Henare PeeniPEENI HENARE (Labour—Tāmaki Makaurau): Tēnā koe Mr Chair. Thank you very much for this opportunity. I want to touch on a couple of points that the Hon Annette King made with reference to my colleague Mr Davis and his contribution. New subsection (3) of section 15 inserted by clause 10 says: Subsection (2) does not affect any right of first refusal that a person or group of persons has in relation to the land under Treaty of Waitangi claims settlement or collective redress Act or deed." The amendment tabled by my colleague Mr Davis wants to include in there after "any" the words "current or future". I think that is an important thing. He spoke of a noble tribe from the Far North a tribe called Ngāpuhi and actually if you hear the claims being put in front of the Waitangi Tribunal the extension of their land goes all the way into Auckland all the way down past Mahurangi and falls within the Auckland Unitary Plan and that is an important fact that is being missed here. That is really important and I want to raise a particular case within Tāmaki-makau-rau that actually points to the ambiguity and some of the issues that will fall out from this type of proposed legislation. I want us to all think of Ngā Whare Waatea Marae in Tāmaki-makau-rau—Ngā Whare Waatea Marae. A bit of a history lesson—that land was confiscated by the troops who raided the Waikato. It was subsequently sold on to another family member after the confiscation. It was then taken by the Public Works Act. It was taken by the Public Works Act in the hope that Child Youth and Family could use it to build hostels for troubled teens. That was the purpose of that land. It was not used. It sat vacant there for a long long long time. A visionary in South Auckland the mother of Mr Willie Jackson a former member of this House decided—Hon Gerry Brownlee: What'd you call him? Did you call him a visionary?PEENI HENARE: Ha ha! Well he is part Ngāti Porou and so am I so he can be a visionary for the purposes of this discussion. They decided to use it to build a marae to service the people of South Auckland. They built the marae to service urban-based Māori. Those who did not have any particular strong connection to their tribes—those who were disconnected—attached themselves to Ngā Whare Waatea Marae. Ngā Whare Waatea Marae goes to apply for a permit to make sure that they can expand on their buildings so that they can cater for the influx of numbers. This is where the whole situation falls apart because that land is currently still owned as a result of the Public Works Act by Child Youth and Family. That is a really big issue because it is not using that home yet it is stopping the use of that land by a community organisation. No right of first refusal has gone back to any of the owners whether they were the ones subsequent to the confiscation. Ngāti Paoa has a claim on that land which has been heard by the Waitangi Tribunal. All of these parties are involved in that one piece of land. How is this Government proposing to fix that? How is this Government proposing to offer a right of first refusal to one particular group while forgetting the others? It is doing it by subterfuge. It is pushing this proposed part tacking it on to Part 1 and just brushing it off as a minor amendment. It is definitely not that. Say that to the people at Ngā Whare Waatea Marae. Say that to those who attach themselves to that marae and the services it provides. I wonder what is going to happen with that particular land given the size of it. There are large vacant lots on there and I suspect that this Government is going to move very shortly to call it a social housing project and deny the rights of Ngā Whare Waatea Marae which has occupied that area for a long time. This is the ambiguity that comes out of a rushed process where people are not heard—where the democratic process is not engaged. People outside of these walls do not have an opportunity to contribute."