Mapp Wayne: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Mapp Wayne: Ngati Tuwharetoa (Bay of Plenty) Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:625;Page:20259] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I think it was appropriate that the Hon Georgina te Heuheu spoke first in this final part of the Committee debate. She is of Ngati Tuwharetoa so she has precedence in a matter like this and we acknowledge that. 
The National Party does support settlements as a general principle and we do so for quite a deliberate reason which is that we want this country to move beyond being trapped in grievance mode. To some extent settlements have had an ironic effect. They have helped race relations and helped Maori move forward but at the same time I think they could almost be said to have harmed race relations. There is a great deal more friction these days I suspect than there has been in the past. Therefore the way to deal with that issue is to ensure that the process is done reasonably quickly. That is why National has committed to completing all settlements by 2010. Even Labour apparently now sees the wisdom of accelerating settlements and it had to be driven to that point by National. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Who had the idea first? 
Dr WAYNE MAPP 
: I wanted to make reference specifically to the ACT party and I had this set down as one of the points that I wanted to make but Mr Shirley has asked who had the idea first. Well I say to ACT party members that they cannot have a policy that states that they will settle everything quickly—and I acknowledge that they have said that—and not actually vote for anything. It is just such a bizarre irony. One assumes from the way ACT party members conduct themselves that unless the settlement meets their needs in every precise particular they cannot agree to it. Well the real world is not like that. One has to have a degree of compromise and seek something of a consensus. 
National has pointed out during this debate our concerns about the style of the preamble. I think there is far too much reference to people as they were back in time without enough acknowledgment of the way that people are developing and advancing. So I would like to see more balance on that aspect in the future. The second thing is that we made reference to our concerns about the inclusion of the principles of the treaty. Finally we referred to our concerns about the inclusion of myth and legend in the law of the land. I acknowledge that virtually everyone has a belief of some description or another. Even if a person is an atheist that is still a belief. We however do not expect beliefs to be included in the law. I would invite the Government to think very seriously about that issue. I was heartened in some respects to note that the Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations did acknowledge that concern which I think is now quite widely felt in this Parliament. 
I want to conclude on this point. We believe that settlements must fit within the criteria of building equality—equality within the law. A settlement that infringes that principle in a serious way would not receive our support and we have signalled our very deep concerns indeed about the settlements around the lakes in the Rotorua area. Essentially that does seem to take rights away from the wider community and we think settlements of that nature will prove to be harmful rather than helpful. So it is not likely that that kind of settlement would meet with our agreement. But as a general principle we do support settlements. We do vote for them. They may not be perfect in every particular but they do have a pretty broad consensus as I think the votes in this Committee have demonstrated today. It is perhaps a pity that ACT members do not also support the settlements—at least occasionally—as a testament of good faith to back up their own views about the need to conclude settlements. 
We will have the opportunity in the third reading to speak more broadly on this. I think this debate has been valuable. We are bound to signal our concerns about these settlements and the way we would deal with them in the future.