Street Maryan: Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Street Maryan: Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11849] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Deputy Speaker. E te whaea te Minita tenei te mihi ki a koe. It is an extraordinary moment I think that a descendant of the tribe the hapu the iwi in question is the Minister of the Crown who moves the second reading of the Ngati Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. The Minister may have missed it but my halting Maori at the beginning of my speech greeted her. It was a short mihi of acknowledgment of her role and some acknowledgment from a Pakeha who tries to understand what this might mean. Suddenly we are coming to the end of 100 or more years of struggle and protest on behalf of the Ngati Apa people in order to reclaim some of the land that was theirs originally. 
I will talk about a couple of things that I think are particularly significant in this settlement bill. I recommend that anybody who wants to know why this Parliament does these things read the preamble to the bill. The history that is recounted in this bill in the preamble is worth more people knowing about than just this House and the immediately affected iwi. It is the story of an indigenous people who were trying to get on with those who arrived more recently. They were trying not only to get on with them but to benefit from living together in that part of the country which is largely around the Rangitikei area but includes part of the country that runs between—if I remember correctly—the Whanganui River and Whangaehu River. Being brought up in Taranaki I had to learn from the Hon Tariana Turia out of respect for where she comes from to pronounce the w-h as a “wh” and I acknowledge that. It is difficult to unlearn things but saying “Whangaehu” when I have always driven across it over it and around it and pronounced it “Fangaehu” is something that I will make an effort to do out of respect for those who come from there. 
One of the amendments I am pleased to see that the Maori Affairs Committee put in was one in which they insisted on putting the “h” into Whanganui. They insisted on that regardless of protests from outside that it should not be spelt that way. I acknowledge the work of the select committee not only in that respect but also for the fact that with the submissions that they heard and the protests that were registered with them they arrived at the conclusion that there was not much to amend in the bill as it was first put forward. 
In pledging Labour’s support for this bill which I hope has been obvious from my comments so far I recognise some of the history and the length of time it has taken for this bill to get where it is. In fact negotiations were led by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen and the deed of settlement was signed on behalf of the Crown by the Hon Parekura Horomia in October 2008. The bill’s introduction came in August 2009 and the first reading in November 2009. From there it was referred to the Maori Affairs Committee and finally has emerged today after report-back for its second reading. 
The area we are talking about in this bill is that part of the Rangitikei-Manawatu area that anybody who is familiar with that country knows is beautiful—beautiful pastoral land and a beautiful part of the North Island. I commend to people to read the story of purchase and quasi-agreement that started this process of alienation of land. Much of it as I said is recounted in the preamble. It is worth noting that Ngati Apa never felt that they were properly consulted when an agreement was being drafted and that they were never properly taken into account. Regardless of whether they received £1000 in exchange for 86200 acres of land and regardless of whether that was fair at the time it is true that the reserve lands that were set aside for Ngati Apa were also alienated later. 
It is hard to find a piece of Aotearoa New Zealand that has been subjected to more laws quite frankly. By the time one has gone through the events of the 1830s the 1840s and on into the 1850s and the application of a number of laws to the settlement of this piece of land it is a wonder that anybody can track exactly what went on particularly as we are told because in some instances the diary of the Pakeha negotiator was the only record available. 
I refer to some of the content of this bill. It provides a number of critical things that now people ought to be becoming familiar with as we move through Treaty settlements. One is an acknowledgment of the obligations of the Crown. Another is an apology because there are times when an apology is the only way that we can proceed as a nation to move forward. There has to be some recognition of wrongdoing and an apology even generations later. Beyond that the critical things that also are contained in the bill are to do with cultural redress and commercial redress. The settlement includes a historical account much of which I have alluded to in my speech; the Crown acknowledgment of historical breaches of the Treaty; a Crown apology; a cultural redress package featuring the transfer of a number of sites of cultural significance to Ngati Apa including two lake beds; and a quantum of money including the opportunity to purchase four Crown properties in the Rangitikei region. 
In winding up I acknowledge some words that my colleague the Hon Mita Ririnui said in his first speech on this bill’s first reading. They echo the statement of the Minister and recognise the young people who came forward to negotiate this settlement. I pay tribute to them.