Volume 678 Week 7 - Thursday 29 March 2012 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Volume 678 Week 7 - Thursday 29 March 2012 
[Volume:678;Page:1495] 
Thursday 29 March 2012 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Business Statement 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 When the House resumes on Tuesday 3 April the Government will look to progress a number of bills on the Order Paper including the first reading of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Amendment Bill and the Committee stage of the Appropriation (2010/11 Financial Review) Bill. Wednesday of course is a members’ day.  
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 Can I ask the Deputy Leader of the House whether it is the Government’s intention to table next week the delegations resulting from the resignation of Nick Smith or whether it will wait until the inquiries into Judith Collins are completed before they do that.  
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 The member well knows that that is entirely at the discretion of the Prime Minister.  
Questions to Ministers 
ACC Minister—Confidence 
1. 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he have confidence in the Minister for ACC? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister) 
 on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes the Minister is a hard-working and competent Minister. 
Grant Robertson 
: What occurred after the ACC Minister’s first denial that she was behind the leak of the email sent by Michelle Boag that prompted him to ask her a second time as he told the media he had done? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I think the member is making a mountain out of a molehill. The fact is that these matters were serious matters of public interest and as the story unfolded the Prime Minister simply checked his understanding of what had occurred. 
Grant Robertson 
: Did someone from his office ask blogger Cameron Slater whether he received the email from Ms Collins’ office and if so what was the reply? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I simply do not know the answer to that question. 
Grant Robertson 
: Who else has he or his office spoken to about whether they were part of or behind the leaking of the Michelle Boag email? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: What happened with the email is a matter for the Minister and a matter for the ACC board. The Prime Minister does not regard it as his— 
Hon Member 
: Why did he ask her then? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: The Prime Minister is not involved with managing ACC cases. He has asked the Minister for an assurance and he has received it and he has confidence in that Minister. 
Grant Robertson 
: Does he agree with Bill English’s assessment of Judith Collins as being “pushed beyond her capacity” with an “unfortunately high estimate of her own competence.” and that she “spent too much time cultivating the media herself and believing the resulting publicity.”? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I think those comments were made some 7 or 8 years ago. The Prime Minister understands that Mr English has changed his views on all of those matters. 
State-owned Assets Sales—Fiscal and Economic Benefits 
2. 
MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What are the fiscal and economic benefits of selling minority shareholdings in four State-owned energy companies and Air New Zealand? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 The rationale is quite simple. The sale of Government shares would free up $5 billion to $7 billion less than 3 percent of taxpayers’ total assets of $245 billion to invest in priority assets like modern schools and hospitals without having to borrow more money on volatile world markets from overseas lenders. The Government is still spending and borrowing more than it can afford so it makes sense to reorganise the Government’s assets and redeploy capital to higher-priority areas so that we do not have to borrow more.  
Maggie Barry 
: What other benefits will the Government’s mixed-ownership programme deliver? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Under the mixed-ownership programme New Zealanders would have an opportunity to diversify their increasing savings away from property and from bank deposits which are growing quite rapidly at the moment and also the public listing of these companies will increase scrutiny of their decisions and encourage better business disciplines as well as deepening capital markets. 
Maggie Barry 
: What have recent profit and dividend payments been from the four State-owned energy companies? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Over the 6 years to 2011 ordinary dividends—that is dividends that exclude one-off sales of Government assets by these companies—have totalled $356 million. That is a 2.4 percent annual return to the taxpayer on the most recent commercial valuations of these companies. The Crown Ownership Monitoring Unit advises that the average cost of Crown borrowing over the last year is 4.5 percent; that is these companies are returning ordinary dividends of 2.4 percent per annum. The average cost of Crown borrowing is 4.5 percent. Estimates of 18.5 percent returns are quite misleading because they include major revaluations and changes in accounting methodology and also one-off large asset sales by these Government companies. 
Maggie Barry 
: Under the mixed-ownership programme what do comparisons of forecast loss of profits with expected savings on interest costs tell us? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: On its own comparing lost profits with reduced interest payments tells us nothing. As any owner of an asset will tell you it is not just what you forgo in profits that matters; it is the price received up front in the sale. If investors believed there would be strong profits from these companies then that would be reflected in a higher sale price. If they believe the profits will be weaker that will be reflected in a lower sale price.  
Accident Compensation Corporation—Release of Personal Information 
3. 
ANDREW LITTLE (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for ACC 
: When was the email she received between 12 March 2012 and 18 March 2012 from Michelle Boag concerning Bronwyn Pullar and the involvement of both in a meeting over a mass privacy breach first printed by her or a staff member in her office? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 Since this matter is before the Privacy Commissioner it is not in the public interest for me to answer that.  
Andrew Little 
: Does she stand by her statement in an interview on Radio Live this morning commencing at 8.22 a.m. that “I know exactly what has happened in terms of my office and myself.”? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I stand by all my statements.  
Andrew Little 
: In whose custody and control was the copy or copies of the email that was made in her office placed? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: That matter is before the Privacy Commissioner and it is not in the public interest for me to answer that.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I want to hear Andrew Little’s question. 
Andrew Little 
: What instructions did she give to any staff in her office or any ACC staff member in relation to the Michelle Boag email or any copy of it? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Since that matter is before the Privacy Commissioner it is not in the public interest for me to answer that.  
Dr Russel Norman 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister has been in the media discussing this issue and now she is using a public interest defence in the House. How can you accept that she can use a public interest defence here when she is in the media discussing this issue? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As I have said to the House before it is not the Speaker’s decision whether or not a matter is in the public interest. As Speaker I would certainly intervene were I to see that such a claim was outrageous. But on this occasion the Minister has indicated that the matter is being inquired into by an independent authority—the Privacy Commissioner—and it is not uncommon for Ministers to declare in their answer to such questions on matters that are being examined by an independent authority that it is not in the public interest to answer them. So in my view it is not outrageous for the Minister to be making that claim. It seems reasonable given the fact that an independent authority is conducting an investigation. 
Hon David Parker 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I ask you to reflect upon an earlier series of difficult questions for a Government which were questions by the then Hon—still honourable—Lockwood Smith in respect of Taito Philip Field. There were inquiries in respect of Taito Philip Field that were under way and yet the Government was still required to answer questions in respect of its conduct where Ministers had ministerial responsibility. I suggest to you that that shows that we cannot have Ministers just avoiding answering questions by claiming public interest when patently it is a matter of ministerial responsibility. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I would be very happy to look back over that  
Hansard 
. If I could refresh the member’s memory somewhat the bulk of those questions all occurred after the publication of the Ingram report if I remember correctly. Questions prior to that time were usually met with an answer that there was an inquiry under way. I think it is pretty standard practice. What I would I think make clear to the House because this—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! I am on my feet. This is a serious issue. Were the inquiry to be an internal inquiry by the Government I think that would be a different matter. That would be a different matter but where we have an independent authority conducting an inquiry or an investigation that can be compromised by the matter being questioned in this House. I think that is not in our interests. I make that distinction. Were it to be simply an internal Government inquiry I think the matter would be different but this is an independent authority. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is an inquiry being conducted by the Privacy Commissioner. It is not a commission of inquiry; it is not a judicial inquiry. The Minister has raised no issues of there being a sub judice rule preventing her from answering a question. It is not a matter of law; it is a matter of evidence. “When was that email reproduced?” is what she is being asked and to get up and fob the House off by saying it is not in the public interest is a decision that you have got to make not her. She is the Minister; she is being held accountable. Whether it is a matter of public interest or not is over to you to make and my submission is that I would like to hear from her why she thinks— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No no no— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: —based on the law or Speakers’ rulings— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No no the member has gone far enough now. The member has been here long enough to know the Speaker does not according to the traditions of this House decide whether matters are in the public interest or not. That is a decision of Ministers and the member knows that full well. As I have said before I would be prepared to depart from the tradition if I were to see a situation that was clearly outrageous. However the Privacy Commissioner has very significant powers of inquiry and it is an independent authority set up by statute. The Privacy Commissioner operates under statute. It is therefore I think not unreasonable for a Minister to claim that it is not in the public interest given that an inquiry by such an independent authority is under way to answer detailed questions on the matter. That is my ruling on the matter. If the member wants a ruling from the Speaker that is my ruling. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I seek a clarification? You mentioned that if you saw an instance of—I think the word you used was “outrageous” or “outrageous conduct”. Can I just ask you this: in terms of definition are you saying that if a Minister was to wax eloquent in the media about an issue and then come into this House and claim public interest to shut it down you would look at that issue? I just seek your clarification. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No no. By way of clarification what I want to make clear is that it is where a Minister claims that it is not in the public interest to answer a question and clearly the claim has no merit at all that it is not in the public interest. I mean here we have an inquiry being conducted by a statutory authority and it is not unreasonable in my view for a Minister to claim it is not in the public interest to answer detailed questions just as a Minister not long ago asserted in the House here quite reasonably it was not in the public interest to answer detailed questions about the Pike River tragedy while that was under investigation. But I will be watching the issue quite carefully. I will be taking advice on the matter because it has cropped up in recent days more than once. I accept the concern of Opposition members that it is unacceptable for Ministers to use the claim that it is not in the public interest unless it is genuinely not in the public interest. But on this occasion I believe that it is a reasonable claim for the Minister to make that that is not in the public interest given the independent authority is conducting the inquiry. 
Grant Robertson 
: Did she make the comments on Radio Live this morning that the member mentioned in an earlier supplementary question after the inquiry of the Privacy Commissioner was announced and if so why are those comments able to be made and ones in the House not able to be made because of the public interest? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Because they are quite different and also the Privacy Commissioner has emailed me today and advised me of the extent of her inquiry. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would like to ask the Minister whether in fact she has that with her. I have an email— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member will resume his seat immediately. That was totally outside the Standing Orders of the House. It was not a point of order at all. I do not know what rush of blood caused that and there will be no repeat of that. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Point of order Mr Speaker— 
Dr Russel Norman 
: Point of order Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Point of order to the Hon Trevor Mallard. Since I have admonished him I will consider his point of order. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I seek leave to table an email to Judith Collins and me from the Privacy Commissioner this morning. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If we accept that the Privacy Commissioner’s announcement of the investigation was yesterday—and the tabling was to establish that—and then the Minister went on radio and talked about exactly this issue she cannot come into the House and claim a public interest defence. I believe that you should label that outrageous. I think that does step over the boundary of “outrageous”—where the Minister spoke about this issue on radio this morning after the announcement of the inquiry and then claims public interest. How can it be that to speak about this topic on radio is in the public interest but not to speak about it in this House? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: To me the difference that we have seen in the House today was that there was a question relating to the Minister’s comments on the radio this morning. The Minister answered that question. It was other matters that the Minister has asserted as not being in the public interest to answer. But I recollect a question from Andrew Little about whether the Minister stood by her comments on a radio programme this morning and the Minister answered that question. So I have not seen anything outrageous so far and I assure members that I will watch this issue carefully because I accept the concern that it is not acceptable for a Minister to assert that it is not in the public interest to answer just to avoid being held to account. That would not be acceptable. Speakers have to be careful because they are normally guided by Ministers on their judgment but I am prepared as Speaker if I see something that is to me outrageous in that regard to overrule the Minister if I see that to be the case. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: What is it about the date of the reprint of the email referred to in the primary question that is not in the public interest and yet her comments to the public via the media are apparently in the public interest? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: That matter goes to the heart of the Privacy Commissioner’s inquiry. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. What goes to the heart of the Privacy Commissioner’s inquiry? I asked her a question about why she is giving that answer— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Indeed the member asked his question. He is just trying to ask it again by way of a point of order. The Minister answered it. I accept that the member is not particularly satisfied with the answer but that is the answer and the member cannot ask his question again by way of a point of order. I will hear the member further on the matter. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I am not asking my question again at all. But surely the answer “that goes to the heart of the inquiry” begs the conclusion that there has to be more than that because I am asking about the issue of public interest and she has not answered that at all. Maybe the Privacy Commissioner is; I do not know that. But I did not ask her what is going to the heart of the Privacy Commissioner’s inquiry; I am asking her what is different about these two different occasions—in this House and this morning on radio. 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I might be able to assist. The member asked for my opinion. I have given it. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: That is outrageous. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The House will come to order. It is not outrageous. The Minister raises a fair point that she was asked what the difference was which is seeking her opinion on a matter. She gave her opinion and that is an answer to that question. There is nothing I can do about that. 
Andrew Little 
: What inquiries has she made about how the email or a copy of it made it into the hands of the media including social media? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: That matter is a matter for the Privacy Commissioner and it goes to the heart of the inquiry. 
Dr Russel Norman 
:I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was a question about—[ 
Interruption 
]  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I want to hear this point of order. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: That was a question about what inquiries she had made. It was not about what the Privacy Commissioner was up to; it was about her responsibility as a Minister. It was about what inquiries she had made. I would also draw your attention to Speaker’s ruling 173/1 which says that a Minister must answer a question “ ‘if it can be given consistently with public interest’.” That was Speaker Wilson’s ruling. If an answer can be given consistent with the public interest the Minister must give it. This was about her inquiry. She has a responsibility for that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: What I will do because I want to make sure that everyone has a fair opportunity to pursue a serious matter like this is let the member repeat his question so that everyone can hear exactly what he is asking. 
Andrew Little 
: What inquiries has she made about how the email or a copy of it made it into the hands of the media including social media? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Since the Privacy Commissioner is looking into how this email document ended up in the media I think this goes to the heart of the Privacy Commissioner’s inquiry and I do not believe it is in the public interest for me to answer that. 
Andrew Little 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question was about the actions of the Minister and the inquiries she made. The responsibility of the Privacy Commissioner is whether or not a complaining individual’s privacy was breached. It has nothing to do with the actions that this Minister has taken with a publicly acknowledged action she has taken in copying this email. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Clearly the Privacy Commissioner’s investigation will investigate the actions of the Minister. I have to be careful; I am presuming. But it would be extraordinary if the investigation by the Privacy Commissioner did not investigate the actions of the Minister and therefore again it is not unreasonable for the Minister to claim that to talk about her actions while that investigation is under way is not in the public interest. Again I am concerned that I do not want to see this argument of it not being in the public interest used to block this House’s ability to hold members of the executive to account. But at the same time I think that where we do have an independent inquiry by a statutory authority I do have to respect that assertion of it not being in the public interest to comment while that inquiry is under way. Once that report is out members will have a lot of opportunity to ask questions and questions can be just as effective. One of the member’s colleagues referred to the Ingram report. Most of the questioning happened after that report came out. It was pretty effective. 
Charles Chauvel 
: To which Minister does the Privacy Commissioner report and to whom is she accountable; and how can this Minister possibly expect the House to believe or accept that the Privacy Commissioner can conduct an independent inquiry into her own Minister’s actions? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The Privacy Commissioner reports and is responsible to the Minister of Justice. She has independence under the Privacy Act. I say that it is an extraordinary statement and comment by that member that the Privacy Commissioner cannot be independent. I have to say that is one of the most extraordinary statements and I suggest he might want to apologise to the commissioner. 
Oil and Gas Extraction—Hydraulic Fracturing 
4. 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: Will he implement a nationwide moratorium on new fracking wells until the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment can assure the public it is safe? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 No. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Would it not make sense to wait for the results of the investigation before allowing new fracking wells to go ahead given the Minister has said in the media that the investigation “will answer some questions that have been unanswered”? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: It did not make sense to stop using 1080 when the commissioner was looking into the use of 1080. Subsequently the commissioner found that the use of 1080 was probably sensible. In the same way it is a bit silly to stop everything just because the Greens want to stop everything. Inquiries are going on. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Why will the Minister not wait for the questions to be answered when the East Coast Hawke’s Bay and Horizons regions will be considering their first fracking wells in those regions shortly? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Hydraulic fracturing has been used in New Zealand for well over two decades and appears to have been well managed. That is what I have been advised. We did not stop the use of 1080 when the commissioner was looking at that so I think the member is getting ahead of himself in my view by asking for a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing which has been going on for a long time as well. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Given that the Gisborne District Council has admitted it does not have the expertise to regulate fracking and TAG Oil is pursuing what it itself describes as an aggressive programme there why will he not implement a nationwide moratorium on new fracking wells until the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment can assure Kiwis it is safe? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Because hydraulic fracturing has been undertaken for well over two decades in Taranaki successfully on the face of it all the information that is put towards me and the expertise in Taranaki from both industry and the regulators such as the Taranaki Regional Council and from my officials can certainly be transferred to Gisborne should that be necessary. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Is the fracking issue different from the 1080 issue and was there a cusp of a massive expansion of 1080 use at the time of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s report into that? Given that we have seen a 170 percent increase in new fracking wells in just the last year alone in New Zealand compared with the last 18 years and that this Government has permitted 4 million hectares of New Zealand land to be used for fracking why will he not wait until the results are in? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Hydraulic fracturing is different from the use of 1080. I hope the House understands that. But also hydraulic fracturing— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: The man’s a genius! 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Well I could explain the difference and actually I am happy to give the member a briefing on the difference between the use of 1080 and hydraulic fracturing should he approach my staff. 
Gareth Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know I cannot raise a point of order in respect of flippant answers. But the question was not: “What is the difference between fracking and 1080?”. It was about the situations at the points in time when the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment was investigating both controversial topics. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invite the member to repeat his question because the answer did get a fair way away from the member’s question. I invite him to repeat his question. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Is there a difference between the situation where the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment investigated the use of 1080 and were we then on the cusp of a massive expansion in the use of 1080? Given that with fracking we have seen a 170 increase in new wells in the last year and that this Government has permitted 4 million hectares of new Kiwi land to be used for fracking will he wait until the results are in on the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s investigation? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I have made it clear why we are not going to have a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing while the commissioner investigates this. We will be very interested in her findings and certainly we will take them into account. I draw the comparison between the use of 1080 and hydraulic fracturing in the sense that both are claimed to have significant environmental effects. Both might have significant use. But it would be fair to say that although 1080 use was not on the cusp of significant use throughout New Zealand it is in fact used very very widely in New Zealand and it is hard to see how you could actually increase its use. I accept that the comparison is not exactly apples with apples but I think I have made my point. We cannot stop everything just because an investigation is in place. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Given that we have seen well blowouts water contamination and consents being breached right now in Taranaki is it not prudent to wait until the results are in so we can answer those questions and make sure we have got regulations and practices to protect our water to protect our communities and to protect our health? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Unfortunately whenever the member has put these claims to the media to my officials or even to an independent body such as the Taranaki Regional Council they have come back with substantial science to say that it is not in fact the case. In terms of water contamination the independent body Taranaki Regional Council went to Hill Laboratories which is independent too did water testing and found no effects on water quality. This is the point of the commissioner’s inquiry and that is why I welcome it. She will be able to determine the difference between fact and science and fiction and the Green Party. 
Gareth Hughes 
: I seek leave to table the Shell Todd Oil Kapuni study from 2007 jointly published by the Taranaki Regional Council and Shell Todd Oil which showed water contamination from the Kapuni wells. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Gareth Hughes 
: I seek leave to table the Cheal Petroleum report from 2011 also jointly published with the Taranaki Regional Council which showed water contamination from those wells as well. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Given that the hydrocarbons are not going anywhere what is the rush to frack them? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: The member may not have walked along Lambton Quay this morning but actually there are cars and trucks there and all over the world that are using oil and gas reserves. I believe that the member has used such transport facilities. The reality is there is a world demand for oil and gas. If we can access that oil and gas in New Zealand sell it get the royalties and the tax income build better schools and hospitals and create jobs I think we should. 
Benefits and Superannuation—2012 Annual General Adjustment 
5. 
ALFRED NGARO (National) 
 to the  
Minister for Social Development 
: How will this year’s annual general adjustment provide greater certainty to those receiving benefits and New Zealand Superannuation? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development) 
: 
 This will give greater certainty to more than 1 million New Zealanders who will benefit from this year’s annual general adjustment rate increases on 1 April. This adjustment increases rates of New Zealand superannuation and the veterans pension; rates and thresholds for main benefits student allowances student loan living costs and the foster care allowance; rates and thresholds for some supplementary assistance; and thresholds for the community services card.  
Alfred Ngaro 
: What effect will this adjustment have on the amount paid to superannuitants? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: From 1 April the married rate of New Zealand superannuation after tax will increase by 2.65 percent from just over $1045 per couple per fortnight to $1073.60. That is an increase of $27.68 per fortnight. It will also mean that over the last 4 years since 1 April 2008 the married rate will have increased by $194 per couple per fortnight. That is an increase of over 22 percent. 
Alfred Ngaro 
: How does this adjustment support those receiving benefits and student allowances? 
Hon PAULA BENNETT 
: As part of our 2008 campaign commitments National locked in this adjustment into legislation ensuring it happens every year to give certainty to those who rely on benefits. This means that payments match the increases to that of inflation. 
Question No. 6 to Minister 
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) 
: 
 I seek leave for this question to be held over till next Tuesday. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is objection. Does the member wish to ask his question? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: No. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: He does not. OK. 
Rt Hon John Key—Recording of Private Conversation 
7. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Police 
: Did the Police Commissioner or any of his staff inform the Prime Minister or any of his staff of the decision not to prosecute Mr Bradley Ambrose; if so on what date? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Police) 
: 
 Yes; I am advised that police contacted John Key on Monday 26 March to advise him as the complainant in the case of their decision. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Were the police aware that John Key would be overseas on Tuesday 27 March the date on which they publicly announced the decision not to prosecute Mr Ambrose? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I was not involved in that conversation. It is an operational matter and as policing Minister I have no knowledge of that. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Can she assure the House that there is no relationship between the delay in making the decision not to prosecute Mr Bradley Ambrose and the public announcement of that decision on the one hand and the fact on the other that the complainant is the Prime Minister and that he would be overseas on the date of the announcement? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: The police who are operationally independent under section 16 of the Policing Act deal with operational matters on a case by case basis and exercise their discretion as appropriate. It is absolutely inappropriate for any Minister of Police to take any part in an operational matter. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to be very clear with the Minister that I was asking a question about the connection between a decision not to prosecute which I accept is an operational matter that is not within her competence and the public relations matters that were associated with that decision for which she is responsible to this House. She has not dealt with that issue at all.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Well no the Minister if I heard her correctly said that the Minister’s office is not involved in the decision as to when they make announcements at all. She made very clear to the House that her office had no involvement in that whatsoever. I have got to take her word for that. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is this speaking to the point of order? 
Charles Chauvel 
: Yes. My primary question should have put the Minister on notice that I was interested in knowing about the communication decisions that were made about the decision not to prosecute Mr Ambrose and liaison with the complainant about that matter. So as I say I am not asking her about the operational prosecution decision; I am asking her about the public relations and the communication with the Prime Minister for which she is responsible. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The Minister has made it clear unless she wishes to change her answer that she had no part in that communication decision at all. That is what I understood the Minister said and I have got to take the Minister’s word. She answered the question. She said she had no part to play in that whatsoever. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I sought an assurance from her that there was no relationship between the communication decision on the one hand and the absence of the Prime Minister overseas. I submit— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member’s question has been answered. He has got more supplementary questions he can use to pursue the matter further should he want. But in terms of that question he asked the Minister I thought was very clear in answering it. She said that her office had no involvement in the public relations decision if that is what the member wants to call it—the communication management of the decision made. That is a clear answer and I have got to take her word for that as the House does.  
Kris Faafoi 
: Given that charges were not laid does she agree with the Prime Minister’s comment that Mr Ambrose’s actions have been “deemed unlawful” and if so why? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: Firstly I have no responsibility for the Prime Minister. Secondly I always agree with the Prime Minister. 
Kris Faafoi 
: Given that the Prime Minister said in November last year that police “do have a little bit of spare time” to investigate the teapot tape how much did this investigation—done in police spare time—cost the taxpayer? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I understand that that question was asked of the police at the Law and Order Committee and they said they were unable to put a cost on the investigation. However anyone in this country has a right to make a complaint. The police deal with operational matters and Ministers do not get involved. 
Electricity—Generation from Renewable Sources 
8. 
JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: What progress has the Government made towards increasing the proportion of electricity generated from renewable energy sources in New Zealand? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 I am pleased to advise that electricity generated from renewable energy sources increased to 77 percent in 2011 up from 74 percent in 2010. The National-led Government is focused on ensuring that renewable electricity generation thrives in New Zealand and I am pleased to see us well on our way towards achieving our goal of 90 percent renewable generation by 2025.  
Jonathan Young 
: What environmental benefits come from increased renewable electricity generation? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: The Government is aiming for 90 percent of electricity generation to be from renewable energy sources by 2025 and there are significant environmental benefits from increased levels of renewable generation. These include a reduction in reliance on thermal electricity generation sources and a reduction in electricity generation emissions leading to a reduced environmental footprint.  
Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme—Treasury Monitoring of Deposits 
9. 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Finance 
: What written reports did he receive from the Treasury during the 5 months after his appointment as Minister of Finance in late 2008 describing the increases in deposits in finance companies after they entered the Crown guarantee scheme as referred to in paragraphs 6.2 and 6.5 of the Auditor-General’s performance audit report on the Treasury’s handling of the Crown Retail Deposit Scheme and what did those reports tell him if anything about how much the Crown’s exposure to those financial companies had increased? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance) 
: 
 Before I address the details of that question I just want to remind the member that the point of the deposit guarantee scheme which was set up by the previous Government in 2008 was to protect depositors in extraordinary financial times and administration of the scheme was delegated to the Secretary to the Treasury. The risk that finance company deposits would increase was recognised by the previous Government when it set up the scheme. Indeed allowing the institutions to continue lending was one of the scheme’s main aims. In terms of the member’s question I received no written Treasury reports specifically about the increase in deposits although I discussed the management of risks associated with the scheme regularly and intensively with Treasury.  
Hon David Parker 
: In the light of the fact that he received no reports during that period to that effect is he aware that the Auditor-General’s report says: “It took 5 months for the Treasury to begin monitoring” and that South Canterbury Finance’s deposit base increased by 25 percent in the first 4 months and it increased its loans including many new loans capitalising interest—in other words Ponzi schemes—and second mortgages all of which increased the risk profile under the guarantee? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I did not say I received no reports; I said I had received no written reports but the matters were discussed extensively. As the Auditor-General has already pointed out in the early stages of the scheme Treasury did not have immediately in place the kinds of arrangements you would expect for the management of such a large liability. But can I also remind the member that in early 2009 now 3 years ago South Canterbury Finance was regarded as a large strong sound finance company but in hindsight it now appears that its bad lending practices meant that regardless of the guarantee it was going to fail because of the impact of the global financial crisis. 
Hon David Parker 
: Has he heard that Treasury’s main excuse for not monitoring finance companies or advising the Minister—and I am not blaming the Minister here—as advised by the Auditor-General to the Finance and Expenditure Committee yesterday was that Treasury does not like to intervene in finance markets; and does he agree with the Auditor-General that that does not withstand scrutiny because the Crown had already intervened through the grant of the guarantee and should have been guarding against that risk growing unwisely? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: Yes I have heard that but we need to bear in mind that the deposit guarantee scheme as set up by the previous Government was correctly focused on protecting the depositors. It was not intended as a means of running the companies. As I said to the member earlier South Canterbury Finance was regarded as a big strong successful soundly run finance company. It actually took most of 2009 for anyone to get enough information about its activities to understand that it was likely to struggle to survive and matters went on for another 6 or 8 months with every effort being made to protect the taxpayer by supporting South Canterbury to trade through. As it happened it could not. 
Hon David Parker 
: Will he support Treasury appearing before the Finance and Expenditure Committee to answer questions about the Auditor-General’s criticism of Treasury’s monitoring and its failures to advise you as Minister which may have caused $100 million or more extra and avoidable cost to taxpayers? 
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: That is a matter for the select committee. It is not within the Minister’s purview. However I would ask the member to consider this issue: that although some people say there should have been more intervention no one has actually said what that intervention should have been short of becoming deemed directors of the company and therefore essentially taking over the running of it and that as I understand it was never the intention even of the previous Labour Government when it set up the guarantee. 
Hon David Parker 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was not whether he believed that the Finance and Expenditure Committee should have Treasury in front of it. That is for the Finance and Expenditure Committee. My question was whether he would support Treasury appearing in front of the Finance and Expenditure Committee to answer the Auditor-General’s criticisms.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: That was indeed the question. It would be helpful if the Minister were to answer that because that was the absolute thrust of the question—whether the Minister would support Treasury appearing in front of the select committee. The Minister made it clear he thought it was the select committee’s responsibility but the question asked for an opinion—whether the Minister would support it—and some attempt to answer that would be helpful.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH 
: I do not take a view about that. It is hypothetical. The committee will make up its own mind whether it wants to get Treasury in. All public agencies know they are open to parliamentary scrutiny.  
Accident Compensation Corporation—Release of Personal Information 
10. 
KEVIN HAGUE (Green) 
 to the  
Minister for ACC 
: What advice has she received about when ACC Board Chairman John Judge first became aware of the issues that were the subject of the December meeting between senior ACC managers Bronwyn Pullar and Michelle Boag; and if she hasn’t asked for that advice why not? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister for ACC) 
: 
 That particular meeting that the member is referring to is I know the subject of a matter that ACC has referred to the New Zealand Police. However I can refer the member to the written report from ACC for me that was placed on its website on 16 March this year and I can read from that. It says: “The client who received the file contacted an ACC Board member to discuss matters pertaining to her specific case. No specific reference was made to the data held or the breach of privacy. As is normal practice the Director referred the matter to the Chairman who in turn referred the matter to senior ACC management who confirmed the matter would be dealt with at an operational level.”  
Kevin Hague 
: Has she been briefed on all the correspondence between Ms Pullar and John Judge prior to that December meeting and what was she told?  
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: Well I do not know whether I have been because I do not know what all the correspondence is. I have received some correspondence which is the ministerial file which is held in the Minister for ACC’s office. There may well be other correspondence that I have not seen and therefore have not been briefed on.  
Kevin Hague 
: Does she believe that two senior managers from ACC met with Ms Pullar and Ms Boag on 1 December at a meeting arranged by an ACC board member with the knowledge of the ACC board chair during which they learnt of serious concerns about ACC processes and risk to the organisation yet apparently did not then report those concerns to either the chief executive officer or the board chair?  
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: What happened in that meeting is as I have said forming part of a matter that ACC has referred to the New Zealand Police. But I do know that it related as well to a massive breach of privacy and I would also like to take the opportunity to congratulate that member when those same documents were sent to him on referring them straight back to ACC.  
Kevin Hague 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know a bit about what the content of that meeting was but that was not my question. My question is about whether given what we know about the meeting how it was set up and the level of the risk to ACC that was exposed in that meeting the Minister believes the account that those senior managers reported that to no one.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister has been asked for an opinion on that matter and it would be helpful if the Minister was able to express an opinion without compromising any—I call the Hon Judith Collins.  
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: If I am told a matter by people then I accept their word unless I have evidence—real evidence—to the contrary.  
Kevin Hague 
: Given what she now knows of John Judge’s management of all the issues concerning the Pullar case does he retain her full confidence and does she believe he should remain chair of ACC?  
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: I do not know yet until the investigations have been completed as to who knew what in the Pullar matter. I do have confidence that the board of ACC has done an excellent job around the finances of ACC but I have on numerous occasions said that I am not yet satisfied that all of the provisions relating to privacy are in fact where I would like them to be. That is one of the reasons why ACC is working with the Privacy Commissioner and other independent people to make sure that it gets those processes right. 
Grant Robertson 
: Why did she forward the email from Michelle Boag to John Judge when she explicitly agreed with Ms Boag that that email would not be forwarded to anyone else? 
Hon JUDITH COLLINS 
: The member’s assumption is quite incorrect. 
Housing Affordability—Government Measures to Address 
11. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Labour—Rongotai) 
 to the  
Minister of Housing 
: What action is the Government taking to make housing more affordable? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY (Minister of Housing) 
: 
 The most important action this Government has taken is to manage the economy well during a difficult period. This includes less tax putting more money in people’s back pockets to pay their mortgage and a sustained period of low interest rates making homeownership more affordable for Kiwis. We have also changed the Building Act and the Resource Management Act to remove unnecessary red tape and we have increased the Welcome Home Loan caps. Since we have been in Government in fact 7500 people have bought their first home using the scheme—a total value of borrowing of $1 billion. That is an awful lot of first-home buying. 
Hon Annette King 
: Is he aware there is now a housing crisis in Christchurch with agents saying last week that it is impossible to find rental accommodation; if so how many of the over 600 Housing New Zealand Corporation rental houses currently boarded up with no decision made to repair or rebuild them could be made available to help relieve the growing housing problem? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: The member may not be aware but there is a red zone in Canterbury where a large number of those 600 houses are. The Government has made it pretty clear and residents have made it pretty clear that they want to shift out of them. If she is suggesting that we should leave State house tenants in the red zone but everyone else gets moved to safety I do not know where this Labour Party is going. 
Hon Annette King 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That answer was most unnecessary. I did not raise the red zone. I asked about 600 houses and asked how many of them could be used and made available for people where there is a housing shortage in Christchurch. It did not warrant that answer or attack on the Labour Party and on what we thought about the red zone. 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I made it clear that many of those houses are in the red zone. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The Minister’s answer I accept was somewhat more aggressive perhaps than necessary but he did indicate that most—he said the majority—of those 600 houses are in the red zone and that is why they would not be used. The member has the chance to pursue that answer further in further supplementary questions. 
Hon Annette King 
: Has Gerry Brownlee raised with him the problem faced by an 85-year-old Christchurch Housing New Zealand Corporation tenant who has been told to vacate her temporary accommodation on Saturday with no accommodation offered by Housing New Zealand Corporation and with her family finding it impossible to even contact the department and if so what action has he taken to assist this woman? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: It has not taken Gerry Brownlee to tell me of that particular case. I am aware of it and so is Housing New Zealand Corporation. There is no doubt that there are significant housing issues in Canterbury but it would be fair to say that over the last 12 months the pressure on Housing New Zealand Corporation tenants—the way that they have been managed shifted to alternative accommodation—has caused very little political or actual noise at all and Housing New Zealand Corporation has done an excellent job. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Just before I call the next question I thought the question asked what was done about this particular case which the Minister has acknowledged he is familiar with. Given the nature of the Minister’s answer perhaps he could have said what was being done for this person since he is familiar with it. 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I was asked whether Gerry Brownlee had told me about it. I started my answer with that but I am happy to develop the answer if you would like me to.  
Hon Annette King 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked whether Gerry Brownlee had raised it and what he had done about it if it had been raised. In his answer he said he was aware of it so he could have told us.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I accept that people interject when they should not—on my right here—when a point of order is being considered. One could technically argue that it is two questions. Had the Minister been absolutely 100 percent helpful in his answering of these supplementary questions I might have ruled differently but given the fairly aggressive answers that have been given I will ask the Minister to provide the further information—what has he done to assist this person? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I had been assured that Housing New Zealand is looking at the case. It looks at many hundreds if not thousands of cases. I am not completely up to speed with where that one is at the moment. I think if the member gets permission for me to release the details on that particular woman perhaps I will look at providing her with a detailed response.  
Dr Jian Yang 
: What recent reports has the Minister seen regarding home affordability? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I have seen a report as recently as this morning by Massey University’s real estate analysis unit stating that in the 3 months ended February the national affordability measure has improved even more. According to the report falling house prices rising wages and falling mortgage interest rates have all combined to make housing its most affordable in 8 years.  
Hon Annette King 
: I seek leave to table the said report that the Minister has just mentioned which goes on to say— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Which report is this? 
Hon Annette King 
: This is the home affordability report from Massey University. It goes on to say that there is demand causing pressure in the housing market particularly in Auckland and Christchurch.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Rino Tirikatene 
: What reports has he received on affordability and overcrowding in Christchurch—for example of 11 people crowded into a two-bedroom house people renting a garage to live in for $160 a week or the young man sleeping in his car when he is not delivering pizzas because he cannot afford the rental or find a place to live? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I am aware of some of those media reports. I think Opposition members need to realise that yes there are housing pressures in Canterbury due to the earthquake but they should also remember that when we set up temporary accommodation whether in the form of caravans or the units that are very successful in Kaiapoi and Linwood now the Opposition parties attacked that and opposed it. They cannot have it both ways. 
Hone Harawira 
: Why did the Government get rid of the rural housing fund leaving more than 7000 Tai Tokerau households without the badly needed renovations that had been approved under the fund? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Because we decided to put that amount of money plus some into the development of new housing particularly papakainga housing on multiple-owned Maori land or other land that Maori and iwi use. That fund has been very successful. We figured that new houses well insulated and well designed are much better than patching up roofs that are leaking and rusting and patching up houses that are uninsulated and rotting which is what happened under the previous Labour Government.  
Hon Annette King 
: Has he got his priorities right when he has Housing New Zealand Corporation restructuring its services at a cost of $80 million— 
Andrew Little 
: How much? 
Hon Annette King 
: —$80 million—getting rid of staff and overspending its transformation project budget by $8 million so far and when you have a woman in Christchurch who cannot get a house from Housing New Zealand Corporation and to this moment nothing has been done about it? Where is this better service? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Housing New Zealand Corporation provides almost 70000 houses across New Zealand. That is 70000 families—actually that is 220000 people. That is a huge commitment. The fact that it is increasing the housing supply in places like Auckland is the right direction. What happened under previous Governments where you had one person rattling around a four-bedroom house and entertaining gangs in State houses and all those things are being put behind us. I believe that Housing New Zealand Corporation is heading in the right direction. 
Denis O’Rourke 
: Will the Government regulate the exploding home-rental increases in Christchurch?  
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I refer the member to the answer in the House by the Hon Gerry Brownlee in recent weeks. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I think it is unreasonable to refer a member to an answer in the House in recent weeks. The Minister is the Minister of Housing he has responsibility for Housing New Zealand Corporation and I think he should answer the question.  
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: I do not think he was asking particularly about Housing New Zealand Corporation; I think he was talking about the rental market in general. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the Minister. The question did indeed ask about the general housing market; it did not specify. To sort this matter out I invite Denis O’Rourke to repeat his question because he should have realised that the Minister is not responsible for the general housing market. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Where does it say that this Minister is not responsible for housing practice and building and construction in this country? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. I will hear the Hon Phil Heatley first. 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Can I introduce Winston Peters to the Minister for Building and Construction. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The House will come to order and stop this nonsense. Someone will be leaving very soon unless there is silence all around. This nonsense will stop. Of course the Minister is not responsible for markets. I have not cut out the member’s question. I was not happy with the answer the Minister gave; it was not good enough. However he points out that the question went beyond his responsibilities so I invite the member to repeat his question to make it clearly within the Minister’s responsibility and I expect an answer. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It may or may not assist the Minister but he is the Minister responsible for housing policy. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member will resume his seat. It is nothing to do with the Opposition which Minister is responsible for what; that is a Government matter. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have heard the member sufficiently and as far as I am concerned it has nothing to do with the order of this House. I have ruled on the matter and I will hear Denis O’Rourke’s supplementary question. 
Denis O’Rourke 
: The question was will the Government regulate the exploding home-rental increases in Christchurch? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: We are not considering that at this time. 
Denis O’Rourke 
: Will the Government do anything about the exploding home-rental increases in Christchurch? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: The Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery announced last week that we are providing more temporary accommodation in Christchurch to provide more supply. Clearly we have got new developments coming on stream and we believe that supply will help meet demand and will therefore drive down rents and house prices. That is what our primary objective is. 
Denis O’Rourke 
: Given that some people forced out of their homes in the red zone in Christchurch cannot afford to buy a replacement home will the Government provide some form of affordable bridging finance to assist them? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: At the moment there are a number of forms of finance that the Government does supply. Clearly we are buying people out of housing properties in the red zone so they can take that cheque and buy elsewhere. I am assured by the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery that when he reads a newspaper there are sections and house packages available. We also have the temporary housing villages. We have the accommodation supplement. Those who are seeking rental in Housing New Zealand Corporation properties have the income-related rent supplement. Yes we are open-minded to any other interventions but at this stage we believe that our progress so far is sufficient. If we need to ramp up we will.  
Denis O’Rourke 
: Given the growing gap between accommodation allowances and actual rentals in Christchurch will the Government review those allowances? 
Hon PHIL HEATLEY 
: Those particular allowances are a matter for the Minister for Social Development. I believe that they are passed through her department so it might be best to put that to that Minister. 
Treaty of Waitangi Settlements—Progress 
12. 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
 to the  
Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: What progress has the Government made towards enacting deeds of settlement with iwi in legislation? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 This morning the Ngati Manawa and Ngati Whare claims settlement bills and the Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Bill all passed their third readings. After question time we will debate the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill and the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. This is a very significant number of Treaty settlements to be progressed against a historical average of around 1.7 bills per year. 
Louise Upston 
: What has contributed to this progress? 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON 
: First the Government has taken steps to increase the rate at which historical claims negotiations are resolved by the Crown and iwi through better resourcing and taking innovative steps to improve negotiations and secondly there is the support and cooperation of this House in progressing these important bills. Today we have seen members sit during the extended hours of 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. in order to give three bills third readings without having to go into urgency. I am very grateful to all members for their assistance. 
Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill 
Third Reading 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
 on behalf of the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: I move  
That the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill be now read a third time 
. Kei taku iwi kua pa mai tenei honore ki a au mai i Minita Finlayson kia arahina tenei kaupapa te pepa tuatahi mo ta tatau kereme. Na reira e tika ana kia mihi ki a koutou kua tae pai ki tenei Whare Paremata. A na reira nau mai ki te kaupapa ewhakakotahi ai tatau i tenei ra tena koutou. Kei te tangi au ki a ratau kua ngaro atu ratau e mahi ana i te kereme me era katoa kua tukuna atu e koutou ki te kopu o te whaea Papatuanuku. Na reira tena koutou. Ko Tom Gemmell tetahi. Noho tahi maua i Te Aute i Te Runanga o Ngati Kahungunu i era wa na me okioki pai ratau i roto i te Kaihanga. Engari i tenei wa ka nui te hari te koa ki te mihi atu ki a koutou kua tae mai nei i tenei rangi tena koutou tena koutou nau mai hara mai ra. 
[ 
My people the honour of leading this matter pertaining to our claims has been bestowed upon me by Minister Finlayson. Therefore it is appropriate that I greet you for arriving safely at Parliament. Welcome to the occasion that unites us today; greetings. I mourn those we have lost those who worked on the claims and all of those you have returned to the womb of mother Earth. And so greetings. Tom Gemmell was one. We lived together at Te Aute and worked together at Te Runanga o Ngati Kahungunu and so may they rest in peace with the Creator. Nonetheless at this moment I am delighted to greet you for coming here today. Thank you and welcome. 
] 
Although I was unable to participate in the policy decisions about the Ngati Pahauwera settlement due to a declared conflict of interest it is with great pleasure that I stand to speak today in the third reading of this bill the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill. I stand to acknowledge the children of Tamatea Arikinui mai Tawhiti Tureia Te Huki Puruaute. I pay tribute to those who have travelled from the brow of the sacred mountain Tawhiwhirangi from the ancestral waters of Mohaka. I also pay tribute to those who for years also travelled from the lands of our tipuna Te Kahu o Te Rangi bearing the grievances and aspirations of Ngati Pahauwera. Those who have passed live on in our history live on in our people and most important today live on in New Zealand law. I remember today Wikitoria Hapeta Aerial Aranui Te Awhi Winiata Raymond Joe—my cousin—Charlie Hirini George Hawkins Reay Paku and Tom Gemmell.  
Tangitu ki te moana 
Maungaharuru ki uta 
Mohaka te awa 
Ko Ngati Pahauwera te iwi. 
This whakatauki describes the essence of Ngati Pahauwera from the mountains to the sea from the river to the iwi. Maungaharuru forest lands provide food and resources; Tangitu our coastal territory and fisheries. The Mohaka River’s spiritual cultural and economic value to the people of Pahauwera is immeasurable.  
Te tapu o Irakewa.  
Mohaka tomairangi.  
Mohaka te waiora.  
Made sacred by Irakewa.  
Mohaka the unifier.  
Mohaka the life-giver.  
The people of Pahauwera comprise a confederation of hapu centred around Mohaka on the eastern coast of Te Ika-a-Maui. Ngati Pahauwera stretches from the Ohinepaka Stream south of Wairoa to the Waikari River inland to the Maungaharuru Ranges and north to the Waiau River. In 1994 the Maori Land Court appointed eight people to represent Ngati Pahauwera under section 30 of the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 for the prosecution and settlement of the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty claims against the Crown. On 8 May 2008 the Crown and the section 30 representatives signed terms of negotiation in Wellington. On 30 September 2008 the Crown and Ngati Pahauwera signed an agreement in principle which covered the foreshore and seabed interests of Ngati Pahauwera as well as their historical Treaty claims. Tom Gemmell one of the leading forces behind the Pahauwera claim died just weeks after signing that agreement in principle. Moe mai e te rangatira e te hoa. [ 
Rest there the leader and the friend. 
] 
On 5 November 2010 Ngati Pahauwera presented a deed of settlement detailing the historical Treaty settlement aspects of this agreement to their people. The deed received overwhelming support from the Ngati Pahauwera people and was ratified and signed on 17 December at Mohaka. Ngati Pahauwera were represented in their negotiations by the trustees of the Ngati Pahauwera Development Trust which took over responsibility from the section 30 representatives.  
The final reading of this bill today marks the fruition of many years of hard work. I would like to commend in particular the current and former trustees of the Ngati Pahauwera Development Trust—Toro Waaka Kuki Green Charles Lambert Gerald Aranui Sissiel Henderson Arthur Gemmell Tureiti Moxon and Tania Hodges—for all their hard work and diligence which has resulted in a very strong settlement. Ngati Pahauwera walked a long path to reach this point and can be proud of what they have negotiated—i-ha!  
I am pleased the settlement acknowledges Ngati Pahauwera’s relationship with their whenua as well as their relationship with their awa and moana. I believe that this settlement will support the healing of the relationship between Ngati Pahauwera and the Crown. I hope that the apology which forms part of the settlement will also assist with this healing. Ngati Pahauwera acknowledge that the Crown’s apology represents its commitment to build a positive relationship with Ngati Pahauwera and to honour its obligations under the Treaty for the good of this and future generations. The settlement will be a key step in allowing the iwi to move forward economically and culturally. The financial redress will provide Ngati Pahauwera with an ability to focus on and develop their future. Today we are celebrating the beginning of a new relationship between the Crown and Ngati Pahauwera. Ngati Pahauwera is demonstrating a spirit of cooperation and generosity in the relationship by gifting back to all people of New Zealand much of Te Heru o Tureia. I hope that the Crown is a worthy partner in this new relationship. I also hope that the people of Ngati Pahauwera benefit from an ongoing relationship between the Crown and Ngati Pahauwera as Treaty partners. 
Na reira koutou ma mohio ana au i te mamae o tenei mahi whakatakoto kereme whakawhiti korero i te Karauna era ahuatanga katoa. Nga mea kua mate i tera wa tae noa ki tenei rangi na reira ka nui nga mihi ki a koutou kua tae ki tenei rangi. Ahakoa kua oti nga mahi mo tenei kereme he wa hou mo to tatou iwi. He timatanga kia pakari ai to tatou iwi kia whakatokia nga whakaaro ataahua kia puawai to tatau iwi. Mehemea kei roto i te ohanga mehemea kei roto i te kotahitanga o nga hapu mehemea kia noho pakari ai i roto i nga tikanga o Ngati Pahauwera o Ngati Kahungungu. Na reira kare e roa aku korero ki a koutou heoi ano kei konei au te kaikorero tuatahi ki te mihi atu ki a koutou i tenei ra ki te tautoko i tenei mahi tenei kereme kua oti pai i a koutou. 
[ 
I know the hurt associated with the Treaty claims process holding discussions with the Crown and those sorts of things. People have died during that period until this day and so I congratulate you for coming today. Although the work pertaining to this claim is complete it is a new era for our tribe. It is a start so that our people can be strong and be able to institute fascinating ideas for our tribe to flourish be it in the economy the collaboration of subtribes or a robust set of protocols for Ngati Pahauwera and Ngati Kahungunu. My address to you is about finished so here I am the first speaker to acknowledge you today and to endorse this role and this claim which you have completed well. 
] 
I am pleased and honoured to be here today to mark this momentous occasion and support the final reading of this bill. 
Ko Tawhirirangi te maunga 
Ko Mohaka te awa 
Ko Kahuoterangi te tangata 
Ko Ngati Pahauwera te iwi. 
[ 
Tawhirirangi is the mountain Mohaka is the river Kahuoterangi is the chief and Ngati Pahauwera is the tribe. 
] 
I commend this bill to the House. 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour—Ikaroa-Rawhiti) 
: 
 Tena koe. Ki a koutou o Pahauwera e tae tahi e tae kaha atu i konei i te wahi o te Whare Miere e mihi kau ana i a koutou. Nga mea pakeke Haami koutou katoa nga kuia nga koroua e mihi kau ana. Tena koutou mo to kaha rawa e tae ana e peka ana i konei hei rongo ki te korero o tatau e mahi atu pera i to tatau Minita Maori. No reira tena koutou.  
Na te pai o te rangi nei ko tenei te timata o te otinga mo koutou. Ahakoa te roaroa haere o te whakaae kua whakaae atu koutou kua tae atu i konei i te manaaki atu. Mo ratau e rere atu pera i a te whaea a Sophie a Tom a ratau ma e tangi hoki te ngakau. Engari na te pai hoki kei te ora kaha atu te ahua o Pahauwera. No reira tena koutou.  
Mo te koroua a Charlie King kare au e kite e mihi kau ana. Ahakoa te tangata o Nanaia e mihi atu ki a Charlie ki a koutou katoa tena koutou. A tena koe e te Minita e Chris e pai ana i tae atu tatau i konei hei oti pai tenei. He tino take atu tenei to tatau Minita a Pita mo ratau o tera wahi.  
He tika atu nga korero mo te pakanga e ngaro atu te whenua e tangohia atu to ratau wahi a te Kawana e te mahi taurekareka ki a ratau. Ahakoa i nga wahi o Te Heru o Tureia i te wahi o Mohaka te wahi o Raupunga i reira ke e mahi atu nga mahi. No reira e pai ana e tae atu tatau i konei. Ahakoa e tu kaha atu nga maunga i reira to ratau awa o Mohaka he tino rekareka atu i te tae atu tatau i konei mo tenei otinga.  
[ 
Thank you. I wish to acknowledge Ngati Pahauwera who have come here as one to the Beehive. To the elders including Haami greetings. I congratulate you on your strength in coming here to listen to those of us like the Minister of Maori Affairs. And so I salute you.  
Because it is a beautiful day this is the beginning of the end of the process for you. Although the process took a long time you have given your consent and are here to take care of the matter. I mourn those who have passed away such as Sophie and Tom. But it is wonderful that the nature of Ngati Pahauwera is clearly felt. And so I thank you.  
I wish to greet the elder Charlie King whom I cannot see here. Although he is Nanaia’s man I congratulate Charlie and all of you. Thank you. I want to congratulate the Minister Chris; it is great that we are completing this bill. This is an important matter to our Minister Pita and to those from that area.  
The stories about the wars are correct: their land was taken by the Crown through its despicable actions. Whether it was at places like Te Heru o Tureia Mohaka or Raupunga it was doing its work. Therefore it is good that we are here. Although their mountains and river Mohaka stand proudly it is delightful that we are here for the completion of this bill. 
] 
I want to mihi to the negotiators to Toro Waaka and co.—and it is no good naming them all because I think a whole lot of them have been negotiating up there—and to the negotiating team. If you start naming people you will leave somebody out so kia ora to the negotiating team. It is important to acknowledge that during the course of the negotiations Ngati Pahauwera made allowances for delays in the negotiations while the Crown worked through policy issues around the co-management of natural resources including rivers. They put a lot of effort into parking up until the Crown had its act together and that needs to be recognised. The negotiations were unique in that at the outset the Crown and Ngati Pahauwera sought to address both the historical Treaty claims and the foreshore and seabed interests of Ngati Pahauwera in a single negotiation. As that legislation was realigned that was pulled out and they continued with the settlement today.  
The basis of the claims is very telling. It is about the failure to ensure that Ngati Pahauwera retained sufficient lands for its future needs through land purchases and confiscations in the Ngati Pahauwera rohe successive pieces of native land legislation and the actions of the Native Land Court. There is some special unique redress in this settlement for Ngati Pahauwera. The effects of war following military conflict with Paimarirein the Napier area in 1866 saw the Crown confiscating all Maori land between the Waikari and Esk Rivers. This included lands in which Ngati Pahauwera held interests even though they had fought alongside the Crown forces. So they did not get thanked very much. I am glad Minister Finlayson that today we are making this special effort to ensure that that is recognised.  
The special unique redress needs to be mentioned and it is about the transfer and gift back of the Te Heru o Tureia conservation area subject to 168 hectares of land around the summit of Te Heru o Tureia and 52 hectares alongside the Mohaka River. Hangi stones cannot be extracted—I read a very interesting point about these hangi stones—from the Mohaka or Te Hoe Rivers without Ngati Pahauwera consent. It is fascinating that we have put a lot of effort into that.  
I hope as you go along in relation to co-management with the conservation order that those issues relevant to metal extraction are truly discussed and that the benefits and the costs of those metals are something that they get a fair whack out of because they have been getting a pittance or nothing at all. We all know the value of shingle and metal at the moment. That we are importing steel parts from overseas to make up the road structures in place of metal is something that fascinates me. I hope that these negotiators and the Crown team are very clear on the value of that metal that may be extracted.  
Ngati Pahauwera have the right to nominate members of any special tribunal to hear and report on applications in relation to the Mohaka River water conservation order or make a new water conservation order in relation to the Mohaka River or its tributaries. That allocation is quite important in the sense of the water issue that is starting to rise up—dare I mention it now—and I hope that we are serious and clear about what their rights are in relation to that water.  
The unique redress also recognises that Ngati Pahauwera and the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council have agreed to enter into an agreement about gravel extraction from the Mohaka River. This I think Minister is something that we have to labour on—excuse the pun—because there are these partnerships already in place in some of the other settlements and I am not too sure whether they are listening to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. I hope we are clear and we are sure about making sure that they have an equal say at least with the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and that they come to agreement about who does the extraction when why what for and of course—I know this is being pragmatic—the return on it because I think that more than the timber and the forestry and everything else gravel is going to be a high-priced commodity.  
In the standard redress the protocols and letters of introduction to Ministers and local authorities—that is lined up over here—again like the Ruapani paepae the Ministers and iwi paepae get together and are supposed to meet yearly. I think it is already starting to fail. I would hope that you would keep an eye on that Minister and make sure that it does happen. It is too easy for people to say: “Yep we have got a charter with you. Yep we have got an agreement and we don’t want to go and see you Maoris down Mohaka or wherever.”  
The $20 million includes the value of the Mohaka Crown forest licensed lands and it needs to be noted that the accumulated rentals will also transfer. Thirteen properties are to be transferred as commercial redress including the Mohaka Forest Rawhiti Station and five surplus Wairoa District Council properties. Sixteen sites are to be vested in Ngati Pahauwera as cultural redress.  
These are two great places: Raupunga and Mohaka. You know they have some special characteristics. They have got a whole lot of kids who can play the saxophone. I listened to them on Saturday—11 of them. I do not think there is anywhere else in the world where they have got 11 kids who can play the saxophone. There are some young fellas who live with their grandfather who still catch kahawai like the grandfather used to catch them. They were kind people and they have got a very interesting whare down in Mohaka have they not? Rino reckons he used to go there a lot of times and have big feeds down there in Mohaka.  
Certainly I want to remember those people who have passed on. Sophie Keefe was an old battler. She used to tell me that the thing with the Pahauwera people is that you have got to be careful because sometimes when they are saying yes they mean no and sometimes when they are saying no they mean yes. It sounds like other people.  
I am glad of the challenge being settled but I would like to say to the Ngati Pahauwera people and to our Minister of Maori Affairs quite simply that the whare still sits there unfinished. It is great that this journey of settlement happens today. I am not saying you should use the settlement money to finish it Minister but I am looking at you—and the other Minister because he is the Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage. Sophie Keefe would be very happy and so would a whole lot of other people if it was finished because it is not finished for whatever reason whatever matter. I want it registered in the House that I said that to you—both of you.  
Tenei ano te mihi i roto i aku. E mihi kau ana i a koutou kia pai to hoki ki te kainga kaua koe e noho roaroa atu i te wahi nei. Rorirori te haere o wetahi mahi atu i nga mahi i konei. Hoki kaha atu i te kainga. No reira tena koutou tena tatau kia kaha. 
[ 
I wish to congratulate you again. I thank you. Travel home safely and do not stay away from here too long. Some who do the work here do crazy things. Be strong as you return home. So congratulations to you collectively and to us as well; be strong. 
] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 I too acknowledge the people of Ngati Pahauwera and welcome those who have travelled from the Hawke’s Bay and are here in the gallery to listen to this the third reading of their claims settlement bill the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill. I acknowledge those who have worked so hard to make this day possible and I join in what Mr Horomia said about what kind people they are—generous in spirit. My first meeting with them was to tell the trustees that there was to be a review of the foreshore and seabed legislation so that part of the negotiations would be on hold and there was to be a review of river arrangements and that part of the negotiation was to be on hold. But I think they would agree with me that the new Hawke’s Bay model is going to work very well and I acknowledge the work they did with Fran Wilde and with the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council to put those new mechanisms in place.  
In their dealings with the Crown the trustees have been gracious. They have conducted themselves with great honour and dignity throughout all negotiations and I place on record how much I enjoyed working with them. I am very very pleased that many are here today to witness this third reading so that their Treaty settlement can pass into law.  
This bill settles the Treaty grievances of Ngati Pahauwera. In this bill the Crown acknowledges its breaches of the Treaty offers an apology to Ngati Pahauwera and provides for cultural financial and commercial redress. The passage of the bill marks a historic point in time a point where the Crown and the iwi stand together as the Crown takes responsibility for its past actions and omissions some of which I want to refer to now. During the process of land alienation that began in the 1850s the Crown failed to make sure that Ngati Pahauwera had sufficient lands for its future needs. By the mid 20th century Ngati Pahauwera was virtually landless and ever since they have suffered economic social and cultural impoverishment.  
During the New Zealand Wars Ngati Pahauwera communities at Mohaka were left virtually defenceless because their warriors were away with the Crown’s forces. The Crown ignored warnings of a possible attack on communities at Mohaka. When the attack occurred the Crown provided minimal assistance to help Ngati Pahauwera recover from the attack on their pa and kainga.  
There is a detailed apology in the deed of settlement and I hope that very soon I will be able to travel to Mohaka to formally read that apology out. The deed of settlement also records that Ngati Pahauwera acknowledge that the Crown’s apology represents its commitment to build a positive relationship with Ngati Pahauwera and to honour its obligations under the Treaty for the good of this and future generations. So they accept the apology offered by the Crown and look forward to building a positive relationship with the Crown.  
Ngati Pahauwera has travelled a long but rather different road than is usual to have their claims addressed by the Crown. In 1994 the Maori Land Court made an order appointing eight people to represent the iwi in the prosecution and settlement of their Treaty claims against the Crown. The tribunal reported on the historical claims of Ngati Pahauwera in 1992 with the great Mohaka River Report and in 2004 with the  
Mohaka ki Ahuriri Report 2004 
. In May 2008 terms of negotiation were signed for a combined negotiation of their Treaty of Waitangi claims and their foreshore and seabed interests. An agreement in principle setting out the broad components of the Crown’s settlement offer was signed on 30 September 2008.  
Since then the trustees and the Crown have negotiated very intensively. A draft deed of settlement to settle the claims was ready for ratification on 4 November 2010. An overwhelming 99 percent of those who voted in the ratification of the deed endorsed the work of the negotiators in approving the deed of settlement. On that wonderful day 17 December 2010 Ngati Pahauwera and I signed the deed of settlement at Mohaka. I was very pleased that Mr Horomia was there to support me. It was a very special occasion for all those who attended.  
This bill gives effect to the agreement to a final settlement of all historical claims of Ngati Pahauwera. Its provisions enable cultural redress to be provided to the iwi including as Mr Horomia said the vesting of Te Heru o Tureia in Ngati Pahauwera and the subsequent gift of a major portion of the area to the people of New Zealand as a historic reserve and the retention by Ngati Pahauwera of Nakunaku as a historic reserve and subject to a conservation covenant Te Heru o Tureia. There is the vesting of 14 other cultural redress sites. There is provision for Ngati Pahauwera to be involved in managing the taking of hangi stones from the Mohaka River and a statutory acknowledgment over the relevant part of the Earthquake Slip Conservation Area.  
The bill provides for some aspects of commercial redress: financial redress of $20 million authorising the transfer of five former Wairoa District Council properties to the iwi the purchase of licensed land within the Mohaka Forest and a right of first refusal over Crown land in a designated area. As Ministers are compelled to say every time a settlement bill is debated in this place the redress provided can never fully compensate for the loss of life land and opportunity. I trust that the agreement reached with Ngati Pahauwera which is embodied in this bill will enhance the relationship between the Crown and Ngati Pahauwera into the future.  
The enactment of this settlement is a historic milestone. It is a very important step in this country’s progress towards settling historical Treaty claims. I know that you Mr Assistant Speaker Robertson and all members of the House are increasingly aware of the large volume of bills proceeding through the House at various stages. For example four other Treaty bills are being read for a third time today. All these bills represent significant progress and in different ways the resolution of complex and longstanding Treaty claims. I acknowledge the work continuing all around the country to achieve Treaty settlements.  
There are many people who have contributed to this settlement over the years. I acknowledge the contributions of my predecessor the Hon Dr Michael Cullen as well as those of the Hon Mr Horomia who signed the agreement in principle with Ngati Pahauwera in 2008 and is always such a good person to chat through issues as they arise. I acknowledge my Ministerial colleagues in particular the Minister of Maori Affairs the Minister of Conservation and the Minister for Land Information.  
I wish to acknowledge the valuable support and contribution made through the work of many Government departments and officials who contributed to this settlement. I have already mentioned the great contribution of Fran Wilde my negotiator who thoroughly enjoyed working with Ngati Pahauwera. I know she would very much want to be present today but her work as chair of the Greater Wellington Regional Council has taken her out of town I think.  
Most important I want to acknowledge the hard work and commitment of Ngati Pahauwera and particularly those who negotiated this settlement and to thank them for their dedication on behalf of their iwi. It has been absolutely vital in the path towards settlement. I know that this claim has dominated their lives and negotiating this settlement has come at tremendous personal cost. I do not think many New Zealanders really understand the sacrifices made by leaders such as these on behalf of their people and I commend them for their commitment. But our business is not yet concluded. I know that Ngati Pahauwera want very much to talk to me about the marine and coastal area in the near future and I want to tell them that I am looking forward to this negotiation.  
In conclusion I wish all the best for Ngati Pahauwera—their elders their descendants their negotiating team and their trustees—and wish them all the very best for the future. 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 A kati e te Kaihautu o te Whare tena koe. Huri rawa atu ki enei o o tatau manuhiri kua tatu mai ki Te Upoko o Te Ika kua tomo mai ki te ana o te raiona kua tae mai ki te matakitaki i o koutou huanga nga kanohi Maori nga kaitorangapu Maori e whakawerawera nei me pehea ranei ka kitea he rongoa e murua ai nga nawe i tukua mai ki a tatau mai i te taenga mai o nga Pakeha me o ratau pakanga ki o tatau matua Maori. I tenei rangi ko koutou kua tatu mai ki te tuku i nga whakaaro i taimaha ai tatau te Maori kia rere kia uru mai ai tetahi whakaaro hou e hou tonu ai ki roto i te hinengaro te ngakau me te wairua o o tatau tamariki a tona wa. Hei a ratau nga taonga e korerongia ake nei e tatau ahakoa kei te kapu o te ringa kaumatua i tenei ra a tona wa ma ratau e whakatinana. Na reira nau mai piki mai kake mai. Tena koutou katoa. 
[ 
Well then Mr Speaker of the House thank you. I turn now to these of our visitors who have arrived here in Wellington into the lion’s den to watch their relations Maori representatives and politicians sweating over how indeed solutions will be found to take away grievances handed down to us since the arrival of Pakehas and their wars inflicted upon our Maori parents. Today you are the ones who have landed here to give us your thoughts as to why we as Maori have been weighed down and in doing that allow it to fly away and let in fresh ideas that will become entrenched in the mind hearts and spirits of our children who will in the future take over resources that we are talking about but are in the hands of the old people today. They will implement these when they take over in the future. Therefore welcome clamber aboard mount up. Greetings to you all. 
] 
As I have said in Maori I acknowledge the presence of the members of Ngati Pahauwera and their leaders. I am taking a slightly different tack from the one I took in my speech in dealing with Ngati Maniapoto because as I predicted I mentioned two men and no women so I suffered a very severe censuring outside. So I welcome them in their uniform strength and I welcome them as someone who comes from an area in New Zealand that has yet to experience the full range of emotions that one goes through from having a long protracted settlement exercise and finally getting to this point—that is consummation with the passage of the legislation the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill. We from the north look forward to that experience.  
I want to remind those of us who are in the House how far we have come. It is important that we recite some of the names of the people related to this whanau today. Indeed I remember in the late 1970s attending Maori Council meetings in the esteemed old Maori affairs select committee room and seeing such people as Charles Mohi Timi Kara Turi Kara Te Huata and a host of other whanau from this part. They have gone on and oh but that they were here today to witness this Parliament providing an opportunity for the expression of culture providing an opportunity for an apology to be made and passing a special piece of legislation that moves on from the old paternalistic trust board model that afflicted a lot of the Maori tribes.  
During the Second World War attempts were made to resolve land grievances. There was the Myers Commission in my area and we see here in an earlier time a reference to the Stout and Ngata exercise. In fairness to the people of that time without having to pay too much or do too much they were trying to get away with a lot but that was the spirit of that time. And as the Attorney-General and Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations has said this current generation of taxpayers can never fully meet the burden if it was to be fully monetarily tabulated of this bout of alienation etc.  
But what we do here today is pass legislation strengthening the status of this group of tangata whenua and also endowing back into their ownership either in actual asset title or other interests such as reflected in statutory instruments so that the management of catchment the management of rivers and the improvement of the environment do not take place in spite of their existence but because of who they are and the contributions credible at an economic social and cultural level of this group of New Zealanders the tangata whenua of Mohaka—Ngati Pahauwera. That is something to celebrate. There may have been elements in the last Parliament that were not too keen on it. Suffice to say they now have new jobs.  
I would like to remind everyone that there are challenges in these settlements because they are often happening in parts of Aotearoa where the economy is not strong. Many of their relations are at the moment it has been reported to us by Parekura Horomia having a hang of a time at that Wairoa freezing works. For those of you who come from Te Wahanga Whare Patu Miti from that particular background in the freezing works etc. as Parekura has no doubt reported to you and as we report back to you we stand alongside with you. We do not want to see in those parts of New Zealand our people made increasingly irrelevant so the only option they have is to disappear to Australia and our maraes get lonely and our mokopuna grow up as Aussies or “Mozzies” not New Zealand - based Maori.  
That actually increases the difficulty of the task of turning these settlements into a permanent legacy that generates wealth and income certainly if it is a part of Aotearoa where there are big economic challenges. I can say this without a sliver of doubt because I come from such an area in the very far north so all power to the stewards to the governors and to the supporters. There will always be differences of opinion. There will always be the challenges etc. but unfortunately that defines us at a very deep level as to who we are as Maori.  
The other thing I have said in earlier speeches is about the centrality of rivers because rivers remind us about the difficulty of environmental management and they remind us that as we go forward and try to grow the size of our economy we are going to rely more and more on water. As we rely on water that is going to throw up a new debate as to how can we manage water in such a way that people who are not as judicious in their use of water suffer a penalty and those who are clever in their use of water suffer a benefit.  
It may come to pass that a future Government wants to introduce a raft of rights to do with water. Well I say in this House today that the moment that happens we will see a new bout of Maori negotiations because Maori business where it is to do with natural resources is never over. Treaty business where it is to do with natural resources—that bottle has been uncorked—is never over but it can be dealt with if it is dealt with very openly in goodwill on both sides. After all rain falls from God in equal distribution upon saint and sinner. I see that when I think of rivers as a new challenge coming for tira—groups—such as this one and other Maori groups etc.  
It may not be in the time of a number of us as parliamentarians but unfortunately once scarcity meets industry—and water is the resource that people pursue—rest assured an allocation debate will take place. Maori will be involved in that allocation debate. The final shape and form that the Maori presence takes in a water allocation debate that is for the future but do not for a moment think that it is going to be written out of the script like as I said some angry farmer on a regional council wanting to dismiss the local Maoris. Unfortunately for him his grandchildren could be marrying one.  
We stand and support the sitting member Parekura Horomia; support Dr Sharples who is closely related to this group; and support the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and we and think of the people who have made their own contributions to these groups. After all it was only in 1975 that we had the passage of the Treaty of Waitangi legislation and it drifted for a while but over the last 5 years it has certainly gathered a great deal of pace. No one on this side of the House wants to see that pace slow. I am disappointed the Greens have a different view. Fortunately the influence of their view is proportionately related to the size of their numbers in this House.  
We wish them well and we wish well those who have taken a responsibility to steer the waka forward. Tena koutou. Kia ora tatou katoa. 
DAVID CLENDON (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Kei te mihi nui ki a koutou e te manuhiri nga hapu katoa o Ngati Pahauwera tena koutou katoa. 
[ 
Thank you Mr Speaker. To you the visitors and all of you of Ngati Pahauwera I acknowledge you greatly. Salutations. 
] 
I am pleased to stand on behalf of the Greens to express our support for the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill. Contrary to what my esteemed colleague has just said we are by no means interested in delaying the progress of any settlement legislation but we are entirely unwilling to sacrifice fairness or justice for speed. That is our position and I thank the member for giving me an opportunity to restate it. 
We acknowledge the very long road the very considerable hardship and loss that have been suffered by Ngati Pahauwera over many many years. We acknowledge their leaders past and present whose work whose determination and whose perseverance have brought them to this place to this point if not of resolution at least a considerable step towards that final resolution. 
Sadly reading the history—the background to this settlement bill and the history of Ngati Pahauwera—is all too familiar. It is a story of people who in the turbulent times in this country in the mid 19th century were obliged to participate in wars and conflict not of their making and to their considerable loss. They lost not only their homes and resources; they lost their friends their whanau. It was a bad time in this country. We saw the destruction of social and economic as well as physical resources and systems; the structures that supported and had supported those people over many centuries were destroyed and it is only now over 100 years later that we seek to see those structures rebuilt in a way that meets the needs and the aspirations of the people who will benefit from these settlements. 
Mr Horomia has already made the point that the bill records that following hostilities in 1866 there was a raupatu a confiscation of all land between the Esk River and the Waikare River. Some of the whanau and hapu who lost land in that raupatu were indeed the same people who had stood alongside the Crown. It was indeed a very shabby reward for their loyalty for their support and for their commitment to that particular side in the battles of the day. There was a loss of land and there was an ongoing loss of well-being for those people. Indeed even after the shooting stopped again in too common a story the Native Land Court and other agencies of the Crown continued to nibble away at their resources at their possessions and at the rights and their well-being. It is only now that we seek to amend that loss to make good that loss and to provide some means some wherewithal for a rebuilding to begin. 
It was my pleasure as recently as last Sunday to travel through some of the land that is affected by this settlement. I travelled from Gisborne through the Hawke’s Bay through the Wairarapa and back here to Wellington. In the course of that journey there are many stunning views. There are some very beautiful landscapes. I am hard-pressed to think of a more dramatic more memorable landscape than that around the Mohaka River—those incredible vertical cliffs dropping to the river; it is extraordinarily rich in scenery and rich in natural beauty. Unfortunately that richness is not reflected in the well-being of many of the communities who live in that area. We know that as recently as 2001 an assessment of the people living in the Mohaka-Raupunga area found that those people were living at the lowest level according to the New Zealand index of deprivation. I daresay that is a great crime in fact; it is a great misfortune a great shame that people living in such a diverse and potentially rich part of the country have been reduced to such a condition. The economic social and cultural well-being has been stripped away over many years by the process of colonisation and it is a real and genuine privilege to be able to make a very small contribution to the making good to the amends that are now beginning to be made for that. 
Ngati Pahauwera under the provisions of this bill will gain some co-management rights to the Mohaka River and to the Waihua and Waikari rivers. There will be a co-management process in place and that is a good thing. It may not entirely meet the aspirations of those people those kaitiaki who may have preferred even more control and authority over the rivers and the future use of them. But it is a significant step and is not to be undervalued. I am sure that Ngati Pahauwera will be very active very committed partners in seeing to the restoration of the river the future care and utility of the water in it and the management of those taonga tukunga iho. 
With this co-management the resolution that is being acknowledged and passed today is a considerable step towards an ultimate resolution that will genuinely honour the spirit of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. It is a step towards enabling genuine exercise of tino rangatiratanga in this area we are speaking to specifically and in the country generally. It remains only for me again to wish Ngati Pahauwera every success as they utilise what has been given back to them as I am sure they will to build a much more positive future for themselves and for their descendants. We wish them well in that endeavour. Kia ora koutou.  
JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) 
: 
 I am pleased to take my second call in the House today to speak on one of the Treaty settlement claim bills that we have before us this one being the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill. I wish to start as many other speakers have by acknowledging the people here today from Ngati Pahauwera—the kaumatua the kuia the people who have fought for many years for redress of the wrongs of the past who have been through a battle through the days of the past to seek rights to correct the wrongs of the past. It is good to see them here today. I am pleased that this House is considering another Treaty bill—one of the 22 deeds of settlement that have been signed since 2008 by the Hon Chris Finlayson. It is great that we are considering so many of these historical issues today because they are important issues for many people in this country. As a nation as we mature we have to recognise that significant wrongs were committed and we have to make sure that going forward we acknowledge those. We put in place measures to compensate for those issues and we acknowledge that the Crown has not always done right by the people of New Zealand.  
Reading through the deed of settlement there are some alarming facts in there but it is good that those facts are being acknowledged as wrongs of the past—things like early land transactions that led to thousands and thousands of hectares of land being lost by Ngati Pahauwera. There were the effects of the wars in the past where we saw dozens and dozens of Ngati Pahauwera men women and children killed during attacks on Mohaka and the lack of assistance by the Crown to help Ngati Pahauwera recover. We saw the economic and social consequences of that lack of action by the Crown which has affected Ngati Pahauwera. We have seen the Crown which has received assistance from Ngati Pahauwera in the past not fulfilling its own obligations back to Ngati Pahauwera. One of the most significant things in any Treaty settlement is the Crown apology and it is good to see that that Crown apology exists for this Treaty settlement as it has for all other Treaty settlements. It is also pleasing to see that Ngati Pahauwera has accepted that apology from the Crown because not until the two parties both one apologise and the other accept that apology can we move forward.  
I know from my time in local government and dealing with certain iwi in my own particular area that one of the most significant things for any Maori people is not necessarily the financial redress that comes through a Treaty settlement; it is also the recognition of cultural wrongs of the past and also the loss of land. I am pleased to see that Ngati Pahauwera will be receiving and subsequently gifting back to the people of New Zealand a large portion of Te Heru o Tureia conservation area. It is very generous of Ngati Pahauwera to gift that back to the people of New Zealand and I say thank you to them for that.  
On the website of Ngati Pahauwera they make a very significant comment—it is a saying I would suggest. It goes like this: “As Old Father Thames is to the Londoner as the Ganges is sacred to the Indian as the Jordan is spiritual to the Palestines so is the Mohaka all these things to Ngati Pahauwera.” The fact that this bill addresses provisions for Ngati Pahauwera in relation to Mohaka is also a very good thing. I hope that going forward the issues that have been addressed in this Treaty settlement and the provisions that the Crown is making towards Ngati Pahauwera help Ngati Pahauwera succeed for many years to come in the future and I wish them the best of luck.  
BRENDAN HORAN (NZ First) 
: 
 Te Kaihautu o te Whare tena koe. Ladies and gentlemen children whanau dear friends and people of New Zealand we have heard today about the lengthy process that iwi have undertaken to get to this House to hear the third and final reading of their settlement the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill and move beyond grievances that have plagued their whanau for generations. Ngati Pahauwera have endured a process no less arduous than other iwi and I would like to acknowledge those who are here today and those who have passed on and are watching in spirit. Tena koutou tena koutou tena tatou katoa. 
As I speak to the particulars of this settlement one of the most significant features is the Mohaka River. Going forward the water resource and management of our waterways will become more controversial and inevitably more valuable. One of the distinct advantages that our country enjoys is not only climate but water. Ngati Pahauwera might be regarded as one of Maoridom’s river tribes. The Crown has acknowledged the significance of the awa the rivers to this tribe. These rivers are taonga and represent something akin to a life-force to the iwi. The special relationship with these rivers must be advanced. Rivers cannot be seen purely for their utilitarian purposes. Rather they have inherent value and all of us in the House today should join with Ngati Pahauwera and ensure that these awa remain wild and free. I am sure as other speakers have reminded us a clean river is a healthy river. 
The settlement bill also acknowledges their loyalty to the Crown and I am speaking of service in theatres of war overseas. Let me read into the record a small but significant example of this ethic of service. In World War I Ngati Pahauwera demonstrated its loyalty to the Crown as part of the Allied war effort. They raised funds to help send their young men overseas some of whom were decorated for their war service. They suffered heavily in the loss of young men and potential leaders. One such man Henare Wepiha Te Wainohu gave distinguished service in the Maori Pioneer Battalion. He died in 1920 depriving Ngati Pahauwera of an exemplary leader but his acts of bravery and encouragement to the Maori contingent endure and here is one of his quotes: “Remember you have mana. The honour and the good name of the Maori people is in your keeping this night.” And that still resonates today. 
I agree with the sentiments of the Hon Shane Jones as to the challenges that face Ngati Pahauwera going ahead. New Zealand First supports this bill and we wish Ngati Pahauwera well. Aue ake ake kia kaha e.  
MIKE SABIN (National—Northland) 
: 
 It is a great privilege to be able to take a very short call on this Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill today. Can I firstly acknowledge you all—kaumatua kuia and people of Ngati Pahauwera—for making the journey here. It is not always the most exciting place to be but I am sure today is a very very exciting one for you and I acknowledge your presence here. I live in Te Tai Tokerau a proud Northlander but my iwi is Tainui which does sometimes cause me some concern. However the significance of the settlement process for Tainui cannot be overestimated. Although we may have got off to a bit of a rough start in some ways—trailblazers often do—can I just say that now the returns and the economic benefits to Tainui are significant and can I say to you that I hope moving forward you also can enjoy the ability to look forward to plan and to invest in your people and in your futures.  
I am proud that this Government over the last 3½ to 4 years has made a significant investment in empowering iwi such as you and others to do that. I just want to acknowledge the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for his significant efforts to do this. I am very proud as a National Party member of Parliament that we have got on as a Government with providing the tools for these settlements to progress. Lastly can I say that I was privileged to be in the far north recently at the deed signing for Te Aupouri and I have never seen so many people in Te Kao to be honest. Normally I stop there for an ice cream. It was a special day. There were at least 2000 people there and there was a sense of pride there was a sense of closure but more so there was a sense of future. I wish you all the best in your future and I commend this bill to the House. Thank you.  
RINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 Tangi tu ki te moana maunga haruru ki uta. Ko Mohaka te awa ko Ngati Pahauwera te iwi. Ko au ke tetahi o nga uri o Pahauwera mihi tonu atu ki a koutou e aku whanaunga. Ka mihi te aroha nui ki a koutou. 
[ 
The sea’s lament on the shoreline and mountains resounds inland. Mohaka is the river and Ngati Pahauwera is the people. I am a descendant of Ngati Pahauwera and acknowledge that direct connection to you my relatives. Huge salutations and regards to you collectively. 
] 
It is a great pleasure and a very proud moment for me to stand and speak on the final passage of the Ngati Pahauwera Treaty Claims Settlement Bill. This bill is very deeply personal to me because I am very proud of my Ngati Pahauwera whakapapa and in fact there are many Ngati Pahauwera whanau whanaunga puta noa—all the way through—the Wai Pounamu. I acknowledge my dear great-grandmother or as we say in our southern dialect taua—Hauataua. Her name was Amiria Henrici and she was the daughter of Adolfus Henrici and Ropine Hinemare Te Aohi. It is a very very big whanau but she was one of that very big whanau and all of my whanaungas are here today and many of them connect up through those lines.  
The passage of this bill is deeply personal because this bill records—and I do acknowledge the Hon Chris Finlayson and his officials for the work they have put into this settlement—the history and the complete background to the grievances of our Ngati Pahauwera whanaunga and it is important that we acknowledge that.  
In regards to the attacks on Mohaka my great-grandmother Amiria was a baby at the time and her older sisters swam across the Mohaka River to escape from the Crown attacks at Mohaka. As one sister tired she handed the little baby their baby sister over to another sister. That young baby obviously grew into a fine young lady a Mohaka Pahauwera princess and they moved down to Te Wai Pounamu to the Banks Peninsula. Their father Adolfus Henrici was a very skilled boatbuilder and so he took his talents down there to Akaroa. He was very famous down there with his boatbuilding prowess.  
She married into another very big Ngai Tahu whanau down there my poua Aperahama Tupahu Solomon Score. Their two children Rangi Solomon and my tawa Ruti Matekino Solomon basically had a huge whanau right across Te Wai Pounamu and I am a product of that. My auntie and my late father were products of that and they were all brought up by our great-grandmother and that is why there is such a very close and dear affinity and affiliation to our Ngati Pahauwera side.  
I would also like to acknowledge that growing up my late father always made it very clear to us telling us the stories and making sure that we would go back. I was playing in the Reo and we would link up with Te Reo o Hamuera we would go through to Mohaka and have many a great whakamoemiti and hui on that marae and we had many wonderful 21st occasions and many ceremonial occasions in the hall—wonderful hakari wonderful times. I remember I was playing my cornet in the band but we could not match Raymond Joe and the Blue Mooners when it came to letting the hair down in the evenings in that wonderful hexagonal hall which is there in Mohaka the whare kai. So yes I am very very proud to be standing to speak on this bill.  
There are many elements to these settlements and I mentioned earlier this morning that it is not about just the money and it is not about just having words on paper. These are very deep acknowledgments and it is all about establishing the permanence of Ngati Pahauwera to their place and their connection to the Mohaka River and their whenua. So I am delighted to be here to actually speak on the passage of this bill. 
I do want to acknowledge a couple of other people whom I have had the pleasure of dealing with over the years in previous careers. One is Toro Waaka. I know Toro Waaka has worked tirelessly on the Ngati Pahauwera claim for many many years. A few years ago I took Toro overseas on seafood missions looking at new markets for our iwi fishing companies. I always saw Toro’s really entrepreneurial drive and his commitment to his mahi and that later progressed when he was a member of Te Ohu Kaimoana the Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission under Shane Jones who was the chair at the time. I mihi to Toro in particular for all his work. 
I am very proud that my sisters and I are registered as beneficiaries for Ngati Pahauwera. We receive all the mail through the post and I am very delighted to receive those letters and all those updates. I also would like to acknowledge as Parekura mentioned Bishop Moxon—mihi tonu atu ki a koe—who is here today.  
There are many elements to this bill. I will not traverse the details because I know other speakers have actually gone through all the elements of it but important to me is the acknowledgment and the apology that are listed in the legislation from the Crown and the acceptance by Ngati Pahauwera of the apology. I think that shows a wonderful gesture on behalf of Ngati Pahauwera that they accept that apology in the legislation.  
Then there are also the various other aspects—the cultural redress and the commercial elements. One in particular is the mechanism to provide for Ngati Pahauwera participation in the natural resources. I think this is a significant part of all the recent settlements that are coming through particularly around the awa the rivers with the co-management models protocols letters of introduction representation on planning committees roles in nominating people to tribunals and the like. All of those are as I mentioned earlier very important in re-establishing restoring and reclaiming Ngati Pahauwera’s space their river and their lands.  
I would just like to conclude my speech by saying that I am shortly leaving. I apologise to Ngati Porou because I will not be here for the full duration of their Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. I will be shortly travelling down to Kaikoura where I will be this weekend. While I am down there I will visit the urupa where Amiria Henrici is buried there in Oaro. I will call in on her and fill her in on all the great developments that are happening with all of her whanaunga up there in Ngati Pahauwera.  
I commend this bill. I mihi to all my whanaunga here Ngati Pahauwera and also all of my fellow members in this House. Kia ora ano tatou. Tena koutou tena koutou kia ora tatou katoa.  
ALFRED NGARO (National) 
: 
 Me mua kia orana tatou katotoa i te aroa matua o te Atua. Kia orana to tatou tangata o Ngati Pahauwera kua au te tangata o Moana Nui a Kiwa no Rarotonga no Aitutaki no Mangaia. Kia orana tatou katotoa no te aere mai tatou no tenei ra. 
It is an honour to be here today and to acknowledge a historic moment though I did ask myself who I am to be here a Cook Islander born in New Zealand. All I can think about is toku mama reo toku mama gran toku mama Tepaki no Ngati Tepaki no Aitutaki. She would often tell us that we are tuakana so today I stand as tuakana to witness this historic occasion for what you are witnessing today is a moment in this place and in this time. So I humbly stand here to acknowledge that. I also remember that my grandmother would say to me e toku tamait kare te enua kua au tea enua no te Atua—“O little one o little boy never forget that this land does not belong to you for it belongs to a greater one te Atua.” I think it is a reminder for us that though we are receiving back that which belongs to us in one sense it does not belong to us. Instead we are the kaitiaki; we are the guardians. So I acknowledge the role that Ngati Pahauwera play. Today we are putting right that which was made wrong. We are honoured here. Today simply in this short moment of time in this history which is your history I stand as tuakana to acknowledge you in this place for the history that is made.  
Finally I say this. At times we would often say “This is the beginning of the end.” but maybe today it is the end of the beginning of a future that you will realise of the potential that was once dreamt of many times over. So to tatou pure our prayers our hopes and our dreams are your prayers are your hopes and are your dreams all that have gone before you and all that will be now in this place. No reira kia orana tatou e kia manuia. 
Hon CHRIS TREMAIN (Minister of Civil Defence) 
: 
 Tihei mauri ora! 
Whakataka te hau ki te uru 
Whakataka te hau ki te tonga. 
Kia makinakina ki uta 
Kia mataratara ki tai. 
E hi ake ana te atakura 
He tio he huka he hauhunga. 
No reira tena koutou. Ki te Whare e tu nei tena koe. Ki a Papatuanuku ki waho tena koe. Ki nga mate o Ngati Pahauwaera haere haere haere. Ki nga kaumatua nga rangatira o Ngati Pahauwera tena koutou. Ki nga tangata o Ngati Pahauwera tena koutou. Tena koutou tena koutou tena tatou katoa. 
[ 
Behold the sneeze of life! 
Cease the winds from the west 
Cease the winds from the south. 
Let the breezes blow over the land 
Let the breezes blow over the ocean 
With a sharpened air a touch of frost and a promise of a glorious day. 
So salutations to you collectively. Greetings to the House that stands before me and to mother Earth outside. Farewell the deaths of Ngati Pahauwera; depart depart. To you the elderly leaders and people of Ngati Pahauwera I salute you. And so acknowledgments and salutations to us all. 
] 
Kia ora. Can I say what an absolute privilege it is to be here today in one of the final speeches on the settlement for Ngati 
Pahauwera. It is a privilege for a number of reasons but principally that Ngati 
Pahauwera’s settlement is the first in the area of my rohe of Heretaunga in the area of my electorate which starts at the Tutaekuri River heads up to Mahia and Mahanga and out to the beautiful Lake Waikaremoana and comes down the Kaweka Ranges and back to the Tutaekuri. My stomping ground my turangawaewae is one of the most beautiful places in Aotearoa. At the heart of that electorate is the Mohaka River starting up closer towards Taupo in the Poronui area at the confluence of the Taharua River and flowing all the way down to the sea through some of the most spectacular country in New Zealand.  
It is rugged country. The Mohaka River has grade 5 rapids at the top and flows down to the sea. There is beautiful scenery surrounded by native bush through much of the river. It is a wonderful wonderful awa. The Mohaka Marae is just at the end of the river on the left-hand side where I have to say it was a privilege to be at the signing with Mr Finlayson of the initial deed that actually led to this process. You do not take these privileges lightly as a member of Parliament. They are one of those sorts of things that you touch on when you leave this place. That there are events like this which are markers and which have taken place while you have been here is something to be proud of for members from across the House—not just this side of the House not just on the Labour side or the Greens side or the New Zealand First side. For all of us to be moving forward in this way is something to genuinely be proud of.  
 I used that whakatauki at the start of this speech this korero because it goes to the heart of what we are doing here which is moving forward. To talk about that whakatauki in English it basically says: “Cease the winds from the west. Cease the winds from the south. Let the breezes blow over the land let the red-tipped dawn come with a sharpened ear a touch of frost a promise of a glorious new day.” and that is what is happening. We have got to a point where we have been through a settlement process. We have been through all the issues that many many speakers have spoken about today—the issues the grievances—but we have gone to a point now where a settlement has been reached and an apology has been given and accepted by Ngati Pahauwera where there has been redress through not only forestry some land and the handing back of sacred taonga of other land but also wider settlements which means that we can move forward. 
What I want to focus on is the going forward from here—not looking back over our shoulder but where we go to not only as Ngati Pahauwera but also as iwi throughout the country as we go through these settlement processes. I do not want to mark the ground about who has kind of achieved what in that space in a certain number of years. The point is that we are moving forward as a nation in settling these grievances. Some will take longer; I have no doubt about that. But the point is that we are moving forward and this sort of redress allows Ngati Pahauwera to be part of the economy in a way that they have not been previously. That is about building an economy of their own jobs creating wealth creating a future for their people. But it is not just Ngati Pahauwera. There are lots of other people in the Hawke’s Bay community and in the Waharoa area—Raupunga and all around that area. That is my challenge: how we use this settlement now to maximise the opportunity to go forward with it. I know that Craig Foss who is also an electorate member from my party from across the way here would join me in that particular mihi.  
So the future is important. I think the economy is amazing. I think with regard to some of the land that is at the end of the Mohaka River there there are some wonderful opportunities. It has fertile soil and the opportunity to invest in that and go forward has to be considered.  
I want to finish with another mihi that again looks to the future. But before doing that I just acknowledge the trustees Toro Waaka Tania Hodges Kuki Green Sissiel Henderson Charles Lambert Tureiti Moxon and Gerald Aranui. I just acknowledge the efforts and I know there have been a number of trustees who have passed away during the process as well and I want to mihi to them as well. I just say thank you on behalf of this Parliament for the work that you have done in seeing that settlement through. Like I said I just want to finish on that final whakatauki: “Whaia te pae tawhiti kia tata whaia te pae tata whakamaua kia u kia tina”.  
[ 
“Seek the distant and near horizon so that it is closer. Firm it up and secure it”. 
] 
That mihi talks about us reaching for the stars going forward pulling our goals close to us and that is something we should do as an iwi with this settlement taking it forward. Ladies and gentlemen thank you. It has been a privilege to speak in this debate tonight. Thank you. 
Bill read a third time. 
Waiata; karanga 
Sittings of the House 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Deputy Leader of the House) 
: 
 I seek leave for the House to sit beyond 6 p.m. today to allow the completion of the third reading of the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There is none. 
Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill 
Third Reading 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of Maori Affairs)  
on behalf of the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: Tuatahi kei nga mana kei nga reo kei nga kaumatua nga koroua nga kuia. Ngati Porou whanui kua tatu mai i tenei rangi ki te whakanui i te kaupapa i whakahuihuitia tatau e whakakotahi ai tatau i tenei ra. Na reira nau mai hara mai ra ki te Whare Paremata i tenei ra ataahua te ra i hui tahi tatau ki te whakahonore i nga mahi kua mahia e koutou kia whakaoti te kereme ki tenei wa.  
Tino roa rawa te huarahi kua takahia e koutou kia tae ki tenei wa. Engari i te mutunga ake he timatanga hoki. Kua mutu tena whawhai kua timata inaianei te wa ataahua ki te whakapuawai i nga hiahia i nga moemoea o ratau e mahi ana i te kereme me ratau kua ngaro atu. Na reira kua pa nei ki a au tenei honore kia mihi atu ki a koutou me te korero tuatahi e pa ana ki ta koutou kereme i tenei ra.  
Na reira kare e roa aku mihi ki a koutou i tenei wa. Hoi ano kua tae mai na reira nau mai hara mai ki te Paremata. Ahakoa maku e mihi atu ki a koutou naku tena mahi. E ko etahi o koutou noho ai i konei te nuinga hui ka tu mo ta koutou kereme. Ko etahi o Ngati Porou hoki e mahi ana i konei Ngati Porou ki Tai Rawhiti Ngati Porou ki te Paremata. Kei konei ratau e mahi ana mo tatau te iwi whanui i roto i te Whare Paremata nei. Na reira heoi ano nau mai hara mai ra. 
[ 
Firstly to the powers languages elders menfolk womenfolk and Ngati Porou at large who have gathered here today to celebrate the matter that brought us together as a united front welcome to Parliament on this beautiful day—a day that brought us together to honour the work done by others of you to complete the claim to this point in time.  
The road you have travelled to date has been a long one. But in the end it is really only a beginning. That struggle has ended and the best part which will bring to fruition the aspirations and dreams of those who worked on the claims—those who are alive still and those who have passed away—is only just beginning. Hence this honour to acknowledge you and to introduce your settlement today has been placed upon me.  
My tributes to you will not be too long at this point in time; indeed you have arrived so welcome welcome to Parliament. It is my responsibility to acknowledge you—after all some of you live here and the majority of meetings for your claims take place here. Some of you work here as well while some are back at the coast. So welcome welcome indeed. 
] 
I move  
That the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill be now read a third time. 
 To the sons and daughters of Porou Ariki Te Matatara a Whare Te Tuhi Mareikura o Rauru nau mai. From the resting place of the sacred waka  
Nukutaimemeha 
 atop the peaks of Hikurangi to the Waiapu waters at Rangitukia as it surges into Te Moana-nui-a-Kiwa. The first on earth to see the dawn of a new day—since the dawn of time itself: Ngati Porou mana whenua mana moana mana tangata mana Atua. Ko Hikurangi te maunga ko Waiapu te awa ko Ngati Porou te iwi. 
The area of interest for Ngati Porou is on the East Coast of the North Island. One of Aotearoa’s largest iwi with 72000 members the marae of Porourangi are located around the East Cape from Potikirua in the north to Te Toka-a-Taiau in the south covering 400000 hectares. 
The historical grievances of Ngati Porou relate primarily to the Crown’s failure to honour its Treaty promise to respect Ngati Porou rangatiratanga over their own affairs. Ngati Porou rangatira signed Te Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840 and from then on sought to uphold the Treaty as a matter of honour. However Crown actions soon created some disillusionment among Ngati Porou as to the Crown’s commitment to the Treaty. The Crown imposed land tenure reform on Ngati Porou which deprived iwi members of collective control over their land and made it difficult to utilise their land for economic development.  
Although it is not possible to fully compensate Ngati Porou nor any claimant group at all for the loss their people have suffered nevertheless the redress in this bill seeks to recognise the longstanding cultural and spiritual association that Ngati Porou have within the region. It gives effect to the undertakings by the Crown in the deed of settlement by offering reconciliation redress including an agreed historical account Crown acknowledgments and apology cultural redress that vests sites of cultural and historical significance and a number of arrangements designed to facilitate good working relationships between Ngati Porou and the Crown. I am confident that the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill will settle the claims of Ngati Porou in a full and final matter and set the foundation for a productive future relationship with the Crown. The Crown apologises to Ngati Porou for past dealings that breached the Crown’s obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi. These include the detention without trial of some Ngati Porou on the Chatham Islands the Crown’s abuse at times of its monopoly powers to purchase Ngati Porou land and the Crown’s failure in a number of ways to respect Ngati Porou rangatiratanga in the administration of their own land. 
This settlement will see the creation of a strategic partnership arrangement where the Crown and Ngati Porou jointly develop a separate section of the East Coast Bay of Plenty Conservation Management Strategy to be known as  
Nga Whakahaere Takirua mo Nga Paanga Whenua o Ngati Porou. 
 This arrangement will provide Ngati Porou with input into the strategic governance of specified public conservation lands within the Ngati Porou area of interest. Fifteen sites of cultural and historical significance will be vested in Ngati Porou totalling approximately 5898 hectares. These sites are currently administered by the Department of Conservation except for one site Taitai which is 170 hectares and is Crown forest land administered by Land Information New Zealand. 
 The Crown also recognises that Ngati Porou have a proud record of military service overseas in New Zealand’s defence. The New Zealand Defence Force and Ngati Porou seek to affirm their relationship through the naming of officer entry scholarships and higher defence training programmes that are awarded to people of Ngati Porou descent. The naming will be subject to the recipient’s approval. 
As we prepare to settle the Treaty of Waitangi claims of the descendants of Porourangi it is fitting to honour those who are not here in body but who no doubt are here in the hearts and minds of their people and whose spirit lives on in the words of this historic settlement—and it is a historic settlement. We pay tribute to Mate Kaiwai Dr Te Kapunga (Koro) Dewes—KD—Dame Katerina Mataira Dr Paratene Ngata Sir Henare Kohere Ngata Merekaraka Ngarimu Anaru Paenga Hopa Keelan Waho Tibble Wi Kuki Kaa Martin Kingi Jules Ferris Honore Chesley Tame Te Maro and Whaia McClutchie. Me era atu. Na reira koutou okioki tonu mai koutou hei whariki ma matau. Koutou ki a koutou haere. [ 
And others. So rest there as a mat for us. You the dead remain there with the dead; farewell. 
] 
Ngati Porou mana whenua mana moana mana tangata mana atua. Na reira koutou ma he honore maku ki te panui i tenei kaupapa ki a koutou i tenei ra. He kaupapa kua whakatakotoria e koutou i nga tau kua pahure ake. Nga mamae nga tautohetohe era atu mahi kua oti. Kua tau pai i roto i te pepa nei. Na reira nga mihi nui ki a koutou tena koutou tena koutou. 
[ 
Ngati Porou has autonomy over their lands seas people and gods. It is an honour indeed for me to introduce this bill today. It was presented to you some years ago. The pain debates and other related activities are complete now and are well documented in this bill. Therefore huge congratulations to you; well done and good on you. 
] 
I commend this bill to the House. 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 I te tuatahi tena koe e te Kaihautu o te Whare huri noa ki to tatou Whare tatou nga kaitorangapu e noho tonu nei kia tutuki pai i a tatou nga mahi whakarite hai whai ma tatou i tenei rangi. Otira me huri atu ki nga upoko ki nga rangatira ki nga whaea ki a koutou katoa kua tatu mai ki Te Upoko o Te Ika te uranga o te ra mai i Poitikirua ki te Toka-a-Taiau huri noa ki te tihi o Hikurangi maunga maturuturu tonu a rere atu ki Te Moana-nui-a-Kiwa ma roto i te awa o Waiapu. Ko koutou nga kaitiaki ko koutou nga kaipupuru o te mauri kei tena rohe ko ta matou he whakatau he mihi atu ki a koutou i tenei rangi.  
Hei aha maku te whakahuahua atu i nga ingoa otira tautoko i te ahuatanga o te reo whakamihimihi i puta i to tatou Minita mo o koutou matua ratou kua poupou ki te matemate. Ta te mea hau tetahi i whakatipungia ai i roto i te kainga o taku tupuna whaea maku ano mo nga wahine e whakahua i te ingoa marae o Te Kawa he hoa tino tata ki tena tupuna oku me te mahara ki te wa i tatu ai matou ki waenga tonu i a koutou mihi ana tera hau tupua o roto i Te Tai Rawhiti ki a matou ka hinga atu i roto i tana mihi a Tawhai Tamepo. Na reira ratou ki a ratou tatou ki a tatou tena koutou tena tatou katoa. 
[ 
Firstly greetings Mr Speaker of the House and throughout our House to politicians who have remained so that we can complete the business well that has been set down for us to pursue today. Indeed I turn now to the heads leaders elderly womenfolk and all of you who have landed here in Wellington from the arrival place of the sun at Potikirua to Te Toka-a-Taiau around the summit of Mount Hikurangi where the water trickles down and flows to the Pacific Ocean via the Waiapu River. You are the guardians and the holders of the life-force at that region and ours is to formally welcome and acknowledge you today.  
It is not for me to name you individually but rather to endorse the welcoming sentiments expressed by our Minister in respect of your forefathers who have passed on. Because I was raised in the home of my great-aunt and for the benefit of the women I will mention Te Kawa a very close friend to that ancestor of mine. I recall the time when we arrived amongst you and during the acknowledgments by a great East Coast ancestor Tawhai Tamepo died. Therefore let the dead remain there among their own and we the living among ourselves; respects and salutations to us all. 
] 
As I have said in Maori we acknowledge the presence today of one of the great tribes of Te Ao Maori. I should say that because they have a great man in this House in the form of Parekura Horomia. They are obviously a very sensible tribe because they sent him back here. I want to acknowledge as we have said earlier today the Ministers of the Crown on both sides whether they be in the time of Parekura Horomia Dr Michael Cullen or even stretching further back to Koro Wetere in the days of endeavouring to vest Hikurangi mountain back in the people of Te Tai Rawhiti Ngati Porou. They have all made their contribution. Indeed there has been a recent innovation to expedite the settlement of claims: they are called Crown negotiators. We have one I think in our midst Mr Paul Swain who after leaving the Labour Party found something possibly more valuable to do and that is represent the Crown in the settlement of historical grievances i.e. the Ngati Porou one. We acknowledge his presence.  
We also have in the audience some survivors of Te Rua Tekau ma Waru the 28th Maori Battalion and we also have a host of other soldiers who have been down in the dugouts and from time to time people have tried to dispatch them to the latrines. I think here of Api Mahuika. Tena koe Api. Your task must not go unmentioned and your record must not go unmentioned as we give our speeches. Unfortunately for those of you who reach those heady heights in our iwi affairs your good works do not go unpunished but we acknowledge your presence here today.  
Ngati Porou produced someone whom a number of us Maori members regard as the most peerless of all Maori parliamentarians Sir Apirana Ngata. It was he who during the 1937 debate over the ownership of petroleum—if memory serves me correctly—advocated very strenuously that there was a Maori interest in that resource. I rather suspect as the iwi go forward and turn this settlement into an enduring legacy that those are the kinds of challenges that the stewards of this settlement will face: how to strike a balance between an opportunity of economic significance the maintenance of cultural heritage and also the safeguard of environmental standards. The reality is that as a consequence of the passage of the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill in this House both sides working with the Crown are watching a capital transfer take place. Whether it be in the form of commercial redress cultural sites reserves or indeed the actual recognition of interests in the takutai moana we are seeing something historic today.  
 There is not a great deal that we can add more than the fact that it is our duty as Maori parliamentarians to bear witness and testimony to this so that when others follow on behind us they can be reminded that each generation of iwi leaders each generation of Crown Ministers and each generation of Maori parliamentarians have to make their contribution. Those contributions are defined by the challenges of the time and the challenge of the time for this settlement process has been that it is not possible for current generations of taxpayers in our system either of society or politics to meet the full cost and weight of colonialism that fell upon this particular iwi. Dare I say it that this is an iwi that has given long and valuable service to their fellow New Zealanders whether it is the Maori Pioneer Battalion Te Hoko whitu a Tu; the famous 28th Maori Battalion; or their contributions throughout the theatres of war around the world. Indeed I bump into a number of them on a regular basis at the Manurewa RSA. I shall be encouraging them to go home and get their fair share of the spoils.  
This is a day where we should have an element of sadness for those who have gone on but an element that defines our Maori personality as being appropriately light-hearted. Because what the task ahead represents for those of us who have a life inside Maori politics whether it is in Parliament or out is that the real challenge lies in ensuring not so much that the assets are managed well but that they are grown. To seize growth opportunities is always going to involve haggling compromise and a clear plan that enables people to dedicate their capital but also finds a balance to protect heritage. Nowhere will we find finer carved meeting houses—wharemoko—than on Tai Rawhiti. Nowhere will we find land that stretches from the mountain right down to the takutai moana than the Tai Rawhiti. Nowhere will we find people who are very proud of their Ngati Porou ancestry and never shirk from reminding you of how proud they are!  
Ka nui enei korero ki tenei reo Pakeha me mihi atu au ki a tatou i roto i to tatou Whare; kia kaha kia u kia manawanui. Na koutou i whakawerawera kia tutuki pai ai nga wahanga i whiwhi ai koutou nga mihi. Nga wahanga horekau i whakaaengia me whakahe atu i a Robert Wahawaha McLeod i te kore o Hone i puta i tenei ra. 
[ 
I have spoken enough in English. I acknowledge us in our House; be strong be committed be stout-hearted. You put the effort in to get the parts that you gained well—congratulations. The blame for the parts not agreed upon must be with Robert Wahawaha McLeod for Hone not making it today. 
] 
They have had a number of fine negotiators and one that I should mention is Robert McLeod who I am told unfortunately could not make it; Whaimutu Dewes working with Api Mahuika; and all their supporters because it has not been easy.  
Kia tau nga manaakitanga ki a koutou e oku huanga tuakana teina i roto i Te Tai Rawhiti. Na i roto i te pono o te ngakau te manawa roa te whakawerawera ka tutuki te roanga ake o nga moemoea me nga tumanako. Ko ta matou he tautoko i a koutou tena tatou kia ora tatou katoa.  
[ 
Look after yourselves my relatives elder and younger siblings living down the East Coast. Long-term dreams and aspirations will result through faith resilience and effort. Our part is to support you. Congratulations and salutations to you and us collectively. 
] 
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 I too stand to acknowledge the people of Ngati Porou and especially those who have travelled from Tai Rawhiti and are here in the galleries today to listen to this the third reading of the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. I acknowledge them and all of those from Ngati Porou who have worked so very hard to make this day possible. I acknowledge the many Ngati Porou who are no longer with us who provided leadership and inspiration to Ngati Porou negotiators and their people. In saying this I too want to refer to the great Sir Apirana Ngata who was such a distinguished member of this House and I am sure he would be very very pleased to see the third and final reading of this bill. I also want to mention Sir Henry Ngata who died only recently. Some years ago shortly before his death I was in Gisborne on a hui to deal with the foreshore and seabed legislation and I will never forget his presence—his overwhelming presence—and his utterly principled position on that particular topic.  
The Ngati Porou negotiators have done Ngati Porou proud. Throughout their dealings with the Crown they have conducted themselves with honour with dignity even in very difficult times. I am so very pleased that many of you are able to be here today to witness your Treaty settlement passing into law.  
This bill settles the Treaty grievances of Ngati Porou. In the bill the Crown formally acknowledges its breaches of the Treaty offers an apology and provides cultural financial and commercial redress. The people of Ngati Porou have waited a very long time for this day. After many years of preparation formal negotiations began in 2008. The Crown recognised the mandate of te runanga in April of that year. Negotiations with Te Haeata—the negotiation’s subcommittee of te runanga—commenced in July 2008. A non-binding high-level agreement outlining key elements of financial and commercial redress was signed by the Crown and Ngati Porou on 23 October 2008. After a period of robust negotiations a deed was initialled in October 2010. During November and December of that year te rununga undertook a ratification process for the deed and the proposed post-governance entity. The work of the negotiators was acknowledged and endorsed by the people. Those who voted voted overwhelmingly to ratify the settlement. The Crown and Ngati Porou signed a deed of settlement on 22 December 2010 and since then both parties have worked together constructively as their legislation has been progressed. The passage of this bill is the final step which will enable the Crown to provide settlement redress to Ngati Porou.  
I know that most of the elected representatives of the governance entity are here today. I know you have achieved a lot including your inaugural AGM in February this year and I wish you very well in your endeavours. The people have put their faith and trust in you and I am confident you are going to do what is best for the iwi.  
The historical grievances relate primarily to the Crown’s failure to honour its Treaty promise to respect Ngati Porou rangatiratanga over their own affairs. The Crown imposed land tenure reform on Ngati Porou which deprived iwi members of collective control over their land and made it difficult to use their land for economic development. This has helped make the East Coast one of the most socioeconomically deprived regions of New Zealand.  
 Despite the Crown’s failure to honour its Treaty promise and the resulting deprivations Ngati Porou have played a very significant role in a number of aspects of New Zealand’s life. One aspect in particular I want to mention is the long and proud record of service in New Zealand’s defence. This has not come without very tragic consequences. The immediate and long-term consequences for Ngati Porou of the Second World War were that every Ngati Porou whanau had members who either did not return home or returned badly scarred by their war service overseas. Some family names and even family lines no longer exist because the last representative died as a result of the war. This resulted in the loss of many present and future Ngati Porou leaders. On behalf of all New Zealanders I thank Ngati Porou for the sacrifices they have made for our country.  
The bill gives effect to the undertakings by the Crown in the deed. The reconciliation redress includes an agreed historical account the Crown acknowledgments and apology and the naming of New Zealand Defence Force scholarships in higher defence training awarded to people of Ngati Porou descent. The cultural redress package includes the vesting of sites of cultural and historical significance and a strategic partnership with the Department of Conservation over specific public conservation lands within the Ngati Porou area of interest. I am very pleased also that as Minister for Arts Culture and Heritage I can say that we are working together with Ngati Porou on the long-overdue Maori Battalion museum in Gisborne. In that respect I acknowledge that wonderful New Zealander—I would have to say after Parekura Horomia and I had better say Hekia Parata my favourite “Ngati Porouvian”—Nolan Raihania a young member of C Company who fought for his country in several theatres of war came back to New Zealand made his contribution and is now the esteemed chair of the runanga. There is also redress designed to facilitate good working relationships between Ngati Porou and the Crown and that includes protocols with Government departments a letter of commitment with Archives New Zealand the National Library and Te Papa Tongarewa to facilitate the care and management of Ngati Porou taonga and a commitment by the Crown and Ngati Porou to develop a relationship accord to work together to address contemporary issues within the rohe.  
Then there is the financial settlement of $110 million comprising $90 million in financial and commercial redress and $20 million in cultural and historical redress and redress over Crown properties including licensed forest land. Mr Shane Jones said it so well—and I have said it at other times during the day—redress can never fully compensate for what has been lost but having acknowledged that the settlement given effect by this bill will provide Ngati Porou with a platform for future growth.  
There are so many people who have contributed to this settlement over the years. I acknowledge the contributions by my predecessor Dr Michael Cullen to the early stages of the negotiations. I of course acknowledge Mr Horomia who as I have said in other debates is always so helpful to have a quiet chat to about issues. I also acknowledge my ministerial colleagues in particular the Minister of Maori Affairs the Minister of Conservation and the Minister for Land Information.  
I want to acknowledge the valuable support and contribution made by the work of many Government officials and departments who contributed to this settlement. I particularly want to place on record the wonderful work by Paul Swain who was my Crown negotiator. He did such a wonderful job that he has been press-ganged into other negotiations. Most important I want to acknowledge the hard work and commitment of Ngati Porou particularly those from Te Haeata who negotiated this settlement. I particularly mention my other favourite “Ngati Porouvian” Dr Apirana Mahuika. In fact I should have mentioned him earlier and I apologise. He is a great New Zealander. I have known him for over 20 years and I always enjoy working with him. The dedication and determination of the negotiators has been absolutely vital in the path towards achieving settlement.  
So I wish Ngati Porou all the very best. I acknowledge of course when I look at today’s Order Paper and see item 53 Nga Rohe Moana o Nga Hapu o Ngati Porou Bill that we have some unfinished business. I think my first task after becoming Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations was to have to tell Dr Mahuika and the team that this bill would have to be put on hold while we looked at the foreshore and seabed legislation but members of the iwi will be pleased to know that we have had a number of meetings. The new legislation has been passed and it is my sincere hope and indeed expectation that this legislation will be progressed in the very very near future.  
So congratulations once again. Thank you to those who have made such a significant contribution. I look forward to seeing Ngati Porou continue to grow and develop and make those wonderful contributions to the country in the years to come. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 A tena koutou. Tenei e tapiri atu i aku mihi ki era i waihotia i mua i te aroaro ki a koutou Ngati Porou tena koutou tena koutou. Ki nga kaumatua nga whaea nga kuia koutou katoa e hapai nei i tenei o nga hiahia kia tutuki pai tenei kereme ka nui te mihi atu. 
[ 
Greetings to you collectively. I add my acknowledgments to those placed before you Ngati Porou; salutations and acknowledgments to you. I congratulate you elders aunts old women—indeed all of you who elevated the notion that these aspirations in respect of this claim be achieved well. 
] 
It gives me great pleasure to be able to join with speakers before me and support the third reading of the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. I was thinking in some regards as to how to approach this speech today because we have had four preceding settlements and the hope and opportunity that comes from a settlement process is very real. But we are having a very different conversation here with Ngati Porou because this settlement is in part a continuation of a conversation and a relationship that has been well established. This is a sophisticated smart and strategic settlement in that not all the issues for Ngati Porou have been resolved. So it will lock future Governments into a continued relationship of having to work with Ngati Porou to achieve the best outcomes in that area.  
I was reminded of some sage advice that was given to me by a kaumatua when I came into Parliament. He said to me: “Remember kotiro when you get up and speak on a kaupapa that is a Maori kaupapa you must be able to whakapapa to that kaupapa.” Do not get up and say something if you do not know anything about it—that is what he was telling me. 
I thought that on this particular issue the footprints of Ngati Porou have definitely left a deep impression on contemporary New Zealand history. When I think about that I think about the bust that is at the front of the Grand Hall and as you walk past that bust you cannot help as a parliamentarian and certainly as a Maori parliamentarian to be inspired by the leadership of Apirana Ngata and what he sought to achieve in his lifetime. I make mention of that particular point in history because were it not for Apirana Ngata and his relationship with Te Puea I am sure our fate may have been very different.  
I want to highlight three important strategic and significant contributions of Ngati Porou that have endured to this day and have certainly left an impression with my people. Firstly there is the contribution of the 28th Maori Battalion and that legacy of being a proud fighting people and being able to contribute towards the effort to preserve and protect who we are as a country as a nation for the benefit of our people and our citizens here in Aotearoa.  
The other contribution was really in my mind where Ta Apirana Ngata had a deep impact on Te Puea my ancestor and that was around land development. I mentioned earlier that we are having a very different conversation with Ngati Porou because unlike many other iwi they do know what it is to develop their lands have an economic base and look after their own people.  
The third important contribution was in the area of cultural restoration—our language and our taonga. We see very much in the components of this settlement those significant historical contributions being reflected in this settlement. That is why it is a sophisticated strategic settlement in my mind and I am sure a lot of iwi will be looking at how they realise the gains from it.  
But here it is at a fine point. In Ngata’s relationship with Te Puea he impressed on Waikato the importance of self-sustainability through land development. Indeed my father used to holiday in Waiuku in one of those places where Te Puea was trying to get land development back under Ngata’s times in the late 1920s and my dad can remember going to the farm that he worked on that Ngata and Te Puea had established. The other part was the importance of strategic political relationships. It would be true to say from our telling of history that Te Puea’s own relationship certainly with the powers that be of the day were reinforced because of her personal relationship with Ngata and it endured beyond their personal relationship.  
The third really important element was education. Many other iwi can tell this story but I think Ngati Porou tells it particularly well and that story is about the importance of education underpinning successful and enduring leadership for the future and that in itself I think is a huge legacy. Prior to Te Puea’s relationship with Ngata there was a huge campaign against going to schools because of our experience during the 1860s and it was only with the relationship with Ngata that Te Puea embraced the fruits of education. Indeed had that not happened my father would not have been sent to Mount Albert Grammar School. So I do have a lot to be grateful for in terms of Ngati Porou’s legacy of leadership and how it has impacted on me and that is really how I whakapapa to the conversation that is being continued here today.  
This is a great settlement in my view. There are real opportunities for other iwi to learn from what can be achieved in areas like the letter of commitment and what is being tried around the cultural redress aspects of it. I look forward to the realisation of what I am sure will be a dynamic regrouping of Ngati Porou histories traditions and taonga in some very unique ways for the benefit of future generations.  
The other I guess innovation that through the Treaty settlement process was something we grappled with was that because the direct negotiation process cut across the Waitangi Tribunal hearing phase and hearings were suspended throughout the submission process we pointed to the airing of grievances opportunity and how very real it is for iwi and people who have a historical grievance to tell their story. This is a particular innovation that has not been seen in any other settlement.  
I certainly want to highlight that throughout the hearing of submissions it was very important in some shape or form to give some prominence to people being able to air their own particular grievances so that their history could be told. Far be it from me to say the level of hurt that was felt during the submission process; I am only highlighting really that this is an innovation and could be one that could endure going forward as well for other settlement models.  
The other unique innovation I think which really ties again to how strategic Ngati Porou is around the skills value-add that they can derive from the Crown is in these unique Defence Force scholarships. We all know in our own iwi that we would love to take those 10 percent of my cousins who may not do so well at school but could do really well in the police force and the defence forces; and opportunities like these I think will be looked at very keenly to see whether they can afford more tangible ways of turning lives round but making a great contribution to our country and producing great leaders.  
I want to thank the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and former Ministers from Ngati Porou who all had a hand in this in one way or another I am sure for presenting this kind of a settlement to the House. It is an important day today but as I say we are at a different part of the conversation with Ngati Porou as a Parliament from where we are with some other iwi. What we need to be able to say and promote—na te mea ehara te kumara e korero mo tona ake reka [ 
however it is not for the sweet potato to say how tasty it is 
]—is that where there are exemplars we should be embracing and pushing and ensuring that they can continue to be exemplars. Where there are issues where lessons can be learnt let us share that experience so we do not recreate the wheel.  
He iti noa tenei naku hei tuitui ki te whariki korero i waihotia i mua i te aroaro. No reira ki a koutou katoa i tenei wa tena koutou tena koutou kia ora mai tatou. 
[ 
This contribution from me is but a small one to be woven into the fabric of the contributions put before you. Therefore acknowledgments salutations and congratulations to you and to us all. 
] 
DENISE ROCHE (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Ki nga tangata whenua o Ngati Porou te ra tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa.  
[ 
Thank you Mr Speaker. To the local people of Ngati Porou fond greetings acknowledgments and salutations indeed to all of you. 
] 
The Green Party recognises that this is an extremely important moment in your long and vibrant history within Te Tai Rawhiti and Aotearoa. We recognise the sense of achievement that must accompany what is a significant settlement for this iwi. Like our colleagues across the House we wish to acknowledge the people who have worked on this settlement the people from Ngati Porou the people from the Crown and the Waitangi Tribunal and all those who for generations have contributed time and effort and their stories and their lives to creating this bill the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill today.  
We know the redress that is needed in the rohe and that Ngati Porou have many plans and dreams that are coming closer to fruition. We have to place on record our concerns about the cross-claimants who have spoken to us of their marginalisation from this claim process. We cannot ignore them and we have stood in this House to support this settlement. We have also stood in this House to support their right to challenge and to be heard. It is the Crown processes that divide and manipulate but there is no escaping the contradictions. So hard as it is we think it is important to acknowledge the issues and not pretend that the processes the Crown dictates have advantaged the smaller natural groups of self-determining hapu.  
However having said that I need to return to the reasons for this claim. It may not be the same story as the raupatu in Taranaki or the theft that occurred in Waikato which is where I come from but each claim tells its own extraordinary story of the mechanics and the strategies of the mutating virus of colonisation in achieving access to land and resources from nga tangata whenua o Aotearoa. The Crown compulsorily acquired land from Ngati Porou on more than 2000 occasions. That is a simple statement really but actually it is about 2000 incidents of outrage dispossession and damage. That is what is being recognised today and that is what is being addressed in part.  
My colleague Catherine Delahunty who could not be here today explained in her speech in the first reading of this bill that she saw at first hand that damage that continues when she was a beneficiary advocate at Ruatoria. She explained that on one of the trips to Ruatoria they were invited to stay the night at Waiomatatini by descendants of your great ancestor Sir Apirana Ngata. She described sleeping in the corner of the room of that remarkable house from that remarkable whanau and looking out over the river flats and imagining the leader coming home from Parliament tired from the battle for the best interests of his own people. And so it has continued. So you have continued.  
The settlement is worth $110 million and 6000 hectares plus cultural redress and recognition across Ngati Porou rohe. It is the second-largest single deal in the history of Treaty settlements and I agree with what my esteemed colleague Nanaia Mahuta has just said about the importance of the historical strategic alliances that have been built up over the many decades. There are many ideas and plans to use this wisely in support of the people. We look forward to those benefits being available at last to the people in the broken houses in Tokomaru and the people who are jobless beneficiaries without transport credit or opportunities in the back country between Te Puia and the cape. My colleague Catherine Delahunty met many of these people as an advocate and they are still rich in culture and rich in te reo language and history. But they did not have the same material privilege that many of us and in fact many of us here in this House take for granted. They did not have their young people who were mainly away working the elders and the very young. They want their community back and they want it to be a shared well-being. My best wishes and our best wishes go to them all.  
Ngati Porou is a magnificent country and we acknowledge that some signed the Treaty and some felt no need but my wish is that this somewhat controversial but very hard-won agreement will enhance the whenua protect the moana and restore the wairua of the people. We congratulate you. We wish you well and we will be supporting this bill. No reira tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa. 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Police) 
: 
 I feel privileged to stand here in this House today as the MP for East Coast for the third reading of the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. The territory covered by this bill is the area from Potikirua Point to the place of the stone in the centre of the Turanganui River which runs through the centre of Gisborne and forms a large part of the diverse East Coast electorate.  
This is a unique day in Parliament and I think it is fitting then that Ngati Porou form part of this very unique experience. As I look around the gallery I see many many familiar faces who have made the trip down from Tai Rawhiti to celebrate this third reading and the closure of one part of the Ngati Porou story today. Can I acknowledge Dr Apirana Mahuika sitting up there. Can I acknowledge His Worship the Mayor Meng Foon—I see him in the gallery—and his councillor Bill Burdett. But there are many many more up there and of course they bring with them the spirits of those who have gone before who would have loved to be here today to celebrate the settlement of this Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill.  
Ngati Porou is the second-largest iwi in New Zealand with 72000 members 58 hapu and 48 marae and they are spread far and wide. Many of them make it here to Parliament and we are pleased to have them. In fact I was in Christchurch last year following the earthquake meeting with some Ngai Tahu there and talking about how we would be helping them with some of the kohanga reo that had been badly damaged in the earthquake. They informed me that there were more Ngati Porou living in Christchurch than there were up on the East Coast. I do not know whether that is correct but it does indicate the difficulties of the area that we all come from which is quite remote in New Zealand. The last couple of weeks have shown us just how remote we are when first we lose our roads and then we lose our rail. But I admire Ngati Porou for recognising what could be a disconnect between some of their people. Of course the iwi themselves recognise ahi ka the people who remain at home and Ngati Porou kei te whenua those who reside outside of the tribal lands and are seeking to make their way in the world.  
Ngati Porou has a proud history of working with the Crown to preserve the New Zealand way of life. Many Ngati Porou fought in World War II in the Maori Battalion. Ngarimu VC the first Maori New Zealander awarded a Victoria Cross was of course of Ngati Porou descent. And their spirit lives on not just in the stories and the recognition of their valour but also in the Ngarimu VC and 28th (Maori) Battalion Memorial Scholarship Fund Board. I had the privilege to chair that board for 3 years as the Minister of Education. We worked hard to embody the mana and the tikanga despite some very rigid legislation.  
When I read this not insubstantial bill here on the Table of the House for me there are one or two paragraphs that stand out that I would like to read: “The Crown acknowledges that despite Ngati Porou fulfilling its Treaty obligations the Crown has breached the Treaty of Waitangi and its principles in a number of respects. The Crown also acknowledges that despite Ngati Porou’s significant contribution to New Zealand it has failed to address the longstanding grievances of Ngati Porou in an appropriate manner and that recognition of Ngati Porou grievances is long overdue.” For me that embodies the work that has gone in over the years to bring us to this point.  
There is one other part that I want to read out. It was interesting that my colleague Nanaia Mahuta referred to education and Ngati Porou because there is a paragraph here where the Crown “acknowledges the significant harm Ngati Porou children suffered by being punished for speaking their own language in Crown-established schools for many decades. It also acknowledges that the education system historically had low expectations for Maori academic achievement and that the educational achievements of students in East Coast schools have lagged well behind those of other New Zealand children.” We all wish that that story could have changed throughout New Zealand because I believe after 3 years as Minister of Education that there still are low expectations for Maori children in our schools.  
However I believe that what Ngati Porou have done with education reflects their long struggle and their long focus on the way ahead for their people. In particular can I acknowledge Dr Apirana Mahuika who I think is a great leader. He is a man who is constantly looking forward at how he can ensure that Ngati Porou people get the very best out of everything that modern New Zealand has to honour. The education programme that was put into place and overseen by Ngati Porou over the last years has reaped enormous rewards to the point that when the Education Review Office went in and had a look at those schools last year there was hardly a school that had not made significant improvement in focusing on the achievement of their children. I think that that is a great testament to not only the leadership of the iwi but the commitment of the families the teachers and the communities to ensure that every opportunity is given to Ngati Porou children for the future.  
I am delighted to stand as the local MP to welcome all those who come from Tai Rawhiti to this House to celebrate the end of this particular journey knowing that it is just the beginning of the longer journey in the partnership between the Crown and Ngati Porou. Kia ora tatou.  
BRENDAN HORAN (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First asked for these settlement bills to be read in the bright light of day so that all of New Zealand could gain a greater understanding of each grievance and the process and to witness the settlement. In many settlements iwi are given land in a ceremonial fashion and then return it. They have been more than reasonable so that awareness is gained apologies are accepted and a commitment to move forward into the future is understood and undertaken. 
We have seen four prior settlements today and in earlier speeches I have referred to the opportunities afforded iwi with financial settlements. But let no one in this House or anywhere in New Zealand believe that money is being thrown at Maori. The total amount paid out to all Maori tribes is not billions; in fact it pales in significance when compared with asset sales and the $1.7 billion South Canterbury Finance bailout. It may surprise you that the total amount of settlements in the history of New Zealand to date is less than $1 billion; it is $955 million. Having said all of that I am sure that no one would begrudge a little money going to our East Coast National Provincial Championship team who I am told have endured the presence of Parekura Horomia for many years. 
I would like to point out to iwi with new finances that there is a powerful tool on our doorstep that can revolutionise the retraining and upskilling of our people with new skills and competencies. The biggest convergence that the world has ever seen is about to happen and that is broadband power coming together under the same umbrella as browser ubiquity. That convergence will bring about change in human behaviours in the new education systems related to that convergence. The social infrastructure of whanau hapu and iwi advantages Maori for the new broadband literacies that will be required to trade and operate successfully in the new commercial world. I look forward to seeing intergenerational learning intergenerational caregiving health and support systems and intergenerational and cross-iwi networks. 
New Zealand First offers congratulations to Ngati Porou on the culmination of a journey where reparation was first sought during the Muldoon Government. It has been a long gruelling journey and there have been many difficulties of varying nature—one being communication because of the relative isolation of what some would say is the most beautiful part of New Zealand. Our East Coast roads are not like the smoothly travelled highways of Auckland and journeys can often be delayed due to slips such as the one currently blocking the Waioeka Gorge which is the main route from Gisborne through to Whakatane and on to the port of Tauranga. There is of course the coast road but you only have to see a logging truck coming at you from round a blind bend as you are travelling from Torere through to Te Kaha to know how scary that can be. I know the East Coast well through my fishing and surfing sojourns as I grew up in Whakatane but if you have never been on this stretch of coastline you are missing out. It is amazing and you only have to see the children fishing gathering kai moana and riding horses around bareback to know what a special place and what a special piece of country this is and also a slice of Kiwi life that is precious.  
Another major challenge for Ngati Porou was the cost of World War II—the shocking loss of so many promising young Maori from the 28th Battalion or the Maori Battalion. This war deprived Ngati Porou of many future leaders who gave their lives for our country so far away from their East Coast shores. In 2008 I had the privilege to be present at Te Poho-o-Rawiri Marae for the launch of the book on C Company written by Monty Soutar. It is a wonderful account of the mana of Ngati Porou and the soldiers of the Maori Battalion. Modern New Zealanders know of Corporal Apiata VC but I want every member in this House to remember the peerless hero of the Maori Battalion Ngati Porou’s warrior son Te Moananui-a-kiwa Ngarimu VC and let no one doubt the ethic of service that this tribe has shown to fellow New Zealanders. And it was the giant of all Maori parliamentarians Sir Apirana Ngata who characterised the efforts of his tribe and the battalions as being the price of citizenship. 
I would like to remind us that this tribe not only have affection for their land but they have a mighty river the Waiapu. Settlements are not only about economic opportunity but a chance to improve Maori participation in natural resource management. I look forward to the implementation of the vision and strategies that Ngati Porou leaders have for their tribe. 
Ngati Porou are no strangers to New Zealand First. [ 
Interruption 
] I am listening to my fellow members and in keeping with their encouragement to be modest—and like the kumara that never boasts of its sweetness—we are proud to support the elders the chiefs and all the leadership in their strategies to lead the tribe forward to benefit not only Ngati Porou but the entire East Coast and the greater New Zealand. Kia ora. 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 Ko Hikurangi te maunga ko Waiapu te awa ko Ngati Porou te iwi. Tena koutou tena koutou tena tatou katoa. 
[ 
Hikurangi is the mountain Waiapu is the river and Ngati Porou are the people. Greetings and acknowledgments to us all. 
] 
I am extremely proud to be a member of this House on this historic day of the passing into law of the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill. This bill recognises and addresses those grievances and settles the historical Treaty of Waitangi claims of Ngati Porou which are significant and longstanding. The historical grievances are the direct result of the Crown’s failure to respect Ngati Porou’s rangatiratanga. The Crown-imposed significant land tenure reform on Ngati Porou has meant that the East Coast does remain one of the most socioeconomically deprived regions of New Zealand despite the significant efforts and achievements of the people and the runanga of Ngati Porou thus far. Although it is not possible to fully compensate Ngati Porou for the losses and grievance suffered as the Minister of Maori Affairs has said the redress in this bill seeks to recognise the longstanding cultural and spiritual association that Ngati Porou has within our region.  
This Treaty settlement is—in true Ngati Porou style—innovative strategic and at all times carried out with the famous Ngati Porou modesty. It includes the vesting of sites of cultural and historical significance a strategic partnership over public conservation lands a financial settlement a relationship accord between Ngati Porou and the Crown and much more. But as others have done I want to particularly mention the inclusion of recognition of Ngati Porou’s military service. No family has been left untouched by the enormous contribution Ngati Porou men and women have made to the military efforts of Aotearoa and I want to acknowledge them today. But what we must ensure is that these strategic relationships and partnerships are real and enduring and that they do not disappear or fade away after an initial burst of enthusiasm on behalf of the Crown and its entities. But I am confident that the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill will provide the base for a continuing productive and mutually respectful relationship with the Crown.  
I want to acknowledge the work of Te Haeata the subcommittee responsible for the supervision of negotiations and the work of the negotiating team. Te Haeata is indeed an appropriate name given the new dawn this Treaty settlement heralds for the people of Ngati Porou and I look forward to the continuing cultural and economic renaissance of Ngati Porou following this settlement. It is important to acknowledge the work of Te Runanga o Ngati Porou thus far. As part of the post-settlement process the runanga will also pass over $50 million worth of agricultural social and cultural assets built up from practically nothing over the last 25 years. Collectively these assets already employ 300 people in our region. And as a scientist I welcome the work that is under way on post-settlement initiatives. These will potentially include firstly a science technology and innovation unit to work with universities to find more efficient and profitable ways of managing farms aquaculture and fisheries and to turn round the historical relative underperformance of Maori assets. Maori in general and Ngati Porou in particular have found it very difficult to access mainstream research funding from central government. Government science and innovation strategy documents do not acknowledge the particular needs and interests of the Maori economy. Changes need to be made to ensure Maori applicants’ equitable access to mainstream science and innovation funding not just small carved-off specialist pots of money.  
They also potentially include the development of a science syllabus which will prepare students for work for the tribe in the future. They include the establishment of a school of excellence focused on tikanga and reo and an associated sporting academy. And they include housing and alternative education initiatives. These are all initiatives that will make a significant difference to the economy and to the people of Ngati Porou. I note that an online poll on the www.tehaeata.co.nz website shows that 74 percent of respondents said employment should be the priority for Ngati Porou. So I particularly welcome the comments from the Te Runanga o Ngati Porou chairman Dr Api Mahuika when he reaffirmed that post-settlement decisions will focus on people not just the financial bottom line. As we grow our assets and our economic activity we are going to need the people with the skills to look after those assets. And I could do no better than to read this quote from Dr Mahuika: “We have to develop ourselves at home because if you can’t keep the home fires burning and if you can’t keep the sentiment of your people and the tikanga that they belong to—then you lose them … and we don’t want to lose them because they are the repositories of our history our knowledge our tikanga and our reo.” Kia ora uncle. We must do everything we can to give our young people opportunities at home not in Australia.  
I want to mention one last thing. Today is a significant step forward for the relationship between the Crown and Ngati Porou. But that relationship is holistic and not limited solely to Treaty settlement processes. The Crown must treat the relationship as one of ongoing mutual respect in practice as well as in word and in regard to recent activities and processes embarked upon by the Government in relation to oil and gas exploration off the East Coast the Crown fell seriously short of its obligation under that relationship.  
So it is an honour to speak today. I want to congratulate all those who have worked to get us here today especially the many who are no longer with us. Today marks a new dawn for the people of Ngati Porou. Kia kaha. Kia manawanui. Tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou. Kia ora mai koutou katoa. 
HONE HARAWIRA (Leader—Mana) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Hoi ano tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa e Ngati Porou koutou i haere tawhiti mai ki roto i to tatau Whare i te ra nei. Me mihi atu ki a koe e te matua e Tamati koutou ko nga rangatira o to tatau ao Maori i kawe atu i te aroha ki te whanau o te Kingi o Tonga i tera ra. Koutou ko ta matau Minita ano hoki. No reira i haere koutou a kua hoki mai nei ki roto i a matau i te ra nei. Hari ana te kite i a koe. No reira nga mihi nga mihi nga mihi ki a tatau.  
[ 
Thank you Mr Speaker. I extend acknowledgments salutations and congratulations to all of you of Ngati Porou who travelled from afar to be here in our House today. I acknowledge you elder Tamati you and our leaders of Maoridom who accompanied our Minister as well the other day to express our sympathy to the family of the King of Tonga. Your entourage went and has returned today to be with us. How wonderful it is to see you. And so fond salutations three times over to us. 
] 
I was listening to one of the earlier speakers talk about ongoing bills etc. establishing a lock between the Crown and Ngati Porou—as if anybody from any other tribe thinks that Ngati Porou has not already got a lock on the Government. Hekia on that side Parekura on this side my whanaunga up there Stephen Ihaka wanting to put his hand up for the Greens is it Stephen? And I understand Herewini is wanting to stand for United Future. Me mihi atu. I do not think you are going to lose any relationship with the Government there Api. Your situation is safe for many generations to come. 
Hoi ano hara i te mea kia ’hakapau korero i te mea mohio ana au kei konei a Parekura me Hekia hei whakaoti i wa tatau kaupapa i te ra nei. No reira me mihi atu ki a koutou. 
[ 
However it is not because to continue talking is a waste of words but rather because I am aware that Parekura and Hekia will cover our matter off today. So I am merely acknowledging your presence. 
] 
Just one thing. Parekura promised me when I came into the House that if I supported this Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill right to the end he would ensure that I got a bach in Tolaga Bay. I came into the House today to ask him whether or not that clause is in the bill and he said: “I think some of my relations have put a casino there already.”  
Hoi ano hari ana au kia tae mai me te mohio ano hoki koutou ’hakoa nga piki nga heke i roto i a matau i roto i tenei Whare e tu kotahi ana nga mema Maori hei tautoko i te kaupapa kia whakahokia nga mana ki nga iwi. Tena koutou tena koutou kia ora tatau katoa. 
[ 
However it pleases me to be here. You need to be aware as well that despite the ups and downs we experience here amongst ourselves in this House Maori members stand as one in supporting policy whereby autonomy is returned to tribes. So salutations acknowledgments and good wishes to you collectively and to us all. 
] 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Labour—Ikaroa-Rawhiti) 
: 
 Ko Hikurangi te maunga ko Waiapu te awa ko Ngati Porou te iwi whanau rua. Te rere haere atu te awa o Uawa e tae kaha i te moutere o Pourewa. I reira ke e tu atu te waka o Hinematioro. E whakahoki atu te kitenga o Te Whakatatare ki te whare o Ruakapanga i te taenga o Te Kani peka ana ki te wananga o Te Rawheoro nga karangatanga o Rangiuia tihei mauri ora.  
E mihi kau ana i a koutou nga koroua nga kuia o te kainga mai i Tikirau ki Te Toka-a-Taiau. E rekareka atu i te kite atu i a koutou e tae atu i konei mo te oti pai nei. Ahakoa nga piki nga heke. E whai atu e whai kaha atu koutou. E mohio atu tatau mo ratau e rere atu e kore e konei. Ahakoa e kore e konei e mohiotia atu ko wetahi o ratau he mahi wharikitia mo tenei otinga. No reira tena koutou.  
Te papa e Apirana tena koe. Ta Tamati e mihi kau ana. Ki a koutou o nga tokotoru tapu e noho i mua ra a te papa a Barlow Uncle Noel Tate e tino mihi atu i a koutou. Tahia koutou. He whakaaro mo ratau e kore e konei. No reira tena koutou tena tatau. E Ming tena koe. He nui atu o nga korero mo nga Hainamana e tae atu i konei i tango whenua. Kaua koe e haere kaha atu i reira. E Herewini ana koutou katoa. He tino kaha atu koutou. Tena tatau. 
[ 
Hikurangi is the mountain Waiapu is the river and Ngati Porou is the tribe on both sides of the family. The canoe sails on the Uawa River. It reaches Pourewa Island where Hinematioro’s canoe was. When Te Kani arrived Te Whakatatare was taken back to the house of Ruakapanga and then went to Te Rawheoro the traditional school of learning; to the descendants of Rangiuia behold the breath of life.  
I salute you the elderly men and women from home from Tikirau to Te Toka-a-Taiau. It is wonderful to see you here for the completion of this bill. You have pursued it with strength. We all know that those who have passed on are no longer with us. Although they are not present it is well known that they laid the groundwork so that this bill could be finalised. And so I thank you.  
To my Uncle Apirana greetings. Greetings Sir Tamati. To the sacred trio sitting in the front—Uncle Barlow Uncle Noel Tate—I congratulate you. Our thoughts are with those who are no longer with us. And so I salute you. Greetings Ming. There has been a lot of talk about the Chinese coming here to take land. Do not go there. To Herewini and to you all you are all strong. Thank you. 
] 
The only thing I ever promised Hone Harawira was a mamae during duck shooting season. [ 
Interruption 
] And I hope that instead of shooting mallard they try to shoot him. 
Can I say seriously that this is a wonderful day to celebrate. We have done five settlements today and it attests to the seriousness that some of us try to ensure is imbued through that great statement of nationhood. I want to recognise the Minister of Maori Affairs Dr Sharples and especially Chris Finlayson the Attorney-General who defended his right not to say anything yesterday. But I want to thank Chris for his effort and to remember my colleague Michael Cullen and Mita Ririnui and all of those who had something to do with this. I want to especially recognise my very close cousin who has good blood in her Hekia Parata the Minister of Education and to say that I am very proud of her being Minister of Education even though at times we may disagree.  
The redress is here. Everybody has read it. There are a whole lot of things in here that will make life better for our people. There certainly have been struggles. One of our tupuna—we have a whole lot of chiefs and chieftainesses in Ngati Porou no Tai Rawhiti—was Te Kani-a-Takirau who was a relation of my tupuna. He was well known. He hikoi-ed to Pukawa in November 1885 to try to ensure that unity was true and proper amongst Maori leaders. In all that he pervaded over Ngati Porou he lived with the great people of Hauiti and I want to remember that today. 
Tribes are not too unlike Pakeha Christian churches. They have the same God and the same goal but they differ at times. And that is what Treaty settlements seem to be to me. You want a good outcome and there is a good outcome here for our tribe. I am of Ngati Porou descent and my nanny said to me when I used to roam around on the road—she was from Te Horo—“Whatever you do e hoa don’t tramp on any Maori’s neck whether it is down in Te Wai Pounamu or up in Ngapuhi.” I said: “Why is that Nan?”. She said: “Because you might be tramping on your own neck.” Whakapapa is a great thing as my colleague Nanaia put forward about the mahi between Te Puea and Apirana Ngata. 
I took umbrage. I have really warmed to the Minister—the Attorney-General the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. He said a few great things today about finishing the Maniapoto settlement building the whare for the 28th Maori Battalion and ensuring that the rest of the Ngati Porou settlement will be done in this sitting. I think that is what he was leading up to and I want to thank him for that and I look forward to it. He made a bit of a faux pas in suggesting that Ngati Porou were sluggish in economic development. I want to tell you that Ta Apirana was way ahead of his time. He gave Taranaki the first 12 cows. They have forgotten about that now that they are the big shareholders in Fonterra. He built a dairy factory. He was ahead of his time. 
Then this damn Kawana legislation convinced our people in the late 1940s 1950s and 1960s to pack their gear up. I remember being a 5-year-old in 1955 sitting on the post of a cream stand—people do not know what a cream stand is any more—with my nanny watching the Haengas the Crawfords the Tautaus and the Kopas pull their houses down. They were going to this faraway land called Wainuiomata or Manuwera. It may as well have been New York for us because we hardly got to go to Tolaga Bay. Our people have been transient. In those 22 years 86 percent of our population left Ngati Porou. I am seeing them going to Aussie now. It is a repeat. But I would suggest to Minister Finlayson do not ever underestimate Ngati Porou’s economic prowess. They held on to their land. They are going forward. 
I was part of a group who decided to build an abattoir in Ruatoria I recall which Potter Swann designed. Everybody said we were mad. If only we had built that abattoir. 
Hone Harawira 
: You were mad not to! 
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA 
: That is right. We had the water. We had worked it all out and my cousin Martin Kingi said to me: “Build the abattoir.” Martin was a bit of a drinker. I think of the people who are not here. I think about Bill Te Kani and Uncle Noel and my Uncle Hinga two of the last of the 28th Maori Battalion. Let it not be said that Ngati Porou have not done their bit to serve their country. Honore Chesley had a smile like a million dollars. There are some great people in Ngati Porou. I think of Auntie Gaga and the famed prophet and scholar Koro Dewes who believed that life began and ended at Whangaokena. He was a great great warrior and a great partner for Uncle Api and them coming here and finding ways through for this settlement. I think of Maraea-te-Kawa Pehi Kaa who has just passed on Senior Tangaere Tip Tamae-te-Maro Tom—all of those people. Auntie Kate I want to mihi to but I do not see her here. And Ta Henare who has passed away. To all of the people up in the gallery here it is great to see you all. This is a good day. Take your time going home and keep an eye on everything that is going on. 
I thought I would use the last minute of my call again. You know Maori signed up for forestry plantations at 3 percent. It was a rip-off. It was terrible. They were chased with the Noxious Weeds Act to get rid of the scrub and the gorse. Then all of a sudden there was money allocated from the Government to do forestry. I am not too sure what it does for our people. So I can assure you that the guardians the runanganui in charge of this big effort will ensure that the best results with decent partners will happen for our people. Let it not be said that we rely on the middle people all the time. I want to say to our leaders quite seriously: trust yourself your own intellect and intelligence and believe in the people living there inside. It is important we get expertise from outside but not to chastise and control us like lawyers and accountants have done over several years. Let us ensure that we can do that and make sure that we can leap forward on it. 
It is a great day for Ngati Porou. I am certainly proud to be here with my cousin Hekia. Rino thought she was wearing Ratana colours. I told him “They’re not Ratana colours; we had those before you.” That is about Hiruharama. That is why Whaea Tilly has got the purple on too. So tena koe. 
E mihi kau ana i a koutou katoa e Vic. [ 
I congratulate you all Vic. 
] I want to mihi to my whanaunga Heeni and Maria Whitehead. You have really been consistent Maria. Tena koe. Tena tatou. 
Pai ana te rangi nei mo tatau o Ngati Porou. Kare mo te korero whakahihi hoki pai ki te kainga tukuna mahi atu te mahi pai mo nga uri katoa o tatau. Kia ora tatau. 
[ 
This is a great day for us of Ngati Porou. We will not speak with arrogance as well but return home nicely launch it and accomplish the positives for all of our kinfolk. Congratulations everyone. 
] 
Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Tena koe e te Mana Whakahaere otira tena tatou katoa e whakawhaiti nei. Ko Hikurangi te maunga ko Waiapu te awa ko Ngati Porou te iwi tena tatou tena tatou tena tatou katoa. 
[ 
Greetings to you Mr Speaker and indeed to all of us packed together here. Hikurangi is the mountain Waiapu is the river and Ngati Porou are the people so salutations acknowledgments and greetings to us all. 
] 
Can I say how proud I am to be standing in the House today in your company and in the company of all our tupuna whose presence I feel around us today. I am pleased that we were able to begin this final reading of the Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill with our Minister of Maori Affairs and as I rushed in from the airport listening to the speeches and the names on the roll-call of some of the Ngati Porou people who have been attendant upon this claim I was concerned that I would get here in time and be able to participate in the final passage of this bill. Katahi nei au ka hoki mai i Tuwharetoa me nga mihi a Ta Tumu me te whanau o Tuwharetoa ki a tatou mo tenei ra whakahirahira. 
[ 
I have just returned from Tuwharetoa with salutations from Sir Tumu and the Tuwharetoa family on this momentous day. 
] 
I would also like to join with the previous speakers in the House from all parties for the sentiments they have expressed for the ideas that they have canvassed for the acknowledgments that they have paid to Ngati Porou and for the recognition of the particular and unique and distinctive contribution that Ngati Porou has made to our nation of Aotearoa New Zealand. We indeed do come from a tribe with particular characteristics that are sometimes misunderstood by the rest of the world and that strengthen all of us no matter what pathway we walk in our lives and no matter what place we occupy at different stages of our lives. 
He tu whakaiti tenei ki mua i a koutou he tu whakahihi hoki na te mea he nui nga mahi kua mahia e koutou nga kanohi o ratou kua mene atu ki te po. Kei te mohio tatou ehara i te mea ko koutou anake e waha nei i tenei kaupapa engari ko nga whanau ko nga tangata ko nga kuia ko nga tipuna kua mene atu ki te po; kei konei tonu ratou a kei waenganui i a tatou. 
[ 
I rise in humility before you and proudly as well because much work has been done by you collectively as representatives of those who have gathered in the world of death. We are conscious that it is not just you alone who bear this matter but families people elderly men and womenfolk and ancestors who have assembled in the world of the dead; they are still here of course among you. 
] 
This has been a long journey. It has been a long journey and at different times different people have carried the responsibility of keeping the process going of keeping the momentum up. It has cost a lot of energy and emotion and time for all of you who have been involved with it. I want to acknowledge all of you who have at different times carried this kaupapa because it has relied not on one person but on everyone at different stages.  
Although it has been in the context of a Treaty settlement where injustices and breaches of relationships and trust have characterised this process it has nevertheless allowed Ngati Porou to retell our stories to ourselves to remind ourselves of the narratives that make us who we are to remind us of the people from whom we are descended and to remind us of the responsibility that we have to the future. So as other speakers have remarked this is indeed the end of a particular chapter but it is a chapter amongst many chapters yet to unfold in the Ngati Porou story not only of who we are as a people but of the continuing contribution that we can and must continue to make to our Aotearoa New Zealand.  
We all of us engaged in this process are nation builders. All iwi across the country have a particular and distinct contribution to make to who we are as a nation and I am mindful that there have been four other settlements passed in this House today. I think that in going forward the particular things that I am interested in are what we do with this settlement how we build the strength of Ngati Porou for the future how we continue to invest in the cultural richness of who Ngati Porou are and how we ensure that the dialectal richness of our language is imbued in our children and that we do not rely only on the education system to support that. It is not the education system’s language and it is not the Government’s language.  
If we want te reo o Ngati Porou to be transmitted and transformed and to be part of the language of our children and of our mokopuna then we have to speak it. It is not the Government that comes to our christenings or our twenty-firsts or our weddings or our tangihanga or our hura kohatu. It is us. It is us who stand on the sidelines and cheer on Ngati Porou East Coast rugby to ever-greater victory. It is us who speak to ourselves about ourselves in our most modest way! It is important that we are able to do that with the full range of the beautiful vocabulary that is part and parcel of who we are as Ngati Porou.  
So I would hope that we are going to invest our settlement in the growth of that cultural capital as well because it is through using our language that we carry the full beauty and breadth and depth of the stories of who we are. I would hope that we are going to invest our capital in the growth of our social well-being. Yes that does include employment. I believe as I have said that we do not actually have an unemployment problem; we have a skills-deficit problem.  
Ngati Porou through its his and her story has demonstrated its capacity to invest in education to understand the importance of developing the most potent the most powerful the most transformational resource we will ever have and that is the one between our two ears. It is how we think about ourselves it is how we process the world around us and it is how we take the knowledge from the past and create new knowledge in order to continue the unfolding story of who we are as Ngati Porou and how we contribute that back to Aotearoa New Zealand.  
 So I would hope—and I do not think it is coincidental that I have the honour to stand before you today as our Minister of Education—that we in Ngati Porou will take the opportunity to really invest in growing the educational achievement of Ngati Porou children wherever they are kei te kainga kei te whenua. It is important that our babies and toddlers go to early childhood education whether it is playcentre kindergarten puna reo or kohanga reo. The fact is that it is important that they go that they engage in the learning process they take advantage of Te Whariki—the architects of which are in the gallery today—and that they grow and become competent and go on to primary school.  
It is important that they are then received by teachers who care about their learning who want to see them progress and who understand that it is as much about language identity and culture as it is about academic achievement. It is important that they then transfer on into secondary school and achieve National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2. They will then have a meaningful qualification that allows them to have a self-determining life. It would be helpful if you could contribute to our target of 85 percent of all 18-year-olds achieving NCEA Level 2 by 2016. Of course it would be great if we could have a competition between iwi as to how many more Maori children we could have successful in our education system because then they will be self-directing and self-determining in terms of their life choices and their life chances.  
I would hope that with our settlement as others have said we invest in the physical assets that are the basis of our rohe that we grow that with the science and innovation that others have mentioned here and that we take advantage of the technological opportunities that ultra-fast broadband and the internet give us. I hope that we do all of that with the intelligence and the strategic outlook that others in this House have mentioned tonight and that we grow the social economic and cultural capital of Ngati Porou not just for Ngati Porou but for the ongoing contribution that has been part and parcel of the way Ngati Porou have participated in the growth of our nation. 
 As others have said when I come to the House every day and I pass that bust of Sir Apirana Ngata I feel motivated and inspired and I never feel alone ever in this place. The weight of expectation of all of you in the gallery and all whom you represent and reflect from home and from other parts of the country inspires all of us here—my brother Parekura who is obviously focused on what I am saying—in the House and we are motivated and committed to making a difference. Whether here on this marae or on our marae in Ngati Porou all of us are responsible for raising the quality of citizenship for not only paying the price of citizenship of which Sir Apirana Ngata spoke but for also receiving the gifts of citizenship that are the reciprocal obligation between the Crown and iwi in the honouring of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the compact between ourselves.  
So I am proud and humbled to be a participant in this chapter of the development of Ngati Porou and of our country. In so doing I would like to acknowledge the Ministers who have made it possible: my colleague the Hon Christopher Finlayson; previous Ministers of Treaty settlements; Dr Michael Cullen; and those Ministers back before them some of whom have been mentioned in the House today; and indeed everyone who has had a hand in this officials and negotiators and all of you who have been responsible for bringing to fruition this settlement today. I acknowledge you I thank you and I wish you well in turning this chapter into yet a greater saga of development by Ngati Porou for Ngati Porou and for Aotearoa New Zealand. Tena koutou tena koutou tena koutou katoa. Kia ora. 
Bill read a third time. 
Waiata; karakia 
Waiata; karakia 
The House adjourned at 6.18 p.m.