Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Peters Winston: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:621;Page:17148] 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 The last speaker has been on his feet with other colleagues because the leader of their party is incapable of sustaining an argument on the issue any more. [ 
Interruption 
] I say to Mr Franks that that was my first sentence. The member should show a bit of tolerance. Why is he so sad about it? It is because he is a loser and he is locked into a loser. That is why he is not patient. He will not even hear my first sentence before he starts shouting. 
If those members had any argument then Mr Brash would be here. If they had any substance— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: That is a reference to the non-presence of a member. The member was phrasing it correctly before but— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Is it appropriate for a member to stand up and directly say to another member of Parliament that he is a loser? It should have been picked up because comments like that are directed towards the Chair which is not good but also I do not think it is good to say that other members are losers. Members have been pulled up in this debate—indeed one of them was slung out of the Chamber without any justice whatsoever—for doing far lesser things. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I thank the member for raising that issue. The member who has the call was getting a little loose. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: How sensitive people have become when they cannot even take that criticism! They rise and seek the Chair’s defence. The National Party has lost all shred— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: The Chair must not be brought into this argument. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I rose to defend a much smaller party not the National Party. If Mr Peters wants to point to the National Party and say “Loser” that is OK; he would clearly be looking in the mirror and seeing what has happened to him since 1992. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: Again I thank the member. It did not even occur to me that he was seeking the defence of the Chair. 
Ron Mark 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. We are in danger here and I really would like a considered opinion on this. I never ever thought I would hear the sensitivities of the National Party being expressed in this way. Are we now to say as has often been touted by the Labour Government that there are no winners no losers every one is a participant and should be treated fairly and gently and we should not prick people’s sensitivities? Because debate in this Chamber will be restricted if we go down the National Party line here now. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: I would appreciate it if there are no further points of order along those lines because they are not in fact points of order. I was enjoying listening to the Rt Hon Winston Peters. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: My point is though that the reason why the National Party and ACT party have been so venomous is that what is clearly emerging from this bill and this debate is the fact that there is only one party that has always stood for one law for everybody and that party is New Zealand First. That is why they have been so bitter so twisted and so venomous. Their track record is absolutely contrary to what they say. The idea that they could actually claim this issue as Dr Brash sought to do in Orewa and ever sustain it was never going to happen and it is back now where it belongs—it is back home with New Zealand First where it always was. That has always been the case with our party. We were founded on it unlike that party over here. 
I believe that the reality is that when Judge Hingston made a decision that water and land are the same thing he never ever thought that the Court of Appeal would accept it. He never believed that the Court of Appeal would accept it. The Court of Appeal actually did not accept it. What it said was one can go to the Maori Land Court but one’s chances of winning are virtually nil. So pray tell me how did Maori go from that decision to start believing as some extremists did that they owned the foreshore and the seabed? 
Hon Dover Samuels 
: Somebody told them that. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: I am telling that member this: the media in this country have a lot to answer for because they helped plant that totally extravagant supposition in Maoridom’s ears and in their mind. And they have sustained it all these months although the Court of Appeal said nothing of the sort. The Court of Appeal could not conceive of any Maori group winning—not just NgatiApa. That is a fact. 
There was Tariana Turia out there on a march saying: “We own the foreshore and the seabed.” Well let me tell members that we never did because 170 miles of it was given to us by international treaty. That is what nationhood is about—not making extravagant claims that we cannot sustain and that frankly are embarrassing. It is embarrassing to a people who believe in independence and self-worth—this hugging mentality that somehow we will have conveyed upon us something that does not belong to us. We do not ever bow down in respect of where we come from to those Maori who think somehow we are being treacherous. I have never heard so much bunkum in all my life. 
But my point to her is this. What is her record when it comes to keeping land? What is her party’s record her management committee’s record about selling Maori land? What is it? Because ours is intact. Dover Samuel’s record is intact. She should not criticise us Maori and say we are less Maori than her. She makes extravagant claims that are totally and utterly unsustainable. If we want to be fair about this we know full well that what is being said by a number of people is utter drivel. 
The sad aspect in particular is this. I heard people talk about wahi tapu yesterday as though that issue was of no moment whatsoever. I could not believe it. Who brought Christianity to this country? Who adopted Christianity? The Maori did. And here they are believing in these traditions and believing that they are important. To have Europeans in this Chamber such as those from the National Party whom I heard say that stomping all over a tradition brought here adopted here and acclimatised here— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: It’s as broad as a bus; it’s this wide. 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS 
: Oh there you go you see. Like Ninety Mile Beach is a wahi tapu? That is rubbish.