Hughes Darren: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Hughes Darren: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:670;Page:17287] 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to take a call— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. That member was sitting on his behind; he did not even call and you called him. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: The member called at the same time as the member who took the call. I did not look up but I registered him as a member who had not had a call at that point so I have given him the call. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: Thank you Mr Chairman; there is no one as angry as a former talkback radio host. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I apologise to my colleague for making him sit down. Given the ongoing flouting of your ruling by Tau Henare who was calling across the Chamber after my colleague was invited to speak and had started speaking which is when that member should have sat down I think it might be time for you to educate him on the rule that when the presiding officer is ruling a member does have to sit down. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Points of order will be heard in silence. I will manage the Committee. I am fully aware that there is quite a bit of passion over this bill. I am endeavouring to give a fair call for both sides. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: It is a pleasure to take a call on Part 2 of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill. I have listened to the member opposite the former member of Parliament for Te Tai Tokerau interject wildly on all the members who are speaking in this debate. 
One of the questions he has put to members on this side of the Chamber is what the position was of certain members in 2004. We never need to ask what the position of Tau Henare was in 2004 because we know what it was. He was on talkback radio as a Newstalk ZB host praising Don Brash’s position on this legislation. If members opposite want to raise the question of his position I say that he was in favour of Don Brash’s position. Remember Don Brash’s position was that the existing Foreshore and Seabed Act gave Maori too many rights. The Maori Party’s position on the Foreshore and Seabed Act was that it gave Maori too few rights. This is the great reconciliation of the position on Part 2 today: trying to marry together the position of the old National Party—when Tau Henare was in talkback radio land making sure that the supporters who put him into Parliament on the National Party list were against the bill—and lining up the interests of the Maori Party on Part 2. 
Paul Quinn 
: What has radio got to do with Part 2? 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: I say to Paul Quinn that we are on Part 2 of the bill. The reason Paul Quinn will not know about Part 2 of the bill is that he has not made a single contribution to the debate. He is sitting here in Parliament with the other National MPs taking a pause from proceedings only to clear their BlackBerrys of the emails from their supporters opposing Part 2. The only time those members take a break from interjecting is when they are deleting like crazy the hundreds of emails they are getting from people—their own supporters—who think this is bad legislation and none of them has the gumption to get up on their pins to speak about why Part 2 is important. 
I will ask the Committee some questions about Part 2 particularly clauses 11 and 17. They are the parts I want to focus on this afternoon. I ask the Minister in the chair the Attorney-General— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Again I apologise. This member is not a quiet member but there appear to be two members opposite who can yell and stand but not do both at the same time. I ask you to keep them a bit quieter. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: The member raises a valid point of order in this respect. I have constantly asked the Committee that interjections be rare and reasonable and that there be no barraging. At the same time the member who raised the point of order should not say disparaging things about another member so I caution him on that as well. Remember that interjections should be rare and reasonable. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: I will take my time now to discuss clauses 11 and 17 in Part 2 particularly as they affect the mining sector. The departmental report which I know was not considered in any enormous detail by the Maori Affairs Committee sets up a lot of what the issues are in this part of the bill. I will go through what some of those issues are and seek a response from the Attorney-General to see whether the Committee of the whole House can get a sense of what direction the Government is heading in with them. We have heard from Maori Party speakers that this bill advances the position of Maori yet the departmental report raises a number of issues about ownership and the ability for minerals to be explored and extracted from the coastal and marine area. It is not entirely clear why New Zealand Steel and the New Zealand Minerals Industry Association have expressed such enormous concern for the ability of their industries to participate if these clauses are passed. I note that New Zealand Steel submitted that the bill would have “a significant dampening effect on investment in the minerals and mining sector because it insufficiently protects existing rights and consented activities and also thwarts future development.” 
I would like to know from the Minister in the chair the Attorney-General whether in regard to his bill—either the bill he has presented which has not been amended by the Maori Affairs Committee but certainly the bill and his I think 75-page Supplementary Order Paper of amendments—he is satisfied that the amendments he is pushing forward do answer those concerns about those clauses. If we go particularly to clauses 77 and 78 dealing with the protection of wahi tapu it is clear from the position of other speakers in the Committee that somehow these are enhanced for Maori interests or groups who are seeking customary and marine title yet when the departmental report gets to the commentary of the Government’s position it states that the Government’s intent is for the existing use rights to be protected until the end of their term. At the point when they come up for renewal I ask the Minister in the chair whether this part of the bill kicks in to provide for differing rights for iwi hapu and whanau groups who are seeking customary and marine title than would otherwise be the case if they did not need to use this vehicle or these clauses. I think that is a tension within the bill that— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: So what does Ngati Porou say? 
Hon DARREN HUGHES 
: Well Ngati Porou of course negotiated a deal under the existing Foreshore and Seabed Act. Ngati Porou did not need to have the coastal and marine bill as many of National’s supporters are saying to those members in their email. 
But I want to come back and not be interrupted or taken astride by those members opposite to say that Ngati Porou were able to use the existing legislation to do that. I am trying to get some indication from the Minister—