Paraone Pita: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
Paraone Pita: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20690] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 A tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker a tena hoki tatau o te Whare nei. A tena hoki nga manuhiri mai i Te Moana a Toi Te Huatahi koutou o NgatiTuwharetoa nga rangatira ngakaumatua ngakuikuia. Koutou hoki te ropuikawe mai itenei kaupapa mai i te waitonoa atu e koutou ki te Taraipiunara tae noa ki teneira. Na reira nga mihi whanui ki a koutou. 
[ 
Greetings to you Mr Assistant Speaker and indeed to all of us here in the House. Greetings as well to the visitors from the Bay of Plenty especially you NgatiTuwharetoa the chiefs elders men and womenfolk you also of the group who brought this matter here who took it before the tribunal and as a consequence is here today. Therefore a great acknowledgment to you 
.]  
It is my pleasure to stand on behalf of New Zealand First—and I remind members once again that it is the only non - politically aligned party in this House—to contribute to the third reading of the NgatiTuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill and in particular to signal our support for it. 
I acknowledge the presence of a number of members of NgatiTuwharetoa Bay of Plenty who are in the precincts of this Chamber together with members of the claims negotiating team. I also acknowledge their whanau who were not able to travel to be here today and who remain at home listening to what is essentially an important day for their iwi. They have arrived at this point after a period of almost 16 years; it has been 16 years since they first initiated their claim. From that time to this a number of their fellow tribesmen who were involved in this claim have passed on. I support the sentiments expressed by the member for Waiariki in acknowledging those who have returned to the spirit world. 
The passing of this bill will give final effect to the deed of settlement entered into between the Crown and NgatiTuwharetoa Bay of Plenty back in 2003. It will also see another chapter added to the history of NgatiTuwharetoa Bay of Plenty—a chapter intended to place some closure on events that have had an adverse effect on this iwi since the 1860s when war broke out ironically in the Waikato. I say “some” because although this settlement is full and final and all parties to this settlement have signed up to it no one can say that it fully compensates NgatiTuwharetoa Bay of Plenty. 
Like many other claims already made to the tribunal this claim relates to breaches by the Crown of its obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi and in particular to the confiscation of most of the land within this iwi’s rohe the inadequacies of the compensation court process and the subsequent alienation of the remaining lands that were subject to the native land laws and Crown purchasing. 
It is important to acknowledge the team representing this iwi who have been able to confront the difficulties that are becoming quite common for those who are charged by their respective iwi to negotiate with the Crown. Those difficulties include getting the mandate for their own appointment; getting the mandate of the tribe to negotiate on the tribe’s behalf for what they believe is their entitlement much of which is consequently not accepted by the other party; negotiations with Crown representatives; and getting the mandate from their iwi to accept final offers. Added to that list is the length of time taken to get to the settlement point—a matter that is clearly a sad commentary on the current process of negotiation and settlement. 
However those difficulties will pale into insignificance given the task that lies ahead for the iwi of NgatiTuwharetoa Bay of Plenty in terms of how they deal with the proceeds of this settlement. To that extent I make this point to the present and future leadership of NgatiTuwharetoa. If they thought that their journey thus far has been one of challenge I say that the future will provide further challenge as they confront the demands of the future and of their iwi. I say to the leadership to never forget to look back from time to time so as to ensure that those they lead are in fact still there. 
Before I conclude I make reference to two particular issues that arose during the earlier debates on this bill. The first one is in regard to references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi being included in the bill. It is well known that New Zealand First is seeking to have all references to the expressions “the principles of the treaty” “the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi” and the “Treaty of Waitangi and its principles” eliminated from all New Zealand statutes including all preambles interpretations schedules and regulations. 
The references to the principles of the treaty as articulated in this bill refer to an apology already given and to the definition of historical claims. It is stated in clause 15 that in terms of the deed of settlement and this Act the settlement “is final”. The settlement therefore ensures that there is finality to these claims. New Zealand First is able to vote for this bill because we support the settlement process and because the bill makes no functional reference to future decision-making around the expression or the concepts of the Treaty of Waitangi. 
The second issue is that during the Committee stage an amendment was made by way of Supplementary Order Paper 367 to amend the English text. I refer to recital 32. The Supplementary Order Paper from the Government asked for the omission of the words “NgatiTuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) around Kawerau” and the substitution of the words “NgatiTuwharetoa around the Kawerau area”. However the Maori text was not amended. New Zealand First subsequently lodged an amendment to reflect that amendment with the suggestion that the Maori text be amended to read: “iwaenga te rohe o Kawerau”. 
To my utter surprise the Minister in the chair at the time the member for Waiariki Mita Ririnui a Maori whom I regard as quite fluent in the use of the Maori language refused to support the proposal. In his words it was purely a matter of semantics. I tell that member that we in this House have a responsibility to ensure that the legislation made here is clear and accurate to all New Zealanders and in particular to those affected by it. Although it may be said that the amendment is unlikely to affect the intent of the bill or the durability of this settlement I think we have a responsibility to ensure that the use of te reo Maori in legislation is correctly translated whether it be from or into te reo. 
In furthering the use of te reo Maori in legislation passed by this House I had intended to propose that the title be amended to read “NgatiTuwharetoa (Te Moana-a-Toi-te-Huatahi) Claims Settlement Bill” but because of the earlier lack of support by the member for Waiariki I felt compelled to pass up that opportunity. History provides enough evidence to give credence to what I have said. If anyone has any doubt in that regard I refer them to a particular document first signed in 1840 at Waitangi in which the Maori text was not a clear translation of the English text. 
Finally on behalf of New Zealand First I wish NgatiTuwharetoa Bay of Plenty all the best for their journey—a journey intended to bring them economic social and cultural prosperity. Their success in that regard will be of benefit not only to them but also for New Zealand Aotearoa.