Simpson ScottHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Thank you Madam Speaker. Well look it's a pleasure to actually be speaking in support of this first reading of the Māori Fisheries Amendment Bill. The Minister for Oceans and Fisheries this evening has actually set out in considerable detail some of the technical aspects that the bill seeks to amend and I'm not going to relitigate those this evening because I think as I said the Minister's set them out in reasonable detail but there are a couple of issues that I do think we want to as a House at first reading probably explore.I want to start by focusing on the report-back date the truncated shortened three-month report-back date for what the Minister in his own words has indicated is an important piece of legislation to iwi and to the broader fisheries sector. What's been very apparent in my reading and research and conversations about this legislation is that it's had a pretty long gestation. It's a piece of legislation that has been within Māoridom within the mandated iwi organisations it's been well discussed there have been lots of hui there has been a lot of debate there's been a lot of discussion there's been a lot of to-ing and fro-ing and it's taken a long time. Now the Minister is saying Well this needs to be rushed through the select committee process quickly." Well actually that's the Minister's view but the reason that the Minister wants to rush it through quickly I suspect is more to do with the bottleneck of legislative initiatives that the Government wants to get through before the election later this year and very little to do with haste and speed that is being accorded it for other reasons. Iwi have been very patient in this process waiting for it to come to the House for a first reading. It's taken a very long time and yet it is an important piece of legislation.Now I'm the first to admit that much of what is contained in the legislation is of a technical governance nature that is—if I was to put a sort of a layperson's light upon it I would phrase them as essentially being housekeeping issues that improve the efficiency that modernise the governance structure that rearrange the electoral college rules and the way that the decision making is made for the mandated iwi organisations. It's an acceptance I think that quite a lot of governance best practice has actually changed since the principal Act was first passed in 2004 and a lot more has changed since the original 1992 deed of settlement. So there's nothing wrong with having an iterative evolving growing process of change that reflects best practice in terms of governance and management and also the operation of the deed of settlement through the principal Act. To amend the Act is—well actually it was mandated in the 2004 Act that there should be a review after 11 years. That review as the Minister said was completed in 2015 and then subsequently following the recommendations made in that independent review there had been all this debate discussion and consultation amongst the interested and involved parties and groups.Now that's all very good but actually those groups have been incredibly patient waiting for the current Government to bring this legislation to the House. I'd like to know from the Minister at some point as we progress this legislation through the Parliament why it's taken so long to get us to this point where we're having a first reading tonight because it seems to me that actually iwi and Te Ohu Kai Moana have been ready to get it done to get the job done quite some time ago—quite some time ago. In the meantime because the Government's had a very slow legislative agenda what it's meant is that some of the issues that the legislation seeks to resolve and remedy have just been put on the backburner—so issues relating to the surplus funds distribution for instance. Now that is financially important to the mandated organisations. How those funds are distributed what the criteria is who makes the decisions what the time frame is—those are all important things that have been delayed because of the Government's slow legislative initiative in bringing this piece of legislation to the House. And then when finally the Government does bring the legislation to the House they say "Oh no no no. It's very important. We've got to do it fast. We've got to get it through select committee in three months. We've got to truncate the process." Well I don't buy that. I think that actually that does a disservice to the mandated iwi organisations it does a disservice to the spirit and mana of the original 1992 deed of settlement and it does a disservice to the legislative requirement in the principal Act of 2004 that required a review to take place. That was done and discussed and debated and argued and tested as is right and proper amongst the organisations and people involved but then sort of lay waiting on the legislative Order Paper for the Government to get their act together and finally bring it to the House tonight for first reading.So the National Party will be supporting the bill at first reading because we think that on balance what we see makes sense. But we will be wanting to hear from submitters not just from iwi but across the wider fishing sector to hear their views to hear their opinions. We want to have their input. And we don't think that a truncated shortened process does that select committee principle justice at all and we actually think that that is a disservice to the whole process.So as I said it's not my intention to relitigate all the matters that the Minister went through in detail but there are a number that are going to be significant. When this legislation is eventually passed it's going to give the iwi organisations better control better understanding and better involvement in the important decision-making the commercial and fisheries decision-making that they have been imbued with through the original Fisheries Deed of Settlement back in 1992. And we're not arguing that it doesn't need to be updated that it doesn't need to be modernised—it does. Indeed this proposed legislation provides for a further future review and that's a good thing. That's a good thing because these are evolving entities they are evolving organisations and the fishery itself is evolving as well in terms of best practice and how it's governed and what the best outcomes are what the science is what the technology is and all those matters. Nothing is carved in stone in terms of a time frame about how things should be done. On this side of the House we think that the basis for the original 1992 deed of settlement was a sound one and one that should be modernised as is appropriate from time to time and is provided for in the in the principal Act and this piece of legislation in the future.So on that note we on the National Party side are looking forward to participating actively in the select committee process but we do have some questions that we want answered. And we'll be looking forward to hearing from a wide range of submitters and not just those that have agreed with the process—because the Minister made it clear that the decisions that are being proposed are not unanimously held by all in the mandated iwi organisations that there is a variety of opinion and view about how decisions should be made how the surplus funds should be distributed and all those matters. We think that a full and proper select committee process would have been far more desirable but we'll be looking forward to participating at select committee. Thank you Madam Speaker."