Flavell Te Ururoa: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:640;Page:10493] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
Tena koe Madam Assistant Speaker. Kia ora tatou e teneipo. Six months ago not far from here down at Pipitea Marae there was a gathering of some 45 lawyers a number that by all accounts appears to be unprecedented in the history of the Waitangi Tribunal. They were brought together by the call from Judge Carrie Wainwright to attend a judicial conference in response to the complaints from more than 50 Maori groups concerning unfair and prejudicial treatment by the Crown’s Treaty settlement process. 
The report of the Maori Affairs Committee on Vote Treaty Negotiations gives little hope that there has been any change to this dire situation. The report describes the Minister assuring the committee “that officials acted in good faith but that the document discovery process was inadequate at the time” that an “exercise of judgement is required” and that further advice on the process is required “to ensure that such oversights in the supply of evidence to claimant groups will not be repeated.” The key words are: “inadequate” “exercise of judgment” and “oversights”. What the Minister could have said comes straight from the report of the tribunal into the Tamaki-makau-rau settlement process—namely: “The Crown’s policy and practice have been unfair both as to process and outcome.” In reviewing the 2007-08 appropriations we cannot ignore the conclusions of claimants and the tribunal that fair and equitable settlements are being thwarted by inequities in the terms of settlement the fact that proposed redress has been set aside and a process too flawed to achieve progress. 
Indeed so desperate is the situation that the Waitangi Tribunal report on the Tamaki-makau-rau settlement process urged that Crown negotiations with NgatiWhatua o Orakei must be halted immediately. This crisis seems to have fallen on deaf ears although the select committee cuts to the chase. In relation to concerns that the Crown had not consulted with other tangata whenua throughout Tamaki-makau-rau the Minister assured the committee that “… NgatiWhatua o Orakei has engaged extensively with other claimants”. Who will take responsibility for the Crown’s failure to interact with cross-claimants as it promised and failure to provide accurate information about their status in negotiations evidence the tribunal described as being provided “late reluctantly and piecemeal”. This is not just a one-off isolated crisis. Less than a week after the Tamaki-makau-rau report was issued the tribunal released another damning report this time stating that during the Crown’s process in Te Arawa: “OTS failed to act as an honest broker in the negotiation process … failed to discharge its Treaty and fiduciary duties to all Maori … OTS did not act honourably and with the utmost good faith.” 
Under the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 section 8I “Annual report on implementation of recommendations” the Minister of Maori Affairs apparently is required to report on progress each year. Well the Minister has not tabled a report at all since 1995 but apparently will do so in the next couple of weeks in order to catch up for 12 years. Well he may as well not do it now because the Waitangi Tribunal has done the job. Twelve years of no monitoring by the Minister is not good enough and our people expect more. 
There are longstanding concerns of claimants. The select committee report makes it quite clear that despite the unanimous and ferocious opposition to the 1992 fiscal cap the Government is working to a fiscal cap—a cap that has continued to be applied to the Treaty settlement process since day one. The report spells it out as a general assumption of three $19 million settlements per year. We believe that it is essential that claimant funding needs to be reviewed and increased so that all parties are on a level playing field. As part of this the fiscal cap on Treaty settlements must go. The Maori Party will not minimise the actions of the Office of Treaty Settlements as being mere oversights—oversights that the tribunal views as “cavalier unfair and generally uncooperative”. Something needs to change today. 
The tribunal has concluded that in many cases the process of settling is damaging more relationships than it is improving. It is in light of this that we in the Maori Party are calling for an independent settlements authority to achieve greater resolution to settlements so that settlements can be settled earlier fairly and with a broad consensus for the process. The Maori Party will not ignore the urgency of an underfunded and oversubscribed tribunal. We know that the tribunal needs to be resourced sufficiently so that it can deal with claims more speedily. 
In closing I want to return to the Minister’s words in response to the 2007-08 estimates in Vote Treaty Negotiations: “inadequate” “exercise of judgment” and “oversights”. What we in this House and indeed others outside want to hear is a commitment to ensure impartiality fairness greater transparency faster processing and better access to mediation. The time for oversights is well and truly over. What we in this House want to hear is a commitment to justice—Treaty justice. Kia ora tatou.