has been suffered. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: With how many parties is the Government currently involved in negotiations over seabed and foreshore issues? 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I do not see how that is related to the question of the resourcing of the Crown Law Office. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: It was raised in a supplementary question. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: The negotiations that are currently afoot with— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry. To assist the Minister I point out that the Attorney-General is responsible for foreshore and seabed negotiations so the question is relevant. It was also raised in the context of the questions. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: Current negotiations involve three iwi: Ngati Porou Te Whanau-a-Apanui and Ngati Porou ki Hauraki. 
Tariana Turia 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I take offence at the comment the Minister made when he said “if such a delay indeed happened”. Is he questioning my integrity in relation to the first question when I said that I had written a letter in April last year? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Ministers in their responses do not have to accept the assertions of members of whatever nature. The Minister responded in addressing the question. If the member has taken offence at that the member can raise a point of order and ask for that comment to be withdrawn. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I can clear the matter up. I did not intend to question her choice of dates or cause offence. I was not accepting the proposition that there was delay though. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you for that clarification. 
Hone Harawira 
: E ai ki tona mohio he aha te whakautu o te Tari Ture o te Karauna ki te take i tae ake i te 17 o Hakihea i te tau 2004 i ki nei mo te Ture Takutai Moana he pire tera “i takahi i tona mana tangata he mea whakahahani he mea e noho taupatupatu nei ki nga korero o nga Ture Whakamana i te Tangata i Aotearoa” kei te whakaae ia me waiho te take nei mo te 14 marama tuhi reta ai?  
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
What will Crown Law’s response be to the complaint first lodged on 17 December 2004 in which the complainant contends that the foreshore and seabed legislation “violates his human rights that it is racist and that it should be declared as inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights”; and does he think it is OK to take 14 months to write a letter? 
] 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: I certainly do not accept the proposition advanced that this legislation breached the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.