Flavell Te Ururoa: Southland Agricultural and Pastoral Association Empowering Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Southland Agricultural and Pastoral Association Empowering Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:634;Page:5679] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Kia ora tatou. Tatou e noho nei i te Whare. The progress of the Southland Agricultural and Pastoral Association Empowering Bill has for some been seen as a simple formality. It is as if it is no big deal. So I thought it would be a good idea to do some research so that all of us here and indeed those listening at home understand that there is a history to this bill. 
Not far from here is the Alexander Turnbull Library where people can spend hours to their hearts’ content studying Aotearoa—our history our experiences and our people. The historical atlas maps held in that library show that as a result of pre-1865 land purchases the total percentage of Southland land in Maori ownership was a whole 1 percent out of a possible 34 million acres. It was land literally available at a steal. In August 1853 the Commissioner of Crown Lands Walter Mantell obtained over 7 million acres of land as part of the Murihiku deal for a mere £2600. Comparatively speaking it was a better deal than ever before. 
Some 5 years earlier in June 1848 Kemp had transacted a purchase with Ngai Tahu of 20 million acres the largest block of land ever bought by the Crown for a bargain. It was snapped up at a piffling £2000. One hundred and fifty years later the Waitangi Tribunal was to conclude that the purchases of Mantell Kemp and their ilk were by any standards totally inadequate. The tribunal’s 1991 Ngai Tahu report concluded: “It is not stating the position too strongly to say that the effect of the Crown’s niggardly allocation was to ‘ghetto-ise’ Ngai Tahu on small uneconomic units on which they could do little more than struggle to survive”. 
 Forty years after Kemp’s transactions Mackay’s 1886 investigation into the extent of landlessness amongst Maori in Southland gave “a depressing account of poverty listlessness and despair amongst Ngai Tahu at the time”. This is the past the present and the future in which the Southland Agricultural and Pastoral Association Empowering Bill sits—an iwi ghettoised economic arrangements from which the people could do little more than struggle to survive and a people confronted with poverty listlessness and despair. Yet a century and a half later those same people are at risk of being re-ghettoised from the passage of the legislation we are discussing today. 
The  
Hansard 
 states that Kai Tahu o Murihiku had been neither consulted nor informed as part of the negotiations. Te Ao Marama which encompasses expertise with iwi liaison within the rohe had not been approached. The relevant papatipu runaka the tribal councils of Kai Tahu were not part of the feedback loop. We raised those issues at the first reading of the bill and urged the House to recognise the importance of consultation with iwi on resource management issues. Indeed given that Ngai Tahu are mana whenua it would be appropriate to ask them what they want to be consulted on and how when by whom and why. 
The Maori Party wants however to put on record our appreciation of the way in which the sponsor of the bill Eric Roy responded to the issues we raised at the first reading. I commend the way in which the member for Invercargill received our advice and indeed made a point of standing to give an explanation to the whole House. Such generosity and genuine commitment to acknowledging the concerns of the constituency can only be positive as we now move quickly to advance the bill. 
When I last addressed the House on this bill I spoke of the proud history the people of Murihiku have as entrepreneurs—their active roles in the flax trade and the whaling industry and in supplying food to the ships. A contemporary example of their innovation is the Hikoi Fatigue Kete project which was developed by Oraka-Aparima Health and Social Services in order to raise awareness amongst Southland Maori about the dangers of driver fatigue. The kete is packed full of goodies for avoiding fatigue including chocolate treats barley sugars a first aid kit a map of New Zealand to help plan breaks a water bottle and ample safety information. I do wonder whether we could commission that organisation to provide a House fatigue kete to help avoid fatigue during our extended sessions but I have been persuaded otherwise—the robust debate and stimulating interplay we experience on a daily basis would make such a kete redundant. 
The point I am making is that Southland Maori are often required to make long trips on a regular basis. The fatigue kete is a novel concept that meets the needs of the constituency in a practical way. Therefore I suggest that in the long trip ahead for the Southland Agricultural and Pastoral Association as it moves to sell the property and relocate to Ascot Park Raceway it might just consider that mana whenua could be an enthusiastic and committed project partner. 
Despite the context of colonisation and land alienation despite the hardship experienced by the predominantly landless people and despite the final insult of not being consulted at an early stage in the progress of this bill mana whenua have been munificent in overlooking those offences and have worked productively for the future of Invercargill and its people. The Maori Party is now satisfied that not only have mana whenua been actively involved in the existence of the legislation but also the promoter of the bill himself Mr Eric Roy listened to our concerns and has taken the need for consultation into account. 
We are happy to support the bill at its second and third readings. Finally we recommend that the ideal outcome of the parliamentary debate might be that the Southland Agricultural and Pastoral Association for the sake of its further empowerment also considers the opportunity for mana whenua to be involved. Kia ora tatou. 
Bill read a second time and a third time.