Smith Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Murray: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:617;Page:12837] 
3.  
MURRAY SMITH (United Future) 
 to the  
Minister of Maori Affairs 
: Does he continue to stand by his statements last week that “We are a party that does not turn our backs on the issues facing Maori and walk away from the difficult problems.” and that he has “spent a lifetime advocating for Maori to Governments.”; if so why? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 Yes. This Government will continue to face up to the challenging issues facing Maoridom. This contrasts starkly with the politics of divisiveness promoted by other parties. I will always be an advocate for Maori. 
Marc Alexander 
: Has the Minister advocated for Maori to the Minister of Corrections on behalf of the seven Northland Maori iwi that are pleading with the Government to maintain private management of the Auckland Central Remand Prison because of its enviable record in working with Maori or has he actually turned his back on Maori and walked away from the problem by slavishly voting for the Corrections Bill on ideologically “pink think” lines? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Let me just say to the member that that question is very wide of the original question. That question really is about a completely separate matter and I do not think it is fair to allow it. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to the original question which is about the Minister’s statement about turning “our backs on issues facing Maori” and walking away from “difficult problems” etc. In that context I refer you to this morning's  
New Zealand Herald  
and the article on this particular issue which shows that Maori interests in Auckland are taking a very strong stand on this particular matter. I would therefore submit that given the Minister’s statement the question from my colleague asking about his role—in furtherance of his statement—with regard to this measure which is attracting interest from Maori groups is entirely in order. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is a Minister of Corrections. However I do not want to be unfair to the member. If the Minister wanted to make a brief comment on it he could but it is the Minister of Corrections who is the Minister responsible for this issue. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am rising only because quite clearly your ruling could have an effect on subsequent supplementary questions that may relate to this issue. The point here is that the Minister is being asked whether he has taken an advocacy role as he has claimed in the House—and he has reaffirmed in his answer today that he always does—on behalf of Maori with regard to the private prison. Surely there should be able to be some questions to him with regard to that advocacy even though he is not the Minister of Corrections. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Supplementary questions can elucidate primary questions. This could turn into questions without notice which I do not encourage. I will hear each question and gauge it on its merits. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: In the view of this Government the administration of prisons is a core State function and the Maori programmes will continue. 
Mahara Okeroa 
: Can the Minister amongst many instances recall when he advocated for Maori? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: Yes. I most certainly can recall many such instances. 
Judith Collins 
: Name one. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: In particular 20 years ago right here in Parliament I was actively advocating that young Maori not go to prison—in 1984 at the Hui Taumata—and I am still advocating that now to make sure that they do not go to prison that we get them out and that it is not so much about the management. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to your ruling that asking a question of Ministers regarding their advocacy of particular causes is tantamount to asking a question without notice and contrast that with the previous question which was very much in effect a question without notice to the Minister and was clearly answered as such. I ask you for some consistency in the interpretation. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Well I certainly intend to apply consistency. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Given that the October 1984 Hui Taumata quickly became a “Hui No-matter” and nothing happened as a consequence is it a fair judgment of the Minister’s effectiveness that the so-called closing the gaps policy—much-vaunted by his leader—has been utterly forgotten? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: The titles might have changed but I tell my elder over there that this Government has been doing the hard yards and dealing to the difficult issues. We now have more Maori in work. Maori unemployment for the March quarter was at 9.4 percent—the lowest since December 1985. We have more Maori succeeding in business—700 Maori businesses over the last 3 years. Recent research shows that Maori women continue to be more entrepreneurial than their counterparts internationally. We have more Maori learning. Nine hundred Maori are involved in the Modern Apprenticeships programme. That is good government and good for Maori. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I could not hear what the Minister was saying and I would be delighted if you gave the Minister a chance to repeat his answer so that we could all hear it over here— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. I heard what the Minister said. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: —otherwise those 20000 Maori protesting last week must have been a figment of my imagination. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order and the member knows it. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: How is the Minister’s advocacy helping Maori when this Government which is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to build new prisons has today announced an apparent massive investment in rehabilitation programmes of $1.2 million? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: The member cannot have it both ways. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have been reasonably generous in allowing a little bit of toing and froing because there have been causes for it but now I want to return to question time. 
Sue Bradford 
: What is the Minister’s response as an advocate for Maori to the Attorney-General’s recent finding that the Foreshore and Seabed Bill prima facie breaches the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: I will continue to support the Government’s foreshore and seabed legislation and it is consistent with what we are doing now. 
Stephen Franks 
: In the Minister’s advocacy for Maori and given anxiety about the extent of Maori claims just how far off shore should a customary use or ancestral connection extend; for example will it stop at the edge of the territorial sea or could it go beyond the exclusive economic zone perhaps as far as ancestral Hawaiiki or maybe even Taiwan? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: That is certainly something for the Maori Land Court. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. I would like the Minister to give a little bit more of an answer—to talk about the sea rather than about the Maori Land Court. I wonder whether the Minister might be prepared to add something to that answer. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: The bill makes it clear what the limits are. 
Marc Alexander 
: How will the Minister as a supposed advocate in Government for Maori support the view of the seven northern Maori iwi that the Auckland Central Remand Prison is the shining light in prison management for its relationship with tangata whenua and the view of Tariana Turia that the Government should support my Supplementary Order Paper that calls for a review of Auckland Central Remand Prison performance before final decisions are made on private or public management of prisons; if not why not? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: My friend is entitled to her views and certainly there are different views in Ngapuhi up in North Auckland. That is something that has to be worked through. 
Marc Alexander 
: In light of that answer does the Minister agree as an advocate in Government for Maori that simply turning the Auckland Central Remand Prison into a State-run Gulag will not ensure that positive outcomes for Maori inmates will continue in light of the claim by those Maori who have worked successfully with the Auckland Central Remand Prison that in the management of Maori in other prisons the Department of Corrections has a “We know best.” attitude which explains why the flexible approach of the privately run remand centre was able to achieve what it has? 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: Let me be quite clear: I want to make sure that Maori stop going to prison. That is what this Government is about. The good Maori programmes within prison will continue.