Twyford Phil: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTwyford Phil: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 08 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17705. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—TeAtatū): Like Su’a William Sio I did not get the opportunity to serve on the Local Government and Environment Committee which was reviewing the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill so this is the first time I have come into contact with it but I too am happy to have a say in this debate and share the very positive views that have been expressed by members so far in supporting a move to modernise to streamline and to strengthen the governance of the protection of historical places and our heritage in this country.It seems very appropriate that in doing this the bill should fully recognise the interests of tangata whenua in protecting and celebrating our heritage. That seems entirely appropriate.With particular attention to Subpart 2 of Part 4 “National Historic Landmarks/NgāManawhenua o Aotearoa meōnaKōreroTūturu” in terms of the establishment of a kind of a premier category of landmark sites this seems to be a really good development. When I think about what kinds of sites might qualify for that special status and think about what kinds of places around the country they would be the ones that spring to mind most immediately are sites that are—this is obviously my own personal perspective here but I would imagine that things like as the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage suggested the site of the Battle ofŌrākau would be a prime candidate.Again I would have thought Parihaka would be the sort of place that is immensely significant not only for Māori but for this country’s modern history in the last couple of hundred years. For a whole range of reasons it is enormously significant. Waitangi of course would be an obvious candidate and I would have thought the primary site of the massacre on the Chatham Islands orRēkohu. The name of that site escapes me at the moment but it is a specific place on the Chathams where probably the worst most concentrated violence took place during the genocide onRēkohu. Those sorts of places are enormously significant in the telling of the stories of this country. I am sure everybody will have their own ideas about what should qualify but it seems to me that the innovation that Subpart 2—the list of national historic landmarks—brings to the heritage system I think is very very welcome.Just more broadly in Part 4 in terms of establishing a system for historic sites again you start to think about what kinds of places might be worth recognising and protecting in this way. I thought about Port Craig which is a really interesting settlement down on the Southland coast where in the early years of the 20th century there was a thriving settlement establishing a timber mill in the most hostile of conditions. You can actually visit the historic settlement today. Hundreds of people tried to scratch out a living at Port Craig and there are still some buildings and some historical artefacts that are there today and it is a pretty extraordinary part of our early settler history.For me personally there would be things like the Blackball miners’ strike in 1908. That was a seminal point in the early 20th century development of labour relations in this country and led to not only of course the formation of the New Zealand Labour Party but much of the legislation on welfare and labour issues in the 20th century. The first State house in Fife Lane in Miramar may well be worthy of recognition as a historic site.As an Aucklander when I think about the volcanoes that are all over the Auckland isthmus—the volcanoes that were quite intensively cultivated and inhabited in the hundreds of years prior to colonisation and now are right in the middle of our country’s biggest city—they are worthy as many people have proposed not only of historic and heritage protection but as sublime natural features in our landscape. They would be worth protecting as well.I just want to say that I think that this is really a bill that will do a lot of good in modernising and reforming this area. If the effect is to strengthen the protection of our heritage and to make it more effective and more efficient then that will be a success but I think also there is every indication that the reforms will also make it easier for the public to understand and engage with our heritage. That also would be of tremendous benefit.