Maori Trustee Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Maori Trustee Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:653;Page:2764] 
Maori Trustee Amendment Bill 
In Committee 
Part 1  Amendments to principal Act 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I rise to speak in the Committee stage of the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill particularly to Part 1. Supplementary Order Papers containing some technical amendments and an amendment to the commencement date have been lodged by the Minister of Maori Affairs and we certainly support them. 
The history of this particular bill is that it has been well debated in this House. The previous Labour Government introduced it with two specific components. One was to have the office of the Maori Trustee established as a stand-alone entity and the other was to do with accelerating Maori development. The Maori Affairs Committee at the time gave the bill quite a full hearing and what we now have in the Committee stage are some minor but useful amendments. 
As I point out some of those issues I hope that the Minister in the chair the Hon Georgina te Heuheu sees fit to take a call because what has happened is that of the two parts of the bill as it was introduced by the previous Labour Government the first part of the bill has remained all but intact with some useful amendments and the second part regarding Maori development has been left for a further conversation. 
I was not a member of that select committee but I remember the debate in the House. It is interesting that people tend to forget what they have said in Opposition once they are in Government. I have a particular statement here which is a very forceful one: “National believes that the role of the Maori Trustee needs fundamental revision. National believes that it is time to have a deep think about how Maori land should be reviewed particularly the assets involved with the Maori Trustee. It is fundamentally wrong to have this approach. It simply transfers assets that could have been transferred to iwi back into a centralised approach … It simply transfers assets that could have been transferred back to iwi back into a centralised approach.” That was said by none other than Dr Wayne Mapp during the first reading debate. What he was saying there basically is that what Labour was doing in trying to set up the Maori Trustee office as a stand-alone entity was not the right thing to do— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Oh rubbish! You’ve got it wrong. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA 
: —and that we should in fact give all the assets back to iwi. I have that statement here I say to Mr Henare and I am quite happy to table the statements made by Dr Mapp when he was in the House. 
Actually the important thing about this particular issue is what it leads one to think. National now that it is in Government has a real ability to add things into the Maori Trustee Act. When National members were in Opposition they talked about the types of things they said they would do. Now that National is in Government it has the prime opportunity to do those things and it has not done so. 
I will give an example. One of criticisms voiced by Mr Henare when he was in Opposition was that it was difficult to find Maori landowners. Many of the Maori electorate MPs—in fact many of the Maori MPs in this House—know just how difficult it is to find Maori landowners and to try to ascribe a lot of those unclaimed moneys. Is there anything in the Supplementary Order Papers that suggests a way of putting greater obligation on the Maori Trustee to do this? There is nothing. Members opposite when in Opposition criticised things that were very difficult to do and they said that this should be done and that should be done. Now they have an opportunity to do that and they have not done so. I have raised that point because it is very interesting to hear what people say in Opposition and do not deliver on when in Government. 
Largely this bill is not controversial. I think everyone would agree that setting up the Maori Trust Office as a stand-alone entity is a good thing. I see that it is the strong intention of the Government to make sure that the Act comes into force by 1 July and I think the sooner the better. That is very important. The Act is to be read in line with Te Ture Whenua Maori Act and I do want to pick up on some comments made by Dr Wayne Mapp in the previous debate. I also agree that Te Ture Whenua Maori Act is in need of review and some changes should and must be made. 
This is a slight departure from the debate but it is a useful one I think. When we consider a number of the inhibiting and constraining factors around developing unproductive Maori land we see that part of it lies in a legislative solution and part of it lies in policy but a great part of it lies in a reorientation of how current policy is used. I am particularly pleased to see that Te Puni Kokiri is continuing its review of Maori land with regard to the valuation of Maori land and the rating of Maori land. I think this in part may help to loosen some of the constrictions. 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
: 
 I welcome the opportunity to speak to the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill during the Committee stage and I am sure my friends and colleagues from the Opposition will be pleased to know that I intend taking a number of calls on it. There is a lot to share with them and for them to understand and come to grips with. 
But I want to start by reflecting on one statement that my friend and colleague Master Hipkins has reiterated throughout this evening in respect of the previous bill—that this is a Labour bill that National is bringing forward. The truth of the matter is that he is right but what he has not said is that Labour was unable to get things done. It has been left to the great National Government that we are becoming to clean up and clear the slate. This bill is a classic example. Let me if I may take a moment of the Committee’s time and read from the select committee report: “Because it is desirable that changes to establish the Maori Trustee as a stand-alone organisation be passed into legislation before the close of this Parliament we resolved that splitting the bill along these lines was prudent.” In recognition of trying to get this bill through the previous Parliament Labour split the bill but it still could not deliver. 
The Opposition might remind us from time to time that when this great National Government was in Opposition we opposed this bill. That is correct as well. But the reason National opposed the bill was as my honourable colleague the previous speaker Nanaia Mahuta has pointed out that this was part of a much larger bill commonly referred to as the Maori Trustee and Maori Development Amendment Bill. In fact because of the great stewardship and leadership shown by the select committee members who considered this bill which I note was made up of a majority of members who are now Government members they were able to bring some focus and some common sense to the reality of “let’s just deal with the Maori Trustee aspects of this”. 
We were opposed because on the one hand there was a need to deal with the specific issues around the Maori Trustee and the Maori Trust Office but the then Government also on the other hand tried to create this monolith Maori Development Corporation to which it was going to appoint a whole lot of ministerial cronies and create this huge slush fund for them to spend. We opposed that because time and time again we have had reference made to political appointments. My learned friends on the Opposition benches are past masters and colleagues of this particular skill. We were opposed to that and through our great vision and drive and the majority we had on the select committee we were able to separate it out and create a focused bill to deal specifically with the issues confronting the Maori Trust Office. 
As we work our way through this bill I think it will provide an excellent opportunity to focus on the work that the Maori Trust Office does and needs to do because there are a number of aspects in this bill that will drag the office and the Maori Trustee into the 21st century. For instance there are clauses in the bill that deal with the fact that the Maori Trustee no longer has to just sign cheques and cheques only but will be able to use other means of efficient distribution and so on. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I will pick up from where I left off. In terms of the opportunities provided by this bill and the associated mechanisms that may help to support the development of unproductive Maori land which I think falls on the Maori Trustee to try to aid the real issue is trying to review Te Ture Whenua Maori Act to look at how the role of the Maori Trustee can support the development of unproductive Maori lands. Many of these lands might fall under his purview. I think further thinking can happen in that space. It was interesting to listen to the speaker on the other side of the Chamber Paul Quinn. Not once did he mention a lot of the detail of Part 1 but then as a new member he may not have read the full part of the bill. 
There are obviously some practical issues in respect of setting up the Maori Trust Office. At the moment the Maori Trustee exists under Te Puni Kokiri. They co-locate in many regions. Their office spaces share resources. The new opportunity that is afforded here is that the Maori Trustee will be set up as a corporation sole and it will have in its own right the capacity to employ people. It will continue to have deputy trustee officers who will have certain delegations. I think that is all well and good and it is really important. My only concern in terms of the transitional issues that the two parties will have to consider is the fact that we are in a recession. I hope they do not lose the opportunity if and where useful to continue to co-locate. There are some very sound financial reasons why I think that is really important. 
The other aspect that could be considered—and I am not sure whether the Maori Affairs Committee deliberated on it—is that of the annual reports. Given that the trustee is to be set up as a stand-alone entity that will be fully accountable for its operations I hope the annual reports provide greater clarity to the beneficiaries of unclaimed monies. Those are exactly the kinds of things that the Maori Trustee will undertake on their behalf. The devil will be in the detail and in the reporting. 
I welcome under schedule 2 the insertion of “the Maori Trustee” to schedule 4 of the Public Finance Act which will give a level of accountability that will be very important to many of the beneficiaries who have a right to know what the Maori Trustee is doing on their behalf. The explanatory note and some other information I have read suggest that some beneficiaries will choose or elect to retain their small shareholdings within the Maori Trust Office. That may well be the case and that is why greater transparency around annual reporting will be helpful to them. 
The other aspect of Part 1 that I want to comment on in particular relates to the termination of appointment of the Maori Trustee. I will take some time on this because I have some questions to ask. The criteria for terminating the appointment of the Maori Trustee are well set out in the bill. Essentially there could be a situation whereby the Maori Trustee is appointed for 5 years and rolls over for another 5 years or the trustee could be terminated according to express criteria in the bill. If the Minister chooses to terminate the employment of the Maori Trustee who then carries out the functions? It is not clear. Although there are deputy trustees who have specific written delegations if the Minister is required for some very public reasons or based on some very public criticisms to suspend the office of the Maori Trustee what happens to those delegated functions in that time period? In the way the legislation reads one must have express written delegations to the deputy trustee. 
I ask the Minister in the chair the Hon Georgina te Heuheu to clarify that particular question for no other reason than to highlight that there could be a bit of a difficulty there. Often with appointments like this the consideration of termination or suspension of time in office is carried out purely for political reasons. That presents a difficulty in terms of the smooth functioning and running of the office. I would like the Minister to take a call to clarify that. 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I am mindful that the previous speaker in her opening 5-minute speech said that what members say when they are in Opposition is the opposite of what they say when they are in Government. But I am not sure whether she was talking about us or them. 
Opposition members have mentioned that the Maori Trustee will stand alone they have mentioned Wayne Mapp and they have mentioned all those flowery things that could happen to the Maori Trustee. Actually all of those things are happening under this bill. As for the stuff that is not happening—the development stuff that Nanaia Mahuta talked about—I ask Labour members why they did not put it in the bill when they were in Government. Oh that is right—they did not do that. They tried to cleverly siphon off $35 million into some sort of development fund but nobody knew how that development fund was to be worked out. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: Will the member take a question? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: No I am not a Minister. I should be—but OK that is not for me to say. All of the things the previous speaker talked about—the corporation sole and a stand-alone Maori Trustee—are good excellent ideas. That is why the previous Maori Affairs Committee—chaired I might add by Dave Hereora who did a pretty good job—had already agreed to do all of that. So it should not come as a shock. 
If other things should have been added to Part 1 why did that last Maori Affairs Committee not have those things in front of it? It is because the previous Minister of Maori Affairs the Hon Parekura Horomia in his wisdom thought otherwise. In his wisdom he brought the Maori Trustee and Maori Development Amendment Bill to this House and to the select committee. We have split that bill in half because there was not too much agreement on its second half but there certainly was on the first half as we see here in Part 1. This bill is about a corporation sole and about making the Maori Trustee more responsible and transparent. It is about making sure there is a reporting regime so that all of the beneficiaries can see what the trustee is up to. 
The bill addresses the termination of the trustee but I bet a year’s salary that if the trustee were terminated one of the assistant trustees or another person—maybe it would be the Chief Executive of Te Puni Kokiri; who knows—would be put in place. There would be a process whereby the office of the Maori Trustee would have a leader for however long. 
So the previous speaker can go on about what should have been in the bill what is in the bill and what is not in the bill but here is the question: if so much is missing from this part of the bill and from the part that was shaved off by the previous Maori Affairs Committee why did the present Opposition not do something about it during its 9 years in Government? This is not a big criticism but it is in response to the previous speaker saying that what members say in Opposition is different from what they say when they are in Government. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (Associate Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 I will make a few observations particularly in relation to the matter raised by the Hon Nanaia Mahuta which my colleague the Hon Tau Henare also made some comment on. 
By way of a preliminary I thank the Maori Affairs Committee for its work. This bill is very important to the National Government. When National was in Opposition its members on the Maori Affairs Committee were very clear that they supported the setting up of the Maori Trustee as a separate organisation in order to make sure that it had independence. As has already been referred to by one of my colleagues National did not agree with what the Labour Government of the time tried to include in the original Maori Trustee and Maori Development Amendment Bill hence the split into the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill and the Maori Trustee and Maori Development Amendment Bill. When National was in Opposition it clearly did not support the original bill. There was no support for it and it was not raised in consultation with Maori at the number of hui that were held around the country. The setting up of the Maori Trustee as an independent organisation was supported but the other part of the bill was not. The select committee worked quite hard last year to make sure that when and if the bill emerged in the House again it would deal with the core issue which was to create the Maori Trustee as an independent organisation. 
Under current law the Maori Trustee is independent from the Crown but also it is an office conferred on an employee of Te Puni Kokiri. Under current arrangements there is potential for the perception of a conflict of interest; that matter has been raised by Maori over a long period of time. The setting up of the Maori Trustee as a stand-alone organisation will underline its independence as I have already said; there was broad support for this stand-alone Maori Trustee at consultation. Those are very important points and it was on the basis of those points that the National Opposition last year opposed the bill as it was originally brought to the House by the Labour Government. That is why we are very pleased to be here in the Chamber tonight in the Committee of the whole House and to see this bill as it is now—as the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill—progress through Parliament. 
I want to make some comments though; I think it is fair as the Hon Nanaia Mahuta raised the issue. One of the questions raised by the member was how the Maori Trustee is able to be removed from office. 
Hon Nanaia Mahuta 
: If they’re removed— 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: Yes—what will happen if the Maori Trustee is removed from office? In that event—and we hope that it would never occur—grounds are set out. New section 6B(5) explains that the Minister of Maori Affairs may remove the Maori Trustee from office on the grounds of “(a) undischarged bankruptcy misconduct or neglect of duty; or “(b) inability to perform the functions and duties of the Maori Trustee.” We should be very clear that this threshold is very high—very high indeed—and is similar to the thresholds applying to the removal from office of the Auditor-General. The bill makes explicit the Minister’s requirement to observe the rules of natural justice—again that threshold is very high. The Minister must also publish any removal or suspension in the  
Gazette 
. 
The member asked who if by some unfortunate chance that event should occur will then take up the role. The Deputy Maori Trustee will if one is appointed by the Maori Trustee; the deputy will pick up delegated responsibilities. It would be very very unlikely that there would be no deputy in place. So that is the provision that deals with that issue. As I say I ask the Committee to note the high threshold for removal of the Maori Trustee. If the position is terminated by the Minister of Maori Affairs the Minister is also in a position to make a new appointment. Thank you. 
Hon MITA RIRINUI (Labour) 
: 
 I congratulate the Hon Georgina te Heuheu the Associate Minister of Maori Affairs on rising to her feet to give us a very detailed explanation of her understanding of the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill. I think that it is very appropriate that she should have done that given that she was one of the three members in this Parliament who was part of the Maori Affairs Committee under the previous Government. The Hon Tau Henare and I were the other two. But it is interesting that although there were two members on the select committee from the same party their recollection of events and of the issues raised and interpreted in a number of ways are quite different. But let me backtrack a little because I think I can bring a better understanding of the intensity of the discussion that took place at the Maori Affairs Committee when we were considering and deliberating on this particular bill. 
There was considerable support for the Maori Trust Office to become a stand-alone organisation and necessary changes were made to the legislation to ensure that the level of accountability and the responsibilities of the Maori Trustee were very clear in law. But it is a pity that when the opportunity was put before the committee to establish a funding arm to encourage Maori economic development because of the political differences around the table it basically met with considerable resistance—not on the part of the members of the previous Government but on the part of the members of the previous Opposition. When I say that they are wrong it is amazing how people from the same party recollect things in different ways which is what I am going to speak about at this point in time. 
The Minister in the chair the Hon Georgina te Heuheu did say that that proposal for Maori Business Aotearoa New Zealand or for a Maori business development organisation was tagged on as part of the consultation on the review of the Maori Trust Office. If I have misunderstood what the Minister said I apologise but I understand that she said that it was a tag-on and that as a result the members of the Maori Affairs Committee were very very concerned. But that is not entirely true. In fact there were submitters who were of the view that it was a cloak-and-dagger approach on behalf of the Government; that was not true at all. The proposal was raised as part of the consultation for the establishment of Maori Business Aotearoa New Zealand and put before the select committee. Although the Maori Trustee had his concerns about it the select committee was required to make its decision or its views known based on the evidence placed before it. 
I was one of the Government members at that time on the select committee who was more than satisfied with the level of discussion that had taken place prior to the matter coming before the committee. I would like to say that that was an opportunity that was lost. I concede that there was still a bit more work to be done on the proposal and the Maori Affairs Committee was in a position to do that. Instead the Opposition at that time raised the issue strongly enough for the proposal basically to be shelved until another day and I believe that that is what is happening at this point in time. But as I said before different members on that committee have different levels of recollection. 
I will congratulate the Maori Affairs Committee because it was a very intense discussion and people came in support not only of the Maori Trustee being a stand-alone organisation but of the concept of the development of a Maori development organisation out of the putea. And that was referred to in this House as the establishment of a slush fund for certain people’s friends. That is a phrase I have not heard in a very very long time because I do not believe that it happens any more. A former Minister of Maori Affairs the Hon Tau Henare may recall that those things may have happened during his time. But we are now in the 21st century and those sorts of practices as I might term them are no longer apparent with the former Minister of Maori Affairs and I certainly would say with the current Minister of Maori Affairs—unless he wants to prove me wrong and I would like to see that happen! But I congratulate the current Minister of Maori Affairs on supporting this bill to this stage and say that it is also good to hear from the Associate Minister of Maori Affairs who is currently in the chair expressing views on this very very important bill. 
DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East) 
: 
 It is a great pleasure to speak in the Committee stage of the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill. It is important to note that the Labour members opposite are not saying they will vote for the bill; they are doing everything they can to talk about the outlying issues of this legislation but they will not actually commit to supporting it. They will not say they believe that National is doing the right thing in putting this bill forward with our Maori Party colleagues and they will not admit that this bill is in the best interests of Maori. 
Labour Party members do not see the benefits in establishing the Maori Trustee as a stand-alone organisation. It is important that we do establish it as a stand-alone organisation because we need to give that degree of accountability and transparency to any Government position and given the issues that have been so prominent in recent times. In creating that stand-alone position of the Maori Trustee this bill leads to that transparency and that accountability. The Maori Trustee will be free from political pressure. 
The Maori Trustee Amendment Bill provides for better and more open communication between the Maori Trustee and its beneficiaries. The provisions of this bill enable the beneficiaries of the Maori Trustee to be sure they are receiving equal income from the common fund. In all this bill is a very positive step forward by the National Government taking into account what can be done in the best interests of Maori. It is very disappointing to see that Labour members cannot stand up and admit to that. They cannot stand up and say that this bill is in the best interests of Maori and that they will support it. In this legislation members will see that support and see the support from the people who see the benefit of having the Maori Trustee as a stand-alone organisation. It is part of the National Government’s commitment to having a strong relationship with Maori. 
In this current economic climate it is important that public entities are seen as transparent and accountable because difficult times are coming. We need to make sure that the best processes are there for our people going forward. The Maori Trustee Amendment Bill is part of providing that transparency and accountability. 
Hon Member 
: 2 minutes David. 
DAVID BENNETT 
: It is important to see that Labour members are now trying to create some havoc in this debate. They will not actually stand up and support the bill or constructively add value to the debate. They talk about what happened in the select committee in past Governments; we look at what is going forward for Maori. This bill will provide a future and a solution to this issue. This bill shows that the Government is listening to the people is taking on board the issues people see as relevant and is providing constructive solutions. These solutions are what we need. This is a Government based on solutions that are fair and proper. These solutions take into account that there are issues that need to be dealt with through a Maori Trustee that is open independent and not subject to political pressure. That is why we need to have it as a stand-alone organisation. That is what we have achieved through this legislation. I think the National Government and its colleagues can take great credit for the way this issue has moved forward. We now have a situation where the Government will pass legislation that enables there to be a stand-alone organisation to take advantage of the requirements of Maoridom and this community to see that kind of respect and legislative impetus behind it. 
This bill includes a few major amendments to the creation of that stand-alone organisation that the Maori Affairs Committee has worked on. It instructs that in exercising authority to terminate the appointment of the Maori Trustee the Minister must observe the rules of natural justice. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 Anyone listening to the debate right now should know that that was a second-term Government member—unfortunately from the Waikato but who must have drunk too much water from another catchment. I say to Mr Bennett that if he had listened to the debate he would have known all too well that the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill as introduced was actually introduced by the previous Labour Government so that is half of his speech gone. On the second half about the issue of a stand-alone entity it is well agreed within this Chamber that people believe that the Maori Trustee should be a stand-alone entity. Really if Mr Bennett wants to get involved in debates such as this one he should take a leaf out of the old marae handbook: titiro whakarongo then korero. He certainly did not do any of that when he talked in this debate; I think his two mates next to him in the Chamber must have given him a big side ball. Anyway I appreciate his efforts to try to contribute to this debate. We all agree that the Maori Trustee should be a stand-alone office. But this is a Committee stage debate and Mr Bennett knows well that it is an opportunity to debate the clauses within the bill not just to talk at some random level. Everybody is being so polite to David Bennett in the Chamber. 
Anyway I want to get back to acknowledging the Minister in the chair the Hon Georgina te Heuheu. I thank the Minister for taking a call on the issue I raised. It was a very serious question about practicalities if a termination of a Maori Trustee did occur; there were some practical things that I thought were not as clear as they could have been. Firstly the issue of termination is a direct matter between the Minister of Maori Affairs and the Maori Trustee. It must occur in writing and the criteria are clearly set out in the bill. The reason I raised the question is that the bill also sets out the basis upon which a delegation occurs which must be by written authority. The Minister has clarified in part that the threshold for termination is very high and I accept that. But I do think there is the potential for a practical difficulty to occur when a Minister has had reason perhaps to suspend the Maori Trustee while an investigation is occurring. During that period of time at which notification occurs there has not been any authority delegated to the deputy trustee and it is not clearly expressed in the legislation what happens if for the practical reason of a time lapse the Maori Trustee is suspended before a written delegation occurs. That is the nature of the question but I accept the explanation that the Minister has given on the basis that it is a high threshold in the first instance. I just invite the Minister to maybe consider that there is a potential loophole there. 
Mr Henare made an interesting contribution as well. I often like to go back to what he said in the Chamber because holding him accountable is so easy. He said “National fully supports Maori economic development but don’t go and steal other people’s money to do it.” I re-state that on the record. He says time and time again that “We will privatise services and get people to use their own money instead.” In fact the Government has convinced the Maori Party that if we privatise prisons it will be a good thing for Maori. Maori can then use their own money to invest in rehabilitation programmes to try to improve the lot of those who unfortunately are in prison. That is the ethos of Mr Henare. 
But I have a serious question. I could ask the question of the member directly or of the Minister. I would prefer to ask the question of the member because he is the one who raises these types of issues in the Chamber and because he has been a Minister before. I want to know what assurance that member as a member of the Government will give that the retained earnings of the Maori Trustee will not be used by the Government for any other Maori development purpose. Would the member answer that because I think it is a very important question? Is there a commitment to ring-fence the Maori Trustee’s retained earnings so that the Government cannot draw down on that for any other development opportunities? There is silence. I could ask the question of the Minister but out of courtesy I will not. The implication of what Mr Henare said was that the Government will not touch it. The Government will leave it to Maori beneficiaries and not touch it at all. So I challenge that member to get up in this Chamber and be accountable for the information he gave that the National-led Government will retain the earnings of the Maori Trust Office in its own entity and will not draw down on it at any point in time in the future for Maori development. I suspect he will find difficulty in answering that question. 
HEKIA PARATA (National) 
: 
 Mr Chair tena koe. Tena tatou katoa. I am delighted to rise and take a call on the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill as this is my first opportunity as a new member of the House to participate in a Committee of the whole House. I will address my attention to Part 1 and specifically to a couple of clauses within it. I would also like to make some general comments in support of this bill. 
First I would like to acknowledge the select committee that did all of this work and the approach from both sides of the House in attending to this important matter. The key reason for my support of this bill is that it symbolises the coming of age of a very old institution that has been a very important part of Maori development. The bill recognises the need for the Maori Trust Office and the Maori Trustee to be a stand-alone organisation and to be accountable transparent and disciplined in the manner that the functions of that office are discharged. Currently the Maori Trustee is an employee of a department of the State. The separation of the Maori Trustee from this ambiguous and confusing situation is a really important step away from the State’s constant oversight of all things Maori. The bill represents the long-overdue maturing of the State in terms of respecting the ability of Maori and those in charge of Maori assets to take responsibility for to organise and to direct those assets in the interests of the beneficial owners. I am delighted that the Maori Trustee is to become a stand-alone organisation. 
Similarly I am delighted that the bill will update some of the core processes and functions within the Maori Trust Office so that it may be comparable with other like trust entities. Maori beneficial owners may expect like other beneficial owners of trusts that they will be well treated that market conditions will apply and that there will be transparency and discipline in the way that the functions of the Maori Trustee are carried out. Clauses 9 9A and 9B set up a new appropriation account for funds received from the Crown. They also repeal the current sections 19 and 21 of the Maori Trustee Act which relate to the way that payments by the Maori Trustee can be made. Why are these changes necessary? It is because the Maori Trustee’s existing accounts had been set up for separate specific purposes that are set out in the statute. The setting up of a new appropriation account for Crown funding will provide transparency and will enhance accountability to the Crown and to the beneficial owners. 
As everyone in this House knows and is aware under this fresh new National-led Government there has been a focus on getting greater discipline within State departments and on ensuring that they are not oversubscribed in terms of the processes but do meet the best professional disciplines possible. This bill gives the opportunity for a very old institution to be brought into modern times. It recognises that banking procedures have moved beyond purely cheque accounts. It recognises that it is possible to take advantage of new banking instruments and to use the technology that is so much part and parcel of our very secure and stable banking system which has helped to provide a very strong and resilient foundation to Aotearoa New Zealand during these challenging times of recession. So the changes ensure that the Maori Trustee can operate a very contemporary practice and in so doing can provide a better and more professional service to the beneficial owners of the Maori Trustee. 
There are changes in clause 11 to the way in which income from the common fund is to be paid to account holders. Account holders will now be paid what the Maori Trustee receives less a management fee. Why are the current provisions being changed? At present the interest rates paid on funds held in trust are set by the Maori Trust Office Regulations 1954—from a time before I was born. 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 The Labour Party supports—we do indeed—the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill. We support changes to establish the Maori Trustee as a stand-alone organisation. At present the Maori Trustee is an office conferred on an employee of Te Puni Kokiri as many people have mentioned already this evening. The bill will establish the Maori Trustee as a stand-alone organisation and we all support separating it from Te Puni Kokiri. This will underline the independence of the Maori Trustee in carrying out the position’s fiduciary responsibilities. I refer to clause 5 “Independence of Maori Trustee” which states that “the Maori Trustee must act independently free from any direction or instruction from the Crown.” I support this in that it ensures the integrity of the Maori Trustee. It is important that the integrity of the Maori Trustee is not jeopardised just by direction or instruction from the Crown but also by direction or instruction from any organisation. Just by carrying the name “Maori Trustee”—or the name “Maori”—means there is responsibility on the Maori Trustee to be seen to be highly independent and existing right away from any sort of undue influences. There is a saying that Maori have to work twice as hard as other people to be seen to be half as good so it is really important that the Maori Trustee is seen not to have any bias or favouritism in what it does. 
New sections 26 to 26B substituted in clause 11 relate to money held in the common fund being invested in the fund and in part section 26(1) states: “and any income derived from investment of the money forms part of the Common Fund.” I want to talk about investing this fund because particularly at this time of global recession I think that Maori need to be seen to be investing in Maori initiatives. Our tupuna were entrepreneurs. When Europeans first came to New Zealand it was our ancestors who grew the crops and exported them and who created an economy that sustained the people. So we have a history of being entrepreneurs but there are a number of Maori initiatives and Maori businesses that could do with support from the Maori Trustee fund. 
We heard today about a really exciting Maori business development in the information technology and broadcasting industry that has been successful internationally but to sustain the business research and development investment is needed. It would be really cool if the Maori Trustee were able to invest in that business and help to sustain it and grow it further. A number of Maori businesses up north could do with investment through that fund. I think specifically of relations of mine who are in the honey industry. They are looking for ways to expand and grow their business to develop it and spread it further and to look for new markets; the Maori Trustee would be a great way of investing in this Maori-owned business and enterprise. Other successful Maori industries such as the oyster farms up north are in jeopardy. They are very successful but the Northland Regional Council is asking for a $22000 per hectare bond on those oyster farms. That affects our relations up north and I can think of one relative in particular who has had to fork out $250000 just on bonds. 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 It is a great pleasure to take a call on this important bill the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill and Part 1 of it which we are speaking on. I was sitting in my office looking at the television and I saw my great friend Paul Quinn up on his feet telling the Opposition what this bill is all about. I was moved enough to walk from the building on the other side of the parliamentary complex and come to the Chamber to support Paul. He is a great speaker. 
I make reference to something that others have said earlier—in particular the Hon Nanaia Mahuta and her concern that the public of New Zealand should know that this was the previous Government’s bill. In fact all I have heard over the last 5 months is “Here is another one of our bills that we brought forward.” I put this down to the scattergun effect of a re-election strategy on the part of the previous Government. It put up a lot of bills did nothing at all about them but pretended it was doing everything so that the world would be a great place. When it was thrown out of Government by the people of New Zealand it said “This was our bill; we were going to fix this problem.” Labour had its chance and it did not fix the problems. 
Nanaia Mahuta also spoke about the very great member of Parliament for Hamilton David Bennett a second-term member who is now in Government. The member was saying she was unsure whether the people of the Waikato were proud that he was representing them. I ask David what his majority was on election night. Did it go up from that of 3 years ago? I think the answer to that is yes it did. I can confirm to the Hon Nanaia Mahuta with whom I had the pleasure of sharing a television platform and talking about issues to do with Maori people during the election campaign that I enjoyed doing that. She spoke a lot of wisdom there and I thought she was a very nice lady; I am not sure whether that is the case today. She has not yet said she will support this bill but I know she is going to despite all the excuses she gives us. Nanaia Mahuta spoke about my good friend David Bennett in Hamilton and she said he had been drinking too much water from the Waikato River. I have been to Hamilton. [ 
Interruption 
] It was from another catchment was it? Well I have been to Hamilton with David Bennett and I can confirm that that member does not drink water at all. 
As I come directly to the bill and Part 1 of it I say there are some very important things here particularly about the way that the Maori Trustee will be appointed. The Minister of Maori Affairs will appoint the Maori Trustee for a period of 5 years. This appointment must be made in writing. Trustees cannot take up the position until they receive their letter. They can be reappointed for other periods of time up to 5 years. It is important that the legislation states what is to happen in the case that a Government or a Minister has not decided on who may replace a trustee when the 5-year period is up. Let us think about the importance of that in the bill. Let us think about the situation a good 15 years from now when the members opposite are hoping to weakly limp back into Government. That could be three more appointments of trustees from now. A new Minister who has limped from the Opposition into Government 15 years from now might not be able to make up his or her mind whom to appoint or what should happen to the important money that is tied up in trust which the trustee administers on behalf of Maori landowners. What this legislation means is that the trustee would stay in place. The bill specifically says that until a Minister is able to decide who is to be appointed then upon the termination of his or her appointment the current trustee remains in place and continues to look after the people he or she is responsible for. 
When I looked at the Maori Trustee’s website I saw it makes great comments about Part 1 of this bill. It says the Maori Trustee’s role is to protect and enhance the interests of Maori clients and their resources. That is why it is important that Ministers make good decisions. Let us hope 15 years from now that the Opposition does not limp into Government because the current Minister of Maori Affairs is going to do a very good job in this area. 
It is important that the Maori Trustee is a stand-alone organisation. Why is this important? The Maori Trustee deals with a number of disagreements that have taken place between different agencies and sets those aside so that those who would benefit from the funds being held in trust can do so. The bill of course amends the Maori Trustee Act 1953. 
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I am not sure whether I made the point as clearly as it could have been made but for the benefit of the previous speaker I say the point was not so much about whom to delegate to. The point was that within the way that the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill is written the process for terminating or suspending the employment of the Maori Trustee is that it has to be in writing between the Minister and the Maori Trustee. The process by which delegated authority occurs is by written delegation. The issue I was raising if the member was at all interested in the point I raised was that there could potentially be a time lapse. A meeting with the Minister to inform the Maori Trustee that some issues may have arisen or been brought to the Minister’s attention and that therefore a suspension is impending has to be followed through by a written letter. And it may be for practical reasons—or in the court of public opinion things have to happen sooner rather than later—that the Maori Trustee has not written formally greater delegations than those already held by the deputy trustee. 
Progress to be reported presently. 
House resumed. 
The Chairperson reported the Protected Disclosures Amendment Bill without amendment and progress on the Maori Trustee Amendment Bill. 
Report adopted.