Flavell Te Ururoa: Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Forestry Sector) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Forestry Sector) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:655;Page:4558] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Kia ora tatou katoa e te Whare a kia ora tatou kua tae mai i tenei po. I te ahuatanga o nga korero i runga i o tatou marae ko taku i te tuatahi he tuku poroporoaki ki a koe e Wiha ki a koe Maxine. Korua tahi kua ngaro atu i te tirohanga kanohi nga pou o te reo Maori i te wa i a korua. Ko tetahi i eke ki te ahuatanga o te kuia ko tetahi he tamariki tonu. Hoi ano ahakoa pehea korua tahi haere. Whakangaro atu i te tirohanga kanohi me te mohio ano hoki kua tutuki pai nga ahuatanga i te wa i a koutou mo te aha? Mo te painga o to tatou reo. 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. Greetings to us all the House and to those present tonight. With due respect to speeches on our marae the first thing for me to do is to farewell you Wiha and you as well Maxine both of you pillars of the Maori language in your time. One lived to an advanced age the other was still in the prime of life. And so regardless I say to you both farewell. Disappear from view knowing full well that what you set out to do in your time has been achieved. And for what purpose? To advance our language 
.] 
This last week Maoridom lost two key figures who advanced te reo Maori: Wiha Malcolm—I think that was her name at the time of her passing—and Maxine Tamihori who was well on in age. Both were doyennes of Maori language and that has some influence in respect of discussion about the Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Forestry Sector) Amendment Bill in the sense that the context of the Maori world around us is something they knew in their time. They were promoters of the notion that we as tangata whenua use te reo Maori to express our world view. Our environment our weather system and our natural world are woven throughout all the waiata they used in order to teach about our stories and those elements help to guide our daily lives. 
To help the House understand that one example of how we use te reo Maori to express that notion of the environment being intertwined with us as a people is to look at this whakatauki: “Nau i whakatakoto i to hinaki i te wai tawawarua anei te waituhi ka taha.” Loosely interpreted the message is that the eel pot should be set during the main flood after all of the smaller eels have passed through leaving the bigger ones to follow. That whakatauki is saying that to be effective timing is everything. I have been thinking about that simple message as we have looked into the forestry sector amendments as they apply to the New Zealand emissions trading scheme. In essence the key issue in this slim little bill is to delay requirements relevant to the forestry sector under the emissions trading scheme as other speakers have alluded to. 
The Maori Party has been well served on the Emissions Trading Scheme Review Committee by our member for Te Tai Tokerau Rahui Katene. Ms Katene in turn appreciated the excellent advice that came forward from nearly 30 submissions from Maori trusts corporations and runanga. It goes without saying that we are mindful of the advice from the Climate Change Iwi Leadership Group people including Api Mahuika of Ngati Porou Timi te Heuheu of Ngati Tuwharetoa Mark Solomon of Ngai Tahu and other iwi actively engaged in the emissions trading scheme. The group supported the delay. Ngai Tahu are comfortable with the delay and I understand that the Central North Island Iwi Collective have also passed a resolution supporting the delay on the basis that they have been given assurances that their position would be no worse. This is an excellent and important qualifier with the support being conditional on the basis that iwi will not be in a worse position. 
As other speakers have mentioned the current law under the Climate Change Response Act requires foresters to have reported any deforestation during the 2008 year by 31 January 2009 and to apply for exemptions for small forest blocks by 30 June 2009. Without putting too fine a point on it that is next Tuesday. Those dates are unreasonable given the process still in train of the committee review and the associated lack of public awareness of these requirements. Therefore we recognise that without this bill many forest owners would unknowingly find themselves in breach of the law or adversely affected by it. 
Although it is a very complex picture it seems that iwi with forest interests support the delay. We respect their views. Some of the inherent complexity can be understood by looking at the Central North Island Iwi Collective in a little bit more detail. We know that there is likely to be a split view across different iwi with forestry interests depending on whether they supported the emissions trading scheme in the first place but there are other layers to the complexity. Reaction to this bill may depend on whether an iwi is a part of the Central North Island settlement group whether they want to settle or not or whether like Ngati Tuwharetoa they have forest lands included in the Central North Island settlement and extensive forest estates outside of it. It is a complex picture and it is vital that we get it right not hurry for the sake of political expediency. We must take care to consider how we meet the Kyoto obligations and how we can protect the climatic systems from excess carbon emissions while also considering the adjustments required specifically to achieve fair and equitable provisions for the forest sector. 
The House has the benefit of some very strongly expressed views from Maori to assist it in how we can improve upon the legislation. There was the consistent recommendation that there should be a clause included in the bill that establishes a bottom-line position namely: “Nothing in this Act shall be inconsistent with Te Tiriti o Waitangi.” The Federation of Maori Authorities went so far as to say that the bill breaches the Treaty in failing to uphold rangatiratanga while Morikaunui Incorporation said that the bill as drafted conflicts with the principles and provisions of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. The sticking point is the bill imposes an encumbrance over Maori land that is effectively an alienation. 
Perhaps one of the clearest explanations of the issues related to this bill comes from the submission from Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu. Their concern was chiefly to do with their land; they considered it to be the most suitable for conversion to another commercial use. Ngai Tahu purchased this land before 2002 when the Government announced its intention to introduce some form of deforestation controls. Ngai Tahu were therefore unable to take advantage of the 2002-08 period to deforest key areas of land as many owners of the pre-1990 forests have done. In fact they concluded that Ngai Tahu would suffer a disproportionate and significant liability as a result. The financial costs for Ngai Tahu would be huge in scope. It was the thinking of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu that land returned as a part of a Treaty settlement that falls into those categories should be excluded. Ngati Awa of the Whakatane area meanwhile believed that those iwi in the same position as them should be eligible for a one-off adjustment to choose how they wish to use their lands in the future without reference to the emissions trading scheme. Such an option would have meant that they can make the choice that they originally envisaged they would have when they purchased the forest and therefore be required to comply with the emissions trading scheme. 
I described the context of this bill as complex. The more one reads through the submissions and appreciates the range of issues emerging from it it becomes all the more evident that there is a great deal more to this bill than the five pages initially indicate. Wairongomai Incorporation put it bluntly: “The bill is inequitable and has disproportionate negative effects on Maori.” It was their position that the Crown had assumed to itself the ownership allocation and management of the carbon allocation resource. 
I return to the advice from the Federation of Maori Authorities. The federation told the select committee that Maori know full well the need for climate change policy that tangata whenua are fully in support of the focus on behaviour change to mitigate human impacts on the climate and that that was in line with their kaupapa of kaitiakitanga—the capacity to nurture the spiritual cultural and environmental protection of Te Ao Marama. That is taken for granted. But when we get to this bill what we see is significant inequality of treatment of Maori. By locking Maori lands into this regime and legislating how Maori are to use their lands the bill perpetrates a system of inequalities that I am sure the Minister for Climate Change Issues will consider as the bill moves through its various stages. 
Finally the Maori Party has supported the call from many runanga iwi and incorporations for the Treaty of Waitangi clause to be added to the bill and the call for amendments to protect the integrity and durability of the settlement. Now we listen again to the views of Maori who are saying that they should support the call to delay and therefore that will be our vote for this first reading of the bill. Tena tatou.