Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:617;Page:12760] 
7.  
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: What is the current status of negotiations if any between the Crown and Tainui over the West Coast harbours of Kawhia Aotea Raglan Manukau and the Waikato River? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House)  
on behalf of the  
Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: In 1995 the then National Government settled one part of Tainui’s claim for $170 million. What was missed out at that time which includes the matters referred to by the member requires a further settlement. The Government is in preliminary discussions with Tainui about the settlement of the omitted matters. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Does the Minister understand Nanaia Mahuta’s statement that: “The Government will need to work hard to retain the confidence of my electorate and strengthen their relationships with Tainui waka.” to mean that the seabed and foreshore around the harbours of Kawhia Aotea Raglan and Manukau will have to pass into fee simple title under the ownership of Tainui? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No the foreshore and seabed legislation as I have said many times does not pre-empt any future treaty settlements one way or the other. 
Mahara Okeroa 
: Will the discussions with Tainui about its outstanding historical claims be slowed down by the foreshore and seabed legislation? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: No such claims are not affected by the proposed foreshore and seabed legislation. The legislation provides for a forward-looking regime for the recognition of existing or surviving customary rights and interests. It also addresses any potential effects on existing customary rights and interests resulting from the vesting of full title in the Crown—it does not affect future treaty discussions. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Who was in Government when the Tainui settlement was effected who was it who gave Tainui to believe that those outstanding matters would be later dealt with and who gave Doug Graham a knighthood for doing all this? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The then National Government in the same way that it vested the ownership of Lake Taupo and the water column above it. And of course that Government also vested title to Lake Ellesmere in NgaiTahu as part of the NgaiTahu settlement. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With the greatest of respect that must have been a mistaken answer by the Minister. That cannot possibly be true given what I have been reading around the country. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. That is a point of political scoring and it does not always come off. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Has his Government given any assurances or promises to Tainui leading up to Nanaia Mahuta’s statement in the House last week that she and Tainui would stay with Labour; if so what are the details of those promises or assurances? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations and the Minister of Finance met with Tainui once and the Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations met with Tainui a further time. Assurances were given at those meetings that the foreshore and seabed legislation does not pre-empt any future treaty settlements and negotiations—that is all. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Is the Minister aware of the comments this morning on  
Mana News 
 by Tainui chief executive Hemi Rau who was suggesting that these assurances given by Ministers to Tainui will see them hold ownership of the seabed and the foreshore? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Obviously I am aware that Hemi Rau was also quoted as saying that they were reminding the Government that what was promised in their settlement legislation of 1995 was the right to negotiate for ownership of those harbours. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Will the Minister give this House an assurance that the Tainui people will not end up owning the foreshore and seabed of those four West Coast harbours? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Treaty negotiations do not take place in this House by way of supplementary question and answer; they consist of sitting down and negotiating. I am sure the member is capable of finding out more about the progress of those talks from within his own caucus. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That was an extremely long answer to a question that should have been answered “yes” or“no”. Is it reasonable that we should be given an extra supplementary question over our allocation to try to tease that information out of the Minister? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. I thought the Minister addressed the question. The member cannot demand a “yes” or “no” answer to a question. That has been ruled on hundreds of times. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: In an expansion to my earlier question does the Minister expect the House to believe that Nanaia Mahuta pledged her support and the support of Tainui to this Government without any assurances or promises whatsoever of actions by this Government to meet their needs? 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I suggest to you that that was not a reply to the question. We are in an interesting situation because the Minister appears to be giving an assurance to the House that no assurance has been given in order to get a member to pledge support to the Government. When put to the test I think he might be trying to get away from that first answer. Of course if the Government has actually been pledging taxpayer resources to an MP in order to keep that member onside then that is a matter the House has a legitimate interest in knowing about. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: That last point had nothing at all to do with the question asked by the member’s colleague Mr Ken Shirley. No suggestion has been made in any question so far that any money had passed hands. The only time I am aware of that ever happening in this House was when Alamein Kopu was essentially bought into supporting the previous Government. As to the question itself I had already told the House that Tainui was given an assurance that nothing in the legislation affected future treaty settlements. The question itself was therefore based upon a false premise. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I listened to the question. I did not think that the reply the Minister gave initially addressed it sufficiently. The Minister has now made a statement at the end of his point of order that does address it. Perhaps the Minister might care to read that into the question. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I am prepared to reaffirm yet again that the Government has told Tainui—as indeed it has told everybody else in the country—that nothing in the foreshore and seabed legislation pre-empts any future treaty settlement. It actually cannot do so. That is the nature of the sovereignty of Parliament. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I take this opportunity to point out that in a previous answer the Minister misrepresented the position of a previous Government. We would not negotiate with the Tainui people because we were not prepared to give away the ownership of the seabed and foreshore. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As the member well knows he is making a point—not a point of order.